Review of Dioxins and Furan From Incineration CSR

&
A.J. Chandler
Associates Ltd.
ReviewofDioxinsandFuransfromIncineration
InSupportofaCanadawideStandardReview
AReportPreparedfor
TheDioxinsandFuransIncinerationReviewGroup
throughacontractassociatedwith
CCMEProject#3902007
December 15, 2006
PN 1395
This report was prepared by A.J. Chandler & Associates Ltd. It is a working
paper only and contains information which has been prepared for, but not
approved by, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME).
CCME is not responsible for the accuracy of the data contained in this report
and does not warrant, or necessarily share or affirm, in any way, any opinions
expressed therein.
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Inc. 2007
Environmental Management Consultants

12 Urbandale Avenue Willowdale Ontario Canada M2M 2H1
Telephone 416-250-6570 Facsimile 416-733-2588 e-mail: john.chandler@bellnet.ca
TableofContents
Acronyms,Abbreviations,andMeasurementUnits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
EXECUTIVESUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
1.0
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1
ScopeofReport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2
Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3
ReportStructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.0
PCDD/FFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1
CombustionControlPrinciples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.0
INCINERATIONPROCESSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2
MunicipalSolidWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1 AvailableMSWCombustionAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1.1 MassBurningSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EUROPEANTYPESYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MODULARINCINERATIONSYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OTHERMASSBURNVARIANTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1.2 RefuseDerivedFuelSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SEMISUSPENSIONBURNINGSYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
STOKERFIREDSYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OTHERRDFVARIANTSFLUIDISEDBED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3
HazardousWasteIncinerationEquipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 RotaryKilns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.2 LiquidInjectionIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.3 FluidizedBedIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.4 FixedHearthIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4
SewageSludgeIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.1 MultihearthIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5
BiomedicalWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.1 RetortFurnaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.2 InLineFurnaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6
OtherSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.7
ProcessSummaryandPCDD/FGenerationPotential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
12
16
16
17
17
20
22
23
23
24
24
24
25
27
28
30
31
31
33
33
35
36
38
4.0
AIREMISSIONCONTROLSTRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1
PostCombustionControl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2
PCDD/FControlAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.1 ActivatedCarbonBedFilters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
40
44
44
1
1
2
5
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
PACInjectionSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
CatalyticDestruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
OtherRemovalTechniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.0
PCDD/FSAMPLINGMETHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2
RegulatoryMethods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.1 SampleCollectionAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.2 SampleExtractionandCleanup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.3 IdentificationandQuantification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.4 MinimumDetectionLimits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.5 MeasurementUncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4
LongTermSampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4.1 AMESA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4.2 DMS(DioxinMonitoringSystem) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5
AlternativeAnalysisProcedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5.1 SurrogateProcedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5.2 Immunoassays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50
50
51
52
56
58
60
62
67
67
67
68
68
69
6.0
REPORTINGMEASUREMENTRESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2
ExpressionofPCDD/FasToxicEquivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3
TreatmentofLowValues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.4
ConversionProceduresforSamplingConditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.5
ReportingProceduresforthisReport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70
70
71
74
75
76
7.0
PCDD/FEMISSIONREGULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2
Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.4
Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.5
NewZealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.6
EuropeanUnion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.7
UnitedStates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.8
SummaryofEmissionStandards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
77
77
80
81
82
83
85
89
8.0
EMISSIONDATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
8.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
8.2
BackgroundofHistoricalIncineratorInstallationsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
8.2.1 CanadaWideStandardsBasic2000Inventory
. . . 94
8.2.3 CCME2005Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
8.3
UpdatingtheIncineratorsInventoryto2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
8.3.1 MSWIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
8.3.2 MedicalWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
ii
8.3.3 HazardousWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.3.4 SewageSludgeIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.3.5 IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntitiesoronFederalLands . . . . . .
8.3.6 OtherIncineratorsinRemoteLocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PCDD/FEmissionsinExhaustGasStream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4.1 MSWIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4.2 MedicalWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4.5 IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4.6 IncineratorsOperatedinRemoteLocationsonFederalLandsor
elsewhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.....................
PCDD/FEmissionsinSolidandLiquidStreams
8.5.1 MSWIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.5.2 MedicalWasteIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.5.5 IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntitiesoronFederalLands . . . . . .
SummaryofEstimatedPCDD/FEmissionsfromIncinerators . . . . . . . . . . . . .
134
137
137
138
140
142
144
148
9.0
ALTERNATIVEEQUIVALENCYFACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9.1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9.1
DataforAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9.2
AffectofApplyingDifferentTreatmentsforLowConcentrationData . . . . . .
9.3
AffectofApplyingWHO98TEF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
151
151
152
159
159
10.0
FINDINGSandCONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
11.0
RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.1
NumericalStandard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.2
Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.3
AnnualThroughputCalculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.4
SiteDisposalCapacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5
ImplementationMeasures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5.1 BatchEquipmentCertification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5.2 ContinuousMonitoringofBatchSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5.3 OperatorTraining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5.4 IncineratorsEquippedwithHeatRecoverySystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.6
ExistingIncineratorInstallations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.7
PCDD/FIncineratorInventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4
8.5
8.6
iii
108
112
115
121
124
125
127
129
131
133
165
165
165
166
166
167
167
168
169
169
170
170
APPENDIXA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TheRelationshipbetweenAnalyticalResultsandMeasurementUncertainty . . . . . . .
AnalyticalLaboratoryResults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
UncertaintyinStackMeasurementResults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iv
172
172
172
182
ListofTables
Table3.1
Table4.1
Table5.1
Table5.2
Table5.3
Table7.1
Table7.2
Table7.3
Table7.4
Table8.1
Table8.2
Table8.3
Table8.4
Table8.5
Table8.6
Table8.7
Table8.8
Table8.9
Table8.10
Table8.11
Table8.12
Table8.13
Table8.14
Table8.15
Table8.16
Table8.17
Table8.18
Table8.19
Table8.20
Table8.21
Table8.22
Table8.23
Table8.24
SummaryofIncineratorTypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
ComparisonofOperatingFeaturesofVariousAPCAlternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
ComparisonofRegulatorySamplingMethods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
LimitsofCongenerQuantificationbasedupona5.5m3samplevolume . . . . . . 62
SummaryInternalVariabilityDatafromValidationTestsforCEN . . . . . . . . . . 65
JapaneseEmissionStandardsforIncinerators[ngTEQDFP/Nm3] . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
USEPANSPSforNonHazardousWasteIncineratorSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
SummaryofPCDD/FEmissionStandardsforIncineratorsintheUnitedStates
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
InternationalIncineratorPCDD/FEmissionRegulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
SummaryofCWS2000IncineratorInventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
SummaryofIncineratorslistedinNPRIData . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
SummaryofMunicipalSolidWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
SummaryofMedicalWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
SummaryofHazardousWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
SummaryofSewageSludgeIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
SummaryofCanadianIncineratorslocatedatFederalFacilities . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
SummaryofCanadianIncineratorslocatedinRemoteAreasonFederalLand
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
TypicalResidentialWasteComposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
SummaryofMiscellaneousSmallWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . 123
SummaryofAirEmissionsfromLargeMSWIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . 126
SummaryofAirEmissionsfromMedicalWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . 128
SummaryofAirEmissionsfromHazardousWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . 130
SummaryofPCDD/FEmissionsfromSewageSludgeIncineratorsinCanada
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
EstimateofPCDD/FEmissionsfromIncineratorslocatedatFederal
Establishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
PCDD/FEmissionsfromIncineratorslocatedinRemoteAreasoronFederal
Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
PCDD/FinResiduesfromLargeScaleMunicipalSolidWasteIncinerators . . 139
PCDD/FinResiduesfromMedicalWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . 141
PCDD/FinResiduesfromHazardousWasteIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . 143
PCDD/FinResiduesfromSewageSludgeIncineratorsinCanada . . . . . . . . . . 145
PCDD/FinResiduesEmissionsfromIncineratorslocatedatFederal
Establishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
PCDD/FinResiduesfromIncineratorslocatedinRemoteAreasoronFederal
Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
SummaryofInstalledCanadianIncinerators2005/2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
SummaryofPCDD/FEmissionstoAirfromOperatingIncinerators2005/2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Table8.25
Table8.26
Table9.1
Table9.2
Table9.3
Table9.4
Table9.5
Table9.6
TableA1
TableA2
SummaryofPCDD/FinResiduesfromOperatingIncinerators2005/2006 . . . 150
SummaryofPCDD/FEmissionsfromOpeatingCanadianIncinerators2005/2006
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
RawAnalyticalData[pg]fromStackTestingProgramsVariousFacilities . . . 153
StackTestingDataCongenerConcentrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
LOQValuesDerivedfromTestDataandITEF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
LOQValuesDerivedfromTestData&WHO98TEF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
StackTestingDataTotalEmissionasToxicEquivalentsVariousMethods . . . 157
PercentageIncreaseProducedbyUsingWHO98TEF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
ExpandedUncertaintyRangeofAcceptableConcentrations* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
SummaryInternalVariabilityDatafromValidationTestsforCEN . . . . . . . . . 186
ListofFigures
Figure1.1
Figure3.1
Figure3.2
Figure3.3
Figure3.4
Figure3.5
Figure3.6
Figure3.7
Figure3.8
Figure4.1
FigureA1
SchematicDiagramsofPCDD,PCDFandPCBs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
GeneralizedSchematicofanIncinerationSystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
SchematicofFixedHearth,TwoStageIncinerator(fromUSEPA) . . . . . . . . . . . 21
SchematicofRotaryKilnIncinerator(fromUSEPA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
SchematicofLiquidWasteIncinerator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
SchematicofFluidizedBedIncinerator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
TypicalMultiHearthIncineratorfromUSEPAAP42 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
RetortIncineratorfromAP40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
TypicalInLineFurnacefromAP40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
ComparisonofAirPollutionControlSystemOptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
DiagrammaticIllustrationoftheEffectofMeasurementUncertaintyandthe
Limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
vi
Acronyms,Abbreviations,andMeasurementUnits
Thefollowingdefinitions,acronyms,andmeasurementunitsareprovidedtoclarifythe
discussionthatfollows.
Acronyms
ACR
AMESA
APC
ASME
CB
CCME
CEN
CEMS
CFR
CWS
DIN
DMS
DRE
ECT
EN
EPA(U.S.)
ESP
EU
GC/MS
HAP
HRSG
ITEQbasis
LDR
LOD
LOQ
LWAK
MACT
MHF
MOE
MRR
MSW
MTEC
NITEP
NESHAP
NPRI
activatedcharreactor
adsorptionmethodforsamplingPCDD/F
airpollutioncontrolsystem
AmericanSocietyofMechanicalEngineers
chlorobenzenes
CanadianCouncilofMinistersoftheEnvironment
ComitEuropendeNormalisation(EuropeanCommitteefor
Standardization)
continuousemissionsmonitoringsystem(s)
CodifiedFederalRegulations(UnitedStatesofAmerica)
CanadaWideStandards
DeutschesInstitutfrNormung(GermanInstituteforStandardization)
dioxinmonitoringsystem
DestructionRemovalEfficiency
evaporativecoolingtower
EuropeanNormals(StandardsissuedbyCEN)
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency
electrostaticprecipitator
EuropeanUnion
gaschromatography/massspectrometry
hazardousairpollutant
heatrecoverysteamgenerator
2,3,7,8tetrachlorinateddibenzopdioxintoxicequivalentbasedonthe
1989Internationaltoxicequivalencyfactors
landdisposalrestrictions(USRegulations)
levelofdetection
levelofquantification
lightweightaggregatekiln
maximumachievablecontroltechnology
multihearthfurnace
MinistryoftheEnvironment(Ontario)
MaterialResourceRecoverymetalrecoveryoperationinCornwall,ON
municipalsolidwaste
maximumtheoreticalemissionconcentration
NationalIncineratorTestingandEvaluationProgram
NationalEmissionStandardsforHazardousAirPollutants
NationalPollutantReleaseInventory
vii
OPG
PAC
PAH
PCBTotal
PCDD/F
PIC
PM
POHC
RCRA
RDF
RSI
SCR
SVOC
TEF
TEQ
TCLP
TSMP
UCL
U.S.EPA
WHO
WHO98TEQ
OntarioPowerGeneration
powderedactivatedcarbon
polycyclicaromatichydrocarbons
CEPADefinitionissumoftritodecaisomersofpolychlorinated
byphenyls
polychlorinateddibenzopdioxinsandpolychlorinateddibenzofurans
productsofincompletecombustion
particulatematter
principalorganichazardouscomponent
ResourceConservationandRecoveryAct(USRegulations)
refusederivedfuel
RcupreSolinc.BennettSoilRemediationfacilityinSt.Ambroise,PQ
selectivecatalyticreactor
semivolatileorganiccompound
toxicityequivalencefactor
toxicequivalentquantity
toxiccharacteristicsleachingprocedure
ToxicSubstancesManagementPolicy
UpperConfidenceLimit(definitionofupperboundoftestresults)
UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency
WorldHealthOrganization
2,3,7,8tetrachlorinateddibenzopdioxintoxicequivalentthatincludes
coplanarPCBtoxicequivalencyfactors
DEFINITIONSAPPLIEDTOCHARACTERISEINCINERATORS
Batch
Commercial
Continuous
SemiContinuous
incineratorsthatareloadedwithwastebeforethewasteisignitedandthe
doorremainscloseduntiltheashhascooledinsidethefurnace
meansthosethatchargeatippingfeefordisposingofwaste
incineratorsthatareloadedperiodicallyduringoperationandashis
removedduringtheburningphase(typicallyoperateforperiodsfrom
weekstomonths)
incineratorsthatareloadedperiodicallyduringoperationbutashisonly
removedafteracooldownphase(typicallyoperateforperiodsofdays)
viii
AbbreviationsandMeasurementUnits
Btu
o
C
dscf
dscm
g
g/a
gr
MJ
kg
kg/a
kW
m3
mg
Mg
Mg/d
Mg/a
ng
Nm3
ppmv
Rm3
=BritishThermalUnit(measureofenergy)
=degreesCelsius(degreesFahrenheit=(oC*9/5+32)
=drystandardcubicfeet(at14.7poundspersquareinch,68oF)
=drystandardcubicmeters(at14.7poundspersquareinch,68oF)
=gram(454gramsperpound)
=gramsperannum
=grains(7,000grainsperpound)
=megajoules(energyinput,1MJ=947.82Btu=0.27778kW.h)
=kilogram(0.454kilogramsperpound)
=kilogramsperannum
=kilowatt(measureofenergy)
=cubicmeter(35.3cubicfeetpercubicmeter)
=milligrams(103grams)
=megagram(1.1tons)
=megagramsperday
=megagramsperannum
=nanogram(109grams)
=normalcubicmetre(at0oC,101.3kPa)
=partspermillionbyvolume
=dryReferencecubicmetre(at25oC,101.3kPaand11%O2)
totalmassbasis
=totalmassoftetrathroughocta(dioxins/chlorinateddibenzop
dioxinsandfurans)dibenzofurans
MetricPrefixes
TheSIPrefixesusedtoformnamesandsymbolsofdecimalmultiplesand
submultiplesofSIunitsare:
Prefix Symbol
Magnitude
Factor
exa
peta
tera
giga
mega
kilo
E
P
T
G
M
k
1000000000000000000
1000000000000000
1000000000000
1000000000
1000000
1000
1018
1015
1012
109
106
103
milli
micro
nano
pico
femto
atto
n
p
f
a
0.001
0.000001
0.000000001
0.000000000001
0.000000000000001
0.000000000000000001
103
106
109
1012
1015
1018
ix
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
AspartofthereviewstipulatedintheCWSPCDD/Fstandard,thisreportexaminesthewaste
incinerationsectorandtheprogressthatsectorhasmadeinreducingthereleaseofPCDD/Fto
theenvironment.TheCWSPCDD/Fstandarddefinesincinerationintermsoftheequipmentas
follows:
Waste incinerator: a device, mechanism or structure constructed primarily to thermally treat
(e.g., combust or pyrolyze) a waste for the purpose of reducing its volume, destroying a
hazardous chemical present in the waste, or destroying pathogens present in the waste.
Thisimpliesthatthestandardappliestoanythermalprocess,eventhoughthedefinitionlists
combustionandpyrolysisasexamplesofthermaltreatment.Thisinnowayrestricts
applicationofthestandardtoanyalternativemethodofheatingandtreatingwastetoreduceits
volumeorbreakingdowncompoundswithinthewaste.Assuch,thePCDD/FWaste
IncinerationCWSwouldapplytoanyformsofthermaltreatmentsystems.
Thisreportprovidesanoverviewofthefurnacesthatcanbeusedforwasteincinerationand
methodstheirdesignersusetoensuregoodcombustionandlowemissions.Airpollution
controlequipmentisemployedatlargerfacilitiestofurthercontrolthereleaseofPCDD/Fand
thereportsummarizesthetypesofairpollutioncontrolsystemsthatcanbeused.Monitoring
theperformanceofsystemsrequiresthatsamplesbecollectedandanalysedtodeterminethe
quantityofPCDD/Fbeingreleasedatanytime.Areviewoftheacceptedmonitoring
proceduresandtheirlimitationsisincluded.Howtheseresultsarereportedandthe
regulationsthatthedefinethelimitsonemissionsinvariousjurisdictionsarereviewedto
provideacomparisonfortheCWSstandard.TheoriginalCWSstandardwasdevelopedbased
uponareviewofemissionsfromtheincineratorsoperatinginthelate1990s.Comparing
estimatedemissionsin2005withthosedevelopedfortheoriginalinventoryprovidesan
importantmeasureofprogressmadeinreducingemissions.Asthescientificcommunitys
understandingofhowPCDD/Freactintheenvironmenthasgrownthemeasureofthetoxicity
ofthesecompoundshaschanged.AreviewofsomeoftheemissiondatafromCanadian
incineratorswasconductedtoconfirmtheanticipatedeffectofchangingthetoxicequivalency
factorsusedtoquantifyPCDD/Femissions.Duringthereviewtherewereanumberoffindings
andtheauthordevelopedsomeconclusionsfromthestudy.Theseconclusionswereusedto
developaseriesofrecommendationsthatshouldallowtheindustrytomovetowardsthe
ultimateobjectiveofthevirtualeliminationofPCDD/Femissionsfromthesector.
PCDD/FFormation
PCDD/Freleasesfromcombustionprocessesaregenerallyconsideredtobeunintentional.That
is,theprocessisnotdesignedtocreatethesecompoundsandtheirpresenceisindicativeof
eithertheirlackofdestructioninthecombustionprocess,ortheirformationbysome
mechanismsoperatinginthefurnace.
TheformationofPCDD/Fastracebyproductsofcombustionprocesseshasbeenstudied
extensivelybecauseitisahighlycomplexphenomenainvolvingmultiplegasandsolidphase
reactions.TwomaintheoriesregardingthemechanismofformationofPCDD/Fduring
combustionprocesseshavebeendeveloped.
Thedenovosynthesistheoryisconsideredthemajormechanism.Thistheorysuggeststhat
PCDD/Fisformedinthepresenceofflyashcontainingchemicallyunrelatedunburntaromatics
andmetalcatalysts.Thereactionsoccurinthepresenceofoxygenandcatalystsat
temperaturesintherangebetween250OCand450OC.Formanyincinerators,thistemperature
rangeisonlyfoundinthepostfurnaceregion,typicallythewasteheatboilerorinelectrostatic
precipitators(ESP).Denovosynthesisexperimentssuggestthatmorefuranthandioxin
congenersareformed.
ThePrecursorTheorysuggestssimplythatthevariouschemicallyrelatedchlorinated
aromaticsundergocondensationreactionsonflyashsurfacesinthepresenceofmetalcatalysts.
Thus,twoprecursormoleculesarecoupledtoformadioxinorfuranstructure.Theoptimal
temperaturerangeforsuchformationisthesameasthatobservedfordenovosynthesis(i.e.,250
to450EC).Therefore,formationofPCDD/Ffromprecursorsmustalsooccurinthe
postcombustionzonesofthermalprocesses.Thistemperaturerangeisoftenconsideredthe
windowofopportunityforcatalyticformationofPCDD/Fonsurfacesofflyashparticles.
Thetwotheoriesarenotnecessarilymutuallyexclusive.TheformationofPCDD/Finthermal
processesisundoubtedlytheresultofacomplexsetofcompetingchemicalreactions.
RegardlessofwhichtheoryortheoriesbestexplainshowPCDD/Fareformed,certainoperating
conditionsincreasethepotentialforPCDD/Fformationincluding:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
incompletecombustionofafuel
anoxidizingatmosphere
presenceofachlorinesource
flyashsurfaces(carbonsource)
flyashwithdegeneratedgraphiticstructures
presenceofcatalyticmetals(especiallycopper,butiron,manganeseand
zincarealsoindicatedaspotentialcatalystsforPCDD/Fformation)
temperature/timehistoryofatleast1secondatlessthan600OC(optimal
temperaturerangeliesbetween250and450OC)
Thus,goodcombustion,whichreducestheconcentrationofproductsofincomplete
combustion,boththegaseousandsolidforms,mustbethefoundationofanymeasuresto
reducePCDD/Femissionsfromincinerators.Secondly,limitingthetimethegasesareinthe
generationtemperaturewindowwillfurtherhelpreduceemissions.
Somesuggestthatcontrollingtheamountofchlorineinthesystemmightinfluencethe
generationofPCDD/F,howeverconsistentanalysisoftheavailabledataindicatesthatchanging
xi
theamountofchlorinehasnodiscernibleimpactonPCDD/Femissions.
CombustionControl
Combustioncontrolmustcompensatefor:
thenaturalvariabilityinfuelquality;and,
thecontrollingfactorsthatgoverntherateofchemicalreactions.
Homogeneityofthewastestreamismuchbetterinsewagesludgeandliquidhazardouswaste
systemsthanMSW,medicalwasteorevensolidhazardouswastes.Eachcomponentofawaste
streamhasitsinherentenergycontentandthismustbematchedwithsufficientoxygento
ensurepropercombustion.Incineratoroperatorsunderstandtheneedtokeeptheoperationat
asteadyleveltoachievethebestperformanceandtypicallymixthecomponentsasthefirst
step.Fromthere,combustioncontrolsystemscompensatefortheremainingfuelvariability.
Intwostagestarvedairandkilnsystemsalargequantityoffuelinthefurnacewillreducethe
variability.InconventionalmassburnMSWincineratorstherateofheatreleaseissensedand
thesupplyofcombustionairisadjustedtocompensateforhighorlowheatreleaserates.
Alternatively,thefuelfeedratecanbeadjustedtocompensateforthevariability.Through
thesestepsitispossibletoestablishanappropriaterangefortheconcentrationofoxygeninany
system.OperationinthiszoneminimizesthereleaseofCOandthusalsominimizestrace
organicreleases.
Goodcombustionconditionsleadingtoreducedorganicemissionsarethosethat:
ensurecompletemixingofthefuelandtheair;
maintainhightemperaturesinthepresenceofsufficientoxygen;and,
preventtheformationofquenchzonesorlowtemperaturepathwaysthatwould
allowpartiallyreactedsolidsorgasestoexitfromthecombustionchamber.
Thesedesignconditionsmustbecombinedwithgoodoperatingconditionstoensurethatthe
performanceismaintainedandorganicconstituentsarereducedtothebasicelements.
Whilemuchoftheresearchemphasishasbeenfocussedondefiningtheconditionsconducive
tominimisingemissionsofPCDD/Fthroughthestack,theseconditionsalsohaveimplications
forsolidresiduestreamsgeneratedbycombustionequipment.Obviously,ashfromthegrateof
solidfuelcombustiondevicewillbeexposedtotemperaturesinexcessofthatconduciveto
formation,indeedtemperaturesintherangewhereanyPCDD/Fwillbedestroyed.Rapid
quenchingofashdischargedfromthegratesshouldminimisethepotentialforanyPCDD/Fin
thatwastestream.Ontheotherhand,residuesfromheatrecoverysystems,whichoperatein
thecriticaltemperaturezonemaybeexpectedtohavesomePCDD/Fpresent,buttheamount
willlikelyvarywiththetemperatureregimewheretheashwascollected,andthetimetheash
xii
wasinthegasstreamatthesetemperatures.ThissuggeststhatthePCDD/Fformation
processesrelatedtodenovosynthesisorprecursorsmaybeinhibitedifthegassesleavingthe
systemarerapidlyquenchedtobelowtheoptimaltemperatureranges.
IncineratorSystemsandAirPollutionControlEquipment
WastestreamsbeingincineratedinCanadainclude:municipalsolidwaste[MSW];medical
wastes;hazardouswastes;andsewagesludge.Thewastestreamsdifferincharacterand
particularlyintheirenergyvalue.Designershavedevelopeddifferenttypesoffurnacesto
handlethedifferentwastestreamsbutsincetherearealsosimilaritiessomefurnacescanbe
usedforsimilarstreams,providedthedesigntakesintoconsiderationthecalorificvaluesofthe
wastestreamandprovidessufficientairtothefurnacetoensuregoodcombustion.ThusMSW
andmedicalwastecanbeburnedinthesameincinerator,albeitatdifferentratessotheenergy
inputtothefurnaceismaintained.ThegeneralclassesofincineratorsusedinCanadaare:
twostagemassburnincineratorsthathandleupto100Mg/dofMSWandcan
handlemedicalwasteatafeedrateapproximately50%thatofMSW;
Europeanmassburnincineratorsthatgenerallyarelargerthanthe2stage
systemsandoperatewithairorfuelfeedcontrolstominimisecombustion
upsets;
liquidinjectionfurnacesthatstandaloneforthedisposalofhazardouswasteor
areusedafterrotarykilnshandlingsolidhazardouswastesasaafterburner;
multihearthfurnacesforsewagesludgedisposalwhicharebeingreplacedby
moreeffectivefluidisedbedsystemsthatarecapableofhandlingvariationsin
themoisturecontentofthesludge;
newerbatchfedtwostagecombustionsystemsthatcanhavecapacitiesassmall
at23kg/hrandrangeupto1Mg/day;and,
olderdesignssuchasmultiplechamberincineratorsusedinresearchfacilities
andhospitals.
Allincineratorshaveazonewherethewasteisignitedandmixedwithairtopromote
combustion.Mostincineratorsprovideadditionalairtocompletethecombustionprocess.
Afterthewastehasbeenoxidizedinthefurnace,residues,generallyreferredtoasbottomash,
mustberemovedfromthefurnace.Theenergyavailableinthehotgasstreamgeneratedby
combustionmayberecoveredinaheatrecoverysteamgenerator[HRSG]orboilerthereby
creatingsteamthatcanbeusedtoproduceelectricityorhotwaterforprocessorspaceheating.
WhileanHRSGinstalledinthesystemwillreducethegastemperatures,ifthereisnoheat
recoveryequipment,butthereisanairpollutioncontrolsystem,arapidquenchsystemwillbe
usedtoreducegastemperaturestotherangethatisappropriatefortheAPCsystemtotreat.
Suchquenchinglimitsthepotentialfordenovosynthesisbecausethegastemperaturemoves
rapidlythroughthecriticaltemperaturerange.FurnacesequippedwithneitheranHRSGoran
APCsystemtypicallyreleasehightemperaturegasesdirectlytotheatmosphere.
xiii

Ifanairpollutioncontrolsystemisinstalledtotreatthegasesleavingtheincineratoritis
generallysizedforthevolumeofgasesproducedatthelowertemperature.Airpollution
controlequipmenttypicallyinvolvesinjectingreagentstocontrolacidgasreleases,sorbentsto
trapmercuryandPCDD/Fandhighefficiencyparticulatemattercontroldevicestominimise
thereleaseofdusttotheatmosphere.Solidresidues,flyash,depositedinHRSGunits,or
collectedinairpollutioncontrolsystemsareremovedfordisposal,generallyathazardous
wastedisposalfacilities.ThequantityofPCDD/Fpresentintheflyashstreamscanvary
dependinguponthetemperaturehistoryandwheretheflyashisremovedfromthesystem.
TypicalAPCsystemsusedinCanadainclude:
wetsprayhumidifiers/dryscrubbers/fabricfilterswithorwithoutpowdered
activatedcarbonadditiontothegasstreamusedinlargeMSWandcommercial
medicalwasteincineratorsaswellassomehazardouswasteincinerators;
wetscrubbersusedaloneinsewagesludgeincineratorinstallations,orin
combinationwithpowderedactivatedcarbonandfabricfiltersinonehazardous
wastefacility;
onehazardouswasteincineratoremploysanelectrostaticprecipitatorratherthan
afabricfilterforparticulatecontrol;
onefacilityhasanactivatedcharbedfilterinstalledafteraquenchsystemand
anotheronewillbeinstalledin2006;and,
onefacilityhasinstalledaselectivecatalyticreactorthatincludesprovisionsto
destroyPCDD/Freachingthecatalystdownstreamofawetsprayhumifier/dry
scrubber/PACinjection/fabricfiltersystem.
Detailsofthevarioustypesofincineratorsandairpollutioncontrolsystemsandtheir
performancecharacteristicsarepresentedinthereport.
PCDD/FSamplingMethods
MeasurementsofPCDD/Fconcentrationsintheexhaustgasstreamsofcombustionsytems
wererequiredtodeveloptheunderstandingoftheformationmechanismsandproveAir
PollutionControlsystemperformance.SomeoftheearlyCanadiansamplingstudiesused
techniquesthathavenowevolvedtoberecognizedasoneofthestandardmethodsfor
samplingandanalysisofPCDD/Finstacks.TheEnvironmentCanadaproceduresarevery
similartothoseusedbytheUSEPA.SimilardevelopmentshavetakenplaceinEuropewhere
threedifferentsamplingsystemshavebeendevelopedandapplied.Sincethemid1990smuch
oftheemphasisinthisfieldhasbeenonimprovingmethodstoensurethatthequalityofthe
reportedresults,andtomeettheincreasingdemandsposedbylowerandloweremission
concentrations.
ThemethodscurrentlyincorporatedinNorthAmericanandEuropeanregulationsandpermits
xiv
aresimilar.Gasbeingexhaustedissampledbyextractingaportionoftheflowstream
isokinetically;filteringtheextracttoconcentratethespeciesofinterest;and,recoveringthe
concentratedsamplefromthesamplingsystemsothelaboratoryanalysiscanbecompleted
usingHRGC/HRMStechniquesarethebasicstepsinallmethods.Beingsimilar,theyshould
producesimilarresultsifthemethodsareemployedbytrainedsamplersandchemistswho
takecarewiththeirtasks.
Eveniftestersprovidereliablemeasurementresults,themethodshavelimitations.Itisdifficult
toquantifythemassofPCDD/Fpresentinsamplescollectedfromsystemsoperatingasvery
lowemissionrates,unlesslongsamplingtimesareemployed.Convertingthatquantitytoan
emissionconcentrationmeasuringthesamplevolumeandthestackgasflow.Whenallthe
measurementsarecombinedsomeuncertaintyisinherentinthereportedresults.
Thus,duetolimitsinthelevelofPCDD/Fthatcanbequantifiedandthevariationsinthese
measurements,theEuropeanstandardincorporatesaproceduretodefinethelevelof
quantificationforeachPCDD/Fcongenerandliststheuncertaintythatwasdeterminedfor
resultsfromalargecomparativetestingprograms.
InCanadatheapproachtodealingwithsampleswithlowconcentrationshasbeentorefer
directlytothelaboratoryreports.Whenthelaboratoryliststheresultsasbeingbelowthe
detectionlimit,thedetectionlimitvalueissubstitutedintothecalculationprocedurewhen
determinetheTEQvalueforthetest.TheresultingTEQvalueisthencomparedtoavalueof32
pgITEQ/m3@11%O2,thevaluestatedbyEnvironmentCanadaasbeingthelevelof
quantification,orthestackconcentrationlevelthatEnvironmentCanadasuggestscanbe
reliablymeasured.IftheresultinglevelislessthanthisEnvironmentCanadaLOQ,PCDD/F
areinterpretedashavingbeenvirtuallyeliminated.WhenreportingtoNPRI,sourceswith
resultsbelow32pgITEQ/m3@11%O2canreportzeroemissions.
TheEuropeanapproachrequiresthattheconcentrationofeachcongenerbedeterminedand
thesedatabeincorporatedintothecalculationoftheITEQvalueofthesample.Ifthe
concentrationofanycongenerislessthantheLOQderivedfromapplyingtheequationLOQi=
0.5[pg/m3]/ITEFi,theITEQvaluefortheemissionconcentrationmustbereportedintwoways
usingthequantificationleveltosubstituteforvaluesbelowthatlevelandusingzeroto
substitutefortheconcentrationoftheparticularcongener.
Theimplicationsofthisapproacharethat,laboratoriesmightbeabletoreportlowervaluesand
somedo.Conversely,theLOQcalculatedfromthedatacanalsobeabovethepermissibleLOQ.
Ifthisisthecase,andtheoverallITEQexceedstheapplicablestandard,thelaboratorymightbe
requiredtodomorecleanupofthesample,oranalysethesampleonanothercolumnto
confirmtheresults.Iftheproblemstillexists,theotheralternativeistoextendthesampling
timetherebyincreasingthevolumeandthecongenerquantity.
Thevariabilityinsamplingresultswasexaminedintwostudies.InEuropetheresultsreflect
thosefromcomparisonsamplingwithdifferentmethodsandusingdifferenttestingteams.The
xv
resultssuggestthattheexternalvariability,andhencetheuncertaintyofthemeasurementsof
PCDD/F,was50pgITEQ/m3atameanmeasuredconcentrationof35pgITEQ/m3.The
resultssuggestthatnoconclusionsondifferencesinemissionscouldbemadeiftheresultsare
lessthan85pgITEQ/m3becausethedataiswithintherangeoftheuncertainty.North
AmericandatawasexaminedinastudyconductedfortheAmericanSocietyofMechanical
Engineers.Thisstudycomparedtheresultsofdualtraintestingatvariousvenues.Basedupon
thedataavailableandanupper95%confidenceintervalthestudyfoundthat,at32pgITEQ/m3
theuncertaintyis18.6pgITEQ/m3.Theuncertaintyrisesto49.5pgITEQ/m3atanaverage
concentrationof80pgITEQ/m3.Theauthorofthestudyrecommendsthatmoredataatthe
extremesoftherangeisrequiredtoimprovethemodelused.TheNorthAmericanstudy
suggestthatatthecurrentCWSlimitforincinerators,80pgITEQ/Rm3,theuncertaintyinthe
measuredvaluewouldextendfromlessthantheLOQtoapproximately130pgITEQ/Rm3.
WhilethereisconsiderablediscussionontheapplicationofthestandardPCDD/Fsampling
methods,costsandtimelinessofdataavailabilityhavepromptedthedevelopmentof
alternativeapproachesfordeterminingPCDD/Fconcentrations.Therearetwosimilarlong
termsamplingmethodsemployedinEurope.Theseessentiallycollectsamplesover30day
periodsandthesamplesareanalysedbythesamemethodsusedforstacksamplingtrains.
Theseapproachesofferalongersamplingperiodaveragewhichiscomfortingtopeoplewho
areconcernedthatnotallstacksamplingisconductedundertypicaloperatingconditions.They
arealsolessexpensiveduetothereductioninmanpowerneededtocollectthesample.Having
notbeenincorporatedintolegislationatpresent,thesemethodshaveseenonlylimited
application.
Anothermethodthatpromisesfastercheaperresultsisabioassayapproach.Bioassay
proceduresuseadioxinspecificantibodyfordioxinsanddioxinsimilarcompoundstodetect
andquantifyasampledirectlyasanITEQsumvalue.Bioassaysareextremelysensitive(0.001
pgrange),andcanbeusedforsampleswithaminorPCDD/Fcontent,typicallyfeedandfood
samples.Indeed,inJapan,bioassaywasadoptedasoneofmeasurementmethodintheLaw
ConcerningSpecialMeasuresagainstDioxins(DioxinsLaw).Onepresumesthatshouldthe
bioassaysuggestasamplehasfailedtomeetthelimits,therewouldbeaneedtoverifythis
conclusionbycompletingthedetailedtesting.
PCDD/FRegulatoryStandards
Thereare210isomersofPCDD/Fand209isomersofPCBthatcouldbeidentifiedinthe
analyticalprocedures.Trackingthesesubstancesforthepurposesof:settinglimits;identifying
controltechniques;or,evendeterminingthemechanismsbywhichtheyareformed,wouldbe
extremelyonerous.Whenscientistsidentifiedthatparticularisomerswereresponsibleforthe
effectsnotedduringexposuretoPCDD/Ftheyreasonedthat,ifthedegreeofeffectcausedby
differentisomerscouldbemeasured,itcouldbepossibletoexpresstheamountofPCDD/F
presentbasedupontheanticipatedeffectofthemixture.Thus,theconceptofassessing
PCDD/Femissionsonthebasisoftoxicitywasadopted.Thisapproachhasbecomeknownas
xvi
theTEQortoxicequivalencemethod,baseduponapplyingtoxicequivalencyfactors[TEFs]
thatrelatethetoxicityofeachisomertothatofthemosttoxicdioxincongener,namely2,3,7,8
tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin(2,3,7,8TCDD).Twoschemeshavebeenusedoverthepast1520
years.Thefirstschemewasbaseduponthe1989InternationalToxicEquivalencyFactors[I
TEQ].Thesecondschemeevolvedfromincreasedknowledgeabouttheeffectsofthese
chemicalsandincorporatesvaluesforthecoplanarPCBcompounds.Areviewoftheaffectof
theapplicationofthetwodifferentapproachessuggeststhatthelatestscheme,theWHO98TEF
approach,wouldaddabout15%tothetotalPCDD/Femissions.Todatenojurisdictionhas
adoptedthisapproachtoexpressingemissionstandards.
Inreviewingemissionregulationsfromvariousjurisdictionsitisevidentthatnotall
concentrationsareexpressedinthesamemanner.Differentjurisdictionshaveattemptedto
standardizesuchreadingsbydefininghowtheresultsshouldbeexpressed.Whiletemperature
andpressureaffectgasvolumes,andarespecifiedinmoststandards,concentrationcanalsobe
influencedbytheamountofairpresentinthegasstream.Ifmoreairisadded,the
concentrationisreduced,butthemassflowrateofthepollutantofinterestdoesnotchange.
Theregulatorystandardsfordifferentjurisdictionsareshowninthetableonthenextpage.The
EmissionLimitunitsareexpressedas[pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2],wherethereferenceconditions
are25OCand101.3kPa.
xvii
SummaryofInternationalEmissionRegulationsforPCDD/FfromIncinerators
COUNTRY
Incinerator Type
European Union
All
92
Australian &
New Zealand
All
92
Japan
(based upon
size and age)
>4 Mg/hr
92
existing facilities have limit of 920
2 - 4 Mg/hr
920
4,600
United States
MSW
<2 Mg/hr
Medical
(existing)
Medical
(new)
Emission
Limit
diluent corrections note applied when < 11% O2
no I-TEQ standards rather use total PCDD/F [ng]

existing >225 Mg/d c/w ESP = 25 w/o ESP = 21
new all sizes = 9 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
small units <225 Mg/d with Class I total site >225
existing Class I c/w ESP = 50 w/o ESP = 25
existing Class II = 88 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
1,610
10,500
182
1,610
Existing urban total = 88 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2

Existing rural total = 560 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
<90 kg/hr continuous or <725 kg/day batch
(87.5 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2)
>90 kg/hr continuous or >725 kg/day batch
(17.5 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2)
HazWaste
142
78
without dry APCD system or waste heat boiler

with dry APCD or waste heat boiler
Commercial &
Industrial Waste
287
>32 Mg/day capacity

<32 Mg/day = 23 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
Other Solid
Waste
Canada
(per CWS 2001)
Comments
Municipal
80
existing by 2006, all new construction after 2001
Medical
80
Hazardous
80
Sewage Sludge
80
all new construction after 2001, existing

facilities limited to 100 pg ITEQ/Rm3 @ 11%O2
xviii
TheCanadianIncineratorPCDD/FInventory
AspartoftheoriginalCanadaWideStandards[CWS]PCDD/Fcommitteesworkaninventory
ofoperatingfacilitieswasassembledin2000.Theincineratorsoperatingatthattime,andthe
estimatedemissionsfromthesefacilitiesaresummarizedinthetablebelow.
Baseduponthetotalnumberofincineratorsinthelist,54%wereusedformedicalwaste
disposal.Themedicalwasteincineratorswereestimatedtoaccountfor72%oftheannual
PCDD/Femissions.Theotherlargecategorywerethefacilitiesonfederallandswhichmadeup
athirdofalltheincineratorslisted,howeverthesewereestimatedtoaccountofonly20%ofthe
annualemissions.Onlyafewofthemedicalwasteincineratorshadbeentestedatthetimethe
inventorywaspreparedandnodatawasavailableforthefederalfacilities.Thus,emissions
hadtobeestimatedbaseduponboththeestimatedtonnageprocessedbytheseincineratorsand
emissionfactorsfromtheliterature.Theemissionfactorselectedforthesesourceswas4.67mg
ITEQ/Mgwasteburned.
Table1
Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
SummaryofIncineratorsusedin2000EvaluationofPCDD/FEmissions
Number of Incinerators by Province
AB
BC
Medical
Hazardous
MB
NB
NF
NT
2
37
NS
NU
1
6
Sewage Sludge
Federal Entities
11
13
43
10
Totals
ON
PE
QC
46
SK
YK
11
101
16
10
62
Remote
TOTALS
Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
AB
BC
1.4
6.6
MB
NB
NF
NT
117
9269
2.3
NS
NU
13
1501
141
Sewage Sludge
Federal Entities
73
188
Estimated PCDD/F Emissions to Air [mg I-TEQ/yr] by Province
Medical
Hazardous
791
524
311
54
653
278
235
933
531
9580
56
770
1779
248
ON
PE
QC
2034
85
36
9165
133
SK
Totals
YK
2293
603
389
21,062
2.5
35
178.5
82
29
111
2709
124
87
224
690
5766
Remote
TOTALS
xix
13,993
218
389
29,411
ToupdatethePCDD/Femissioninventoryforincinerationfacilitiesforthisstudy,itwas
necessarytoestablishwhichfacilitieswereoperating,howmuchwastetheyburnannually,
selectanappropriateemissionfactorforeachfacility,andprovideanestimateofthetotal
emissionstocomparetothe2000numbers.The2005estimatesareshowninthetablebelow.
Table2
SummaryofIncineratorsandPCDD/FEmissions2005
Incinerator
Classification
Number
Identified
Waste
Quantity
[Mg/year]
Releases of PCDD/F
[mg I-TEQ/year]
Air
Residues
Total
Large Municipal
762,793
60
4,139
4,198
Medical
42
8,082
3,142
81
3,222
Hazardous
204,418
257
610
867
Sewage Sludge
172,525
46
1,501
1,547
Federal Entities
30
1,087
159
168
Remote and Federal Lands
22
3,320
34
14
47
Totals
116
1,152,225
3,697
6,353
10,051
In2000,theonlyemissionsconsideredwerethosetotheatmosphere.Addedtotheinventory
for2005isaestimateofthePCDD/Freleasedinresidues.Thenumberofoperatingincinerators
in2005,116,issignificantlyfewerthanthoselistedinthe2000inventory,188.Theactual
numberofincineratorslistedinthereportis119.Thelatternumberincludesthreehazardous
wasteincineratorswhicheitherdidnotoperateasaseparatesystemin2005orforwhichno
definitivedatacouldbegathered.TheBelledunefacilitywasnotoperatingin2005,butis
commissionedandcanoperate.ThecarbottomfurnaceatMRRcanonlybeoperatedin
conjunctionwiththeotherfurnaceonsiteandemissionswereassumedtobecombined.Lastly,
nothroughputdataisavailableontheSteacyfacility.The2006reviewidentifiedincinerators
thathavebeenaddedtotheinventorysince2000orweremissedfromthatinventory.These
includethreehazardouswasteincineratorsthatwerenotincludedin2000and22incineratorsat
newresourcedevelopmentsites.
Theclosureofolderfacilities,combinedwithadjustmentsintheestimatingprocedures,
producesarevisedestimateforannualPCDD/Femissionstotheairthatisjust16%ofthe2000
number,lessthan4gmITEQperyear.Thebiggestreductionsoccurredinthemedicalwaste
categorywherethe2005estimateis15%oftheearliernumber.GiventhePCDD/Femission
factorusedforearlierestimatesofthesewagesludgeincineratoremissions,theclosureofthe
Torontofacilityreducedairemissionsforthiscategorybyover50%.Similarreductionsare
evidentinthelargeMSWincineratorcategory.Asignificantnumberofincineratorsoperatedby
federalentitieshavebeenclosedleavingjust30incineratorsinthiscategoryandtheiremissions
areestimatedtohavebeenreducedtolessthan3%ofthepreviousnumber.Hazardouswaste
incineratorsoperatinginthecountryhaveincreasedfrom7to12inthelisting,althoughmostof
theadditionalunitsarenotnew,justonesthatwereoverlookedinthepreviousinventory.
Emissionstotheatmosphereforthiscategoryhaverisenbyover40%toanestimated0.26
g/year.
xx
TheadditionofanestimateforthePCDD/Finresiduestreamsaddsapproximately6.4g/yearto
thetotalPCDD/FreleasesfromincineratorsinCanada.Thisnumberdoesnotincludethe
contributionofresiduesstreamsfromthehazardouswastesectorbecausedisposalvolumesfor
theseunitswerenotavailable,notwasthereanyinformationontheamountofresiduethey
produced.Alltheresidueemissionsareestimatedonthebasisofdefaultfactorsandwould
benefitfromconfirmationbysitespecifictesting.
Thetotalemissionsfromincineratorsin2005,includingtheportionassignedtotheresidue
streams,isestimatedtobeapproximatelyonethirdofthatidentifiedfortheairemissionsonlyin
the2000inventory.
FindingsandConclusions
Duringthecourseofthestudy,22incineratorswereidentifiedashavingbeeninstalledatremote
miningandexplorationcampstoaddresstheneedforsafewastedisposalinareaswhere
landfillingisnotapracticalwastemanagementoption.Theseunits,someservicingrelatively
largecamps,disposeofconsiderableamountsofwasteonadailybasis.Anothergroupofnew
incineratorsinstallationswereidentifiedatvariousindustrialandcommercialinterestsin
Alberta,butitwasnotascertainedwhetherthistrendhasoccurredinotherprovinces.Mostof
thesenewunitsarebatchtypeincineratorsdesignedwithaprimaryandsecondarychamberthe
latterbeingequippedwithatemperaturecontrolledsecondaryburner.Noneareequippedwith
HRSGsandfewhavebeeninstalledwithAPCequipment.RegardlessofthelackofAPC
equipmentontheseunits,limitedtestdatasuggeststhattheiremissionscouldmeettheCWS
standard.Goodcombustioncontrolintheseunitscoupledwithanafterburnerthatensuresthat
minimalquantitiesofproductsofincompletecombustionarereleased,andstacktemperatures
wellinexcessofthedenovosynthesiswindowexplainthisperformance.
Commercialwasteincinerators,thoseburningMSWandmedicalwaste,havebeenupgradedto
meettheCWS.MostofthisoccurredshortlyaftertheStandardwasadopted,andconsistent
monitoringdatashowsmostofthesefacilitiestoberecordingemissionconcentrationsthatare
belowthe32pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2levelofquantificationstandarddefinedbyEnvironment
Canadaassatisfactorilyprovingvirtualeliminationforthatsource.Largecommercial
hazardouswasteincineratorsdidnotmeettheCWSstandardasearlyastheMSWincinerators.
Threeofthe6majorhazardouswasteincineratorslistedinaSeptember2004reporthadtestdata
belowtheCWStarget.ThisreviewhasshownthatthereisuncertaintyinthereportedPCDD/F
valuesbutevenassumingtheworstcase,thecommercialMSWandmedicalwasteincinerators
arestillbelowtheCWSstandard.Ifthereporteddatawereassumedtobesubjecttoapositive
bias,thehazardouswasteincineratorperformancemightbesatisfactorytomeettheCWS.
ThesamplingandanalysismethodsusedinCanadaarecomparabletothoseusedinEurope.
ThelattermethodswererecentlyupdatedbytheEuropeanNormalisationCommissionandcan
beassumedtoreflectthebestavailabletechniquesforensuringrepresentativeemission
xxi
concentrationsarereported.TheEuropeansamplingmethodsprovideanalternativewayof
determiningthelevelofquantificationinasamplebaseduponreviewingthecongenerdata
providedbytheanalyticallaboratory.Withthisapproachthecontributionofspecificcongeners
isincludedoromitteddependinguponthequantitydeterminedintheanalysisandthe
calculationoftheITEQvaluesisdeterminedontwodifferentdistributions.Thisclearlyshows
thepotentialimpactofusingdetectionlimit/quantificationlimitvaluesintheequivalency
calculationandovercomessomeoftheinconsistencieswiththewaytheresultsarepresented.
Similarregulatorystandardsareappliedtoincineratorsinmostjurisdictions.Thesestandards
areappliedregardlessofthewastetheincineratorisburning,orthesizeoftheincinerator,with
theexceptionofsomelowlevelcutoffs.Furtherexceptionstothisfindingwerefoundinthe
UnitedStatesofAmericawheredifferenttypesofincineratorsaresubjecttodifferentstandard,
andinJapanwhereaslidingscaleofallowableemissionsbaseduponsizeisapplied.Inthe
UnitedStates,thestandardsweresetonthebasisoftheMACTprotocolwherethebest12%of
theexistingpopulationwereusedtosetthestandard.InJapan,thereappearstobearecognition
ofthecosteffectivenessofaddingmoresophisticatedcontrolstolargerfacilities.
CanadasCWSPCDD/Fstandardsarethemoststringentinanynationallegislation.
ItdoesnotappearthatanycountryhasmovedtowardsadoptionoftheWHO98TEFfactorsin
theirnationallegislation;however,giventheuncertaintyinPCDD/Fmeasurements,andthe
limitedimpactthattherevisedTEFswouldhaveonthetotalWHO98TEQvalueformost
operatingfacilities,itsimplementationshouldhavelittlerepercussiononoperatingfacilities.
LargefacilitiesinCanadaarerequiredtoroutinelymonitorthestackemissionsofPCDD/F
accordingtotheCWS.Suchmonitoringappearstoberequiredannually,apracticethatisinline
withtherequirementsoftheUSEPA,butlessfrequentthanthetwiceyearlytestingrequiredin
theEuropeanUnion.Provinceshavetheoptiontoallowtestingfrequencytobechangedaftera
considerableperiodofreportedconcentrationsbelowthe32pgITEQ/Rm3LOQleveldefinedby
EnvironmentCanada.TheCWSrequiresthatthisvaluebedeterminedusingdetectionlevel
valuesforcongenersthatarenotquantifiedduringtheanalyticalprocedure.TheCWSwould
appeartoimplythatsmallfacilitiesarethoseburninglessthan26Mgperyear.Theseunitsare
requiredtomakedeterminedeffortstoachievetheCWStargets,and,ifpossible,theyareto
provethattheyindeedtomeetthesestandardsbyasingleroundoftesting.
Thisstudyhasidentifiedthatamajorlimitationinthedataavailablefrommanyofthenon
commercialfacilitiesisthelackofconsistencyindefininghowmuchwasteischargedtothe
furnace.Thisleadsmanyfacilitiestofallintoasituationwheretheytrytorationalizetheirstatus
asasmallfacilityonthebasisofthatthefacilitiesareusedinfrequently,eventhoughthe
incineratorsratedcapacitywouldsuggestthatthefacilitycouldburnconsiderablymorethan26
Mg/yror500kg/weekor70kg/day.
Typically,smallbatchincinerators,designatedbytheirhourlyburncapacity,willaccept
xxii
between70and210kgofwasteperbatch,operatefor23hoursoneachbatch,andcanbe
cycledanywherefrom3to6timesperday.Thissuggeststhatthesesystemscouldprocess26
Mg/yrifthesmallestunitwasrunoncedailythroughouttheyearbutthesameunitcould
processupto156Mg/yrifrunatthemaximumfrequency.Consideringthesmallestunitisrated
at50lbor22kg/hrburnrate,itisclearthatmanyoftheseincineratorshavethepotentialto
exceedthesmallincineratordesignationintheCWS.
Ifthisrationaleisaccepted,mostincineratorsinthecountrythushavethecapacitytoexceedthe
smallincineratordesignation.ThatmeansthattheCWSsuggeststhattheymustallbetested
annually.Giventhecapacityofthetestingindustry,theremotelocationsofmanyofthese
facilities,andthecostofcompletingsuchtesting,itisunlikelythatsuchtestingwillbe
completed.Thus,thereisaneedtoreconsidertherequirementsunderCWSwithrespecttothe
sizeoftheincinerators.
Recommendations
TheimplementationoftheCanadawideStandardsforPCDD/Ffromincineratorshasbeen
effectiveinreducingemissionsfromlargefacilities,andhasforcedtheclosureofmanysmaller
facilitiesthatcouldnotbeviablyupgradedtomeetthestandards.Furthermore,thisstudyhas
shownthattheCWSPCDD/Femissionstandardsetstheworldsmoststringentemissiontarget
therefore:
ItisrecommendedthatnofurtheradjustmenttotheCWSPCDD/Fnumericalemission
standardsisnecessary.
Toclearlyenunciatetherequirementsdefinedbythestandard,giventhedefinitionofwaste
incineration:
Itisrecommendedthatanysystemthatthermallytreatswastesforthepurposeof
disposalbesubjecttotheCanadawideStandardsforPCDD/F.
Whilenewthermaldestructiontechnologiesarebeingdevelopedandemployedinvarious
countries,theirapplicationinCanadawillrequirethattheymeettheCWSforPCDD/F.To
avoidanydebatesabouttheapplicabilityofnewtechnologiestomeetthesestandards:
Itisrecommendedthatanynewthermaldestructiontechnologyonlybeapprovedifthe
proponentcandemonstratethatthesystemwillmeettheemissionstandard,either
throughtheapplicationofasuitableairpollutioncontrolsystem,orbysubmitting
validatedtestdatafromafullscalefacilityoperatinginanotherjurisdiction.Fullscale
facilitiesaretypicallydeemedtobeincommercialoperation,thatistheyarenotlarge
scalepilotfacilities,orevenproofofconceptdemonstrationunits.
xxiii
Thisstudyhasidentifiedagroupofexistingandnewincineratorsforwhichthemonitoring
requirementsoftheexistingCWSstandardarenotviable.Assuchthereareanumberofsteps
thatcouldbetakentoaddressthesesystems.
Thereisevidencethatmostsmallincineratoroperatorsdonotroutinelyrecordwasteloadsto
theirfurnacesandthusthetotalwasteprocessedinayearispoorlydefined.Sincesomesteps
shouldbetakentoestimatetheannualemissionsfromsuchfacilities:
Itisrecommendedthatwastethroughputusedforannualemissioncalculationsforany
smallbatchincineratorshouldbebaseduponthedesignratedcapacityofthespecific
incinerator.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatthenumberofbatchesassumedtobechargedtothe
unitbebasedupon24dividedbytwicethemanufacturerscycletimefortheunitin
hours.
Inanyoftheaboverecommendationsthedocumentidentifiedthatwhendefiningcapacityfor
anyinstallationisshouldbeinthebasisofallincineratorsinstalledonasite:
Itisrecommendedthat,forthepurposesofdefiningthestepsthatanoperatormusttake
toensurethatthefacilitymeetsalltherequirementsoftheCWSforPCDD/F,thetotal
installedincinerationcapacityonagivenpropertybeused.
Thiswillresultinnewinstallationscomprisedofnumeroussmallincineratorsnotbeingableto
avoidtheprovisionsoftheCWSbyclaimingtheunitswerebelowthe26Mg/yearthreshold.
Largeincinerators,whoprovideaservicebaseduponatippingfee,shouldbeusingtheirannual
testdataandtheannualwastethroughputtocalculateannualPCDD/Femissions.However,
thereiscurrentlylimitedinformationavailablefrommostfacilitieswithrespecttoPCDD/Fin
solidresiduesthataretransferredfordisposalso:
ItisrecommendedthatPCDD/Finsolidresiduesshouldbeincludedintheannual
emissionestimatesfromallincinerators.Proceduresandsuitabledefaultfactorsshould
bedevelopedtoaidinthesesubmissions.
Whilelargefacilitiesareroutinelytestedinmostjurisdictions,thesameisnotthecasefor
smallerincinerators.Indeed,eventhoughthedeterminedeffortsclauseoftheCWSsuggests
thataonetimeproofofeffectivenessshouldbecompletedforthesmallerfacilities,thishasnot
beenaccomplished.Suchtestingwouldimposealargefinancialburdenonsmallfacilities.
However,thelimitedtestdatapresentedfornewequipmentshowsthatmoderntwostage
systemsarecapableofmeetingtheCWS.Toencouragetheuseofgoodincinerationpractices
thatwillassisttheoperatorinmeetingthestandards:
xxiv
Itisrecommendedthatjurisdictionsexploreopportunitiestoemployuptodate
incinerationequipmenttoreplaceexistingsystemsthatwouldotherwiseneedtobe
upgradedwithcomplexairpollutioncontrolsystemstomeettheCWS.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatjurisdictionsallowsuchequipmenttobeoperated
withouttheannualtestingrequirementsprovidedtheoperatortakesappropriate
measurestoensuregoodoperationandprovidesadequaterecordsofsuchoperation.
Coupledwiththeserecommendationsareaseriesofimplementationrecommendations.
CurrentlyavailabledatasuggeststhatnewincineratorsarecapabletomeetingtheCWS
standardswhenoperatedaccordingtothemanufacturersinstructions.
ItisrecommendedthatanymanufacturersellingabatchincineratorinCanadaobtain
thirdpartycertificationthattheunitmeetstheCWSforPCDD/Fwhenburningthetype
ofwasteintendedforaspecificinstallation.
Tofacilitatesuchcertification
Itisrecommendedthatamultistakeholdercommitteeconsistingofregulators,
manufacturers,andtestingcompaniesbeconvenedtocommencethedevelopmentofa
certificationprocedureforbatchincinerationequipment.
Suchsystemsshouldbeequippedwithcertainmonitoringequipmenttoensureproperoperation
ismaintained.Asawayofimplementingsuchmeasures:
Itisrecommendedthatequipmentthatachievescertificationcanonlybesoldwitha
monitoringpackagecapableofrecordingpertinentoperatingparametersthatensurethe
systemisbeingusedinthemanneritwasintendedtobeused.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatallinstallationsusingacertifiedincineratorshall
installweighscalestorecordthechargeweightofeachloadchargedtotheincinerator.
Themonitoringpackageshouldbeconnectedtoacomputerwhichwillcontinuouslylogdata
fromtemperatureprobes,differentialpressuremetersandauxiliaryfuelflow.Thedatafrom
thissystemwillbemadeavailabletoenvironmentalinspectorswhowillbeabletocheckthe
performanceofthesystem.Thus:
Itisrecommendedthatthecomputermonitoringequipmentbeintegratedwithallthe
operatingcontrolsofthefacilityinamannerthatwouldfacilitateremoteaccesstothe
datatoenablethemanufacturertoassisttheoperatorwithtroubleshootingtheoperation
oftheunit.
xxv
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatarrangementsbemadesotheappropriate
regulatoryorjurisdictionalauthoritycanaccessthedataremotelyforthepurposesof
monitoringtheoperation.
Theoperatorsofsuchequipmentmustunderstandtheirrolesinensuringappropriate
performanceandthusitisrecommendedthat:
Operatorsbetrained,eitherthroughanappropriatesitespecifictrainingprogramsor
throughacertificationprogramprovidedbyaqualifiedbody,ontheoperationofthe
unit.
Operatorsbeinstructedtodistinguishbetweenbroadcategoriesofwaste,saypackaging
versusfoodwaste,andbegivenclearinstructionsonhowmuchofeachcomponentitis
suitabletochargethefurnacewithoneachload.
Theprovisionsforequipmentcertificationthatavoidtheneedforannualtesting,andthe
suggestionthatcertainsystemsdonotneedAPCsystemstomeettheCWSonlyappliesto
systemsthatventdirectlytotheatmosphereattemperaturesinexcessof600OC.Systems
equippedwithheatrecoveryboilershavethepotentialtohavehigheremissionsduetothegases
spendingtimeinthedenovosynthesistemperaturewindow.
Itisrecommendedthatanyownercontemplatingtheinstallationofaboileronawaste
incineratorberequiredtoinstallanAPCsystemtoremovePCDD/Ffromtheexhaustgas
stream.
Newer,simplersystemshavebecomeavailableandcanbeusedtolimitemissionswhilenot
undulyincreasingthecomplexityofthesystem.
ExistingincineratorsshouldberequiredtoprovethattheyaremeetingtheCWSforPCDD/F.To
thatendseveralrecommendationsaddressthesmallsystemstilloperatinginthecountry.Many
oftheseincineratorshaveproducedlittledatatoenabletheiremissionstobeestimated.Indeed,
annualwastethroughputdatawasnotavailableformostofthesesystems.Therefore:
Itisrecommendedthatallfacilitiesinstallscalesandstartrecordingtheamountofwaste
chargedtotheirincineratoralongwiththedateandtimeofthestartandcompletionof
eachoperatingcycle.
Electronicrecordsshouldbecollectedtofacilitateanalysisofannualthroughput.
Sincemostofthesesystemsaresmall,batchincinerators,forwhichthecostofannualtesting
maybeprohibitive,ifitisdeemedappropriatetoallownewbatchinstallationswithoutPCDD/F
testingrequirements,existingsmallbatchincineratorsshouldmeetsimilarrequirements.Thus:
xxvi
Itisrecommendedthatthesefacilitiesberequiredtoinstalltemperature,pressureand
auxiliaryfuelflowmonitoringequipmenttoconfirmtheincineratorisoperated
appropriately.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatallrecords,monitoringdataandreportsrequired
shallbemaintainedatthesiteforaminimumperiodofatleasttwo(2)yearsfromthe
dateoftheircreationinahardcopyformatandasanelectronicrecordandshallbemade
availableforinspectionbyregulatorystaff.
WhilethePCDD/Finventorywasupdatedforthisstudy,keepingituptodaterequiressome
informationfromtheoperatingfacilities.Toimprovetheinventory:
Itisrecommendedthatallfacilitiesberequiredtofile,withtheappropriateregulatory
authority,theirannualwastethroughputdata,bytheendofMarchinthefollowingyear
startinginMarch2008.Thisfilingshouldincludedetailsonthequantityanddisposition
ofresiduesdischargedfromthefacility.
Asnotedearlier,arecommendationwasincludedtoencouragethedevelopmentofmoredata
onresiduequalityandvolumessotheinventorycanbeupdatedtoincludethecontributionof
theresidues.Lastly,whenthethroughputandresiduedatabecomeavailable:
ItisrecommendedthatthePCDD/Finventorydevelopedaspartofthisstudybeupdated
in2008bytheincorporationofwastethroughputandresiduegenerationdataalongwith
theresultsoftheresiduetestingprograms.
Basedupontheresultsofthisupdate:
ItisrecommendedthatsuitabledefaultfactorsforairemissionsandPCDD/Finresidues
bedevelopedtoaidinpreparingtheannualemissionestimatesfromallincinerators.
xxvii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
UndertheCanadianEnvironmentalProtectionAct1,thefederalToxicSubstancesManagementPolicy
(TSMP)andtheCCMEPolicyfortheManagementofToxicSubstances,dioxinsandfurans[PCDD/F]
weredesignatedasTract1substancesandscheduledforvirtualeliminationfromtheCanadian
environment.ToachievethisgoaltheincidentalreleaseofPCDD/Finemissionsfromvarious
combustionsystemswastargettedforaction.DuringthedevelopmentoftheCanadaWide
StandardforPCDD/F,thatculminatedintheadoptionbytheMinistersin2001,anumberof
sourcecategorieswereconsideredforspecificrecommendations.Amongthesourceswas
incinerationforwhichspecificairemissionstandardswereadopted.
UndertheadoptedCWSstandard,allneworexpandedincinerationfacilitieswererequiredto
meetanumerictargetandconfirmthatthishadbeenachievedthroughonetimetesting
followingstartup.Existinglargeincinerationfacilitieswererequiredtomeetnumericstandards
by2006,andtoprovetheymetthestandardbyundertakinganannualtestingprogram.Existing
smallincinerators,definedasthoseincineratinglessthan<26tonnesperyear,weretoundertake
determinedeffortstoreducePCDD/Femissionsthroughtheapplicationoftechnicallyand
economicallyfeasibleinplantchangesoradditionstotheemissioncontrolsystemsthatwould
produceongoingreductionsinemissions.Forthesmallfacilitiessubjecttothedetermined
effortsdefinitioncontainedintheStandard,itissuggestedthattheeffectivenessoftheseefforts
shouldbeevaluatedthroughonetimetestingfollowingimplementationofthemeasures.
TheMinistersincludedarequirementthatprogresstowardsmeetingtheCWSobjectivesbe
reviewedafter5years.Thisreportformspartofthematerialsbeingpreparedforthatreview.
1.1
ScopeofReport
WhentheRequestforProposalsforthisreviewwasissueditcalledforanumberofaspectsof
incinerationtobeaddressed:
updatingthenationalinventoryofincineratorsourcesandtheiremissions;
reviewingmethodsemployedbyoperatorstomeettherequirementsofCWS;
assessingtheimplicationsofimprovedairemissioncontrolstrategiesonresidue
streams;
comparingemissionstandardscurrentlyappliedinCanadatothoseinother
jurisdictions,includingassessingtheapplicationofalternativewaysofexpressing
emissioncriteria;and,
consideringtheimplicationsoftheimplementationofalternativethermal
processesforwastedestruction,includingthepotentialeffectofthesesystemson
thereleaseofPCDD/Ftotheenvironment.
CEPA,1999.CanadianEnvironmentalProtectionAct,1999.1999,c.33[AssentedtoSeptember14,
1999]Availableathttp://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C15.31/
A.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd.
ApreliminaryreviewoftheprogressmadeontheCanadaWideStandardforPCDD/Fwas
conductedforCCMEin20052.Thatreportmadeanumberofrecommendationsthatwere
incorporatedintothescopeofthisstudy.Thestudyteamnotedthattheyhadnotbeenableto
correlatethe2000PCDD/Finventoryestimateswithdataavailableinthe2004NPRIlistings.
Theysuggestedthattherewasaneedtomakethelinkbetweenthetwolistsmoretransparent
andatthesametimeevaluatethequalityoftheinventorydata.Furthermore,thestudyteam
suggestedthattheirexaminationoftheliteratureindicatedthatemissionswerenotreportedina
consistentmannersoitwasdifficulttocompareliteraturedatatoavailableemissioninformation.
Toprovidethebackgroundfortheemissionestimatesderivedinthisreport,incinerator
technologiesandairpollutioncontrolequipmentcapabilitiesarereviewed.Asanextensionof
thetechnologydescriptions,typicaltestdatafromvariousfacilitiesarereviewedanddiscussed
withrespecttothecurrentunderstandingoftheformationofPCDD/Fincombustionprocesses.
Suchdatacanbeinterpolatedtoprovidebetterestimatesofemissionsfromincineratorsinstalled
inthelastfiveyears.Moreover,toimprovethetransparencyoftheemissionestimatesderivedin
thereport,adiscussionofallaspectsofemissioninventorydevelopmentisprovidedandthe
inventoryisbaseduponrecommendationsforcalculatingtheappropriatefactors.
1.2
Nomenclature
Aspointedoutinthe2005review,partoftheproblemmanypeoplehavewhenreviewingdata
onPCDD/Femissionsisthatthedataarenotexpressedinaconventionalconcentrationmanner.
ThisisbecausethetermPCDD/Freferstomanyorganicspecies.
Thepolychlorinateddibenzopdioxins[PCDD],thepolychlorinateddibenzofurans[PCDF]and
thepolychlorinatedbiphenyls[PCB],thethreeorganicspeciesofparticularinterestinthisreport,
aresimilarinnature.Theirgeneralmolecularstructureconsistsoftworingsofsixcarbonatoms
(benzenerings,asshowninFigure11)boundbyoxygenatom(s)(shownasOinthefigure)with
chlorineorhydrogenatomsattachedinthenumberedpositions.Thereare75different
configurationsforthechlorineatomsassociatedwithPCDDs,eachofwhichisknownasan
isomerorcongener.Theyarefoundin8groups,definedashomologuesorcongenergroupsin
theUSEPA3.Homologuesaredividedbaseduponthenumberofchlorineatomspresentonthe
rings(1,2,3,4,5,6,7or8).Similarly,thereare135PCDFcongenersalsodividedinto8
homologues.
JacquesWhitford,2005.DioxinsandFuransCanadaWideStandardsEmissionInventoryUpdate
andReviewofTechnicalPollutionPreventionOptions.AreporttotheCanadianCouncilofMinistersofthe
Environment.
3
USEPA,2005.TheInventoryofSourcesandEnvironmentalReleasesofDioxinLikeCompounds
intheUnitedStates:TheYear2000Update(ExternalReviewDraft,March2005;EPA/600/p03/002A)
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/2kupdate/
3
Figure1.1
SchematicDiagramsofPCDD,PCDFandPCBs
4
Polychlorinatedbiphenyls[PCBs]aremorecomplicatedthanPCDD/Fs.Thereare209PCB
congeners,ofwhichonly13werethoughttobesimilartodioxins:thosewithfourormorelateral
chlorineatomswithoneornosubstitutionintheorthoposition4.Thesecompoundsare
sometimesreferredtoascoplanar,meaningthatthetwobenzeneringsareonthesameplane
givingthemoleculeaflatstructure.
Forallthesechemicals,thephysical/chemicalpropertiesofeachisomervariesaccordingtothe
degreeandpositionofchlorinesubstitution.
Ascanbeappreciatedtryingtodocument,letalonetrackandsetlimitsfor210PCDD/Fisomers
and13specificPCBcongenerswouldbeexceedinglydifficult.Indeed,duringtheNITEPPEI
studiesconductedforEnvironmentCanada,theresultsforthePCDD/Fsweremerelyreportedas
thehomologuevalues,withthesumofthehomologuesbeingthedatathatwaspublishedfor
PCDD/Femissions.PCBswerereportedasthesumofallPCBhomologuesmeasuredduringthat
testing.Itwasnotuntilafterthatstudy,conductedin1984,thattheconceptofassessingPCDD/F
emissionsonthebasisoftoxicitywasadopted5.ThisapproachhasbecomeknownastheTEQor
toxicequivalencemethod,baseduponapplyingtoxicequivalencyfactors[TEFs]thatrelatethe
toxicityofeachisomertothatofthemosttoxicdioxincongener,namely2,3,7,8
tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin(2,3,7,8TCDD).ThisconceptwasinitiallyappliedforPCDD/F
congeners,andonlymorerecentlyhasitbeenextendedtoincludePCBs.ThemostcommonTEF
valuesusedthroughoutthe1990sweretheInternationalfactors(ITEF)6.ThesumofthePCDD/F
emissionsexpressedinthismanneraredesignatedintheliteratureasITEQvalues.Forthemost
part,allconcentrationsreferredtointhisreportareexpressedinthismanner,asdesignatedby
theinclusionofITEQinthedefinitionofmass,ie.pgITEQ/g.
Otherconventionsrelatedtodescribingemissions,namelytheinclusionofdiluentfactorsand
differenttemperaturesstandards,ortheusealternativetoxicequivalencyschemesareintroduced
intheappropriatesectionsofthisreport.
Ahlborg,VG;Becking,GC;Birnbaum,LS;etal.(1994)Toxicequivalencyfactorsfordioxinlike
PCBs.Chemosphere28(6):10491067.
5
USEPA,(1989a)Interimproceduresforestimatingrisksassociatedwithexposurestomixturesof
chlorinateddibenzopdioxinsanddibenzofurans(CDDsandCDFs)and1989update.Washington,DC:Risk
AssessmentForum.EPA/625/389/016.
6
Kutz,FW,Barnes,DG,Bottimore,DP,Greim,H,Bretthauser,EW.1990.Theinternationaltoxicity
equivalencyfactor(ITEF)methodofriskassessmentforcomplexmixturesofdioxinsandrelatedcompounds.
Chemosphere,20,751757.
1.3
ReportStructure
Thisreportisorganizedintothefollowingchapters:
Chapter2PCDD/FFormationprovidesabriefoutlineofthecurrentunderstandingofthe
formationofPCDD/Fasameansofexplainingwhythemainwayofcontrollingtheirreleaseis
generallytoapplygoodcombustionpractices.
Chapter3IncinerationProcessessummarizesthetypesofincineratorsystemsusedinCanada
andhoweachattemptstoaddresstherequirementforprovidinggoodcombustioncontrol.
Chapter4AirEmissionControlStrategiesprovidesadiscussionofairpollutioncontrol(APC)
systemswithanemphasisonthemethodsusedtocontrolthereleaseofPCDD/Fpresentinthe
gasesleavingthecombustionportionofthefacility.
Chapter5PCDD/FSamplingMethodsreviewsthesamplingmethodsusedbydifferent
jurisdictionstodeterminetheamountofPCDD/Fbeingemittedintheexhaustgasstream.
Chapter6ReportingMeasurementResultsdiscusseshowdifferentjurisdictionsexpress
PCDD/Fmeasurementresultsandidentifiesconversionprocedurestoallowcomparisonof
results.
Chapter7PCDD/FEmissionRegulationsprovidesasummaryofthePCDD/Femissionslimits
thatareinplaceinAustralia,EuropeanUnion,Japan,NewZealand,andtheUnitedStates.
Chapter8EmissionDataprovidesasummaryoftheavailableemissiondataforincinerators
operatinginCanadainfourmaincategories(largeMSWincinerators,medicalwasteincinerators,
hazardouswasteincinerators,andsewagesludgecategories)andalsoprovideslimiteddataon
smallbatchincinerators.
Chapter9AlternativeEquivalencyFactorsprovidesadiscussionofalternativestotheITEQ
equivalencyfactorsandexaminestheeffectofusinganalternativeequivalencyfactoron
Canadianincineratoremissionmeasurementresults.
Chapter10FindingsandConclusionsprovidesasummaryofthemainfindingsand
conclusionsofthisreport.
Chapter11Recommendationsprovidesrecommendationsbasedonthefindingsand
conclusionsofthisreport.
2.0 PCDD/FFORMATION
PCDD/Freleasesfromcombustionprocessesisgenerallyconsideredtobeunintentional.Thatis,
theprocessisnotdesignedtocreatethesecompoundsandtheirpresenceisindicativeofeither
theirlackofdestructioninthecombustionprocess,ortheirformationbysomemechanisms
operatinginthefurnace.Thischapterprovidesabriefoutlineofthecurrentunderstandingof
theirformationasameansofexplainingwhythemainwayofcontrollingtheirreleaseis
generallytoapplygoodcombustionpractices.AdetaileddiscussionofPCDD/Fformationis
includedinaCCMEcommissionedreportonwastemanagementpollutionprevention
alternatives7.Thatdocumentprovidesthefollowingsummaryoftheissuessurrounding
formationandcontrol:
TheformationofPCDD/Fastracebyproductsofcombustionprocesseshasbeenstudied
extensivelysincethemid1980swithmuchoftheresearchbeingconductedon
municipalsolidwasteincinerators.Thisstudyhasdeterminedthatformationisahighly
complexphenomenainvolvingmultiplegasandsolidphasereactionsbetweenminute
quantitiesofreactants.Twomaintheoriesregardingthemechanismofformationof
PCDD/Fduringcombustionprocesseshavebeendeveloped.Thesetheoriesshouldnot
beregardedasbeingmutuallyexclusivefromoneanothersincetheymayactin
combinationduringthecombustionofanycarbonaceousmaterial.
ThedenovosynthesistheoryisconsideredthemajormechanismbywhichPCDD/Fare
formedinthermalindustrialprocesses.ThistheorysuggeststhatPCDD/Fisformedin
thepresenceofflyashcontainingchemicallyunrelatedunburntaromaticsandmetal
catalysts.Gasphasechlorineisbelievedtoformmetalchloridesonthesurfaceofthefly
ash.Themetalchloridessubsequentlyreactwiththecarbonstructuresontheflyash.
Thisisfollowedbymetalcatalyzedoxidation/gasificationoftheflyashsurface,which
releasesvariouschlorinatedorganiccompoundsincludingPCDD/F,chlorophenols,
chlorobenzenes,andaliphatics.Thesereactionsmustoccurinthepresenceofoxygenand
catalystsformedfromtransitionorheavymetals.Moreover,researchersfoundthat
temperaturesintherangebetween250OCand450OCweremostlikelytoresultinhigher
PCDD/Fgeneration.Formanyincinerators,thistemperaturerangeisonlyfoundinthe
postfurnaceregion,typicallythewasteheatboilerorinelectrostaticprecipitators(ESP).
Denovosynthesisexperimentssuggestthatmorefuranthandioxincongenersareformed
(ie.,PCDF:PCDD>1.0)alongwithotherchlorinatedorganiccompounds(eg.,PCBs,
chlorobenzenes,chlorophenols,chlorinatedpolycyclicaromatics).
Researchershaveconcludedthatthebasicsetofconditionsrequiredfordenovosynthesis
ofPCDD/Fareasolidmatrixcontainingcarbonstructures,organicorinorganicchlorine,
copperorironions,anoxidizingatmosphere,andanoptimaltemperaturerangeof250to
Chandler,A.J.,2002.TechnicalPollutionPreventionOptionsforIncineratorsAReportPrepared
forTheCanadianCouncilofMinistersoftheEnvironmentInc.byA.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd.WillowdaleON.
September2002
7
450OC.
ThePrecursorTheorysuggestssimplythatthevariouschemicallyrelatedchlorinated
aromaticsundergocondensationreactionsonflyashsurfacesinthepresenceofmetal
catalysts.Thus,twoprecursormoleculesarecoupledtoformadioxinorfuranstructure.
Inthistheory,theprecursorcompoundsmusthaveastructuralresemblancetodioxin
andfuranmolecules.Theoptimaltemperaturerangefordioxinandfuranformationover
whichtheprecursortheoryoperatesisthesameasthatobservedfordenovosynthesis
(i.e.,250to450EC).Therefore,formationofPCDD/Ffromprecursorsmustalsooccurin
thepostcombustionzonesofthermalprocesses.Thistemperaturerangeisoften
consideredthewindowofopportunityforcatalyticformationofPCDD/Fonsurfacesof
flyashparticles.
Boththedenovoandprecursortheorieshavebeenvalidatedinlaboratorystudies;
however,therelevanceofeachtheorytoactualcombustionscenariosinthefieldhasnot
beenwellestablished.Themaindifferencebetweenthesetwotheoriesrelatestothe
carbonsource.Itislikelythatfurtherresearchmayblurthedistinctionbetweenthese
twotheories,suchthatthecarbonsourceinPCDD/Fformationisderivedbothfrom
condensationofgasphaseorganicsandvolatilizationofflyashderivedorganics,with
therelativeattributiondependentonfacilityandprocessspecificvariables.Thus,thetwo
theoriesarenotnecessarilymutuallyexclusive.TheformationofPCDD/Finthermal
processesisundoubtedlytheresultofacomplexsetofcompetingchemicalreactions.
RegardlessofwhichtheoryortheoriesbestexplainshowPCDD/Fareformedduring
thermalprocesses,certainconditionsthatactincombinationtoincreasethepotentialfor
PCDD/Fformationhavebeenwellcharacterizedinthescientificliterature,particularly
thosestudiesconductedwithmunicipalsolidwasteincinerators.Theseconditions
include:
incompletecombustionofafuel
anoxidizingatmosphere
presenceofachlorinesource
flyashsurfaces(carbonsource)
flyashwithdegeneratedgraphiticstructures(moreorderedcarbonatom
arrangementsarelesspronetodecompositionreactions)
presenceofcatalyticmetals(especiallycopper,butiron,manganeseand
zincarealsoindicatedaspotentialcatalystsforPCDD/Fformation)
temperature/timehistoryofatleast1secondatlessthan600OC(optimal
temperaturerangeliesbetween250and450OC)
Fromthisitfollowsthatgoodcombustion,whichreducestheconcentrationofproducts
ofincompletecombustion,boththegaseousandsolidforms,mustbethefoundationof
anymeasurestoreducePCDD/Femissionsfromincinerators.Theotherattributesrelate
8
totheconditionsandsubstancesfoundintheincineratorand,aftergoodcombustion
controlhasbeenemployed,littlecanbedonetochangethesesituations.
Onthebasisofthislist,somehavesuggestedthatcontrollingtheamountofchlorinein
thesystemmightinfluencethegenerationofPCDD/F.Consistentanalysisoftheavailable
dataindicatesthatchangingtheamountofchlorineinwastestreamsdoesnothavea
discernibleimpactonPCDD/Femissionsfromwasteincinerators.Therefore,itis
unlikelythatinterventionstoreducetheamountofchlorineinwastewillproduceany
appreciableeffectonPCDD/Femissions.
FromtheforegoingitcanbeseenthatgoodcombustionisnecessarytoensurelowPCDD/F
emissions.Forengineersandscientiststhephrasegoodcombustionhassomemeaning,but
whataretheimplicationsforregulatorsormembersofthepublictryingtograpplewiththe
potentialperformanceofnewincinerators?Moreover,withmanyinfrastructureprojects
becomingapublic/privatepartnership,howdopoliticiansandfinanciersjudgethesuitabilityofa
particulardesignfortheirspecificrequirements?
2.1
CombustionControlPrinciples
Combustioncontrolmustcompensatefor:
thenaturalvariabilityinfuelquality;and,
thecontrollingfactorsthatgoverntherateofchemicalreactions.
SewagesludgeandliquidhazardouswastesaremorehomogeneousthanMSWandmedical
wastestream,therebyiteasiertocontrolcombustioninincineratorsusedfortheirdisposal.
However,variabilityinthefuelstillmustbeaddressed.Incineratoroperatorsunderstandthe
needtokeeptheoperationatasteadyleveltoachievethebestperformance.Eachcomponentof
awastestreamhasitsinherentenergycontentandthismustbematchedwithsufficientoxygen
toensurepropercombustion.Becausethemixofcomponentscanchange,somemeansmustbe
providedtoallowthesystemtohandlethisvariability.Ensuringthatthewasteiswellmixed
beforeitischargedtothefurnaceisthefirststep.Theremainingvariabilityinthefuelmustthen
behandledbyawelldesignedfurnace.
Typicallycombustioncontrolsystemscompensateforthefuelvariability.Twostagestarvedair
systemsandkilnsystemsgenerallyrelyuponmaintainingalargequantityoffuelinthekilnto
dampoutthevariabilityinthewastequalitywhereasconventionalmassburnMSWincinerators
mustrespondtotheheatreleasebyadjustingtheairflow.Bysensingtherateofheatreleasein
thefurnaceandadjustingthesupplyofcombustionairthecontrolscompensateforespecially
highorlowheatreleaserates.Alternatively,somedesignersadjustthefuelfeedratesto
compensateforthecalorificvaluevariability.
Theimportanceofthecontrolstepscannotbeoveremphasizedbecausethethermaldestruction
9
oforganicsisnotasimpleprocess.Manyintermediatestepsareinvolvedintheoxidationoflong
chainhydrocarbonmaterialstotheproductsofcompletecombustionnamelycarbondioxide
(CO2)andwater.Generally,itisagreedthatthereactionoccurringinthefuelbedisoneof
gasification,withthewastebeingexposedtoairwhilebeingheated.Theamountofairadded
underthebedofmaterialandthedegreeofagitationofthebedcontrolstherateofgas
generation.Thegasesthatleavethebedarerichincarbonmonoxideandhydrogenandcontain
manyunburnedhydrocarbons.Whenprovidedwithadditionalairthesegaseswillburnreadily.
Thisadditionalairisnormallyreferredtoasoverfireairandissuppliedabovethebed.The
degreetowhichthecombustionprocessiscompletedisafunctionofhowwelltheairandthe
gasesaremixed.Theamountofcarbondioxidegenerateddefinestheextentofcombustion
completionandisgenerallyreferredtoasthelevelofcombustionefficiency.Complete
combustionwillresultinthegenerationofCO2andwatervapouronlybutthisisrarelythecase
assometracesoforganicmaterialscanusuallybefoundinincineratorexhauststreams.
Carbonmonoxide(CO)isthemostrefractory,ordifficulttooxidize,speciesintheoxidativechain
fromhydrocarbontocarbondioxideandwater.TheoxidationofCOtoCO2isaccomplished
muchfasterinthepresenceofhydrogen.MillerandFisk8suggestthedominantreactioninthe
chainis:
CO+OH>CO2+H
Theconcentrationofhydroxylradicalsisthusveryimportantinthereaction.However,the
reactionbetweenhydroxylradicalsandhydrocarbonsisfasterthanthatbetweenCOandOHand
itisnecessarytoconsumeallthehydrocarbonsinthesystembeforethesystemcanmaximizethe
conversionofCOtoCO2.ThushighlevelsofCOaregenerallycorrelatedwithhigherlevelsof
residualhydrocarbonsillustratingtheratelimitingstepsinthereaction.
Ifexcessiveairispresentinthefurnace,thecombustiontemperatureandtheconcentrationof
hydroxylradicalsarereduced.Inturn,theorganicsreactwiththeOHradicalsandtheCO
oxidationdoesnotoccur.Conversely,insufficientaircanleadtopocketsoffuelrichgasthatlack
sufficientoxygentooxidizetheCO.Itispossibletoestablishanappropriaterangeforthe
concentrationofoxygeninanysystem.OperationinthiszoneminimizesthereleaseofCOand
thusalsominimizestraceorganicreleases.Theestablishmentofthisrangeismostimportant
because,oncedeterminedforasystem,itcanbeusedtoensurethatthesystemisoperatingatits
mostefficientlevel.
Goodcombustionconditionsleadingtoreducedorganicemissionsarethosethat:
ensurecompletemixingofthefuelandtheair;
maintainhightemperaturesinthepresenceofsufficientoxygen;and,
Miller,J.A.andG.A.Fisk,1987.CombustionChemistry.C&ENAug.31,1987;pp2248.
10
preventtheformationofquenchzonesorlowtemperaturepathwaysthatwould
allowpartiallyreactedsolidsorgasestoexitfromthecombustionchamber.
Thesedesignconditionsmustbecombinedwithgoodoperatingconditionstoensurethatthe
performanceismaintainedandorganicconstituentsarereducedtothebasicelements.Asnoted
byMcKay9itisparticularlyimportanttopreventthegenerationofsootinthesystem,because
sootconsistsofcarbon,andasdiscussedintheprevioussection,carbonintheflyashofthe
incineratorwillleadtoPCDD/Fformation.
Whilecombustioncontrolisgenerallydesignedtoaddressthedestructionoforganiccompounds,
adjustingcombustionconditionscanalsoinfluencethedownstreampartitioningofinorganic
materialsintheincinerator.Highertemperaturesinthefurnaceinfluencethenatureofthe
compoundsformedinthefurnaceandwhetherthesecompoundsarevolatilizedortransportedin
solidphasewiththeexhaustgases.Highertemperaturesandmorecompletecombustionresult
intracemetalsbeingfoundfurtherdownthesystem,particularlyintheAPCresiduestream.
SuchconditionswerenotedduringtheNITEPMSWsystemtestingatPEIinthemid80s10.Of
course,sincetracemetalemissionsmustbealsobecontrolled,theairpollutioncontrolsystems,
discussedlaterinthisreport,mustfulfillvariousroles.Whilenofurtherdiscussionofthe
relationshipsbetweencombustionandtracemetalsemissionsiscontainedinthisreport,the
readerisreferredtootherdocumentsforadetaileddiscussiononthosecontaminants11.
Theconditionsthatleadtoareductioninorganicemissionsalsocancauseanincreaseinthe
generationofNOx.TheformationofNOxisattributedtotwomechanisms:theoxidationofthe
fuelnitrogentoNOx;andthecombinationofnitrogenandoxygenincombustionairathigh
temperatures,thethermalNOxportion.TheconversionoffuelnitrogentoNOxisdependent
uponthelocaloxygenavailabilitytovolatilespecies,theamountoffuelboundnitrogenandthe
chemicalstructure.ThethermalNOxreactionisstronglytemperaturedependentbecauseitis
formedbythecombinationofradicalsofthetwospecies.Ithasbeenshownthattheconversion
offuelnitrogencanrangefrom5%to50%controlledlargelybytheextentofmixingandthe
contentofoxygen.
Partofthepreviousdiscussionindicatedthatifdenovosynthesisistooccurseveralconditions
mustbesatisfied,nottheleastofwhichishavingthegasandparticulateparticipatinginthe
McKay,Gordon,2002.Dioxincharacterisation,formationandminimisationduring
municipalsolidwaste(MSW)incineration:review.ChemicalEngineeringJournal86(2002)343368.Availableat:
http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/mckay_dioxinformation_2002.pdf.
10
NITEP,1986.TheNationalIncineratorTesting&EvaluationProgram,(NITEP),AirPollution
ControlTechnology.EnvironmentCanada,ReportEPS3/UP/2,September.
11
Chandler,A.J.,2003.BackgroundStudyontheIncinerationofHazardousWaste.FinalDraftof
AReporttoENVIRONMENTCANADAtocompleteContractNumberK223720006.PreparedbyA.J.Chandler&
AssociatesLtd.Toronto.March
11
reactionspendsufficienttimeinthetemperaturerangeconducivetosuchsynthesis.Typically
heatrecoverysteamgenerators[HRSG],orboilers,areusedatMSWincineratorfacilitiesto
converttheenergyinthewastetousefulformsofenergyfordistrictheatingorelectricity
production.Temperaturesinsuchdevicesareintheappropriaterangetoencouragethe
synthesisreactions.Thusonewouldexpectthat,giventhesamecombustionefficiencyinan
MSWincineratorsandasewagesludgeincinerator,thePCDD/FemissionsfromtheMSW
incineratormightbehighergiventhatHRSGdevicesaremorelikelytobeusedinMSWfacilities
thanonsewagesludgeincinerators.Similarly,boilersarenottypicallyinstalledinhazardous
wasteincineratorsorbiomedicalwasteincinerators.
Whilemuchoftheresearchemphasishasbeenfocussedondefiningtheconditionsconduciveto
minimisingemissionsofPCDD/Fthroughthestack,themechanismsdiscussedabovealsohave
implicationsforsolidresiduestreamsgeneratedbycombustionequipment.Obviously,ashfrom
thegrateofsolidfuelcombustiondevicewillbeexposedtotemperaturesinexcessofthat
conducivetoformation,indeedtemperaturesintherangewhereanyPCDD/Fwillbedestroyed.
Rapidquenchingofashdischargedfromthegratesshouldminimisethepotentialforany
PCDD/Finthatwastestream.Ontheotherhand,residuesfromheatrecoverysystems,which
operateinthecriticaltemperaturezonemaybeexpectedtohavesomePCDD/Fpresent,butthe
amountwilllikelyvarywiththetemperatureregimewheretheashwascollected,andthetime
theashwasinthegasstreamatthesetemperatures.ThissuggeststhatthePCDD/Fformation
processesrelatedtodenovosynthesisorprecursorsmaybeinhibitedifthegassesleavingthe
systemarerapidlyquenchedtobelowtheoptimaltemperatureranges.
Ofcourse,thecorollaryisalsotrue.IfPCDD/Fmaterialsareexposedtoelevatedtemperaturesin
theabsenceofoxygenthePCDD/Fwillbedestroyed.BaseduponhisresearchHagenmaier12
developedtheheatsoaktechnologyinGermany.Byheatingtheflyashinanatmospherewith
littleornooxygenPCDD/Faredestroyed.Thisapproachisnowbeingsuccessfullyusedfor
PCDD/PCDFdecontaminationofflyashandotherresiduesmainlyinEuropeandJapan.
12
Hagenmaier,H.,M.Kraft,H.Brunner,andR.Haag,CatalyticEffectsofFlyAshfromWaste
IncineratorFacilitiesontheFormationandDecompositionofPolychlorinatedDibenzopdioxinsand
PolychlorinatedDibenzofurans,EnvironmentalScienceandTechnology21,pp.10801084,1987
3.0 INCINERATIONPROCESSES
3.1
Introduction
Thepreviouschapteridentifiesincineratoroperatingcharacteristicsthatareanticipatedtogive
risetoinadvertentproductionofPCDD/F.Tounderstandhowthesefactorsmightrelateto
PCDDD/FemissionsthischaptersummarizesthetypesofincineratorsystemsusedinCanada
andhoweachattemptstoaddresstherequirementofprovidinggoodcombustioncontrol.With
thelikelihoodthatsomePCDD/Fmaybereleasedevenfromthebestoperatingincinerators,air
pollutioncontrolsystemscanbeemployedasthelastoptiontominimizethereleaseofPCDD/F
totheatmosphere.Theavailableairpollutioncontrolsystemsarediscussedinthenextchapter.
Figure3.1isageneralizedschematicofanincinerationsystem.Notallcomponentsshowninthe
diagramareinstalledineveryfacility.Thedottedlinesindicatecomponentsofthesystemthat
couldbeconsideredoptionalinsomeincineratorinstallations.
Figure3.1
GeneralizedSchematicofanIncinerationSystem
13
Regardlessofthewastebeingdestroyed,allincineratorshaveazonewherethewasteisignited
andmixedwithairtopromotecombustion.Mostincineratorsprovideadditionalairtocomplete
thecombustionprocess.Afterthewastehasbeenoxidizedinthefurnace,residues,generally
referredtoasbottomash,mustberemovedfromthefurnace.Theenergyavailableinthehotgas
streamgeneratedbycombustionmayberecoveredinaheatrecoverysteamgenerator[HRSG]or
boilertherebycreatingsteamthatcanbeusedtoproduceelectricityorforprocessorspace
heating.
Ifanairpollutioncontrolsystemisinstalledtotreatthehotgasesleavingtheincinerator,thegas
treatmentsystemincludessomemeansofreducingthegastemperaturebeforethecontrol
devices.Thisreducesthesizeoftherequiredcontrolequipmentbecausethegasvolumeis
reduced.WhileanHRSGinstalledinthesystemwillreducethegastemperatures,ifthereisno
boilertypicallyarapidquenchsystemwillbeusedtoachievethedesiredgastemperatures.As
notedinthepreviouschapter,suchquenchingwilllimitthepotentialfordenovosynthesis
becausethegasesdonotremaininthecriticaltemperaturerangeforsufficienttimetoallowthe
reactionstoproceed.LackingeitheranHRSGoraboiler,gasescanbereleaseddirectlytothe
atmosphere,typicallyashightemperature.
SolidresiduesdepositinHRSGunits,orarecollectedinairpollutioncontrolsystems.These
streamsaregenerallyreferredtoasflyashbecausetheyhavetravelledsuspendedintheexhaust
gases.Again,becausetimeisrequiredforthesynthesisreactionsthatproducePCDD/F,the
quantityofPCDD/Fpresentintheflyashstreamscanvarydependinguponwheretheflyashis
removedfromthesystem.
The2006CWSIncinerationreviewtaskencompassesincineratorsdesignedtodisposeof:
municipalsolidwaste[MSW];
biomedicalwastematerials;
sewagesludge;and,
hazardouswaste.
Thesewasteshavingdifferentphysicalandchemicalcharacteristicsandincineratorsneedtobe
purposebuilttohandlethespecificmaterials.Thus,anincineratordesignedforsewagesludgeis
unlikelytoprovidesatisfactoryoperationforthedisposalofliquidhazardouswastematerials,or
evenmunicipalsolidwaste.Similarly,MSWcannotbechargedtoaliquidhazardouswaste
incinerator,oramultiplehearthsewagesludgeincinerator.
Foranyspecificfurnacethereisalimitationontheamountofmaterialthatcanbechargedtothe
system.Thechargingrateislimitedbythesystemsdesignheatreleaseratewhichinturnis
governedbytheabilityofthespecificfurnacetosupplyandmixsufficientairtoensureallthe
wasteisburnedinthemosteffectivewaypossible.Asnotedinthepreviouschapter,toohigha
heatreleaseratemakesitunlikelythatcombustionprocessescanbecompleted;toolowaheat
releaserateusuallyleadstoinsufficienttemperaturesinthecombustionsystemandthe
14
productionofproductsofincompletecombustion.Indesigningthesystem,themanufacturer
seekstoprovidegoodcombustioncontroltominimizethepotentialforPCDD/Fformation.
Itshouldberecognizedthatforagivenwastetypedifferentdesignvariantscanbeemployed.
Differentdesignsofincineratorsarelimitedinboththeminimumandmaximumamountof
wastetheycanbefed,thussomedesignsarepreferredforsmallinstallationsandsomeare
requiredforlargeinstallations.Thesuitabilitybothforthetypeofwaste,andtheamountof
wastethatwillbedestroyed,dictatesmostincineratorselectionsasthesefactorshaveadirect
impactonthecapitalcostoftheequipmentandthusthepertonnedisposalcosts.
Thedesignvariantsdiscussedinthisdocumentaresomewhatgenericinnature,thatistheycan
beemployedfordifferenttypesofwastes,providedtheyaredesignedforthespecificwastethat
willbechargedtothefurnace.Inthiswayfixedgratefurnacesareemployedformedicalwastes,
certaintypesofhazardouswastes,andgeneralMSWdisposalinsmallbatchtypesystems.
Similarly,fluidizedbedfurnacescanbeusedforsewagesludgedisposal,hazardouswaste
disposalandMSWdisposal.Rotarykilnfurnacesarefrequentlyemployedforhazardouswaste
destructionbutalsoformanintegralpartofonemanufacturersMSWincineratoroffering.
Specificfurnacetypes,suchasthemassburnEuropeanfurnacesusedforMSWdisposal,seldom
seedutyforothermaterials.Thediscussionthatfollowsdealswithincineratordesignsbyfuel
typesasaconvenientwaytodifferentiatebetweenthedesigns.
Table31providesasummaryofthetypesofincineratorsavailableinthemarketplace,thetypes
ofwastestheytypicallyhandle,andtherangeofcapacitiesthatareavailable.Specificdetailsare
providedonthepagesfollowingthetable.
15
Table3.1
SummaryofIncineratorTypes
Description
General
ApplicableWasteTypeHandled
SubCategory
MassBurn
Modular
MSW
Hazardous
SewageSludge
Medical
100700Mg/d
StarvedAir
5120Mg/d
453,500kg/hr
453,500kg/hr
ExcessAir
10100Mg/d
453,500kg/hr
453,500kg/hr
RotaryKiln
50300Mg/d
60150x106Btu/hr
453,500kg/hr
FluidizedBed
50150Mg/d
AsReqd
RDF
Stoker
SemiSuspension
4001000Mg/d
<5.7m3/hr
Multihearth
Catalytic
565Mgdry/d
30450Mg/d
LiquidInjection
Multichamber
Fume
0.56Mgdry/d
Retort
10350kg/hr
10350kg/hr
Inline
225900kg/hr
225900kg/hr
Fume
AsReqd
16
3.2
MunicipalSolidWasteIncinerators
MSWincineratorfacilitiestypicallycontainseveralprocesssections:
awastereceivingandstoragearea;
awastefeedsystemtochargetheincinerator;
acombustionsystem;
aboilertoconverttheheatofcombustiontousableenergy;
anairpollutioncontrol[APC]system;and,
anashhandlingsystem.
Thefirstfiveoftheseprocessesallhavethepotentialtoinfluencetheoperationofthefacilityand
thequalityandquantityofairemissionsandsolidresiduesreleasedfromthefacility.Processing
thewastetoremovenoncombustiblematerialswillreducethevolumeofresiduesgenerated.
Processedfuel,generallytermedrefusederivedfuelorRDF,isnormallyburnedinfurnacesthat
areconfigureddifferentlyfromthoseusedtoburnMSWandbothtypesoffurnaceshavetheir
ownoperatingcharacteristicsandemissionspatterns.
3.2.1
AvailableMSWCombustionAlternatives
Thereareatleast18majorincineratorsystemmanufacturerswithoperatingMSWincinerator
systemsintheworld.Whileeachsystemhassomeuniquefeatures,combustionsystemscanbe
dividedintotwobroadcategoriesbaseduponthefuelcharacteristics:
massburningtheasreceivedMSWisfeddirectlyintothefurnaceandburned
onagrateorhearthwithoutanypretreatmentsuchassizereduction,shredding,or
materialseparationpriortoburning.
refusederivedfuel(RDF)apreparedfuelofamorehomogeneousnaturewhich
issoldtooutsidecustomersorburnedinanonsitededicatedincinerator.
MassburningwasadoptedinEuropeattheturnofthecenturyandhascontinuedtoevolveover
thepast25years.Whilethesesystemsdonotrequirepretreatmentofthewastefedtothe
furnace,removalofoversizedmaterial(appliancesandfurniture,etc.)andmixingofthewaste
beforefeedingarecriticaltosmoothoperationofthesefacilities.Massburningisawell
establishedtechnology.Twotypesofmassburnsystemsareavailable:
theEuropeanorlargesystem;and,
themodulartypesystem.
TheRDFprocessinvolvestheseparationofcertainmaterialsfromthewastetoimprovethe
combustioncharacteristicsofthefuel.Variouslevelsofprocessingarepossiblebuttheyall
involvethesamebasicoperations.TheMSWisusuallyshreddedtherebyreducingthesizeofthe
17
material;sortedtoremovenoncombustibles;andburnedinsemisuspensionorsuspensionfired
furnaces.Ferrousmetalsmayberecoveredusingmagneticseparators;and,glass,gritandsand
mayberemovedbyscreening.Furtherprocessingcanbeusedtoremovecertainplasticsand
aluminummaterialsifdesirable.Airclassifiersorrotarydrumsmayalsobeusedtofurther
processthefuelproductbyremovingadditionalnoncombustiblematerials.Duringprocessing
thematerialisthoroughlymixedimprovingitshomogeneity.
Thereisnouniqueanswerastowhichincinerationmethodisbetter.Thechoiceofsystemis
typicallybasedupontheamountofwastethatmustbedisposed,ortheageofthefacility.In
Canada,noRDFfacilitiesarestillinoperation.ThelastRDFfacility,theSWARUplantin
Hamilton,Ontarioclosedin2002.MassburnEuropeanfurnacesareoperatedinQuebecCityand
Vancouver,BritishColumbia.StarvedairmodularincineratorsareinstalledinCharlottetown,
PrinceEdwardIslandandBrampton,Ontario.ThefurnacesatLevis,QuebecandIledela
Madeleinearedefinedasstepgratefurnaces.
3.2.1.1 MASSBURNINGSYSTEMS
EUROPEANTYPESYSTEMS
TheEuropeansystemshaveproventoberuggedaswellasreliableandhavebeenconstructedin
sizesrangingfrom100Mgperday(Mg/d)to750Mg/d.Massburningtechnologycanbeapplied
inalmostallsituations;however,itdoesnotcompetewellwithotherincinerationsystemsat
designcapacitiesbelow300Mg/dbecauseofthehighcapitalcostperMgofwasteburneddaily.
TheEuropeanmassburningincineratorcanbeeitheroftherefractorylinedorthewaterwall
design.Inarefractorylinedfurnace,combustiontemperaturesareregulatedbyusinghigh
excessairrates(100to200percentexcessair).Inawaterwallfurnace,thecombustiontempera
tureismaintainedbycirculatingwaterincloselyspacedtubeslocatedonthefurnacewalls.Most
waterwallfurnacesoperateatalowerexcessairrate,intheorderof80%.Thisresultsina
reductionofboththefurnacevolumeandthesizeoftheairpollutioncontrolequipment.
ThebasiccombustionprocessinEuropeanmassburnfurnacesconsistsoflayeredburningofthe
wasteonthegratethatformsthebottomofthefurnaceandtransportsthewastematerialthrough
thefurnace.Thefuelpassesthroughvarioustemperatureregimeswhileonthegrate.Theinitial
gratesectionisusedtodrythewaste;radiantheatfromthefurnace,combinedwithunderfireair
drivesoffthewater.Oncethematerialisdryitbeginstopyrolysepriortoburning.The
pyrolysisandcombustionprocessatthisstageconsumesthewastebutgeneratessignificant
quantitiesofhydrogen,carbonmonoxideandunburnedhydrocarbons.Additionalairisrequired
tocompletetheconversionofthesematerialstocarbondioxideandwatervapour.Thisairis
suppliedabovethematerialonthegrate,andiscommonlycalledoverfireair.Thelastsectionof
thegratecompletesthereactiondrivingthebalanceofthecombustiblesfromthebedmaterial.
Sufficienttimemustbeallowedforthislaststageofcombustiontogotocompletionandmaintain
highcombustionefficiency.Materialleavingtheburnoutsectionofthegratepassesthrougha
18
quenchtankbeforebeingdewateredandconveyedtoanashstoragebunker.
Generallythegratemanufacturersprovidethegratesystemanddesignthefurnaceconfiguration
abovethegrate.Whencombinedwiththeirproprietaryaircontrolsystems,thegratesystemscan
meetguaranteesoftheappropriatelevelofcombustionforthewastebeingburned.TheHRSGor
energyrecoverysystemdownstreamofthefurnacecanbesuppliedbyanyoneofseveralboiler
manufacturers.
Differencesingrateandfurnacedesignoroperatingphilosophyarebaseduponthe
manufacturersexperience.Theefficiencyofthegratesystem,asdefinedbyconsumptionof
carbon,dependsuponitsabilitytoprovidecombustionairtoallthewaste.Thisrequiresthatthe
wastebemixedwhileonthegratetherebyexposingfreshsurfacesforburning.Whilethegrates
canvaryinconfigurationtheyaregenerallydividedintothreecategories:
Rockinggrateswithalternaterowsbeingmechanicallypivotedorrockedto
produceanupwardandforwardmotion,advancingandagitatingthewaste.
Reciprocatinggratesconsistingofsectionsstackedaboveeachotherwitheachpair
consistingofafixesportionandonethatslideshorizontally.Wastetumblesoffthe
fixedportionandisagitatedandmixedasitmovesalongthegrate.
Travellinggratesareformedofacontinuousmetalbeltconveyororinterlocking
linkagesandmovealongthelongitudinalaxisofthefurnace.Severalbeltscanbe
stagesthroughthefurnacebottom,andwhilethewasteisnotagitatedwhileon
thebeltitiswhentransferredfromonebelttothenext.
Maintaininguniformconditionsreducesthepossibilitiesofoperationalproblemscausedbyash
slaggingorcorrosioninthecombustionzone.Themanufacturersachievestableoperationby
controlling:
bedcoverage:tryingtomaintainauniformdistributionofwasteonthegrate;
combustionairflow:adjustingtheinitialcombustionzoneairtomatchtheburning
characteristicsofthesolids;and,
therelationshipbetweenthegrateandthegasgoingtotheupperpartofthe
furnaceandthelocationofoverfireairports:developinggoodmixingofgases
abovethebedandenhancingthecombustioneffectiveness.
Thefurnaceconfigurationplaysanimportantroleintheeasewithwhichcombustioncanbe
controlledandthequalityoftheashleavingthegrate.Thepaththatthecombustiongasestake
aftertheyleavetheburningwasteisalsoimportantinensuringuniformandcomplete
combustion.
Asthegasesleavingthegratemovethroughthethroatofthefurnace,additionalairmustbe
19
addedtocompletethecombustionprocess.Thedesignofthefurnacethroatisanimportant
aspectinensuringpropermixingofthisairandthuscontrollingtheconcentrationoforganic
contaminantsinthefluegasandtheAPCresidues.Overfireairmustbewellmixedandhave
limitedpotentialforshortcircuitingorcreatingtemperaturedepressioniflowemissionsaretobe
achieved.Thethroatcausesaflowconstriction,therebyenhancingturbulenceandprovidingthe
bestlocationtoensurethecompletemixingoftheoverfireairandthecombustionproducts.
Thebalanceofunderfiretooverfireair,thewastenatureandthecontrolofthesystemcan
influencethewaythematerialburnsandaffectbothashqualityandtheairemissions.Air
controlsystemsprovidevaryingflowsofairtodifferentregionsofthegrateandtodifferentareas
ofthezoneabovethegrates.Typically,60to80%oftheairaddedtothefurnacecomesfromthe
underfiresystem.Withlimitedoverfireair,itsadditionmustbecarefullycontrolledtoachieve
thedesiredmixing.Thelocationandconfigurationoftheoverfireairportsismademorecritical
bythevariationsinthewasteandtheneedtofollowthesteamdemandinenergyfromwaste
[EFW]plants.Controllingsteamproductioncanbeaccomplishedinseveralways.The
philosophiesoftwodifferentmanufacturersillustratehowthesecanvary.
VonRoll(QuebecCity)monitorsthesteamproductionrateandcontrolstheram
feederfrequencyandtheamountofprimaryairtothemiddleregionofthegrate,
thepyrolysisregion,tomaintainthecorrectsteamrate.VonRollalsomonitorsthe
furnacetemperaturesintheradiantregiontocontrolthesecondaryairflowrates.
Ifthetemperaturedrops,thesecondaryaircanbereducedtorestoretemperatures
tothecorrectlevel.
Martin(Vancouver)usesO2levelsinthefluegastocontroltherefuseramfeeder
rateandthegratespeed,thuscontrollingtheMSWfeedrate.Asecondcontrol
loopmonitorssteamrateandadjuststheunderfireairtocontrolthesteam
productionrate.
Bothofthesecombustioncontrolphilosophiesarealsoaimedatmaintainingloworganic
emissionratesfromthefurnace.Theseconditionscaninfluencethetracemetalpartitioning
betweenthefurnaceandtheAPCsystembecausetheynotonlycanchangethetemperature
regimesonthebedandvolatilizematerialsthatmightotherwisenotbecomevolatilebutalso
localvelocitiesthatcaninfluencetheamountofmaterialentrainedintothegasstream.
20
MODULARINCINERATIONSYSTEMS
Smallermassburnincineratorsaretypicallyofthemodulardesign,beingfactorybuiltand
installedinthefield.TypicalmodularincineratorsforMSWapplicationsrangeincapacityfrom
10to100Mgperday.Smallersizedmodularincineratorsareusedformedicalandhazardous
wastedisposal,withthesmallestmodularincineratorsbeingskidmountedtransportablesystems
thatcanbeusedinremoteareas.Thelatercanbeinthe3590kg/hrsize.
Themodularincinerator,alsoreferredtoasthecontrolledairincinerator,makesuseofatwo
stagecombustionprocess.Typicallymodularincineratorsconsistofaprimarychamberanda
secondarycombustionchamber.Theyareclassifiedaseitherexcessairorstarvedair(sub
stoichiometric)onthebasisoftheprimarychamberoperatingmode.Thedifferenceinthesetwo
modesofoperationaresummarizedbelow:
a)StarvedAirIncineratorTheprimarychamberofthisincineratorisrunwithout
sufficientairtocompletetheburningprocess(belowthestoichiometricrequirement).
Typically30to80%ofthestoichiometricrequirementisprovided.Withoutsufficientair,
pyrolysisgasesareformedintheprimarychamber.Excessairisprovidedinthe
secondarychambersectionoftheincineratortocompletethecombustionprocess.
b)ExcessAirIncineratorTheprimarychamberintheseunitshasmorethanthe
stoichiometricrequirementofair.Typically60200%excessairissuppliedtotheseunits
andthispromotesalmostcompletecombustionintheprimarychamber(intheorderof
9095%).Gasphasecombustioniscompletedinthesecondarychamberwhereadditional
airisaddedonanasrequiredbasis.
Ofthetwotypesofcontrolledairincinerators,thestarvedairunit(SeeFigure3.2)appearstobe
themorewidelyused.Thesuccessofthestarvedairdesignhasbeendue,inlargepart,toits
abilitytoreducetheentrainmentofparticulatematterinthefluegas.Thishasbeenattributedto:
1.
2.
3.
minimizingthedisturbanceofthefuelbedbylimitingthenumberofgrates;
maintainingaslowrateofvolatilizationbyreducingairflow;and,
consuminganyliberatedparticlesinthesecondarychamber.
Moststarvedairmodularsystems(theCharlottetownfacilityandtheBramptonfacilityaretwo
typicalexamples)featureasteppedseriesofsolidhearthswithlimitedairinjectionpoints.Thisis
differentfromEuropeanmassburnandexcessairmodularunitsthatfeatureairintroduction
throughthegrateandnumerousmovinggratesections.Largermodularincineratorsusedfor
continuousoperationareequippedwithahopper/ramassemblyordoubleramsystemtoallow
wastetobechargedtothefurnaceonaperiodicbasis,typicallyevery68minutes.Thewasteis
movedthroughthefurnacebytransferramsplacedalongthesteppedbottomofthefurnace.To
21
Figure3.2
SchematicofFixedHearth,TwoStageIncinerator(fromUSEPA)
maintaincombustioncontrolwithvariablewastematerialsthesefurnacesretainalargemassof
partiallyburnedmaterialatalltimes.Thecontrolledairconceptprovidesfasterresponseto
temperaturefluctuationsbecauseupperchambertemperatureiscontrolledbyvaryingtheover
fireairadditionrateratherthanthemorecomplicatedsystemsemployedinlargeconventional
massburningunits.
Thelargemassofmaterialinthefurnace,minimaldisturbanceofthebed,andlowunderfireair
additionratesinthestarvedairsystemgenerallyresultinpoorercarbonconversion,higherash
quantitiesandlowerenergyrecoverytypically5560%comparedto6570%formassburning.
Thelatestgenerationofstarvedairunitshaveincludedprovisionforaburnoutheartharea
whereextraairissuppliedbelowthewasteonthefinalhearth.Thishasreducedtheashvolume
andloweredtheunburnedcarbonlevelstobelow6%,asdemonstratedduringthe1992startup
oftheBramptonfacility.
ModularincinerationsystemshavealowercapitalcostperdailyMgofwasteburnedcompared
tomassburningoperations.Starvedairsystemscanhavelowerexcessairrequirementsthan
massburnunitstherebyreducingthesizeofAPCequipment.
ControlledairincineratorsaremanufacturedbyseveralvendorsincludingBasic(Wainwright),
Consumat(PEI,Brampton),MorseBoulger,andSimonds.Theseunitsaresuppliedasstandard
modelsbutcanbemodifiedtosuitthespecificneedsofacustomer.Manymanufacturersalso
supplyequipmenttomedicalcarefacilitiesforthedisposalofbiomedicalwastes.
22
OTHERMASSBURNVARIANTS
Severalothermassburningtechnologiesareinlimitedusethroughouttheworld.Amongthese
technologiesarevariationsoftherotarykiln.SeeFigure3.2.
Systemscategorizedinthisclassconsistofarotarykilnandanafterburner.Rotarykilnsarethe
basicprocessingcomponentinthecementandlimeprocessingindustriesaswellasprovidingthe
enclosureforthedestructionofsolidhazardouswastematerials.
Therotarykilnisalongcylindrical,refractorylined,steelshellthatrotatesaroundits
longitudinalaxisduringoperation.Toallowittorotate,thekilnisfabricatedwithreinforced
steelbandsontheoutsideofthecylinderandtheseringsrideonsteelrollers.Kilnsaretypically
rotatedbyageartrainthatengagesaspurgearaffixedtothecircumferenceoftheshell.
Mostkilnsforwastecombustionapplicationsare4.5to6metresindiametertofacilitatetheir
factoryfabricationandshipmenttosite.Theirlengthcanrangefromtwicetotentimestheir
diameterdependinguponthespecificapplication.Therefractoryliningfortheshellisacid
resistantbrick.Normallytheinsideofthekilnissmooth,however,somedesignsincorporate
vanesorpaddlestoencouragesolidsmixingalongthekilnlength.Thelongaxisofthekilnis
normallyslightlyinclinedtothehorizontal.Typically,thisincline,referredtoastherake,isin
therangeof2Oto4O.Rotationalspeedsrangefrom0.5to2revolutionsperminute,again
dependinguponthenatureofthewastesbeinghandled.Itisimportanttorealizethatthe
combinationoftherakeandtherotationalspeedcombinetodeterminetheresidencetimeofthe
solidsinthesystemandtheamountofmixingprovidedforwastesandcombustionairinthe
furnace.Mixingalsoservestotransferheatbetweenthewaste,theflamesandtherefractory.
RotarykilnsusedforMSWprocessingcanbeofwaterwallorrefractorywalldesignandcanalso
includeignitiongratessimilartothegrateinaEuropeanmassburnsystem.Systemsincurrent
operationincludetheVolundrotaryfurnace,andtheWestinghouse/OConnorrotarykiln.The
differencebetweenthesesystemisthattheWestinghouseunitisawaterwalllinedkilnwithair
andwatertubeslaidlongitudinallyinthekiln.TheVolundisarefractorylinedkiln.
TherearenorotarykilnincineratorsusedforMSWinCanada,butthehazardouswaste
incineratorsattheSwanHillsTreatmentCenterareofthisdesign.
23
Figure3.3
SchematicofRotaryKilnIncinerator(fromUSEPA)
3.2.1.2 REFUSEDERIVEDFUELSYSTEMS
Unlikethemassburnsystems,RefuseDerivedFuel(RDF)systemsfireawastethathashadits
physicalcharacteristicsaltered.Thefurnacesthenhandlethiswastebypneumaticallyinjectingit
intothecombustionchamber.Thefuelisthenfiredinsuspension,onastokergrateorina
fluidisedbedincinerator.
SEMISUSPENSIONBURNINGSYSTEMS
Whilesemisuspensionfurnaceareusedtoburnwoodwasteorcoal,operatingexperiencewith
MSWhasbeenrelativelylimited.ThemostrecentinstallationsofthistypeareinHartford,
ConnecticutandDetroit,Michigan.TherearenoinstallationsofthistypeinCanada.Inthese
furnaces,thefuelisinjectedintothefurnacethroughwallports.Onceinthefurnaceitignites,
andburnswhilefallingtothegrate.Thebottomofthefurnaceisgenerallyequippedwitha
travellingscreentypegratesystemwherefinalburnoutoccurs.
RDFsystemsaredesignedtohaveheaviermaterialsburnonthegrate.Themajordesign
considerationwiththesesystemsistoensurethatthefuelisinjectedinsuchamannerthatit
buildsanevenbedacrossthegrate.Thisisanalogoustothedesireforuniformbedcharacteris
ticsinthemassburnsystem.Toaccomplishedthis,thedesignersensureheaviermaterialstravel
24
furtheracrossthefurnacebeforetheyfalltothegrate,andtheydesigntheinjectionsystemto
spreadtheinjectedmaterialacrossthegrate.
Thistechnologytypicallyoffershigherenergyrecoveryefficiency,lowerexcessairrequirements
andlowercapitalcost(perdailyMg)ascomparedtomassburningsystems.Inspiteofthese
advantages,semisuspensionburningisgenerallynoteconomicalforplantsizesbelow400t/d.
DatafromtheHartfordfacilityindicatethatthecombustioncharacteristicsofthesefurnaces
promotesincreasedentrainmentofparticulatematterfromthefurnacethroughtheboilerand
intotheAPCsystem.Thisbehaviourhasthepotentialtoincreasecarbonmonoxidelevelsand
regulatoryrequirementsforcarbonmonoxidearelessstringentthanforothertypesoffurnaces.
STOKERFIREDSYSTEMS
Stokerfiredboilersarecommonintheutilityindustry.TheiradaptationtoburningMSWor
combinedMSWandcoalwasadevelopmentthatbenefittedboththeutilitiesbysupplyingfuel
andthemunicipalitieslookingforMSWdisposaloptions.Thisoldertechnologywasemployed
fortheSWARUfacilityinHamiltonbeforeitclosedin2002.
InstokerfiredsystemstheRDFinjectedontothecleanpartofthegrate.Thedistributionacross
thegrateiscontrolledbythedistributionairnozzle.Unlikeoldersemisuspensiongratesystems
wheretheunderfireairissuppliedbyoneplenum,thetypicalspreaderstokerhasseveral
plenumssoairdistributioncanbematchedtothewastepatternonthegrate.Overfireair
introductionintothesesystemsisaccomplishedthroughatangentialentrysystem.Thisissimilar
inconcepttothemanufacturersutilityboilerdesigns.
OTHERRDFVARIANTSFLUIDISEDBED
Thefluidisedbedreactoriscapableofdestroyingawiderangeofwastesincludingsewage
sludge,petroleumwasteandpaperindustrywaste.TheseunitshavebeenadaptedtofireRDF
materialsandareusedextensivelyinJapanforMSW.Theyaremorelikelytobeusedfor
hazardouswasteorsewagesludgeinNorthAmericaandadetaileddescriptionofthetechnology
isprovidedlaterinthischapter.
3.3
HazardousWasteIncinerationEquipment
Thereareanumberofdifferenttypesofincineratorsthatcanbeusedfordisposingofhazardous
wastes.Thetypeofincineratorselecteddependsuponthenatureofthewastebeingdisposed.
Forinstance,solidhazardouswastecannotbedestroyedinaliquidinjectionfurnace,butliquid
wastescanbeinjectedintodedicatedzonesofsystemsthathandlesolidwaste.Liquidscanbe
disposedinawiderangeofsystemsfromtheliquidinjectionfurnacetoboilersorindustrial
furnaceswheretheenergycanberecycledintonewproducts.
25
Themajorityoftheoperatingcommercialhazardouswastedisposalsystemsarebaseduponone
ofthefollowingtechnologies:
rotarykilns;
liquidinjectionincinerators;
fluidisedbedincinerators;and,
fixedhearthincinerators.
Thedisposalofhazardouswasteinindustrialfurnacesformsasignificantportionoftheavailable
disposalcapacityintheUnitedStates,butnotinCanada.Cementmanufacturingisahighly
energyintensiveindustrywithaheavyproductthathasresultedincementplantsbeingspaced
about300kmapartoverthemoredenselypopulatedportionsoftheUS.TheUSEPAnoted13that
in1994therewere111operatingcementmanufacturingfacilitiesintheUS.About30separate
siteswereburninghazardouswastederivedfuelatthattime.
Similarapplicationscouldincludelightweightaggregatekilns[LWAK]andlimekilns.TheUS
EPA14designatestwelvedifferenttypesofindustrialfurnacesforpotentialhazardouswaste
disposalinthatcountry.Theseincludeonsiteboilerswhichconvertfuelenergytothermal
energyeitherforprocessheatingorelectricalenergy.Boilers,asdefinedbytheUSEPA,40CFR
Part266,SubPartH,areencloseddevicesthatusecontrolledflamecombustiontorecoverand
exportatleast75percentoftheenergyoffsiteintheformofsteam,heatedfluid,orheatedgases.
Bydefinition,boilersburninghazardouswastesintheU.S.musthaveacombustionchamberand
primaryenergyrecoverysystemofintegraldesigntoensurethattheenergyrecoveredisin
excessof60percentoftheinput.
ThemainhazardouswasteincineratorsinCanadaarerotarykilnandliquidinjectionfurnaces.
Theirgeneralconfigurationofthesystem,theinputwastecharacteristicsandoperating
parametersaredescribedbelow.
3.3.1
RotaryKilns
Thegeneraldiagramanddescriptionofthistypeofincineratorwasprovidedearlier.
Solidsandgassesmoveinthesamedirectioninmostrotarykilnsusedforsolidhazardouswaste
disposal.Whenthewastesandauxiliaryfuelareintroducedinthesameendofthekiln,the
wasteisignitedquicklyandtheproductsofcombustionareprovidedthemaximumresidence
13
USEPA,1995.TechnicalSupportDocumentforHWCMACTStandards,Volume1:Descriptionof
SourceCategories.PreparedbyU.S.EPAsOfficeofSolidWasteManagementDivision,technicalsupportbyEnergy
andEnvironmentalResearchCorporation(EER)andEERGCunderEPAContracts68D20164,and68W70029.
14
USEPA,1991.BoilerandIndustrialFurnaceregulationsregardinghazardouswastedisposal.40
CRFPart266,SubpartH,56FR7134,February21,1991.
26
timeintherotarysectionofthefurnace.Solidsarefedoneitheracontinuousorsemicontinuous
basisusingvariousfeedmechanisms.Batchfeedingisachievedthroughanairlocktocontrolthe
excessairinthekiln.Liquidsareintroducedeitherinbatchformincontainers,oratomized
throughthedirectburneroranauxiliarywastefuellancethatintroducesthewasteintothemain
burnerflame.Atomizingisprovidedbyairorsteamindualfluidnozzles.Whilemostwastesdo
notrequirepretreatmentfordisposalinhazardouswasteincinerators,someoperatorsmixliquid
andsolidwastestoprovideameansofbalancingtheheatinputandneutralizingcorrosivewastes
priortofeedingtothekiln.Wastefeedsarecontrolledsothatwasteoccupiesnomorethan20%
ofthekilnvolume.
Directimpingementofthemainflameonthewastestartsthedestructionprocess.Heatisalso
transferredtothewastefromthebulkgassesandtherefractorywalls.Asinmostcombustion
processes,volatilisation,partialcombustionandgasificationreactionscontributetothe
destructionofthewaste.
Hazardouswasterotarykilnsystemsaretypicallysizedfor60millionBtu/hrheatinput,butcan
beaslargeas150millionBtu/hr.Solidsretentiontimesinthekilnrangefrom0.5to1.5hours,
whilegassesareretainedforapproximately2secondsinmostsystems.Typicalgastemperatures
inthekilnexceed870OC,whilethesolidsattaintemperaturesinexcessof650OC.Combustionair
isprovidedthroughportsonthefaceofthekiln,andthroughleakagethroughtherotaryseals.
Theresultingexcessairlevelsrangefrom50to200%.
Thenatureofrotarykilnsmeansthattheirsealsaretheweakpointforemissions.Highratesof
volatilisationcancausepressureincreasesinthekilnwhichleadtogassesescapingthroughthe
seals.Thus,theintroductionofhighlycombustibleorexplosivewastesneedstobecarefully
controlled,ortherateofmixingmustbereducedtominimisetheexposureoffreshsurfaces.
Inorganicmaterials,includingash,slagandotherincombustibleitemsthatremainwhenthe
wastereachestheendofthekilnaredischargedintoawaterfilledquenchtank.Thewateractsas
asealpreventingtheentryofairintothekiln.Therateofdischargeofashresiduemustbe
controlledsolarge,hotmassesdonotdropintothequenchtankandcreatesteamexplosionsthat
increasethepressureinthekiln.
Gassesleavingtherotarykilnareroutedtoasecondaryrefractorylinedcombustionchamberor
afterburnertocompletethedestructionofvolatilegasphaseunburnedmaterialsleavingthekiln.
Thisisessentiallyaliquidinjectionfurnace.Temperaturesontheorderof1200OCwith100to
200%excessair,turbulentflowmixingandagasresidencetimeof1to3secondsensuresuitable
performancefromtheafterburner.Temperaturesaremaintainedthroughtheuseofauxiliary
fuel,normallyapumpableliquidhazardouswaste.Sinceslaggingcanbeaconcernatthehigh
temperaturesachievedintheafterburner,somefacilitiesemployhotcyclonespositionedbetween
thekilnandtheafterburnertoremoveentrainedparticulatematter.
Theprecedingdescribesthebasicrotarykilninstallationhoweverseveralvariantsareemployed
inspecializedapplications.Thefastrotarykilnisoperatedatgreaterthan20rotationsperminute
27
toincreasemixingofthewasteandthegasses.Starvedairoperation,wherethekilnisrunsub
stoichiometric,reducesfluegasvolumesandauxiliaryfuelrequirements.Oxygenassistedkilns
involvetheintroductionofoxygenintothesystemtoreducetheamountofairrequiredand
hencetheauxiliaryfuelrequirements.Slaggingkilns,operatedattemperaturesexceedingtheash
meltingpointoftheinorganicsaredesignedtogenerateamoltenash.Slaggingkilns,suchasthe
installationatSwanHills,typicallyhavelowerparticulateemissionratesandproducesolid
residuesthatarelesssusceptibletoleachingoftoxicmetals.Withtheirhigheroperating
temperatures,slaggingkilnsproducehigherNOxemissionsandexperiencereducedrefractory
operatinglife,butaresuitedtothedestructionofsaltladenwastesandcanincreaseorganic
destructionefficiency.
RotarykilnsareusedtovolatilizeorganicsfromcontaminatedsoilsatthetwoBennettfacilities,
oneoperatinginQuebecandtheNewBrunswickfacilitythathasnotbeencommissionedyet.In
boththesesystems,afossilfuelafterburnerisusedtodestroythevapourphaseorganicsliberated
fromthesoils.
3.3.2 LiquidInjectionIncinerators
Liquidinjectionincineratorsarethesimplestofallthesystemsusedforhazardouswaste
disposal.Typicallytheyconsistofacombustionchamberequippedwithawasteburner,air
supplyandauxiliaryfuelsystems.Asnotedinthediscussionofrotarykilnsystems,the
afterburneronhazardouswasterotarykilnsystemsisaliquidinjectionfurnaceusuallyoperating
withlimitedrangeofhazardouswastefeedmaterials.Ineitherapplicationsliquidinjection
furnacesarefittedwithanairpollutioncontrolsystem.Morecomplexliquidinjectionsystems
havenumerouswastefeedportsdesignedtohandledifferenttypesofwasterangingfromhigh
specificheatsolventsoroiltypematerialstoleanaqueousbasedwastes.Themajorlimitationon
liquidwastesisthattheymustbeatomisedtopromoteefficientcombustionsotheviscosityofthe
materialislimitedtolessthan10,000SSUandsludgesormaterialswithhighsolidscontentsmust
bescreenedpriortobeingfedtotheburner.
Atomisationisthekeytothesuccessfuloperationofaliquidhazardouswasteincinerator.Dual
fluidnozzlesutilizingairorsteamormechanicalsystemsthatrelyonpressureatomisationor
rotarycupsystems,provideafinemistwithdropletsof40morlessinsize.Thedropletsof
wastehavealargesurfaceareatopromoterapidvaporisationandleadtotheformationofa
highlycombustiblemixtureofwasteandairinthefurnace.
28
Figure3.4
SchematicofLiquidWasteIncinerator(fromUSEPA)
Typicalliquidinjectioncombustionchamberresidencetimesrangefrom0.5to2secondsand
temperaturesof700to1700OCensuremaximumdestructionofthewaste.Liquidwastefeedrates
canbeashighas5.7m3/hour.Onecriticalperformancecriteriaforthesefurnacesisthatthey
shouldalwaysbeoperatedneartheirdesigninputheatreleaserate.Thedesignoftheburnerand
thefurnacerequirehighlevelsofinternalturbulenceandanyreductionininputcanleadtoshort
circuitingorcoldzonesinthefurnacethatwillincreasethereleaseofproductsofincomplete
combustion.OvertheyearstheinputtothefurnaceasCleanHarborsCorunnafacilityhasbeen
increasedandemissionsoftraceorganicshavedecreasedclearlyindicatingthattherewasan
optimaloperatingpointforthefurnace.
LiquidinjectionsystemsareoperatedbyCleanHarborsatboththeCorunnaandMercier
facilities,anddownstreamoftherotarykilnsintheSwanHillsTreatmentFacility.
3.3.3
FluidizedBedIncinerators
Asnotedearlier,thefluidizedbedreactoriscapableofdestroyingawiderangeofwastes.While
fluidisedbedsystemsareusedforhazardouswastedisposalinthechemicalindustryinEurope,
theyhavemorelimiteduse,generallyforsewagesludge,inNorthAmerica.InCanadaagood
examplearethesewagesludgeincineratorsintheLakeviewplantnearToronto.SeeFigure3.5.
Wastepreparation/feedsystemsfortheseincineratorsaredividedinaccordancewiththetypesof
29
wastesbeinghandled:liquidorsolids.Itisnotuncommontoseethesestreamssplitto
accommodatewetordrysolidsandviscousandnonviscousfluidsinseparateinjectionsystems.
Forsolidshandlingtypicallythewasteisshredded,separatedintolightandheavyfractionswith
thelightermaterialsfedtothefurnace.Forliquids,holdingtanksandrecirculatingpump
systemsareusedtofeedauniformwastestreamthroughnozzlesintothebed.Thealkali
containingbedmaterialsinafluidisedbedreactoractasacidgascontrolreagentsmakingthese
systemsefficientfortreatingwastescontainingsulphurorhalogensastheyreducetheloadon
theAPCsystems.
Thereactorusuallyconsistsofaverticalrefractorylinedsteelvesselcontainingabedofgranular
materialsuchassilicasand,limestone,alumina,orceramicmaterial.Thebedmaterialis
supportedbyarefractorylinedgrid.Thisgridisperforatedtoallowairtobeinjectedbelowthe
bedmaterialusingdiffuserslocatedunderthegrid.Theairpassingthroughthegridexpandsthe
bedby80to100%causingittobecomefluidised.Wastescanbeinjectedintothebed
pneumatically,mechanicallyorbygravity.Theconstantmovingactionofthefluidisedbed
causesquickuniformmixingofwastesandbedmaterial,resultingingoodcombustion
Figure3.5
SchematicofFluidizedBedIncinerator(fromUSEPA)
conditions,andrelativelyhighheattransferrates.Furthermore,themovingandtheheatofthe
bedservetoincreasetheburnoutofmaterialandonlyminimalamountsofbottomashare
generated.
Atypicalfluidisedbedreactorhasaheighttodiameterratioof1.25:1withtheexpandedbed
30
occupyingabout20%oftheheight.Thebedmaterialfunctionsasaheatsinkcapableofabsor
binglargeamountsofheatgeneratedduringthecombustionprocess.Bedtemperaturesare
typicallymaintainedintherangeof760oCto870oCwhichislowerthantheoperating
temperaturesofothertypesofsystems.Theselowergastemperaturesandlowerexcessair
requirementsminimizetheformationofnitrogenoxides.
Fluidisedbedsystemsmayrequireauxiliaryburnerslocatedeitheraboveorbelowthebedto
maintainbedtemperature,howeverotheroptionsareavailabletomaximizethermalefficiency.
Thereactorcanbeoperatedeitherasacoldwindboxinwhichthefluidisingairisinjecteddirectly
intothereactororasahotwindboxinwhichtheairispreheatedinaheatexchangeror
recuperatorpriortoinjectiondependinguponthenatureofthewasteandtheneedtosupply
additionalheat.
Becauseofitssimpledesignconcept,thefluidisedbedreactorhasalowcapitalcost,arelatively
longservicelifeandlowmaintenancecosts.Inaddition,thisunitcantoleratelargefluctuations
inbothwastecompositionandtherateoffeedduetothehighthermalinertiaofthebedmaterial,
typicallyintheorderof596,000kJ/m3(16,000Btu/ft3).
Someofthepotentialproblemsandspecialconsiderationsofthefluidisedbedincineratorinclude
thebuildupandremovalofresidualmaterialfromthebed,theformationofeutecticmixtures
thatfuseinthefurnace,andbeddegradation.Furthermore,thesystemsrequireparticulate
removaldevicesinthegasstreambecauseinternalvelocities,neededtofluidisethebed,entrain
ashandcarryitoutofthebed.
3.3.4
FixedHearthIncinerators
Thefixedhearthincinerator,alsoreferredtoasthecontrolledairincinerator,makesuseofthe
twostagecombustionprocessdiscussedearlier.Itusuallyconsistsofaprimarychamber,
followedbyasecondarycombustionchamber.Theseunitstypicallyhandlesolidhazardous
wastes,butaswithotherhazardouswastevariants,theycanbeequippedwithliquidinjection
afterburners.
AConsumat2stageincineratorisoperatedbyCamecoatthePortHope,Ontariorefineryto
disposeofmaterialscontaminatedwithradionuclidesandasimilartypesystemhasrecentlybeen
installedbyOPGattheTiverton,Ontariosite.Severalfixedhearthfurnacesareusedformetal
recoveryoperationsatfacilitiesinOntario(MRRandGarySteacy).Thesefurnacesessentiallyuse
fossilfuelstoheatthechargeofcontaminatedmetaltherebyvolatilizingtraceorganicsthatare
presentonthemetal.Theorganicsreleasedaredestroyedinanafterburner.Inthecaseofthe
radionuclidecontaminatedwastes,theradioactivityisconcentratedinthebottomashand
residuesproducedbytheprocess.
31
3.4
SewageSludgeIncinerators
SewagesludgeincineratorsinCanadaaretypicallyeithermultihearthorfluidisedbedsystems,
althoughintheUSsomesewagesludgeisdisposedinelectricinfraredfurnaces.Ascanbe
appreciated,sewagesludgetypicallyhasahighmoisturecontentsoanysystemmustdriveoff
thewaterbeforecombustionofthesolidscanoccur.Itispossibletocofiresewagesludgewith
MSWhowevercarefulblendingofthetwostreamsisrequiredsothemoisturelevelsdonot
presentproblemsduringcombustion.
Thissectionwillonlyaddressmultihearthincineratorssincetheapplicationoffluidisedbed
systemshasbeencoveredabove.
3.4.1
MultihearthIncinerators
Asthenameimplies,themultihearthincineratorcontainsmanyhearthsascanbeseeninFigure
3.6.Thebasicmultiplehearthfurnace(MHF)isaverticallyorientedcylinderconstructedofsteel
andlinedwithrefractory.Insidethecylinderareaseriesofhorizontalrefractoryhearthswitha
centerhole.Ahollowcastironrotatingshaftrunsthroughthecenterholewithfixedrabblearms
foreachhearth.Coolingairisintroducedintotheshaft.Eachrabblearmisequippedwitha
numberofteeth,approximately6inchesinlength,andspacedabout10inchesapart.Theteeth
areshapedtorakethesludgeinaspiralmotion,alternatingindirectionfromtheoutsidein,to
theinsideout,betweenhearths.Typically,theupperandlowerhearthsarefittedwithfour
rabblearms,andthemiddlehearthsarefittedwithtwo.Burners,providingauxiliaryheat,are
locatedinthesidewallsnearthehearths.
Partiallydewateredsludgeisfedontotheperimeterofthetophearth.Therabblearmsmovethe
sludgetowardthecenterofthefurnace.Holesnearthecenterofthehearthallowthesludgeto
droptothenexthearthwherethematerialisrakedoutwardstoholeswhereitfallstothenext
hearth.Therabblemotionbreaksupsolidmaterialallowingbettersurfacecontactwithheatand
oxygen.Asludgedepthofabout1inchismaintainedineachhearthatthedesignsludgeflow
rate.Scum,oils,grease,hair,waxes,fats,andothermaterialsthatwillfloat,canbefedtooneor
morehearthsoftheincinerator.
Ambientairisfirstductedthroughthecentralshaftanditsassociatedrabblearms.Aportionis
thentakenfromthetopoftheshaftandrecirculatedintothelowermosthearthaspreheated
combustionair.Thecombustionairflowsupwardthroughthedropholesinthehearths,
countercurrenttotheflowofthesludge,beforebeingexhaustedfromthetophearth.
32
Figure3.6
TypicalMultiHearthIncineratorfromUSEPAAP4215
Themultiplehearthfurnaceisgenerallydividedintothreecombustionzones.Theupperhearths
providedryingat425and760OC.Combustionoccursinthemiddlehearthsasthetemperatureis
increasedtoabout925OC.Thethirdzone,madeupofthelowermosthearth(s),isthecooling
zone.Insomeapplications,afterburnersareusedtoreduceodoursandunburnedhydrocarbons.
Toreducecomplaintsaboutodourandpoorcombustionperformance,somemultihearth
furnaceshavebeenconvertedtoprovideadditionalfumedestructionintheareaformerlyused
bythetoptwohearths.Bymovingthefeedpointtothethirdhearthfromthetopandinstallinga
fossilfiredburnerintheareaofthesecondhearth,theupperpartofthefurnaceisusedtodestroy
materialsleavingtheupperbed.
Undernormaloperatingcondition,50to100%excessairisaddedtoanMHF.Theserelatively
highratesofexcessairarenecessarytocompensatefornormalvariationsinboththeorganic
characteristicsofthesludgefeedandthesludgefeedrate.Toolowanexcessairlevelallowsonly
partialoxidationofthecarbontooccur,increasingemissionsofcarbonmonoxide,soot,and
hydrocarbons.Toomuchexcessairincreasesentrainmentofparticulatematterandcauseshigh
auxiliaryfuelconsumption.
15
USEPA,1995.CompilationofAirEmissionFactors.Chapter2.2SewageSludgeIncineration.AP
42.Availableathttp://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch02/final/c02s02.pdf
33
3.5
BiomedicalWasteIncinerators
Traditionally,medicalwasteincineratorswereinstalledinhospitalsanddesignedtohandleon
sitewastedisposal.Somesystemsdateback40yearstoatimewhentheywereusedtodisposeof
tissueandpathologicalwastesthatwerenotsuitablefordisposalinlandfills.Overtheyearsthe
olderunits,designedforlowcalorificvaluematerials,wereusedtoburntheincreasingamounts
ofplasticsfoundinhospitalwastestreams.Thiscauseddeterioratingperformanceandinsome
casesforcedtheclosureoffacilities.Insomepartsofthecountrythedistributednetworkofsmall
incineratorshasbeenreplacedbycentralfacilitiesdesignedtohandlethemustburnportionof
themedicalwastestreams.Othertypesofmedicalwastearethentreatedwithautoclavesand
shreddingbeforethewasteisdisposedinlandfills.ThecentralizedfacilitiesoperatedinNew
BrunswickandOntarioaretwostageincineratorsasdescribedundertheMSWcategory,
equippedwithairpollutioncontrolsystemstoremoveacidgases,PCDD/Fandmercuryalong
withothercontaminants.Inotherprovincestheolderfacilitiesmaystillexistanditis
appropriatetoreviewthesetypesofincineratorsinthissection.
Ina1992reporttotheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard16itisnotedthatthemostcommontypesof
medicalwasteincineratorsarestarvedairmodularunitssuchasthosediscussedintheMSW
section;rotarykilnunitsdiscussedinbothMSWandhazardouswastediscussions;and,excessair
multichamberbatchincinerators.Themultichamberincineratorsoftwodifferenttypes17were
supplied:
3.5.1
Retortincinerators;and,
Inlineincinerators.
RetortFurnaces
Typicallyacompactcubicshape,thisfurnacehasmultipleinternalbafflesinstalledtoguidethe
combustiongasesthrough90Oturnsinbothhorizontalandverticaldirections.Asthegasstream
turnsanyentrainedashdropsoutoftheflowstream.Theprimarychamberoftheretorthasan
elevatedgratewherethewastesits,andanashpitbelowthegrate.Forapplicationswithmedical
wastethegratewassolidtopreventtheleakageofmaterialsintotheashpit.Inthese
circumstancesairwascirculatedunderthesolidgrate.theFigure3.7providesacrosssectionof
atypicalretortfurnace.
16
CARB,1992.SurveyofMedicalWasteIncineratorsandEmissionsControl.ContractNo.A832155
FinalReport.January,CaliforniaEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,AirResourcesBoard,ResearchDivision.
Availableathttp://www.arb.ca.gov/research/abstracts/a832155.htm#Vol
17
OntarioMOE,1988.GuidanceforIncineratorDesignandOperation.Volume1,General.ISBN0
772942323.
34
Figure3.7
RetortIncineratorfromAP4018
Boththeprimaryandmixingchamberintheretortfurnacearetypicallyequippedwithauxiliary
fuelburnerstoprovidesufficientenergytoraisetemperaturesinthefurnace.Whenthewaste
hassufficientcalorificvaluetoachievetheappropriatetemperaturesintheprimarychamberthe
primaryburneronlyrunsonstartup.Themixingchamber,orsecondaryburnerwilllikelyrun
throughoutthecycletomaintainthedesiredoperatingtemperatures.
18
Danielson,J.,1973.AirPollutionEngineeringManual,CountyofLosAngeles,AirPollution
ControlDistrict.AP40May.
35
Retortfurnaceswerenormallyusedineitherbatchorsemicontinuousmodeinthecapacity
rangeof10to350kg/h.Theyweredesignedtooperatewithlowcalorificvaluewastes,and
becausetheyrelyuponnaturaldraftforairinputtothesystem,theyareunabletoadequately
treathighcalorificwastebecausesufficientairisunlikelytoenterthecombustionchamber.Over
theyearsthesealsonthefurnacesdeteriorateanduncontrolledleakagecanstarttooccur.This
forcesthefurnacetooperatewithhigherlevelsofexcessairmakingitdifficultforthesystemto
achievethedesiredtemperatureregimesandthusalsoleadingtoemissionproblems.
3.5.2
InLineFurnaces
Inlinefurnacesareinternallysimilartotheretortfurnacebuttheyarelaidoutsothegasflows
axiallyfromoneendofthefurnacetotheother.Bafflesandopeningsstillcausethegastochange
flowdirectionandauxiliaryburnersarestillinstalledinthesesystems.Figure3.8showsa
typicalinlinefurnacealsotakenfromAP40.
Figure3.8
TypicalInLineFurnacefromAP40.
Inlineincineratorsrangedinsizefrom225to900kg/handwereoccasionallyequippedwith
automaticchargingandashremovalsystems.
Typicallythesefurnacesoperatedwith200%excessairwithoverhalfthisquantityenteringthe
36
furnaceasaresultofleakage.Inoperationthedesigncalledfor70%oftheairtobeprovidedas
overfireair,10%asunderfireair,and20%inthemixingchamber.
Multiplechamberincineratorswereusedforpathologicalwaste,crematoryfurnacesandother
specializedfurnacessuchasmetalbarrelreclamation.Inbothpathologicalandcrematory
applicationshotheartharrangementswereemployedwiththefluegasesbeingcirculatedunder
thehearthtocauseittoheatuptherebyaidinginthevolatilisationofthewastes.
Asnotedfortheretortfurnaces,themajorproblemswithmultiplechamberincineratorsistheir
designheatreleaserateandthepotentialforuncontrolledleakage.Bothcanresultinincomplete
combustionandelevatedemissionlevels.Frequently,blacksmokecanbeobservedfromthe
stackofthesesystemswhenoperationissubstandard.
3.6
OtherSystems
WhilethemajorityofincineratorsoperatinginCanadacanbeclassifiedintooneofthecategories
discussedinthepreviouspages,thereareotherpotentialvariantsthatmightnotappearto
readilyfitinthesecategories.
Canadianincinerators,designedandbuiltbytwodifferentmanufacturers,WestlandandEco
WasteSolutions,aretwochamberfurnacesdesignedwithcontrolledairadditionandan
afterburnertoensuregoodperformance.Inthelistofincineratorsdiscussedlaterinthis
documenttheyarereferredtoastwostagec/wafterburneror[2StageAB].Inthesesystems,a
fossilfuelledburnerisusedtoinitiatethecombustionofthegarbageandquicklybringthe
furnacetotheappropriateoperatingtemperature.Atthispoint,theburnershutsoff.This
ensuresthattheprocessoccursatarelativelyslowpaceandpromotesamoreefficientoxidation.
Oxygenflowsthroughspeciallydesignedductsandiscontrolledtomaintaintheinternal
temperatureconditionsbetween650and850oC.Measuresaretakentolimittheprimarychamber
temperatures,inonecaseanautomaticallyoperatedsprinklersystemisactivatedtolower
temperatures.Theairintakecanalsobeclosed.Anothersafetymechanismautomaticallyshuts
offthesystemshouldtheprimarychambertemperaturereachahighlimitsetting.
Thegasesandunburntparticlesofmatterflowthroughthesecondarychamberwhereaselected
internaltemperatureismaintainedbytheuseofauxiliaryburners.Inmanyinstances,thegases
andparticlesactasfuelandaresufficienttomaintaintheappropriatesecondarytemperature,so
theburnersautomaticallyadjusttousetheoptimalamountoffuelrequiredtomaintainthe
desiredtemperature.Theoxygenintaketothesecondarychambercanalsobeusedtocontrolthe
temperature.Bothsystemsusepatentedconfigurationsfortheadditionofairtothesecondary
chamber.Thesearedesignedtoforcethegasesintoaswirlingpattern,promotingacompletemix
andtotaloxidation.Theretentiontimeinthesecondarychambercanbeadjusted,baseduponthe
sizeofthechambergiventheratedinputoftheincinerator.Typicallyretentiontimesareinthe
orderofonetotwoseconds.
37
Afterthisstage,thecombustionisconsideredcompletedandtheremainingharmlessgases
escapetotheatmospherethroughthestack.Inoneofthesesystems,acarbonmonoxideprobe
canbeinstalledinthestackandlinkedtothecontrolcomputer.Thisparametercanthereforebe
continuouslymonitored.
Thereareexcessairincinerators,eitherrectangularboxesorroundcylinders,withafterburners
installedinvariouslocationsinCanada.Theafterburnerscouldsimplybeinaportionofthe
stack,ortheycouldbeseparatechambersinstalledbehindorabovetheprimarychamber.In
mostcasesthesesystemsareoperatedinabatchmode,loadedwithwaste,ignitedwithan
auxiliaryburnerandthenletburnuntilthewasteisreducedtoash.Theafterburnershould
operatethroughoutthewholecycle.
DuringthereviewofincineratorsonFederallands,theCanadianArmedForcesidentifiedthat
theyhaveanumberofSmartAsh100barrelburners.Theseareessentially200loildrumsfitted
withlidsandairinjectionsystems.Thewasteisloadedintothebarrelandignited.Thefanis
thenturnedontoforceairintothebarrelinacyclonicflowpatternandadditionalairisaddedin
aspeciallydesignedexhaustsystem.Theadditionalairactsasoverfireairensuringdestruction
ofthemajorityoftheorganicmaterialsthatmightbepresentinthegasstream.Thesebatch
incineratorsholdupto200lofwaste,typicallyoilyragsetc.,andaredesignedtoburnthese
materialsatarateof22kg/h.AsnotedintheCompassreport19theseunitstypicallyrunfor45
minutesto1hour,severaltimesaweekatvariousCanadianForcesBases.
Alltheincineratorslistedaboveareessentiallyclosedchamberswithairbeingsuppliedeither
throughnaturaldraftinthecaseofsomemultichamberincinerators,orbyforcedandinduced
draftfans.Assuchalltheseincineratorshavesometypeofstacktoexhaustthecombustiongases
fromtheprocess.Manyoftheseunitscanbefittedwithairpollutioncontrolequipmentto
decreasethepotentialemissionsofPCDD/F.Adiscussionofpotentialairpollutioncontrol
options,byincineratorapplicationcategoryisprovidedinthenextsectionofthischapter.
Thereareaclassofwastecombustiondevicesthatarenotaddressedinthisreport,butare
sometimesincludedwhenemissionsfromMSWcombustionarediscussed.Thesearepitburners,
orconicalburners.ThehighestpreponderanceoftheseunitsarefoundinNewfoundlandand
Labradorwhere,becauseofthenatureoftheterrain,landfillscannotbereadilyestablished.Most
smallremotecommunitiesaresituatedonrockyoutcropsandhavefewareassuitablefora
landfill.Moreover,thelocalanimalsintheseareascouldpresentproblemsshouldrawwastebe
disposedinlandfills.Forbothvolumereductionandtocontrolverminmanyofthese
communitiesburnwasteinlargeconcretepits.Thewasteisignitedandairisblownintothepit
toassistwithcombustion.Thetopofthepitisgenerallycoveredbyarooftokeepprecipitation
outofthepit.Theareabetweenthetopofthepitwallandtheroofisopentotheatmosphere
19
CompassEnvironmentalInc.,2006.AssessmentofSelectFederallyOwnedWasteincinerators.A
reportpreparedforWasteManagementDivisionofEnvironmentCanada,Ottawa.March.
38
althoughinmanylocationswiremeshisplacedaroundthepitopeningtocapturelargepiecesof
unburntpaperetc.Theseunitshavenostack.
Asecondtypeofwasteburner,theconicalburnerconsistingofafixedhearthinsideasteelshell
isusedinmanyremotelocalitiesinNewfoundland.Thesteelstructure,eithercylindircalwitha
convergingconeontop,orconicalshapefromthegroundup,isequippedwithopeningsaround
thebasetoallowairtoenterandfeedthefire.Airfeedratesarecontrolledinaveryrudimentary
mannerandthesystemamounttolittlemorethanlargebarrelburners.
Newfoundlandisattemptingtoreducetheuseoftheseburnersbyencouragingreplacementwith
moreappropriatetechnology,butthereareeconomicbarrierstosuchplans.Currentlythese
facilitiesareincludedintheNPRIPCDD/FinventoryasMSWincinerators.Thepresenceofthese
burnerswasrecognizedduringthedevelopementofthefirsCSWPCDD/Fincineratorstandard
andthesesystemswerespecificallyexcludedfromconsiderationbecausetheprovincedeveloped
aseparateplantoaddressthispractice.Thatplanisscheduledtoresultintheclosureofthese
facilitiesby2010.
Barrelburning,wasteburninginopenbarrelsinthebackyardsofruralresidences,canbea
significantsourceofPCDD/FemissionstotheatmosphereaccordingtotheUSEPA.Sincethese
sourcescannotbereadilyidentified,andclearlyarenotassociatedwithamunicipalityora
business,theyarenotcurrentlyincludedintheNPRIinventory.
3.7
ProcessSummaryandPCDD/FGenerationPotential
ThepreviouschapternotesthatPCDD/Fformationfromcombustionprocessesisafunctionof
boththequalityofthecombustionandthetemperatureregimeinthesystem.Assuming
combustioniswellcontrolledinasystem,themajorgenerationofPCDD/Fwilllikelytakeplace
afterthegasesleavethefurnace.Ifstackgasescomeincontactwithflyashattemperaturesinthe
250450OCrangeforanylengthoftimeresidualcarbonintheflyashcanformPCDD/F.Such
situationsaremostlikelytooccurinsystemsequippedwithHRSGs.Thusdenovosynthesis
reactionscanbeexpectedtobethepredominantsourceofPCDD/Femissionsfromthelarge
incineratorsMSWincineratorsinVancouver,Wainwright,Brampton,QuebecCityandPrince
EdwardIsland.AscanbeseenfromthePCDD/Femissioninventoryprovidedlaterinthis
document,thesearetheonlyfacilitieswithHRSGs.
Chemicalreactionsaretypicallydrivenbyconcentrationeffectssothemoreflyashpresent,the
higheronemightexpectemissionstobe.Theamountofparticulatematterentrainedinthe
exhaustgasstreamisafunctionoffurnacedesign.Twostagecombustionsystemsinfacilities
suchasPrinceEdwardIslandandBramptonwouldbeexpectedtohavelowerflyashlevels.This
couldreducetherateofdenovosynthesisatthesefacilities.Oldermassburntypesystems,with
poorcombustionandhighparticulatemattercarryovertypicallyhadveryhighPCDD/F
emissions.QuebecCitywasmodifiedinthe1990stoimprovecombustionandreduceemissions.
39
Atthattime,anadvancedairpollutioncontrolsystemwasinstalledonthesystemtoreduce
emissions.
AttheoppositeendoftheincineratorspectruminCanadaaretheremainingmultichamber
furnacesinstalledingovernmentresearchfacilitiesorhospitals.Datafromthe1980ssuggested
thatthesetypesofincineratorshadonlyalimitedcapabilitytocontrolairadditionwhichcanlead
topoorcombustionconditions.Couplethiswiththechangesinthewastestreams,evolvingfrom
lowheatingvaluewasteswithhighmoisturecontenttoastreamwithahighpercentageof
plasticswiththeirhighheatingvalues,theseunitshavethegreatestpotentialforpoor
combustionperformanceandhighemissions.Moreover,fewofthesesystemshavebeen
equippedwithairpollutioncontrolequipment.Thusonewouldbejustifiedinapplyinga
reasonablylargeemissionfactortothesefacilities.
Thereareincineratorsatgovernmentandotherresearchfacilitiesthatcouldstillbemanagingthe
wastestreamstheywereinstalledtotreat.Animalandplantwastesfromresearchactivitieswill
havechangedlittleovertheyears,providedtheoperatorsarenotusingthesystemsasageneral
disposalmethod.Thus,ifaspecificincineratorisstillbeingusedinthemanneroriginally
envisioned,iethenatureofthewastehasnotchangedovertheinterveningyears,andtheunit
hasbeenmaintained,carefulconsiderationshouldbegiventotheunitsfunctionandcontinued
operation.However,giventhelimitationsofthesesystems,shouldconditionshavechanged,
clearlytestingwouldbeinordertoascertainwhetherithasoutliveditsusefullife.
Thenewgenerationofbatchfired,modularincineratorshavebeentestedand,asshownlaterin
thisdocument,havelowemissionsofPCDD/F.Thisisnodoubtduetothefactthatcombustion
iswellcontrolledandthegasesleavetheincineratorattemperaturesinexcessof900OC.This
affordslittleopportunityfortheinadvertentformationofPCDD/Fthroughthedenovosynthesis
process.Unfortunately,aswillbeseenlater,whiletheseunitsshouldoperatewellintheory,
practicecanleavesomethingtobedesired.Operatorsmustbetrainedtooperatetheseunitsand
theinstructionsshouldbefollowedtoensureoptimalperformance.
Hazardouswasteincineratorswouldgenerallybeconsideredtohavegoodcombustioncontrol.
InmostcasesthetemperatureregimeafterthefurnaceisnotconducivetoPCDD/Fgenerationby
denovosynthesisreactions.Givensomeofthevariabilityinthewastesthesesystemshandle,they
dorequireairpollutioncontrolsystemstomeetstandardsonaconsistentbasis.Fluidisedbed
sewagesludgeincineratorshavegoodcombustioncontrolalthoughthereissignificantcarryover
offlyashfromthefurnace.Temperatureregimesinthesesystemscouldplayaroleinthe
quantityofPCDD/Fgenerated.Multihearthincineratorscanbeexpectedtohaveahigher
emissionfactorthanwillfluidisedbedfurnaces.
LaterinthisreportthepotentialemissionsfromeachoperatingincineratorinCanadaare
estimatedbaseduponsystemdesignparametersandemissiontestdatafromcomparable
facilities.Ofcourse,theinfluenceofAPCsystemsonemissionsmustbeincorporatedinthe
estimates.Suchsystemsarediscussedinthenextchapter.
4.0 AIREMISSIONCONTROLSTRATEGIES
SignificantimprovementsweremadeintheairemissioncontrolsystemsofMSWincinerators
after1984.Insomecasesthesefacilitiesstartedtoadoptthetypesofairpollutioncontrol[APC]
systemsusedonEuropeanhazardouswasteincinerators.Sincethentherehavecontinuedtobe
advancesinthetypesofAPCsystemsusedforbothMSWandHazardousWasteincinerators.
TheconvergenceofthesesystemsisevidentintheEUDirectiveof2000thatsetemission
standardsforallincineratorsinEuropeatthesamelevel.
EarlyAPCsystemsonhazardouswastefacilitieshadwetscrubbersystemsinstalleddownstream
ofaprimaryparticulatecontrolsystem,usuallyanelectrostaticprecipitator[ESP].Theeffluent
fromthewetscrubberwasinjectedintothehotstackgasesaheadoftheAPCsystemtoreduce
thetemperatureofthefluegasses.
AlternativeAPCsystemsdevelopedinthelate1980sofferedtheparticulateremovalcapabilities
ofafabricfilterwithacidgasneutralizingprovidedbylimeinjectedintothegasstream.These
systemsdidnotcreatewastewatereffluentsandwerethusconsideredmoreconvenientto
operate.Asitbecamenecessarytoimprovetheremovalofcertaincontaminants,(PCDD/Fand
mercury),formsofactivatedcarbonwereaddedtothelistofreagentsusedintheAPCsystems.
AbriefdiscussionofAPCsystemsispresentedinthischapter.Theemphasisisonmethodsused
tocontrolthereleaseofPCDD/Fspresentinthegasesleavingthecombustionportionofthe
facility.
4.1
PostCombustionControl
Postcombustioncontrol,theuseofairpollutioncontrol[APC]systems,toremoveunwanted
contaminantssuchastracemetalsandvariousacidgasesfromthegasstreamexitingthefacility
isemployedonmostnewlargeincinerators.TheNITEPprogram20showedthattraceorganics
canbereducedthroughtheuseofsuchsystems.ThethreekeyaspectsofAPCsystemsare
reagentaddition,temperaturecontrol,andparticulateremoval.
APCsystemsrelyuponbothphysicalandchemicalunitprocessesinvolvingdifferentsolids
removalandchemicalconversionstepstoeffectcontrolofunwantedemissions.Theseprocesses
arecombinedtoachievethedesiredfluegasqualityatanacceptablecapitalandoperatingcost.
Differenttypesofsystemscanchangethequantityofresiduesresultingfromthefluegasclean
up,therebyinfluencingthecostsforresiduedisposal.
Theintegrationofairpollutioncontrolsystemsintoaparticularfacilityinvolvesmakinga
20
41
numberofchoicesabouthowparticularfunctionswillbeaccomplished.Theseareshown
schematicallyinFigure4.1baseduponapublicationbyFlkt21.Amoredetaileddiscussionis
presentedinthepreviouslyreferencedHazardousWasteBackgroundstudyreport22.
FlktsAPCcategorieslooselyaligntostandardoperatingpracticesinvariousfacilitiesin
Canada.TheDrysystemtypicallyincludesanevaporativecoolingtower[ECT]tocoolthegas
stream,dryreagentadditionfollowedbyparticulatecontrolwiththelatterpreferablybeingby
fabricfilterbutESPshavebeenemployed.TheWetDrysystemintroducesthereagentsasawet
slurrytherebycombiningthefunctionoftheECTandreagentaddition.Thissystemisemployed
attheCorunnaHazardousWasteincinerator.TheWetsystememployswetscrubbersinsystems
suchasthatmentionedelsewhereinthisreportwitheffluentusedtocoolthegassesintotheESP,
thescrubberwithreagentaddition,sometypeofmoistureremovalsystemandlikelyafabric
filteratthebackofthesystemforfinalparticulatemattercontrol.
TheDrysystemisemployedatQuebecCity,BramptonandVancouvertonamethreeMSW
installations.TheWetDrysystemisemployedatCleanHarboursCorunnainthehazardous
wastefacilitywhereasSwanHillshasavariationoftheWetsystem.Otherwetsystemsinclude
theBramptonmedicalwasteincinerator.Thesesystems,whileformingthebasiccontrol
equipmenttocontrolparticulates,tracemetalsandacidgases,arefrequentlyaugmentedwith
specialreagentsorequipmenttoenhancetheremovalofparticularcontaminants.Thesepost
datetheoriginalFlktassessment,andinvolveeithertheinjectionofcarbonintothegasstreamat
somepointbeforethefinalparticulatecontroldevice,orpassingthegasthroughacarbonbed
filtertoremoveunwantedcontaminants.Itistheaugmentedsystemsthatwillbeelaborated
uponinthefollowingpages.
Table4.1providesFlktsgeneralizedcomparisonbetweenthebasicalternatives.Theorderof
useofdifferentcomponentsisgovernedbytheselectionoftheprocesssteps.Thetableshould
notbeusedforselectionpurposesbutrathertogiverelativecomparisonsbetweendifferent
options.Note,however,thatFlktsrecognizedtheneedtotreattheeffluentfromwetscrubbers.
Theheatpotentialcategoryrelatestothedesiretouseavailableheatforotherpurposesandhere,
thewetscrubberoffersthebestpotential;however,ifNOxcontrolistobeused,someofthis
potentialmaynotberealized.
Theadditionofcarbonsystemsaddscomplexityandcosttoanyofthealternativesevaluatedin
thetable,andifthecarbonfilterisusedaddstothepressuredropintheAPCsystemandthus
energycosts.Organicsremovalwouldgotoextremelyhighifcarbonwereaddedtothesystem.
21
Flkt,1991.CleaningFlueGasesinEnergyfromWastePlants.AsalesdocumentfromFlkt,
Sweden.
22
Figure 4.1 Comparison of Air Pollution Control System Options (adapted from Flakt, 1991)
Gas Cooling Phase or

Initial Particulate Control Phase
Acid Gas Control
Particulate Matter Control
NOx Control
Heat Recovery or Addition
Incinerator
Incinerator
Combustion System
Evaporative
Cooling
Lime
Fabric
Filter
ESP
Economiser
Economiser
Slurry
Handling
Dry Reactor
NOx
Control
Existing
Precipitator
Residue
Heat
Recovery
Incinerator
ESP
Fabric
Filter
Wet
Scrubber
Wet-Dry
Reactor
Fabric
Filter
ESP
Existing
Precipitator
NOx
Control
To
Atmosphere
Residue
Heat
Recovery
Condensing
Stage
To
Atmosphere
To
Atmosphere
FUNCTION
Dry Cleaning System
Water
Treatment
Residue
Reheating
Stack
Existing
Precipitator
Wet-Dry Cleaning System
Wet Cleaning System
Heat
Pump
43
Table4.1
ComparisonofOperatingFeaturesofVariousAPCAlternatives(afterFlkt,1991)
CLEANINGPRINCIPLE
DRY
WETDRY
WET
INVESTMENTCOSTS
low
medium
usuallyhigh
limeconsumption medium
low
low
sodaconsumption none
none
medium
OPERATINGCOSTS
(ifusespecialSOxstage)
energyconsumption low
medium
medium
low
medium
dust veryhigh
veryhigh
high
HClandHF veryhigh
veryhigh
veryhigh
medium
high
maintenancerequirements verylow
COLLECTIONEFFICIENCY
SOx medium
(withspecialstage)
NOx low
low
none
heavymetals veryhigh
veryhigh
medium
hydrocarbons veryhigh
veryhigh
medium
medium
veryhigh
(withoutspecialaddonstage)
HEATRECOVERYPOTENTIAL
high
44
4.2
PCDD/FControlAlternatives
Theintroductionofafinelydividedreagentintothegastocontrolacidemissionsprovidesan
additionalbenefitintheremovaloftracemetallicandtraceorganicspecies.Volatilemetalsand
organicsdemonstrateahighaffinityforsurfacesorptionandprovidingalargesurfaceareainthe
formoffineparticlesintheacidgascontrolsystemincreasestheprobabilityofsurfacereactions.
ThisisillustratedbyreducedemissionsofvolatilespeciesfrommodernAPCsystems.Some
limitationsexist.IftheparticulatematteriscontrolledbyanESP,fineparticlesaremorelikelyto
escapeandemissionratesforvolatilecompoundscanberelativelyhigherthanincomparable
fabricfilterinstallations.TheremovalefficiencyofESPequippedsystemscanalsobereducedif
particlecharacteristicschange.Furthermore,theadsorptioneffectsaretemperaturedependant
andregardlessoftheparticulatemattercontroldevice,highertemperaturesreducethevolatile
substancecaptureefficiency.Lastly,insomedryinjectionsystems,therecyclingofthefabric
filterdusttotheventurireactor,toincreaseSO2removalefficienciesandlowerreagentcosts,can
resultinanincreaseintheconcentrationofsaltsandtracespeciesintheresiduestream.This
increaseleadstodifferentresiduebehaviourandcanchangethecostsofresiduedisposal.
Operatingexperiencesatmostcommercialincinerationfacilitieshassuggestedthatevenwith
advancedacidgasandparticulatecontrolsystems,furthercontrolisnecessarytoachievethe
desiredlevelsofPCDD/Femissions.
Agoodparticulatemattercontroldevicecanreducetheemissionsoftracemetalsandtrace
organics.Asnotedabove,limeoffersnumeroussitesforsurfacesorbtionreactionsthatallow
thesematerialstobetrappedandremovedwiththeparticulatematter.Inasimilarmannera
commonreagentusedformercurycontrol,carbon,providesexcellentPCDD/Fcontrol.
Severaldifferenttechnologiescanprovidetherequiredremovalefficiencyfororganic
contaminantsinthefluegasstream.CarbonbasedsystemsareeffectiveforPCDD/Fcontrol.The
twomainvariantsofthistechnologyarePACinjectionintothegasstreamandcarbonbedfilters
knowncommerciallyasactivatedcharreactors[ACR]oradsorbers.Recentlyanewcarbon
system,theADIOXprocess,hasbeendevelopedinEurope.Thissystemhasbeenappliedin
manyEuropeanwetcleaningsystemswherethescrubberelementshavebeenreplacedbycarbon
impregnatedpolypropyleneelements.Anothercontrolmeasure,thecatalyticreactor,destroys
thePCDD/Fmolecules.
4.2.1
ActivatedCarbonBedFilters
OneEuropeanmanufacturerdevelopedafixedactivatedcarbonbedscrubberthatcouldbe
installedattheendoftheAPCsystemtopolishthegasesandremovetraceorganicsand
mercury.Theactivatedcharadsorberconsistsofaverticalchamberwithabeddepthoftypically
0.5to1meter.ThefluegasflowsthroughtheACRhorizontallyatavelocityoftypicallybetween
0.1and0.2m/s.Theactivatedcharslowlymigratesfromthetoptothebottomofthereactorata
rateofabout0.15mevery612hours.ThesizeofanACRcanbedeterminedbytheits
45
maximumwidthof6metersandthemaximumpermissiblefluegasvelocityof0.2m/s.The
heightshouldnotexceedabout20meters,thusseveralmodulesmightberequiredinparallel.
ACRsrequireoperatingtemperaturesbetween120and150Ctoavoidcondensation.
ACRsystemshavethehighestknownremovalefficiencyfordioxinsandfurans(>99.9%)aswell
asformanyotherpollutantsandarecommonlyusedinEurope(Austria,Germany,Holland),
Asia(Japan,Korea)andAustraliaasafinalfluegaspolishingstageforwasteincinerators,iron
oresinteringplantsandotherindustrialinstallationswithhighpollutantemissions.Numerous
adsorbentssuchasactivatedcharmadefrombrowncoalorlignite,activatedcarbonmadefrom
bituminousorhardcoal,activatedcharcoalmadefromwoodorcoconutshells,orAktinertmade
fromactivatedcharorcarbonandlimeorlimestoneareused.Themaincriterionforselectingan
appropriateadsorbentareavailabilityandcost.Thespentadsorbentincludingtheadsorbed
dioxinsandfuransneedstobesafelydisposed,preferablybyincineration.
Themajordisadvantageofthecarbonfiltersystemisthecapitalinvestmentandoperatingcosts
associatedaswellastheneedforproperdisposalofthespentadsorbent.Concernshavealso
arisenoverthepotentialforfiresinthesesystemsshouldorganicloadsinthecarbongettoohigh.
Thelattershouldnotposeaproblemwithincineratorinstallationswherethecharcanbefedto
thefurnace.
ThemostrecentapplicationofcarbonbedfiltersinCanadaisattheMedicalWasteManagement
inBrampton.ThisfacilityutilizesatotallyfactoryassembledandskidmountedAPCsystem,
manufacturedbyEMCOTEK.Thisunitconsistsofahightemperaturewaterwallinletand
quenchtowerfollowedbyacondenser/spraytower,tworotaryatomizermodulesforparticulate
removal,aproprietarythreestageMistFreepolypropyleneacidabsorberanddemistersystem,
followedbyasteamreheatsystemtoraisegastemperatureto50OCbeforeintroducingthegasto
acarbonbedfilter/HEPAsystemformercuryandPCDD/Fpolishing.Thefiltermoduleconsists
ofagranularcarbonbedfilterfollowedbyaparticulateairfiltertoensurethatanycarbon
dislodgedfromthegranularbedisnotdischargedthroughthestack.Approximately2250kgof
4x6meshgranularcarbonarecontainedinthebedbuiltfortheMWMfacility.Thecarbonis
sandwichedbetweentwoperforatedsteelplatesallowingflowtomoveupwardsthroughthebed
ofcarbon.ThiscarbonneedstobereplacedperiodicallydependingupontheamountofHgand
PCDD/Fremovedfromthestackgases.ThegasesaremovedthroughtheAPCsystembyanID
fanwithvariablefrequencydrivedesignedtomaintaindraftontheincinerator.Thissystem
performsveryeffectively,theresultsinannualtestingattheMWMfacilityareconsistentlybelow
theLOQ.
4.2.2
PACInjectionSystems
Whileproducingalowerremovalefficiency,theinjectionofpowderedactivatedcarbonintothe
gasstreamisalessexpensemethodofcontrollingPCDD/Femissions.Suchasystemhasbeen
definedasanentrainedflowadsorber.Thisusuallyconsistsofabaghousewithanactivated
carboninjectionsystemupstream.PCDD/Fisremovedviaadsorptionontotheinjectedactivated
46
carbon.Thebulkoftheadsorptiontakesplacewhiletheadsorbentisentrainedinthefluegas
flowingtowardsthebaghouse.Thefiltercakeformedonthebagsprovidesanadditionalbarrier
forthefluegastopassthroughtherebyprovidingadditionaladsorption.
Themajordisadvantagesofentrainedflowreactorsareassociatedwiththeconsumptionof
activatedcarbonaswellastheinevitabledisposalproblemoftheresidues.Entrainedflow
reactorsarewidelyusedinwasteincinerators,steelplants,andnumerousotherindustrial
applicationsthroughoutAsia,EuropeandNorthAmerica.Eventhoughentrainedflowreactors
arelesscostlythanACRstheinvestmentandoperatingcostsaresignificant.
Heath23reportsthatPACinjectionprovidedPCDD/PCDFremovalefficienciesof7780%atan
ESPequippedfacility.ThisissimilartotheperformancereportedinASMEsponsoredworkat
DavisCounty.Licata24reportsontheWurzburgtestsandnotesthatPCDD/PCDFemissionswere
reduced200fold.DatareceivedbytheUSEPA25ledtheAgencytoconcludethatanadditional
50percentorgreaterreductionofPCDD/PCDFemissionscanbeachievedwithcarboninjection
inMSWfacilities.IntheHeerenfacilityinRoosendaal,TheNetherlands,PACexperimentshave
shown99.9%PCDD/PCDFreduction26.
QuebecCity,VancouverandBramptonEFWfacilitiesallusePACinjectionasmercuryand
PCDD/Fcontroltechniques.ThistechniqueisalsoemployedattheCorunnahazardouswaste
facilityandononeofthetwoincineratortrainsattheSwanHillsTreatmentFacility.
4.2.3
CatalyticDestruction
PCDD/PCDFareorganiccompoundsthatcanbedestroyedbyoxidation,producingCO2and
watervapour,howevertraceamountsofHClarealsogenerated.Normallysuchoxidationtakes
placeathightemperaturestotakeadvantageoffasterreactiontimes.Ofcourse,raisingthegas
temperaturerequirestheexpenditureofenergymakingthisapproachimpracticalforlargeMSW
incineratorinstallations.Toovercomethislimitation,catalystssuchasplatinumandoxidesof
vanadiumandtitaniumwhichpromotethermaloxidationatlowtemperaturescanbeemployed.
23
Heath,PatrickB.,1995.DesignandInstallationofPowderedActivatedCarbonStorageand
InjectionSystemsforMunicipalSolidWasteIncinerators.Proceedingsofthe88thAnnualAWMAMeeting.Paper95
RP147B.01.SanAntonio,Texas.June.
24
Licata,A.,M.Babu,andLPNethe,1994.AnEconomicAlternativetoControllingAcidGases,
Mercury,andDioxinsfromMWCs.Proceedingsofthe87thAnnualAWMAMeeting.Paper94MP17.06.
Cincinnati,Ohio.June.
25
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,1995BID.
26
Unsworth,J.F.,DioxinremovalbyCRIsShellDenoxsystem,HeerenWasteIncinerationtrials,
Roosendaal,TheNetherlands,CRICatalystCo.UKLtd.,Woking,GU215BH,UK.AsquotedinAnderssonetal.
47
Thesecatalystscanbeemployedinselectivecatalyticreduction(SCR)NOxcontrolsystemswhere
acatalystisusedtoincreasethelowtemperaturereactionofammoniaandoxidesofnitrogento
createnitrogenandwatervapour.Theadditionofthesecatalystspromotesoxidationatlower
temperaturesthanwouldnormallyberequiredfororganiccompounds.Usingthesemetalsina
selectivecatalyticreductionprocessforNOxcontrolandoperatingthecatalystinthe230to310oC
rangeprovidesveryeffectiveremovalofPCDD/PCDF.Evenattemperaturesaslowas165oC,
50%destructionofPCDD/PCDFisanticipated.Thehigherthetemperaturethegreaterthe
organicdestruction.ThesystemshavebecomeknownasSCRDeDioxtechnology.
Catalystsarenotinexpensiveandtheirlifeisnotinfinite,however,thesimplicityoftheoperating
systemissuchthatonlylimitedmaintenanceisrequired.Catalyticreductionoforganicsismost
practicalwhenitcanbecombinedwithNOxreductionbecauseofthehighcostofconstructing
andoperatingsuchequipment.However,catalyticreductionofPCDD/PCDFensuresthatthe
materialsaredestroyed,notjusttransferredtoanothermediasuchasAPCresidueswhich
ultimatelymustbedisposed.
SincetheSCRDeDioxtechnologyhasnomovingpartsandisessentiallyapieceofexpanded
duct,theinvestmentaswellastheoperatingcostsarethelowestofallthealternatives.Thisis
mostlyinfluencedbythefactthatthetechnologydoesntrequireanyadditivessuchasadsorbent
andthePCDD/Faredestroyedresiduefree.Morethan10yearsoffullscalecommercial
operatingexperienceisavailableforawidearrayofapplicationsinnumerousdifferent
industries.
TheonlySCRDeDioxinstallationintheCanadaisinstalledattheAlgonquinPowerEFW
incineratorsiteinBrampton,ON.Treatingapproximately35Rm3/s@11%O2ofstackgases,the
systemoperatesat235OC.Priortotheinstallationofthisequipment,theupperconfidencelimit
ofallthePCDD/Femissionconcentrationmeasurementsconductedatsiteovera9yearperiod
was280pgTEQ/Rm3@11%O2.DuringcommissioningtestinginNovember2001thefacility
recordedthreePCDD/FemissionconcentrationvalueswellbelowtheEnvCanLOQof32pg
TEQ/Rm3@11%O2.Thistranslatestoremovalefficienciesinexcessof88%.Sincethattimethe
facilityhasconvertedtousingPACtoremovemercuryfromthestackgasesandsubsequent
annualemissiontestingsuggeststhatthePCDD/Fremovalefficiency,baseduponpreexpansion
levels,areontheorderof99.5%.Asnotedelsewhereinthisdocument,thetestingmethodisnot
capableofreliablyreportingPCDD/FconcentrationvaluesbelowtheLOQ,norhastheinlettothe
SCRDeDioxsystembeenmeasuredconcurrently,soitisnotpossibletostatetheabsolute
removalefficiencyachievedatthesite.Alsonotableisthelackofothervolatileorganicspeciesin
thestacktestingresults.Thequantityofmosttraceorganicscollectedinsamplingtrainsbefore
theSCRwasteinstalledweremeasurable,whereasaftertheSCRwentintooperation,these
substancesarenotdetectableinthelaboratory.ThePCDD/Femissionsfromthefacilityhave
beenreducedsignificantly.Furthermore,thematerialwasdestroyed,nottransferredtoanother
media,soPCDD/Fremovedinthesystemnolongerexists.
Catalyticreactionscanbeemployedindifferentwaysasdemonstratedbyoneofthefabricfilter
48
manufacturers.27Theycreatedacatalyticfiltersystem.Thesystememploysbothsurface
filtrationandcatalysistoremoveparticulatematterfromthegasstreamwhileoxidizingthe
PCDD/Ftothemorecommonchemicals.ThesystemconsistsofanePTFEmembranefilterwitha
catalyticneedlepunchedfeltsubstratemadefromePTFEfibrescontainingPCDD/Fdestroying
catalyst.TheGORETEXmembranecapturessubmicronparticleanddoesnotallowthemto
passthroughthecatalyticfelt.Bonteetal.reportthattheperformanceofthisfiltersystemwas
demonstratedontheBelgiumIVROMSWincineratorwithdestructionefficienciesontheorderof
99.5%.
ManyhavequestionedwhethercatalyticsystemsmerelyadsorbedthePCDD/F.Bonteetal.
quotedatafromWeber28andXu29thatshowlittleifanyPCDD/Fisadsorbedontothecatalyst
howevertheynotethatthesetestsdidnotincludetheeffectofparticulatematterandthusthey
undertooktestsonthefiltermaterialfromIVROtoseeiftheparticulateadsorbedPCDD/F.These
testsshowedthattheparticulatephasePCDD/Finthegasstreamaheadofthefilterandinthe
fabricfilterdustwereequivalent.Thefilteritselfappearedtoretainlessthan0.01%ofthe
PCDD/Fpresentintherawgasstream.
4.2.4
OtherRemovalTechniques
Companiesandresearcherscontinuetolookfornewapproachestoairpollutioncontrolsystems.
OnesuchproductissuppliedbyGtaverkenMiljofSweden.Intheearly1990sduringthestart
upofthenewAmsterdamMSWincineratorresearchersnoticedthatthePCDD/Femissionswere
notconsistentunderdifferentoperatingconditions.Furtherstudyshowedthattheplastic
materialsusedinthesystemabsorbedPCDD/Fundersomeconditionsandunderother
conditionsthecontaminantswerereleasedfromtheplasticbackintothegasstream.The
researchershypothesizedthatthiseffect,whichtheylikenedtoaflywheelstoringandreleasing
energy,couldbethereasonthattheperformanceofthefacilitywasnotatexpectedlevels.Thisis
nowrecognizedtobeamemoryeffectthatisafunctionoftemperature,concentrationandthe
natureoftheplasticmaterials.Inwetscrubbingsystemsthepackingmaterialsarefrequently
constructedofplasticthustherewasaneedtoreducethememoryeffect.
OriginallydevelopedattheKfKinGermany30,GtaverkenMiljmarketsanewmaterialforthe
packingthathascarbonparticleshomogeneouslyembeddedinpolypropylene.Theycalledthis
27
Bonte,J.L.,K.J.Kritsky,M.A.Plinke,M.Wilken.2001.CatalyticDestructionofPCDD/FinFabric
Filter:ExperienceataMunicipalWasteIncineratorinBelgium.IT301Conference,Philidephia,PA.May,2001.
28
Weber,R.etal.2000.DioxinDestructionEfficiencyofCatalyticFiltersEvaluationofLaboratory
andComparisontoFieldOperationOrganohalogenCompounds,45,2000,pp.427430.AscitedinBonteetal.
29
Xu,Z.2000.CatalyticDestructionofPCDD/F:LatoratoryTestandPerformanceinaMedical
WasteIncinerator.OrganohalogenCompounds,45,2000,pp.419422.AscitedinBonteetal.
30
Andersson, S., Kreisz, S., Hunsinger, H. (2002) OrganohalogenCompounds58:157160.

49
materialAdiox31.TheplasticstillabsorbsthePCDD/Fbutthesecontaminantsdiffusethroughthe
polypropylenetothecarbonparticleswheretheyareirreversiblyadsorbedtothecarbon.The
plasticactsasabarrierforthecarbonensuringthatitisnotcontaminatedbyothermaterialssuch
asmercury.
TheADIOXmaterialhasbeeninstalledinanumberofapplicationsincludingascrubberataDow
facilityinCanada.TheinitialapplicationinanincinerationfacilitywasintheThistedEFWin
Sweden.In2001,thepackinginthewetscrubberswasreplacedwithAdioxpacking.Initial
removalefficiencieswereinexcessof90%withinletconcentrationsinthe610ng/Nm3.Testing
at3,6and9monthsshowedthegasphaseremovalefficiencyvaluesconsistentlyintherangeof
6575%.After12monthsthetotalremovalefficiencywasstillinthe80%range.Afterthefirst
yearofoperationabaghouseandPACadditionwereinstalledaheadofthescrubber.TheAdiox
didnotreleasePCDD/Fatthelowerinputconcentrationasevidencedbyemissionconcentrations
inthe45pg/Nm3range.Theseresultswerefromawetscrubberwithasaturatedgasstreamso
wateronthepackingwouldinterferewiththetransferefficiency.In2004adryAdioxabsorber
wasinstalledatanotherSwedishincinerator.GastreatmentinthissystemconsistsofanESP,two
wetscrubbers,reheaterandabaghousefilter.TheAdioxdryscrubberwasinstalledinthegas
streambetweenthereheaterandthebaghouseandoperatedattemperaturesinthe6080OC
range.Efficienciesinexcessof97.5%wererecordedinvarioustests,withthehighestefficiencies,
>99%,beingrecordedatthehighesttemperatures.Themanufacturersuggeststhisoccursbecause
thediffusionreactionsoccurfasteratthehighertemperatures.
Thedryscrubbercanbedesignedtooperateatapproximately20OCabovethedewpoint.The
scrubbercanbehousedinatowerofbetween0.5and7mindiameterand4to15mhigh
dependingupontheoperatingconditionsanddesiredemissionconcentration.
Themanufacturerhasnotdeterminedhowlongthepackingmaterialwilllast.Various
documentsonthewebsitesuggestitwillbeatleastafewyearsbeforeitmightneedtobe
replaced.Disposaloftheexistingpackingcouldbedoneintheincineratorweretheabsorberis
installedhoweverfeedrateswouldneedtobecontrolledtoensurethatthethermalcapacityof
thesystemisnotcompromised.
31
http://www.gmab.se/documents/Andersson_DryAdiox_Dioxin2005_CD2218_000.pdf
5.0 PCDD/FSAMPLINGMETHODS
5.1
Introduction
MeasurementsofPCDD/Fconcentrationsintheexhaustgasstreamsofcombustionsytemswere
requiredduringresearchneededtodevelopboththeunderstandingofthemechanismsdiscussed
inChapter2andtheAirPollutionControlsystemsdiscussedinChapter4.IndeedearlyNITEP
work32includedanevaluationofthenewlydevelopedASMEModifiedMethod5protocolfor
samplingandanalysisofPCDD/Finincineratorstacks.Since1984samplingmethodshavebeen
revisedtoensurethatthequalityofthereportedresults,andtomeettheincreasingdemands
posedbylowerandloweremissionconcentrations.
Themethodsemployedindifferentjurisdictionsarereviewedinthischapter.Whilethereare
severalsamplingproceduresemployedforcollectingPCDD/FandPCBcontaminantsinstack
samples,themethodscurrentlyincorporatedinNorthAmericanandEuropeanregulationsand
permitsaresimilar.Gasbeingexhaustedissampledbyextractingaportionoftheflowstream
isokinetically;filteringtheextracttoconcentratethespeciesofinterest;and,recoveringthe
concentratedsamplefromthesamplingsystemsothelaboratoryanalysiscanbecompletedusing
HRGC/HRMStechniquesarethebasicstepsinallmethods.Beingsimilar,theyshouldproduce
similarresultsifthemethodsareemployedbytrainedsamplersandchemistswhotakecarewith
theirtasks.
Eveniftestersprovidereliablemeasurementresults,themethodshavelimitations.Inthe
analyticallaboratorytheabilitytomeasurethequantityofPCDD/Fpresentinthesampleis
limitedbytheinstrumentation.Convertingtheanalyticallydeterminedquantitytoanemission
concentrationrequiresthatboththesamplevolumeandthestackgasflowbequantified.There
arelimitationsinthesemeasurementsaswell.Whenallthemeasurementfactorsarecombined
theyintroducesomeuncertaintyinthereportedresults.
Boththeconceptofthedetection/quantitationlimitandtheconceptofuncertaintyinthereported
resultsarepresentedinthischapter.Sincetheseconceptsarebaseduponstatisticalanalysisof
data,amoreintensivetreatmentoftheisprovidedinanappendixtothereport.
Regardlessofthesamplingmethodemployed,traditionalstacksamplingprocedurespresent
limitationsbothtoresearchersandoperatorsofcombustionequipment.Thesamplingmethods
arelabourandequipmentintensive,requiringaminimumof4hourssamplingtimetoextract
sufficientsamplefromthestack.Typicallyaminimumof2peoplemustundertakethistask,but
itoneisattemptingtoensurethatoperatingconditionsareappropriateduringthetesting
continuousemissionmonitoringequipmentisalsooperatedbyanotherpersonatthesametime.
Afterthesampleiscollected,itmustberecoveredfromthesamplingtrain,thisusuallytakesat
32
51
least1hourandtypicallysamplingteamsdedicateonepersontothistask.Thesampleis
deliveredtothelaboratoryandanalysisrequires68weeksundernormalconditions.Analytical
costscanbeashighas$1500/sample,puttingthecostoftheaveragesamplingcampaignatnearly
$30,000.So,$10,000perresultand90daysoftimearerequired.Thiscanbeviewedas
unsatisfactorybecausepeoplewanttobeensuredthatthesystemoperatesproperlyallthetime.
Toprovidethatassurance,thecontinuousoperatingdataistypicallymonitored,andindeed
regulationsrequirethatfacilitiesbeoperatedwithintheoperatingrangetheyweretestedat.
Typicallytheotherparametersmonitoredforthispurposeinclude:temperatures,flows,
pressures,reagentfeedrates,wastefeedrates,andcombustiongasconcentrations.
Somelongertermsamplingsystemshavebeendevelopedinanattempttoprovidemore
assurancethatcontinuousoperationissatisfactory.Bymonitoringforalongerperiod,withan
insitusystem,labourisreducedandanalyticalcostsarecontrolled.Twosuchmethodsare
discussedinthischapter.
Fortheresearcher,accesstoinstantaneousmeasurementsofPCDD/Fconcentrationswouldbe
ideal,howevergiventhequantitationlimitsexistinganalysersthisisnotpossible.Researchers
arethuslookingintoemployingsurrogatesthatreflectPCDD/Femissionsbutcanbemeasured
onacontinuousbasis33.Whilethesetechniquesarenotappropriateforregulatorytesting,they
arereviewedinthischaptertoillustratedevelopmentsinthefield.
5.2
RegulatoryMethods
MeasurementsarerequiredtodeterminetheconcentrationofPCDD/FanddioxinlikePCBsin
theexhaustgasstreamofanincineratoraretypicallydefinedinregulations.
InNorthAmericathemethodemployedisreferredtoasUSEPAMethod2334.Method23forms
thebasisoftheEnvironmentCanadamethodswhichweredevelopedsubsequenttothe1984
NITEPPEIstudytoformalizeasamplingandanalysisprocedureforPCDD/Fandsemivolatile
organicspeciesinCanada.EmployingtheEnvironmentCanadamethodsprovidesquantification
ofPCBs,chlorobenzenes,chlorophenolsandpolyaromatichydrocarbonsaswellasPCDD/F.
ThisisunlikelytheanalyticalmethodusedintheUnitedStatesaspartofMethod23whichonly
providesPCDD/Fdata.TheEnvironmentCanadamodificationsinvolvedifferenttrainspiking
andsamplehandlingprocedureswhenthesampleisreturnedtothelaboratory.Typically,stack
samplingconsultantsinCanadastillrefertothePCDD/FsamplingmethodasMethod23.The
33
USEPA,2004.TheUseofSurrogateCompoundsasIndicatorsofPCDD/FinCombustorStack
Gases.AnreportbyPaulLemieux.Availableat:http://www.epa.gov/appcdwww/aptb/EPA600R04024.pdf
34
USEPAMethod23DeterminationofPolychlorinatedDibenzopdioxinsand
PolychlorinatedDibenzofuransfromMunicipalWasteCombustors.02/91FRCopy.Availableat:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m23.pdf
52
samemethodisemployedinbothAustraliaandNewZealand.
Quassetal.35notethatEN194836istheEuropeanstandardguidelineforsamplingandanalysing
PCDD/Femissionsfromwasteincinerators.ItisstatedthatEN1948isthebasisfornational
standardguidelinesforthedeterminationofthedioxinemissionsinmanyEuropeancountries,
(e.g.CSNEN1948;DINEN1948andVDIof3499etc.).VDI3499sheets1to3aretheGerman
standardguidelineforthedeterminationofdioxinemissionsfromstationarysources,and
providestwomeasurementprocedures:PartAtheapplicationofDINEN1948forPCDD/F
emissionsatlevelsofabout0.1ngITEQ/m;and,inPartBthemethodismodifiedforPCDD/F
concentrationsinexcessof0.1ngITEQ/m.WhileusingthemethodforPCDD/Fdeterminations
hasbeenvalidated,themethodhadnotbeenvalidatedforPCBbyOctober2005.
CallingupontheworkofQuasset.al.thefollowingmaterialprovidesacomparativedescription
ofthevariousproceduresmentionedabove.Thefollowingisdividedinto3sections:
5.2.1
samplecollectionandrecovery;
sampleextractionandcleanup;and,
identificationandquantificationofsamples.
SampleCollectionAlternatives
EuropeanMethodsasEndorsedbyCEN
ThestandardproceduresusedforPCDD/FsamplinginEuropearecoveredbyEN19482006.
EN1948,providedin3volumes,waspublishedinarevisedversioninMay2006.Themethod
includesdirectionsforsampling,extractionandcleanup,andidentificationandquantificationin
separatesections;Volume1dealswithsampling.
ThisguidelinewasdevelopedandvalidatedforthemeasurementofPCDD/Femissionsinthe
rangeof0.1ngITEQ/mwithdustloadingupto15mg/m.PCBconcentrations,accordingto
Quassetal.,shouldbeintherangeof0.01ngWHOTEQPCB/mbaseduponinformationina
fourthvolumeofthestandardwhichisstillindraftstatus.
EN1948suggeststhat3differentsamplingmethodscanbeused.Asisstandardforallmethods,
35
Quass,Ulrich,ChristineKube,StefanHaep,AlfonsBuekens,BernardDeCaevel,
CatherineLambert,2005.PreparatoryworkfornewdioxinmeasurementrequirementsfortheEuropeanmetal
industry.FinalReportReferenceENV.G.2/ATA/2004/0070 October2005.IntendedforEuropeanCommissionDG
Environment.Availableat:http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/pdf/dioxins_final_rep.pdf
36
EN19481,2and3.2006.StationarysourceemissionsDeterminationofthemassconcentration
ofPCDDs/PCDFs.EuropeanStandardapprovedbyCENon2006123.ObtainedthroughANSIfromSIS.
53
thesamplegasistakenataflowratethatmatchesthevelocityinthestack,thuscapturing
particulatematterinarepresentativemanner.Allsamplingmethodsrequirethatsurfacesin
contactwiththesamplegasbemanufacturedfromglass.
ThefirstmethodlistedisknownastheFilter/CondenserMethod.Thesamplegaspasses
throughaparticulatematterremovaldevicemaintainedatatemperaturebetweenthedewpoint
and125C.Theremovaldevicecantakeseveralformsfromafilter,toacyclone/filter
arrangementorevenapackedglasswoolfilter.Aftertheparticulatematterisremoved,the
samplegasiscooleddowntobelow20C.ThegaseousPCDD/Fcompoundsarecollectedeither
inabsorptionsolutions(impinger)oronasolidadsorbent.ThetotalPCDD/Fcontentis
determinedasthesumofthecontentsinthefollowingcompartments:
Glasstubeoftheprobe(ifused)
Particlefilter(andpackedglasswoolfilterorcyclone)
Condensate
Impingersolutionand/orsolidadsorbent
Rinsingsolution(usedforcleaningofallglasssurfaces)
Thesecondmethod,knownastheDilutionmethodinvolvescollectingthegasthroughaheated
probefollowedbyrapidcoolingofthegasstreamtobelow40C.Coolingisaccomplishedina
mixingchannelbydilutingthegaswithdriedandfilteredair.Thedilutionpreventsthe
temperaturefromfallingbelowthedewpointofwater.Acombinationofaparticlefilterand
solidadsorbentisusedtoseparateandaccumulatethePCDD/Fcontainedinthesamplegas.
Compartmentsfortheanalysisare
Particlefilter;
Solidadsorbent;and,
Rinsingsolution.
Toensurethatthedilutionaircannotcontaminatethesample,thisairispassedthroughafilter
andsolidadsorbentbeforebeingcombinedwiththesamplegas.Thisportionofthetrainis
renewedforeachtestand,shouldthesampleresultsbeunsatisfactory,thedilutionairfilterunit
hastobeanalysedtocheckforpossiblecontaminationofthesamplebythedilutionair.
Thethirdmethod,knownasthecooledprobemethod,involvescollectingthesamplegasusinga
watercooledprobe.Thesamplegastemperatureattheexitoftheprobe,mustbebelow20C.
Anycondensateformedintheprobeiscollectedandthemajorityoftheparticlesinthegas
streamcollectinthecondensate.ThegaseousPCDD/Fsfromthesamplegasareaccumulatedon
solidadsorbentsorinimpingers.Aparticlefilterisinstalledbeforethefinalsorptionstepto
collectsmallparticlesoraerosols.
54
Compartmentsfortheanalysisare:
Condensate;
Impingerand/orsolidadsorbentandfilter;
Rinsingsolution.
Regardlessofthesamplingmethodemployed,theproceduresrequirethatafieldblankbeused
toensurethatcontaminationdoesnotenterthesystemduringtransport,handlingandrecovery,
andreturnoftheequipmenttothelaboratory.Blanksshouldnotexceed10%oftheregulatory
limit.Thesamplingtrainsarespikedwith13C12labelledstandardsubstances(PCDD/Fsand/or
PCBs).Asasecondqualitycontrolstandard,therecoveryrateofeachstandardsubstancemust
begreaterthan50%,calculatedonthebasisoftheextractionstandard.
SpecificMethodsusedinGermanyforHighConcentrationsorHighDustLoads
TheGermanstandardVDI3499isalsoprovidedinthreeparts,sheet1337.ThethreepartsofVDI
3499describethethreedifferentsamplingmethodsoutlinedaboveinthediscussionofEN1948.
Eachsheet(1,2or3)isdividedintotwoparts:Acoveringsamplingandanalysisidenticalto
theEN1948procedures;and,BamodifiedmeasurementprocedureforPCDD/Femissionson
systemsanticipatedtoexceed0.1ngITEQ/mortohavedustloadsgreaterthan15mg/m3.Part
Bproceduresaredescribedinthefollowingparagraphs.
PartBprovidesmodificationsforcaseswithhighPCDD/Femissionconcentrations,emissions
withhighdustloading,emissionscontainingtarryparticlesorformeasurementsofuncontrolled
exhaustgasstreams.
Asaprecaution,thestandardnotesthatseparatesamplingtrainsmustbeusedforhighandlow
rangesofemissionconcentrations.Thisistoavoidthepotentialformemoryeffects.Asampling
trainpreviouslyusedinaPCDD/Femissionconcentrationrangemuchhigherthan0.1ngI
TEQ/mmustnotbeusedinthelowerconcentrationrangeof<0.1ngITEQ/m.
Incaseswherethereisahighdustloadinganadditionalparticulatematterfilterhastobe
installedinthesamplingtrain.Forthedilutionmethodanddustconcentrationsabove100
mg/m3,themethodrecommendsaWB50filterbeaddedtothesystem.Forthefilter/condenser
methodusedinsituationswherethedustconcentrationis>20mg/mthemethodrecommendsa
packedquartzwoolfilter.
Furthermore,themethodsrecommendthatthemassofthe13C12labelledstandardsubstances
(sampling,extractionandinjectionstandards)beadaptedtotheexpectedPCDD/Femission
37
VDI3499,AStandardGuidelinefortheDeterminationofPCDD/Femissionsfromstationary
sources.Sheet13;2003;
55
concentrationandthatthesamplingtimebeadaptedtothemeasurementtask(upto8hours).
NorthAmericanProcedures
TheNorthAmericanstandard,Method23,wasreferencedintheintroductiontothissectionof
thereport.Inthiscasethesamplingtrainisconfiguredwithglassnozzleandprobe,aglass
fibrefilterandasolidadsorbent(XAD2)housedinaglasscartridge.
ComparedtoEN1948thissamplingmethodcouldbethoughtofasasimplifiedfilter/condenser
method.Thesamplegasisbroughttoatemperatureof$120Cintheprobeandfilterandthenit
isfurthercooledinthecondenser.Thetemperatureofthesamplegasshouldthennotexceed
20C.ThegaseousPCDD/Farecollectedonasolidadsorbent.Thecondensateiscollectedafter
theadsorptionstageexclusivelyforthedeterminationofthemoisture.Therelativelycomplex
liquidliquidextractionofthecondensate,asintendedinEN1948andVDI3499,isnotrequired.
Compartmentsfortheanalysisare:
Particulatefilter(glassfibrefilter);
Solidadsorbent(XAD2);
Rinsingsolution.
Quassetal.suggestthatMethod23issuitabletodeterminePCDD/Fconcentrationsfrom0.2to
0.4ngITEQ/minthefluegas;however,thismethodisroutinelyusedinCanadafor
concentrationsconsiderablybelowthislevel.Whileitissuggestedthattheguidelineshouldbe
goodfordustloadingsupto20mg/m3,thetraincanbemodifiedwiththeadditionofacyclone
beforethefilterifitistobeusedforrawgassamplingathigherconcentrations.
WhilethereisnoinformationinMethod23onusingthemethodforthecollectionofother
organiccomponents,likePCBorPAH,theEnvironmentCanadasamplingandanalysis
procedures38provideforsuchanalyses.
IntheEnvironmentCanadaapproach,thetrainconsistsof4impingers,filledwith
empty/ethyleneglycol/empty/silicagelrespectively.Recoveryofthesamplesincludecleaning
andrinsingthenozzle/probeassemblyandretainingtherinsings.Removingthefilterfromthe
housingandsaving.Allthesamplingtrainaheadofthefilteristhencleanedandrinsedwiththe
rinsingsbeingcombinedwiththosefromtheprobe.TheXAD2trapandthecoolingjacketare
sealedandreturnedtolaboratoryforsamplerecoverythroughextraction.Thecontentsofthe1st
38
EnvironmentCanada,1989.ReferenceMethodforSourceTesting:MeasurementofReleasesof
SelectedSemiVolatileOrganicCompoundsfromStationarySources,DepartmentoftheEnvironment,ReportEPS
1/RM/2,June.and:AMethodfortheAnalysisofPolychlorinatedDibenzoParaDioxins(PCDD),Polychlorinated
Dibenzofurans(PCDF)andPolychlorinatedBiphenyls(PCB)inSamplesfromtheIncinerationofPCBWaste,
DepartmentoftheEnvironment,ReportEPS1/RM/3,June.
56
threeimpingersarecombinedasanothersample.Rinsingsfromtheimpingersarecombinedina
2ndimpingersample.
SummaryofSampleCollectionProcedures
Table5.1summarizestheregulatoryrequirementsforsamplingPCDD/FsinEuropeandinthose
jurisdictionsthathaveadoptedUSEPAMethod23asthebasisoftesting.
Table5.1
Standard
ComparisonofRegulatorySamplingMethods
Rangeof
PCDD/F
Basisof
Sampling
Temperature
[OC]
Samples
Created
PCBValidated
[ngITEQ/Nm3]
EN1948
<0.1
Note:dust
concentration<15
mg/Nm3
VDI3499
>0.1
Note:Dust
>20mg/Nm3
Method23
5.2.2
0.20.4
Filter/
Condensor
20
no
Dilution
40
no
CooledProbe
20
no
asabovebutparticulatefilteraddedto
trainquartzglassorWB50
no
Simplified
filter/
condensor
method
20
Note:Dust
<20mg/Nm3
validatedwith
EnvCanada
Method
Dust
>20mg/Nm3
asabovebutaddcyclone
asabove
SampleExtractionandCleanup
Inalltheregulatorymethods,thesamplesmustbereturnedtothelaboratoryforanalysis.This
sectiondiscussesthevariousproceduresusedbythedifferentmethods.Eachoftheregulatory
methodsoutlinedwerepublishedwithdetailedlaboratoryanalysisprocedures.Whilesimilar,it
isappropriatetoreviewthemethodsasthesampleextractionandcleanupproceduresinfluence
thelimitsofdetectionofthemethods.Generally,thelaboratoryanalysisproceduresrequirea
twopartprocess:
extractingthePCDD/Fandotherorganicsfromthecollectionmatrix;
cleaningtheextractedmaterials;and,
analysingthequantityofPCDD/Fandothercontaminantsusinghighresolution
57
gaschromatographycoupledwithamassspectrometer.
Thestepsandcautionsfromthemethodsareoutlinedinthefollowingsections.
EuropeanMethods
TheextractionandcleanupproceduresforsamplescollectedwithEN1948methodsareoutlined
in19482,thesecondvolumeofthestandard.
Soxhletextractionandliquidliquidextractionproceduresareused.Acleaningprocedureforthe
rawextractofthesampleremovesmatrixcomponents,whichcoulddisturbtheseparation
process.InadditionanenrichmentofthePCDD/Fsand/orPCBsisachieved.
TheseparationofPCDD/FsandPCBstakesplaceduringacolumnchromatographycleanup,
e.g.usingFlorisilorAlumina.Inprincipleseveralcleanupstepscanbeused,providedthe
procedureisvalidated.
Ineachsampletherecoveryrateofeachstandardsubstanceoftheextractionstandards
shallbe:
50130%forthetetratohexachlorinatedcongeners
40130%fortheheptatooctachlorinatedcongeners.
Deviationsarepermissibleifthecontributionsoftherespectivecongenersdonotexceed10
%tothetotalITEQ(30150%forthetetratohexachlorinated;20150%fortheheptato
octachlorinatedcongeners).
TherecoveryrateforthePCBextractionstandardsubstancesshallbe40120%.
GermanCleanupProcedures
Subsequenttosampling,theVDImethodsoutlinescleanupandotherproceduresgenerally
followingthoseoutlinedinEN1948.However,whentarryandsimilarcomponentsarepresent
intherawextractsofthesamples,thesearetobesubjectedtoadditionalcleanupmethodsusing
sulfuricacid.Thesulfuricacideffectsthedecompositionofvariousorganicmatrixcomponents.
InadditiontothecollectionofPCDD/Fsthesamplingdeviceisalsosuitableforthedetermination
offurtherorganiccompounds(e.g.PCBs,PAHs).However,thesemeasurementshavenotbeen
validated.Typically,thesamplingmethodsinpartBareappliedtoawiderangeoffacilitiese.g.
smeltingplantsfortherecoveryofcopperandaluminiumandironsinteringplants.
Method23
ForMethod23,theextractionsteps,cleanupandidentificationaswellasthequantificationofthe
58
PCDD/FcongenersaresimilartoEN1948.Theconfigurationofthe13C12labelledstandard
substancesareslightlydifferentthanthoseinEN1948butthisshouldnotbeconsidered
significant.OnemajordifferencefromtheEN1948directions,Method23callsforadding
approximately2.5to5morestandardtothetrain.
Tomonitorextraction,cleanupandanalysisofsemivolatilesamples,labelledsurrogatesare
addedtothesamplesbeforeextraction.Onesettothesolidsamplesbeforethesoxhletextraction.
Asecondaddition,theinjectionstandardsareaddedjustpriortosampleinjection.TheXAD2
resincartridgereceiveafieldspikepriortodeploymentintothefield.Cleanupefficienciesare
determinedbytheadditionofanalternativestandardpriortothecleanupphase.
WiththeEnvironmentCanadamodificationstoMethod23,atthelaboratory,solidsareextracted
withdichloromethanefollowedbytoluene.Tolueneacidifiedwithtrifluoroaceticacidisusedto
ensureextractionofchlorophenolsandPCDD/F.Thecombinedextractsfromthevariouspartsof
thetrainaresplit5wayspriortocleanup.Oneisretainedforreanalysisifnecessary.The
remainingfourarecleanedforvariousanalyses:PCDD/F;PCB/CB;CP;andPAH.
SummaryofRecoveryandCleanupProcedures
WiththeexceptionsoftheGermanmethodstodealwithtarryresiduesorthosewithhighdust
loadings,andtheCanadianproceduresthatprovidesamplesfordeterminationofadditional
species,thesamplerecoveryandcleanupproceduresoutlinedabovearereasonablysimilar.The
cautionisthatthesemethodsmustbeappliedbyqualifiedprofessionalsinlaboratoriesdesigned
andequippedtoproducehighqualityresultsonsamplescontainingverylowconcentrationsof
thetargetspecies.
5.2.3
IdentificationandQuantification
RegardlessofthesamplingandcleanupproceduresdeterminationofPCDD/Fsanddioxinlike
PCBsisbaseduponquantitativeanalysisusingtheisotopedilutiontechniqueswithahigh
resolutiongaschromatograph/highresolutionmassspectrometer[HRGC/HRMS]system.This
techniquereliesuponquantifyingthe13C12labelledstandardsubstances,whichareaddedto
differentstepsoftheoverallprocedureasinternalstandards.Therearesomedifferencesbetween
themethodsoutlinedinthevariousprotocols.
EuropeanMethods
Fortheidentificationofthecongeners
aHRGC/HRMSwithamassresolutionof10,000isnecessary.Aresolutioninthe
rangefrom5,000to10,000isacceptableiftheabsenceofinterferencesiswell
documented.
Atleasttwoionsofthemolecularisotopeclusterofeachchlorinationshallbe
59
recorded.
Theisotoperatiobetweentheionsmustcorrespondtothetheoreticalvalueof20%
(PCDD/F)and15%(PCB).
Theretentiontimesofthenativecongenersarewithinatimewindowfrom+3sto
0scomparedtothesignalofthecorresponding13C12labelledstandardsubstance.
Thesignaltonoiseratiooftherawdatamustbeatleast3:1forthesignaltakenfor
identification.
Additionally,theidentificationrequirementsofthefollowingimportantpointsmustbefulfilled
forquantification:
TheseparationofallPCBcongenersofinterestshallbeachievedbyusinga
standardreferencemixture.
Itisnotpossibletoseparateall2,3,7,8chlorinatedPCDD/Fcongenersbyusing
onlyonechromatographycolumn.Multipleanalysisbyusingdifferent
chromatographycolumnsallowsforacompleteseparation.Resultsofan
individualcolumnmayberecorded.Iftheregulatorylimitisexceeded,additional
confirmationanalysisisnecessary.
Therecoveryratesoftheextractionstandardsubstancesmustcorrespondtothe
requirementsspecifiedalready.
Themeasuringrangemustbelinear(atleast5pointcalibrationforthe
determinationoftheresponsefactors).
Anextractionblankvalueistobedetermined.Theconcentrationsofallcongeners
shouldbebelowthelimitofdeterminationand/orfactor10belowthelowest
measuredconcentration.
GermanMethods
AnalyticalproceduresareidenticaltotheEN1948methodusingHRGC/HRMSandisotope
dilutiontechnology.
Method23/EnvironmentCanada
Isotopedilutionanalysisproceduresusetheinternalstandardvaluestocorrecttheresulting
PCDD/Fdataforrecovery.NosurrogaterecoveryfactorsareappliedtotheresultsofthePAH,
PCB,CBorCPdata.ItshouldbenotedthatatpresentPCB/CBandPAH/CPanalysesare
completedwithlowresolutionGC/MS.
SummaryofAnalysisProcedures
Aswiththeotherportionsofthisreviewofmethods,analyticalproceduresaresimilarinall
standards.Fortheexperiencedpractitionerapplicationoftheanalyticalprocedurestoproduce
goodresultsrequiresknowledgeoftheequipmentbeingusedandhowtodetermineifthe
60
equipmentisoperatingattheappropriatelevelwhentesting.Qualityassurance,qualitycontrol
proceduresmustbeadheredtoiftheanalystistoensurehighqualitydata.
Regardlessofthemethodsemployed,theresultsshouldbecomparable.
5.3.4
MinimumDetectionLimits
NodiscussionofPCDD/Fsamplingandanalysiswouldbecompletewithoutsomereferenceto
themethodcapabilitytomeasurelowconcentrations.Thisissometimesreferredtoasthelimitof
quantification[LOQ].Essentially,theaimistoestablishthelowerendoftheanalyticalresults
thatcanbereliablyreported.
Currently,inCanada,theLOQforPCDD/Fisdefined39intermsoftheITEQvalueforthesample.
TheITEQvalue,discussedinthenextchapter,iscalculatedbysummingtheproductofeachof
theindividualcongenersmultipliedbyitsrespectivetoxicequivalencyfactor,toprovideasingle
numberdescribingemissionconcentrations.ForstacksamplingdatatheEnvironmentCanada
LOQvalueissetat32pgITEQ/Rm2@11%O2.Accordingtothereport,theLOQwasdetermined
byassessingthevariability(standarddeviation)ofrepeatedmeasurementsofanalytesata
concentrationnearthedetectionlimit.InCanada,theLOQisusedasabaselinetoassistin
establishingthevirtualeliminationtarget.
TheLOQshouldnotbeconfusedwiththedetectionlimitforasample.ThedefinitionsinEN
1948distinguishbetweenthetwoterms:
limitofdetection[LOD]minimumvalueofthemeasurandforwhichthe
measuringsystemisnotinthebasicstate,withastatedprobability.Typically,the
LODisexpressedasthemeananalyticalblankvalue[bave]plusthree(3)timesthe
standarddeviationoftheanalyticalblank[sb].Theequationisthus:
LOD = bave + 3sb
Thetypicalconfidencelevelusedforthisexpressionis99%.InEN1948theLOD
shouldpreferablybecalculatedfromtheanalyticalblankaverage.Ifthisisnot
possible,theLODcanbecalculatedfromthesignaltonoiseratioaccordingtoEN
1948Part38.1whichstatesthatthesignaltonoiseratiooftherawdatashallbe
atleast3:1forthenativecongenersignalusedforidentification.
.
limitofquantification[LOQ]limitabovewhichaquantificationofthemeasurand
ispossible,isexpressedasthemeananalyticalblankvalueplus,fivetotentimes
thestandarddeviationoftheanalyticalblank.ThefactorFdependsuponthe
39
EnvironmentCanada,1999.LevelofQuantificationDetermination:PCDD/PCDFand
Hexachlorobenzene.AreportbyAnalysis&AirQualityDivision,EnvironmentalTechnologyCentre,Environment
Canada.November
61
acceptedmeasurementuncertainty.TheequationdefiningtheLOQisthus:
LOQ = bave + Fsb

InEN1948,thelimitofquantificationshouldpreferablybecalculatedfromthe
analyticalblankaveragehowever,ifthisisnotpossible,thelimitofquantification
canbecalculatedfromthesignaltonoiseratioasdefinedinPart38.3e,thatis
thesignaltonoiseratioofthenativecongenersshallbe10:1andthesignalto
noiseratioofthe13C12labelledcongenersusedforquantificationshallbe>20:1.
TheEN1948standarddefinesapermissiblelimitofquantification[LOQ]forindividual
congenersas:
Where
0.5 pg / m3
LOQi
I TEFi
LOQi=individualcongenerlevelofquantificationand
ITEFi=internationaltoxicityequivalencefactorforthecongener
UnliketheCanadianLOQ,whichisasinglenumberdefiningthelimitbelowwhichitcanbesaid
thatPCDD/Fshavebeeneliminated,theEN1948approachrequiresthattheconcentrationof
eachcongenerbedeterminedandthesedatabeincorporatedintothecalculationoftheITEQ
valueofthesample.Iftheconcentrationofanycongenerislessthanthevaluederivedfromthe
equationabove,theITEQvaluefortheemissionconcentrationmustbereportedintwoways:
thesumoftheproductoftheconcentrationandthetoxicequivalencyfactorforall
thecongenerswiththemassofthosebelowtheLOQbeingsetequaltotheLOQ;
and,
thesumoftheproductoftheconcentrationandthetoxicequivalencyfactorforall
thecongenerswiththemassofthosebelowtheLOQbeingsetequaltozero.
AttheLOQ,thequantityofeachoftheindividualcongenersthatrepresenttheminimumthat
couldbequantifiedforatypical5.5m3sampleisshowninthethirdcolumnofTable5.2.Ideally,
laboratoriesmightbeabletoreportlowervaluesandsomedo,asexemplifiedbythelowendof
therangeinthefourthcolumnofthetable.However,therealityisthattheLOQcalculatedfrom
thedatacanalsobeabovethepermissibleLOQasseeninthefourthcolumn.Ifthisisthecase,
andtheoverallITEQexceedstheapplicablestandard,thelaboratorymightberequiredtodo
morecleanupofthesample,oranalysethesampleonanothercolumntoconfirmtheresults.If
theproblemstillexists,theotheralternativeistoextendthesamplingtimetherebyincreasingthe
volumeandthecongenerquantity.
TheEN1948approachsuggeststhatthetheoreticalLOQforasamplemightbeontheorderof
7.93pgITEQ/m3ifeachcongenerwasattheLOQ.BasedupontherangeofLOQITEQvaluesfor
theindividualcongenersintheCENvalidationstudythesampleLOQwouldbeanywhereinthe
rangeof7.1to60.3pgITEQ/Nm3ifallthecongenerswereeitherattheminimumormaximum
62
value.ThecongenerLOQvaluesforanyparticularsamplewouldbeexpectedtobedistributed
betweentheextremesandthevalueforthesamplewouldliesomewhereintherangeorabove
themaxima.
TherangeoftheoreticalsampleLOQvaluessuggeststhattherecouldbeotherfactorsthataffect
theresultsofanysamplingprogram.
Table5.2
LimitsofCongenerQuantificationbasedupona5.5m3samplevolume
Congener
I-TEQ
LOQ [pg]
CEN Quantification
Limits [pg ITEQ/m3]
2.75
0.4 to 0.5
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
0.5
5.5
0.3 to 0.7
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
27.5
0.3 to 2.8
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
27.5
0.2 to 2.8
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
0.1
27.5
1.0 to 2.8
2,3,7,8-TCDD
5.3.5
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
0.01
275
0.2 to 6.2
OCDD
0.001
2750
0.1 to 8.8
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.1
27.5
0.4 to 0.5
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
0.05
55
0.3 to 0.8
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
0.5
5.5
0.3 to 0.8
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
27.5
1.0 to 3.2
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
27.5
0.5 to 3.2
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
0.1
27.5
1.0 to 3.2
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
27.5
0.4 to 3.2
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
0.01
275
0.1 to 7.2
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
0.01
275
0.2 to 7.2
OCDF
0.001
2750
0.4 to 6.4
MeasurementUncertainty
AnappendixoftheEN1948addressestheuncertaintyinmeasurementsandservesasastarting
pointforthissection.
Therearetwotypesoferrorsthatcanoccurinanymeasurementsystem:
RandomErrors(TypeA);and,
SystematicErrors(TypeB).
Typicallywhenevaluatingsucherrorsonewouldlookateverystepoftheprocedureand
performapropagationoferrorsestimate.OnlytheRandomErrorscanbedetermined
63
experimentally.Generallytheprocedurewouldbetoseveralparalleltestsandcalculatethe
standarddeviationofthetestresultsasameasureoftheerror.TheSystematicErrorscannotbe
determineddirectly,theycanonlybeestimatedbecausethetruevalueofastackconcentrationis
seldomknown.Errorsduringsamplingcanoccurthroughnonrepresentativesampling,
inhomogeneitiesinthesample,orcontaminationinthesampler.Duringthesamplerecovery,the
extractionprocedures,columnchromatographyandevensamplelosscancontributetoerrors.
Referencestandardsmayhaveerrorsinthecertifiedvalue,ordilutionscanbedoneincorrectly.
Matrixeffectsorinterferencesbothcontributesystematicerrorsduringthequantificationstep
andtheintegrationofthesignaloutoftheinstrumentcanalsocontributetotheerror.By
developinganequationtodescribeallthesefactorsanddifferentiatingitforeachvariablewould
beverydifficultsothenextbestapproachistoassumeallthefactorsareindependent.This
allowsthesquaresoftheestimateofeacherrortobesummedandtheoverallerrorcanbe
determinedbytakingthesquarerootofthisvalue.
InAnnexBofEN1948itisconcludedthatthevariouserrorsincludethefieldsampling
uncertaintyof11.1%andthemeasurementuncertaintyof6.8%whichsuggestthattheoverall
samplingprocedureerroris13%.Thecontributionsoftheblank,aleak,uncertaintiesinthe
standards,andnotcorrectedanalyticalsystematicerrorssuchaslossesduringcleanupcreatean
uncertaintyontheorderof27%forthesystematicerrors.Takethesquarerootofthesumofthe
squaresofthesevaluesproducesanoveralluncertaintyontheorderof30%35%accordingto
EN1948.
AnnexBconcludesbynotingthatthe7%uncertaintyintheanalyticalprocedureagreeswellwith
methodintercalibrationsonroundrobinanalysistrials.Theconclusionsgoontonotethatwhen
combinedwithsamplevolumedeterminationstheuncertaintywithinthesamelaboratoryison
theorderof15%andbetweenlaboratoriesthisisextendedto2030%.
Uncertainty,expressedasapercentage,isonewayoflookingatsamplingdata.Asnotedabove,
whenthetrueconcentrationisnotknown,asisthecaseinallstacksampling,itisimpossibleto
determinehowmuchtheresultsmightvaryfromreality.However,dualtrainmeasurements,
determinationsofstackconcentrationsbaseduponsimultaneoussamplingwithtwoormore
trains,canprovideameasureofvariability.Twosuchstudieshavebeenpublished:
AnnexFofEN1948providesanassessmentofbothinternalandexternal
variabilityofmeasurementsconductedwiththethreedifferentsamplingtrains
listedintheprotocolaspartofthevalidationstudiesconductedonthemethods;
and,
ASMEReMap40projectwhichconsideredsimultaneoussamplingdatacollected
40
Lanier,W.StevenandCharlesD.Hendrix,2001.ReferenceMethodAccuracyandPrecision
(ReMAP):Phase1.PrecisionofManualStackEmissionMeasurements.PreparedundertheauspicesofAmerican
SocietyofMechanicalEngineers,ResearchCommitteeonIndustrialandMunicipalWaste.PublishedasASME
ReportCRTDVolume60.
64
fromvarioussourcesbyvariousstudyteamsandprovidesinformationnotonlyon
PCDD/Fsamplingmethodvariabilitybutalsolooksatparticulatematteranddata
forseveralmetalspecies.
BoththesestudiesareincludedintheAppendixonsamplingattachedtothisreport.Theresults
aresummarizedinthefollowingparagraphs.
CENStudyResults
TheresultsofthevalidationtestsweresubmittedtheCENcommitteeforreview.Thecommittee
checkedalltheresultstoensurethatalltherequirementsoftheStandardhadbeenmetbeforethe
statisticswerecalculated.TheinternalvariabilityresultsaresummarizedinTable5.3foreachof
thethreefacilitiestestedwiththevariousmethods.
Outofthetotalof36possiblesamplesfromfacilityA,33sampleswereavailableforanalysisat3
differentlaboratories.Inaddition3crosschecksamplesweresubmitted.Eighteenanalytical
results,includingallthosefromonelaboratory,wererejectedasbeingoutsidethelimits,even
aftertheextractionlimitswereenlargedtoarangeof10%to180%.Atotalof10pairsremained
forthecalculationofvariability.
Outofthetotalof36possiblesamplesfromfacilityB,34wereavailableforanalysisat5
laboratoriesand2crosschecksweresubmitted.Only11pairswerejudgedsuitableforthe
calculation.
ForfacilityConly4daysoftestingwerecompleted,producing24possiblesamples.Allthe
sampleswereavailableandsenttoasinglelaboratory.Onlyonepairofsampleswerejudgedto
beunacceptableforcalculationprocedures.
Bycomparingthedifferencesbetweentestresultsgeneratedbythedifferentsamplingcontractors
andlaboratoriesanexternalvariabilitycanbedetermined.Thisprovidesanevaluationofthe
overalluncertaintyattachedtotheresultsofanindividualmeasurement.
Unfortunately,notallthetestdatawasjudgedsuitablefortheevaluationoftheexternal
variability.TheresultsfromfacilityCwereallanalysedatonelaboratorysothesedatawerenot
available.AtfacilityA,evaluationoftheresultsdeterminedthatthesamplingpointswere
sufficientlydifferentthatthesedatashouldnotbeusedtodetermineexternalvariability.Thus,
externalvariabiltywascalculatedonthebasisoffacilityBdata.
65
Table5.3
Facility
SummaryInternalVariabilityDatafromValidationTestsforCEN
Method
Number of
Pairs
Average
[ng I-TEQ/m3]
Internal
Variability
[ng I-TEQ/m3]
Dilution
0.19
0.12
Filter/Cooler
0.04
0.06
Dilution
0.04
0.016
Filter/Cooler
0.03
0.014
Cooled Probe
0.041
0.011
Dilution
0.13 (0.10)*
0.21 (0.08)*
Cooled Probe
0.13
0.02
Note: *indicatesasingleoutlierpointremovedfromthecalculation
Theexternalvariability,andhencetheuncertaintyofthemeasurementsofPCDD/Fexpressedas
ITEQdeterminedfromthesedatawas0.050ngITEQ/m3atameanmeasuredconcentrationof
0.035ngITEQ/m3.Whilethiswouldsuggestthatnegativevaluescouldbereported,inreality
therangeshowsthatthedatalikelydoesnotfitanormaldistributioncurve.Mostenvironmental
dataislognormallydistributed.Thatisthebulkofthedataisclosetothemeanbutalow
numberofhighandlowvaluesareexpectedtobefound.Thevariationsistreateddifferently
withlognormaldistributionsandtheapparentanomalywouldnotoccur.Theresultssuggest
thatnoconclusionsondifferencesinemissionscouldbemadeiftheresultsarelessthan85pgI
TEQ/m3becausethedataiswithintherangeoftheuncertainty.
TheASMEStudy
TheReMAPmethodologyinvolvedanassessmentoftheexternalvariabilitybecausethedatawas
collectedfromanumberofprojectsundertakenbydifferentsamplingteamsatdifferentfacilities
andtypicallyanalysedbydifferentlaboratories.Someofthedataincludestheresultsof
validationstudiesfordifferentmethods,otherdatawerecollectedaspartofspecificresearch
projectsbeingundertakenforUSEPAorotherentities.
ThedatausedfortheoriginalReMapstudyincluded19pairedsamplescollectedfromthemid
pointintheairpollutioncontrolsystemofanMSWincinerator41.Thesesampleswerenot
collectedatthestack,rathertheywerecollectedbeforetheESPbutafterthereagentinjection.
41
Rigo,H.GregorandA.J.Chandler,1997.RetrofittingESPEquippedMWCstomeetthe1995
EmissionGuidelinesusingSensibleHeatExchangerCoolingandDryReagentInjection.Apresentationatthe5th
NorthAmericanWastetoEnergyConference.RTP,NorthCarolina.ProceedingspublishedbySWANAGRWTE
0105.
66
Alsoincludedinthedatawere3pairsofdata,essentiallysimultaneoustestsonalightweight
aggregatekilnexhaustconductedfortheUSEPAbytwodifferentcontractors.Subsequenttothe
preparationoftheReMAPreport,simultaneoustestingwasconductedduringcompliancetesting
atanotherMSWincineratorintheUnitedStates.Atotalof5additionalpairedtestswere
includedinarevisiontothePCDD/Ffindings42.
Baseduponthedataavailableandtheupper95%confidenceintervalonthepowerlawfunction,
at32pgITEQ/m3theuncertaintyis18.6pgITEQ/m3andthisrisesto49.5pgITEQ/m3atan
averageconcentrationof80pgITEQ/m3.AsHendrixnotesinthereviseddocuments,itis
importanttorecognizethatsincethemodelisaregressionlinethemodelimprovesifitcontains
moredataneartheextremes.
ComparingtheuncertaintyprovidedbytheCENstudywiththatatsimilarconcentrationsfound
intheReMAPstudysuggeststhattheuncertaintyshownbytheReMAPdatais40%ofthevalue
developedfromtheCENstudy.UnliketheCENstudy,wheresimultaneoussamplepairswere
analysedbydifferentlaboratories,eachoftheReMAPstudiesreflectsonlythevariabilityinone
laboratory.
TheReMAPvaluessuggestthatatthecurrentCWSlimitforincinerators,80pgITEQ/Rm3,the
uncertaintyinthemeasuredvaluewouldextendfromlessthantheLOQtoapproximately130pg
ITEQ/Rm3.
Therelationshipbetweenconcentrationandprecisionneedstohavemorestudy,mostlyby
encouragingmoredualtrainsamplingattheloweremissionconcentrationscurrentlybeing
achievedbysomeoftheMSWincineratorsinCanada.
42
Hendrix,CharlesD.,2006.UpdatingtheModels.PrecisionofManualStackEmission
Measurements.DraftdocumentsubmittedforreviewtoASMEcommittee.
67
5.4
LongTermSampling
Whileyearoveryearsamplingusingmethodsoutlinedintheprevioussectionshowsthatnewly
upgradedfacilitiesroutinelymeettheCWSstandards,therearequestionsabouthow
representativetheshorttermsamplesareoftheannualsituation.InEuropethisquestionhas
beenaddressedbythedevelopmentof2longtermsamplingsystems:
5.4.1
AdsorptionMEthodforSAmplingofDioxinsandFurans[AMESA];and,
DioxinMonitoringSystem[DMS].
AMESA
AMESAissimilartothecooledprobesamplingmethodandEPA23.Theisokineticsampleis
removedfromarepresentativepointinthestack,andcooledto70Cwithintheprobe.Itthen
passesthroughanadsorptionunit,consistingofaquartzwoolfilterandsolidadsorbent(XAD2)
wherePCDD/Fsarecollected.Condensateiscollectedbehindtheadsorptionunitsomoisture
levelscanbeusedtonormalisetheflowrate.
Unlikethemanualsamplingmethods,onlythecontentsofthetheadsorptionunitisanalysed.
TherecommendedprotocolsfollowEN1948.Quassetal.suggestthatAMESAwillallowthe
determinationofthePCDD/Femissioncontentwithintherangeof0.000110ngITEQ/mwitha
dustloadofupto20mg/m.Thesamplingtimecanvarybetween6hoursand4weeks.AMESA
isinstalledinmorethan70wasteincinerationplantsinEurope.
ComparativemeasurementsbetweentheFilter/Condensermethod,theCooledprobemethodand
AMESAshowedgoodresults.
5.4.2
DMS(DioxinMonitoringSystem)
DioxinmonitoringsystemDMSisbaseduponthedilutionmethodofEN1948.Thesamplegasis
collectedinisokineticmodeviaaheatedprobeandcooleddownveryrapidlybelow40Cwith
driedandfilteredairinamixingchannel.Acombinationofparticlefilter(thisunitconsistsofa
finedustfilteranda2stagefoamfilter)andsolidadsorbentisusedtoextractandaccumulatethe
PCDD/Ffromthesamplegas.
Aswiththeotherlongtermmethod,onlytheadsorptionunitisanalysedaccordingtoEN1948.
WhileQuassetal.quotethePCDD/FmeasurementrangetobesimilartotheAMESAunit,itis
suggestedthattheDMScanhandledustloadingsupto150mg/m.Samplingtimesforboth
unitsaresimilar.DMSisinstalledinvariousincinerationplants.
Quassetal.notethatUmicoreHobokeninBelgiumusedanAMESAsystemattheirfacilityfor
aperiodofalmosttwoyears.Theirconclusionsattheendofthetestperiodwasthatsemi
68
continuoussamplingwasnotcostcompetitivetomanualsamplingduetothehighinitial
investmentrequiredandtheongoingmaintenancecosts.
5.5
AlternativeAnalysisProcedures
UndertakingPCDD/Fsamplingprograms,evenannualtesting,isexpensive.LongtermPCDD/F
sampling,asnotedabove,canbemoreexpensive.Clearly,ifalternativestotheexisting
approachescanbedevelopedtherewouldbeareadymarket.Thishaspromptedresearchinto
theuseofsurrogatesandimmunoassayprocedures.
5.5.1
SurrogateProcedures
AsdiscussedintheUSEPAreportreferencedatthestartofthischapter,surrogatesare
essentiallyindicatorspecieswhoseconcentrationinthestackgasescorrelatecloselywiththe
PCDD/Fand/orthedioxinlikePCBconcentrations.Ideally,thecompoundsofmostinterest
wouldbethosethatcanbesampledonacontinuousbasiswithinstrumentssuchasonline
GC/MSunits.InfluegasfromincinerationprocessesCB(chlorobenzenes)andCP
(chlorophenols)aswellasPCDD/Fsaredetected.Currentlytheanalysisoflowconcentrationsof
chlorophenolsreliesuponaderivatizationstepthatformsacetatederivativesthatareeasierto
monitoronlowresolutionGM/MS.Chlorobenzenesontheotherhandcanbemonitoreddirectly
andthuswerethefirstsurrogatecompoundsproposed.IfalinearrelationshipexistsbetweenCB
andPCDD/Fitcanbecharacterisedbyacorrelationcoefficient[r]oracoefficientof
determination[r2].Thecorrelationsatcombustionfacilitieshavebeenverygood.
Theuseofsuchsurrogatesmaynotbeuniversaltoallincineratorsystems.ThePCDD/F
signaturesfordifferentcombustionsystemsvaryandwiththesetheITEQwillvary.Shoulda
systembedevelopedtoutilizeCBsassurrogatesforPCDD/Ftherewillneedtobesignificant
facilityspecificvalidationtests.
ItisimportanttorecognizethatLemieuxrecommendsthatbeforesurrogatescanbeusedwith
adequateconfidenceatwastecombustionfacilitiesonaroutinebasis,additionaldatasetsneedto
begenerated.Itwouldbeusefultomakedetailed,isomerspecificmeasurementsofCBandCP
compounds,aswellaslowchlorinatedCDDs/Fs,duringeverytestwherePCDDs/Fsare
measured.
Itmustberememberedthatthistechnologycannotcurrentbeappliedtoregulatorytestingof
incineratoremissions,itisaresearchtoolusedbyscientistsexaminingthephysicalandchemical
phenomenathatgoverntheemissionsofPCDD/Fandotherorganicsfromcombustionsources.
69
AspointedoutbyGullett43theinstrumentisnotsensitiveenoughtomeasuretheconcentrations
ofthetargettedspeciesafterAPCequipment,thetechniquemustbeemployedattheexitofthe
furnaceorboiler,beforeanycontrolmeasuresareemployed.
5.5.2
Immunoassays
Surrogates,withextensivevalidationtests,willnotprovideparticularsimplificationtothe
proceduresrequiredtomonitorPCDD/F.Theywillstillrequireextensivemonitoringwith
elaborateanalyticalprocedures.TosimplifytheanalysisstepofthePCDD/Fdetermination,
bioassaysareavailableonthemarket.
Bioassaysproceduresuseadioxinspecificantibodyfordioxinsanddioxinsimilarcompounds
(PCB,PHAHetc.)todetectandquantifyasample.Asaresultbioassaysdirectlyproducean
ITEQsumvalue.Theextractionandthecleanupareessentiallysimplified.Ittakesonly24
hourstogetananalysisvalue.Bioassaysareextremelysensitive(fgrange),sothatthese
measurementmethodsaremostlyusedforsampleswithaminorPCDD/Fcontent,e.g.feed
andfoodsamples.Indeed,inJapan,bioassaywasadoptedasoneofmeasurementmethodinthe
LawConcerningSpecialMeasuresagainstDioxins(DioxinsLaw).Onepresumesthatshouldthe
bioassaysuggestasamplehasfailedtomeetthelimits,therewouldbeaneedtoverifythis
conclusionbycompletingthedetailedtesting.
TheKyotoElectronicsManufacturingCo.(KEM)44isdevelopinganewsimplifieddioxinmethod
fortheanalysisoffluegas,flyash,bottomash,soil,sediment,airandwater.In2006,asafirst
step,KEMhasmarketedthesamplepreparationsystemandadioxinbiosensorforfluegas,flue
ashandbottomashresiduesinJapan.Thesamplepreparationsysteminvolvespurifyingacrude
extractofhexanesolutionandsubstitutingitforDMSOsolutioninthepreparationsystem.The
resultingpreparedsamplecanbeusedinnotonlyKEMDXS600DioxinBiosensorbutalsoin
variouskindsofbioassaytechnique.
Thebiosensorusesahighlysensitiveantibodywhichrecognises2,3,4,7,8Cl5CDF.Thisdioxin
congenershowsaclosecorrelationtotheITEQofthePCDD/Finmostincinerationprocesses.
ThetotalITEQiscalculatedfromtheresultsofthe2,3,4,7,8Cl5CDFcongener.
BioassaydevelopmentsarealsobeingexploredintheNetherlandsbyBiodetectionSystems.To
reducecostsassociatedwithexistingPCDD/FandPCBanalysisproceduresforfoodandfeeds
thatEUlegislationrequiresbemonitored,theyhavedevelopedbioassaytechniquesthatrely
uponBioDetectionSystemsChemicallyActivatedLuciferaseExpressionorCALUXreporter
genebioassay.Essentiallythebioassayproducesalightthatisproportionaltoconcentration.
43
Gullett,BrianK.,2006.Commentsmadeduringapresentationatthe4thICIPECConferenceKyoto,
Japan,September.
44
See:http://www.kyotokem.com/english/products/dioxin/e_02.php
6.0 REPORTINGMEASUREMENTRESULTS
6.1
Introduction
Duringsamplingthegasandanycontaminantspresentinthestreamareextractedandpassed
throughacollectiondevicewhichconcentratesthespeciesofinterestinthesample.The
sampleisrecoveredfromthesamplingtrainandsenttothelaboratoryforanalysis.Inthe
laboratorythesampleisprocessedandtheresultisaweightmeasurementforthespeciesof
interest.Thatweightisthenusedtocalculatetheconcentrationinthestackgasesbydividingthe
weightbythevolumeofgasextracted.Whilethisisverystraightforwardforparticulatematter
orevenvolatileorganicspeciessuchastoluene,ormetalssuchasleadormercury,howwereport
PCDD/Femissionsiscomplicatedbythefactthatthesamplingdiscussedinthepreviouschapter
resultsinobtainingatleast17differentvaluesforPCDD/Falone.AsnotedintheIntroduction
thereare210isomersofPCDD/Fand209isomersofPCBthatcouldbeidentifiedintheanalytical
procedures.Trackingthesesubstancesforthepurposesof:settinglimits;identifyingcontrol
techniques;or,evendeterminingthemechanismsbywhichtheyareformed,wouldbeextremely
onerous.Asnoted,earlymeasurementsaddressedhomologuetotals,ie.theamountofmaterial
foundatdifferentchlorinationlevels.Whenscientistsmanagedtoidentifythattherewere
particularisomersresponsiblefortheeffectsnotedduringexposuretoPCDD/Ftheyreasoned
that,ifthedegreeofeffectcausedbydifferentisomerscouldbemeasured,itcouldbepossibleto
expresstheamountofPCDD/Fpresentbasedupontheanticipatedeffectofthemixture.Thus,
theconceptofassessingPCDD/Femissionsonthebasisoftoxicitywasadopted45.Thisapproach
hasbecomeknownastheTEQortoxicequivalencemethod,baseduponapplyingtoxic
equivalencyfactors[TEFs]thatrelatethetoxicityofeachisomertothatofthemosttoxicdioxin
congener,namely2,3,7,8tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin(2,3,7,8TCDD).Inthischapter,the
conceptoftoxicequivalenceandthedifferentschemesemployedarediscussed.
Inreviewingemissionregulationsfromvariousjurisdictionsitbecomesevidentthatnotall
concentrationsareexpressedinthesamemanner.Duringthesamplingprocedurethegasesare
typicallycooled,moistureisremovedandthenthevolumeofgassampledisdetermined.While
thatvolumecanberelatedtotheflowinthestack,whichisdeterminedbymeasuringthevelocity
profileacrossthestackalongwiththetemperatureofthestackgases,differentjurisdictionshave
attemptedtostandardizesuchreadingsbydefininghowtheresultsshouldbeexpressed.While
temperatureandpressureaffectgasvolumes,andarespecifiedinmoststandards,concentration
canalsobeinfluencedbytheamountofairpresentinthegasstream.Ifmoreairisadded,the
concentrationisreduced,butthemassflowrateofthepollutantofinterestdoesnotchange.
Thus,whensettingconcentrationlimitsitisimportanttostandardizetheamountofdilutionthat
isacceptablefortheparticularsource.Theissueofstandardizationisalsoaddressedinthis
chapter.
45
USEPA,(1989a)Interimproceduresforestimatingrisksassociatedwithexposurestomixturesof
chlorinateddibenzopdioxinsanddibenzofurans(CDDsandCDFs)and1989update.Washington,DC:Risk
AssessmentForum.EPA/625/389/016.
71
6.2
ExpressionofPCDD/FasToxicEquivalents
Massisthebasisforallconcentrationmeasurementsasdiscussedabove.Inanattemptto
simplifythestandardsforemissionsofPCDD/F,themassoftheindividualcongenersidentified
duringanalysisareadjustedonthebasisoftheirtoxicityandtheadjustedconcentrationsare
summedtoprovideasinglenumberofPCDD/Fbasedupontoxicity.Thisconcentrationis
frequentlydenotedwithareferencetothewaytheadjustmentwascarriedout,suchasthe
currentCanadianpracticeofreportingdataas[massITEQ/Rm3@11%O2].Thealternative
adjustmentfactorsarediscussedinthissection,thesignificanceofpartoftheaboveexpression
aftertheslashisdiscussedinthenextsection.
In1984,whentheconceptofassessingPCDD/Femissionsonthebasisoftoxicitywasadopted,
therewasnocommondesignation,buttheapproachhasbecomeknownastheTEQortoxic
equivalencemethod.Asnoted,theapproachisbaseduponapplyingtoxicequivalencyfactors
[TEFs]thatrelatethetoxicityofeachisomertothatofthemosttoxicdioxincongener,namely
2,3,7,8tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin(2,3,7,8TCDD).ThemostcommonTEFvaluesused
throughoutthe1990sweretheInternationalfactors(ITEF)46.TheITEFfactorsareshownin
Table6.1.ThesumofthePCDD/Femissionsexpressedinthismanneraredesignatedinthe
literatureasITEQvalues.
Asstudiesintotoxicologicaleffectsprogressed,itbecameapparentthatpolychlorinated
biphenyls[PCBs]alsoplayaroleintheeffectsthatwerebeingfound.ThestructureofPCBsis
morecomplicatedthanthoseforPCDD/Fsinthatthemoleculestakedifferentshapes.Thereare
209PCBcongeners,ofwhichonly13werethoughttohavedioxinliketoxicity:thosewithfouror
morelateralchlorineatomswithoneornosubstitutionintheorthoposition47.Thesecompounds
aresometimesreferredtoascoplanar,meaningthatthetwobenzeneringsareonthesameplane
givingthemoleculeaflatstructure.Thephysical/chemicalpropertiesofeachcongenervary
accordingtothedegreeandpositionofchlorinesubstitution.
ToaddressthebehaviourofPCBs,revisedTEFswereproposedbyAlhborgandhiscolleaguesin
1994.Thesefactors,whichhavebecomeknownastheTEQWHO94,wereusedbyscientists
undertakingriskassessmentevaluations,butfewcountriesadoptedthemforemission
characterization.TheTEQWHO94factorsareprovidedinTable6.1.Notethat,forPCDD/F
congeners,theTEFsarethesameinboththeITEQformulationandtheWHO94proposal.
46
Kutz,FW,Barnes,DG,Bottimore,DP,Greim,H,Bretthauser,EW.1990.Theinternationaltoxicity
equivalencyfactor(ITEF)methodofriskassessmentforcomplexmixturesofdioxinsandrelatedcompounds.
Chemosphere,20,751757.
47
Ahlborg,VG;Becking,GC;Birnbaum,LS;etal.(1994)Toxicequivalencyfactorsfordioxinlike
PCBs.Chemosphere28(6):10491067.
72
In1997anexpertgroupfromtheWHOreassessedtheTEFsforPCDD/FsandPCBsbyre
evaluatingtoxicologicaleffectsdataonarangeofspecies,andinvivobiologicaldata48.Thegroup
recommendedrevisingthehumanbasedTEFsandadoptingnewTEFsforfishandbirdswhen
thesefactorsweretobeusedinriskassessmentstudies.ThesumofPCDD/FandPCBemissions
calculatedusingtheserecommendedfactorshavebecomeknownastheTEQWHO98values.The
newTEFsforhuman/mammalhealtharethesameastheITEFsformostdioxincongenersbut
includeahighervaluefor1,2,3,7,8pentachlorodibenzopdioxinandlowervaluesfor
octachlorodibenzopdioxinandoctachlorodibenzofuran.
Ithasbeensuggested49thattheTEFWHO98willproduceamoreconservativeTEQresultfrom
theanalysisofsamplesasthevalueswillincreasebyapproximately10%comparedtothose
calculatedusingtheITEFs.TheUSEPA50provideannualemissionestimatesforlargemunicipal
incineratorsintheUS(Table37inreferencedreport),expressedonthebasisofboththeITEQ
andWHO98approaches.Thetablesuggeststhatthedifferenceintheannualemissionsbased
solelyonthePCDD/Fcongenerdataisapproximatelya10%increasewiththeWHO98
formulation.Anotherexamination51lookedatemissiondatafromNewZealandincineratorsand
determinedthattheWHO98TEFswouldproducea4to14%increaseintheTEQforPCDD/F
discharges.TheimpactachangeintheformulationwillhaveonCanadianemissionlevelsisbest
determinedbyexaminingtheavailableemissiondatafordifferenttypesofsourcesand
comparingthetwoTEQvalues.Thiswillbedonelaterinthisdocument.
AstohowtheTEFWHO98valuesarecurrentlybeingapplied,JapanhaveadoptedtheTEQ
WHO98factorsforusewhendefiningbodyburden.Japanesedocumentsappeartosuggestthat
thesefactorswillalsobeusedwhenassessingincineratoremissions,howeverthiscannotbe
confirmed.Similarly,AustraliaandNewZealandsuggesttheymightchangethebasisofthe
48
VandenBerg,M,Birnbaum,L,Bosveld,ATC,Brunstrm,B,Cook,P,Feeley,M,Giesy,J,Hanberg,
A,Hasegawa,R,Kennedy,SW,Kubiak,T,Larsen,JC,vanLeeuwen,FXR,Liem,AKD,Nolt,C,Peterson,RE,
Poellinger,L,Safe,S,Schrenk,D,Tillitt,D,Tysklind,M,Younes,M,Wrn,F,Zacharewski,T.1998.Toxic
equivalencyfactors(TEFs)forPCBs,PCDDs,PCDFsforhumansandwildlife.EnvironmentalHealthPerspectives,
106,775792.
49
VanLeeuwen,F.X.R.,Younes,M.M.(eds).2000.ProceedingsoftheWorldHealthOrganization
andInternationalProgrammeonChemicalSafetyconsultation,2529May1998,Geneva,Switzerland:Assessmentof
theHealthRiskofDioxins:ReevaluationoftheTolerableDailyIntake(TDI).In:FoodAdditivesandContaminants,
17,223240(executivesummary).
50
intheUnitedStates:TheYear2000Update(ExternalReviewDraft,March2005;EPA/600/p03/002A)
51
SinclairKnightMerzLimited,2001.DioxinDischargesfromWasteIncinerationTechnical
SpecificationsforaNationalEnvironmentalStandard.NewZealand,August.Availableat:
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/hazardous/dioxinwasteincineratorsaug01.pdf
73
Table6.1
SummaryofToxicityFactorsusedinDifferentFormulations
Congener
IUPAC
Number
2,3,7,8-TCDD
I-TEQ
TEQ-WHO94
TEQ-WHO98
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
0.5
0.5
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
0.01
0.01
0.01
OCDD
0.001
0.001
0.0001
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
0.05
0.05
0.05
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
0.5
0.5
0.5
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
0.1
0.1
0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.1
0.1
0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
0.01
0.01
0.01
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
0.01
0.01
0.01
OCDF
0.001
0.001
0.0001
0.0005
0.0001
3,3',4,4'-TeCB
PCB-77
3,4,4',5-TCB
PCB-81
2,3,3',4,4'-PeCB
PCB-105
0.0001
0.0001
2,3,4,4',5-PeCB
PCB-114
0.0005
0.0005
2,3',4,4',5-PeCB
PCB-118
0.0001
0.0001
2',3,4,4',5-PeCB
PCB-123
0.0001
0.0001
3,3',4,4',5-PeCB
PCB-126
0.1
0.1
2,3,3',4,4',5-HxCB
PCB-156
0.0005
0.0005
2,3,3',4,4',5'-HxCB
PCB-157
0.0005
0.0005
2,3',4,4',5,5'-HxCB
PCB-167
0.00001
0.00001
0.01
0.0001
3,3',4,4',5,5'-HxCB
PCB-169
0.01
2,2',3,3',4,4',5-HpCB
PCB-170
0.0001
2,2',3,4,4',5,5'-HpCB
PCB-180
0.00001
2,3,3',4,4',5,5'-HpCB
PCB-189
0.0001
0.0001
74
reporting,butdonotappeartohavechangedtheirregulationstoreflectthis.TheEuropean
UnionDirectiveonIncinerationclearlynotesthattheITEQapproachistobeused.TheUSEPA
stillreferenceITEQbasedfactorsforcalculatingemissionconcentrations.Whilenotadoptedfor
emissionscharacterization,theTEQWHO98approachisincorporatedintoregulationsonfood
andfeedsintheEU52.
ThediscussionofPCDD/Femissionvalueswouldnotbecompletewithoutreferencingthe
emissionvaluesusedforsomeoftheUSNSPSregulations.Theselimitsareexpressedonthe
basisofthetotalmassofthe17congenersintheITEQlist,butwithoutadjustingthevaluesfor
thetoxicitylevels.Thiswasarefinementofthehomologuesummationmethodusedinthe1980s,
sincethetotalofthehomologueswhichincludesthe17congenersistypicallylargerthanthesum
ofthe17bythemselves.
Regardlessofthetoxicequivalencyfactorsselected,theapplicationofthefactorsisthesame.
Eitherthemassortheconcentrationoftheindividualcongenerismultipliedbytheappropriate
factortogetanadjustedvalueforthatcongener.Theadjustedvaluesarethensummedto
provideasinglenumberdescribingthePCDD/Fand/orPCBpresentinthesample.Thisnumber
shouldbedesignatedastheTEQvalue.
6.3
TreatmentofLowValues
Whenmeasurementsofindividualdioxincongenersarebelowthelimitofquantification[LOQ],
asdiscussedinChapter5,differentapproacheshavebeenadoptedtodealwithreportingthese
values.
AsoutlinedinthediscussionofEN1948,themethodisclear:ifthequantityofaspecificcongener
isbelowtheLOQ,theTEQmustbecalculatedintwoways:oneincludingthespecificcongeners
atthequantificationlimitandtheothersettingthequantitytozero.
InUSEPAMethod23itstatesthat:AnyPCDDsorPCDFsthatarereportedasnondetected
(belowtheDL)shallbecountedaszeroforthepurposeofcalculatingthetotalconcentrationof
PCDDsandPCDFsinthesample.
EventhoughMethod23isusedinNewZealandtoo,ithasbeenrecommendedthatsampling
dataincludehalfofthelevelofdetection53asthemeasuredconcentration.Thisisjustifiedon
52
COMMISSIONDIRECTIVE2006/13/ECof3February2006amendingAnnexesIandIItoDirective
2002/32/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilonundesirablesubstancesinanimalfeedasregards
dioxinsanddioxinlikePCBs.
53
75
thatbasisthatitprovidessomeadvantageswhencalculatingdischargeTEQconcentrations.This
approachensuresthatasatisfactoryanalyticaldetectionlimitisachievedusingthemethods
employed.Sincelaboratoriesareroutinelyabletoachieveverylowdetectionlimits(atthe
pg/Sm3level),thecontributionofLODvaluestolimitswouldbeexpectedtobeverysmallevenif
nodioxincongenerswereactuallyquantified.
6.4
ConversionProceduresforSamplingConditions
Emissionstandardsaregiveninmanydifferentunitsandcanberelatedtodifferentdiluentlevels
(ie.differentoxygenconcentrations,orCO2concentrations,orevenexcessairlevelsinthe
regulationsfromtheprovinceofQuebec).
Inordertoallowacomparisonofstandardsitisnecessarytoconvertvaluestothesamebasis.
Forthisreport,allCanadianemissionsummariesandrecommendationsareexpressedin
mass/Rm3@11%O2,wheretheRorreferenceconditionsare101.3kPaand25OC.The
conversionscanbeaccomplishedwiththefollowingequations.
Tocorrectfordiluentconcentrationfromareferencedvalue:
Concentration@11%O2=Concentrationreferencedx[(20.911)/(20.9O2referenced)](1)
Note:O2referenced=20.91.14CO2(%)dry
(2)
ToconvertforexcessairaccordingtotheQuebecRegulationontheQualityoftheEnvironment
c.Q2,r.20thefollowingequationisapplied:
Concentration@50%ExcessAir[EA]=Concentrationmeasuredx11.30/(N2/O2measured)(3)
WhereN2=nitrogenconcentrationbydifferenceassumingstackgasesarenitrogen+
oxygen+carbondioxide+carbonmonoxidewithvolumeofgasesexpressedas
percentageofthetotal.
Bycombiningequations2and3,assumingthat11%oxygenisthereferencedconditionandthat
thecarbonmonoxidelevelsinthelowppmrangeandhavenosubstantiveeffectontheresults,
50%excessairvaluescanbeconvertedto11%oxygenlevelsusingthefollowingequation:
Concentration11%oxygen=Concentration50%EAx{[100O2CO2]/O2}/11.30
Concentration11%oxygen=Concentration50%EAx{[10011(9.9/1.14)]/11}/11.30
=0.646Concentration50%EA
76
Toconvertfromonestandardtemperaturetoanotherthevolumeofgasmustbeadjustedforthe
effectoftemperature.Sincegasvolumevariesdirectlywiththeabsolutetemperature,the
absolutetemperatureratioisappliedtoperformthecorrection.Theabsolutetemperatureis
273.16plusthetemperatureofthestandardinOC.TheabsolutetemperatureforCanadian
standardconditionsis298.16,andthisgoesonthebottomoftheabsolutetemperatureratio.
Bycombiningthediluentcorrectionandthetemperaturecorrectiontermsitispossibletoadjust
theconcentrationsexpressedinotherregulationstotheCanadianbasis.
StandardconditionsintheUSare20OCwith7%oxygendiluentlevels.Theconversionis
ConcentrationCanadianRef
=ConcentrationUSx(20.911)/(20.97)x293.16/298.16
=0.7003xConcentrationUS
StandardconditionsintheEC,Japan,AustraliaandNewZealandare0OCwith11%oxygen
diluentlevels.Theconversionis:
ConcentrationCanadianRef
=ConcentrationECx273.16/298.16
=0.9162xConcentrationEC
Valuesaregenerallyreportedtotwosignificantfigures.
6.5
ReportingProceduresforthisReport
ForthisreporttheemissiondatawillbereportedonthebasisoftheEN1948advice:
iftheconcentrationofanycongenerislessthantheLOQ,twovalueswillbereportedfor
thesite:
atotalthatincludesthecongenertakenaszero;and,
atotalthatincludesthecongenertakenattheLOQ.
Furthermore,inordertoascertainthepotentialimpactofusingtheTEQWHO98factors,the
emissionswillbereportedbothonthebasisoftheITEQfactorsandtheTEQWHO98factors.
7.0 PCDD/FEMISSIONREGULATIONS
7.1
Introduction
In1988aCCMEpredecessorissuedareport54concerningtheanticipatedperformanceof
municipalsolidwasteincinerators.Shortlythereafterasimilardocumentrelatedtohazardous
wasteincineratorswasissued.Whiletheinitialreportstoppedshortofdefiningaregulatory
limitforemissionsfromMSWincinerators,basedupondataavailableatthetime,itsuggested
thatwelloperatedfacilitiesshouldbeabletolimitPCDD/Femissionsto0.5ngTEQ/Rm3@
11%O2.ThisnumberbecamethedefactostandardthatwasappliedinvariousCanadian
jurisdictionsforMSWandotherincinerators.TheTEFusedinthecalculationofthisnumber
werethesameastheITEQfactorsdiscussedelsewhereinthisreport,withtheexceptionthatthe
factorfor1,2,3,7,8PeCDFwas0.01versustheITEFforthesamecongenerof0.05.
Theapproachofsettingemissionlimitsbasedupontheperformanceofinstalledequipmentwas
recognisedasawayofforcinglowerlimitswhileensuringthattheywereachievable.Aguidance
documentissuedbytheOAQPSDirector55addressedtheneedforconsistencyintheapplication
ofBestAvailableControlTechnology[BACT]principlestoMSWincineratorsandmade
recommendationsforstandardsonthatbasis.Anotherexampleofthetrendwasthe
developmentoftheMaximumAchievableControlTechnology[MACT]principleinTitleIIIofthe
U.S.CleanAirActwhichstatesthattheEPAmustconsiderstandardsbaseduponthe
demonstratedperformanceofthebest12%ofthepopulation56.ThiswasappliedwhentheU.S.
EPAreleasedtherulesgoverningairemissionsfrommanyformsofincineratorsasdetailedlater
inthischapter.Ontarioadoptedasimilarapproach,designatedinthatcaseasaPerformance
Standard57withtheissuanceofGuidelineA7in1995.
Thisdirectioninloweringstandardstokeeppacewithprogressiveadvancesincontrol
technologysuggeststhat,forthemostpart,jurisdictionshavereachedthelowestlevel
practicable.Thedefinitionofanystandardmustrelatebothtotheabilitytoachievethe
performancelevelspecified,andalsotoprovethatithasbeenmet.Ascanbeappreciatedfrom
thediscussioninthesamplingchapter,todayssamplingproceduresarecapableofdetermining
54
CanadianCouncilofResourceandEnvironmentMinisters,1988.OperatingandEmission
GuidelinesforMunicipalSolidWasteIncinerators.
55
USEPA(1987).OperationalGuidanceonControlTechnologyforNewandModifiedMunicipal
WasteCombustors.AmemorandumfromGeraldA.EmisonDirectorOfficeofAirQualityPlanningandStandards
(MD1Q)RTPNC,June26,1987.
56
Lee,Bryan(1991).HighlightsoftheCleanAirActAmendmentsof1990.J.AirWasteManage.
Assoc.Vol.41,No.1.January.pp.1619.
57
MOE,1995.GUIDELINEA7CombustionandAirPollutionControlRequirementsforNew
MunicipalWasteIncinerators.LegislativeAuthority:EnvironmentalProtectionAct,PartV,Section27,andPartII,
Section9OntarioRegulation347,GeneralWasteManagementRegulation,OntarioRegulation346,GeneralAir
PollutionOntarioRegulation512/95
78
thepresenceoflowlevelsofPCDD/Finthestack,albeitwithsomelevelofuncertainty,andas
willbeseeninthechapteronemissionlevels,currentlyinstalledequipmentiscapableofforcing
theneedforsuchlowdetectionlimits.Thejustificationforpushinganyemissionstandards
lowerthancurrentlybeingachievedmustcomefromaconsiderationofthepotentialdamagethat
couldbeposedbysuchemissionsandthecostsassociatedwiththereductionintheseemissions.
In2001theemissionlimitforPCDD/FfromincineratorsinCanadawassetat0.080ng/Rm3@11%
O2.ItisimportanttorecognizethatincludedinthePCDD/FCWSforincinerationwasa
definitionofincinerationthatallowsthestandardtosetemissionlimitsforanythermalprocess.
Toquotefromthedefinitioncontainedinthestandard:
Waste incinerator: a device, mechanism or structure constructed primarily to thermally treat
(e.g., combust or pyrolyze) a waste for the purpose of reducing its volume, destroying a
hazardous chemical present in the waste, or destroying pathogens present in the waste.
Thedefinitionlistscombustionandpyrolysisasexamplesofthermaltreatment.Theoriginofeg
islatin,exempligratia,whichwouldtranslateasfreeexample.Thisusageisbynomeans
limitingsuggestingthatanyalternativemethodofheatingandtreatingwastetoreduceits
volumeorbreakingdowncompoundswithinthewastecouldbeclassifiedaswasteincineration.
Assuch,thePCDD/FWasteIncinerationCWSwouldapplytoanyformsofthermaltreatment
systems.
HowthecurrentCWSstandardcomparestostandardsinotherjurisdictionsisthesubjectofthis
chapter.
Beforeembarkinguponthatdiscussionitisimportanttosetthestagebyrecognizingthat,with
theexceptionofCanada,theUnitedStates,theEuropeanUnion,andJapan,fewcountrieshad
establishedPCDD/Femissionlimitsforanycombustionequipmentbeforetheacceptanceofthe
StockholmConventiononPersistentOrganicPollutantsbytheUnitedNations58.Thiswas
adoptedinMay2001andenteredintoforceon17May2004whenthe40thnationsignedthe
document.Workhadstartedin1997todevelopthisinternationalbindinginstrumentrelatedto
theneedtoreducepersistentorganicpollutants[POPs]toprotecttheenvironmentandhuman
health.
TheStockholmConventionsetsoutarangeofmeasurestoreduceand,wherefeasible,eliminate
POPreleases,andArticle5,requiresPartiestotakemeasurestoreduce,andwherefeasible,
eliminatereleasesofunintentionallyproducedPOPs,includingdioxins,furans,HCBanddioxin
likePCBs.Article5alsorequiresPartiestopromotethedevelopmentofand(whereappropriate)
58
AttheConferenceofPlenipotentiariesontheStockholmConventiononPersistentOrganic
Pollutants,held22to23May2001inStockholm,Sweden,theConventionwasadoptedandopenedforSignature.It
remainedopenforsignatureattheUnitedNationsHeadquarters,TreatySection,inNewYork,until22May2002.
Seehttp://www.pops.int/formoreinformation.
79
requiretheuseofproductsorprocessestopreventtheformationandreleaseofunintentionally
producedPOPs.IncludedinthisprovisionistherequirementthatBestAvailableTechniques
(BAT)andBestEnvironmentalPractices(BEP)beappliedforbothnewandsubstantially
modifiedsources.TheConventiondefinesBestAvailableTechniquesasusingthemost
effectiveandadvancedtechniquesthatcanbepracticallyadoptedtopreventorminimiseharmful
emissionsofbyproductPOPsandotherenvironmentalimpacts,orreducethemtoacceptable
limits.
Withthiscontext,Availabletechniquesarethosetechniquesthatcanbeappliedbyanoperator
toaspecificfacility.Thatistheyaredevelopedtoastatethattheycanbeemployedonafacility
inaneconomicalandtechnicallyviableway.Similarly,bestenvironmentalpracticesimplies
theapplicationofthemostappropriatecombinationofenvironmentalcontrolmeasuresand
strategies.
ThisapproachfollowsthoseincorporatedintotheCCMEIncineratorGuidelinesandtheUSEPA
MACTapproachforstandardssetting.
TheeffectoftheStockholmConventionhasbeenthatmanycountrieshavedevelopednational
implementationplanstoaddresstheemissionsofPOPs,andinthoseplanssetoutstandardsfor
PCDD/Femissions.ToassistParties,aninternationalExpertGroupwasassembledtodevelop
draftguidelinesforBATandprovisionalguidanceonBEPinformationtoensurethatfacilitiesare
operatinginaccordancewiththeworldsbestpractice.
WhilethemostfrequentinterpretationofthegoalsoftheStockholmConventionappearstobeto
eliminatethereleaseofPOPStotheatmosphere,therearespecificreferencesinthetextofthe
ConventiontoresiduesandstockpilescontainingPOPS.InArticle6itstatesthatwastes
containingthechemicalsmustbemanagedinamannerthatprotectshumanhealthandthe
environment.Thearticlegoesontonotein1d):
Disposed of in such a way that the persistent organic pollutant content is destroyed or
irreversibly transformed so that they do not exhibit the characteristics of persistent
organic pollutants or otherwise disposed of in an environmentally sound manner when
destruction or irreversible transformation does not represent the environmentally
preferable option or the persistent organic pollutant content is low, taking into account
international rules, standards, and guidelines, including those that may be developed
pursuant to paragraph 2, and relevant global and regional regimes governing the
management of hazardous wastes;
SincepartoftheNationalActionPlanprescribedbyArticle5requiresthatpartiesidentify,
characterize and address the release ofunintentionalPOPSitisappropriatetounderstandhow
incineratorsresiduesfitintotheinventoryofPCDD/FsinCanada.
PartVofAnnexConUnintentionalPOPSgoesasfarastosuggestthatthecriteriaforevaluating
newfacilitiesmightbethattheyincorporatesystemstorenderresiduesinert,orattheveryleast
80
todetoxifythem.
Inthevariousjurisdictions,regulatorshaveusedanumberofapproachestocontrolPCDD/F
emissionstotheenvironment.JapanandNewZealandhavepassedlawstoaddressthe
reductionofPCDD/Fintheenvironment.Australia,followingtheguidanceoftheStockholm
ConventiononPOPsdevelopedacomprehensivenationalplanforaddressingthesesubstances
andoutofthatprocessconfirmedemissionstandardsforincinerationsources.TheEuropean
UnionandallitsmembercountriesareboundbyregulationsthatlimittheamountofPCDD/Fin
foodstuffsandfeedmaterialsandemissionregulationsfordifferentcategoriesofsources
includingspecificincineratorregulations.TheUnitedStateshasdevelopedNewSource
PerformanceStandardsforarangeofdifferentcombustionalternatives.TheCanadaWide
Standardsprocesshassoughttodevelopconsensusguidelinesthatcouldbeadoptedbythe
variousjurisdictionsasawayofmeetingthevirtualeliminationtargetsetintheCanadian
EnvironmentalProtectionAct.AdetaileddiscussionofCanadasapproachtomanaging
unintentionallyreleasedpersistentorganicpollutantsisavailableintheCanadianfilingtothe
StockholmConvention59.
7.2
Japan
ThebasisoftheJapaneseemissionregulationsdoesnotfollowthetrendinothercountrieswith
theadoptionofanadvancedemissioncontrolstrategy,ratherJapandefinedatolerabledaily
intake[TDI]valuesforPCDD/FsinJune1999settingthelevelat4pgTEQDFP/day/kgofbody
weight60.ThiswasincludedaspartoftheLawConcerningSpecialMeasuresAgainstDioxins
(TheDioxinsLaw)61.
TheTEQvaluespecifiedincludedthecontributionsofcoplanarPCBsaswellasPCDD/F.In
conjunctionwiththeTDI,environmentalqualitystandardswerespecifiedforthefollowing
environmentalcompartments:
fortheambientairannualaverage:notmorethan0.6pgTEQDFP/m3;
forthewaterannualaverage:notmorethan1pgTEQDFP/L;
forthesedimentnotmorethan150pgTEQDFP/g;and,
forthesoilnotmorethan1,000pgTEQDFP/g.
59
GovernmentofCanada,2006.CanadasNationalImplementationPlanundertheStockholm
ConventiononPersistentOrganicPollutants;Ottawa,Ontario,Canada.Availableat:www.ec.gc.ca/
cleanair-airpur/default.asp?lang=En&n=8DDE4B39-1
60
GovernmentofJapan,2003.Dioxins.InformationBulletinavailableat
http://www.env.go.jp/en/chemi/dioxins/brochure2003.pdf
61
GovernmentofJapan,1999.LawConcerningSpecialMeasuresagainstDioxins
(LawNo.105of1999.PromulgatedonJuly16,1999).Availableathttp://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/chemi/index.html
81
Toachievethelevelsspecifiedabove,theLawalsosetoutstandardsforemissionsfrom
incinerators.Thesetargetemissionconcentrationswereclassifiedaccordingtocapacity.The
lowercutoffontheapplicationofthesestandardswasahearthareainexcessof0.5m2ora
combustioncapacityofmorethan50kg/h.Recognizingthatexistingfacilitieswouldneedtobe
retrofittedandthatsuchfacilitiesmightnotbeasefficientasnewfacilities,threesetsof
standardswereset:newfacilities;aninterimtargetuntilNovember2002forexistingunitsanda
postNovember2002standardforexistingsystems.Table7.1summarizestheexistingstandards.
Table7.1
JapaneseEmissionStandardsforIncinerators[ngTEQDFP/Nm3]
Scaleoffacilities
(Capacityofincineration)
Morethan4t/h
2t/h4t/h
Below2t/h
Newfacility
(post1999)
0.1
1
5
ExistingFacility
1
5
10
TheinformationbulletinonDioxinsreferencedabovenotesthat:
Small-scale incinerators, to which emission standards are not applied, need to be able
to burn at 800OC and higher and the structure must include a thermometer and devices
for supporting combustion.
TheseinitiativeshavereducedemissionsfromincineratorsinJapanfrom2200g/annumin2000to
anestimated220g/annumin200462,about63%ofthetotalreleasesintheinventory.The
governmentistargetingfurtherreductions.
EffluentstandardswerealsosetaspartoftheDioxinLaw.Forwastewaterorsludges/solutions
fromincinerators,postJanuary2003,thestandardtobemetwas10pgTEQDFP/L.
Itisinformativetonotethatthegovernmentbansopenburning,isclosingschoolandothersmall
incinerators,andispromotingthereductionofwastetoreducetheneedtoburnwasteand
therebycontrolPCDD/Femissionsfromwastecombustion.
7.4
Australia
TheAustraliangovernmentthroughitsEnvironmentProtectionandHeritageCouncilissueda
nationalactionplanforaddressingPCDD/FinOctober200563.Thisfollowedthesuggested
62
GovernmentofJapan,2005.Dioxins,AnUpdatedInformationPamphletfromtheOfficeofDioxin
Contol,EnvironmentalManagementBureau,MinistryoftheEnvironment,GovernmentofJapan,Tokyo.
63
AustraliaEnvironmentProtectionandHeritageCouncil,Oct.2005.NationalDioxinsProgram
NationalActionPlanforaddressingdioxinsinAustralia.ISBNWeb:0642323976.Availableat:
82
protocoloftheStockholmConvention.TheactionplansuggeststhatPCDD/Femissionsin
Australiaarelowerthanmanyotherdevelopedcountries,attributabletolowerlevelsof
industrializationthanmanyareasofNorthAmericaandEuropeandmeasuresthathavebeenput
intoplacesince1995toreduceemissionsandbantheuseofcertainchemicals.Furthermore,
whenthegovernmentofAustraliadiscouragestheuseofhightemperatureincinerationforthe
disposalofcertainchemicalwastes:PCBs,HCB,andorganochlorinepesticides.In1992they
developedaseparatemanagementstrategyfordealingwitheachthethreestreams.PCBswere
largelytreatedwithtwochemicaldechlorinationtechniques.Pesticideresiduesaretreatedwitha
homegrownplasmadestructionsystem,thePLASCONsystem.
LiketheCanadiansituation,controlofemissionsourcesisastatefunctioninAustralia,although
allthestatesareapplyingthe100pgITEQ/Nm3emissionlimitstandardforcombustion
equipmentfornewapplications.Theactionplansuggeststhatgovernmentswillevaluatenew
proposalsagainstthemeasuresrecommendedasBATbytheExpertCommitteeforthe
StockholmConvention.
7.5
NewZealand
Australiasdecidedtorejecthightemperatureincinerationin1992afterdiscussionsbetween
AustralianandNewZealandenvironmentofficials.Bothcountriesfollowasimilarapproachto
dealingwithchemicalwastes.NewZealandproducedanationalenvironmentalstandardthat
includedasectionpertainingtoPCDD/F64in2004.Thepurposeoftheenvironmentalstandard
wastodevelopmandatorytechnicalrequirementsfortheoperationoffacilities.Theapproachto
dealingwithPCDD/Fsourceswastobancertainoperations:
Lightingoffiresandburningofwasteatlandfill;
Burningoftires;
Burningofbitumen;
Burningofcoatedwire;
Burningofoil;
Incineratorsatschoolsandhealthcareinstitutions;and,
Hightemperaturehazardouswasteincinerators.
Theregulationsareaccompaniedbyclarificationsthatexplaintheintentofthebans.Forlandfills,
deliberateburningofwasteisprohibited,butlandfillgasflaresareallowed.Accidentalfiresare
nottobeallowedtocontinueinthelandfill.Tirescannotbeburnedintheopen,butcanbeused
http://www.ephc.gov.au/pdf/EPHC/final_NAP_october_2005_rev.pdf
64
GovernmentofNewZealand,2004.ResourceManagement(NationalEnvironmentalStandards
RelatingtoCertainAirPollutants,Dioxins,andOtherToxics)Regulations2004SR2004/309.Availableasan
Appendixin:http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/userguidedraftoct05/index.html
83
inproperlypermittedindustrialfacilities.Rehabilitationofroadsbyburningisbannedinall
formsandauthoritiesareadvisedtouselessintrusivemeansofimprovingroadsurfaces.The
banonburningcoatedwiredoesnotapplytolicensedfacilities.Openburningofoilisalso
prohibited,butthisdoesnotlimittheuseofoilasafuelinvariousprocesses.Whileincinerators
wereallowedinschoolsandhealthcareinstitutionswithoutpermitsuptothedateofthis
regulation,asofOctober2006theywillrequirepermits.Schoolswereactivelyencouragedto
ceaseoperatingincinerators.Theregulationspecificallybansusingwasteasafueltoheat
schools.Furthermore,theusersmanualfortheregulationsuggeststhathospitalsemploy
autoclavesforwastedisinfectionpriortolandfilldisposal.
TheNationalDioxinActionPlan65statesthattheapplicablelimitforincinerationsourceswillbe
100pgTEQWHO98DFP/Nm3@11%O2.However,itshouldbenotedthatrevisionstothe
standards,whichappeartobeITEQbased66wouldrequireaformalrevisiontotheResource
ManagementActof1991,andavailableinformationcannotconfirmthatsuchameasurewas
taken.
Thestandardeffectivelyprohibitsnewhazardouswasteincinerators.Atthetimetheusersguide
waspublished2oftheexisting3hazardouswasteincineratorswereeithershutdownorbeing
shutdown.Theremainingunitcanapplytocontinuetooperateafteritsexistingpermitexpires,
althoughitwillneedtomeetthesametargetasMSW,schoolorhospitalincinerators.
7.6
EuropeanUnion
Until1994themanagementofhazardouswasteintheEuropeanCommunitywascoveredeither
bynationalpoliciesorunderthegeneralrulesfromwastemanagementissuedbytheCouncilof
theEuropeanUnion.In1990,theCouncilrequestedthattheCommissiondevelopapositionon
theincinerationofhazardouswastehavingregardforthefactthatasfarbackas1975Member
Stateswererequiredtotakethenecessarymeasurestoensurethatwastewasdisposedofwithout
endangeringhumanhealthandwithoutharmingtheenvironmentandthata1984directive
requiredthatnohazardouswasteincineratorbeoperatedwithoutapermit.TheCommission
developedthefirstEUDirectiveonHazardousWasteIncinerationwhichwasadoptedin199467.
ThisDirectivenotonlyspecifiedairemissionlimitsbutalsosetstandardsforaqueousreleases
fromAPCequipment.
65
GovernmentofNewZealand,2001.AnActionPlanforReducingDischargesofDioxintoAir.
from:http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/hazardous/dioxinactionplanoct01/html/index.html
66
67
COUNCILDIRECTIVE94/67/ECof16December1994ontheincinerationofhazardouswaste.
84
Theprovisionsof94/67/ECcameintoforceatthebeginningof1995withallnationsexpectedto
developtheirowninternallegislationtoenforcethesestandardsandhaveallfacilitiesmeeting
thestandardsbyDecember2000.AsreportedbyA.J.Chandler&Associates68thisappearsto
havebeenthesituationin2004.
Evenwiththislegislationinplace,theEuropeanCommunity69recognizedin2000thatnew
standardsforairemissionsinotherareasrequiredanupdateofthe1994Directive.Withinthe
UNECEProtocolonpersistentorganicpollutantstheECadoptedtargetsforPCDD/Femissions
forMSWincinerators,biomedicalwasteincineratorsandhazardouswasteincineratorsand
institutedbindinglimitsformetalsandparticulateemissions.TheEUnotedthatthe
precautionaryprinciplecouldstillresultinfurtherinitiativestoloweremissionseventhough
theysetwhatwereconsideredtobeminimumrequirementsforincinerationandcoincineration
underDirective2000/76/EC.
Theemissionlimitvaluesfor2000/76/ECforPCDD/Fare100pgITEQ/Nm3.Theemissionlimit
valuesareregardedasbeingcompliedwithifnoneoftheaveragevaluesoverthesampleperiod
exceedsthe100pgITEQ/m3concentrationlevel.Theemissionvalueisstandardizedatthe
followingconditions:temperature273K(0degreesCelsius),pressure101.3kPa,11%oxygen,dry
gas,intheexhaustgasofincinerationplantsbutonlywhenthegasstreamcontainsmorethan
11%O2.ToconverttoCanadianunits,theEUstandardsmustbemultipliedby0.916(i.e.,
273/298).Therewerenodifferencesbetweenthe1994and2000standardsforPCDD/F.
ItisimportanttonotethatDirective2000/76/ECisallencompassing,coveringallwaste
incineration,withtheexceptionofagriculturalwastesorbiomass.Thesameemissionlimitations
areappliedtoMSWincinerationandHWIincineration,althoughtheDirectiveincludes
provisionsforadjustingemissionlimitsforcoincinerationfacilitysuchasboilersandindustrial
furnaceswherewasteisusedinconjunctionwithprimaryfuels.WhileAnnexIIofthe
2000/76/ECDirectiveprovidesemissionlimitationvaluesforfacilitiesthatcoincineratewaste
usingamixingrule,thiscannotbeappliedforPCDD/Femissionsandtheemissionlimitfor
cementkilnsandcombustionfacilitiesarethesameasthoseforincinerators.
Alsoincludedinthe2000/76/ECDirectivearestatementsonResiduesandAqueousdischarges.
WhilenotlimitingthePCDD/Fcontentofbottomashandslag,theDirectiveencouragesgood
burnoutwhichshouldproduceextremelylowPCDD/Fconcentrations.Similarly,Article9
encouragesminimisationofresidues,andcharacterizationofthesematerialsforchemicaland
physicalproperties.AsaddressedintheDirective,aqueouswastesarerequiredtomeetEmission
Limitvaluesat0.3ngITEQ/LforPCDD/Fforaqueousstreamsfromthecleaningofexhaust
gases.
68
A.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd.,2004.RegulatoryRequirementsforHazardousWaste
Incinerators.AReportPreparedforEnvironmentCanadaSept20,2004
69
EUROPEANCOUNCILDirective2000/76/EC4December2000ontheincinerationofwaste
85
TheCommunicationfromtheCommissiononthereviewoftheCommunityStrategyforwaste
managementassignspreventionofwastethefirstpriority,followedbyreuseandrecoveryand
finallybysafedisposalofwaste;initsResolutionof24February1997onaCommunityStrategy
forwastemanagement,theCouncilreiterateditsconvictionthatwastepreventionshouldbethe
firstpriorityofanyrationalwastepolicyinrelationtominimisingwasteproductionandthe
hazardouspropertiesofwaste.
7.7
UnitedStates
TheUnitedStatesEnvironmentProtectionAgencydefinesemissionlimitsforawidevarietyof
sourcesundertheirNewSourcePerformanceStandards[NSPS]detailedin40CFR6070.Forease
ofreferencethevariousNSPSfornonhazardouswasteincineratorsarelistedinTable7.2.
TheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(U.S.EPA)establishedemissionstandardsfor
hazardouswasteincineratorsandhazardouswasteburningcementkilns,lightweightaggregate
kilnsonSeptember30,199971.ThisruleiscalledtheHazardousWasteCombustorMaximum
AchievableControlTechnologyrule(HWCMACTrule)andincludesnotonlythestandards
themselves,provisionsbywhichthestandardsaretobeimplemented.Effectively,thesenew
ruleschangedtheemissionstandardsforhazardouswasteincineratorsandboilersandindustrial
furnaces.Subsequenttothe1999promulgation,theU.S.EPAhasissuedamendmentstothisrule
thatimprovetheimplementationoftheemissionstandards,primarilyintheareasofcompliance,
testingandmonitoring72forsubstancesincludingPCDD/F.Theyalsodefinestandardsfortypes
hazardouswasteincinerators.Therulescontinuedtoevolvethroughvariouscourtchallenges
untiltheUSEPAissuedafinalrule73inOctober,2005.
TheU.S.EPAhasadoptedseparatelegislationforboilersandindustrialfurnacesburning
hazardouswastes.Thelegislationisfoundin40CFRPart266,SubpartH.Nostandardsare
listedforPCDD/Femissions.TheAgencynotedinApril2005tocontinuetocollectdataonthe
operationoftheseunits.
70
USEPA,2006.The40CFR60regulationspertainingtoincineratorsareincludedincitations
availableat:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=d274bb332d27c21ddd7839b5702c498d&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title4
0/40cfr60_main_02.tpl
71
USEPA,1999.40CFRPart63,266,and270,NESHAP:StandardsforHazardousAirPollutantsfor
HazardousWasteCombustors.PublishedSeptember30,1999,(64FR52828).
72
USEPA,2002.6968FederalRegister,Vol.67,No.31,Thursday,February14,2002.Rulesand
Regulations.
73
USEPA,2005.40CFRParts9,63,260etal.NationalEmissionStandardsforHazardousAir
Pollutants:FinalStandardsforHazardousAirPollutantsforHazardousWasteCombustors(PhaseIFinal
ReplacementStandardsandPhaseII);FinalRule.70FR59402,October12,2005.
86
AllUSEPAstandardswerebasedupontheconceptoftheMaximumAchievableControl
Technology74[MACT].Thatis,theemissionlimitationsaretechnologybased,reflectingwhatthe
bestperformingfacilitiesareachievingandforcingallfacilitiestooperateatthelevelofthebest.
TheproceduresusedtosetthefinalruleMACTfloorsinvolve:
Arraying,ranking,andevaluatingemissionsdata(aswellasfeedratedatafor
chlorineandmetalsforHAPs(HazardousAirPollutants)inhazardouswaste)to
identifytheMACTcontrolusedbytheaverageofthe12%ofbestperforming
sources.
DetermininganemissionslevelthattheMACTcontrolcanroutinelyachievein
practicebasedondatafromsourcesemployingMACTcontrol.
Thusthestandardsdevelopedforallincineratorsaregenerallyacceptedasrepresentingwhatthe
technologycanachieve.
HavingbasedtheemissionstandardsontheMACTapproach,therearenotonlydifferent
categoriesofincineratorsbutwithintheseincineratorstherearedifferentclassesofunitsthat
havebeenassigneddifferentemissionlimits.Thecategoriesweredevelopedfromreviewofa
broadrangeofcontaminantsandthustherearenotasmanyvariationsinthePCDD/Femission
standardsforincinerationequipmentasmightbeexpected.ThePCDD/Femissionstandardsfor
incinerationequipmentintheUnitedStatesaresummarizedinTable7.3.
ItisimportanttonotethatUSEPAemissionstandardshavechangedovertheyears.While
earlierstandardswerebasedupontotalPCDD/Fbeingemittedfromthestack,thelatest
standardsallreferenceemissionconcentrationsonthebasisofITEQvalues,albeitthatalltheUS
standardsarereferencedat20OCand7%oxygenandtocorrectthesetoCanadianstandard
conditionstheymustbemultipliedby0.7003.
74
USEPA,1999.FinalTechnicalSupportDocumentforHWCMACTStandardsVolumeIII:
SelectionofMACTStandardsandTechnologies.PreparedbyU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,OfficeofSolid
WasteandEmergencyResponse,Washington.July.
87
Table7.2
USEPANSPSforNonHazardousWasteIncineratorSystems
Subpart
Description
Source and Date
Cb
Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Large Municipal

Waste Combustors That are Constructed on or Before September 20,
1994
60 FR 65415, Dec. 19, 1995

as amended at
71 FR 27332, May 10, 2006
Ce
Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for

Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators
62 FR 48379, Sept. 15, 1997
Standards of Performance for Incinerators - excluding incinerators

covered by Sub-Parts Cb, Eb, AAAA, or BBBB; and, FFF or JJJ of part
62
42 FR 37936, July 25, 1977, as

amended at
71 FR 27335, May 10, 2006
Eb
Standards of Performance for Large Municipal Waste Combustors for

Which Construction is Commenced After September 20, 1994 or for
Which Modification or Reconstruction is Commenced After June 19,
1996
60 FR 65419, Dec. 19, 1995

as amended at
62 FR 45121, 45126,
Aug. 25, 1997
Ec
Standards of Performance for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste

Incinerators for Which Construction is Commenced After June 20,
1996
62 FR 48382, Sept. 15, 1997

as amended at
65 FR 61753, Oct. 17, 2000
AAAA
Standards of Performance for Small Municipal Waste Combustion

Units for Which Construction is Commenced After August 30, 1999
or for Which Modification or Reconstruction is Commenced After
June 6, 2001
65 FR 76355, Dec. 6, 2000
BBBB
Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Small Municipal

Waste Combustion Units Constructed on or Before August 30, 1999
65 FR 76384, Dec. 6, 2000
CCCC
Standards of Performance for Commercial and Industrial Solid

Waste Incineration Units for Which Construction Is Commenced
After November 30, 1999 or for Which Modification or
Reconstruction Is Commenced on or After June 1, 2001
65 FR 75350, Dec. 1, 2000
DDDD
Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Commercial and

Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units that Commenced
Construction On or Before November 30, 1999
65 FR 75362, Dec. 1, 2000
EEEE
Standards of Performance for Other Solid Waste Incineration Units

for Which Construction is Commenced After December 9, 2004, or
for Which Modification or Reconstruction is Commenced on or After
June 16, 2006
70 FR 74892, Dec. 16, 2005
FFFF
Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Other Solid Waste

Incineration Units That Commenced Construction On or Before
December 9, 2004
70 FR 74907, Dec. 16, 2005
88
Table7.3
SummaryofPCDD/FEmissionStandardsforIncineratorsintheUnitedStates
Type of Incinerator
Category
Emission Limit
Municipal Solid Waste
Small Existing Class I facility
30 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (no ESP)

60 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (c/w ESP)
Small Existing Class II facility
125 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2
Large Existing
30 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (no ESP)

35 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (c/w ESP)
New (any size)
Commercial and Industrial

Waste
Existing or New >32 Mg/day
410 pg I-TEQ/Dsm3 @ 7% O2
Other Solid Waste
Existing or New <32 Mg/day MSW

or Institutional Solid Waste
Medical Waste
Urban setting
125 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 or

2300 pg I-TEQ/Dsm3 @ 7% O2
Rural setting (>50 miles from

large population centre and <900
kg/wk charge

15000 pg I-TEQ/Dsm3 @ 7% O2
Small (<90 kg/hr continuous or

725 kg/day batch)

2300 pg I-TEQ/Dsm3 @ 7% O2
Medium and Large
Incinerator (existing or new or

reconstructed without dry APCD
or waste heat boiler)
Incinerator (new or reconstructed

with dry APCD or waste heat
boiler)
Cement Kiln
LWAK
Liquid Fired Boiler (with dry

APCD)
Notes:
Small furnaces are <229
Mg/day capacity but >32
Mg/day size
Class I facilities >229 Mg/day
Class II facilities <229 Mg/day
Medical Waste
(existing)
(new)
Hazardous Waste
(Existing/New/Reconstructed)
Note: some increase is
emissions is allowed if the
facility employed rapid
quench of exhaust gas
89
7.8
SummaryofEmissionStandards
Theprecedingsectionshaveprovidedasummaryofregulatoryemissionlevelsfordifferent
jurisdictionsreportedonthebasisofthestandardsforthatcountry.AsnotedinChapter6,
standardconditionsanddiluentcorrectionsinotherjurisdictionscanbedifferentfromthose
Canadians,buttheycanbeeasilyconverted.Atthepresenttimemostjurisdictionsappeartobe
applyingtheITEFprotocoltoprovideasingleemissionnumberforPCDD/Femissionsreported
asITEQ.WhiletheimpactofchangingthatprotocolwillbediscussedwhenCanadiandataare
reviewed,fornowtheITEQvalueswillbeusedinthesummarytableofemissions.Table7.4
providesthecomparisonoftheregulatorylevelsinCanadianunits.
MostjurisdictionsthathavesetemissionlimitsforPCDD/Frequiresomeperiodictestingofthe
emissionstoprovethattheymeetthestandardssetoutinlegislation.IntheEuropeanUnion,the
DirectiverequiresthatincineratorfacilitiesbetestedforPCDD/Fevery6monthsafterthefirst
yearofoperation,andtheymustbetestedevery3monthsinthefirstyear.IntheUnitedStates
testingisrequiredonanannualbasis,however,forlargeMWCinstallationstherulesallow
facilitieswithmultiplelinesandseparateAPCsandstackstotestjustoneuniteachyearprovided
theemissionsfromalltheunitshavesatisfiedathresholdcriteriafortwoyears.Shouldoneof
theannualtestsfailtopassthethreshold,thefacilitymustreverttoannualtestingforeachstack
until2yearsofsatisfactorydataareamassed.Thetestingrequirementsintheotherjurisdictions
discussedinChapter7arenotasclearlydefined.InCanada,Ontariorequiresannualtestingof
allincineratorsandtodatehasnotallowedthetestingfrequencytobereducedevenifthefacility
continuouslyreportslevelsbelowtheLOQ.
90
Table7.4
InternationalIncineratorPCDD/FEmissionRegulations
[pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2]
COUNTRY
Incinerator Type
European Union
All
92
Australian &
New Zealand
All
92
Japan
(based upon size
and age)
>4 Mg/hr
92
2 - 4 Mg/hr
920
<2 Mg/hr
4600
United States
Emission
Limit
MSW
diluent corrections note applied when < 11% O2
no I-TEQ standards rather use total PCDD/F [ng]

existing >225 Mg/d c/w ESP = 25 w/o ESP = 21
new all sizes = 9 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
small units <225 Mg/d with Class I total site >225
existing Class I c/w ESP = 50 w/o ESP = 25
existing Class II = 88 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
Medical
(existing)
1.61e+08
Existing urban total = 88 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2

Existing rural total = 560 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
Medical
(new)
1821610
<90 kg/hr continuous or <725 kg/day batch

(87.5 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2)
>90 kg/hr continuous or >725 kg/day batch
(17.5 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2)
HazWaste
140
78
without dry APCD system or waste heat boiler

with dry APCD or waste heat boiler
Commercial &
Industrial Waste
287
>32 Mg/day capacity

<32 Mg/day = 23 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2
Other Solid
Waste
Canada
(per CWS 2001)
Comments
Municipal
80
Medical
80
Hazardous
80
Sewage Sludge
80
all new construction after 2001, existing
facilities limited to 100 pg ITEQ/Rm3 @ 11%O2
8.0 EMISSIONDATA
8.1
Introduction
Operatingfacilitiesinthevariousprovincesarerequiredtoobtainpermitstooperate.These
permitsfrequentlycontainrequirementsthatstacktestingbeundertakentoestablishemission
performance.Thus,evenbeforetheCWSforPCDD/Fwasapprovedin2001,incineratorswere
buildingadatabaseoftheiremissionvalueswhichallowsitespecificemissiondatatobe
determined.ThesearethedatathatshouldbeusedfortheannualsubmissionstoNPRI,butsince
theNPRInumbersaresimplygivenasITEQvaluesthatwereselfreported,thequalityofthe
datacannotbeconfirmed.Infact,asnotedinthe2003MSWincineratorreport75somefacilities
revertedtousingtheNPRIdefaultfactorswhichwereinappropriatefortheircase.
Thischapterprovidesasummaryoftheavailabledataforthedifferenttypesofincinerators
operatedinthecountry.Aswellasthefourmaincategories:
largeMSWincinerators;
medicalwasteincinerators;
hazardouswasteincinerators;and,
sewagesludgeincinerators.
Thischapteralsoincludesadataforagroupofsmallbatchincineratorsthatwerenotincludedin
the2000inventory.Theseunits,operatedchieflyinremotelocationsonlandleasedfromthe
Federalgovernment,burnsignificantlymorewastethanthe26Mg/yearcutoffintheCWS
PCDD/Fstandard.Thus,itwasconsideredimportantthattheirperformancebeconsideredinthe
IncineratorPCDD/Femissioninventory.
ImportanttotheestimationofannualPCDD/Femissionsfromanyoftheseincineratorsaretwo
mainfactors:
theamountofwasteprocessedannuallyatthefacility;and,
theemissionfactor[ngITEQ/Mgofwastedisposed]suitableforthatfacility.
Thischapterprovidesthebackgroundinformationforupdatingtheannualemissionsfrom
incineratorsinCanada.Sincethedataavailabilityisnotallthesamequality,thebackgroundof
thewastethroughputestimates,andtheemissionfactorsareaddressedintwoseparatepartsof
thischapterandtheresultscombinedintheestimatedemissions.
Whendiscussingemissionsfromincineratorstheusualconcernistheamountofcontaminantsin
thestackgasesleavingthefacility.TodatelittleattentionhasbeenfocussedonPCDD/Fin
75
Chandler,A.J.&AssociatesandCompassEnvironmental,2003.MunicipalSolidWaste
IncinerationinCanada:AnUpdateonOperations19992001.
92
residuestreams.Airemissionsaregenerallyassumedtobethesourceofthecontaminants
throughwhichmostpeoplebecomeexposed.Thesearealsotheemissionsthataremost
frequentlymeasuredatfacilities.Indeed,fewoperatingfacilitieshaveextensivedataonPCDD/F
concentrationsinsolidresiduestreams.
IthasgenerallybeenacceptedthatAPCresiduesfromincineratorsshouldbehandledas
hazardouswasteduetothequantitiesofsomeinorganicspeciesthatcanleachoutofthese
materials.Withthisdesignation,littleattentionhasbeenpaidtoquantifyingtheamountofother
contaminantsthatmightbepresentinthesestreams.SincebottomashfromMSWincineratorsis
suchaheterogeneousmaterial,itisdifficulttogatherarepresentativesampleforanalysis.
Indeed,obtainingarepresentativesampleofthestackgasusingtheproceduresdiscussedin
Chapter6iseasierthanensuringthatsamplesofbottomashfromthequenchtankare
representative.Ontheotherhand,samplingtheAPCresiduesfromashstoragesilos,orduring
transferoftheashtothesilo,isconsiderablyeasier.However,flyashfoundinotherlocations
includinghotgasducts,orinthehoppersunderboilersandeconomisersisseldomweighedand
monitoredstreambystream.Asnotedearlier,itwouldalsobeanticipatedthatdependingupon
thelocationofthesedepositsandtheirtemperaturehistorythelevelofPCDD/Finthematerials
couldvary.
LiquidstreamsleavingthesystemsalsohavethepotentialtocontainPCDD/F.Theeffluents
fromwetscrubberslikelycontainsomePCDD/F.SincePCDD/Fisomershaveaverylow
solubilityinwater,itisgenerallyrecognizedthatanyPCDD/Ffoundinwatersamplesispresent
asverysmallsuspendedparticulatematter.
InaddressingtheissueofPCDD/Femissionstreamsfromincinerators,wecantakeguidance
fromtheUNEPToolkit76.Thatdocumentsuggeststhat:
The PCDD/PCDF emissions to land are negligible and there is no product. Relevant releases to
water occur only if wet scrubbers are used for the removal of particulate matter and the water is
not recirculated within the process. Releases to water will occur when the effluent is not
adequately treated, e.g., to filter out the particles with the PCDD/PCDF adsorbed onto them or
water is used to cool down the ashes and the water is not caught. Thus, the most significant
release routes are to air and residue. Typically, higher concentrations are found in the fly ash,
bottom ash has lower concentrations but the larger volume.
Thusairemissionsandsolidresiduesfromthegrateorbottomash,flyashfromboilers,andAPC
residuesallcontributetothetotalburdenofPCDD/Farisingfromincinerators.Thischapter
reviewsliteraturedatatoestablishdefaultvaluesforresiduestreamsfromincineratorsbecause
littleanalyticaldataonsuchstreamsisavailable,andmanyincineratorshavenotevenquantified
thedrymassofthesestreams.Italsoconsidersliteraturevaluesandtheresultsofstacksampling
76
UNEP,2005.StandardizedToolkitforIdentificationandQuantificationofDioxinandFuran
Releases,2ndeditionFebruary2005PreparedbyUNEPChemicalsGeneva,Switzerland
93
todefineemissionfactorsforreleasestotheatmosphere.
8.2
BackgroundofHistoricalIncineratorInstallationsinCanada
Therearefourtypesofincineratorsdiscussedinthisreport.Mostareownedandoperatedby
publicbodiesorcontractorsservinggovernments.Assuch,largeMSW,sewagesludgeand
medicalwasteincinerationfacilitiesareknowntothoseinthecommunitieswheretheyare
located.Hazardouswasteincineratorsalsoprovideaservicetosociety,forthemostpart
disposingofhazardousorganicwastesforindustry.Hazardouswasteincineratorsoperatedby
contractorsinthewastedisposalbusinesshavetypicallybeensubjecttoscrutinybytheirlocal
communities.Thus,inmostcommunitiesatleastforsomeconstituentsareawarethatthereare
wasteincinerationfacilitiesintheircommunity.Throughthoselocalcontacts,otherinterested
partiesinthecountryknowoftheexistenceofthesefacilities.Thus,mostcommercialfacilities
arecommonlyincludedinincineratorinventoriesoffacilities.
Anothergroupofincineratorsarenotaswelldocumented.Theseinclude:
captiveincineratorsprocessingspecificwastesfromparticularoperationssuchas:
theradioactivewasteconcentrationfacilitiesoperatedatCameco
manufacturingfacilitiesandbyOntarioPowerGeneration;
incineratorsusedforclassifieddocumentdestructionatgovernment
facilities;
incineratorsoperatedatCanadianForcesBases;and,
federalandprovinciallyoperatedincineratorsthatdisposeof
agriculturalwastestopreventthespreadofdisease;
hospitalwasteincineratorsinbothurbanandremotecommunities;
municipalwasteincineratorsinremotecommunities;
generalwasteincineratorsusedformixedwastedisposalatmineexplorationand
developmentcampsorevenatremoteminesites.
Muchlessisknownaboutincineratorsinthesecondgroup.Inmanycasestheyarelocatedon
federallandsand,assuch,notsubjecttoprovinciallicensingprocedures.Withoutformal
applicationprocedures,size,intendeduse,andoperationalproceduresarenotwelldocumented
andprovidingalistofsuchfacilitiesrequirespollingthoseresponsiblefortheiroperation.Sucha
surveywasconductedbyEnvironmentCanadaandrequiredthatquestionnairebecompletedby
theoperator.Datafromthatsurveyformspartoftheincineratorinventoryinthisreport.Other
datacamefromtheinventoryassembledin2000fortheoriginalCWSefforts.
Thissectioncomparesearlierinventorydataconcerningthenumberandtypesofincinerators
operatinginCanadawiththedatacollectedduringthisstudy.
94
8.2.1
CanadaWideStandardsBasic2000Inventory
AspartoftheoriginalCanadaWideStandards[CWS]PCDD/Fcommitteesworkseveral
definitionsweredevelopedforthefinalCWSforPCDD/F.Awasteincinerator,asdefinedforthe
purposesoftheCanadaWideStandards,is:
a device, mechanism or structure constructed primarily to thermally treat (e.g., combust or
pyrolyze) a waste for the purpose of reducing its volume, destroying a hazardous chemical
present in the waste, or destroying pathogens present in the waste. This includes facilities where
waste heat is recovered as a byproduct from the exhaust gases from an incinerator, but does not
include industrial processes where fuel derived from waste is fired as an energy source as a
matter incidental to the manufacture of the primary product. For the purpose of the Dioxins and
Furans CWS, conical waste combusters are considered separately from other incineration
sectors.
DefinitionsofwastearealsoincludedinthePCDD/FCanadaWideStandard.Theseserveto
limitthesystemsthatareconsideredinthestandardandthusarethesubjectofthisreport.These
definitionsspecificallyrefertolimitationsformunicipalsolidwasteandformedicalwaste:
Municipal solid waste: any waste which might normally be disposed of in a non-secure landfill
site if not incinerated (i.e., including non-hazardous solid wastes regardless of origin), but is not
intended to include clean wood waste. Clean wood waste means waste from woodworking or
forest product operations where the wood waste has not been treated with preservative
chemicals (e.g., pentachlorophenol) or decorative coatings.
Medical waste: any waste which includes as a component any Biomedical Waste as defined in
the February 1992 CCME Guidelines for the Management of Biomedical Waste in Canada, with the
exception that animal wastes derived from animal health care or veterinary research and
teaching establishments are excluded.
Furthermore,duringthedevelopmentofPCDD/FCWSthereweresixdifferentprioritysources
identified.Theseincludedwasteincinerationasfitsthedefinitionsabove,andconicalmunicipal
wastecombustionunitsoperatedinNewfoundland.Thelatterclassofequipmentwasaddressed
byaspecificprovincialstandard.TheprovinceofNewfoundlandmadethecommitmentthat
theseunitswouldbephasedoutofserviceby2008.
IncineratorsmeetingthesedefinitionswereidentifiedaspartoftheCommitteesworkin2000,
andemissionestimatesweredeveloped.Asummaryoftheinformationinthatlistisprovidedin
Table8.1.Thenumberofincineratorsidentifiedbythecommittee,bytypeandprovince,are
listedinTable8.1a).Thetotalamountofwasteestimatedtohavebeenburnedineachfacilityis
listedinTable8.1b)andtheresultingPCDD/Femissionsfromthesefacilitiesaresummarizedin
Table8.1c).AftertheCommitteesworkwascompleted,someadditionalincineratorswere
identified,includinghazardouswaste/radionuclidecontaminatedwasteincineratorsinOntario.
Table 8.1a Summary of Operating Incineration Facilities 2000 Inventory

Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
Province
AB
BC
NB
37
NF
NT
NS
Medical
Hazardous
MB
NU
1
6
Sewage Sludge
Federal Agencies
ON
PE
QC
46
SK
YK
Totals
11
101
10
QC
SK
YK
11
16
13
43
10
73
62

Totals
188
Table 8.1b Summary of Estimated Quantity of Waste Burned at Incineration Facilities 2000 Inventory [Mg/year]
Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
Medical
Hazardous
Province
AB
8,512
BC
250,000
MB
NB
NF
NT
NS
ON
PE
28,000
52,500
290,000
32,000
1,985
1,070
321
1,963
28
35,000
76,328
51,880
NU
289,699
-
Totals
129
Sewage Sludge
123,887
47,587
Federal Agencies
169
112
67
12
140
60
50
580
27
19
43,681
250,112
2,051
1,082
28,140
381
52,550
492,758
389,193
148
950,711
83
5,579
163,208
171,474
1,235

Totals
32,028
83
1,292,207
Table 8.1c Summary of Estimated PCDD/F Emissions at Incineration Facilities 2000 Inventory [mg I-TEQ/year]
Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
Province
AB
BC
1.4
6.6
Medical
Hazardous
MB
NB
9268.6
2.3
NF
NT
116.7
NS
12.8
1500.9
140.9
Sewage Sludge
Federal Agencies
NU
ON
PE
QC
2034.7
85.3
35.7
9165.3
132.6
SK
YK
603.0
388.5
Totals
2,293
21,061
2.5
35.3
179
81.7
28.9
111
123.8
87.2
224
690
791.3
524.2
310.6
53.8
653.4
278.1
235.4
2708.6
934
531
9579
56
770
1779
248
13993
5,767

Totals
218
389
29,410
96
The2000listshowedthat,baseduponthetotalnumberofincinerators,54%wereusedfor
medicalwastedisposal.Theseincineratorswereestimatedtoaccountfor72%oftheannual
PCDD/Femissionsatthattime.
Intermsofthenumberofincinerators,theotherdominantcategorywastheonelistingfacilities
operatedonfederallandsorbyfederalentities.Overathirdofalltheincineratorslistedwerein
thiscategory.Medicalwasteincineratorsoperatedunderfederalsponsorshipwereincludedwith
themedicalincineratorsdiscussedabove.Thereare3suchmedicalincinerators:NorwayHouse,
MB;Weeneebayko,ON;andPercyMoore,MB.Whilelargeinnumbers,thefederalincinerators
wereestimatedtoaccountforonly20%oftheannualPCDD/Femissions.
Muchofthedatadevelopedforthatinventorywasestimated.Onlyafewofthemedicalwaste
incineratorshadbeentestedatthetimetheinventorywaspreparedandnodatawasavailableon
emissionsfromthefederalfacilities.Emissionswereestimatedbaseduponboththeestimated
tonnageprocessedbytheseincineratorsandemissionfactorsfromtheliterature.Theemission
factorselectedforthesesourceswas4.67mgITEQ/Mgwasteburned.Theoriginofthisnumber
isnotknown.Theadequacyofthatnumberwillbediscussedlaterinthischapter.
While11MSWincineratorswereincludedintheinventory,mostoftheemissionsfromthissector
wereassociatedwiththenowclosedSWARUfacilityinHamilton.Atthetimetheinventorywas
prepared,withtheexceptionoftheconicalwasteburnersinNewfoundland,allMSWincinerators
wereestimatedonthebasisofannualthroughputandemissionsdatacollectedduringtesting
programs.TheemissionsestimatesassociatedwiththeNewfoundlandfacilitiesareofsuspect
origin.
Hazardouswasteincineratorandsewagesludgeincineratoremissionswereestimatedonthe
basisoftestdataandthroughputinformationforthemajorityoftheunits.
Totalemissionsfromanyfacilitywereestimatedbymultiplyingtheannualwastethroughput
estimatebyanemissionfactorthatexpressedPCDD/Freleasesasafunctionofthewaste
throughput.Ascanbeappreciated,theuseofestimatedemissionfactors,howevertheyare
selected,leadstosomeuncertaintyintheemissiontotals.Equallyimportantistheuncertaintyin
theestimateoftheamountofmaterialsburnedintheincinerator.Datareviewedforthisstudy
suggeststhatthewasteisseldomweighedbeforebeingchargedtomostsmallbatchincinerators.
Atbest,someofthesefacilitieshavetheoperatorsestimatesofhowmuchwastewascharged.
Thus,thereisuncertaintyintheestimatesprovidedbythe2000inventory.Theamountof
uncertaintyintheseestimateswasneverdetermined.
However,thecreationoftheinventorypromptedprovincialregulatorstostartaddressingthese
sourcesofPCDD/F.Insomecasesitleadtoordersforthecessationofoperationofmedicalwaste
incineratorsevenbeforetheCWSstandardwasratified.Forinstance,allmedicalwaste
incineratorsinhospitalssubjecttoprovincialregulationinOntariowereshutdowninDecember
2003.BritishColumbiahadbannedsuchfacilitiesin1998.Otherprovinceshaveorderedthe
97
closingofsomefacilitiesasaresultoftheCWSstandard.Thusthenatureoftheincinerator
inventoryhaschanged,andonewouldexpectthePCDD/Ftohavedecreased.
Baseduponthe2000list,andcomparisonstothelistdevelopedforthisstudy,thefacilitiesthat
wereclosedwereidentified.Duringthecourseofthisstudyitbecameevidentthatthe2000
identificationofincineratorsoperatedbyFederalEntitieswasnotspecificenoughtoallow
accuratedeterminationofwhichincineratorswerereferenced.Therewereclearlysome
incineratorsinthiscategorythatwerenotincludedinthe2000inventory.
8.2.3
CCME2005Review
In2005CCMEcommissionedareviewofthecompletePCDD/Finventory77includingother
sourcesidentifiedinearlierstudies.ThisreviewwascompletedaspartofCCMEreviewofthe
CWSstandards.Discussedinthereportwereemissionsfromcoastalpulpandpaperboilers,iron
sintering,electricarcfurnacesteelmanufacturingandincinerationsources.Oneobjectiveofthe
reviewwastoassessthepotentialforthedeploymentofnewcontroltechnologiesorproduction
processesinthesesectors.
ThereviewstatesthattheNationalPollutantReleaseInventoryshouldbelookedatasthedefacto
inventoryofPCDD/Fsourcesinthecountry.Assuchtheconsultantsuggeststhattheychoseto
summarizeemissionsonthebasisoftheNPRIdatasortedforNAICScategory5662Waste
TreatmentandDisposal,howeverthepresenceofsewagesludgeincineratorsinthesummary
tablessuggestsadditionalsearcheswereundertaken.Thedatacompiledbytheconsultantis
showninTable8.2.Unfortunately,thedata,whichispresumedtohavebeentakenfromthe
NPRIdatabasehasseveralomissionsandmisclassificationofincinerators.
TwoQuebecincineratorslistedundertheMSWclassificationinTable8.2shouldhavebeen
classifiedassewagesludgeincinerators.NPRIID#5528RiveSudinLongueuilandNPRIID
#3571VilledeMontralarebothlistedintheNPRI2005reportsasCentredpurationdeseaux
uses,wastewatertreatmentfacilities.AlsonotincludedinthetablearetheMercierfacilityof
CleanHarborsandtheBennettfacilityatSt.Ambroise,whichlikelyshouldbelistedunderthe
hazardouswasteincineratorsinQuebec.
The2005reviewreportspecificallystatesthattheconicalwasteburnerswerenotincludedin
thescopeofthereport.However,thereare31MSWburnerslistedasoperatingintheprovinceof
Newfoundland.The2004NPRIsummaryforPCDD/Fshows32filingsforNewfoundland
77
JacquesWhitford,2005.DioxinsandFuransCanadaWideStandardsEmissionInventoryUpdate
andReviewofTechnicalPollutionPreventionOptions.AreporttotheCanadianCouncilofMinistersofthe
Environment.
98
Table8.2
SummaryofIncineratorslistedinNPRIData(fromJacquesWhitford)
Incinerator
Classification
Province
AB
BC
Municipal
Medical
Hazardous
MB
NB
NF
NT
NS
Totals
NU
31
2
Sewage Sludge
Federal Entities
ON
PE
QC
SK
YK
40
17
33
14
11
33
Remote
TOTALS
100
includingtheVoiseysBaymineproject.TheVoiseysBayfacilitymightbeincludedintheon
FederalLandscategory,butitisnotclear.Sincethewasteburnersarenotincineratorssubjectto
theCWSPCDD/Fstandard,theirinclusioninthelistofincineratorsisproblematic.Moreover,
usingtheNPRIdata,whichincludestheNewfoundlandburnershindersacomparisontothose
dataprovidedinthe2000inventory.The31burnerslistedinthe2004NPRIdatafor
NewfoundlandareestimatedtoresultinPCDD/Femissionsthattotal38.2gITEQ/a,ormore
than75%ofallthe2004PCDD/FreleasesfromwastemanagementsiteslistedintheNPRIreport.
Clearlythereisaneedtoensurethattheincineratorinventoryisuptodate,andtheemission
inventoryreflectswhatwouldbeconsideredtypicaloperatingconditions.
Asidefromtheincineratorsthathavebeenclosed,thereareobviousdifferencesbetweenthe
incineratornumbersinTable8.1and8.2thatcanbeexplainedbysectorasfollows:
MSWIncineratorsWhereasonly11unitsarelistedinTable8.1thereare40listedin
Table8.2.Since2000,theSWARUfacilityandthetwoincineratorslistedforNewfoundlandhave
beenshutdown,ormovedtoothercategories.IfTable8.1wereupdatedto2005itwouldonly
contain8incinerators.Table8.2includes29MSWburnersinNewfoundlandwhichshouldnotbe
consideredinthisreportsincetheyaresubjecttoaseparateCWS.Table8.2alsoliststwo
incineratorsoperatinginQuebecasMSWincineratorwhere,infact,theyaresewagesludgeunits
andshouldbemovedtothatcategory.Table8.2ismissingtheCapeBretonfacilitywhichwas
notcloseduntil2006.
SewageSludgeIncineratorsSevenwereshowninTable8.1andonly4inTable8.2.
Since2000,AshbridgesBayfacilityinTorontowasclosedreducingthenumberofincineratorsin
Table8.1.ThetwomisassignedunitsfromtheQuebecMSWlistwouldraisethetotalinTable
8.2to6.
99
HazardousWasteIncineratorsSixareshowninTable8.2and7inTable8.1.The
MercierfacilityismissingfromTable8.2.
MedicalIncinerators101arelistedinTable8.1,and17inTable8.2.Thenetchangein
Ontarioovertheinterveningperiodreflectsclosureof45units.Similarly1unitclosedinNew
Brunswick,3intheNWT,2inSaskatchewan.AnextraunitwasidentifiedforPEI,andanew
systemwasaddedinAlberta.Thenetreductionis49units,whichwouldbringtototalintable
8.1to52units.The35unitdiscrepancy,accordingtoTable8.2,iscreatedbythelistingofonly2
incineratorsasoperatinginManitoba.Whilethiswouldsuggesttheclosureof35units,the
November2004Interjurisdictionalreport78doesnotindicatethatanymedicalincineratorsin
Manitobahadceasedoperation.Theprovincewasactivelyencouragingthereductioninburning
ofwaste.
IncineratorsonFederallandInTable8.1sixtytwoincineratorsarelisted,thisdropped
bynearly50%asonly33areshowninTable8.2.Theseincineratorshavebeensurveyedby
EnvironmentCanada79,80toverifytheircontinuedoperation.Morediscussionoftheseunitsis
includedlaterandthusnodetailedexplanationofthedecreasewasundertaken.Oneanomaly
notedhoweverwasthatthe2004NPRIreportforNewfoundlanddoesnotlistanyfacilitieson
federallands,yetthereare2showninTable8.2.ThesecouldbethetwoVoiseysBay
incinerators.
8.3
UpdatingtheIncineratorsInventoryto2006
ToupdatethePCDD/FemissioninventoryforincinerationfacilitiesinCanadaitwasfirst
necessarytoestablishwhichfacilitieswereoperating.Then,ifpossible,determinehowmuch
wastetheyburnannually,selectanappropriateemissionfactor,andprovideanestimateofthe
totalemissionsthatcanbecomparedtothe2000numbers.Thissectiondiscussestheprocedures
usedtoconfirmthelistofoperatingincinerators,explainshowtheseunitsaredescribed,and
providesabasisfortheassumptionsusedtodevelopemissionestimatesforthedifferenttypesof
incinerators.
Thestartingpointfordevelopingalistofoperatingfacilitieswasthe2000Inventorylist.To
78
CCME,2004.JurisdictionalInterimProgressinAchievingDioxinsandFuransCanadaWide
Standardsfor:PulpandPaperBoilersBurningSaltLadenWood,WasteIncineration,IronSinteringPlantsandSteel
ManufacturingElectricArcFurnaces.Availableat:http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/df_2004_prgs_rpt_e.pdf
79
CompassEnvironmentalInc.,2006.AssessmentofSelectFederallyOwnedWasteIncinerators.A
reportpreparedfortheWasteManagementDivisionofEnvironmentCanada.FinalReport,March.
80
CompassEnvironmentalInc.,2005.AssessmentofCurrentOperatingPracticesforFederally
OwnedSmallIncineratorUnits:AConsolidationofVolumes1,2,and3.AreportpreparedfortheWaste
ManagementDivisionofEnvironmentCanada.FinalReport,March.
100
ensureallfacilitieswereproperlyincludedinthe2000listing,provincialregulatorswereaskedto
confirmtheoperationalstatusoftheincineratorsoperatingwithintheirjurisdictionsandidentify
anyneworclosedunits.EnvironmentCanadaalsocommissionedanumberofstudiesthat
providedataonvarioustypesofincineratoroperatedatfederalfacilities81.UtilizingtheCompass
reviewsofincineratorsoperatedbyfederalentities,oronfederallands,itwaspossibletorefine
thefederalfacilitiesportionofthe2000inventorytoreflectsystemsthatareoperatingasofJune
2006.AdditionalinformationwasgleanedfromaquestionnairecirculatedbyEnvironment
Canadatocompaniesoperatingincineratorsonfederallands.LargeMSWfacilitieswere
reviewedin200382andhazardouswasteincineratorswerethesubjectofareportin200383.
Duringthecreationofthesereports,contactshadbeenmadewithmostoperatorsandchangesto
thesefacilitieswereknowntotheauthorofthisreport.
IncineratorsthatwereclosedbeforeJune2006wereremovedfromthelist.Anynewfacilities
identifiedthroughthisprocesswereaddedtothelist.Anattemptwasthenmadetoprovidea
descriptionofthevariousfacilities.
ThedescriptivematerialfortheMSWandHazardousWasteincineratorswastakenfromtest
reportsordetailsavailabletotheauthor.Whereprovided,incineratordescriptionsfromthe
questionnaires,orincineratormodelnumberswereusedtoidentifythetypeofequipmentthat
wasinstalledataparticularlocation.Datawasalsoreceivedfromincineratormanufacturersand
provincialregulators.
Foreaseofpresentation,thefacilitieshavebeensubdividedintocategoriesasdiscussedearlierin
thisreport.Thedatafortheindividualcategoriesarepresentedinseparatetables.
Informationfortheinstallationsisdescribedintermsofcommunityandprovincewheretheyare
installed,theclassificationoftheincineratortype,itsmanufactureranddesignfeedrate.Since
thepresenceofheatrecoveryequipmentorairpollutioncontrolequipmentcaninfluence
emissions,wherethisdatawasavailableitwasincluded.Lastly,theannualwastethroughputfor
eachoftheincineratorsislistedinthetables.Theannualwastethroughputwasnotderivedthe
samewayforeachincineratorandthesectionsthatfollowdiscusshowwastethroughputvalues
werearrivedatforthevariousfacilities.
81
OwnedSmallIncineratorUnits:AConsolidationofVolumes1,2&3.AreportpreparedforNationalOfficeof
PollutionPrevention,EnvironmentCanada.March.
82
A.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd,andCompassEnvironmentInc.,2003.MunicipalSolidWaste
83
101
8.3.1
MSWIncinerators
ThenumberoflargecommercialincineratorsinCanadaissmall,onlysevenunitsareoperatingin
2006.Dataontheseunitswasobtaineddirectlyfromtheoperatorsoftwoofthesystemsandis
listedasdatafor2005.DataforQuebecCityandLeviswereobtainedfromboththe2003EFW
updatereportreferencedearlierandmorerecentstudiespublishedbybothmunicipalitiesonthe
websites.Thelocationofthesedataisreferencedonthetable.Nodatawasavailableforthe
MRCdesIlesdelaMadeleinein2003,andnonewascollectedaspartofthisstudy.Wainwright
wasnotincludedintheoriginalstudywhichconcentratedondedicatedMSWincinerators,but
hasbeenincludedinthislisting.Estimatesfortheannualthroughputoftheseunitswere
developed.
LargeMSWincineratorsinCanadacaneitherbeownedbymunicipalitiesortheprivatesector.If
ownedbythemunicipality,thefacilityistypicallyoperatedbyacontractorwithknowledge
runningsuchfacilities.Therevenuerequiredtocovercostsofthecontractor,ortheowner,
usuallycomesfromtippingfeeschargedonthebasisofthemasspassingoverthescaleatthe
entrytothefacility.Receiptsarethusthebasisofthequantityofwasteincineratedinayear.
Assumingthatallmaterialreceivedoverthescaleinayearisburnedisareasonablewayto
estimatethemasschargedtothefurnacesinayear.Evenifthereiswasteleftontheflooratthe
endoftheyear,itisunlikelytobemorethanneededtochargethefurnacesfortwoorthreedays,
lessthan1%oftheannualtotal.Wasterejectedasunacceptableistypicallyweighedasitleaves
thefacilityandcanthusberemovedfromthetotals.Sincetheoperatorsubmitsthewastereceipt
recordsforpayment,theycanbeacceptedasagoodestimate.Wastethroughputdatawasnot
availableforMRC.
AsnotedinTable8.3,whichsummarizesalltheMSWincinerators,Wainwrighthasapermitthat
allowsformedicalwaste,municipalsolidwasteandnonhazardousoilfieldwastetobedisposed
inthefurnace.Indiscussionswiththefacilityitwaslearnedthatwastefeedsaresegregatedat
thefacilityandonlyonetypeofwasteisfedatatime.Moreovertherateoffeedforthedifferent
wastestreamsvaries.Forthepurposesoftheinventory,theMSWburnedatWainwrightislisted
inTable8.3whereasTable8.4showsthemedicalwasteburnedatthefacility.
Incineratorscannotbefedafixedmassofanytypeofwaste.Theyshouldideallybefedwasteat
aratethatprovidesauniformrateofenergyreleaseinthefurnace.Thismeansthatifthe
operatorischargingwet,lowenergywaste,forinstanceagreatdealoffoodwastewithhigh
moisturecontent,therateforchargingthismaterialwouldbehigherthanwhenhewascharging
predominantlypackagingwaste.Asnotedelsewhereinthisreport,typicallyMSWismixedto
evenoutthecalorificvalueofthecharge.AtWainwright,theoperatorssegregatethemedical
wastewhichistypicallytwicethecalorificvalueofMSWbecauseitispreferabletohandlethis
Table 8.3
Summary of Large Scale Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Location
Wainwright (MSW feed)

GVRD
Algonquin Power Energy from Waste
Trigen
Centre de traiement des residus urbains
La Rgie Intermunicipale de Gestion Rive-Sud
MRC des Iles de la Madeleine
Wainwright
Burnaby
Brampton
Charlottetown
Qubec City
Levis
Dune-du-Sud
Province
Type
Manufacturer
Heat
Recovery
AB
BC
ON
PE
QC
QC
QC
3-Stage Excess
Basic
Yes
1 x 29
WSH/DS/PAC/FF
2005
2,383
Mass Burn
Martin
Yes
3 x 240
SNCR/WSH/DS/PAC/FF
2005
275,000
2-Stage Starved
Consumat
Yes
5 x 100
WSH/DS/FF/PAC/SCR
2005
140,000
2-Stage Starved
Consumat
Yes
3 x 33
WSH/DS/PAC/FF
2001
32,000
Mass Burn
Von Roll
Yes
4 x 230
ESP/WSH/DS/PAC/FF
2001
280,000
Step grate
None
1 x 80
WSH/DS/PAC/FF
2001
24,310
Step grate
None
1 x 31
WSH/DS/PAC/FF
estimate
9,100
Total
762,793
Capacity
APC System
Year of
Annual
Record Throughput
# x [t/day]
[Mg/yr]
Notes:
APC System Key
ESP - electrostatic precipitator for particulate matter removal
SNCR - selective non-catalytic reduction for NOx control
WSH - evaporator cooling tower or wet spray humidifier
SCR - selective catalytic reduction for NOx and PCDD/F control
DS - dry reagent addition or dry scrubber
FF - fabric filter particulate control
PAC- powdered activated carbon addition

Specific Incinerator Comments
Wainwright is licensed to burn MSW, medical & non-hazardous oil feel waste-oil laden materials - limiting input is 12,500 MJ/hr
Levis data from http://www.ville.levis.qc.ca/Fr/Citoyens_Mat_Con.asp represents 2002 operating data and 2001 test data
Iles de la Madeleine emissions assumed to be similar to Levis in absence of data
103
materialwithoutmixingitwithotherwasteandriskthepackagingbreaking.
WasterecordsobtainedfromAlbertaEnvironmentshowthatin2005Wainwrightburnedalmost
equalquantitiesofMSWandmedicalwaste:2288Mgand2308Mgrespectively,with95Mgof
nonhazardousoilfieldwastes.OperatinghourswhenburningMSWwereabouthalfthosefor
medicalwasteclearlyindicatingthatthehighercalorificvaluemedicalwastecouldnotbefedat
thesamerateasMSW.Overallthesystemoperatedforan80%availabilityintheyear.
TheestimateforthroughputattheMRCfacilitywasbaseduponthesizeoftheincinerator.The
dailyfeedrateis31Mg/d.Systemsofthistype,particularlyinremoteareaswherewasteis
limited,donotruncontinuouslybutratheroperateapproximately80%ofthetime.Thisis
termedthesystemavailabilityandiscalculatedbythenumberofoperatinghoursdividedbythe
totalhoursintheyear.Whenavailable,ifcanbeassumedthattheunitisrunatitsdesignfeed
ratesotheannualthroughputis31Mg/dx365days/yearx0.80or9,100Mg/year.
8.3.2
MedicalWasteIncinerators
Thiscategoryofincineratorscouldbedividedintoseveralparts:
commercialincineratorsinOntario,NewBrunswickandAlberta;
incineratorsoperatedbyFederalentitiesorunderagreementwithFederalentities;
and,
incineratorsoperatedatspecificinstitutions.
Thecommercialunitsareidentifiedinthelistwiththeword(commercial)afterthenameofthe
facility.ThethreemedicalwasteincineratorsthatareoperatedunderFederalagreementsare
notedwith**aftertheirname.Thebalanceofthefacilitiesareathospitals.
Duringtheprovincialagencyreviewtwoadditionalmedicalwasteincineratorswerenoted,
howeverboththeseunitshavebeenexcludedfromthisstudyonthebasisofthedefinitionof
medicalwasteshownin8.2.1.Thesefacilitiesare:
84
PrairieDiagnosticslocatedontheUniversityofSaskatchewanSaskatooncampus
aspartoftheWesternCollegeofVeterinaryMedicine,handlesanimalsandwastes
fromthelaboratoryofateachingfacilitythatoffersveterinarydiagnosticservices
tofarmersintheprovince.Whilethisunitwasusedforthedisposalofotherwaste
generatedoncampusupuntil2001,thispracticeceasedatthattime.
AnincineratorhousedintheDuffRoblinbuildingoftheUniversityofManitobain
Winnipeg.Thisbuilding84houseszoologicallaboratoriesandonepresumesan
incineratorinthisbuildingisforanimalwastefromaresearchfacilitylocatedata
teachinginstitute.
http://umanitoba.ca/maps/
104
SimilarfacilitiesarelocatedattheUniversityofGuelphinOntarioandonepresumesin
CharlottetownattheAtlanticVeterinaryCollegeandinMontrealattheFacultyofVeterinary
Medicine.Ithasalsocometotheauthorsattentionthatanewlargeanimalresearchcentrehas
beendevelopedinAlberta.
Limitedstudyonemissionsfromanimalwasteincineratorssuggeststhatprovidedthattheload
ispredominantlyanimaltissue,PCDD/Femissionswouldbeexpectedtobelow85andcouldwell
satisfytheCWSstandard.DatafromEnvironmentCanadatestsofanEcoWasteCleanAireunit86
showsconcentrationsforthe17congenerstobelargelynondetectable.
The41locationsidentifiedashavingincineratorfacilitiesbelongingtothiscategoryarelistedin
Table8.4.Onecommercialfacilityisequippedwith2incinerators,onebeingusedforbackupso
thetotalcountformedicalincineratorsis42.Whilelistedinthe2000inventoryashavinga
hospital,informationavailableaspartofthelatestcensusdataontheprovincialgovernments
websitesuggeststhatReston,Manitobaonlyhasamedicalclinic.Restonwasremovedfromthe
list.
Thetableshowsverylittledataformanyofthehospitalincinerators.Estimatingannual
throughputforthesefacilitiesthusrequiresanumberofapproaches.Dataismostreadily
availablefromthecommercialfacilitiesinthelist.Forinstallationswithknowninstalledcapacity
guidancecanbeobtainedfromtheUSEPAinventoryreviews.Forhospitalswherenodatawas
availableitwasassumedthatthesizeofthehospital,asdefinedbythenumberofbeds,couldbe
usedasastartingpointinestimatingwastegenerationrates.Eachoftheseapproachesare
discussedinthissection.
Commercialincineratorschargetippingfeesandthushaverecordsthatwouldallowannual
throughputtobedetermined.Iftheyarerestrictedtohourlyfeedratelimits,ordailylimitsthese
wouldbecontainedintheirpermitssuchinformationcanbeusedasastartingpoint,butreality
withthesefacilitiesisthattheytypicallystorewasteatthefacilitypriortostartingaburncycle
andoncerunningoperatearoundtheclockuntilthereisnowastetodispose.Atthattimethey
shutdownformaintenanceactivities.Utilizationofthesefacilitiesisthusnotevenatthelevelof
thesmallMSWfacilitiesdiscussedintheprevioussection.
Lookingatthesefacilities,MedicalWasteManagementinBramptonhasapermitthatlimitsdaily
throughputto10Mg,theequipmentisoperatedsoasnottoexceedthislimitandmaintain
85
Chandler,A.J.&AssociatesLtd.,2004.WesternCollegeofVeterinaryMedicineWaste
ManagementDisposalProcedures.AreportpreparedfortheUniversityofSaskatchewanSaskatoon,Saskatchewan.
byA.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd.Toronto,OntarioFebruary2004
86
Cianciarelli,DominicandC.House,2004.CharacterizationofEmissionsfromanAnimal
CrematoriumEcoWasteCleanAire.ReportERMD200303preparedbytheEmissionsResearchandMeasurement
DivisionoftheEnvironmentalTechnologyAdvancementDirectorateofEnvironmentCanada.Ottawa,March.
Table 8.4
Summary of Medical Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Location
Province
Type
Manufacturer
Heat Recovery
Capacity
APC System
Waste
Wainwright (Medical Waste) (commercial)

Wainwright
Medical Waste Management (commercial)
Brampton
Weeneebayko General Hospital **
Moose Factory
Mr. Shredding Waste Management (commercial)
Moncton
Mr. Shredding Waste Management (commercial)
Moncton
Altona Community Memorial Health Centre
Altona
AB
ON
ON
NB
NB
MB
3-Stage Excess
Basic
Yes
1 x 29
WSH/DS/PAC/FF
medical
2-Stage Starved
Joy Ecolaire MW 2500
None
670 kg/hr
Q/RA/Cond/ACB/HEPA
medical
Arborg & District Health Centre

Brandon General Hospital
Carman Memorial Hospital
Churchill Health Centre
Dauphin General Hospital
Deloraine Memorial Hospital
Flin Flon General Hospital
Gillam Hospital
Grand View District Hospital
Hamiota District Hospital
Percy E. Moore Hospital [hc-sc.gc.ca] **
Arborg
Brandon
Carman
Churchill
Dauphin
Deloraine
Flin Flon
Gillam
Grand View
Hamiota
Hodgson
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
Tri-Lake Health Centre

Minnedosa Hospital
Neepawa District Memorial Hospital
Norway House Hospital **
Killarney
Minnedosa
Neepawa
Norway House
MB
MB
MB
MB
Pine Falls Health Centre (Hospital)

Portage General Hospital
Roblin Personal Care Home
Russell District Hospital
Selkirk General Hospital
Souris Health District Hospital
Ste. Rose General Hospital
Bethesda Health Complex
Stonewall District Health Centre
Lorne Memorial Hospital
Thompson General Hospital
Virden District Hospital
Fort Smith Health Centre
Baffin Regional Hospital
Kivalliq Health Centre
Kitikmeot Health Centre
Queen Elizabeth Hospital
St. Joseph's Hospital
Whitehorse Hospital Corp.
Peace Country Health
Cristallo Engineering (commercial)
Pine Falls
Portage
Roblin
Russell
Selkirk
Souris
Ste. Rose
Steinbach
Stonewall
Swan Lake
Thompson
Virden
Fort Smith
Iqaluit
Rankin Inlet
Cambridge Bay
Charlottetown
Estevan
Whitehorse
Grande Prarie
Beiseker
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
NT
NU
NU
NU
PE
SK
YK
AB
AB
# Beds
Annual
Burns
Generation
Feed Limits
Rate
Year of
Record
(kg/day)
Annual
Throughput
(Mg/yr)
continuous
NA
continuous
<10 Mg/d
2005
2,308
2005
2,040
2005
1,000
2-Stage Starved
Trecaire 3
None
40 kg/hr
Scrubber
medical
58
4 to 5/week
90 kg/batch
2-Stage Starved
Joy JES750
None
195 kg/hr
Q/PTReagent/PAC/VS
medical
NA
continuous
<5 Mg/d
Vent-o-Matic C180
None
180 kg/hr
WS/Cond/PAC/FF
medical
NA
standby
22
160
33
16
160
24
326
160
489
178
30
160
45
16
31
160
47
17
92
160
138
50
18
160
27
10
47
160
71
26
10
160
15
18
160
27
10
33
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
2-Stage AB
Plibrico 100P50
Plibrico CAB 50P
Westland CY50CA
None
None
None
23 kg/hr
23 kg/hr
50 kg/hr
None
None
Lime Scrubber
Medical
Medical
21
<5 Mg/d
12
22
160
16
7/month avg
12
26
160
39
14
27
160
41
15
38
160
57
26
5/wk
13 kg avg
21
136 kg
35
27
160
41
15
122
160
183
67
25
160
38
14
38
160
57
21
75
160
113
41
30
160
45
16
30
160
45
16
80
160
120
44
19
160
29
10
20
160
30
11
72
160
108
39
38
25
160
medical
25
1/wk
Note 4
26
160
14
150 kg/wk
39
14
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
68 kg/batch
None
Note 4
daily
232 kg/day
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
58 kg/batch
None
Note 4
daily
136 kg/day
Note 3
274
160
411
150
29
710 kg/hr
5. Cristallo, Beiseker facility data from Alberta Environment enforcement order information see text.
35
Note 2
53
160
80
medical
49
160
74
27
medical
160
160
240
88
medical
NA
continuous
Notes:
1. In Manitoba census information on web no hospital is listed for Reston so it was removed from the list of incinerators.
2. The facility includes a 53 acute and 38 long term care beds. http://stjosephs.shin.sk.ca/hospital_profile.htm
3. Hospital data from http://www.gov.pe.ca/infopei/onelisting.php3?number=11647
4. In Nunavut there is only one hospital and these two community health centres provide services to local population. Serious cases are sent out. Appears these operate as clinics - clinical waste most likely materials.
http://www.gov.nu.ca/hsssite/nurserecruit.shtml
60
Alberta Env
2002
1,561
Total
8,082
106
optimumperformanceintheincineratoratalltimes.Theirthroughputfor2005was2,040Mg.
Mr.ShreddingWasteManagementinMonctonhastwoincineratorseachapprovedfor5Mg/d
maximumthroughput.Typically,oneincineratorisoperatedwhileoneremainsonstandby
shouldanequipmentmalfunctionoccurontheoperatingunit.Thecompanyoperatesan
incineratorforapproximately5000hoursperyearwithatotalthroughputof1,000Mg/year.
CristalloHoldingsInc.istheowneroftheBeisekerWasteTreatmentplant,abiomedicalwaste
incinerator.Areviewofinformationontheinternetnotesthatthefacilityburnsoilfieldwasteas
wellasmedicalwaste.IthasanagreementwithacompanyinSaskatchewantotaketheirmust
burnmedicalwastefordestruction.TheplantisoperatedpursuanttoanAlbertaEnvironmental
approvalissuedtoCristalloEngineeringTechnologiesInc.AlbertaEnvironmentprovideddata
for2002suggestingthatthefacilityprocessed1,561Mgofwastethatyear.
TheWainwrightfacilityisusedforbothMSWandmedicalwastedisposalasdiscussedinthe
previoussection.Theamountofmedicalwastedisposedatthefacilityislistedinthetable.
Thedesigncapacityofthesysteminstalledinthehospitalisavailableforonly6facilitiesonthe
list.TheUSEPAhasusedthatnumberfortheirinventoryevaluationsinthelast10years87.
Baseduponthesizeoftheunits,andwhethertheywereinstalledwithAPCsystemsornot,the
USEPAdefinedbothusageandemissionsformedicalincinerators.Duringtheirevaluations,the
USEPAfoundthatthereweredistinctdifferencesinemissionsfromunitssmallerthan91kg/hr
capacitycomparedtolargerfurnaces.Theysuggestthatmostsmallunitsareoperatedinabatch
mode,therebyhavingmorestartupandshutdowntimerelativetothelengthoftimethey
operateatidealconditions.Controlledincineratorswerecategorisedonthebasisofthecontrol
equipmentinstalled.
Evenwiththesedataavailable,theUSEPAstillhadtoaddressthequestionofhowoftenarethe
furnacesoperatedandforwhatlengthoftime.Toaidwiththistasktheagencysuggestedthat
unitscouldbecategorizedonthebasisofuseaswellassize.Intermittentoperationswere
definedasthosewheretheincineratorischargedonaperiodicbasisbutmustbeshutdownfor
ashremoval.Continuouslyoperatedunitswereassumedtohavewastefeedandashremoval
mechanismstoallowtheincineratortooperatearoundtheclocksimilartolargeMSW
incinerators.Batchincinerator,loadlightandburnsystem,wereoperatedforafixedperiod.
Anearlyinventoryofmedicalincineratoremissions88suggestedthatacapacityfactorcouldbe
87
intheUnitedStates:TheYear2000Update(ExternalReviewDraft,March2005;EPA/600/p03/002A)Availableat
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/http://www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/2kupdate/
88
Randall,D.(1995)MemorandumdatedApril8,1995,fromDavidRandallandBrianHardee,
MidwestResearchInstitute,Cary,NorthCarolina,toRichardCopland,CombustionGroup,OfficeofAirQuality
PlanningandStandards,U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,ResearchTrianglePark,NorthCarolina.Subject:
Emissionfactorsformedicalwasteincinerators(MWIs),EPAContractNo.68010115;EPADocketNumberA9161;
107
relatedtothedesignsizeoftheincinerator.Simplyput,intermittentlyoperatedunitsoflessthan
227kg/hrwereassumedtooperateabout29%oftheavailablehoursintheyear,whereas
continuouslyoperatedunitswereassumedtooperateabout89%oftheyear.Smallerhospital
incineratorsarelikelytobeoperatedinabatchmodeandtheUSEPA89assumedthattheseunits
werefed160batchesperyear,or3perweek.Typicallyabatchunitwilloperateforseveralhours
foreachcycle.AnotherconclusionfromtheEPAstudywasthatmostMWIunitswereonly
chargedatapproximately2/3rdsoftheirdesignrating.Smallbatchunitscurrentlyavailableonthe
markethaveoperatingcyclesontheorderof2.5to3hours,however,asdiscussedlatterlarge
batchsystemscanrunforaslongas10to12hourspercycle.Assumingthatthedesigncapacity
andcycletimewasknown,thetotalthroughputwouldbe160timesthatcapacity.
CheckingthisestimateagainstthereportedthroughputfromWeeneebaykoGeneralHospital
showscloseagreement.Fortheotherhospitalsprovidingoperatingdatathenumberofcycles
perweekissignificantlydifferentthanpresumedandtheirvalueswereused.Themoststriking
datareceivingwasfromtheKivalliqHealthCentreandKitikmeotHealthCentrewhereitwas
statedthattheunitswereoperateddailyatreasonablylargefeedrates.Sincethesefacilitiesare
nothospitals,butratherclinics,thereportedvolumeofwastesuggeststhatmorethanmedical
wastewasbeingincineratedintheseunits.
Clearly,theUSEPAapproachseemstoreflectthesituationthatmightbefoundatsomefacilities
andcategorisationbaseduponthedesigncapacityofthefurnacewouldbeappropriate.Todo
thiswouldrequirethatthebasicparametersneedtobegatheredforeverymedicalwaste
incineratorinthecountry.Ideally,eachofthehospitalsshouldbepolledtodeterminehowoften
theincineratorisoperated,andwhattheoperatingcycleis,alongwithverifyingthemakeand
modeloftheinstallation.Unfortunately,forthemostpartthesedatawerenotforthcoming
despiterequeststotheregulatorsinmostprovinceswithactivemedicalwasteincinerators.
Thebulkoftheincineratorsinthelistrequireathirdapproach.Theonlyavailableinformation
onmanyofthehospitalsarethenumberofbedsinthefacility.Traditionallythisnumberwas
usedbyengineerstospecifythecapacityofincinerationequipmentneededforhospitals,butby
theearly1990sthereweresuggestionsthatthismightnotbeagoodmeasure90.Factorssuggested
toinfluencetheamountofwasteincludethenumberofemployees,degreeofspecialisationinthe
IVB042.
89
USEPA,1993DocumentationforAP42Section2.6,MedicalWasteIncineration.AppendixA
DocumentationofEmissionEstimationMethodologiesforSourcesof112(c)(6)Pollutants:PolycyclicOrganicMatter
(POM),2,3,7,8Tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin(2,3,7,8TCDD),2,3,7,8Tetrachlorodibenzofuran(2,3,7,8TCDF),and
PolychlorinatedBiphenylCompounds(PCBs).Availableat:http://pubweb.epa.gov/ttn/atw/112c6/app_a.pdf
90
VandeVelde,J.M.A.,1982.AspectsoftheDisposalofHospitalWasteintheNetherlands.
RecyclingInternational.RecoveryofEnergyandMaterialfromResiduesandWaste.K.J.ThomeKozmierskyed.
108
facility,workpracticesincludingdoublebagging,andthenumberofoutpatients.Brunner91
providesanestimateofthetotalwastestreamof6.8kg/day/bed.Furthermore,hesuggeststhat
nursinghomesproduce1.4kg/bed/daybutnoteselsewherethatlaboratoriesproduce0.23
kg/patientdaysuggestingthatthenumberofpatientdaysinafacilitymightbeabetterestimate
forgeneration.Ontariodata92indicatedthatinthemid80saftermostfacilitieshadstarted
divertingfoodwastefromtheincineratorstheperbedgenerationratewas1.5kg/day.That
numberwillbeusedforthisstudy.
Table8.4shows85%ofthe8,082MgofmedicalwasteincineratedinCanadaisdisposedat
commercialfacilitiesthatare,forthemostpart,equippedwithstateoftheartemissioncontrol
systems.Therearefewlargehospitalincineratorsstilloperatinginthecountry.
8.3.3 HazardousWasteIncinerators
Thereare12incineratorslistedinTable8.5thatareusedfordisposalofhazardouswastesinthe
country.Theseunitsarelocatedat10differentsitesacrossthecountry,with2incinerators
locatedatSwanHillsand2ontheMRRpropertyinCornwall.Thereareonly10distinct
incineratorsthatcanbeoperatedindependently.TheBelledunefacilitywassubjectedto
commissioningtestingin2006butfinalapprovalispending.ThecarbottomfurnaceatMRRcan
onlyoperatewhentheotherunitatthatsiteisoperatingsoitisnotconsideredasaseparateunit.
Threeofthelistedfacilitiesareincineratorsusedtoreducethevolumeofwasteonsiteswhere
radioactivematerialsareprocessed,Cameco,PortHopeandBlindRiver;and,OPG,Tiverton.
ThePortHopefacilityisslatedforclosureattheendof2006andallwastefromthisfacilitywill
betransferredtoBlindRiverwheretheincineratorisbeingupgraded.ThetwoBennettfacilities,
St.AmbroiseandBelledunearerotarykilnsoiltreatmentsystems.Theremainingsitesare
commercialoperationscontractingwastedisposalservices.
Thelistofincineratorsdoesnotincludeanyotherboilersorindustrialfurnacesthatmaybeused
todisposeofproductionresiduesgeneratedonthesitewheresuchequipmentislocated.
Therangeoffurnacesinclude:
rotarykilnoperationsinAlberta;
soiltreatmentfacilitiesinQuebecandNewBrunswickbaseduponrotarykiln
technology;
91
Brunner,CalvinR.,1984.IncinerationSystems,SelectionandDesign.PublishedbyVanNostrand
ReinholdCompanyLimited.ISBN0442211929
92
Chandler,A.J.,D.R.Rooney,A.D.Church,andP.DeAngelis,1987.HospitalWasteIncinerators
AsurveyoftheOntarioSituation.ApaperpresentedattheThermalTreatmentofMunicipal,Industrialand
HospitalWastesSpecialtyConference.Pittsburgh.APCASP62.
Table 8.5
Summary of Hazardous Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Location
Province
Type
Manufacturer
Heat
Recovery
Capacity
APC System
Annual
Throughput
AB
AB
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
QC
QC
NB
RK/Afterburner
FBD
None
1676 kg/h halogens
SD/PAC/FF/WS
RK/Afterburner
CE Raymond
None
365 kg/h halogens
Q/Abs/Scrubber
3,274
Liquid Injection
unknown
None
245 lpm
SD/PAC/FF
83,818
2 Chamber
Al-Jon/United
None
12 kg/h PCB
WS+Reheat/PAC/FF in '06
1,183
Fixed Hearth
Al-Jon/United
None
36 kg/h mercaptan
2.3 Mg/day
SD/PAC/FF
598
2 stage starved
Consumat C-225
None
500 kg/h (trash)
None
416
2 Chamber
Al-Jon/United
None
Liquid Injection
unknown
RK/Afterburner
Bennett
RK/Afterburner
Bennett
[Mg/yr]
Swan Hills Treatment Centre
Clean Harbors (see note 1)
Material Resouce Recovery Inc. (Metal Reclaim)
Material Resouce Recovery Inc. (Car Bottom*)
OPG Bruce Power Development
Cameco
Cameco
Gary Steacy
Clean Harbors (see note 1)
RSI Bennett (see note 2)
Bennett (see note 7)
Swan Hills
Swan Hills
Corunna
Cornwall
Cornwall
Tiverton
Port Hope
Blind River
Grafton
Mercier
St-Ambroise
Belledune
2 stage starved
None
309 kg/h + ss + liquid Q/2xPT/reheat/FF/CB/FF
9,300
416
27 lph PCB
None
None
135 lpm
SD/PAC/ESP
61,062
None
1 x 300 (soil)
SD/PAC/FF
43,351
None
1 x 300 (soil)
WSH/DS/FF/Q/WS
Total
203,418
Note: APC System key

ESP - electrostatic precipitator for particulate matter removal
VS - venturi scrubber
SD - spray dryer for temperature reduction/reagent addition
CB - carbon bed filter
WS - wet scrubber for acid gas control
* Car bottom furnace is simply a fixed hearth mounted on rails
Abs - Absorber with reagent addition
so the load can be placed on the hearth outside the furnace
Q - rapid quench system
and then pushed into the furnace. This unit has 12 burners
Scrubber - high energy scrubber with mist eliminator
along the sides of the furnace supplying the heat. Typical use
PT - packed tower with reagent addition
of furnaces is annealing and heat treatment.
1. Annual throughput data for 2005 from operator.

2. RSI/Bennett 2005 annual report for throughput data http://www.bennettenv.com/php/reports/Annual%20report%202005%20-%20BEN-414-05v7_low_res.pdf
3. Bennett MRR facility was upgraded in 2006 with addition of reheat and a fabric filter with PAC addition after the wet scrubber
4. Cameco facility in Port Hope to close in 2006
5. Tiverton throughput value estimated based upon operation five days per week at capacity
6. Cameco throughput values estimated based upon intermittent operation during daytime hours at rated capacity
7. Bennett Belledune not permitted for production operation
110
liquidinjectionfurnacesinOntarioandQuebec;and,
threemetalrecoveryunitsinOntario.
Thebasisbywhichoperationsaredefinedatthevarioussitesvariesascanbeseenunder
CAPACITYinthetable.Thissuggeststhattheannualthroughputforeachoftheunitsmightbe
expressedonadifferentbasisandthiscouldleadtoconfusionwhentryingtoassessannual
emissions.Clearly,itwouldbebetter,giventherequirementthatthesefacilitiesaretesting
annually,touseannualtestdataasthebasisofemissions.Ifasitespecificemissionfactorcould
bedevelopedandappliedagainsttheannualthroughputemissionestimateswouldbestraight
forward.Ifonewerelackingeithertheannualthroughputoraconsistentexpressionofinputto
thesefurnaces,itwouldbeusefultodefineaconsistentalternativebasisforestimatingannual
emissions.Ashortdigressionintohazardouswasteincineratordesignparametersmayhelpwith
developingsuchadefinition.
Incineratorsareheatreleaselimiteddevices.Theiroperationinaneffectivemannerrequiresthat:
theinputtothefurnacedoesnotexceedthedesignlimits;
sufficientairbeprovidedtooxidizethefuel;and,
inthecaseofsystemswithAPCequipmentthatthesizeanddesignofthose
systemsbeadequatefortheoutputofthefurnace.
Thedesignlimitsofanyincineratoraretheamountofheatthatcanbereleasedinthefurnace
chamber.Toolittleheatandthematerialwillnotburn;toomuchandtheenclosurewillbe
destroyed.Theheatofthefuelisgenerallyreferredtoasthecalorificvalueanddefinedonthe
basisoftheHigherHeatingValue[HHV].Temperatureiscontrolledeitherthroughtheairfuel
ratio,ietheexcessairlevelsorthroughheattransferinthefurnace.Inthecaseofliquidinjection
hazardouswastefurnaces,theairfuelratioisthenormalcontrolprocedure.Tolowerthe
temperaturetheoperatorcaneitherincreasetheairflowtothemaximumflowpossible,orcut
backonthefuelflowrate.Thus,thefurnaceisdesignedforacertainfuelfeedrateatacertain
calorificvalueofHHV,andtheairsupplysystemissizedtoprovidetheappropriatelevelof
excessairtocontrolthetemperaturetothedesiredleveleveniftheheatinputvariesfromdesign.
Becausetheoperatorcannotallowthetemperaturetoescalatetothepointwherethefurnacewill
bedamaged,thefuelfeedrateistypicallylimitedbytheamountofairthatcanbesupplied.
Theoperatingtemperatureisafunctionofthedesignofthefurnaceandthetemperaturethatthe
designerchoseforoperation.Inahazardouswastefurnacethisiscombinationoftheretention
timethatthedesignerthinkswillberequiredtodestroythemostdifficulttotreatwastesthe
furnacewillhandleandtheusualeconomiesofsizewhilemaintainingsomeflexibilityforthe
disposalofwastesthatareeasiertodestroy.
Thedesignernormallystartsbydefiningatargetvolumetricheatreleaserateforthefurnaceand
theamountofwasteanticipatedtoneedtreatment.Thevolumetricheatreleaserateisafunction
ofthetypeoffuelbeingusedinthefurnaceanditsburningcharacteristics.Hardertoburn
111
materialsmightrequirelongerresidencetimesinthefurnaceandthevolumewouldneedtobe
adjustedaccordingly.Theoperatingtemperatureinthefurnaceisimportant.Niessen93notes
thattypicallytheoperatingtemperaturesinthesystemprovidealimitforthevolumetricheat
releaserate.Heprovidestypicalheatreleaseratedatarelatedtothedesiredoperating
temperature:
300800OC,requires125540MJ/m3/h;
8001100OCrequires5501450MJ/m3/h;
11001400OCrequires14502100MJ/m3/h.
Brunner94suggeststhattypicalliquidinjectionburnerscanhaveheatreleaseratesinthe750
1100MJ/m3/hrangewhereasvortexburnerscanbe35timesgreater.TheMOEs1988Incinerator
DesignandOperationGuidanceDocumentspecifiesavolumetricheatreleaserateof10003000
MJ/m3/h.NorthAmericanMfg.Co.95notesthattheprimarycombustionchamberofahazardous
wastekilnsystemwillhaveavolumetricheatreleaserateof260520MJ/m3/hwithatypical
installationoperatingat430MJ/m3/h.Giventheneedtodestroysolidsinthekilnsuchsystems
havealowervolumetricheatreleaseratethanliquidinjectionfurnaces.
Ifthefuelwasuniforminheatingvaluethatwouldlikelybetheendofdesignconsiderations,but
designersmustaccommodatefluctuationsintheheatingvalueofthewasteandevendifferent
wastecharacteristics.Theymustensurethatthefurnacetemperaturesdonotdropduetothe
injectionofaqueouswastes.Typicaldesignshaveleanwastebeinginjectedintothefurnace
downstreamoftherichfuelcombustionzoneinsuchamannerthatitsurroundsthemainflame
tolimitthecoolingeffect.Leanwasteshouldnotpenetratetheflameoritwouldhavetoogreata
coolingeffect.Brunnersuggeststhat,iftheoperatorwishestoinjectadditionalwasteintothe
flame,theheatingvalueshouldbeshouldbeinexcessof5000Btu/lb[11,630kJ/kg].Designers
needtocompensatefordifferingflowratestoo,andtypicallydothisbyinstallingnumerous
burnerstohandledifferentrangesofliquids.Itstandstoreasonthat,shouldthesystembeable
toaccommodatemultipleinjectionpoints,havinganumberofflamezoneseachwithasmaller
moreconcentratedflamefront,itwouldgenerallycreatemoreturbulenceandbettermixing,not
tomentionbetterflamestabilityandmoreeventemperaturedistributionthroughoutthe
combustionzone.Goodmixingandgoodcombustionarelikelytoprovidemoreopportunitiesto
limittheeffectofupsetsthatmightoccurifpartofthefuelflowisrestrictedduetoequipment
limitations.
93
Niessen,WalterR.,1978.CombustionandIncinerationProcesses.ApplicationsinEnvironmental
Engineering.MarcelDekker,Inc.Publisher.NewYork.
94
Brunner,CalvinR.,1984.IncinerationSystemsSelectionandDesign.VanNostrandReinholdCompany.
NewYork.
95
Gill,J.H.andJ.M.Quiel,1993.IncinerationofHazardous,ToxicandMixedWastes.PublishedbyNorth
AmericanMfg.Co.ISBN0960159649
112
Thelatitudethedesignertakesinputtingthesystemtogetherestablishesarangeofoperating
conditions.Formanyfurnaceapplications,particularlyforsolidfuelfiredunits,therangeof
operatingconditionsisfrequentlyreferredtoasaStokerDiagram.Suchadiagramplotsthe
SystemHeatReleaserateversustheWasteFeedRate.Theconstraintsonthediagramforman
envelopewithinwhichthesystemshouldbeoperatedandarebaseduponthedesiredresidence
time,systemoperatingtemperature,andexcessairlevels.
Thus,thenatureandquantityoftobedisposeddictatesthesizeoftheincineratorandtheamount
ofcombustionairthatmustbesuppliedandthustreatedintheAPCsystem.Animportant
designlimitationrelatedtotheabilityofthefurnacetoproperlydestroyorganicmaterialsis
ensuringcompletecombustion.Thisrequiresthatsufficientairbesuppliedforthelevelofenergy
input.Combustionengineersusearoughruleofthumbthattorelease100Bturequires1cubic
footofair(3.725MJ/m3air)atstandardconditions(15.6oCand1atmosphereor101.3kPa).This
approximationisbaseduponthegrossheatingvalueofthefuelorthehigherheatingvalue.For
asystemsuchastheCleanHarborsliquidinjectionsysteminCorunnaisdesignedtohandle
about150GJ/hofheatinputthestackgasflowatfullinputwouldbeexpectedtobeontheorder
of88,000Rm3/hr@11%O2.
Operatingpermitswrittenintermsoftheallowableheatreleaseratewouldthusallowthe
generalstackgasflowratetobeusedasthebasisforestimatinghourlyemissionsofPCDD/F.
Thisisdonesimplybymultiplyingtheflowratebytheconcentration.Annualoperatinghours
canthenbyusedtoprovideanupsetmaximumforemissionsfromsuchfacilities.
Mostofthehazardouswasteincineratorsincludedintheinventoryarecommercialfacilitieswho
chargeatippingfeeforthewastethatpassesovertheirscales.Annualdisposalquantities
obtaineddirectlyfromtheoperatorsorextractedfromtheannualreportsofthecompanyare
includedinthetable.Asnotedelsewhere,stacksamplingdatawereusedtoderivetheemission
estimatesforthesefacilities.
8.3.4
Sewagesludgeincineratorsaredesignedonthebasisoftheanticipatedinfluentflowratetothe
treatmentfacility.Theamountofsludgeistypicallydirectlyproportionaltotheamountofwater
treated.Wheninstallingequipmenttoburnthesludgeengineersprovideextraunitstoallowfor
maintenanceandbreakdownsbecausesludgestoragefacilitiesarelimited.Thismeansthatina
multihearthequippedfacility3outof4ofthefurnacesaretypicallyoperatedatanytime,
bringingthetypicalutilizationto75%ofthedesign/installedcapacity.Thiswouldbea
reasonablestartingpointforevaluatingemissionsfromsewagesludgeincinerators.
Unfortunately,theinstalledcapacityaslistedinpermitsisnotagoodbasisforestimatingthe
amountofsludgedisposedatthe6facilitieslistedinTable8.6.Dataforthefacilitieswastaken
fromvariousreferencesshownonthetable.Themostcomprehensivedatawasobtainedforthe
Montrealfacility.Massbalancesforthe2004operatingyearweredownloaded,reviewedare
summarisedinthetable.Theinfluentflowtothefacilityis2.4x106m3/dayandthequantityof
113
drysolidsdisposedin2004was96,525Mg.Thissuggeststhatsludgeproductionaveraged40,220
Mg/millioncubicmetresofwaterenteringtheplantperday.
TorontoprovidesdatafortheHighlandCreekfacilityontheirwebsite.Thissitecurrently
handlesallthesludgefromTorontosfourwastewatertreatmentfacilities.The2005datashows
thesludgegenerationratetobeapproximately62,000Mg/year.
Comparingthetwofacilitiesillustrateshowimportantitistoknowthebasisofthefurnace
rating.AttheHighlandCreekfacilitytheratingis180Mg/dayofwetsludgewhereasthe
Montrealislistedashaving4multihearthfurnaceseachwithacapacityof91Mg/dayofdry
solids.Giventheannualthroughput,thissuggestsanoverallutilisationrateis73%inMontreal.
TheutilisationfortheHighlandCreekfacilitywasstatedas32%96eventhoughcursoryestimates
wouldsuggestitismuchless.
Clearly,thisdiscrepancysuggeststhatthefurnaceratedcapacitycannotbeusedasagoodbasis
forestimatingthroughputonsewagesludgeincinerators.Rather,thethroughputshouldbe
estimatedonthebasisoftheinfluentflowtothefacility,anumberthatisavailableforallwaste
watertreatmentfacilities,andanassumedaveragesludgeproductionrate,say50,000Mg/106m3
offlowintothefacility.Thiswasthebasisfortheestimatesfortheotherfourincineratorsonthe
list.ListedinfluentratesareshownonTable8.6.
ThetotalamountofdrysolidsdisposedinsludgeincineratorsinCanadaannuallyisestimatedto
be172,500Mg.
96
Pers.Comm.AnthonyPigaidoulis,CityofTorontotoA.J.Chandler,Nov.29,2006
Table 8.6
Summary of Sewage Sludge Incinerators in Canada
Name
Location
Highland Creek Sewage Treatment Plant

CUM station d`'puration des eaux uses
Centre d'puration de la Rive-Sud
Duffin Creek W.P.C.P.
Lakeview Wastewater Facility
Greenway
Toronto
Montreal
Longueuil
Pickering
Mississauga
London
Manufacturer
Heat
Recovery
APC System
Year of
Record
168,000
VS
2005
10,500
2,400,000
afterburner/VS
2004
96,525
Type
ON
QC
QC
ON
ON
ON
Multi-hearth
No
Multi-hearth
Yes
Fluidized Bed
Yes
2 x ??? (35% solids)
300,000
ESP
Estimated
15,000
Fluidized Bed
Yes
2 x 105 (30% solids)
420,000
VS/packed tower
Estimated
21,000
Yes
3 x 100 (35% solids)
390,000
VS/packed tower
Estimated
19,500
1 x 65 (dry)
200,000
VS/Re-heat
Estimated
10,000
Total
172,525
Fluidized Bed
Fluidized Bed
Dorr-Oliver
Capacity
Influent Rate
# x [Mg/day]
[cu. metres/day]
2 x 180 (wet)
4 x 91 (28% solids)
Annual
Throughput
Province
[Mg/yr]
Notes:
APC System Key ESP - electrostatic precipitator for particulate matter removal
VS - venturi scrubber
1. Highland Creek 28.6 dry tonnes/day from http://www.toronto.ca/water/wastewater_treatment/treatment_plants/highland_creek/about.htm

2. Montreal average flow to facility 2.4 million cubic metres per day - sludge disposed in dry tonnes/year from Annual Report 2004 details from http://services.ville.montreal.qc.ca/station/
3. Rive Sud average flow to facility, 0.3 million cubic metres per day data from http://www.longueuil.ca/vw/asp/gabarits/Gabarit.asp?ID_CATEGORIE=924&ID_MESSAGE=6334&CAT_RAC=7
4. Duffin Creek average flow to facility 0.42 million cubic metres per day data from http://www.region.durham.on.ca/departments/works/duffincreek/environmental/draftreport.pdf
5. Lakeview average flow to facility 0.39 million cubic metres per day data from http://www.esemag.com/0904/peel.html
6. Greenway total flow for all facilities served by incinerator 0.2 million cubic metres per day Pers. Comm. T. Van Rossum City of London
115
8.3.5
IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntitiesoronFederalLands
Twodifferenttablessummarisetheseincineratorinstallations.Twentynineincineratorsare
listedasbeingoperatedbyfederalentitiesinTable8.7.Theserangefrom5speciallydesigned
barrelburnersusedforoilyragdisposal,toMSWincineratorsusedatremotefacilitiesfor
disposalofcampwastesandevenaconicalburneroperatedatasummercamprunbyaDND
unit.Alsoincludedisanincineratorusedtodisposewasteoilsandsolventswithlowlevelsof
radioactivity.Sixoftheincineratorsareusedatanimalresearchorveterinaryfacilitiesbut,while
theywouldnotbesubjecttoCWSstandardsgiventhedefinitions,theyarelistedtomaintaina
recordoftheirexistenceinthiscategory.Theageoftheequipmentincludesanumberofmulti
chamberincineratorsfromPlibricothatdatebacktothe1970sandrelativelynewEcoWaste
systemsinstalledonaFirstNationssite.Formostoftheseunitsdataonannualthroughputis
consideredtobeunreliable.Ninecompaniesoperateatotalof22incineratorsatsitesthatare
locatedonlandsleasedfromthefederalgovernment.ThesearelistedinTable8.8.Thelist
includesonesitewherenoinformationwasobtainedontheunitinstalled;onecompanywhere
twonewincineratorsweretobeinstalledin2006toreplaceexistingunits;andseveralothersites
withmultipleunitsbetheyregularlyusedormerelythereasbackup.
Generallytheseincineratorsareoperatedinminingcampsandanattemptwasmadetoascertain
thethenumberofpeoplelivinginthesecampstoenablethewastegenerationrateforthesiteto
bedetermined.Thissectiondiscussesissuesassociatedwithestimatingthequantityofwaste
theseincineratorshandleinayear.Muchofthesedatawereobtainedfromquestionnaires
distributedbyEnvironmentCanada.
FromtheEnvironmentCanadaquestionnairesitisevidentthatatthesmaller,remotefacilitiesare
seldomequippedwithweighscales.Indeed,fewoperatorscanoffermorethanaguessaboutthe
amountofwastetheyincinerateduringagivenburncycle.Theunitsaretypicallybatchfed,that
istheyareloadedwithwasteand,whentheoperatorjudgesthereissufficientmaterialtowarrant
burningit,thedoorisclosedandtheburncyclebegins.Itispresumedthatsomeonetoldthe
operatorthattheincineratorwouldhandleacertainamountofwasteforeachburn.One
manufacturerprovidesoperatinginstructionsthatstate97:
Openthechargingdoorandloadincineratorwithrefuseupto60%offullcapacity.DO
NOTOVERLOAD.
Furthermore,giventhetypicalburnandcycletimesthemanufacturerssuggest,someofthe
questionnaireresponsessuggestthateithertheoperatorsareskimpingontheburnercycletimes,
ortheirloadsareverysmallorveryhotinwhichcasetheyburnquickly.Eveniftheoperation
97
WestlandEnvironmentalServicesInc.,unknowndate.CyclonatorTMFForcedAirIncinerator
OperatingInstructions,IncinomiteJ83DSGasFired.SuppliedbyParamountResourcesinresponsetoEnvironment
Canadadatarequest.ResponsedatedAugust30,2006.
Table 8.7
Summary of Canadian Incinerators located at Federal Establishments
Name
Location
Province
Type
Manufacturer
Heat Recovery
Capacity
APC System
Waste
MB
NU
AB
AB
NU
ON
MB
MB
MB
ON
QC
BC
NF
NU
NF
NF
NU
NS
NWT
MB
MB
AB
ON
PE
AB
AB
ON
SK
AB
AB
Liquid Injection
Trecan
None
128 L/hr
None
Waste Oil
2-Stage Batch
Eco-Waste
None
1.8 Mg/batch
None
MSW Paper
12
Barrel
SmartAsh 100
None
22 kg/hr
None
Oily Rags
Barrel
SmartAsh 100
None
22 kg/hr
None
Oily Rags
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Period
Basis of
Estimate
Population Rate Factor
Generation
Units
Rate
[Months]
AECL Whiteshell Laboratories

CFB Alert
CFB 4 Wing Fighter Squadron
CFB Eureka
CFB 8 Wing Transport
CFB 17 Wing Training
DFO Experimental Lakes Research Stn
Cree Nation of Wemindji
Hesquiaht Nation
DND Family Wilderness Camp 5 Wing Training
DND North Warning System BAF-3
DND North Warning System LAB-2
EnvCan Eureka
EnvCan Sable Island
RCMP G Division Headquarters
RCMP/PWC
AAFC Brandon
AAFC Lethbridge Research Centre **
AAFC Ottawa **
CFIA Plant and Animal Lab
CFIA Animal Diseases Research **
CFIA Animal Diseases Research
CFIA Animal Diseases Research **
CFIA Health of Animals Research **
DRDC Suffield **
DRDC Suffield
Pinawa
Ellesmere Island
Cold Lake
Cold Lake
Nanset Sound
Trenton
Winnipeg
Winnipeg
Winnipeg
Kenora
Wemindji
Hot Springs Cove
Goose Bay
Brevoort Island
Saglek
Cartwright
Nanset Sound
Sable Island
Yellowknife
Winnipeg
Brandon
Lethbridge
Ottawa
Charlottetown
Lethbridge
Lethbridge
Nepean
Saskatoon
Medicine Hat
Medicine Hat
Notes: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
**
Annual
Throughput
[Mg/year]
owner
4 hr/month
115
kg/h
population
70-150 avg 70 21 kg/p/wk
1470
kg/wk
76
12
owner
12 burns/wk
40 kg/burn
480
kg/wk
25
12
owner
12 burns/wk
40 kg/burn
480
kg/wk
30 kg/p/wk
25
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
91 kg/batch
None
MSW
population
60 max
1800
kg/wk
23
2-Stage Batch
Midland Ross Mk VI-H
None
200 kg/batch
None
Int'l MSW
12
owner
3 burns/week 200 kg/batch
600
kg/wk
31
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico CAB 20-S
None
70 kg/hr
None
Documents
12
owner
1 burn/month 280 kg/batch
280
kg/m
Barrel
SmartAsh 100
None
22 kg/hr
None
Oily Rags
12
owner
2 burns/week 40 kg/burn
80
kg/wk
Barrel
SmartAsh 100
None
22 kg/hr
None
Oily Rags
12
owner
80
kg/wk
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico RB50
None
23 kg/hr
None
Putresibles
12
population
50 max
14 kg/p/wk
700
kg/wk
36
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
3 Mg/batch
None
MSW
12
size
1200
6.5 kg/p/wk
7800
kg/wk
406
2-Stage AB
Therm-Tec G12-1
None
550 kg/day
None
MSW
12
size
500
6.5 kg/p/wk
3250
kg/wk
169
None
80 kg/batch
None
MSW
13 wks population
75/wk
6 kg/p/wk
450
kg/wk
Conical Burner
2-Stage Starved
Consumat C-32P
None
100 kg/batch
None
MSW
10 wks population
4-7each
20 kg/p/wk
140
kg/wk
2-Stage Starved
Consumat C-32P
None
100 kg/batch
None
MSW
10 wks population
4-7each
20 kg/p/wk
140
kg/wk
2-Stage Starved
Consumat C-32P
None
100 kg/batch
None
MSW
10 wks population
4-7each
20 kg/p/wk
140
kg/wk
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
60 kg/batch
None
MSW
12
8-12W/20S
20 kg/p/wk
320
kg/wk
17
MSW
population
2-Stage Batch
Consumat C-32P
None
37 kg/hr
None
12
population
8 average
10 kg/p/wk
80
kg/wk
Multiple Chamber
CJS Comb.Prod. CJS-205
None
None
Documents
12
from records
5 burns/yr
32 kg/batch
32
kg/burn
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico CAB 20-S
None
70 kg/hr
None
Documents
12
owner
560
kg/wk
29
23 kg/hr
None
Lab wastes
12
owner
as required
150 kg/wk
150
kg/wk
None
pathological
12
owner
as required
80 kg/wk
80
kg/wk
12
owner
as required
1 kg/wk
kg/wk
432
kg/wk
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico
None
2-Stage AB
Howell Refractories
None
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico
None
23 kg/hr
None
pathological
Multiple Chamber
Pyrox B-100-M
None
72 kg/load
None
vegetable
2-Stage Batch
Vertec 1000 TLM
None
400 kg/hr Type 4
None
pathological
12
size
900
kg/wk
47
2-Stage Batch
Vertec 150 E-HE
None
68 kg/hr all types
None
Lab wastes
12
size
450
kg/wk
23
2-Stage Batch
Bigelow-Liptak
None
545 kg/hr
None
pathological
12
owner
2005 data
1000 kg/wk
1000
kg/wk
52
Multiple Chamber
Plibrico 200-P
None
45 kg/hr
None
pathological
12
owner
125 kg/wk
125
kg/wk
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-200-CAPL
None
91 kg/hr
None
pathological
12
size
810
kg/wk
42
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-50-CA
None
64 kg/hr
Lime spray
hazardous
12
size
570
kg/wk
30
Total
1087
12 wks owner
Alert - assuming 66% of food waste is diverted to sewage lagoon, remote generation of 30 kg/wk is reduced to 21 kg/wk.
DFO Environmental Lake sends most of waste except food and soiled paper off site for recycling or disposal, 30 kg/p/wk estimate reduced to reflect food waste only.
DND Early Warning and Eureka assumed to have less food waste due to smaller populations
Sable Island backhauls much of non-burnable and recyclable wastes contribution only food and non-recyclable 50% normal rate but with small population less food waste
Charlottetown facility is mainly plant materials after inspections during harvesting period so used was restricted and from reported data 6 cycles per week were typical
CFIA Lethbridge the larger unit is an animal incinerator and would be exempt from the CWS standard by definition - conservative estimate for weekly loads provided since no data supplied.
Nepean and Lethbridge are animal related materials and the quantities are from federal survey data
Suffield's two incinerators have similar function to those in Lethbridge, one for animal carcasses and the other for chemical and lab wastes assume 3 burns/wk 3 hours per at capacity.
These incinerators, operating at animal research and veterinary facilities, are listed at the request of EnvCanada even though the waste does not meet the CWS definition for inclusion.
Table 8.8
Summary of Canadian Incinerators located in Remote Areas or on Federal Lands
Province
Type
Manufacturer
Heat
Recovery
MB
NF
NF
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
NWT
ON
NWT
YK
NU
NU
Multiple Chamber
PyroThermtec HU-150
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
2-Stage AB
Basis of
Estimate
Population
Rate
Factor
Generation
Rate
Units
owner Dec-Apr
4-5/wk
210 kg/batch
1050
kg/wk
23
12
size
500 kg/day
500
kg/wk
26
12
size
750 kg/day
750
kg/wk
39
routine
12
owner
20-30 burns/wk 45 kg/batch
1350
kg/wk
70
MSW
routine
12
owner
1350
kg/wk
70
MSW
routine
12
owner
1350
kg/wk
Process waste
routine
12
owner
1350
kg/wk
70
MSW
routine
12
owner
3000
kg/wk
156
Water Scrubber
MSW
routine
12
Water Scrubber
MSW
routine
12
None
MSW
routine
Period
Annual
Throughput
Capacity
APC System
Waste
Use
None
70 kg/hr
None
Int'l MSW
periodic
None
500 kg/day
None
MSW
routine
Eco-Waste
None
750 kg/day
None
MSW
routine
2-Stage AB
Westland CV-350
None
None
MSW
2-Stage AB
Westland CV-350
None
None
2-Stage AB
Westland CV-350
None
None
2-Stage AB
Westland CV-350
None
None
2-Stage AB
Westland CV-350
None
None
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-130-CAO
None
64 kg/hr
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-130-CAO
None
64 kg/hr
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-1020-FAD
None
45 kg/hr
2-Stage AB
None
45 kg/hr
None
MSW
routine
12
size
3 burns/day
135 kg/burn
2835
kg/wk
147
2-Stage AB
Westland THF-1020-D
None
64 kg/hr
None
MSW
routine
12
size
3 burns/day
192 kg/burn
4032
kg/wk
210
2-Stage AB
None
90 kg/hr
None
MSW
routine
12
population
363
30 kg/p/wk
10890
kg/wk
566
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-75-CAD
None
64 kg/hr
None
MSW
routine
12
population
273
30 kg/p/wk
8190
kg/wk
426
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
720 kg/day
None
MSW/SS
routine
12
size
720 kg/day
5040
kg/wk
262
Name
Location
CARA Operations Limited (Airport Services)

Voisey's Bay
Voisey's Bay
BHPB Billiton Diamonds Inc.
BHPB Billiton Diamonds Inc. (new unit ordered)
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Diavik Diamond Mine Inc.
De Beers Canada Inc.
Shell Canada
North American Tungsten Corp.
Tahera Corporation
Tahera Corporation
Winnipeg
Voisey's Bay
Voisey's Bay
EKATI Misery
EKATI Misery
EKATI Main Res.
EKATI Waste Management
EKATI Process
EKATI Main Bldg.
EKATI Main Bldg.
Laird West 1
Laird West 2
Cameron Hills
Lac de Gras
Lac de Gras
Snap Lake
Snap Lake
Attawapiskat
Camp Farewell
Watson Lake
Jericho Diamond
Jericho Diamond
Notes:
1. Ekati incinerators are operated on different waste streams.

waste includes MSW and spill pads hydrocarbon contaminated materials note information states, 20 - 30 burns/week at 100 lbs/burn each 3 - 5 hrs. Totals 60 Mg/yr.
Misery 1
waste includes spill pads and hydrocarbon contaminated materials note information states, 20 - 30 burns/week at 100 lbs/burn each 3 to 5 hrs. Totals 59 Mg/yr.
Misery 2
waste is accomodation waste note information states, 3 burns/day at 100 lbs/burn each 3 to 5 hrs in one place 20 - 30 per week in another Totals 50 - 60 Mg/yr.
Main Residence
waste includes spill pads and hydrocarbon contaminated materials note information states, 20 - 30 burns/week at 100 lbs/burn each 3 to 5 hrs. Totals 59 Mg/yr.
Waste Management
waste includes MSW and spill pads hydrocarbon contaminated materials note information states, 20 - 30 burns/week at 220 lbs/burn each 3.5 hrs. Totals 130 Mg/yr.
Process
not operational at July 2006 supposed to replace older units
2 new units
[Months]
12
[Mg/year]
size
2-Stage AB
Eco-Waste
None
720 kg/day
None
MSW
routine
12
size
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-200-CA ?
None
200 kg/hr
VS
MSW
routine
12
size
MSW
routine
12
routine
12
owner
12
population
2-Stage AB
Yellowhead Manu.
None
na
None
MSW
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-2050-FA
None
90 kg/hr
None
MSW
routine
2-Stage AB
Westland CY-1020-FA
None
64 kg/hr
None
MSW
backup unit
3 burns/day
2 burns/day
100
135 kg/burn
2835
kg/wk
70
147
720 kg/day
5040
kg/wk
262
1200 kg/day
8400
kg/wk
437
kg/wk
NA
500 kg/day
3500
kg/wk
182
30 kg/p/wk
3000
kg/wk
156
kg/wk
Total
3320
118
couldbeoptimized,itappearsthattheunitsarefrequentlyoperatedonatimeschedulerather
thanonthebasisofwhentheunitisfull.
Whenasktodefinequantitytheoperatorsays:theincineratorischargedandcycled3timesper
day.Ifoneknowsthecapacityoftheincineratorinkg/hrfromthemodelnumberandtypical
runtimes,thenumberofcyclesperdaymayprovideareasonableannualthroughput.However,
inothercasessuchdataislackingsoanalternateapproachmustbeusedtocompletethe
inventory.
Wasteauditdata,andanecdotalobservations,canbeusedtoprovideabasisforestimatingthe
massofwastechargedtothefurnaces.Wheneversuchapproachesareused,thebasic
assumptionsmustbetemperedwithjudgement,becauseanyestimatecanbemisleadingifone
doesnotaccountforthedifferenceslikelytobemanifestbyproceduresforhandlingwastesat
differentremote,smallsites.Moreover,onecannotcomparedatafromtheselocationstotypical
urbansinglefamilyresidentialwasteauditdata.Takeforinstancethefollowingexamplefrom
theCompassreport.
TheEnvironmentCanadaEurekaWeatherStationistypicalofsmallremotefacilities.Staffedby
812peopleyearround,thestationgetsabout80visitors,researchersandothertransient
residents,duringtheyear.Atsometimesthepopulationcanreach30people.Onaverage
thoughitmightbeappropriatetosuggesttherecouldbeamaximumof20peopleonsite.All
foodisflowninonregularsupplyflightsevery3weeks.Ifmorepeopleareanticipatedtobeon
site,morefoodisprovided.Ofcourse,foodshipmentscanresultinlargequantitiesofpackaging
materialsbeingdiscardedasthefoodisloadedintostoragelockers,andanywasteauditresults
mustaccountforthisvariability.
AwasteauditattheStation98in2003providedasnapshotoftheamountandnatureofwaste
generated.Duringperiodswhennovisitorswereonsite,theauditdocumentedthewaste
generationrateatapproximately8kg/person/wkwiththecompositionbeingputresibles[56%],
paper[19%],plastics[4%],wood[12%]andtherestbeingnoncombustibles.Duringperiodsof
hightransientpopulation,thewastequantitieswerehigherupto21kg/personwith70%
putresibles,10%paper,10%plasticsetc.,and10%noncombustiblessuchasglass,metaletc.
Atfirstglancethenormalgenerationratewouldappeartobesimilartothenationalaverage.
StatsCanadassurveyofwastemanagement99quotesapercapitaresidentialwastegeneration
98
OwnedSmallIncineratorUnits:AConsolidationofVolumes1,2&3.AreportpreparedforNationalOfficeof
PollutionPrevention,EnvironmentCanada.March.
99
StatisticsCanada,2004.WasteManagementIndustrySurvey:BusinessandGovernmentSectors
2002.StatsCanadaReportCatalogueno.16F0023XIE.September.Availableat:
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/16F0023XIE/16F0023XIE2002001.pdf
119
rateof383kg/year,or7.4kg/person/wk.However,itmustbenotedthattypicalwastecollection
inurbanareasincludesacontributionfromyardwasteandothercomponentsnotexpectedtobe
foundinwasteincineratedataremotefacility.
ThetypicalresidentialmunicipalwastestreamcompositionisshowninTable8.9.Thedata
representtheaveragecompositiondeterminedduringauditsinthreecommunitiesofdifferent
sizeacrossCanada.Themajordifferenceintheindividualnumberswassignificantlymoreyard
wasteinthelargeurbancentre.
Table8.9
TypicalResidentialWasteComposition100
Waste Component as defined for the
Study including constituents
Percent
of Total
Removed
at Remote
Sites
Revised
Remote %
Paper
29
15
25.0
Plastic
10.7
Metal
7.1
Glass
8.9
HHW
1.8
Compostables (food[26.5%], yard[11.5%],

sanitary including diapers[6%])
43.5
17.5
46.4
Other (textiles, C&D, White and Oversize or

Bulky Goods, & Electronics)
9.5
9.5
Total
100
44
100
Onewouldnotexpecttoseediapers,yardwasteoreventheOthercomponentsinthewaste
streamofaresearchcamp,oraminingcamp.Similarly,itisunlikelythatthe11%average
newsprintfoundinthewastestreamswouldbefoundinremotelocations,norwouldyouexpect
toseebooks,telephonedirectoriesorjunkmailorgardenhosesandotherplasticitemswhich
accountfor2%oftheplasticstream.Allowingfortheremovalofthesenontypicalcomponents,
theremotesitecompositionmightbeexpectedtolookmorelikethenumbersinthelastcolumn
ofthetable.Whilethemetal,glassandplasticcomponentpercentagesshowninthetableare
highcomparedtotheEurekaaudit,theyarenotthatfaroutofline.
Highergenerationrates,andhigherputresibleloadsfoundatEurekaduringthehighoccupancy
100
TottenSimsHubicki,2006.MunicipalSolidWaste[MSW]Options:IntegratingOrganics
ManagementandResidualTreatment/Disposal.AreportpreparedfortheMunicipalWasteIntegrationNetwork,
andRecyclingCouncilofAlbertawithfundingsupportfromEnvironmentCanadaandNaturalResourcesCanada.
March.
120
auditaretypicaloffoodpreparationpracticesinminingcampsetc.Anecdotaldata101suggests
thatinfacilitieswherealargenumberofpeoplearebeingfedthestandardprocedureistoserve
mealsbuffetstyle.Thequantitiesoffoodpreparedallowsmostpeopletohaveachoiceof
differentfoodthustherearehigherpercentagesofwastefoodthanonewouldexpectfrom
normaloperations.
Someremotefacilitiessegregatewastesandshipmaterialsoutfordisposal.NorthWarningsites,
theSableIslandweatherstation,theexperimentallakescampandseasonalfacilitiessuchasthe
GooseBayfamilycampreducetheamountofwasteincineratedinthisway.TheCFBfacilityat
Alertgrindsallputresiblematerialsanddirectsthemtothesewagelagoon,therebychangingthe
natureofthewastechargedtothefurnacetopredominantlypaper.
Brunner102recognizedtheneedtocharacterisewastestreams,ifonlytoproperlysizeincineration
systemsfordifferentapplications,andprovidesguidanceonboththequantityofwasteexpected
tobegeneratedfromdifferentapplicationsandtheanticipatedoperatingtimeforincineratorsin
thoseapplications.Hesuggeststhatinhighclasshotelsthewastepersleepingroomwould
averageabout9.5kg/weekandkitchenwasteswouldaverage2.7kg/personperdayor28.5
kg/week.Mediumclasshotelsproduceabouthalfthisquantityofwasteperresidenteachweek.
FortrailercampsBrunnersuggeststhatthewastestreamwouldbeontheorderof2.34.5
kg/trailerperdaybutpresumablythiswouldberelatedtomorethanonepersonbeingresident
inthetrailer.Hesuggeststhatincineratorsonindustrialsitesshouldbesizedtoallowallthe
wastetobeburnedwithina7hourshiftwhereasforhotels,institutionsandcommercial
buildingstheruleofthumbwas6hoursofoperationperday.
Totesthowrealistictheseestimatesmightbe,consideroneoftheminingcampsinquestion.The
camphasapproximately100peopleincamp,anditreportsthatthe90kg/hrbatchincineratoris
loadedandrunfor3hours3timeseachday.Allowingthattheactiveburnmayonlybe2hours,
theincineratorshoulddisposeof2.5Mgofwasteperweek.Thetotalwouldgoto3.7Mgifit
trulyoperatedfor3hoursoneveryburn.Thatwouldimplythattheaverageperperson
generationrateisbetween25and37kg/wk.
ForthepurposesofestimatingthechargetoincineratorshandlingmainlyMSWatremotesites,it
hasbeenassumedthattheweeklywastegenerationratewouldbeontheorderof30kg/person.
Thus,ifthecamppopulationisknown,anannualthroughputcanbecalculated.Ifdiversion
activitiessuchas:shippingoutmaterials,ordivertingputresiblestosewagelagoonsarenoted,
thegenerationratecanbeadjustedassumingapproximately60%ofthe30kggenerationrateis
foodwaste,andplastic,paper,andwoodeachaccountfor10%ofthewastewithnon
combustiblesmakinguptherestofthewastestream.
101
PersonalCommunication,JeanLucas,EcoWastetoJohnChandler,July31,2006.
102
Brunner,CalvinR.,1984.IncinerationSystems,SelectionandDesign.PublishedbyVanNostrand
ReinholdCompanyLimited.ISBN0442211929
121
Insomecaseallthatisknownaboutaparticularinstallationisthesizeoftheincinerator.Inthis
casetheannualthroughputshouldbebaseduponthedesignratedcapacityofthespecific
incinerator.Sinceitispossiblethattheseunitscanberunformorethanonecycleinaday,itis
alsorecommendedthatthenumberofbatchesassumedtobechargedtotheunitbebasedupon
24dividedbytwicethemanufacturerscycletimefortheunitinhours.
Typicallysmallbatchunitsaredesignedtoburnabatchin23hoursandrequiremaybe1hourto
coolsufficientlytoallowashremoval.Largerbatchunitscanhaveaburntimeof812hoursand
canrequire58hoursbeforetheyhavecooleddownsufficientlytoallowashtoberemovedand
anewchargeloaded.Undertherecommendationsabove,aunitratedat70kg/batchoperating
ona4hourscycle,couldberunup3timesperdayandwouldbeestimatedtodisposeof767
Mg/year.Alargeunit,burningsay1Mgona14hourcycle,couldprocessonly365Mg/year.
Theincineratorsoperatedbyfederalentitiesincludeunitsinvariousgovernmentlaboratoriesand
facilitiessupportingremotesettlementssuchasweatherstationsandthenorthwarningsystem.
Theestimatedtotalamountofwasteincineratedis918Mg/year.Thelaboratoriesaregenerally
relatedforfoodandagricultureandaredestroyingmaterialscontainingpathogensetc.Those
usedforanimalcarcassesdestroyanestimated154Mgofmaterialannuallybuttheywouldnot
beincludedintheCWSlistofsubjectfacilitiesweretheylocatedelsewhere.TheoneFirst
Nationssettlementonthelisthas1200people.Forthisunitthewastedisposalratewasbased
upontypicalpercapitaratesforfamilyhomesandthisoneunitaccountsfor44%ofthetotal
estimateddisposalcapacity.
Theincineratorsoperatedonfederallands,orinremoteareasbycommercialenterprises,were
largelyunrecognizedinthe2000survey.Theyareusedtomeettheneedsofminingand
explorationcampstodisposeoffoodandsleepingquarterwastesfromlargedormitoryfacilities.
Itisestimatedthatapproximately3300Mgofwasteareburnedintheseunitsinayear.The
estimatesarebaseduponownerprovideddata,eitheronburnrates,orinsomecasesthe
populationinthecampswhichwereassumedtogeneratewasteatarateof30kg/p/wk.Where
throughputperdaywasprovidedtheunitswereassumedtoruneverydayoftheyear.The
majorityoftheestimateswerebasedupontheinstalledcapacityoftheunits,assuming3burns
perdayatthatcapacityeverydayoftheyear.Asnote,themajorityoftheseunitswerenot
includedinthe2000inventoryandthustheyrepresentnewcapacityaddedtotheinventory.
8.3.6
OtherIncineratorsinRemoteLocations
Anotherpreviouslyunlistedgroupofincineratorsarethoselicencedbyvariouscompaniesor
individualsforspecificpurposes.Duringthecourseofthisstudydiscussionswiththetwomajor
suppliersinCanadarevealedthattheyhadsoldmoreincineratorsforuseinthecountrythanhad
beenidentifiedbyprovincialregulatorsorEnvironmentCanada.Manyoftheunitsareusedin
similarfashiontothosebeingoperatedonFederallandsasdiscussedintheprevioussection,but
nolistingoftheseunitscouldbeobtained.AlimitedlistofunitswasobtainedfromAlberta
EnvironmentandareshowninTable8.10.Variousothersystemswereaddedtothelistasthey
122
wereidentifiedbutnodatacouldbeobtainedfortheseunits.Someoftheseunitswereidentified
frommanufacturersreferencelistsontheinternet.
Theunitslistedincludepetcrematoriawhichcouldbeexcludedfromconsiderationunderthe
CWSstandard.Shouldthesetypesofunitsbeconsideredappropriatetoincludeintheinventory,
sourceshavesuggestedthattherewillbenumerousinstallationsfoundinmostprovinces.
Thislistraisesaquestionabouthowsmallerunitscanbeidentifiedandtheirthroughput
estimated,orindeed,iftheseunitsaresmall,whethertheissueofemissionsfromthemis
significant.Atthistime,notthroughputestimatesarepossibleandisnofurtherdiscussionof
theseunitsinthisreport.
Table 8.10
Summary of Miscellaneous Small Incinerators Operating in Canada
Name
Location
Province
1083296 Alberta Ltd.

Red Deer County
Alberta Research Council Inc.
Edmonton
AltaGas Ltd.
Calgary
Calgary
Brian Johnston
Carstairs Veterinary Services Inc.
Carstairs
CE3 Technologies
Edmonton
Country Club Pet Resort Inc.
Calgary
Darcy Kroetsch
Lougheed
Devon Canada Corporation
Calgary
Calgary
Calgary
Calgary
Calgary
La Crete
Friesen Logging Ltd.
Friesen Logging Ltd.
La Crete
Innisfail District Co-operative Association Limited
Innisfail
Invertek Inc.
Calgary
Mackenzie Pork Producers Inc.
La Crete
Material Processing Canada Inc.
Edmonton
Nelson Environmental Remediation Ltd.
Calgary
Calgary
Calgary
Paradise Moving Services Inc.
Calgary
Paramount Resources Ltd.
Calgary
Calgary
Pet Heaven Crematorium and Funeral Chapel Ltd.
Rainbow Pipe Line Company, Ltd.
Slave Lake
Rainbow Pipe Line Company, Ltd.
Slave Lake
Ray Pelletier
Nisku
Remedx Remediation Services Inc.
Calgary
Research and Scientific Support Division
Vegreville
Ryan & Brenda Cumberland
Fairview
Smithbrook Waste Management Systems Inc.
Brooks
University of Calgary
Calgary
Vermilion Veterinary Clinic (1977) Ltd.
Vermilion
Yvo Schmucki
Red Deer
Millar Western Industries Ltd.
Edmonton
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
University of Manitoba - Chown Building

Manitoba Hydro - Brandon GS
Manitoba Hydro - Grand Rapids GS
Manitoba Hydro - Henday Converter Station
Manitoba Hydro - Jenpeg GS
Manitoba Hydro - Kelsey GS
Manitoba Hydro - Kettle GS
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
MB
Winnipeg
Brandon
Grand Rapids
Gillam
Cross Lake
Thompson
Gillam
Type
proposed
proposed
proposed
proposed
proposed
Barrel
Barrel
Barrel
Barrel
Barrel
Barrel
124
8.4
PCDD/FEmissionsinExhaustGasStream
Chapter5reviewsstacksamplingtechniquesavailabletocharacteriseemissionsfrom
incinerators.Typically,stacksamplingprovidesaconcentrationforPCDD/Finthegasesleaving
thestack.Theconcentration[pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2]isimportantbecauseitcanbeusedto
judgetheacceptabilityofthefacilitywithrespecttoemissionstandards.However,thePCDD/F
inventoryforCanada,andthenumbersreportedtoNPRIareprovidedintermsofmassof
PCDD/Freleasedperyear.Toeasiestwaytousetheconcentrationdatatodefinetheannual
emissionrateistoconverttheconcentrationtoamasspertonneofwasteburned,assumingthat
underallconditionstheemissionswillbeinthesamerangethattheywereinduringtesting.
Sincethestackgasflowrateisrelatedtotheamountofmaterialbeingburnedatanygiventime,
multiplyingthestackconcentrationbytheflowrateprovidesanemissionrate[pgITEQ/hour]
anddividingthisbytherateofwastechargedtothefurnace[Mg/hour]producesanemission
factor[pgITEQ/Mgwaste].
Determiningtheappropriateemissionfactorforagiveninstallationrequiresadescriptionofthe
facilitysuchasprovidedintheinventorytables.Insomecasesfacilitiesinstalledmanyyearsago
willlikelyhaveamultiplechamberincineratorratherthanthemoreefficienttwostage
combustionsystems.Adifferentemissionfactorwouldbeappropriatetodistinguishbetween
thesetwotypesoffacilities.Clearly,ifthefacilityisequippedwithreasonablygoodcontrolled
combustionfurnacesandemissioncontrolequipmentcapableofreducingPCDD/Femissionsit
wouldbeinappropriatetocharacteriseemissionsascomingfromanuncontrolled,poorly
operatingfacility.Ideally,ratherthanbasingpotentialemissionsonemissionfactors,itwouldbe
preferabletouseactualemissiondatafromtheindividualfacilitiestoestimatetheiremissions.
Wherethesedataarenotavailable,thereissomeguidanceonemissionfactorsavailableinthe
literature.
Itwasnotuntil2001thatthefirstversionoftheUNEPToolkit103wasreleased.Designedtoassist
countriesindevelopingPCDD/Femissioninventories.Unfortunatelythatinformationwasnot
availableatthetimeoftheinitialinventory,howeverdatainthe1999PCDD/Finventorysuggests
thattypicalemissionconcentrationsforsmallMSWincineratorswereontheorderof35ngI
TEQ/m3.Withspecificvolumetricflowratesontheorderof10,000m3/Mg,theemissionswould
beapproximately350mg/Mg.
Forsomeofthelargeincineratorsinthecountryemissiontestdatawasmadeavailablefor
inclusioninthisreport.Notallthetestdataisfrom2005.Thehazardouswasteincineratordata
wasincludedinthe2003hazardouswastereportpreparedforEnvironmentCanadareferenced
elsewhereinthisreportunlessnoted.ForsomeMSWincinerators,thedatawastakenfromthe
103
UNEPChemicals,2001.StandardizedToolkitforIdentificationandQuantificationofDioxinand
FuranReleasesDRAFT.PreparedbyUNEPChemicalsGeneva,SwitzerlandundercontractwithHansUlrich
Hartenstein,E&ECenergyandenvironmentalconsultantsGmbH,Waldbrl,Germany,PatrickH.Dyke,PD
Consulting,Lechlade,UnitedKingdomandDr.HeideloreFiedlerofUNEPChemicals.January.
125
2003MSWincineratorupdate.Forfacilitieswherecopiesoftestreportswerenotavailable,
alternativeemissionfactors,derivedfromsimilarsystemsordefaultsfromtheUNEPToolkit
havebeenapplied.Theresultsarepresentedinaseriesoftablesthatafacilityspecific.
Discussionofthevariousincineratorgroupsandtheresultsfollows.
8.4.1
MSWIncinerators
Testdatadated2005wasavailablefor3oftheMSWincinerators.Thatdataissummarizedin
Table8.11.TheQuebecCitydatawasbaseduponthe1993testdata104whichagreeswellwith
datafromboththeAlgonquinPowerandGVRD.Wainwrighttestingwascompletedforboth
MSWchargingandmedicalwastecharging,whichaswasnotedintheprevioussectionis
segregatedintheoperation.EmissionconcentrationsfromtheoneMWtestandthetwoMSW
testswereusedtoestablishthenumbersforthatfacility.
GVRD,AlgonquinPower,andtheQuebecCitydataareallrecordedwiththebelowdetection
limitvaluesincludedatthedetectionlimitaccordingtotheCWSprotocol.Allthreefacilities
showvaluesbelowtheEnvCanLOQof32pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2thustheywouldnothavebeen
requiredtolistPCDD/FemissionsintheirNPRIfilings.InMay2006emissiontestingfromthe
PEIfacilityshowedtheconcentrationstoalsobebelowtheEnvCanLOQ.
Thebalanceofthefacilitieshavenotreportedrecenttestdata.Levissmostrecentdata,2001,was
usedfortheemissions.GiventhattheAPCsystematLevisissimilartothatinIlesdela
MadeleinetheLevisemissionvaluewasusedforIlesdelaMadelaine.
ThetotalPCDD/FairemissionsfromMSWincineratorsisestimatedat60mgITEQ/year.
104
A.J.Chandler&AssociatesLtd,andCompassEnvironmentInc.,2003.MunicipalSolidWaste
Table 8.11
Summary of Air Emissions from Large Scale Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Stack
Flow
Waste
Feed
Specific
Flow
Emission
Concentration
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
[Rm^3/s]
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
[pg ITEQ/Mg]
[mg ITEQ/year]
2.3
1.13
7,327
213
1,560,743
3.72
2005
17.7
10.00
6,366
5.07
32,276
8.88
test data
2005
35.2
19.89
6,371
4.19
26,695
3.74
test data
2006
7.3
4.00
6,590
20
131,804
4.22
280,000
reported
1993
6,500
5.70
37,050
10.37
25,132
test data
2002
6,500
130
845,000
21.24
9,100
estimated
6,500
130
845,000
7.69
Total
60
Annual
Throughput
Basis
Test Date
2,383
test data
2005
275,000
test data
140,000
32,000
[Mg/yr]
Wainwright (MSW)
GVRD
Trigen
Notes:
Levis data from http://www.ville.levis.qc.ca/Fr/Citoyens_Mat_Con.asp represents 2002 operating data and 2001 test data
Iles de la Madeleine emissions assumed to be similar to Levis in absence of site data and similar APC equipment
127
8.4.2
Twoofthecommercialmedicalwasteincineratorshavebeentestedinthelastyear.Their
emissionsdata,fromthetestreportsareshowninTable8.12.Bothtestsshowresultswellbelow
theLOQ.
Athirdincineratorhas2006testdata,thatbeingthe50kg/hrunitoperatedinFortSmith.This
unitisrelativelynewandhasasimplescrubberonthebackendtocontrolemissions.
Unfortunately,duringthetestingitwasbeingoperatedinaContinuousIntermittentfeed
mode.Accordingtothetestreport:
Prior to waste introduction, the secondary chamber was pre-heated to approximately 1100OC,
and the primary chamber was pre-heated to 800OC. Once the primary and secondary chambers
reached the setpoint operating temperatures, waste was manually introduced to the primary
chamber via the main charge door. Approximately 4 kg of waste including red bag waste and
sharps containers were loaded at various intervals. Incineration of the charges proceeded until
the oxygen probe indicated combustion was complete, and another charge was introduced to the
"hot" primary.
Thetestreportindicatesthatthefurnacewaschargedwithbetween37and46kgofwasteduring
theperiodofthevarioustests,withaveragefeedratesof913kg/hr.Thisseverelyunderloads
theprimarychamberandopeningthedoorperiodicallychangesthetemperatureregimeandair
flowratesthroughoutthefurnaceleadingtotheperformancelistedinthetable.Notethe
discrepancybetweenthespecificflowforthetwocommercialfacilities,andevenWainwright
whenoperatingonmedicalwasteandthisdatasuggestingveryhighspecificflows.Thiscould
leadtopoorperformance.Whiletheaverageemissionconcentrationwas126pgITEQ/Rm3@
11%O2,thetestswere40,80and256pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2withthelattertestbeingthemiddle
ofthethree.Additionalreviewofthesetestdatawasnotconducted.
TworelativelynewincineratorsareinstalledattwoclinicsinNunavut.Theseunitsaresimilarin
naturetoanMSWincineratorfromthesamemanufacturerthatwastestedbyEnvironment
Canadain2002105andaCleanAireanimalunittestedin2003bythesameteam.Boththesetests
showedtheunitstohaveverylowPDCC/Femissionconcentrations,andlowspecificflows.
TheToolkitdocumentsuggeststhatuncontrolledbatchcombustioncanreleaseasmuchas40mg
ITEQ/Mgwasteburned,correspondingtoastackconcentrationof2,000ngITEQ/Nm3.For
controlledbatchcombustionofmedicalwasteinasystemwithoutAPCequipment,anemission
factorof3mgITEQ/Mgwasteburnedisrecommended,baseduponemissionconcentrationsof
105
Cianciarelli,D.andC.House,2003.CharacterizationofEmissionsfromtheEcoWasteSolutions
ThermalWasteOxidizer,Burlington,Ontario.ReportERMD200203.EnvironmentCanadaETC.
Table 8.12
Summary of Air Emissions from Medical Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Waste
Feed
Specific
Flow
Emission
Concentration
[Rm^3/s]
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
2.6
0.69
13,670
173
2,364,835
1.08
0.44
8,836
1.59
14,050
0.03
3.E+09
63.18
48,316
0.05
class 2
3.E+09
36.14
class 2
3.E+09
26.28
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
535.46
16
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
49.28
17
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
50.92
50
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
151.11
10
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
29.57
26
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
77.20
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
16.43
10
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
29.57
12
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
36.14
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
3.28
14
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
42.71
15
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
44.35
21
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
62.42
35
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
106.08
15
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
44.35
67
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
200.39
14
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
41.06
21
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
62.42
41
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
123.19
16
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
49.28
16
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
49.28
44
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
131.40
10
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
31.21
11
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
32.85
39
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
118.26
14
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
41.06
test data
2006
14
estimate
60
tool kit
class 3
see note 1
8,000
35
tool kit
class 3
see note 1
8,000
150
estimate
Basis
Test Date
2,308
test data
2005
2,040
test data
2006
21
estimate
class 2
1,000
test data
2005
12
estimate
estimate
178
(Mg/yr)
Wainwright (Medical Waste)

Medical Waste Management
Weeneebayko General Hospital
Mr. Shredding Waste Management
Gillam Hospital
Percy E. Moore Hospital [hc-sc.gc.ca]
Minnedosa Hospital
Norway House Hospital
Cristallo Engineering Technologies, Inc.
0.68
0.19
12,884
3.75
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
Stack
Flow
Annual
Throughput
[pg ITEQ/Mg] [mg ITEQ/year]

5.46
NA
0.144
0.014
37,029
126
4,665,600
0.04
3.E+09
42.71
256
2,048,000
0.12
256
2,048,000
0.07
class 2
3.E+09
450.05
14.78
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
27
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
80.48
88
estimate
class 2
3.E+09
262.80
1,561
test data
Alberta Env
Total
3,141.52
1.34
9.8
0.15
Notes:
1. Unit by same manufacturer tested by EnvCan when burning MSW had emission concentration 40 pg/Rm^3 and low specific flow - 3039 Rm^3/Mg
129
200ngITEQ/Nm3.DatapublishedbyEnvironmentCanada106in1999notedthatamedicalwaste
incineratorinOntariohadaverageemissionsof25ngITEQ/m3whichwasintherangeof
Europeandata(average35ngITEQ/m3)forawelloperatedcontrolledcombustionfurnace
systemequippedwithanAPCsystem.Atthisemissionconcentrationtheemissionfactorwould
be0.375mgITEQ/Mg.Theoriginalinventoryusedavaluefo4.67mgITEQ/Mg.
TheEnvironmentCanadatestsjustifyusingasmalleremissionfactorthantheClass2values
fromtheUNEPToolkitforthenewerbatchincinerators.Aspecificflowof8,000wasselected
baseduponthemeasuredspecificflowforMSWandthefactthatmedicalwasteisgenerally
consideredtohaveacalorificvalueapproximatelytwicethatofMSW.Theemission
concentrationselectedwasthetopvaluefoundintheothernewerincineratortests,eventhough
thiswasatleast6timestheaveragemeasuredduringtheMSWtests.
Thebalanceoftheincineratorsinthetableareunitsthatwereincludedintheoriginalinventory
list.TheemissionfactorchosenfortheseunitsisthatofClass2asdefinedintheToolkit.This
value,3mgITEQ/Mgis2/3rdsofthevalueusedinthe2000inventorythatreflectsabroader
evaluationofoperatingdataonolderincinerators.
Thetotalemissionsfrommedicalwasteincineratorsis3.1g/year,mostbeingcontributedby
installationsatlargehospitals.
8.4.3
HazardousWasteIncinerators
HazardouswasteincineratorsinCanadahaveemissionconcentrationdataavailablefromstack
testing.Baseduponthetestdataavailable,aslistedinTable8.13,ifonemakesanassumptionon
annualhoursofoperationitispossibletoprojecttheannualemissions,eventhoughwaste
chargingratesarenotavailableforallunits.
AlbertaEnvironmentprovidedthehoursofoperationforbothofthefurnacesattheSwanHills
facility.Oneoperatedfor3,595hours,theotherfor1,303hoursin2005.Takingtheproductofthe
stackflowrate,theoperatinghoursandtheemissionconcentrationprovidesanannualemission
estimate.
ExperiencesuggeststhattheavailabilityoftheCleanHarborsliquidinjectionfurnacesat
CorunnaandMercierissignificantlyhigherthanthatlistedfortheSwanHillsfacility.Operating
hoursforboththesefacilitieswereassumedtobeontheorder7,000hours,or80%availability.
106
EnvironmentCanada,1999.DioxinsandFuransandHexachlorobenzeneInventoryofReleases.A
reportpreparedbyEnvironmentCanadaandtheFederal/ProvincialTaskForceonDioxinsandFuransforthe
FederalProvincialAdvisoryCommitteefortheCanadianEnvironmentalProtectionAct(CEPAFPAC).January
Table 8.13
Summary of Air Emissions from Hazardous Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Annual
Throughput
Waste
Feed
Specific
Flow
Emission
Concentration
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
Basis
Test Date
[Rm^3/s]
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
9,300
Alberta Env
2005
11.30
2.60
Note 1
126
3,274
Alberta Env
2005
2.36
2.60
Note 1
160
1.77
83,818
test data
2003
16.50
80 GJ/hr
44.00
18.30
1,183
test data
2005
0.46
8.20
0.05
598
test data
2006
0.57
0.08
25,650
28.90
0.15
416
test data
2004
0.73
0.13
19,972
2,564
17.58
416
test data
2003
0.74
108
0.75
test data
2006
0.49
542
3.35
61,062
test data
2003
9.77
800
196.96
43,351
test data
2002
5.00
0.44
NA 2005
Note 3
[Mg/yr]
Clean Harbors Corunna
Cameco Port Hope
Cameco Blind River
Gary Steacy
Clean Harbors Mercier
RSI Bennett
Bennett Belledune
Stack
Flow
[pg ITEQ/Mg] [mg ITEQ/year]

18.43
Note 2
77 GJ/hr
Total
Notes:
1. Alberta Environment provided operating hours for year and assumed stack concentration was the same for the period. 3595 hr for FBD and 1303 hr for CER
2. Permit requires both units to be run together so the emission factor is combined.
3. Belledune facility not operating at the present time.
257.77
131
BoththeSteacyandMRRfacilitiesoperateonabatchbasiswherethefurnacesarefilledandthe
operateduntilthematerialsofconcernaredestroyedandtheresidualareemptiedafterthe
chargecools.TheMRRfurnaceistypicallyloadedatarateofapproximately700kg/batch,and
eachprocessingrunrequiresapproximately2.5hours.Baseduponthetotalannualthroughput,
1,690batcheswereprocessedin2005foratotalof4,225hoursofoperation.Assumingthe
operationissimilaratGarySteacy,thesamevaluewasusedforthissite.
Thethreefurnacesthatdisposeofradionuclidecontaminatedwastes,CamecoandOPG
installations,areoperatedonanasneededbasis.Theseoperationsservetoreducethevolumeof
radioactivelycontaminatedmaterialsthatneedtobehandledfordisposalbyconcentratingthe
radionuclidesintheashandresiduestreams.Datainthetestreportssuggeststhattheseunits
mayoperateafewdaysperweek.Assumingtheavailabilityoftheseunitsis10hoursperday,5
daysperweek,theoperatinghourswouldbe2,600hoursperyear.
ThelastoperatingunitonthelististheRSIsoildestructionfacility.PCDD/Femissionsare
consistentlyverylowforthisfacilitywhichusesarotarykilntovolatilizehydrocarbonsfrom
soilsbeingtreatedandanafterburnertodestroythefumes.Theaveragestackgasflowrateis5
Rm3/sandtheaveragefeedratetothefurnaceis12.5Mg/h.The2005throughputdividedbythe
averagefeedratesuggeststheunitoperatedforabout3,500hoursin2005.
ThetotalemissionsfromhazardouswasteincineratorsaredominatedbytheMercierfacility.
Eightypercentofthereleasesinthiscategoryarisefromthisfacility.TheESPusedforparticulate
controlatthefacilitylikelydoesnotprovidethelevelofcontrolforfineparticulatematterthan
canbeachievedattheCorunnafacility.
8.4.4
EmissionsofPCDD/FtotheairfromsewagesludgeincineratorsaresummarizedinTable8.14.
TestdataisavailablefortheOntariofacilitiesandtheresultsofthesetestswereusedtoproject
thetypicalemissionfactorthatshouldbeusedforthetwoQuebecfacilitiesintheabsenceof
specifictestdata.
ThetestdataavailablefortheHighlandCreekfacilitywasanextractofthetestreportanddidnot
containanyfeedratedata.Thefeedratewasestimatedbytakingthe2005dailyfeedrateand
assumingthatasimilaramountwasbeingfedtotheincineratorduringthetesting.Flowand
emissionconcentrationdatawereavailabletobeconvertedtotheappropriatebasisforinclusion
inthetable.Thecalculatedemissionfactoriscloseto400,000pgITEQ/Mgthatisrecommended
forClass3facilitiesintheToolkit.
SinceCUMisamultihearthinstallation,theClass3defaultwasusedforthisinstallation.
Table 8.14
Summary of PCDD/F Emissions from Sewage Sludge Incinerators in Canada
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
Test Date
Emission
Concentration
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
[pg ITEQ/Mg]
[mg ITEQ/year]
1.19
20,743
18
373,374
3.92
400,000
38.61
Waste
Feed
[Rm^3/s]
6.86
Dry Mg
Dry Mg
[Mg/yr]

Greenway
Specific
Flow
Stack
Flow
10,500
test data
96,525
estimated
2005
15,000
estimated
100,000
1.50
21,000
test data
2005
10.61
2.40
15,908
2.87
45,590
0.96
19,500
test data
2004
8.70
8.93
3,509
9.2
32,281
0.63
10,000
test data
2006
7.92
3.02
9,454
2.46
23,256
0.23
Total
45.85
133
NofeedratedatawasavailableinthetestreportfortheDuffinCreekfacility.Itwasassumed
thattheannualthroughputrepresentedtheaveragefeedratefortheyearforthisfacility,andthe
feedratewasestimatedatthatrate.Stackflowandemissionconcentrationwereavailableand
thecalculatedemissionfactorisanorderofmagnitudelowerthantheToolkitClass3guideline.
AllthedataforLakeviewwasextractedfromthetestreport.
Greenwaytestdataincludedsludgefeedrate,howeverthiswasnotonthebasisofdrysolids.
Alltheemissionfactorandthroughputdataforsewagesludgeincineratorsinthisreportis
presentedonthisbasisandaconversionwasnecessary.Thesolidscontentinthesludgewas
estimatedtobe26%similartothesuppliedLakeviewdata.
ThetotalPCDD/Femissionsestimatedtooccurfromsewagesludgeincineratorsislessthan50
mg/year.ThemajorityofthisarisesfromthemultihearthfacilityinMontrealwhichisestimated
todisposeofmorethanhalfofallthesewagesludgeburnedinthecountry,butaccountsfor80%
oftheestimatedemissionsfromthiscategory.
8.4.5
IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntities
Thereisnospecificemissiontestdataforthiscategoryofincinerators,however,theEnvironment
Canadatestdata,referredtoearlier,canbeusedtoapproximatetheperformanceofthe
incineratorsmanufacturedbythecompany.Theseunitsareamongsomeofthenewer
incineratorsinstalledinthesefacilities.Thebalanceoftheincinerators,forthemostpart,are
olderunitsinstalledatleast15yearsago.Theyincludemultichamberunitsthathavebeen
showntohavepoorercombustioncontrolthannewerincinerators.Allunitsareassumedtobe
operatedonabatchbasis;loadedaswasteisproducedandfiredwhensufficientwastehasbe
placedinthecombustionchamber.
Theincineratorsusecanbedividedintotwocategories:MSWdisposalcoveringcampwaste,oily
ragsandevensomeofthelaboratorywastesdisposedinincinerators;and,pathologicalwaste
coveringthevegetableandanimalmaterialsdisposedinincineratorsatresearchfacilities.
Noneoftheseincineratorshaveemissioncontrolequipment,noraretheyequippedwithheat
recoverysystems.Thetemperatureoftheexhaustgaseswouldthusbeexpectedtobeabovethe
denovotemperaturewindowduringoperationwhichshouldresultinlowconcentrationsof
PCDD/Finthestackgasesiftheunitsarerunatthedesignheatinputlevels.Althoughemission
concentrationswouldbeexpectedtobelow,thefactthattheyareoperatedinabatchmodecould
resultintheashleftinthesystemscontributingtodenovocreationofPCDD/F.Suchmaterial
wouldbeexpectedtobereleasedthenexttimethesystemwasoperated,unlessalltheashwas
removedfromthesystem.Multichamberincinerators,suchasPlibricounits,donotlend
themselvestoroutinecleaningandwouldbeexpectedtoproducethehighestemissions
concentrations.Newertwochamberunitswithafterburnersareunlikelytohavemuchash
remaininginthesecondarychamberafteroperation.
134
Intheabsenceofemissionfactorsfortheseunits,theclass2factorsfromtheToolkithavebeen
used.Theclass2factorwastakenfromtheMSWcategoryforMSWincineratorsandfromthe
pathologicalwastecategoryforthelaboratorypathologicalwasteincinerators.Thedataare
providedinTable8.15.
ReviewingTable8.15,atotalof100mgITEQPCDD/Fareestimatedtobereleasedfromthis
categoryofincinerators.Themajorityofthisisemittedfrom8units,eachofwhichisestimated
toprovideabout10%ofthetotalemissions.Thereissomequestionwhethertheemissionfactor
appliedtoSmartAshbarrelsystemsisappropriategiventhattheseunitsemployahighintensity
afterburnerarrangementtominimizesmokeemissions.Theseunitsdonothaveasecondary
chambertocollectflyashandassuchmayperformbetterthanestimated.Giventhestateduseof
theseunits,andthefactthatotherentitiesarestartingtousethesameunits,itwouldbe
appropriatetohavethemtestedtodeterminepotentialemissions.Unfortunately,totestoneof
theseunitsitwouldneedtobemodifiedtocontaintheexhaustgasessotheycouldbetested.
Thiscouldupsettheoperationoftheafterburner.
Clearlysomeoftheunitswithalargerthroughputshouldbetestedtoestablishsitespecific
emissionfactors.
8.4.6
IncineratorsOperatedinRemoteLocationsonFederalLandsorelsewhere
Thisgroupofincineratorsaregenerallynewerthanthoseinthepreviouscategory.Likethe
previousunits,theyarenotequippedwithheatrecoverysteamgeneratorsorairpollutioncontrol
systems.Thestackemissionsareexpectedtobeatemperatureswellabovethedenovosynthesis
rangeandthus,providedcombustionconditionsaremaintainedandlittleresidualisleftinthe
incineratoraftereachburn,emissionswouldbeexpectedtobelow.Theyweremanufacturedby
twodifferentCanadiancompaniesandtestdatafromaunitmanufacturedbyeachcompanyare
availableandhavebeendiscussedearlierinthisreport.Ratherthanusetheaveragefromthese
testreports,themaximumconcentrationobtainedduringtestingwasincorporatedintoTable
8.16.
Itshouldbenotedthatwhilethetestdataislistedinthetable,ie.theflowandwastefeedrates
wouldnotreflectthoseexpectedtobemeasuredatthevarioussites,theemissionfactorderived
fromthesedataisthenumberusedtoderiveannualemissions.Sincethisvaluewouldbe
consistentwiththetestdataitcanbeappliedtoanysimilarincinerator.Theemissionfactoris
usedtocalculatetheAnnualEmissionsbymultiplyingtheannualthroughput[Mg]bythe
emissionfactor[pgITEQ/Mg].
Atotalof34mgITEQPCDD/Fareestimatedtobeemittedfromthiscategoryofincinerators.
Table 8.15
Estimate of PCDD/F Emissions from Canadian Incinerators located at Federal Establishments
Name
FEDERAL AGENCIES
CFB Alert
CFB Eureka
Hesquiaht Nation
EnvCan Eureka
EnvCan Sable Island
RCMP/PWC
AAFC Brandon
AAFC Lethbridge Research Centre
AAFC Ottawa
CFIA Health of Animals Research
DRDC Suffield
DRDC Suffield
Annual
Throughput
Basis
Test Date
estimate
class 2 MSW
76
test data
EC 2002
25
estimate
25
estimate
23
[Mg/year]
Stack
Flow
Waste
Feed
Specific
Flow
Emission
Concentration
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
[Rm^3/s]
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
[pg ITEQ/Mg]
[mg ITEQ/year]
3.50E+08
1.93
2.16E+05
0.02
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
8.74
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
8.74
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
8.18
31
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
10.92
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
1.18
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
1.46
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
1.46
36
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
12.74
406
test data
EC 2002
2.16E+05
0.09
169
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
59.15
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
2.05
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
0.49
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
0.49
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
0.49
17
test data
EC 2002
2.16E+05
0.004
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
1.46
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
0.05
29
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
10.19
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
2.73
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
0.21
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
0.00
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
0.26
47
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
2.34
23
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
8.19
52
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
2.60
0.77
0.77
0.77
0.914
0.914
0.914
3,039
3,039
3,039
70.98
70.98
70.98
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
0.33
42
estimate
class 2 path
5.00E+07
2.11
30
estimate
class 2 MSW
3.50E+08
10.37
Total
158.95
Table 8.16
PCDD/F Emissions from Incinerators located in Remote Areas or on Federal Lands
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
Test Date
23
estimate
class 2 MSW
26
test data
EC 2002
39
test data
70
test data
70
test data
70
[Mg/year]

Voisey's Bay
Voisey's Bay
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Shell Canada
Tahera Corporation
Tahera Corporation
Stack
Flow
Waste
Feed
Specific
Flow
Emission
Concentration
Emission
Factor
Annual
Emissions to
Air
[Rm^3/s]
[Mg/hr]
[Rm^3/Mg]
[pg ITEQ/Rm^3]
[pg ITEQ/Mg]
[mg ITEQ/year]
3,039
70.98
3.5E+08
7.96
2.2E+05
0.006
0.77
0.914
EC 2002
0.77
0.914
3,039
70.98
2.2E+05
0.008
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
0.67
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
0.67
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
0.67
70
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
0.67
156
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.48
NA
class 2 MSW
3.5E+08
0.00
NA
class 2 MSW
3.5E+08
0.00
147
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.40
147
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.40
210
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.99
566
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
5.37
426
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
4.04
262
test data
EC 2002
0.77
0.914
3,039
70.98
2.2E+05
0.06
262
test data
EC 2002
0.77
0.914
3,039
70.98
2.2E+05
0.06
437
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
4.14
182
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.72
156
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
1.48
test data
Fort Smith
0.144
0.014
37,029
255.90
9.5E+06
0.00
Total
33.75
NA
137
8.5
PCDD/FEmissionsinSolidandLiquidStreams
Topredictemissionsrelatedtosolidwastestreamsfromafacilityitisnecessarytodetermine
howmuchsolidwasteisgeneratedinvariouspartsofthesystem,andthenapplyavailable
concentrationdataforthevarioustypesofstreams.DatafromToolkitwillbeusedtoestablish
thefactorsthatshouldbeusedtocalculatePCDD/Finresiduesbecausethereisverylittle
PCDD/FconcentrationdataavailableforCanadianincinerators.
8.5.1
MSWIncinerators
TheIAWG107reportsthatforeveryMgofwasteburned,theashgeneratedinatypicalMSW
incineratorisproportionedasfollows:
300kg/Mgbottomash;
5kg/Mggratesiftings;
5kg/Mgboilerash;
42kg/MgfilterandAPCresidues;and,
0.05kg/Mginthestackgases.
Inthe2003reportpreparedforEnvironmentCanadathebottomashgenerationrate,even
includingthemoisturepresentintheashafterpassingthroughthequenchtank,averaged25%of
thetotalamountofwasteprocessedattheMSWincineratorsincludedinthestudy.GVRDdata
from1988to2005showsbottomashtoaccountforbetween15and18%ofthewastefedtothe
furnace.Typically,bottomashisweighedasitleavestheincineratorfacilityandnoattemptis
madetodeterminetheaveragemoisturecontentofthismaterial.Moisturecontentrecordedat
onesitehaverangedbetween2237%,avariationthathasbeendeterminedtorelatelargelyto
theamountoffinecarbonleftintheash.Thisfinematerialisveryhygroscopic.Inthe
EnvironmentCanadareport,theamountofflyashandAPCresiduegeneratedconsistently
representedabout11%oftheamountofbottomashproduced.Overallthesolidresidues
accountedfor28%ofthemassfedtothefurnaces.ThelongtermdatafromGVRDsuggeststhat
annualflyashshipmentsareontheorderof2.74.1%oftheannualwasteprocessed.Thisis
higherthantheaveragesseenintheEnvironmentCanadareport.
Thedifferencesrelatetothenatureofthefurnace,withEuropeangratesystemsproducingvery
highlevelsofburnout.Highercarbonlevelsintheashfromthetwostagecombustionprocess,
canbeexpectedtoretainmoremoistureandthusweighmorethantheEuropeantypegrate.
EuropeangratesystemsmightbeexpectedtohavehigherboilerashandAPCresiduequantities
duetomoreashleavingthebedduetohigherairvelocitiesintheburningzonethanfoundina
starvedairfurnace.
107
InternationalAshWorkingGroup,1997.MunicipalSolidWasteIncineratorResidues.Published
byElsevier,ISBN0444825630.
138
TheUNEPToolkitsuggeststhatbottomashfromMSWincineratorscouldbeaslowas1020%
ofthecharge,andflyashintherangeof12%ofthecharge.Thesedataagreereasonablywell
withtheCanadiandata.
Forthisstudyitwillbeassumedthatbottomashwillbe20%ofthemasschargedtothefurnace.
Flyashwillbeassumedtobe2%ofthemasschargedtothefurnace.
WiththelackofanyspecificdataonPCDD/Fconcentrations,againnecessarytorefertoliterature
data.
TheIAWGsuggestthatnewer,welloperatingincineratorswillproducebottomashwitha
concentrationof0.020ngTE/gandflyashcouldbeashighas0.300ngTE/gbasedaconversion
thatlookedattheratioofPCDD/PCDFinthesampleandmultipliedthesumofthePCDDby
betweenonequarteroronehalfthefactorusedforthePCDFtotal.Thesamereferencesuggests
thatoldersystemscanproduceflyashwithconcentrationsbetween50and100timeshigher.
TheToolkitsuggeststhatconcentrationsforbottomashfromnewerfacilitiescouldbe0.005ngI
TEQ/gandflyashcouldbeashighas1ngITEQ/g.TheToolkitsuggeststhatType3incinerators
couldbecharacterisedwith0.05ngITEQ/gofbottomashand15ngITEQ/kgflyash.
DataintheUSEPAinventorydocumentshowsdatathatgenerallyfitswithintherangeofthe
datashownabove.
Forthisassessment,theToolkitclass3data,7ngITEQ/kginbottomashand200ngITEQ/kgfly
ashwillbeusedtocalculatethePCDD/Finresidues.ThePCDD/Festimatedtobereleasedin
residuesfromMSWincineratorsislistedinTable8.17.
8.5.2
CommercialmedicalwasteincineratorsarehandlingamixofwasteverysimilartoMSW,in
furnacesthataresimilartothetwostagesystemsusedforMSW.Theseunitsarealsoequipped
withAPCsystems,butdonothaveHRSGs.Thecommercialunitsallhaveaformofquenchor
wetscrubberpriortothebalanceoftheAPCtrain,andgeneratewaterthatissenttosewer.
Asnotedabove,thePCDD/Fintheeffluentfromawetscrubberwilllikelybeintheformoffine
particulatematter,notdissolvedinthewater.Theparticulatematterisgeneratedmainlythrough
theliberationofflyashfromthefurnacebedandmosttwostagesystemstypicallyhavelow
particulateloadsduetolowvelocitiesasdiscussedinChapter3.Furthermore,sincethegases
leavethefurnaceathightemperatureandareimmediatelyquenchedtotemperaturesbelowthe
denovosynthesiswindow,thepossibilityofPCDD/Fformationislimitedtopoorcombustionin
thesecondarychamber.ThesemeasureswouldsuggestthatthePCDD/F
Table 8.17
PCDD/F in Residues from Large Scale Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
[Mg/yr]
Wainwright (MSW)
GVRD
Trigen
Note:
Ash Percentage
PCDD/F
Concentration
[pg ITEQ/g]
Annual
Emission Rate
[ug
Emissions in
ITEQ/year]
Residues
Bottom
Fly
Bottom
Fly
Bottom
Fly
[mg ITEQ/year]
2,383
estimated
20
200
3,336
9,532
13
275,000
estimated
20
200
385,000
1,100,000
1,485
140,000
estimated
20
200
196,000
560,000
756
32,000
estimated
20
200
44,800
128,000
173
280,000
estimated
20
200
392,000
1,120,000
1,512
24,310
estimated
20
2.4
200
34,034
116,688
151
9,100
estimated
20
200
12,740
36,400
49
Total
4,139
Levis fly ash data from 2002 ops report
140
availabletobetransferredtothewaterwouldbelow.TheToolkitsuggeststhatwhere
concentrationshavebeenmeasuredinMSWincineratorsthePCDD/Fconcentrationhasbeen
foundtobebetweenafewpgITEQ/Lto200pgITEQ/L.
Withoutbeingabletofurtherquantifythesesources,theuseofwetscrubber/quenchtowers
shouldbenotedandtestingrecommendedtofillthisholeintheinventory.
Thesesystemsgeneratelittleornoflyashfromthewetscrubbers,exceptincaseswhereactivated
carbonisintroducedintothegasstreamtoremoveresidualPCDD/F.Aswiththewetscrubber
effluent,thispotentialsourceshouldbenotedandtestingshouldbeconductedtocompletethe
inventory.
Bottomorgrateashfromtheseincineratorscanbeassumedtobesimilarinquantitytothatfound
inMSWincinerators,200kg/Mg.TheToolkitsuggeststhattheconcentrationofPCDD/Fwillbe
between10100ngITEQ/kgofash.Giventhenatureoftwostageincineratorashavalueof50
ngITEQ/kgwillbeselectedforthisreport.
Littledetailisavailableformanyoftherestofthemedicalwasteincineratorsinthecountry.
Thereisnoinformationonmostoftheinstallations,althoughitisknownthattherearesome
newerbatchfed,twostageafterburnersystemsofthetypediscussedinChapter3inoperationin
somelocations.Theseunits,forthemostpart,havenoAPCsystemsonoflyashiscreated,and
onlygrateashneedstobeincludedintheinventory.Forallthesesystemsthe200kg/Mg
generationratewillsuffice.TheconcentrationofPCDD/Finthegrateashforallbutthenewer
batchfedunitsshoulddefaulttotheCategory2valueintheToolkit,100ngITEQ/kg,whereas
thenewersystemsshouldusethe50ngITEQ/kgvalueselectedabove.
ThePCDD/Festimatedtobereleasedinresiduesfrommedicalwasteincineratorsislistedin
Table8.18.
8.5.3 HazardousWasteIncinerators
Theincineratorsclassifiedashazardouswasteunitsperformamyriadoffunctionsfrom:
liquidinjectionfurnaceswithonlylimitedgrateashandAPCresidues(2);
soiltreatmentfacilitieswithnograteashbutAPCresidues(2);
metalrecoveryfurnaceswithnograteashandlimitedAPCresidues(3);
radioactivewastedestructionfacilitiesthathandlecontaminatedmaterialssimilar
toMSWandproducegrateandAPCresidues(3);and,
conventionalhazardouswasterotarykilnincineratorsthatproducegrateashand
APCresidues(2).
QuantifyingthepotentialPCDD/Freleasesfromthesefacilitiesrequiresconsiderationofthe
Table 8.18
PCDD/F in Residues from Medical Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
(Mg/yr)
Wainwright (Medical Waste)

Medical Waste Management
Weeneebayko General Hospital
Gillam Hospital
Percy E. Moore Hospital [hc-sc.gc.ca]
Minnedosa Hospital
Norway House Hospital
Cristallo Engineering Technologies, Inc.
Ash Percentage
PCDD/F
Concentration
ITEQ/g]
[pg
Emission Rate
[ug ITEQ/year]
Annual
Emissions in
Residues
Bottom
Fly
Bottom
Fly
Bottom
Fly
2,308
estimated
20
200
3,231
9,232
[mg ITEQ/year]
12
2,040
estimated
20
50
20,400
20.400
21
estimated
20
100
421
0.421
1,000
estimated
20
50
10,000
10.000
0.241
estimated
12
estimated
20
100
241
estimated
20
100
175
0.175
178
estimated
20
100
3,570
3.570
16
estimated
20
100
329
0.329
17
estimated
20
100
339
0.339
50
estimated
20
100
1,007
1.007
10
estimated
20
100
197
0.197
26
estimated
20
100
515
0.515
estimated
20
100
110
0.110
10
estimated
20
100
197
0.197
12
estimated
20
100
241
0.241
estimated
20
100
22
0.022
14
estimated
20
100
285
0.285
15
estimated
20
100
296
0.296
21
estimated
20
100
416
0.416
35
estimated
20
100
707
0.707
15
estimated
20
100
296
0.296
67
estimated
20
100
1,336
1.336
14
estimated
20
100
274
0.274
21
estimated
20
100
416
0.416
41
estimated
20
100
821
0.821
16
estimated
20
100
329
0.329
16
estimated
20
100
329
0.329
44
estimated
20
100
876
0.876
10
estimated
20
100
208
0.208
11
estimated
20
100
219
0.219
39
estimated
20
100
788
0.788
14
estimated
20
100
274
0.274
estimated
20
50
78
0.078
14
estimated
20
100
285
0.285
60
estimated
20
50
603
0.603
35
estimated
20
50
354
0.354
150
estimated
20
100
3,000
3.000
29
estimated
20
100
580
0.580
27
estimated
20
100
537
0.537
88
estimated
20
100
1,752
1.752
1,561
estimated
20
50
15,610
15.610
Total
80.894
142
natureoftheoperation.TheToolkitassumesthathazardouswasteincineratorgrateashhasa
negligiblePCDD/Fcontentduetothehightemperaturesandtypicalexcessairpresentinthe
primarycombustionzone.
Soiltreatmentandmetalrecoveryfurnacesessentiallyheatthematerialstobetreatedtovolatilise
theorganicconstituentspresentinthecontaminatedmaterialsandthenburnthevolatilegasesto
destroytheseorganics.Assuchtheyhavelittlecarryoverofflyashandlikelyproduceflyash
quantitiesthatarefarbelowthe3kg/MgwastechargedsuggestedbytheToolkit.Inthecaseof
soiltreatmentfacilities,wherereagentsareaddedtotheAPCsystem,theflyashquantitiesmight
behigherthanmetalrecoveryfurnaces,buttheconcentrationwouldbeexpectedtobediluted
too.ConcentrationsofPCDD/Fintheseunits,allofwhichwouldmeettheToolkitsdefinitionof
hightechnologycombustioncanbeassumedtobe30ngITEQ/kgofflyash.
TheradioactivewasteincineratorscanbeassumedtobesimilarinnaturetotheMSW2stage
combustionstarvedairfurnacestheyarederivedfrom.Giventhattheperformanceoftwoof
theseunitscouldonlybeconsideredtomeettheCategory2definitionoftheToolkit,itwillbe
assumedthatthegrateashat200kg/Mgwastechargedwillhaveaconcentrationof15ngI
TEQ/kg.Flyashgeneratedintheseunits,likely3kg/Mgofwastecharged,shouldbeassumedto
haveaconcentrationofPCDD/Fof500ngITEQ/kg.
Thetwoliquidinjectionfurnacesgeneratelittlegrateash,whichasnotedearlier,canbeassumed
tohavenegligiblePCDD/F.TheflyashforCorunna,3kg/Mgofwastechargedwouldbe
classifiedbytheToolkittobeaCategory4systemwithaconcentrationof30ngITEQ/kgoffly
ash.ThepresenceofanESPontheMercierfacilitycouldbeexpectedtoresultinhigher
concentrationsofPCDD/FintheAPCresidues.Avalueof250ngITEQ/kgissuggested.
ThetworotarykilnincineratorsinAlbertacanbeconsideredtobeCategory4facilitiesunderthe
Toolkitdefinition.NoPCDD/Fwouldbefoundinthebottomashandtheflyashconcentrationof
PCDD/Fwillbeassumedtobe30ngITEQ/kg.
ThePCDD/Festimatedtobereleasedinresiduesfromhazardouswasteincineratorsislistedin
Table8.19.
8.5.4
TheToolkitprovidessomeguidanceontheexpectedquantityandqualityofresiduesfrom
sewagesludgeincinerators.Incinerationofsewagesludge108(dewateredtoapproximately20
108
USDOTTurnerFairbankHighwayResearchCenter,1994.SewageSludgeIncineration:Meeting
AirEmissionsintheNinetiesandBeyond,ProceedingsoftheNationalWasteProcessingConference,ASME,1994.
Availableat:http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/ss1.htm
Table 8.19
PCDD/F in Residues from Hazardous Waste Incinerators in Canada
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
[Mg/yr]
Clean Harbors Corunna
Cameco Port Hope
Cameco Blind River
Gary Steacy
Clean Harbors Mercier
RSI Bennett
Bennett Belledune
Ash Percentage
Bottom
[pg
Emission Rate
[ug ITEQ/year]
Annual
Emissions in
Residues
Fly
Bottom
Fly
[mg ITEQ/year]
9,300
estimated
3.00
30
8,370
8.370
3,274
estimated
3.00
30
2,947
2.947
83,818
estimated
3.00
30
75,436
75.436
1,183
estimated
1.00
30
355
0.355
Bottom
Fly
PCDD/F
Concentration
ITEQ/g]
estimated
598
estimated
20
3.00
15
500
1,794
8,970
10.764
416
estimated
20
3.00
15
500
1,248
6,240
7.488
416
estimated
20
3.00
15
500
1,248
6,240
7.488
1000
estimated
1.00
30
61,062
estimated
3.00
250
43,351
estimated
3.00
30
estimated
3.00
300
0.300
457,965
457.965
39,016
39.016
0.000
Total
610.13
144
percentsolids)reducestheweightoffeedsludgerequiringdisposalbyapproximately85percent
implyingthatforeverytonneofsludgefedtotheincinerator,150kgofgrateashiscreated.This
numberislessthanreportedintheToolkit,whereitissuggestedthatabout43%ofthefeed
remainsafterincinerationinamultihearthfurnace.Thiscouldbeafunctionofthedefinitionof
theinputtotheincineratorinthatahighersolidsfractioninthesludgecouldchangetheinput
level.Withoutanydata,itisassumedthat200kggrateashwillbecreatedforeverydrytonneof
sludgefedtoamultihearthincinerator.Fluidisedbedincineratorscreatenograteash.
TheToolkitquotesdatasuggestingthatthequantityofflyashfromamultihearthsystemison
theorderof13kg/Mgofsludge.Thisrisesto373kg/Mgofsludgewithfluidisedbedfurnaces.
ThePCDD/FinthegrateashquotedbytheToolkitformultihearthfurnaceswas39ngITEQ/kg
and470ngITEQ/kgwasfoundintheflyashfromtheESP.PCDD/Flevelsinflyashfrom
fluidisedbedcombustion,againfromanESP,weremuchlower<1ngITEQ/kg.TheToolkit
recommendsthatthecombinedresiduesfrommultihearthfurnacesbeassessedatanemission
factorof23ngITEQ/Mgofsludge.Fluidisedbedsystemsareassessedat0.5ngITEQ/Mgof
waste.
TheToolkitnotesthatwherefacilitiesusewetscrubbersorsimplewaterquenchtocooltheoff
gasesortoquenchgrateash,thatbetween1.2and6.5pgITEQ/LofPCDD/Fcanbefoundin
scrubbereffluents.Typicallytheseeffluentsarefedbacktothewastewatertreatmentsystemin
thefacility.
ThePCDD/Festimatedtobereleasedinresiduesfromsewagesludgeincineratorsislistedin
Table8.20.
8.5.5
IncineratorsOperatedbyFederalEntitiesoronFederalLands
Thereisamixofincineratorequipmentinthiscategory,butmostburnmaterialssimilartoMSW.
Olderunits,Pilbricomultichamberincineratorstypicallyhavenotperformedwellandshould
likelybecategorizedasCategory1ormaybe2accordingtotheToolkitguidance.Theunits
operatedbycompaniesleasingFederallandsarenewerunitsdesignedtoprovidegood
combustioncontrol.WithoutHRSGonanyoftheseunitstheyareanticipatedtohavenoflyash
componenttotheirresiduestreams.
Grateashgenerationlevelscanbeassumedtobe200kg/Mgofwastecharged.
ConcentrationofPCDD/Finthesesystemswillbeassumedtobe100ngITEQ/kgforthemulti
chambersystems,and20ngITEQ/kgforthenewersystems.ThePCDD/Festimatedtobe
releasedinresiduesfromincineratorsoperatedbyfederalentitiesislistedinTable8.21andfrom
thoseonfederallandsorinremotelocationsinTable8.22.
Table 8.20
PCDD/F in Residues from Sewage Sludge Incinerators in Canada
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
Dry Mg
Ash Percentage
PCDD/F
Concentration
ITEQ/g]
[pg
Bottom
Fly
Bottom
Fly
Emission Rate
[ug ITEQ/year]
Bottom
Fly
Annual
Emissions in
Residues
[mg ITEQ/year]
[Mg/yr]

Greenway
10,500
estimated
20
1.30
39
470
81,900
64,155
146
96,525
estimated
20
1.30
39
470
752,895
589,768
1,343
15,000
estimated
37.30
0.5
2,798
2.8
21,000
estimated
37.30
0.5
3,917
3.9
19,500
estimated
37.30
0.5
3,637
3.6
10,000
estimated
37.30
0.5
1,865
1.9
Total
1,501
Table 8.21
PCDD/F in Residues Emissions from Incinerators located at Federal Establishments
Name
FEDERAL AGENCIES
CFB Alert
CFB Eureka
Hesquiaht Nation
EnvCan Eureka
EnvCan Sable Island
RCMP/PWC
AAFC Brandon
AAFC Lethbridge Research Centre
AAFC Ottawa
CFIA Health of Animals Research
DRDC Suffield
DRDC Suffield
Annual
Throughput
Basis
[Mg/year]
Ash Percentage
Bottom
Fly
Emission Rate
[ug ITEQ/year]
Annual
Emissions in
Residues
Bottom
Fly
estimated
20
100
111
0.111
76
estimated
20
100
1,529
1.529
25
estimated
20
20
100
0.100
25
estimated
23
estimated
20
20
94
0.094
31
estimated
20
20
125
0.125
estimated
20
100
67
0.067
estimated
20
100
83
0.083
estimated
20
100
83
0.083
36
estimated
20
100
728
0.728
406
estimated
20
20
1,622
1.622
169
estimated
20
20
676
0.676
estimated
20
100
117
0.117
estimated
20
100
28
0.028
estimated
20
100
28
0.028
estimated
20
100
28
0.028
17
estimated
20
20
67
0.067
estimated
20
100
83
0.083
estimated
20
100
0.003
29
estimated
20
100
582
0.582
estimated
20
100
156
0.156
estimated
20
100
83
0.083
estimated
20
100
0.001
estimated
20
100
104
0.104
47
estimated
20
100
936
0.936
23
estimated
20
100
468
0.468
52
estimated
20
100
1,040
1.040
Bottom
Fly
PCDD/F
Concentration
[pg ITEQ/g]
[mg ITEQ/year]
20
estimated
20
100
130
0.130
42
estimated
20
20
168
0.168
30
estimated
20
20
119
0.119
Total
9.36
Table 8.22
PCDD/F in Residues from Incinerators located in Remote Areas or on Federal Lands
Name
Annual
Throughput
Basis
[Mg/year]

Voisey's Bay
Voisey's Bay
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Paramount Resources
Shell Canada
Tahera Corporation
Tahera Corporation
Ash Percentage
Bottom
[pg
Fly
Emission Rate
[ug ITEQ/year]
Annual
Emissions in
Residues
Bottom
Fly
[mg ITEQ/year]
23
estimated
20
100
455
0.455
26
estimated
20
20
104
0.104
39
estimated
20
20
156
0.156
70
estimated
20
20
281
0.281
70
estimated
20
20
281
0.281
70
estimated
20
20
281
0.281
70
estimated
20
20
281
0.281
156
estimated
20
20
624
0.624
estimated
20
20
0.000
estimated
20
20
0.000
147
estimated
20
20
590
0.590
147
estimated
20
20
590
0.590
210
estimated
20
20
839
0.839
566
estimated
20
20
2,265
2.265
426
estimated
20
20
1,704
1.704
262
estimated
20
20
1,048
1.048
262
estimated
20
20
1,048
1.048
437
estimated
20
20
1,747
1.747
estimated
20
20
182
estimated
20
20
728
0.728
156
estimated
20
20
624
0.624
estimated
20
20
0.000
Total
13.64
Bottom
Fly
PCDD/F
Concentration
ITEQ/g]
0.000
148
8.6
SummaryofEstimatedPCDD/FEmissionsfromIncinerators
FourtablessummarisetheincineratorscurrentlyinstalledinCanadaandtheestimatedemissions
attributedtothem.Theemissiondataisbasedupon2005operatingdatawherethatisavailable.
Table8.23listsalltheincineratorsinstalledbyprovinceandtype.Theemissionsareestimated
forincineratorsthatwereoperatingin2005.ThetotalinstallednumberinTable8.23doesnot
agreewiththetotalinTable8.26becausesomeoftheinstalledunitswerenotoperatingorhadno
datauponwhichtobaseestimates.Thesevenincineratorsforwhichemissionsdatawerenot
determinedinclude:
thebackupmedicalwasteincineratorinNewBrunswick(1)andthebackupunit
operatedbyTaherainNunavut(allwastewasassumedtobeprocessedinone
unit);
incineratorsthatwereinstalledinlate2005or2006,butnotoperated:Ekati(2);
Bennett,Belledune(1);
thesecondfurnaceatMRRthatcannotbeoperateunlessthefirstunitisoperating
andallthewastewasassumedtogothroughthefirstunit;and,
intheabsenceofanydataontheShellCampFarewellunit,noestimateswere
provided.
FortheoperatingincineratorsannualemissionstoairandinresiduesaresummarizedTables8.24
and8.25.TheannualPCDD/Femissionsassociatedwithboththestackreleasesandtheamount
ofPCDD/Fshippedoffsiteinresiduesstreamsareestimatesandthereaderiscautionedthat
thereisuncertaintyinherentinthesenumbers.Thedetailsofthecalculationspresentedearlierin
thischaptershouldbereviewed.
InthecaseofthelargeMSWincinerators,theairemissionsassignedfortheTrigenfacilityneedto
beverified.ThelatestNPRIreportforthisfacilityshowsthesenumberstobelowerbutthereis
nobasisforusingalowernumberatthistimesincethe2004datawasevenhigherthanthevalue
usedforthisstudy.PCDD/FinresiduesfromlargeMSWincineratorsaccountfortwothirdsof
thePCCD/Finresiduesestimatedforthisstudy.Theseestimatesarebasedupondefaultvalues
andcouldberefinedifresiduevolumescouldbeconfirmed,andanalyticaldataforthese
materialscouldbecollected.
Formedicalwasteincinerators,theCristallofacilityemissionsarebasedupondefaultfactorsas
notestdatawasmadeavailable.Theemissionsfromthisfacilitycouldbeupto3ordersof
magnitudehigherthanarebeingestimateddependingupontheamountofwastebeingdisposed.
Themassofmedicalwastebeingdisposedatmostofthefacilitiesinthiscategoryisonlyan
estimatesincelittledatawasavailable,andwithouttestdatafromthelargerindividualhospitals,
theemissionvaluesarebasedupondefaultvalues.Theestimatescouldberefinedbyobtaining
betterinformationonwastevolumesdisposedandalimitedamountofsitespecificmonitoring
data,especiallyfromthelargerfacilities.
149
Hazardouswasteincineratorestimatesarebasedupontestdataandaninterpretationof
operatinghoursbaseduponwastefeedtotalsformostfacilities.TheairemissionsfromMercier
areclosetotheNPRIvaluereportedfor2005.TheestimatesforPCDD/Finresiduescouldbe
refinedbothwithrespecttothequantityandqualityoftheresidues.
Residuerelatedemissionsfrommultihearthfurnacesdominatethesewagesludgeincinerator
totalemissionsvalue.Montreal,whichprocessesalargequantityofsludge,andusesolder
technologyhasthehighestemissions.Theuseofanestimatednumberfortheairemissions,as
wellasthedefaultvaluesforresiduesexacerbatesthissituation.Thereissomeindicationthat
Montrealmaybemovingtowardsothermethodsofsludgedisposalandthesemightresultina
decreaseoftheemissions.Moreinformationonemissionsfrommultihearthincinerators,bothto
theatmosphereandintheresidues,shouldbeobtained.
Theincineratorsoperatedbyfederalentitiesdisposeofanestimated1,000Mgofwasteperyear.
Whilethereareseveralsituationswherethisistheonlyviablealternativefordisposalofthe
materials,thelackofsitespecificdataonwastegenerationrates,oremissionslenduncertaintyto
theestimates.Betterwastegenerationdataisneededformostsites,andsitespecificemission
datashouldbegeneratedforthelargerfacilities.Thequantityandqualityofresiduesshouldbe
definedforthesesources.
Over3,000Mgofwastemaybedisposedinincineratorslocatedatisolatedresourcedevelopment
facilities.WhileairemissionsandresiduerelatedPCDD/Flevelshavebeenestimatedforthese
sources,aswiththeothercategorieswastegenerationratesandthequantityofPCDD/Finairand
residuestreamsshouldbeconfirmedifonlyonalimitednumberofsites.
Table 8.23
Summary of Installed Incinerators by Province 2005/2006
Incinerator
Classification
Province
AB
BC
Municipal
Medical
Hazardous
MB
NB
28
NF
NT
NS
NU
ON
13
35

Totals
1
3
15
17
SK
YK
19
42
12
Totals
30
1
22
119
Summary of PCDD/F Air Emissions [mg I-TEQ/yr] from Operating Incinerators by Province
Incinerator
Classification
Municipal
Province
AB
BC
3.7
8.9
Medical
268.4
Hazardous
20.2
MB
NB
2222
0.05
NF
NT
NS
0.04
NU
ON
42.9
Sewage Sludge
Federal Agencies
40.7
59.2
18.9
333.0
68.0
2249

Totals
3.0
8.0
0.05
0.1
0.01
18.4
3.0
18.5
1.5
8.7
1.5
53.1
1.5
PE
QC
3.7
4.2
39.3
63.2
450.0
40.2
197.4
5.7
40.1
26.3
0.3
0.1
SK
YK
14.8
80.5
59.9
3141.5
257.8
45.8
0.3
4.1
143.3 454.5 276.9
Totals
15.1
158.9
1.7
33.7
82.2
3697.7
Summary of PCDD/F in Residues [mg I-TEQ/yr] from Operating Incinerators by Province
Incinerator
Classification
Province
AB
BC
Municipal
12.9
1485
Medical
29.8
Hazardous
11.3
MB
NB
14.8
10.0
NF
NT
NS
NU
ON
PE
756.0 172.8
0.1
1.2
20.8
1.9
0.7

Totals
55.9
1486
1.1
0.2
0.0
0.5
0.3
9.8
0.4
9.9
16.3
10.0
0.1
0.1
1.7
1.9
0.6
1.7
3.6
Number
Identified
[Mg/year]
Air
0.6
0.5
1038 175.9
1.6
3556
[mg I-TEQ/year]
Residues
Total
Large Municipal
762,793
60
4,139
4,198
Medical
41
8,082
3,142
81
3,222
Hazardous
10
204,418
258
610
868
Sewage Sludge
172,525
46
1,501
1,547
Federal Agencies
30
1,087
159
168
18
3,320
34
14
47
Totals
112
1,152,225
3,698
6,353
10,051
Totals
4138.5
80.9
610.1
1345
0.1
Releases of PCDD/F
Waste
Quantity
YK
1712
Summary of 2005 PCDD/F Emissions from Operating Canadian Incinerators
Incinerator
Classification
SK
497.0
155.5
Federal Agencies
QC
3.0
101.8
Sewage Sludge
Table 8.26
1
2
4
Federal Agencies
Table 8.25
QC
Sewage Sludge
Table 8.24
PE
1500.9
0.1
0.7
9.4
0.7
13.6
1.3
6353.5
9.0 ALTERNATIVEEQUIVALENCYFACTORS
9.1
Introduction
Asdiscussedearlierinthisreport,therearealternativestotheITEQequivalencyfactor.While
thegeneralconsensuspresentedtheresuggeststhatutilisingtheWHO98protocolwillraisethe
effectiveemissionsbylessthan15%,thisconclusionshouldbetestedforvariousincineratortypes
andtheuseofdifferenttreatmentsoflaboratoryresultsthatareatorbelowthequantification
limit.Whiletheidealsituationwouldbetoperformthisevaluationonalltheexistingdatafrom
differenttypesofincineratorsoperatedinCanada,theefforttoaccomplishthiswasconsidered
beyondthescopeofthisreport.Forstarters,theindividualstacktestingreportswouldneedtobe
qualitycheckedbeforetheanalysiswasperformed.Thischeckingrequirestheresearchertogo
backtotherawlaboratorydataandthestacksamplingteamsdatasheetstoredoallthe
calculationsinthetestreports.Ratherthandoingthis,datathattheauthorhasalreadyquality
controlledwillbeusedtoprovideanindicationofhowthischangewouldeffectreported
emissionlevels.
Inthecourseofexaminingtestreportstoobtainthedatausedintheprevioussectionseveral
differenttreatmentsofBDLdatawereidentified.SomereportsprovidedITEQestimatesbased
uponincludingunquantifiableconcentrationsaszerocontributors,otherstookDLvalues,and
stillotherfollowtheCWSguidance:
Jurisdictions must report measurements that are below the detection limit in a consistent
manner . These measurements should be reported as the limit of detection.
Undefinedindefinitionishowthelaboratorieschosetodefinetheirspecificquanitificationlimit.
Inmanycasesitcanbeobservedthatthislevelchangesinaspecificlaboratoryeitherdaybyday,
oratleasttestseriesbytestseries.Thereisaneedforastandarddefinitionofwhenthedata
shouldbeconsideredbelowthelevelofquantification.TheapproachoutlineinEN1948and
discussedinChapter5should,intheopinionoftheauthor,beusedasaconsistentbasisfor
definingthelimit.Remember,theformulationisLOQi=0.5[pg/m3]/ITEFi.Usingthisapproach,
facilitieswhodonotrequirethetesterstoconducttestingofareasonablelengthwillendup
substitutinghigherdetectionlimitvaluesintheirdeterminationoftheTEQvaluesthanwill
facilitieswhoopttopaythetestersformoresamplingtime.
Thischapterthuspresentsdata:
astypicallycalculatedwiththeITEQfactors;
usingthesamebasicvaluesbyapplyingtheWHO98factors;
usingthelaboratorydataandthesamplevolumestodetermineindividualLOQ
valuesandapplyingtheITEQfactors,withandwithoutincorporatingthevalues
thatarebelowtheLOQ;and,
doingstep3withtheWHO98factors.
152
9.1
DataforAnalysis
Table9.1listsPCDD/Fanalyticalresultsfor13triplicatetestsconductedat5differentfacilities.
AlltestswereconductedonCanadianincinerators:
Facility1anMSWincineratorwithacapacityinexcessof500Mg/day;
Facility2amedicalwasteincineratorburning10Mg/day;
Facility3anMSWincineratorwithacapacityinexcessof700Mg/day;
Facility4amedicalwasteincineratorburningabout15kg/hr;
Facility5anMSWincineratorburning1Mg/day.
Thetableliststhevaluesbyfacilityandthedateofthetest.Foreachtesttheblanktraindatais
enteredasthefirstdataforthetestseriesandthebalanceofthetestdataincludesthevolumeof
thesamplecollectedandtheoxygenconcentrationforthattestrun.PCDD/Fdatainthetable
wereenteredasthemassofthecongenermeasured[pg]directlyfromthelaboratoryanalyses.
Valuesreportedbythelaboratorytobelessthanthedetectionlimitdefinedbythelaboratory
wereenteredasanegativevalueatthedetectionlimit.
Thesamplevolumeandtheoxygenconcentrationwereusedtoconverttheindividualcongener
massvaluestoaconcentrationatstandardconditionsincludingthediluentconcentrationvalue.
TheconcentrationdataisprovidedinTable9.2.
TheEN1948LOQvaluesdiscussedaboveareafunctionofthevolumeofthesamplethatis
collected.Twotables,Table9.3and9.4showtheLOQvaluesinconcentrationforeachofthe
tests.TherearetwotablesbecauseboththeITEFandtheWHO98TEFapproachmustbeusedto
determinetheLOQvaluesfortheindividualcongenersfromeachsample.
ThedatapresentationrequirementsinEN1948suggestthatthemeasuredconcentrationforeach
congenermustbecomparedtotheLOQdeterminedonthebasisofthesamplevolumeandthe
individualcongenerTEF.IftheconcentrationislessthantheLOQ,theTEQforthesampleis
calculatebothwithandwithoutthevaluesbelowtheLOQincludedinthesummation.These
calculationswerecompletedandtheresultsaresummarizedinTable9.5.Againthetablereflects
calculationswiththeTEQfactorsforboththeITEFandWHO98TEFschemes.Theheader
designatesthemannerinwhichthevaluewasdetermined.IntheAlternativeCalculation
Regimessectionofthetable,thefirsttwocolumnsshowthevaluedeterminedassumingthat
valuesbelowtheLOQareexcludedfromthesum.The3rdand4thcolumnsofdatapresentthe
resultswhentheLOQissubstitutedforthevaluesthatarebelowtheLOQ.Thelasttwocolumns
providethedataasitiscurrentlyrequiredtobecalculatedbytheCWSPCDD/Fstandard.
Table9.6showstheincreaseintheTEQproducedbyusingtheWHO98TEFforeachapproach.
Table 9.1
Raw Analytical Data [pg] from Stack Testing Programs Various Facilities
Facility
OCDD
TCDF
TCDF2378 TCDD2378 PCDF1
PCDF4
PCDD1
HXCDF14 HXCDF16 HXCDF46 HXCDF19 HXCDD14 HXCDD16 HXCDD19 HPCDF146 HPCDF149 HPCDD146 OCDF
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.0001
0.0001
Sample Specifics
ITEQ
WHO98
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample
Blank
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
Volume
[Rm^3]
PCDF
HXCDF
HPCDF
TCDD
PCDD
HXCDD
HPCDD
Oxygen
[%]
5.061
5.085
5.093
10.6
10.7
10.7
5.047
5.388
5.445
11.07
11.17
10.76
5.792
5.82
5.792
11.4
11.6
11.7
5.154
5.145
5.175
10.9
11.3
10.9
4.825
4.866
4.794
10.9
10.9
10.6
5.461
5.458
5.453
12.1
11.7
11.9
3.75
4.23
3.89
8.05
7.8
7.98
3.538
3.445
3.663
13.54
11.37
11.49
3.667
4.438
4.243
10.48
10.59
10.85
4.484
4.458
4.476
10.8
10.6
9.9
5.893
5.51
5.917
12.4
10.9
12.6
3.2492
3.1964
3.116
14
14.3
14.1
4.075
3.894
4.043
13.9
13.9
14.8
-9.5
3200
2200
1500
-2
82
50
28
-5.5
-31
-21
-23
3.8
-26
-29
-26
-7.7
36
-23
-22
-2.8
-13
-24
-15
-10
-11
-14
17
-5
17
8.5
8.9
-0.5
13.1
9.5
-3.7
-2
45
44
22
-2
2.6
4.4
2.7
-2
27
220
77
0.8
30.4
106.6
168.4
-8.2
300
220
120
-2
-6.4
-3.1
-2
-8.9
-7.2
-7.4
-11
2.7
-3.5
-3.6
-4.2
-11
-10
-10
-14
-2.8
-2.9
-3
-2.8
-6.3
-8.9
-16
-13
-5.5
-5.5
-4.6
-4.5
-0.8
-2.2
-2.3
-0.8
-2
-5
-2
-2
-2
2.4
-2
2.3
-2
37
190
43
-0.4
1.2
2.5
9.2
-8.1
1500
1200
640
-1.9
43
19
8.9
-4.3
-3
-2.8
-3.2
-2.1
-10
-7.8
-7.1
-14
12
-12
-33
-2.9
-5.5
10.2
-6.8
-6.7
-7.2
-6.8
-7.5
-4.6
-4.9
-5.2
-5.1
-1.3
3.1
3.2
2.5
-4
16
16
20
-4
6.3
5
5.3
-4
45
210
68
-0.2
8.8
30.6
42.3
9.8
1600
1200
820
2.6
61
34
20
-4.3
16
9.9
15
-2.9
14
13
13
-13
-16
-11
-30
5
10.8
15.5
12.6
-7.4
6.1
-8.2
14
-3.9
6.3
-4.4
7.1
-1
2.6
-10.6
-8.5
-4
30
26
28
6.5
11
11
18
-4
54
270
160
-0.4
16.2
59.6
92.8
-5.3
550
420
260
-1.9
19
7
5.2
-4.1
-5.1
5.1
6.7
-2
-5.7
6
-5.2
-11
-13
-10
-11
-2.7
4.4
5.5
-4.5
-4.2
-4
-6.6
-8.5
-6.8
-6.6
-6.8
-4
-0.8
-0.5
-0.5
-0.5
-4
22
19
12
9
12
9.6
20
-4
22
230
39
2
4.1
7.1
19.4
-14
3000
2300
1300
-1.8
93
61
30
-3
15
8.2
19
2.4
20
20
17
-4
-21
18
15
-2.6
10.7
19.4
14.6
4.5
-6.7
-6.2
8.6
-2.7
7.4
-3.5
12
-0.4
-3.2
4.5
4.2
-4
50
21
64
-4
13
9.3
11
-4
30
170
62
0.9
41.9
148.6
301.3
-5.5
1500
1100
680
-1.4
49
25
13
-2.6
8.1
-3.5
8.8
-1.7
16
11
9.5
-4
-11
-8.3
-11
-2.4
6.6
11.6
8.9
-5.2
-5.5
-5.2
-7.1
-2.7
3.9
-3.5
7.3
-0.8
2.9
2.5
4.1
-4
31
24
27
-4
9.2
7.4
11
-4
28
130
45
-0.2
18.8
76.5
110.8
15
1400
1100
740
-1.9
51
34
23
-3.2
-11
7
12
-2.2
23
14
-11
-4.4
-12
-5.3
-12
-2.9
4.5
7.5
6.2
7.4
-7.8
-9.2
12
-3.1
4.4
-3.9
6.9
-1.9
3.1
-3.3
3.4
-4
14
8.4
-4
-4
4
-4
-4
-4
1.9
8
-4
0.5
51.4
142.3
257.4
-6.6
86
64
39
-2
-5.4
-3.2
-2.2
-3.4
-3.9
-3.1
-2.8
-2.5
-4.5
-3.4
-3.4
-5
-14
-6
-13
-3.2
-3
-3.1
-3.2
-5.2
-8.7
-8
-7.6
-2.9
-2.8
-3.7
-4.6
-1
-2
-0.4
2
-4
26
2.8
26
5.9
15
12
16
-4
25
110
42
-0.3
3.8
19.2
15.6
-5.7
330
330
220
-1.9
20
5.6
8.8
-6.4
-5.3
-4
-7.8
2.6
-5.6
7.5
5.9
-6.5
-12
-8
-14
-2.9
3.9
6.3
5.2
-6.7
-7.9
-12
-9.5
-5.2
-3.6
-3.8
-3.2
-1
-1.6
-1.6
-0.9
-4
-15
22
17
-4
12
7.4
15
-4
6.2
61
7.6
0.6
2.1
8.5
24.5
-4.3
420
400
260
-1.6
26
11
12
-5.4
11
8.1
11
-2
15
15
13
-6.5
19
19
21
-2.6
8.9
11.3
11.7
-5.1
-6
-9.2
-7.1
-5.1
-3.6
-3.8
-3.2
-1.7
-3.1
2.4
-4.5
-4
100
81
71
6.6
26
20
27
-4
9.7
130
16
0.5
3.8
16.8
31.5
-5.5
670
620
-370
-1.9
52
20
26
-5.7
15
6.9
13
3.2
17
15
15
-6.4
16
19
21
-2.7
9.1
13.3
11.8
-6.2
-7.3
-11
9.5
-5
-3.5
-3.7
4.7
-1.2
-2.1
-2.4
-1.5
-4
34
38
36
5.9
20
15
22
-4
6.8
110
11
-0.4
4.1
15.5
70.1
32
3100
2900
1900
-1.6
210
95
65
-4.4
-30
-13
-36
-2.3
-44
-32
-21
-8.5
-24
-25
-23
-2.3
-13
-24
-19
-4.7
-6.1
-5.3
-16
-2.8
-10
-4.9
-21
-2.8
-4
4.2
7
-4
110
110
110
7.3
44
32
31
-4
29
150
32
-1.1
127.5
358.1
638.3
-12
350
330
-220
-1.7
32
16
15
-4.2
4.8
-3.5
6.8
-2.9
15
6.1
-6
-11
-11
-15
-21
-3.2
-3.1
4.2
-3.4
-6.7
-8.4
-7.2
-11
-3.3
-5.6
-4.4
-4.9
-0.9
1.2
-1.5
2
-4
-30
11
-8
-4
-4
-4
-4
-4
4.2
19
5.7
-1.6
65.1
189.2
219.6
31
2400
2200
1700
-2
190
70
110
-5.4
83
45
97
-3.7
110
86
78
-3.7
84
92
92
3.1
44
66.3
70.6
-7
-11
-11
-16
-4.1
13
9.1
18
-2.2
3.6
4.3
4.6
-4
710
960
840
30
140
130
150
-4
37
320
29
4.1
38.2
199.2
294.6
-21
870
990
-670
6.3
660
50
42
23
33
25
40
18
88
26
-36
16
-23
-23
38
6.4
14.3
18.8
19.2
-17
-12
-15
-18
5
7.5
5.8
8.7
-1.2
-2.2
2.9
-4.2
-20
65
47
31
-15
-15
16
-15
-15
-15
21
-15
2.7
377.9
1013.6
827.2
65
4800
4800
3700
4.7
430
150
200
18
150
76
170
59
560
160
260
29
110
110
140
10.8
59
89.1
127
57
-11
-13
-24
8.9
20
-14
23
-3.4
8.8
10.4
8.5
-20
980
1200
1100
23
210
200
190
-15
45
130
24
11.1
96.9
502.8
481.8
-9.5
25000
20000
11000
-2
600
270
150
-5.5
170
80
110
3.8
120
180
150
-7.7
310
72
63
6.6
79.7
162
91.4
-10
-11
-14
17
-5
37
8.5
8.9
-0.5
76.7
83.7
40
-2
400
520
550
53
82
160
110
-2
1500
810
2000
1.2
136.2
520.9
927
37
25000
19000
11000
2.6
570
290
160
-4.3
65
58
110
-2.9
100
79
54
-13
100
21
-31
5
58.3
103
71.6
-7.7
6.3
-8.5
14
-4.2
25
-4.8
14
-1
19.2
13.3
7.1
-4
460
430
430
25
81
53
110
10
810
3800
1200
-0.3
149.3
513
942.2
14
15000
11000
6700
-1.7
390
230
120
4
70
26
89
2.4
97
81
52
-4.3
31
52
33
-2.8
39.9
78.4
52.3
11
-7
-8.3
19
-2.8
21
-3.6
40
-1.9
6
11.1
21
-4
420
250
278
26
130
88
120
-4
300
1400
480
2.7
223.6
709.9
1334.5
41
5600
5200
3200
-1.6
310
150
120
-4.4
13
7.4
26
-2.6
35
6.1
9.1
-9.7
-24
-25
-23
-2.7
3.1
13.9
4.6
-5.7
-7.1
-6.1
-18
-3.1
-10
-4.9
-21
-2.8
1.2
4.2
13.3
-4
110
194
140
15
56
47
44
-4
48
210
46
-1.4
340.1
913.4
1305.9
-8.2
5500
4100
2600
-2
74
49
40
-8.9
280
200
290
2.7
160
170
190
-11
470
490
450
-68
263
221
288
-6.3
-8.9
-16
-13
-5.5
-5.5
-4.6
-4.5
-0.8
5.6
2.9
-0.8
-2
260
280
310
250
310
240
380
23
3200
14000
3700
4.4
80.8
74.9
215.6
-13
6500
5000
3500
-1.9
120
41
55
11
140
95
150
-2
170
110
190
-11
210
230
150
-18
112
128
169
-4.2
-4
-6.6
-8.5
-6.8
-6.6
-6.8
-4
-0.8
-0.5
3.9
-0.5
-4
740
720
870
160
290
240
330
-4
830
5200
1200
3.1
36
70.1
184.1
76
7200
6700
4900
-1.8
390
180
220
-5.8
250
170
240
5.8
220
270
310
-6.5
500
560
480
-9.2
256
407
729
-5.9
-7
-11
9.1
-5.1
13
5.1
21
-1.7
-3.1
-0.5
-4.5
-4
1800
1900
1900
180
510
390
480
44
260
2200
610
5.5
51.6
201.2
425.9
31
5000
4600
3500
-2
350
140
220
-5.4
160
85
180
-3.7
220
170
160
-3.7
160
170
180
3.1
79.7
126
139
-7
-11
-11
-17
-4.1
22
17
31
-2.2
3.6
10.3
9.4
-4
1700
1800
1600
57
270
290
300
22
71
700
63
5.6
64.6
327
494.3
Table 9.2 Stack Testing Data Congener Concentrations [pg/Rm^3 @ 11% Oxygen]
Facility
OCDD
TCDF
PCDF4
PCDD1
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.0001
0.0001
Sample Specifics
ITEQ
WHO98
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample
Blank
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
Volume
[Rm^3]
PCDF
HXCDF
HPCDF
TCDD
PCDD
HXCDD
HPCDD
Oxygen
[%]
5.061
5.085
5.093
10.6
10.7
10.7
5.047
5.388
5.445
11.07
11.17
10.76
5.792
5.82
5.792
11.4
11.6
11.7
5.154
5.145
5.175
10.9
11.3
10.9
4.825
4.866
4.794
10.9
10.9
10.6
5.461
5.458
5.453
12.1
11.7
11.9
3.75
4.23
3.89
8.05
7.8
7.98
3.538
3.445
3.663
13.54
11.37
11.49
3.667
4.438
4.243
10.48
10.59
10.85
4.484
4.458
4.476
10.8
10.6
9.9
5.893
5.51
5.917
12.4
10.9
12.6
3.2492
3.1964
3.116
14
14.3
14.1
4.075
3.894
4.043
13.9
13.9
14.8
-1.8
607.7
419.9
285.9
-0.4
16.4
9.4
5.0
-1.0
-5.6
-3.8
-4.3
0.7
-5.0
-5.8
-5.0
-1.6
7.4
-4.7
-4.4
-0.6
-2.7
-4.7
-3.0
-1.9
-2.3
-2.5
3.3
-1.6
6.5
2.6
2.6
-0.1
3.4
2.1
-0.9
-0.4
9.8
9.5
4.4
-0.4
0.5
0.8
0.5
-0.9
11.9
103.2
36.0
0.3
10.6
38.7
67.6
-1.6
57.0
42.0
22.9
-0.4
-1.3
-0.6
-0.4
-1.6
-1.3
-1.4
-2.0
0.5
-0.7
-0.7
-0.8
-2.2
-2.1
-2.0
-2.8
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-1.2
-1.8
-2.9
-2.6
-1.8
-2.1
-1.4
-1.3
-0.2
-0.6
-0.5
-0.2
-0.4
-1.1
-0.4
-0.4
-0.4
0.5
-0.4
0.5
-0.9
16.3
89.2
20.1
-0.1
0.4
0.9
3.7
-1.5
284.9
229.0
122.0
-0.4
8.6
3.6
1.6
-0.8
-0.5
-0.5
-0.6
-0.4
-1.9
-1.6
-1.4
-2.8
2.5
-2.4
-6.6
-0.6
-1.1
2.0
-1.4
-1.3
-1.5
-1.2
-1.5
-1.5
-1.9
-1.6
-1.5
-0.3
0.8
0.7
0.6
-0.8
3.5
3.4
4.0
-0.8
1.2
0.9
1.1
-1.8
19.9
98.5
31.8
-0.1
3.1
11.1
17.0
1.9
303.9
229.0
156.3
0.5
12.2
6.4
3.6
-0.8
2.9
1.8
2.8
-0.6
2.7
2.6
2.5
-2.6
-3.3
-2.2
-6.0
1.0
2.2
3.1
2.5
-1.4
1.3
-1.5
2.8
-1.2
2.4
-1.3
2.0
-0.2
0.7
-2.3
-2.0
-0.8
6.6
5.6
5.6
1.2
2.2
2.0
3.6
-1.8
23.8
126.7
74.8
-0.1
5.6
21.6
37.3
-1.0
104.5
80.2
49.5
-0.4
3.8
1.3
0.9
-0.7
-0.9
0.9
1.2
-0.4
-1.1
1.2
-1.0
-2.2
-2.7
-2.0
-2.2
-0.5
0.9
1.1
-0.9
-0.8
-0.8
-1.2
-1.7
-2.2
-2.5
-2.1
-1.1
-0.2
-0.1
-0.1
-0.1
-0.8
4.8
4.1
2.4
1.7
2.4
1.7
4.0
-1.8
9.7
107.9
18.2
0.7
1.4
2.6
7.8
-2.7
569.7
439.0
247.7
-0.3
18.6
11.5
5.4
-0.5
2.7
1.5
3.5
0.5
3.8
4.0
3.3
-0.8
-4.3
3.7
3.0
-0.5
2.2
3.8
2.9
0.9
-1.4
-1.1
1.7
-0.9
2.8
-1.1
3.4
-0.1
-0.8
1.0
1.0
-0.8
10.9
4.5
12.9
-0.8
2.6
1.7
2.2
-1.8
13.2
79.8
29.0
0.3
14.5
54.0
120.9
-1.0
284.9
210.0
129.6
-0.3
9.8
4.7
2.3
-0.5
1.5
-0.6
1.6
-0.3
3.1
2.2
1.8
-0.8
-2.3
-1.7
-2.2
-0.5
1.4
2.3
1.8
-1.0
-1.1
-0.9
-1.4
-0.9
1.5
-1.1
2.1
-0.2
0.8
0.5
1.0
-0.8
6.8
5.2
5.4
-0.8
1.8
1.3
2.2
-1.8
12.4
61.0
21.0
-0.1
6.5
27.8
44.5
2.9
265.9
210.0
141.0
-0.4
10.2
6.4
4.1
-0.6
-2.0
1.3
2.2
-0.4
4.4
2.8
-2.1
-0.9
-2.5
-1.1
-2.4
-0.6
0.9
1.5
1.3
1.4
-1.6
-1.6
2.4
-1.0
1.7
-1.2
2.0
-0.4
0.8
-0.7
0.8
-0.8
3.1
1.8
-0.8
-0.8
0.8
-0.7
-0.8
-1.8
0.8
3.8
-1.9
0.2
17.8
51.7
103.3
-1.3
16.3
12.2
7.4
-0.4
-1.1
-0.6
-0.4
-0.6
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.5
-0.9
-0.7
-0.7
-1.0
-2.9
-1.2
-2.6
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-1.0
-1.8
-1.4
-1.5
-0.9
-1.1
-1.1
-1.3
-0.2
-0.5
-0.1
0.5
-0.8
5.7
0.6
5.2
1.1
3.0
2.2
3.2
-1.8
11.0
51.6
19.6
-0.1
1.3
7.0
6.3
-1.1
62.7
63.0
41.9
-0.4
4.0
1.1
1.6
-1.2
-1.0
-0.7
-1.4
0.5
-1.1
1.5
1.1
-1.3
-2.5
-1.6
-2.8
-0.6
0.8
1.2
1.0
-1.3
-1.6
-2.1
-1.9
-1.7
-1.4
-1.1
-0.9
-0.2
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.8
-3.3
4.7
3.4
-0.8
2.4
1.3
3.0
-1.8
2.7
28.6
3.6
0.2
0.7
3.1
9.8
-0.8
79.8
76.3
49.5
-0.3
5.2
2.1
2.2
-1.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
-0.4
2.9
3.0
2.5
-1.3
3.9
3.9
4.2
-0.5
1.8
2.2
2.4
-1.0
-1.2
-1.6
-1.4
-1.6
-1.4
-1.1
-0.9
-0.4
-0.8
0.5
-1.0
-0.8
21.9
17.5
14.3
1.3
5.1
3.6
5.4
-1.8
4.3
61.0
7.5
0.2
1.3
6.1
12.6
-1.0
127.2
118.3
-70.5
-0.4
10.4
3.8
4.7
-1.0
2.7
1.3
2.4
0.6
3.3
3.0
2.9
-1.3
3.3
3.9
4.2
-0.5
1.9
2.6
2.4
-1.2
-1.5
-2.0
1.9
-1.6
-1.3
-1.1
1.3
-0.3
-0.5
-0.5
-0.3
-0.8
7.4
8.2
7.2
1.1
4.0
2.7
4.4
-1.8
3.0
51.6
5.1
-0.1
1.4
5.6
28.1
6.1
588.7
553.5
362.1
-0.3
41.9
17.9
11.7
-0.8
-5.4
-2.4
-6.7
-0.4
-8.5
-6.4
-4.0
-1.7
-4.9
-5.1
-4.6
-0.5
-2.7
-4.7
-3.8
-0.9
-1.3
-0.9
-3.2
-0.9
-3.8
-1.5
-6.0
-0.7
-1.0
0.9
1.6
-0.8
24.0
23.7
22.1
1.4
8.7
5.7
6.2
-1.8
12.8
70.4
15.0
-0.4
44.3
130.1
256.2
-2.3
66.5
63.0
-41.9
-0.3
6.4
3.0
2.7
-0.8
0.9
-0.6
1.3
-0.6
2.9
1.2
-1.1
-2.2
-2.3
-3.1
-4.2
-0.6
-0.6
0.8
-0.7
-1.3
-1.7
-1.3
-2.2
-1.1
-2.1
-1.3
-1.4
-0.2
0.3
-0.3
0.5
-0.8
-6.6
2.4
-1.6
-0.8
-0.8
-0.7
-0.8
-1.8
1.9
8.9
2.7
-0.6
22.6
68.7
88.2
5.9
455.8
419.9
324.0
-0.4
37.9
13.2
19.7
-1.0
14.9
8.2
18.0
-0.7
21.1
17.2
14.9
-0.8
17.2
18.7
18.4
0.6
9.1
13.1
14.2
-1.4
-2.3
-2.0
-3.2
-1.3
4.9
2.7
5.2
-0.5
0.9
0.9
1.1
-0.8
155.2
207.0
168.9
5.8
27.7
23.4
30.2
-1.8
16.3
150.2
13.5
1.5
13.3
72.3
118.3
-4.0
165.2
189.0
-127.7
1.2
131.7
9.4
7.5
4.2
5.9
4.6
7.4
3.5
16.9
5.2
-6.9
3.2
-4.7
-4.7
7.6
1.3
2.9
3.7
3.9
-3.3
-2.5
-2.7
-3.5
1.6
2.9
1.7
2.5
-0.3
-0.6
0.6
-1.0
-4.2
14.2
10.1
6.2
-2.9
-3.0
2.9
-3.0
-6.9
-6.6
9.9
-7.0
1.0
131.2
368.1
332.1
12.4
911.6
916.2
705.1
0.9
85.8
28.3
35.9
3.3
27.0
13.9
31.6
11.5
107.6
32.1
49.7
5.9
22.6
22.4
28.1
2.2
12.2
17.6
25.6
11.0
-2.3
-2.3
-4.7
2.8
7.6
-4.2
6.6
-0.8
2.3
2.3
2.0
-4.2
214.2
258.7
221.2
4.4
41.5
35.9
38.3
-6.9
19.9
61.0
11.2
4.1
33.6
182.6
193.4
-1.8
4747.9
3817.5
2096.3
-0.4
119.7
51.0
26.9
-1.0
30.6
14.6
20.4
0.7
23.1
36.1
28.7
-1.6
63.6
14.6
12.6
1.3
16.4
31.9
18.4
-1.9
-2.3
-2.5
3.3
-1.6
14.1
2.6
2.6
-0.1
19.9
18.1
9.3
-0.4
87.4
112.1
110.6
10.2
16.2
28.7
22.2
-0.9
662.4
380.1
934.5
0.4
47.3
189.2
372.1
7.0
4747.9
3626.6
2096.3
0.5
113.7
54.8
28.7
-0.8
11.7
10.6
20.4
-0.6
19.2
15.8
10.3
-2.6
20.5
4.3
-6.2
1.0
12.0
20.3
14.4
-1.5
1.3
-1.5
2.8
-1.3
9.5
-1.4
4.0
-0.2
5.0
2.9
1.6
-0.8
100.6
92.7
86.5
4.8
16.0
9.5
22.2
4.6
357.7
1783.3
560.7
-0.1
51.8
186.3
378.2
2.7
2848.7
2099.6
1276.8
-0.3
77.8
43.4
21.5
0.7
12.6
4.8
16.5
0.5
18.6
16.2
9.9
-0.9
6.4
10.6
6.6
-0.6
8.2
15.5
10.6
2.1
-1.4
-1.5
3.7
-0.9
8.0
-1.1
11.5
-0.4
1.6
2.4
4.9
-0.8
91.8
53.9
55.9
5.0
25.7
15.8
24.2
-1.8
132.5
657.0
224.3
1.0
77.6
257.8
535.7
7.8
1063.5
992.5
609.8
-0.3
61.9
28.3
21.5
-0.8
2.3
1.4
4.8
-0.5
6.7
1.2
1.7
-2.0
-4.9
-5.1
-4.6
-0.5
0.6
2.7
0.9
-1.1
-1.5
-1.1
-3.5
-1.0
-3.8
-1.5
-6.0
-0.7
0.3
0.9
3.1
-0.8
24.0
41.8
28.2
2.9
11.1
8.4
8.9
-1.8
21.2
98.5
21.5
-0.5
118.0
331.7
524.2
-1.6
1044.5
782.6
495.5
-0.4
14.8
9.3
7.2
-1.6
50.4
36.6
53.9
0.5
30.7
34.1
36.3
-2.2
96.4
99.7
90.2
-13.7
54.2
43.6
58.1
-1.2
-1.8
-2.9
-2.6
-1.8
-2.1
-1.4
-1.3
-0.2
1.5
0.6
-0.2
-0.4
56.8
60.4
62.3
48.0
61.3
43.1
76.6
10.6
1413.1
6569.9
1728.7
1.6
28.0
27.2
86.5
-2.5
1234.5
954.4
667.0
-0.4
23.9
7.7
9.9
2.0
25.2
17.4
27.9
-0.4
32.7
22.0
36.3
-2.2
43.1
46.8
30.1
-3.6
23.1
25.2
34.1
-0.8
-0.8
-1.2
-1.7
-2.2
-2.5
-2.1
-1.1
-0.2
-0.1
0.8
-0.1
-0.8
161.8
155.2
174.9
30.7
57.3
43.1
66.5
-1.8
366.5
2440.2
560.7
1.1
12.5
25.5
73.9
14.5
1367.4
1278.8
933.8
-0.3
77.8
34.0
39.4
-1.1
45.0
31.1
44.6
1.1
42.3
54.1
59.3
-1.3
102.6
113.9
96.2
-1.9
52.7
80.2
147.1
-1.1
-1.4
-2.0
1.8
-1.6
4.9
1.5
6.0
-0.4
-0.8
-0.1
-1.0
-0.8
393.5
409.6
382.0
34.6
100.8
70.1
96.8
20.2
114.8
1032.4
285.0
2.0
17.9
73.1
171.0
5.9
949.6
878.0
667.0
-0.4
69.8
26.4
39.4
-1.0
28.8
15.5
33.4
-0.7
42.3
34.1
30.6
-0.8
32.8
34.6
36.1
0.6
16.4
24.8
28.0
-1.4
-2.3
-2.0
-3.3
-1.3
8.4
5.1
8.9
-0.5
0.9
2.2
2.2
-0.8
371.6
388.1
321.7
10.9
53.4
52.1
60.5
10.1
31.4
328.5
29.4
2.1
22.4
118.8
198.4
Table 9.3
LOQ Values Derived from Test Data and I-TEF [pg/Rm^3 @ 11% Oxygen Basis]
Facility
Sample Specifics
ITEQ
WHO98
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample
Blank
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
Volume
[Rm^3]

PCDF4
PCDD1
OCDD
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.0001
0.0001
Oxygen
[%]
5.061
5.085
5.093
10.6
10.7
10.7
5.047
5.388
5.445
11.07
11.17
10.76
5.792
5.82
5.792
11.4
11.6
11.7
5.154
5.145
5.175
10.9
11.3
10.9
4.825
4.866
4.794
10.9
10.9
10.6
5.461
5.458
5.453
12.1
11.7
11.9
3.75
4.23
3.89
8.05
7.8
7.98
3.538
3.445
3.663
13.54
11.37
11.49
3.667
4.438
4.243
10.48
10.59
10.85
4.484
4.458
4.476
10.8
10.6
9.9
5.893
5.51
5.917
12.4
10.9
12.6
3.2492
3.1964
3.116
14
14.3
14.1
4.075
3.894
4.043
13.9
13.9
14.8
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
2.46
2.53
2.54
2.55
2.65
2.52
2.69
2.72
3.08
2.90
2.91
2.90
2.59
2.58
2.57
2.59
2.37
2.41
2.43
2.40
3.00
2.73
2.73
2.73
1.51
1.88
2.12
1.95
2.00
1.77
1.72
1.83
1.99
1.83
2.22
2.12
2.12
2.24
2.23
2.24
3.20
2.95
2.76
2.96
2.33
1.62
1.60
1.56
2.96
2.04
1.95
2.02
49.14
50.61
50.85
50.93
52.93
50.47
53.88
54.45
61.54
57.92
58.20
57.92
51.75
51.54
51.45
51.75
47.33
48.25
48.66
47.94
60.03
54.61
54.58
54.53
30.23
37.50
42.30
38.90
40.07
35.38
34.45
36.63
39.72
36.67
44.38
42.43
42.31
44.84
44.58
44.76
63.98
58.93
55.10
59.17
46.63
32.49
31.96
31.16
59.16
40.75
38.94
40.43
4.91
5.06
5.09
5.09
5.29
5.05
5.39
5.45
6.15
5.79
5.82
5.79
5.18
5.15
5.15
5.18
4.73
4.83
4.87
4.79
6.00
5.46
5.46
5.45
3.02
3.75
4.23
3.89
4.01
3.54
3.45
3.66
3.97
3.67
4.44
4.24
4.23
4.48
4.46
4.48
6.40
5.89
5.51
5.92
4.66
3.25
3.20
3.12
5.92
4.08
3.89
4.04
4.91
5.06
5.09
5.09
5.29
5.05
5.39
5.45
6.15
5.79
5.82
5.79
5.18
5.15
5.15
5.18
4.73
4.83
4.87
4.79
6.00
5.46
5.46
5.45
3.02
3.75
4.23
3.89
4.01
3.54
3.45
3.66
3.97
3.67
4.44
4.24
4.23
4.48
4.46
4.48
6.40
5.89
5.51
5.92
4.66
3.25
3.20
3.12
5.92
4.08
3.89
4.04
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
2457.10
2530.50
2542.50
2546.50
2646.67
2523.50
2694.00
2722.50
3076.78
2896.00
2910.00
2896.00
2587.71
2577.00
2572.50
2587.50
2366.36
2412.50
2433.00
2397.00
3001.53
2730.50
2729.00
2726.50
1511.62
1875.00
2115.00
1945.00
2003.71
1769.00
1722.50
1831.50
1985.79
1833.50
2219.00
2121.50
2115.26
2242.00
2229.00
2238.00
3199.03
2946.50
2755.00
2958.50
2331.52
1624.60
1598.20
1558.00
2958.18
2037.50
1947.00
2021.50
2457.10
2530.50
2542.50
2546.50
2646.67
2523.50
2694.00
2722.50
3076.78
2896.00
2910.00
2896.00
2587.71
2577.00
2572.50
2587.50
2366.36
2412.50
2433.00
2397.00
3001.53
2730.50
2729.00
2726.50
1511.62
1875.00
2115.00
1945.00
2003.71
1769.00
1722.50
1831.50
1985.79
1833.50
2219.00
2121.50
2115.26
2242.00
2229.00
2238.00
3199.03
2946.50
2755.00
2958.50
2331.52
1624.60
1598.20
1558.00
2958.18
2037.50
1947.00
2021.50
Table 9.4
LOQ Values Derived from Test Data and WHO98-TEF [pg/Rm^3 @ 11% Oxygen Basis]
Facility
Sample Specifics
ITEQ
WHO98
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample
Blank
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
Volume
[Rm^3]

PCDF4
PCDD1
OCDD
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.1
1
0.05
0.5
1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.0001
0.0001
Oxygen
[%]
5.061
5.085
5.093
10.6
10.7
10.7
5.047
5.388
5.445
11.07
11.17
10.76
5.792
5.82
5.792
11.4
11.6
11.7
5.154
5.145
5.175
10.9
11.3
10.9
4.825
4.866
4.794
10.9
10.9
10.6
5.461
5.458
5.453
12.1
11.7
11.9
3.75
4.23
3.89
8.05
7.8
7.98
3.538
3.445
3.663
13.54
11.37
11.49
3.667
4.438
4.243
10.48
10.59
10.85
4.484
4.458
4.476
10.8
10.6
9.9
5.893
5.51
5.917
12.4
10.9
12.6
3.2492
3.1964
3.116
14
14.3
14.1
4.075
3.894
4.043
13.9
13.9
14.8
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
2.46
2.53
2.54
2.55
2.65
2.52
2.69
2.72
3.08
2.90
2.91
2.90
2.59
2.58
2.57
2.59
2.37
2.41
2.43
2.40
3.00
2.73
2.73
2.73
1.51
1.88
2.12
1.95
2.00
1.77
1.72
1.83
1.99
1.83
2.22
2.12
2.12
2.24
2.23
2.24
3.20
2.95
2.76
2.96
2.33
1.62
1.60
1.56
2.96
2.04
1.95
2.02
49.14
50.61
50.85
50.93
52.93
50.47
53.88
54.45
61.54
57.92
58.20
57.92
51.75
51.54
51.45
51.75
47.33
48.25
48.66
47.94
60.03
54.61
54.58
54.53
30.23
37.50
42.30
38.90
40.07
35.38
34.45
36.63
39.72
36.67
44.38
42.43
42.31
44.84
44.58
44.76
63.98
58.93
55.10
59.17
46.63
32.49
31.96
31.16
59.16
40.75
38.94
40.43
4.91
5.06
5.09
5.09
5.29
5.05
5.39
5.45
6.15
5.79
5.82
5.79
5.18
5.15
5.15
5.18
4.73
4.83
4.87
4.79
6.00
5.46
5.46
5.45
3.02
3.75
4.23
3.89
4.01
3.54
3.45
3.66
3.97
3.67
4.44
4.24
4.23
4.48
4.46
4.48
6.40
5.89
5.51
5.92
4.66
3.25
3.20
3.12
5.92
4.08
3.89
4.04
2.46
2.53
2.54
2.55
2.65
2.52
2.69
2.72
3.08
2.90
2.91
2.90
2.59
2.58
2.57
2.59
2.37
2.41
2.43
2.40
3.00
2.73
2.73
2.73
1.51
1.88
2.12
1.95
2.00
1.77
1.72
1.83
1.99
1.83
2.22
2.12
2.12
2.24
2.23
2.24
3.20
2.95
2.76
2.96
2.33
1.62
1.60
1.56
2.96
2.04
1.95
2.02
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
24.57
25.31
25.43
25.47
26.47
25.24
26.94
27.23
30.77
28.96
29.10
28.96
25.88
25.77
25.73
25.88
23.66
24.13
24.33
23.97
30.02
27.31
27.29
27.27
15.12
18.75
21.15
19.45
20.04
17.69
17.23
18.32
19.86
18.34
22.19
21.22
21.15
22.42
22.29
22.38
31.99
29.47
27.55
29.59
23.32
16.25
15.98
15.58
29.58
20.38
19.47
20.22
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
245.71
253.05
254.25
254.65
264.67
252.35
269.40
272.25
307.68
289.60
291.00
289.60
258.77
257.70
257.25
258.75
236.64
241.25
243.30
239.70
300.15
273.05
272.90
272.65
151.16
187.50
211.50
194.50
200.37
176.90
172.25
183.15
198.58
183.35
221.90
212.15
211.53
224.20
222.90
223.80
319.90
294.65
275.50
295.85
233.15
162.46
159.82
155.80
295.82
203.75
194.70
202.15
24571.03
25305.00
25425.00
25465.00
26466.67
25235.00
26940.00
27225.00
30767.79
28960.00
29100.00
28960.00
25877.13
25770.00
25725.00
25875.00
23663.61
24125.00
24330.00
23970.00
30015.33
27305.00
27290.00
27265.00
15116.16
18750.00
21150.00
19450.00
20037.15
17690.00
17225.00
18315.00
19857.89
18335.00
22190.00
21215.00
21152.58
22420.00
22290.00
22380.00
31990.30
29465.00
27550.00
29585.00
23315.23
16246.00
15982.00
15580.00
29581.79
20375.00
19470.00
20215.00
24571.03
25305.00
25425.00
25465.00
26466.67
25235.00
26940.00
27225.00
30767.79
28960.00
29100.00
28960.00
25877.13
25770.00
25725.00
25875.00
23663.61
24125.00
24330.00
23970.00
30015.33
27305.00
27290.00
27265.00
15116.16
18750.00
21150.00
19450.00
20037.15
17690.00
17225.00
18315.00
19857.89
18335.00
22190.00
21215.00
21152.58
22420.00
22290.00
22380.00
31990.30
29465.00
27550.00
29585.00
23315.23
16246.00
15982.00
15580.00
29581.79
20375.00
19470.00
20215.00
Table 9.5 Stack Testing Data Total Emission as Toxic Equivalency Various Methods [pg/Rm^3 @ 11% Oxygen]
Facility
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample Specifics
Alternative Calculation Regimes
Sample
Volume
Oxygen
ITEQ
WHO98
ITEQ
WHO98
ITEQ
[Rm^3]
[%]
<LOQ = O <LOQ = O LOQ Sub LOQ Sub
DL
Blank
0.00
0.00
41.77
41.77
4.49
T1OC
5.061
10.6
485.62
537.84
495.74
547.96
488.99
T2OC
5.085
10.7
371.44
411.52
381.61
421.69
374.40
T3OC
5.093
10.7
228.31
253.08
241.04
265.81
237.35
blankOC
0.00
0.00
44.99
44.99
1.11
T1OC
5.047
11.07
6.09
9.88
46.46
47.73
18.32
T2OC
5.388
11.17
3.21
3.21
46.31
46.31
8.98
T3OC
5.445
10.76
0.00
0.00
46.28
46.28
5.65
blankOC
0.00
0.00
52.31
52.31
3.11
T1OC
5.792
11.4
0.00
0.00
49.23
49.23
5.27
T2OC
5.82
11.6
0.00
0.00
49.47
49.47
4.01
T3OC
5.792
11.7
0.00
0.00
49.23
49.23
6.20
blankOC
0.00
0.00
43.99
43.99
1.45
T1OC
5.154
10.9
0.00
0.00
43.81
43.81
5.55
T2OC
5.145
11.3
0.00
0.00
43.73
43.73
5.29
T3OC
5.175
10.9
0.00
0.00
43.99
43.99
4.80
blankOC
0.00
0.00
40.23
40.23
5.77
T1OC
4.825
10.9
0.00
0.00
41.01
41.01
8.31
T2OC
4.866
10.9
0.00
0.00
41.36
41.36
6.76
T3OC
4.794
10.6
0.00
0.00
40.75
40.75
10.14
blankOC
0.00
0.00
51.03
51.03
1.84
T1OC
5.461
12.1
0.00
0.00
46.42
46.42
3.59
T2OC
5.458
11.7
0.00
0.00
46.39
46.39
4.87
T3OC
5.453
11.9
0.00
0.00
46.35
46.35
4.12
blankOC
0.00
0.00
25.70
25.70
3.42
T1OC
3.75
8.05
0.00
0.00
31.88
31.88
4.25
T2OC
4.23
7.8
0.00
0.00
35.96
35.96
5.62
T3OC
3.89
7.98
0.00
0.00
33.07
33.07
6.49
blankOC
0.00
0.00
34.06
34.06
4.57
T1OC
3.538
13.54
0.00
0.00
30.07
30.07
6.51
T2OC
3.445
11.37
0.00
0.00
29.28
29.28
4.25
T3OC
3.663
11.49
0.00
0.00
31.14
31.14
4.55
blankOC
0.00
0.00
33.76
33.76
0.63
T1OC
3.667
10.48
0.00
0.00
31.17
31.17
1.84
T2OC
4.438
10.59
0.00
0.00
37.72
37.72
2.33
T3OC
4.243
10.85
0.00
0.00
36.07
36.07
1.86
blank
0.00
0.00
35.96
35.96
1.98
Run1
4.484
10.8
5.68
8.09
39.31
41.72
15.92
Run2
4.458
10.6
2.80
6.90
38.47
40.33
13.25
Run3
4.476
9.9
2.82
5.23
38.62
38.80
12.15
blank
0.00
0.00
54.38
54.38
2.70
Run1
5.893
12.4
0.00
0.00
50.09
50.09
5.24
Run2
5.51
10.9
0.00
0.00
46.84
46.84
4.02
Run3
5.917
12.6
0.00
4.03
50.29
51.37
6.95
blank
0.00
0.00
39.64
39.64
4.29
Run1
3.2492
14
33.12
37.98
55.86
60.72
40.39
Run2
3.1964
14.3
255.10
309.07
264.69
318.66
257.84
Run3
3.116
14.1
78.73
87.84
92.75
101.86
80.86
blank
0.00
0.00
50.29
50.29
0.78
Run1
4.075
13.9
2.81
2.81
35.41
35.41
10.48
Run2
3.894
13.9
28.04
30.62
51.40
52.03
36.23
Run3
4.043
14.8
65.22
69.12
81.40
85.29
71.54
WHO98
DL
4.98
540.25
413.48
261.38
1.28
20.02
9.60
6.07
3.48
5.70
4.46
6.78
1.63
5.99
5.86
5.24
6.88
9.62
7.75
11.21
2.10
4.03
5.40
4.55
3.82
4.65
6.21
7.32
5.65
7.76
5.27
5.12
0.72
1.91
2.38
1.91
2.39
18.12
15.06
13.15
3.55
6.38
4.85
8.93
5.20
45.23
311.74
89.96
1.14
11.05
37.03
74.96
Table 9.6 Percentage Increase Produced by Using WHO98-TEF
Facility
Date
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
10232000
10232000
10242000
10252000
11192001
11192001
11202001
11212001
9232002
9232002
9242002
9252002
9232003
9232003
9242003
9252003
9202004
9202004
9212004
9222004
10112005
10112005
10122005
10132005
20021219
20021217
20021218
20021219
20040622
20040622
20040623
20040624
20050906
20050906
20050907
20050908
20031031
20031031
20031103
20031104
20050802
20050802
20050803
20050804
20060502
20060502
20060503
20060504
20021023
20021023
20021024
20021025
Sample
Blank
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blankOC
T1OC
T2OC
T3OC
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
blank
Run1
Run2
Run3
Impact of TEF Scheme [% Increase]

LOQ = 0
LOQ Sub
DL
0
11
11
11
10
11
11
10
11
10
10
0
16
62
3
9
0
0
7
0
8
0
12
0
8
0
11
0
9
0
12
0
8
0
11
0
9
0
19
0
16
0
15
0
11
0
15
0
12
0
11
0
10
0
11
0
10
0
10
0
13
0
24
0
19
0
24
0
12
0
15
0
3
0
2
0
3
0
21
42
6
14
146
5
14
86
0
8
0
32
0
22
0
21
2
28
0
21
15
9
12
21
20
21
12
10
11
0
47
0
0
5
9
1
2
6
5
5
159
9.2
AffectofApplyingDifferentTreatmentsforLowConcentrationData
AreviewofTable9.5showsthat,formostofthetestdata,thesubstitutionofzerofortheless
thandetectvalueseffectivelyreducesPCDD/Femissionstozero.Comparingthesevaluesto
thosedeterminedwiththeDLvaluessubstitutedshowsthatalltheteststhatwouldbereported
aszerousingthezerovaluefortheLOQsubstitutionwouldhavebeenlistedasbeingbelowthe
EnvironmentCanadaLOQandthuswouldnothavetobereportedaspartoftheNPRIreporting
function.Thiswouldclearlyaddressmuchoftheconfusionthatarisesinthemindsofthepublic
whentheyseevariationsinthereportedconcentrationsatthislevelandtrytoreadsome
significanceintothechanges.Giventheuncertaintyinanyofthedataatthisconcentrationlevel,
thereisnostatisticallysignificantdifferenceinthereportedvalues.Forthoseteststhatreturned
highconcentrations,thereislittledifferencebetweentheLOQzerosubstitutionandtheDL
substitutionvalues.TheminordifferenceresultsfromhighLOQvaluesforsomeofthehigher
chlorinatedspeciesduetotheirlowerTEFvalues.HPCDF149andOCDDandOCDFarethe
congenersaffectedbythisswitchinthedataforfacility1in2000.
TheLOQsubstitutionresultsinanincreaseintheTEQvaluesunderbothTEFschemeswhen
comparedtotheexistingreportingprocedure.Singledigitconcentrationvaluesnowarereported
intherangeof50pgwiththeLOQsubstitution,significantlyraisingtheconcentrationsreported.
Twoobservationsonthisapparentflawintheapproach.BecausetheLOQsubstitutionhasthe
sameimpactontheBlankTraindataasitdoesontheactualsampledconcentrations,theBlank
Trainvaluesaresimilartothetrainvaluesanditmaybenecessarytolookatcorrectingthe
samplingresultsforthebackgroundthatmightbepresentinallthesamples.Secondly,
increasingthesamplingtimewouldreducetheLOQvaluesooperatorswouldhaveawayof
reducingthereportedconcentrations.
Clearly,theLOQsubstitutionhasbothadvantagesanddisadvantagesandadoptingarevised
protocolwouldrequiresomeexplanationofwhythechangesarerequired.
9.3
AffectofApplyingWHO98TEF
Table9.6showsthatforamajorityofteststhereislittledifferenceinthereportedvalueswhenthe
zerosubstitutionisusedforlowconcentrationvalues.Theblankcellsarecreatedbecauseboth
valueswerezeroforthesetests.TherangeofchangesintheLOQ=0columnvaryoveralarge
range.Thefirstseriesoftestsforfacility1showan11%increase,butindividualincreasesinthis
columnareaslargeas146%.ThisoccursbecauseofthechangesintheTEFfactorforPCDD1.
Facility4showsanaverageincreaseof16%,facility5increasedby5%.
TheaffectofthechangeinTEFprotocolswhentheLOQsubstitutionisusedissimilartothatseen
intheLOQ=0column.OnetrendthatisnotevidentintheLOQSubcolumnistherathersharp
changesintroducedbythechangeinTEFfactorsintheLOQ=0column.Withtheexceptionofone
test,allthepercentageincreasesarelessthan11%.
160
TheimpactoftheTEFchangeonthedataproducedwiththeDLsubstitutionsshowsthatthe
changesrangefrom228%excludingtheblanktraindata.Theaveragesforthevarioustestsare
generallyintherangeof10%howeveronchangeinthesecondseriesatfacility3was24%and
severaltestserieschangedby1418%.Theseresultsseemtoconfirm,thatiftheDLsubstitution
isusedtheimpactofthechangeinTEFfactorswillbelessthan15%.
Ofcourse,ifthereisadesiretochangetheTEFfactorapproach,theEnvironmentCanadaLOQ
willneedtobechangedtoagreewiththenewapproach,orconversely,theEN1948approach
couldbeadopted.Thelattermighthavetheeffectofdrivingademandforlongersampling
periodsandthuslowersubstitutionvalues.
10.0 FINDINGSandCONCLUSIONS
TheCanadaWideStandardforDioxinsandFuransfocusseduponanthropogenicsourcesof
PCDD/FemissionstotheCanadianenvironmentandsetstandardssothecountrycouldmove
towardsthetargetofvirtualeliminationofthesesubstances.Inthelate1990s,testingdatafroma
limitednumberofwasteincineratorssuggestedthatthesectorcouldbecontributingasignificant
portionofthetotalPCDD/FreleasedinCanada.Thus,theincineratorsectorwastargetedasone
ofsixprioritysectorsundertheStandard.IncludedinthatStandardwasarequirementthat
progresstowardsthegoalofreducingPCDD/Fbeevaluatedonaperiodicbasis.Thisreport
formspartofthatprogressreviewandaddresses:
thenationalinventoryofincineratorsourcesandtheiremissions;
theCWSPCDD/Fstandardwithrespecttoregulationsinotherjurisdictions;and,
whetheralternativewaysofexpressingemissioncriteriaarerequiredandthe
potentialeffectsuchchangesmighthaveonoperatingsources.
Inthecourseofpreparinginformationtocompletethereview,itwasnecessarytodocument:
theincinerationandairpollutioncontrolequipmentemployedbytheoperators;
thecontributionofwastestreamsotherthanairemissionsonPCDD/Femissions;
themethodsthatareusedtojudgeperformanceofsourcesinotherjurisdictions
andtheirpotentiallimitations;and,
theimplicationsofalternativethermalprocessesforwastedestruction.
Furthermore,itwasnecessarytocollectinformationconcerningoperatingincineratorsto
assembleanuptodateinventoryofincineratorsources.Itwasfoundthat,ofthe188incinerators
operatingin2000,80hadbeenremovedfromservice.Thisincludes67hospitalincineratorsthat
wereshutdown,themajorityinOntariowheretheywerereplacedbyonenew,stateoftheart
facility.TwoMSWincineratorswereshutdown,becausethelocalgovernmentinbothcases
decidedtheunitsweretoooldtorefurbishtomeetthenewCWSstandard.Oneoftheseunits
accountedforasignificantportionoftheestimatedemissionsfromthatsector.Asewagesludge
incineratorwasshutdowninTorontoastheCitymovedtowardsa100%beneficialuseprogram.
Manyincineratorslocatedatfederalestablishmentshaveceasedoperation,andinformation
suggeststhatothersinthiscategoryhavehadtheirthroughputseverelycurtailed.However,this
studyidentifiedadditionalincineratorsoperatingatfederalestablishments.Itappearsthatthe
netreductioninthenumberofincineratorsoperatedbyfederalentitiesis32.
Duringthecourseofthestudy,itwasidentifiedthat22newincineratorshadbeeninstalledat
remoteminingandexplorationcampstoaddresstheneedforsafewastedisposalintheseareas.
MostofthesearelocatedinnorthernCanadawherelandfillingisnotapracticaloptionforwaste
management.Theseunits,someservicingrelativelylargecamps,disposeofconsiderable
amountsofwasteonadailybasis.Anothergroupofincineratorswereidentifiedasbeing
installedtoservicevariousindustrialandcommercialinterestsinAlberta,butitwasnot
ascertainedwhetherthistrendhasoccurredinotherprovinces.Mostofthesenewunitsarebatch
162
typeincineratorsdesignedwithaprimaryandsecondarychamberthelatterbeingequippedwith
atemperaturecontrolledsecondaryburner.NoneareequippedwithHRSGsandfewhavebeen
installedwithAPCequipment.RegardlessofthelackofAPCequipmentontheseunits,limited
testdatasuggeststhattheiremissionswouldmeettheCWSstandard.Goodcombustioncontrol
intheseunitsandanafterburnerensureminimalquantitiesofproductsofincompletecombustion
arereleased.Highstacktemperatures,wellinexcessofthedenovosynthesiswindow,limitthe
possibilityofthisreactionincreasingemissions.
Clearly,withthenumberofolderunitsintheincineratorpopulationbeingreduced,andcontrol
measuresbeingintroducedonothersystems,mostprovinceshaveexperiencedareductionin
PCDD/Femissionsfromincinerators.Theadditionofnewlyidentifiedfacilitiesinsome
provinceshasraisedtheirtotalemissions.InManitoba,whereitappearsthatmostofthehospital
incineratorpopulationisstilloperating,therehasbeenlesschangethanintheotherprovinces.
Commercialwasteincinerators,thoseburningMSWandmedicalwaste,havebeenupgradedto
meettheCWS.MostofthisoccurredshortlyaftertheStandardwasadopted,andmonitoring
dataconsistentlyshowsmostofthesefacilitiestoberecordingemissionconcentrationsthatare
belowthe32pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2levelofquantificationstandarddefinedbyEnvironment
Canadaassatisfactorilyprovingvirtualeliminationforthatsource.Largecommercialhazardous
wasteincineratorsdidnotmeettheCWSstandardasearlyastheMSWincinerators.Threeofthe
6majorhazardouswasteincineratorslistedinaSeptember2004reporthadtestdatabelowthe
CWStarget.Furtherdataisyettobeevaluated.
ThisreviewhasshownthatthereisuncertaintyinthereportedPCDD/Fvaluesbuteven
assumingtheworstcase,commercialMSWandmedicalwasteincineratorsarebelowtheCWS
standard.Ifthereporteddatawereassumedtobesubjecttoapositivebias,thehazardouswaste
incineratorperformancemightbesatisfactorytomeettheCWS.
ThesamplingandanalysismethodsusedinCanadaarecomparabletothoseusedinEurope.The
lattermethodswererecentlyupdatedbytheEuropeanNormalisationCommissionandcanbe
assumedtoreflectthebestavailabletechniquesforensuringrepresentativeemission
concentrationsarereported.Themethodsprovideanalternativewayofdeterminingthelevelof
quantificationinasamplebaseduponreviewingthecongenerdataprovidedbytheanalytical
laboratory.Withthisapproachthecontributionofspecificcongenersisincludedoromitted
dependinguponthequantitydeterminedintheanalysisandthecalculationoftheITEQvalues
isdeterminedontwodifferentdistributions.Thisclearlyshowsthepotentialimpactofusing
detectionlimit/quantificationlimitvaluesintheequivalencycalculationandovercomessomeof
theinconsistencieswiththewaytheresultsarepresented.
Similarregulatorystandardsareappliedtoincineratorsinmostjurisdictions.Thesestandards
areappliedregardlessofthewastetheincineratorisburning,orthesizeoftheincinerator,with
theexceptionofsomelowvolumecutoffpointsforapplicationoftheregulations.Exceptionsto
thisfindingarefoundintheUnitedStatesofAmericawheredifferenttypesofincineratorsare
163
subjecttodifferentstandards,andinJapanwhereaslidingscaleofallowableemissionsbased
uponsizeisapplied.IntheUnitedStates,thestandardsweresetonthebasisoftheMACT
protocolwherethebest12%oftheexistingpopulationwereusedtosetthestandard.InJapan,
thereappearstobearecognitionofthecosteffectivenessofaddingmoresophisticatedcontrolsto
largerfacilitiesastheallowableconcentrationisreducedasthesizeincreases.
CanadasCanadawideStandardsforPCDD/Farethemoststringentinanynationallegislation.
Todate,itdoesnotappearthatanycountryhasmovedtowardsadoptionoftheWHO98TEF
factorsintheirnationallegislation;however,giventheuncertaintyinPCDD/Fmeasurements,
andthelimitedimpactthattherevisedTEFswouldhaveonthetotalWHO98TEQvalueformost
operatingfacilities,itsimplementationshouldhavelittlerepercussiononoperatingfacilities.
LargefacilitiesinCanadaarerequiredtoroutinelymonitorthestackemissionsofPCDD/F
accordingtotheCWS.Provinceshavetheoptiontoallowtestingfrequencytobechangedaftera
considerableperiodofreportedconcentrationsbelowthe32pgITEQ/Rm3LOQleveldefinedby
EnvironmentCanada.TheCWSrequiresthatthisvaluebedeterminedusingdetectionlevel
valuesforcongenersthatarenotquantifiedduringtheanalyticalprocedure.TheCWSdefinesa
differentapproachtotestingsmallfacilities.Theseareclassifiedasthoseburninglessthan26Mg
peryear.TheseunitsarerequiredtomakedeterminedeffortstoachievetheCWStargets,and
itissuggestedthatthisshouldincludeaonetimetesttoshowthattheyindeeddomeetthese
standards(seeDeterminedEfforts).Thisrequirementisparticularlyonerousforoperatorswho
havesmallerincineratorslocatedatsitesthatarefrequentlyonlyaccessiblebyfloatorski
equippedaircraft.Assuchthereislittleavailableemissiondatafromthesetypesofincinerators.
ThedivisionbetweenlargeandsmallincineratorsincludedintheexistingCWSwaschosento
encouragethatmoreattentionbepaidtothelargerincineratorsthathadthepotentialforhigher
annualemissions.AscanbeseenbythedatainChapter8,thelargeincineratorsseemtohave
loweredtheiremissionssignificantly.
Unfortunately,theexistingdesignation26Mg/yearthroughputcutoffhasthepotentialtoleave
17incineratorsincampslocatedonfederallands,14incineratorsinhospitals,and10incinerators
operatedbyfederalentitiesinthegrouprequiringannualtesting.Whilethoseathospitalsandat
federalestablishmentsarereadilyaccessible,thoseinminingcampsarenot.Thecostoftestinga
facilityisontheorderof$25,000eachperyear,providedthetestingcontractorislocatedinthe
sametown.Travelcostsaddtothetestingbudgetand,whentravelrequiresthetestingcrewto
flyintoaremoteminingsite,costscouldeasilydoubleto$50,000peryear.
SmallMSWincineratorstypicallyoperateforbetween8090%ofthehoursinayear.Atthisrate,
a3Mg/dayunitcouldprocessbetween875and985Mg/yearofwaste.Thiswouldservea
populationof3,000peoplegiventhetypicalpercapitawastegenerationrates,althoughifthe
locationwasruralanddisproportionatequantitiesofpackagingwerealsofoundinthewaste
stream,thissizemightbetoosmall.Atatestingcostof$25,000peryeartranslatestoadding
approximately$25/Mgofwastedisposedannually,moreifthesiteisremoteandtravelcostsare
164
high.Thiswouldappeartobeveryexpensiveformanysmallcommunities.Ifthispracticewere
required,andenforced,communitiesmightthinktwiceaboutinstallingincineratorstodisposeof
theirwaste.Sinceburningisthemostviablewayforremotenortherncommunitiestodisposeof
waste,thisrequirementcouldseecommunitiescontinuetouseopenburningastheironlyviable
option.OpenburninghasthepotentialtogeneratemuchhigherPCDD/Femissionsthan
controlledincinerationandmustbediscouraged.Thissuggeststhatotheroptionsforaddressing
goodoperationofincineratorsshouldbeconsidered.
Thisstudyhasidentifiedthatamajorlimitationinthedataavailablefrommanyofthefacilities
thatdonotchargeatippingfeeisthelackofconsistencyindefininghowmuchwasteischarged
tothefurnace.Thisleadsmanyfacilitiestotrytorationalizetheirstatusasasmallfacility,<26
Mg/year,onthebasisofthatthefacilitiesareusedinfrequently,eventhoughtheincinerators
ratedcapacitywouldsuggestthatthefacilitycouldburnconsiderablymorethan26Mg/yror500
kg/weekor70kg/day.
Typically,smallbatchincinerators,designatedbytheirhourlyburncapacity,willacceptbetween
70and210kgofwasteperbatch,operatefor23hoursoneachbatch,andcanbecycled
anywherefrom3to6timesperday.Thissuggeststhatthesesystemscouldprocess26Mg/yrif
thesmallestunitwasrunoncedailythroughouttheyearbutthesameunitcouldprocessupto
156Mg/yrifrunatthemaximumfrequency.Consideringthesmallestunitisratedat50lbor22
kg/hrburnrate,itisclearthatmanyoftheseincineratorshavethepotentialtoexceedthesmall
incineratordesignationintheCWS.
Therecommendationsthatfollowprovide,amongothers,suggestionstoaddressalternativesto
testingsmallincineratorstoprovetheyaremeetingtheCWS.
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1 NumericalStandard
Asnotedelsewhereinthisreport,largefeecharging,commercialincineratorsoperatinginthe
countrycurrentlymeet,oraremovingtowardsmeetingtheCWSPCDD/Femissionstandard.
GiventhattheCanadawideStandardsforPCDD/Fsettheworldsmoststringentemission
target:
ItisrecommendedthatnofurtheradjustmenttotheCWSPCDD/Fnumericalemission
standardsisnecessary.
Furthermore,nochangesneedtobemadeinthedefinitionsofwasteincinerationincorporatedin
thestandard.
11.2 Applicability
Toclearlyenunciatetherequirementsdefinedbythestandard,giventhewasteincineration
definition:
Itisrecommendedthatanysystemthatthermallytreatswastesforthepurposeof
disposalbesubjecttotheCanadawideStandardsforPCDD/F.
Internationallynewthermaldestructiontechnologiesarebeingemployedinvariouscountries.
Japanhasanumberofgasification/meltingfurnaceinstallationshandlingMSW.Eachofthese
installationshasanAPCsystemsimilartothosecurrentlyemployedinCanadianMSW
incinerationfacilities.Thisresultsinthenewsystemsbeingcapableofmeetingthesame
emissionstandardsasconventionalincinerators.Toalleviateanymisconceptionsthatnew
systemsmightbeabletoavoidinstallingairpollutioncontrolequipment:
Itisrecommendedthatanynewthermaldestructiontechnologyonlybeapprovedifthe
proponentcandemonstratethatthesystemwillmeettheemissionstandard,either
throughtheapplicationofasuitableairpollutioncontrolsystem,orbysubmitting
validatedtestdatafromafullscalefacilityoperatinginanotherjurisdiction.Fullscale
facilitiesaretypicallydeemedtobeincommercialoperation,thatistheyarenotlarge
scalepilotfacilities,orevenproofofconceptdemonstrationunits.
TheimplementationoftheCWSforPCDD/Ffromincineratorshasbeeneffectiveinreducing
emissionstotheatmospherefromlargefacilities,andhasforcedtheclosureofmanysmaller
facilitiesthatcouldnotbeviablyupgradedtomeetthestandards.However,thisstudyhas
identifiedanumberofissuesrelatedtohowthestandardiscurrentlyimplemented.
166
11.3 AnnualThroughputCalculations
Thereisevidencethatmostsmallincineratoroperatorsdonotroutinelyrecordwasteloadsto
theirfurnacesandthusthetotalwasteprocessedintheirfacilityispoorlydefined.Thisresults
incineratorsnotbeingtestedinthemannerprescribedinthestandard.Whilerecommendations
laterinthischaptersuggestweighscalesshouldbeinstalledatallfacilities,ifthisisnotdone,
thereisaneedtostandardisethewayannualwastethroughputisdeterminedatfacilitiesso
facilitiescannotslideunderthecriteriainthestandards.Thus,intheabsenceofrecordedweight
information:
Itisrecommendedthatthewastethroughputusedtoclassifythesizeofanysmallbatch
incineratorbebaseduponthedesignratedcapacityofthespecificincinerator.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatthenumberofbatchesassumedtobechargedtothe
unitbebasedupon24dividedbytwicethemanufacturerscycletimefortheunitin
hours.
Toclarifythisapproach,considerthetypicalsmallbatchunitsthataredesignedtoburnabatch
in23hours.Thesemayrequire1hourtocoolsufficientlyaftertheburntoallowashremoval.
Afterashremovaltheycanberechargedandtheburnprocessisrepeated.Largerbatchunitscan
haveaburntimeof812hoursandrequire58hoursbeforetheyhavecooleddownsufficiently
toallowashtoberemovedandanewchargeloaded.Undertherecommendationsabove,aunit
ratedat70kg/batchoperatingona4hourscycle,couldberunupto6timesperday,but
realisticallyitwouldbeunlikelythatitwouldberunmorethan34timesinany24hours.The
totalannualcapacitywouldthusbe:(24/4/2=3batches/dayx365daysx70kg/batch=767
Mg/year.Alargerunit,burningsay1Mgona14hourcycle,couldprocess(24/14/2=0.857.1
batch/dayor365Mg/year).
Largerincinerators,providingadisposalservicebaseduponatippingfee,shouldbeclassifiedon
thebasisoftheirannualwastereceiptsasrecordedontheincomingscalesusedtobilltheclients.
11.4 SiteDisposalCapacity
Thesurveyconductedforthisstudyidentifiedsomesitesthathaveinstalledseveralsmaller
incineratorstohandlewastedisposal.Whilethesemeasuresmightrespondtotheneedto
transportsuchequipmenttoremotelocationsinatimelyfashion,orprovidemoreflexibilityto
theiroperation,thesizeofindividualunitsshouldnotusedtocategorisewhatmeasuresare
requiredtoreduceincineratoremissionsonasite.Ratherthetotaldisposalcapacityinstalledon
thesiteshouldbeused.Thus:
Itisrecommendedthat,forthepurposesofdefiningthestepsthatanoperatormusttake
toensurethatthefacilitymeetsalltherequirementsoftheCWSforPCDD/F,thetotal
167
installedincinerationcapacityonagivenpropertybeused.
Thiswillresultinnewinstallationscomprisedofnumeroussmallincineratorsnotbeingableto
avoidtheprovisionsoftheCWSbyclaimingtheunitswerebelowthe26Mg/yearthreshold.
11.5 ImplementationMeasures
InAnnex1oftheCSWitisstatedthatthereisaneedtoensurethatthereisalevelplayingfield
thatleadstotheuniformapplicationofthenumericstandardacrossthecountry.Giventhe
experiencesovertheinterveningyears,itisclearthatthishasbeendifficulttoachieve.The
currentrequirementsundertheCWSspecifyannualtestingofallincineratorsprocessingmore
than26Mg/yearofwaste.Furthermore,underthedeterminedeffortsclause,itissuggestedthat
aonetimeproofofeffectivenesstestingshouldbeconductedforsmallerincinerators.As
discussedintheFindingsandConclusionssuchtestingcouldimposeexcessiveoperatingcostson
smallerinstallations.Suchcostswouldonlyincreasethefurtherthecommunityislocatedfrom
thetestingcontractorshomebase.Assuch,virtuallynotestdatahasbeengeneratedoverthe
pastfiveyearforfacilitiesotherthanthefeeforservice,commerciallargefacilities.Indeed,little
informationisavailableonthemeasuresthathavebeentakentoreducePCDD/Femissionsat
smallerfacilitiesthatwereidentifiedinthe2000inventory.
Thelimitedamountoftestdatafornewequipmentpresentedinthisreporthasshownthatthese
twostagecombustionsystemscanmeettheCWSrequirementswithouttheinstallationofair
pollutioncontrolequipmentiftheyareoperatedinanappropriatemanner.Thisprovidesan
opportunitytoencouragetheuseofgoodincinerationpracticeswhichwillhaveminimalimpacts
ontheenvironment,providedsuchequipmentisoperatedappropriately.Tothisend:
Itisrecommendedthatjurisdictionsexploreopportunitiestoemployuptodate
incinerationequipmenttoreplaceexistingsystemsthatwouldotherwiseneedtobe
upgradedwithcomplexairpollutioncontrolsystemstomeettheCWS.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatjurisdictionsallowsuchequipmenttobeoperated
withouttheannualtestingrequirementsprovidedtheoperatortakesappropriate
measurestoensuregoodoperationandprovidesadequaterecordsofsuchoperation.
Toreinforcethisrecommendationaseriesofsubrecommendationsaddresstheimplementation
ofalternativeapproachestoensuringlowPCDD/Femissionsfromoperatingsystems.
11.5.1 BatchEquipmentCertification
Designatingequipmentthathasbeenshown,throughthirdpartytesting,tobecapableof
meetingtheCWSemissionstandardswhenoperatedaccordingtothemanufacturersinstructions
isafirststepintheprocess.Toaccomplishthis:
168
ItisrecommendedthatanymanufacturersellingabatchincineratorinCanadaobtain
thirdpartycertificationthattheunitmeetstheCanadawidestandardsforPCDD/Fwhen
burningthetypeofwasteintendedforaspecificinstallation.
Thisimpliesthatcertificationwouldnotbeavailableforcontinuouslyfedtwostageunits,the
smallestofwhichwouldbecapableofhandlinginexcessof250Mg/yearofwasteifoperatedat
typicalutilisationlevels.
SuchcertificationwillrequirePCDD/Ftestingofthevariousunitsinthemanufacturersrangeto
provethattheperformanceissuitable.Thetestingwouldbeconductedwithwaste
representativeofthatspecifiedinthecertification.Ifanapplicationcouldincludewastesnot
certifiedforthespecificequipment,eithertheownerwouldhavetoundertakesamplingattheir
site,orthemanufacturerwouldneedtoobtainadditionalthirdpartyverificationofthe
equipmentperformance.
Thereareissuesthatwillneedtobeaddressedinestablishingsuchcertification,andparticularly
thetestingprogramthatshouldbeundertakenonspecificequipment.Tofacilitatethe
developmentoftheseprocedures:
Itisrecommendedthatamultistakeholdercommitteeconsistingofregulators,
manufacturers,andtestingcompaniesbeconvenedtocommencethedevelopmentofa
certificationprocedureforbatchincinerationequipment.
11.5.2 ContinuousMonitoringofBatchSystems
Whiletheforegoingensuresthatnewbatchtypeequipmentiscapableofmeetingthestandards,
thequestionbecomes,whatothermeasuresdoweneedtoensurethisperformanceis
maintained?Giventhenatureofthesesystems,therearetwofurtherrecommendations:
Equipmentthatachievescertificationcanonlybesoldwithamonitoringpackagecapable
ofrecordingpertinentoperatingparametersthatensurethesystemisbeingusedinthe
manneritwasintendedtobeused.
Allinstallationsusingacertifiedincineratorshallinstallweighscalestorecordtheweight
ofeachloadchargedtotheincinerator.
Theintentoftherecommendedmonitoringpackageistorecordthoseoperatingparametersthat
affectgoodcombustion.Giventhatmostbatchincineratorsincorporateasecondaryburner
designedtomaintaintemperaturesinthesecondarychamberunderalloperatingconditions,and
thisisanimportantaspectofensuringlowPCDD/Femissions,fuelflow,temperatures,and
differentialpressuresinthesystemshouldbemeasured.Thesemonitorswouldbeconnectedtoa
computerwhichwillcontinuouslylogdatafromtheoperatingincinerator.Thesoftwareinthe
computershouldbecapableofloggingthewastechargedatatoo.Thedatafromthissystemwill
169
beavailabletoenvironmentalinspectorswhowillbeabletochecktheperformanceofthesystem.
Sincethesystemwilllogchargestothefurnace,andoperatingtimeoftheincinerator,shouldthe
ownerchoosetooperatetheunitlessthanassumedundertheAnnualCalculation
recommendation,thesedatacanbeusedtojustifylowerannualemissiontotals.
Wherepossible:
Itisrecommendedthatthecomputermonitoringequipmentbeintegratedwithallthe
operatingcontrolsofthefacilityinamannerthatwouldfacilitateremoteaccesstothe
datatoenablethemanufacturertoassisttheoperatorwithtroubleshootingtheoperation
oftheunit.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatarrangementsbemadesotheappropriateregulatory
orjurisdictionalauthoritycanaccessthedataremotelyforthepurposesofmonitoringthe
operation.
11.5.3 OperatorTraining
Thecornerstoneofensuringgoodoperationofanyincineratoristhatthestaffunderstandhow
thesystemoperatesandtakeappropriatestepstoensurethecontinuedgoodoperationofthe
equipment.Sincethedesignheatreleaserateinthefurnaceisanimportantparameterin
ensuringproperoperation,itisalsorecommendedthat:
Operatorsbetrained,eitherthroughanappropriatesitespecifictrainingprogramor
throughacertificationprogramprovidedbyaqualifiedbody,ontheoperationoftheunit.
Operatorsbeinstructedtodistinguishbetweenbroadcategoriesofwaste,saypackaging
versusfoodwaste,andbegivenclearinstructionsonhowmuchofeachcomponentitis
suitabletochargethefurnacewithoneachload.
11.5.4 IncineratorsEquippedwithHeatRecoverySystems
Theprovisionsforequipmentcertificationthatavoidtheneedforannualtesting,andthe
suggestionthatcertainsystemsdonotneedAPCsystemstomeettheCWSonlyappliesto
systemsthatventdirectlytotheatmosphereattemperaturesinexcessof600OC.Dataavailable
suggeststhatsystemsequippedwithheatrecoveryboilerscouldproducehigherPCDD/F
emissions.Remember,thereleaseofPCDD/Fhasbeenrelatedtothetimethatexhaustgasesare
exposedtotemperaturesinthedenovosynthesistemperaturewindow.Shouldthepotentialfor
PCDD/Fformationberaisedduetotheconfigurationoftheincinerationsystem,itisclearthatit
willbenecessarytotakeadditionalmeasurestominimisesuchemissions.Thus:
Itisrecommendedthatanyownercontemplatingtheinstallationofaboileronawaste
incineratorberequiredtoinstallanAPCsystemtoremovePCDD/Ffromtheexhaustgas
170
stream.
Newer,simplersystemshavebecomeavailableandcanbeusedtolimitemissionswhilenot
undulyincreasingthecomplexityofthesystem(SeeADIOXinChapter4).
11.6 ExistingIncineratorInstallations
Incineratorsthatwereincludedinthe2000inventory,arestilloperating,andhavenotbeentested
toprovethattheyaremeetingtheCWSPCDD/Fneedtobeaddressedinthespiritofensuringthe
applicationofthelevelplayingfield.Manyoftheseincineratorshaveproducedlittledatato
enabletheiremissionstobeestimated.Indeed,annualwastethroughputdatawasnotavailable
formostofthesesystems.Therefore:
Itisrecommendedthatallfacilitiesinstallscalesandstartrecordingtheamountofwaste
chargedtotheirincineratoralongwiththedateandtimeofthestartandcompletionof
eachoperatingcycle.
Recordsshouldberecordedelectronicallytofacilitateanalysisofannualthroughput.
Sincemostofthesesystemsaresmall,batchincinerators,forwhichthecostofannualtestingmay
beprohibitive,ifitisdeemedappropriatetoallownewbatchinstallationswithoutPCDD/F
testingrequirements,existingsmallbatchincineratorsshouldmeetsimilarrequirements.Thus:
Itisrecommendedthatthesefacilitiesberequiredtoinstalltemperature,pressureand
auxiliaryfuelflowmonitoringequipmenttoconfirmtheincineratorisoperated
appropriately.
Furthermore,itisrecommendedthatallrecords,monitoringdataandreportsrequired
shallbemaintainedatthesiteforaminimumperiodofatleasttwo(2)yearsfromthedate
oftheircreationinahardcopyformatandasanelectronicrecordandshallbemade
availableforinspectionbyregulatorystaff.
11.7 PCDD/FIncineratorInventory
Thereareuncertaintiesintheinventorydevelopedduringthisproject.Theserelatetothelimited
amountofdataavailablefrommanyofthesmallerincinerators.Furthermore,thereisalackof
dataconcerningtheconcentrationofPCDD/Finresiduesandthequantityofresiduesgenerated.
Inordertoimprovetheinventoryseveralrecommendationsareoffered:
Itisrecommendedthatallfacilitiesberequiredtofile,withtheappropriateregulatory
171
authority,theirannualwastethroughputdata,bytheendofMarchinthefollowingyear
startinginMarch2008.Thisfilingshouldincludedetailsonthequantityanddisposition
ofresiduesdischargedfromthefacility.
Itisrecommendedthatvariousregulatoryauthoritiesencouragealimitedamountof
residuecollectionandtestingforPCDD/Fcontentfollowingappropriateprocedures.
ResiduesamplingandanalysistodeterminePCDD/Flevelsshouldfollowtheprocedures
outlinedbytheIAWG109.Byfollowingthesamplingrecommendationsrepresentativesamples
canbecollectedfortriplicateanalyses.Samplesshouldbecooledquicklyandstoredat
temperaturesbelow4OC.Residuesshouldbeprocessedonanasreceivedbasisandresults
shouldbeexpressedinamannerthataccountsforthemoisturepresentintheresiduestream.
Shoulditbedeemednecessarytodrythesamples,thisshouldbeconductedattemperatures
below50OC.Theextractionofresiduesamplesisfacilitatedbydecompositionofthematrixusing
hydrochloricacid,afterwhichthesolutionshouldbeneutralisedandlyophilisedpriorto
conventionalorganicextraction.Theobjectofthetestingistodeterminetotalconcentrations,
expressedastoxicequivalents,nottodeterminethequantityofPCDD/Finleachatesfromthe
residuestreams.
In2008,whenthethroughputandresiduedataisavailable,theinventorycanberefined.
ItisrecommendedthatthePCDD/Finventorydevelopedaspartofthisstudybeupdated
in2008bytheincorporationofwastethroughputandresiduegenerationdataalongwith
theresultsoftheresiduetestingprograms.
Basedupontheresultsofthisupdate:
ItisrecommendedthatsuitabledefaultfactorsforairemissionsandPCDD/Finresidues
bedevelopedtoaidinpreparingtheannualemissionestimatesfromallincinerators.
109
InternationalAshWorkingGroup,1997.MunicipalSolidWasteIncineratorResidues.Published
byElsevier,ISBN0444825630.SeeChapter6forsamplingproceduresandpp.236237foranalytical
recommendations.
172
APPENDIXA
TheRelationshipbetweenAnalyticalResultsandMeasurementUncertainty
Toascertaintheconcentrationofcontaminantsinaexhauststream,samplingmustbe
undertaken.EventhebestofthesamplingmethodsdiscussedinChapter5canintroduce
unintendederrorsintotheresults.Moreover,theanalyticalprocedureshavethepotentialtoadd
totheuncertaintyofthefinalvalue.Theissuesofreproducibility,precisionanduncertaintyhave
beenaddressedinanumberofstudies,guidelinesandeveninlegislation.ThisAppendix
examinesinmoredetailsomeoftheissuesraisedintheUncertaintysectioninChapter5toassist
thereaderinunderstandingthatameasurementresultmaynotprovideago/nogodecisionon
thesuitabilityofemissiondata.
Thosewhohavelookedatextensivefilesofsamplingdatarecognizethatthereisvariabilityinthe
results.Typicallythisvariabilityisattributedtodifferencesintheprocess,butinrealityinmost
situationsitisafunctionnotonlyofprocessvariability,butalsorandomandsystematicerrors
thatexistinanymeasurement.Tounderstandtheextentofsuchvariability,anditsimpacton
theuncertaintyofaspecificmeasurementthisappendixdiscussesanumberofdifferentissues.
Initially,itlooksatthevariabilitythatcanexistinalaboratorymeasurementofananimalfeed
sample,becauseatleastwiththistypeofsamplerepetitivemeasurementscanestablishhow
accuratetheresultsare.ThisdiscussiondrawsfrompublishedpapersfromtheEuropean
Communityregardingmeasurementofcontaminants.Theappendixgoesontodrawuponthe
conceptsintroducedwithrespecttolaboratorymeasurementsanduncertaintytoconsiderthe
uncertaintyinstackmeasurements,andpresentstheresultsoftwostudiesthattriedtoestablish
therangeofuncertaintythatmightbepresentinsuchmeasurements.
AnalyticalLaboratoryResults
TheECDirective110oncontaminantsinanimalfeedsetlimitsonPCDD/Fconcentrationinfeed
materials.Todefinethemethodsbywhichsuchsamplesweretobetakenananalysed,theEC
throughtheDirectorGeneralHealthandConsumerProtection,FoodandFeedSafetyDivision
issuedregulations111.Essentiallytheserulessuggestthatthesampleshouldconsistofseveral
110
ECDirective2002/32/EC,2002.Directive2002/32/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandofthe
Councilof7,May2002.AsamendedbyCOMMISSIONDIRECTIVE2003/57/ECof17June2003amendingDirective
2002/32/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilonundesirablesubstancesinanimalfeed(extendthelist
offeedssubjecttoPCDD/FITEQlimits)andbyCOMMISSIONDIRECTIVE2006/13/ECof3February2006
amendingAnnexesIandIItoDirective2002/32/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilonundesirable
substancesinanimalfeedasregardsdioxinsanddioxinlikePCBs(tochangetheITEQvaluestoWHO98TEQ
values.)
111
ECDirective2002/69/EC,2002.COMMISSIONDIRECTIVE2002/69/ECof26July2002laying
downthesamplingmethodsandthemethodsofanalysisfortheofficialcontrolofdioxinsandthedeterminationof
173
aliquotstakenfromthelotofmaterialbeingsampled.Thelotcouldrepresentadays
production,oraparticularcatchoffish,orevenmilksamplesfromoneherd.Thealiquotsare
combinedandthecombinedsampleisthensplittoprovidesubsamplesforvariouspurposes
includingadditionalanalysesbyinterestedparties,andarchiving.Theresultingsubsamplesare
ofsufficientsizethattheycanbeusedtoproducetwoindividualsamplesforanalysisshoulditbe
necessary.Therulegoesontoprovideguidanceontheinterpretationoftheresult.
Recognizingthatsuchsamplingiscomparativelystraightforwardcomparedtosamplingthe
exhaustofanincinerator,andthattheimplicationsoffailuresintheresultscanbegrave,itis
interestingtonotethattheDirectiveonSamplingwasnotthefinalword.
SubsequenttotheissuanceoftheSamplingregulation,acommitteeprovidedareportonthe
interpretationoftheresultsofsuchanalyses112.Thelatestrevisionofthatreportwasdatedin
January,2005.Whileitdealswiththeimportantissueoffoodcontamination,theprinciplesapply
tothepresentationandevaluationofanyanalyticalresultssothefollowingsectionquotes
liberallyfromthatsource.
FromtheintroductiontotheInterpretationreport:
Before any specification is laid down ....., it must be understood that a specific parameter will
depend on the procedures used to estimate it. In particular, an estimate of a specific value may
be dependent upon the method of analysis used, but is always dependent on the method of
sampling used to verify compliance with the specification. It is important for delegates ...... to
appreciate the influence that methods of analysis and sampling may have on the judgements that
may be made with regard to the compliance of ..... asample.
Without common and uniform criteria for methods of analysis and sampling procedures, and their
common application and interpretation, different ..... parties will make different judgements as
to whether a particular batch is in compliance with its ..... specifications.
.... It should be appreciated that the issues involved are real rather than hypothetical. Decisions
have been taken by some ...... jurisdictions which in a given situation were contrary to those
which would have been taken by other ....... jurisdictions in the same situation.
Note:Intheprecedingquotation,specificreferencestoEUpartieshavebeenremoved....and
whereadditionsaremadetopreservethecontexttheyareshowninthebasicfontforthisreport.
TheInterpretationreportfocusesontheroleofanalyticalvariability(normallyknownas
measurementuncertainty)intheinterpretationofaspecification.Theintroductionalsonotes
dioxinlikePCBsinfoodstuffs.Availableat:
http://europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32002L0069&mode
l=guichett
112
ECDGHealthandConsumerProtection,2005.ReporthontheRelationshipbetweenAnalytical
Results,MeasurementUncertainty,RecoveryFactorsandtheProvisionsofEUFoodandFeedLegislation.Available
at:http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/reportsampling_analysis_2004_en
.pdf
174
thattheconceptsrelatetoquantitativeanalyticalresults,notqualitativeresults.Thelatterare
moredifficulttoaddress,butitisnotedinthereportthattheyarecurrentlybeingassessed.
Theauthorsnotethatanumberofassumptionscanpreventtheuniformimplementationof
legislativestandards.Theserangefromtheapparentlytrivialissueofthenumberofsignificant
figuresthatshouldbeincludedinreportedresults,andtheirrelationtolimitstotheuseof
recoverycorrectionfactorswhencalculatingandreportingtheanalyticalresults.Betweenthese
twoextremesisconsiderationofhowanalyticalvariability(ormeasurementuncertainty)
shouldbeincorporatedintotheinterpretationofaspecification.Theseissuesarise,notfrom
concernsoverthequalityofanalyticalresults,thatistechnicalissues,butratherfrom
administrativeconcernsrelatedtoincreasedemphasisontheseissuesinanalyticalcircles113.
Ratherthanreproducingthediscussioninthereportonsignificantfigures,itisworthreiterating
theconclusion:
where this is appropriate for the precision of the result, the analyst should report to one more
significant figure than is indicated in the specification, assuming that the analyst is using an
appropriate method.
Wheninterpretingtheresultsofasamplingprogramroundingthelastsignificantfigureofthe
resulttoproduceanumberthatcanbecomparedtothestandardwillclearlyshowthat0.081ng
wouldmeeta0.08ngor80pgstandard.
TheuseofrecoveryfactorsforPCDD/Fanalyseswasanissuereviewedin1987duringthe
validationoftheNITEPPEITesting.Atthattimetherecommendationofthereviewerswasthat
recoveriesshouldbereported,asaQA/QCmeasure,butthatresultsshouldnotberecovery
corrected.Asnotedinthediscussionofsamplingmethods,theuseofisotopedilutiontechniques
withahighresolutiongaschromatograph/highresolutionmassspectrometer[HRGC/HRMS]
reliesuponquantifyingthe13C12labelledstandardsubstances,whichareaddedtodifferentsteps
oftheoverallprocedureasinternalstandards.Theresponseforthetargetcompoundsisscaled
againsttheresponsefortheisotopedirectly.RecoveryratesinthePCDD/Fanalysisprocedures
aretreatedasQA/QCcriteriaandiftheyareoutofrange,additionalanalysesneedtobe
undertaken.ForthepurposeofthisreportandtheCWSstandard,recoverycorrectionisNOTto
beused.
Byfar,theinterpretationreporttreatstheissueofuncertaintyinthemostdepth.Several
appendicesaddressthevariousaspectsofthisissue.Theexplanationofthebasicsoftheissueare
easilyunderstood,andforthatreasonitisrepeatedinthefollowingparagraphs.
113
Thompson,Michael,StephenLREllison,AlesFajgelj,PaulWillettsandRogerWood,1999.
HarmonisedGuidelinesforTheUseofRecoveryInformationinAnalyticalMeasurement,PureAppl.Chem.,1999,
71,337348
175
All analytical results actually take the form a 2u or a U where a is the best estimate of
the true value of the concentration of the measurand (the analytical result) and u is the
standard uncertainty and U (equal to 2u) is the expanded uncertainty. 4u is the range within
which the true value is estimated, with a high probability, to fall. The value of U or 2u is the
value which is normally used and reported by analysts and is hereafter referred to as
measurement uncertainty and may be estimated and expressed by analyst in a number of
different ways.
With the introduction of ISO and other guidelines on uncertainty estimation, the accuracy
available from analytical methods is increasingly characterised in terms of measurement
uncertainty, which takes into account both the trueness (average departure from a true
value) and the precision (the degree to which successive results tally). The range within which
a is likely to fall i.e. the uncertainty in a depends on the inherent trueness and
precision of the analytical method as used in the laboratory.
MostlaboratoriesperformingPCDD/Fanalysesareformallyaccredited,participateinproficiency
testingschemes,useinternalqualitycontrolproceduresanduseappropriatelyvalidatedmethods
ofanalysis.Theselaboratoriesaregenerallyconsideredbypractitionerstobeincontrol.
If,asisoftenthecasewithstackemissiondatainNorthAmerica,theresultsareacceptedasthe
truevalueoftheconcentrationinthestack,andthemeasurementuncertaintyisnotincluded,
comparisonoftheresultstothestandardmayleadtoerroneousconclusions.Theinterpretation
reportprovidesagraphicexampleofthesituationforsampleresultswherethetruevalueofthe
concentrationisatdifferentlevelscomparedtothelimitvalue,Figure1.Thefigureclearly
suggeststhatsamplesIandIIfailtomeetthestandard.However,ifoneconsidersthe
uncertaintyonthemeasuredvalues,thereareotherpossibleinterpretationsofthesignificanceof
theresults,asshowninFigure1.Clearly,measurementuncertaintymustberecognized.
Furthermore,theinterpretationreportsuggeststhattheuncertaintybecomesmoreandmore
importantastheregulatorylevelsarereduced.Again,usingafoodsample,theinterpretation
reportprovidesnumericalestimatesofthelevelofuncertaintybaseduponcollaborativetrials.
Thevaluesrepresentthe(expanded)uncertaintiesthatmightbereportedbylaboratories.
176
TableA1
ExpandedUncertaintyRangeofAcceptableConcentrations*
Concentration
Expanded
Uncertainty [%]
Range of Acceptable
Concentrations*
100 g / 100 g
96 to 104 g / 100 g
10 g / 100 g
9.5 to 10.5 g / 100 g
1 g / 100 g
0.92 to 1.08 g / 100 g
1 g / kg
11
0.89 to 1.11 g / kg
100 mg / kg
16
84 to 116 mg / kg
10 mg / kg
22
7.8 to 12.2 mg / kg
1 mg / kg
32
0.68 to 1.32 mg / kg
44
56 to 144 ug / kg
<100 ug / kg
*thiseffectivelymeansthatvaluesfallingwithintheserangesmayberegardedasbeingof
thesameanalyticalpopulation.
177
Figure A1
Diagrammatic Illustration of the Effect of Measurement Uncertainty and the Limit

(fromtheInterpretationReport)
If one represents the best estimate by the circle on the vertical lines in the diagram below, and
the measurement uncertainty by the lines, the diagram provides an illustration of four different
situations which could be interpreted in different ways.
Situation I
The analytical result together with the measurement uncertainty exceeds the maximum level.
All enforcement authorities would consider the sample to be non-compliant with the
specification.
Situation II
The analytical result exceeds the maximum level by less than the measurement uncertainty.
Some enforcement authorities would accept the sample as being compliant with the
specification if they take account of the measurement uncertainty. Others would ignore the
measurement uncertainty and refuse to accept the sample.
Situation III
The analytical result is below the maximum level by less than the measurement uncertainty. In
general, enforcement authorities would consider the sample to be compliant with the
specification, but would probably be wary of future samples.
Situation IV
The analytical result is below the maximum value by an amount greater than the measurement
uncertainty. All enforcement authorities would consider the sample to be compliant without
any hesitation.
178
TheuncertaintiesprovidedinTable1werederivedfromtakingtheHorwitzormodifiedHorwitz
predictedFRvaluesanddoublingtoobtaintheequivalentexpandeduncertainty.Thisisbutone
ofseveralwaystodeterminetheuncertaintyassummarizedinAnnexIIoftheinterpretation
report.Amongthemethodsdiscussedinthatreportarethoselistedinthefollowingbox.
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR THE ESTIMATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
It is recommended that food and feed control laboratories use information derived from the
following procedures to help in estimating the measurement uncertainty of their results:
Annex II.1
Annex II.2
Annex II.3
Annex II.4
Annex II.5
Annex II.6
Annex II.7
Annex II.8
Annex II.9
Annex II.10
ISO guide to the expression of measurement uncertainty

EURACHEM Guide to quantifying uncertainty in analytical measurement:
A. component-by-component approach
B. use of collaborative trial data
Use of collaborative trial: data ISO 5725 critical differences
Draft ISO TS 21748 Guide to the Use of Repeatability, Reproducibility and Trueness
Estimates in Measurement Uncertainty Estimation
Concept established by Commission Decision 2002/657/EC implementing Council
Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the
interpretation of results
AOAC INTERNATIONAL approach
Internal quality control approach
NMKL (Nordic Committee on Food Analysis) approach
Microbiological Analyses
Useful references
TheAOACdiscussioninAnnexII.6isparticularlyenlighteningontheissueofuncertaintyand
howtoassessit.ThefollowingexcerptsweretakenfromAnnexII.6.
The idea is very simple what variability can one expect from one's measurements. But
the concept was introduced initially into the analytical laboratory from metrology,
which required an examination of all possible sources of error, adding them vectorially,
and expanding the resulting total error statistically to arrive at a result with an attached
95% probability statement. Analytical chemists, however, had long ago realized that by
performing an interlaboratory study on a standard method using a group of typical
laboratories analysing a set of typical matrixes, they could reproduce almost all the
uncertainty that nature could create. This practical aspect is now being incorporated
into the discussion of uncertainty.
The official definition of measurement uncertainty (from the NIST Web site
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Uncertainty/glossary.html) is:
Uncertainty (of measurement): parameter, associated with the result of a
measurement that characterizes the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be
179
attributed to the measurand.
The parameter may be, for example, a standard deviation (or a given multiple of it),
or the half-width of an interval having a stated level of confidence.
Uncertainty of measurement comprises, in general, many components. Some of these
components may be evaluated from the statistical distribution of the results of a series
of measurements and can be characterized by experimental standard deviations. The
other components, which also can be characterized by standard deviations, are
evaluated from assumed probability distributions based on experience or other
information.
It is understood that the result of the measurement is the best estimate of the value
of the measurand, and that all components of uncertainty, including those arising from
systematic effects, such as components associated with corrections and reference
standards, contribute to the dispersion.
Considerable confusion about this term will be swept away immediately if you note that
the term UNCERTAINTY is attached to a RESULT, not to a method; i.e., measurement
uncertainty is being discussed, not method uncertainty. We will see how the method
gets into the discussion later.
The introductory chapter to practically every textbook of quantitative analysis discusses
the variability of analytical results and often advises reporting results in terms of the
mean of a series of replicates and an interval within which you expect most (i.e. 95%) of
your future results to fall if future analyses were conducted in an identical manner.
However, the economics of chemical analysis dictates that only a few analyses are
conducted on a test sample (the results are usually good enough for government
work), so this theoretical admonition has been largely ignored until recently. Now, for
accreditation purposes, laboratories are required to attach a statement of measurement
uncertainty to their analytical results.
To obtain that halo of uncertainty surrounding your reported result, you have essentially
four options:
(1) The option of calculating the equivalent of a confidence interval from the "t" factor
applied to the standard deviation of replicates.
Run sufficient replicates on the specific test sample under consideration to obtain a
fairly good idea of how the results will scatter in routine work. If you manufacture a
product to a specification of 20% fat day in and day out, with the help of a statistician,
you would soon be able to know the typical uncertainty of the fat content of the
product, of the sampling, and of the analysis. But if you are called upon to provide an
estimate of uncertainty from a set of duplicates from a material you will never see
again, you will have to multiply the standard deviation calculated from that pair of
results by a factor of 12! Such an estimate is essentially useless because experience
180
shows that future analysis from even a moderately experienced analyst will rarely
approach the expected extreme.
Incidentally, running more replicates will not change the true value of the mean or of
the standard deviation. More replicates provide more confidence in the interval
estimate bracketing the true concentration and the true standard deviation.
(2) The theoretical bottom-up approach recommended by the bible on uncertainty,
rubber stamped by nine international organizations.
Sit down and think about everything that might possibly affect the result and estimate
the expected variation that each factor will contribute to the final value. These will
include uncertainties, expressed as standard deviations. When you have thought of
everything that might possibly influence your reaction, separation, and measurement,
and assigned a standard deviation to each factor, calculate the square root of the linear
combination of the variances to obtain the final standard deviation that you attach to
your measurement as the measurement uncertainty. Then multiply this final standard
deviation by a coverage factor (k) of 2 to ensure a probability of 95%, i.e., only a 5%
chance that the true value lays outside the expanded uncertainty limits. Incidentally,
do not forget lot and analytical sampling, which are unique for every lot and which,
therefore, require individual estimation by replication of these components for
completeness. Practical examples can be found in a EURACHEM guide.
This absurd and budget-busting approach (for analytical chemistry) arose from
metrological chemists taking over in entirety the concepts developed by metrologists
for physical processes measured with 5-9 significant figures (gravitational constant,
speed of light, etc.) and applying them to analytical chemistry measurements with 2 or
3 significant figures. This approach also ignores the fact that some chemical methods
are influenced by numerous factors, some positive and some negative, that tend to
cancel out, and that often other chemical methods are influenced by a few factors that
overwhelm the weight and volume uncertainty calculations presented in the published
examples.
(3) The practical top-down approach from the relative standard deviation derived
from an interlaboratory study by the Harmonized IUPAC/AOAC protocol or ISO 572521.
The approach, which is becoming generally accepted in Europe, is to conduct an
interlaboratory study utilizing the Harmonized IUPAC/AOAC or ISO 5725 protocol (which
utilizes an identical statistical model except for outlier removal). The protocols require
a sample of at least 8 typical laboratories analysing a minimum set of 5 matrices
covering the range of materials of interest. Then relate the standard deviation among
laboratories (SR) as being proportional to measurement uncertainty. By utilizing a
sample of presumably typical laboratories operating in different environments on at
least 5 materials covering the range of interest, it is very likely that most of the
potential error factors that are likely to be encountered in practice will have been
introduced. Therefore, if we equate this SR to measurement uncertainty and call it
181
standard measurement uncertainty (standard uncertainty for short), we are at least
about 70% certain that our result plus and minus SR will encompass the true value. If
we multiply SR by a coverage factor of 2, we obtain the expanded measurement
uncertainty (expanded uncertainty for short); we are now at least 95% certain that our
result plus and minus 2SR will encompass the true value.
When using this collaborative study approach, which results in a standard method as
used by ISO 17025, be sure that all of the important variables are specified or
understood (see Definition of Terms and Explanatory Notes section of the Official
Methods of Analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL) with assigned limits. Under such
conditions, SR derived from the supporting collaborative study in the same units as the
reported result with the accompanying number of significant figures, usually 2 or 3, may
be used as the standard uncertainty, assuming the laboratory has demonstrated that it
operates within the performance limits for that method.
(4) The estimate obtained by applying the Horwitz formula relating the relative standard
deviation to concentration, as a mass fraction, RSDR = 2C(-0.15), which is based upon a
review of over 10 000 interlaboratory results, primarily published in the Journal of AOAC
INTERNATIONAL.
[Alternative formula are: H = 0.02c 0.8495 and RSDR = 2 (1-0.5logC) ]
As a last resort, or even before you start any analyses, you can make a rough calculation
to determine if the expected uncertainty at the expected concentration will be fit for
the intended purpose. Apply the Horwitz formula (or a suitably adjusted version of the
Horwitz formula to account for special circumstances such as a single laboratory) to the
anticipated concentration to obtain a within-laboratory Sr and multiply it by 2 to obtain
the expanded uncertainty. The Horwitz formula as initially applied to among-laboratory
reproducibility parameters in %, and with C expressed as a mass fraction, is RSDR (in %) =
2C(-0.15) or as a standard deviation SR = 0.02C(0.85) To apply to within-laboratory
repeatability parameters, divide by 2 and equate this to estimated standard uncertainty:
Sr = 0.01C(0.85)
To obtain the expanded (repeatability) uncertainty, multiply by 2:
Sr = 0.02C(0.85)
For example, if we are dealing with a pure compendial material, C expressed as a mass
fraction is 1, so the anticipated expanded uncertainty, 2Sr, is 0.04 or 4%. This is
interpreted as 95% of anticipated results will fall between 96 and 104%. You can
improve your uncertainty by running independent replicates. Independent means as
a minimum "non-simultaneous" but again economics would not permit it, so the
improvement would be considerably less than theoretical.
The Horwitz formula will tell you if your anticipated uncertainty is such that you will be
182
within the limits of the ballpark with a typical method. The maximum spread obtained
by the top down approach will encompass the true value in almost all practical cases.
It is usually easier to let nature slip in all the un-anticipatable tricks that can befall even
the most careful analysts than to valiantly attempt to foresee them beforehand by the
budget approach. This is how the uncertainty of the method becomes entangled with
the uncertainty of the measurement.
Note 1: Some of these unanticipatable tricks are chaotic, like dropping the
thermometer or missing a decimal point. They are not subject to statistical description.
Such adventitious flaws are handled by quality control but they cannot be predicted in
any quantitative way. Such flaws are not intrinsic to the method.
Note 2: The uncertainty of a method, its bias and variability, is revealed by the spread
of the individual measurements, i.e., by the average and standard deviation of the set
of measurements.
The theory envisions that an infinite set of concentration estimates is obtained for each
true concentration but the hapless finite chemist is forced just to take a sampling from
this infinite set at the given concentration, usually just one or two estimates. Outlier
tests are applied to remove clearly extrinsic interferences with the proper application of
the chemical method. Note also that the uncertainty components, both bias and
variability, are functions of the true concentration, though variability is usually observed
to be more concentration-dependent than the bias.
If a method is to be corrected for recovery (bias) the method will usually so indicate.
Many regulatory methods do not require such a correction because the specification
(tolerance) was established by the same method so the recovery is built into the
specification.
Note 3: The analytical chemist usually ignores sampling uncertainty primarily because
typically little or no information accompanies the laboratory sample as to whether or
not the laboratory sample truly reflects the lot. It is usually left to management to
coordinate the analytical information with the sampling information. However, if the
sample has been collected according to statistical principles (a process that usually
requires a very large number of increments) and if these increments have been analysed
to provide the basis for an estimate of sampling uncertainty, then propagation of error
considerations can provide an overall sampling + analysis uncertainty.
Note3isparticularlyimportantwhenconsideringstacksamplingmeasurements.The
uncertaintythatmightbeassociatedwiththesamplingmethodisofgreatimportanceifoneisto
accountforalltheuncertaintyinagivenresult.
UncertaintyinStackMeasurementResults
Identifyinguncertaintyinanalyticalresultsfromfoodsamples,thethrustofmuchofthe
183
uncertaintydiscussiontothispointinthissection,isstraightforward.Laboratories,orregulators
simplyhavetorequestthatdatafromnumerousanalysesofrelevantreferencesamplesbe
provided.Thesameinnottrueforexhaustgassamples.Therearenotrelevantreference
materialsforexhaustgasstreams.Moreover,giventheanalyticalrequirements,itisnotusualfor
laboratorysamplestobesplittherebyeliminatingthepossibilityofquantifyingthedifferencesin
laboratoryproceduresbyanalysingthesamesamplecatchintwodifferentlaboratories.Clearly,
regulatorsandthescientificcommunityneedtobeassuredthattheresultsthatarebeingreported
usingdifferentsamplingmethodsorfromdifferentsamplingteams,orevenfromdifferent
laboratoriesarecomparable.Ofcourse,ascanbeappreciatedfromtheprecedingdiscussionof
uncertainty,comparablereallyimpliesthatallreportedresultsfromagivenfacilitywillliewithin
therangeofuncertainty.
TwostudiesoftheuncertaintyinPCDD/Fmeasurementsareavailableintheliterature:
EN194831996providesthedetailsofvalidationtrialsconductedonthethree
Europeansamplingmethodsdiscussedearlierinthissection;and,
TheASMEsponsoredReMAPproject114reportlooksattheresultsofpairedtrain
datatoestablishmeasurementprecisionestimates.
ThelatestversionofEN194832006includesanAnnex115thatismoreofathoughtpiecethanan
evaluationofdata.
CENStudy
TheCENValidationstudyinEN19483(1996)presentstheresultsofcomparativevalidation
trialsatwasteincineratorssponsoredbytheCommissionoftheEuropeanCommunities,the
EuropeanFreeTradeAssociationandtheGermanFederalEnvironmentAgency.Theprecision
andtheperformancecharacteristicsforthemethodweredeterminedduringthesetrials.
TherewerethreeMSWincineratorfacilitiesusedforthestudy:
facilityAequippedwithawetsprayhumidifieranddryscrubberandan
activatedcarbonbedformercuryandPCDD/Fcontrol.Thedustconcentrationsin
thestackwerebelow15mg/m3.
facilityBwetscrubberforacidgascontrolfollowedbyanSCRforNOxand
114
Lanier,W.StevenandCharlesD.Hendrix,2001.ReferenceMethodAccuracyandPrecision
(ReMAP):Phase1.PrecisionofManualStackEmissionMeasurements.PreparedundertheauspicesofAmerican
SocietyofMechanicalEngineers,ResearchCommitteeonIndustrialandMunicipalWaste.PublishedasASME
ReportCRTDVolume60.
115
EN194832006.AnnexB(informative)Estimationofthemeasuringuncertaintyandprecisionof
thedeterminationofpolychlorinateddibenzopdioxinsanddibenzofurans
184
PCDD/Fcontrolwithdustemissionconcentrationsbelow3mg/m3.
facilityCwetsprayhumidifierwithlimeandPACadditionfollowedbyanESP
controllingdustlevelstobelow5mg/m3.
AtfacilitiesAandBthreesamplingorganisationssimultaneouslyoperatedtwoidentifical
samplingtrainsinthestackfortestsoneachof6days.Thuseachorganisation,typically
applyingdifferentcollectionmethods,collected12samplesovertheperiod.Thesample
extractionprocedureswereconductedbythesamplingorganisationsandtherawextractswere
senttolaboratoriesforcleanupandanalyses.Atotalof7laboratorieswereinvolvedinthe
cleanupandanalysissteps,sixprimarylocationsandaseventhusedasacrosscheckonsplit
samples.
Theprocedureofhavingthesamplingteamextractthesamplestoarawextractfacilitatessample
splittingforcrosschecking,butthisislesslikelytobefeasibleinNorthAmericawhere,forthe
mostpart,thelaboratoriesreceivedthesamplesfromthetrainandperformtheextraction,clean
upandanalysisallatthesamefacility.
ThecomparisonofthemethodsandtheresultswascarriedoutaccordingtoISO57252:1994116
bytakingparallelduplicatesamples.Since5725isamethodforcalculatingtheinternal
variabilitygiventheavailabilityofareferencematerial,andemissionsamplingistimedependent
andcannotbeassumedtobeconstant,adifferentcalculationapproachwasemployed117.
Essentiallytheconfidenceintervalwascalculatedas:
I C = t1
2
(y
i1
yi 2 )2
i= 1
2n
Where:
Ic
t1/2
n
=
=
=
internalconfidenceinterval
studenttstatisticat=0.05(95%confidencelevel)
numberoftests
Essentiallythesquarerootoftheaverageofhalfthesumofthesquaresofthedifferencesforthe
eachtesttimesthetstatistic.
116
ISO57252:1994Accuracy(truenessandprecision)ofmeasurementmethodsandresultsPart2:
Basicmethodforthedeterminationofrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofastandardmeasurementmethod.
InternationalStandardsOrganisation.
117
NFX43331:1996EmissionsdesourcesfixesDterminationdelintervalledeconfiancedune
mthodedemesureenlabsencedchantillonderfrenceparmesuresparalllessimultanes.:AFNOR
(AssociationFranaisedeNormalisationFrenchStandardsAssociation).
185
Thestatistic,whenappliedtotheresultsfromoneinstitute,providestheinternalvariabilityor
repeatabilityofoneteamapplyingonemethod.Itisanexpressionofthemaximumdifference
thatwouldbeexpectedatthe95%confidencelevelforpairsofsamplestakenbythesameteam
andanalysedinthesamelaboratory.
TheresultsofthevalidationtestsweresubmittedtheCENcommitteeforreview.Thecommittee
checkedalltheresultstoensurethatalltherequirementsoftheStandardhadbeenmetbeforethe
statisticswerecalculated.TheresultssummarizedinTableA2arediscussedbelow.
Outofthetotalof36possiblesamplesfromfacilityA,33sampleswereavailableforanalysisat3
differentlaboratories.Inaddition3crosschecksamplesweresubmitted.Eighteensamples,
includingallthosefromonelaboratory,wererejectedasbeingoutsidethelimits,evenafterthe
extractionlimitswereenlargedtoarangeof10%to180%.Atotalof10pairsremainedforthe
calculation.With36possiblesamplesfromfacilityB,34wereavailableforanalysisat5
laboratoriesand2crosschecksweresubmitted.Only11pairswerejudgedsuitableforthe
calculation.ForfacilityConly4daysoftestingwerecompleted,producing24possiblesamples.
Allthesampleswereavailableandsenttoasinglelaboratory.Onlyonepairofsampleswere
judgedtobeunacceptableforcalculationprocedures.
Bycomparingthedifferencesbetweentestresultsgeneratedbythedifferentsamplingcontractors
andlaboratoriesanexternalvariabilitycanbedetermined.Thisprovidesanevaluationofthe
overalluncertaintyattachedtotheresultsofanindividualmeasurement.Theexternalvariability
encompassesallfactorsthatleadtodifferencesinresultsincludingsamplingprocedures,the
variationsintheconcentrationsinthestackgasesatdifferentpointsinthestack,andthe
variabilitybetweenlaboratories.
Tocalculatetheexternalvariabilitythedifferencesbetweenpairsofmeasurementsaretaken.In
otherwordsif2samplingcontractors(xandy)eachgenerate2samples(1and2)fromagiven
test,thedifferencesare:
x1y1;x2y1;x1y2andx2y2.
Thusfornteststhereare4nvaluesofthedifferences.Thesecanbeusedtocalculatethestandard
deviationofthedifferencesandthemeanofthedifferences.Thesefactorsandthet
statisticfor4n1degreesoffreedomcanbeusedtocalculatetheexternalvariability:
ev = d emean + t 4 n 1 ( de )
Thecalculationassumesthatthedistributionofthedifferencesisgaussian,aconditionthatis
generallysatisfiedif2025datapointsareavailable.
Unfortunately,notallthetestdatawasjudgedsuitablefortheevaluationoftheexternal
variability.TheresultsfromfacilityCwereallanalysedatonelaboratorysothesedatawerenot
available.AtfacilityA,evaluationoftheresultsdeterminedthatthesamplingpointswere
186
sufficientlydifferentthatthesedatashouldnotbeusedtodetermineexternalvariability.Thus,
externalvariabiltywascalculatedonthebasisoffacilityBdata.
TableA2
Facility
SummaryInternalVariabilityDatafromValidationTestsforCEN
Method
Number of
Pairs
Average
[ng I-TEQ/m3]
Internal
Variability
[ng I-TEQ/m3]
Dilution
0.19
0.12
Filter/Cooler
0.04
0.06
Dilution
0.04
0.016
Filter/Cooler
0.03
0.014
Cooled Probe
0.041
0.011
Dilution
0.13 (0.10)*
0.21 (0.08)*
Cooled Probe
0.13
0.02
Note: *indicatesasingleoutlierpointremovedfromthecalculation
Theexternalvariability,andhencetheuncertaintyofthemeasurementsofPCDD/Fexpressedas
ITEQdeterminedfromthesedatawas0.050ngITEQ/m3atameanvalueof0.035ngITEQ/m3.
Thisresulthastwoimplications:
itsuggeststhattherealvalueoftheconcentrationcouldbeanegativevalue,an
apparentlyimpossibleconclusion;and,
itsuggeststhatanyvaluelessthan85pgITEQ/m3isessentiallythesamevalue.
Somediscussionsofuncertaintynotethatnegativevaluescanbereported,simplybecauseatthe
95%confidencelevelvaluesarelikelytobefoundonbothsidesofthemeanandifthemeanis
smallenoughtherelikelywillbesomenegativevaluescontributingtooffsetthehighvalues.
Thissortofasituationisusuallyindicativeofthedistributionnotfittingthenormalcurve,and
withenvironmentaldatathedistributionistypicallylognormallydistributed.Thatisthebulkof
thedataisclosetothemeanbyhighandlowvaluesareexpectedtobefoundinlownumbers.
Typicallyinthelognormaldistributionthehighnumberskewthedistribution.
Thesecondimplicationbasicallysuggestthatnoconclusionsondifferencesinemissionscouldbe
madeiftheresultsarelessthan85pgITEQ/m3becausethedataiswithintherangeofthe
uncertainty.
ASMEStudy
187
TheASMEstudyusedavailabledatatoobtainestimatestheprecisionofUSEPAstandard
methods.Whileparticulatematter,acidgases,metalsandorganicswereallconsideredinthe
ReMAPstudy,thisdiscussionwillfocusontheMethod23results.Theseresultsareprovidedfor
datathatisnotcorrectedfordiluentlevels,butsincemostofthedatacamefromMSW
incineratorsitcanbeassumedthatthiswouldhaveonlyasmallimpactontheoverall
conclusions.
TheReMAPmethodologyinvolvedanassessmentoftheexternalvariabilityasdiscussedinthe
previoussection,becausethedatawascollectedfromanumberofprojectsundertakenby
differentsamplingteamsatdifferentfacilitiesandtypicallyanalysedbydifferentlaboratories.
Someofthedataincludestheresultsofvalidationstudiesfordifferentmethods,otherdatawere
collectedaspartofspecificresearchprojectsbeingundertakenforUSEPAorotheragencies.
UnliketheCENstudywhichdeterminedtheexternalvariabilityonthebasisofthestandard
deviationofthedifferencesbetweenpaireddata,theReMAPstudyusedthesmallsamplebias
correctedvaluesofthestandarddeviationofthedatapairs.Thebiascorrectedstandard
deviationvaluesandtheaverageconcentrationdataarethenweightedforthenumberofdegrees
offreedom,transformedtotheLogLogplanegiventhedatawerefoundtofitapowercurve,and
subjectedtoalinearregressionanalysistodeterminetheparametersofthepowerlaw.The
powerlawequationisthenusedtodetermineapredictedvalueofthestandarddeviationateach
concentrationpoint.Comparingthecalculatedandpredictedaveragevaluesofthestandard
deviationprovidesanappropriatevalueforasecondbiascorrectionfactor.Thatfactorisusedto
adjusttheconstantinthepowerlawformulatoprovideanunbiasedequationdescribingthe
relationshipbetweenthestandarddeviationandconcentration.Usingthesedatathe95%
confidenceintervalscanbecalculatedfortherangeoftheavailabledata.
ThedatausedfortheoriginalReMapstudyincluded19pairedsamplescollectedfromthemid
pointintheairpollutioncontrolsystemofanMSWincinerator.Theobjectofthetestswasto
examinetheeffectsoflimeandPACadditiontothegasstreamatvariousESPoperating
temperatures118.Thesesampleswerenotcollectedatthestack,rathertheywerecollectedbefore
theESPbutafterthereagentinjection.Alsoincludedinthedatawere3pairsofdata,essentially
simultaneoustestsonalightweightaggregatekilnexhaustconductedfortheUSEPAbytwo
differentcontractors.SubsequenttothepreparationoftheReMAPreport,simultaneoustesting
wasconductedduringcompliancetestingatanotherMSWincineratorintheUnitedStates.A
totalof5additionalpairedtestswereincludedinarevisiontothePCDD/Ffindings119.
118
Rigo,H.GregorandA.J.Chandler,1997.RetrofittingESPEquippedMWCstomeetthe1995
EmissionGuidelinesusingSensibleHeatExchangerCoolingandDryReagentInjection.Apresentationatthe5th
NorthAmericanWastetoEnergyConference.RTP,NorthCarolina.ProceedingspublishedbySWANAGRWTE
0105.
119
Hendrix,CharlesD.,2006.UpdatingtheModels.PrecisionofManualStackEmission
Measurements.DraftdocumentsubmittedforreviewtoASMEcommittee.
188
WhiletheoriginalreportprovidedanestimateontheuncertaintyofthePCDD/FITEQ
concentrationmeasurements,itwasnotedthattherewasnodetectablerelationshipbetweenthe
standarddeviationandaveragemeasuredconcentration.Thatisthestandarddeviationwas
constantatallmeasuredconcentrationsintherangeofthedata.Theoriginalreportsuggested
thatonthebasisofthepooledvarianceofthedatathatmeasurementimprecision,uncertaintyin
theterminologyofthisreport,wassomewherebetween68pgITEQ/m3and95pgITEQ/m3
dependinguponwhetheroneacceptedappliedthe95%confidenceboundtothevalueofthe
indexinthepowerlawfunction.Addingtheadditionaldatapointsestablishedthattherewasa
relationshipbetweenconcentrationandprecision.Baseduponthedataavailableandtheupper
95%confidenceintervalonthepowerlawfunction,at32pgITEQ/m3theuncertaintyis18.6pg
ITEQ/m3andthisrisesto49.5pgITEQ/m3atanaverageconcentrationof80pgITEQ/m3.As
Hendrixnotesinthereviseddocuments,itisimportanttorecognizethatsincethemodelisa
regressionlinethemodelimprovesifitcontainsmoredataneartheextremes.Atthepresent
momentthereislittledatainthemodeltolookatvaluesintheregionoftheLOQdefinedby
EnvironmentCanada,32pgITEQ/Rm3@11%O2.
ComparingtheuncertaintyprovidedbytheCENstudywiththatatsimilarconcentrationsfound
intheReMAPstudysuggeststhattheuncertaintyshownbytheReMAPdatais40%ofthevalue
developedfromtheCENstudy.UnliketheCENstudy,wheresimultaneoussamplepairswere
analysedbydifferentlaboratories,eachoftheReMAPstudiesreflectsonlythevariabilityinone
laboratory.
Moreimportantly,theReMAPvaluessuggestthatatthecurrentCWSlimitforincinerators,80pg
ITEQ/Rm3,theuncertaintyinthemeasuredvaluewouldextendfromlessthantheLOQto
approximately130pgITEQ/Rm3.
Therelationshipbetweenconcentrationandprecisionneedstohavemorestudy,mostlyby
encouragingmoredualtrainsamplingattheloweremissionconcentrationscurrentlybeing
achievedbysomeoftheMSWincineratorsinCanada.
SummaryUncertainty
Fromthediscussionabove,thereadercanconcludethatemissionmeasurementsarenotabsolute
numbersthatwillpassornotpassaregulatorylimit,butratheravaluearoundwhichthereisa
considerableamountofuncertainty.

Review of Dioxins and Furan From Incineration CSR

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Review of Dioxins and Furan From Incineration CSR

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

&

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Inc. 2007

Environmental Management Consultants

existing facilities have limit of 920

existing facilities have limit of 4600

existing facilities have limit of 9200

diluent corrections note applied when < 11% O2

no I-TEQ standards rather use total PCDD/F [ng]

Existing urban total = 88 ng total/Rm3 @ 11%O2

without dry APCD system or waste heat boiler

>32 Mg/day capacity

existing by 2006, all new construction after 2001

existing by 2006, all new construction after 2001

existing by 2006, all new construction after 2001

all new construction after 2001, existing

Estimated PCDD/F Emissions to Air [mg I-TEQ/yr] by Province

Remote and Federal Lands

Gas Cooling Phase or

Acid Gas Control

Particulate Matter Control

Heat Recovery or Addition

Dry Cleaning System

Wet-Dry Cleaning System

Wet Cleaning System

Andersson, S., Kreisz, S., Hunsinger, H. (2002) OrganohalogenCompounds58:157160.

LOD = bave + 3sb

LOQ = bave + Fsb

Source and Date

Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Large Municipal

60 FR 65415, Dec. 19, 1995

Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for

62 FR 48379, Sept. 15, 1997

Standards of Performance for Incinerators - excluding incinerators

42 FR 37936, July 25, 1977, as

Standards of Performance for Large Municipal Waste Combustors for

60 FR 65419, Dec. 19, 1995

Standards of Performance for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste

62 FR 48382, Sept. 15, 1997

Standards of Performance for Small Municipal Waste Combustion

65 FR 76355, Dec. 6, 2000

Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Small Municipal

65 FR 76384, Dec. 6, 2000

Standards of Performance for Commercial and Industrial Solid

65 FR 75350, Dec. 1, 2000

Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Commercial and

65 FR 75362, Dec. 1, 2000

Standards of Performance for Other Solid Waste Incineration Units

70 FR 74892, Dec. 16, 2005

Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Other Solid Waste

70 FR 74907, Dec. 16, 2005

Municipal Solid Waste

Small Existing Class I facility

30 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (no ESP)

Small Existing Class II facility

125 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2

30 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 (no ESP)

New (any size)

Commercial and Industrial

Existing or New >32 Mg/day

Other Solid Waste

Existing or New <32 Mg/day MSW

125 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 or

Rural setting (>50 miles from

800 ng total /Dsm3 @ 7% O2 or