4 j

·-- --

COMPREHENSIVE INDUSTRY DOCUMENT SERIES:

EMISSION REGULATIONS (JULY 1984)

PART ONE

COINDS/17/1983-84

[EMRAl BOARD FOR 1HE PREUEDtlOD ADD COD1ROl OF WAlER POllU110D DEW DELHI

•

. :

CO MPREHENSIVE INDUSTRY DOCU MENT SERIES:

EMISSION REGULATIONS

(JULY 1984)

PART ONE

-

C OIN D S / 1 7 / 1 9 8 3-8 4

CENTRAL BOARD FOR THE PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WATER POLLUTION

5TH & 6TH FLOOR, SKYLARK, 60, Nt.HRU PLACE,

NEW DELHI - 110019.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� � (")

"'O (") O'" CD :J < (/) :J (") :J

-

PREFACE

This document contains emission regulations for six

specific industrial operations as per the Schedule

of Industries under Section 17 , of the Air (Prevention

and - Control of PoJlution) Act, 1981. The other ind us-

trial operations listed in the Schedule are under active

consideration for the national evolution of emission

standards.

(NILA Y CHAUDHURI) Chairman

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

CONTENTS

Subject Page () "U ()

Emission Standards OJ m

Cement 4 z <

Thermal Power 9 (j) () CD

Integrated· Iron and Steel 12 :J ....... ....,

Fertilizer (Urea) 14 CD

-

:;E Nitric Acid 1 5 :;E

� Sulphuric Acid 18

("') "'O ("') O'"

Guidelines for minimum stack height 21 CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

EMISSION-STANDARDS

The emission standards for Cement, Thermal Power, Iron & S.teel, Fertilizer

(urea), Nitric and Sulphuric Acid plants, six out of twenty industries listed

in the Schedule in Chapter VII under Section 54 (3) of the Air (Prevention

and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 are given below in abstract�

As prescribed in the Air (Prevent-ion and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

Section 17 ( l) (g), the emission standards for the six air polluting industries

mentioned above have been laid down. The emission standards for other

industries covered in the Schedule will be brought out subsequently. The

rationale for adopting these standards are given in the report.

These standards are applicable up to December, 1 9 86 and will be reviewed

again in January, 1987 based on experience and input from the monitoring

data obtamed in this.· period. The stack monitoring shall be done as prescribed

by the Central Pollution Control Board.

The State Board may adopt standards that are more stringent than thoS'e

given below depending on the location of the industries ahd specially if it

m a protected area. They shall not, however, relax the standards ..

A protected area is one that it already polluted from being in a metropolitan/

industrial location or the area is sensitive because of its proximity to national

parks, forests historical monuments and health resorts.

l. CEMENT

Standard for particulate matrer emisswn

Capacity

200 tpd and Jess

Greater than 200 tpd

Protected area

3 250 mg/Nm

3 150 mg/Nm

Other area

3 400 mg/Nm -

3 250 mg/Nm

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ...., CD -

-

� ("')

-0 ("') 0-CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J -

2. THERMAL POWER

- 2 -

(a) Standard for particulate matter emission

Boiler size

Less than 200 MW

200 MW anq above

Protected area

3 150 mg/Nm

3 150 mg/Nm

Other area Old

(before J 979

3 600 mg/Nm

New (after J 979)

3 350 mg/Nm

3 1 50 mg/Nm

(b) Standard for sulphur dioxide control (through stack height)

Boiler size

Less than 200 MW

200 MW to Jess than 500 MW

500 MW and more

Q = Sulphur Dioxide emission in kg/hr.

H = Stack height in metres.

IRON &: STEEL

Standard for particulate matter

Process

Sintering plant

Coke oven

Blast furnace

Steel making during normal operation

during oxygen lancing

Stack height

H = J 4 (Q)0 .• 3

220 metres

275 metres

Emission Ji.mi ts

3 150 gm/Nm

i50 mg/Nm3

3 400 mg/Nm

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 3 -

4. FERTILIZER (Urea)

Standard for particulate matter emission

Process

Pr i11ing T,awer

Emission limit

3 50 mg/Nm

5. NITRIC ACID

6.

Standard for oxides of nitrogen, NO x

3 kg of NO per tonne of weak acid (before concentration) produced x

SULPHURIC ACID

Standard for sulphur dioxide and acid mist emission

Process

Single conversion

single absorption

Double conversion

double absorption

Sulphur dioxide emission

1 0 kg/tonne of concen­trated (100 %Y acid produced

4 kg/tonne of concen­trated (1 00%) acid produced

Acid mist emission

3 50 mg/Nm

50 mg/Nm3

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� (")

"'O (") O'" CD :J < (/) :J (") :J

-

r

- 4 -

CEMENT

Sources of Emission

Generally particulates are emitted from the following sources ;

i. Rotary Kiln (Dry, Wet or Semi-Dry).

11. Raw Mill, Clinker Cooler.

iii. Finish Grinding.

iv. Packaging, .:)torage (Silos).

Besides emission is also associated with pul ver isa ti on of coal.

The control of particulate m the last three sources, namely, finish grinding,

packaging and storage is usually practiced in India (Refer Annexure-1) at

the highest possible level because of the urge for saving the products and

raw material both in old and obviously new plants. Furthermore, it is easier

to control from these three sources because of conditions of opera ti on.

But in case of the rotary kiln the control of emission is difficult because

of elevated flue gas temperature and the presence of carbon monoxide.

Due to technological limitations, most of the countries had to provide higher

allocation of emission load to th� rotary kiln when all the above 4 sources

are considered together. To site this the Canadian example is used, where

the controlled emission in terms of daily quantum are as furnished in Table

I.

Table l Emission Guidelines for Cement Plants (Canada)

(lb/2000 lb of Cement)

Source Guidelines New Plants Existing plants

Kiln 0.9 1.6

Clinker Cooler 0.6 0.6

F. inish Grinding 0.1 0.1

All others 0.2 0.2

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 5 -

It may be seen that about 50 percent of total quantum of emission is permitted

from the rotary kiln after approoriate control.

Data provided in Table 2 suggest that about 3 to 4% of product 1s emitted

when no control equipment is ·in position. If the industry tries to reduce

this emission to 0.05 percent of product then the efficiency of control ranges

between 98.3 to 98.8 percent, which must be within the technological capa­

bility of the country.

Table 2 : Operation Characteristics oJ Rotary Kilns

Unit l Unit 2

3 Flow rate 1 000 Nm /hr 90 84

Dust cone. gm/Nm 3

(without control 3.65 22.4

Dust emitted tonnes/day 7.88 45. l (without control) -

Production tonnes/day 600 1000

Percent of product emitted l.3 1 4.5

Unit 3

98

35.60

83.9

1 500

5.6

NOTE It may be taken that approximately 3 to 4% of product is the

emission (uncontrolled) from rotary kiln.

The control devices associated with the rotary kiln should be capable of

attaining an efficiency exceeding 99 percent. Hence the efficiency ranges

prescribed here as 98.3 to 98.8 percent is quite conservative, and it is, there­

fore, expected that rotary kiln should not emit more than 0.05 percent of

product after installing control devices. The corresponding concentration

of emission is given in Table 3 for the 3 units. The concentrations range

between 140 to 320 mg/Nm3•

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

'"O ("') 0-CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 6 -

·Table 3 : 3

Emission Concentration in mg/Nm

Production (P) J 00 tonnes/day (tpq)

FJow rate (Q) 1000 Nm3

/hr

Emission concentration (C) mg/Nm3

Unit l

6

90

1 39

C (mg/Nm3

) = 2080 (P/Q) arrived at as below

= 0.05 x p x lo? m_g/day

Recommendation

Q x J 03 x 24 Nm3/day

= 0.05 x p x 1 06

24 x .Q

= 2080 p Q

= 50000 x p 24 x Q

Unit 2

JO

84

248

Unit 3

1 5

98

31 8

For rotary kiln the daily quantum of emission .ts to be computed on the basis

of 0.05 tonne per tonne of cement l?�oduced. The average concentrations

to be maintained by the industry may be computed on the basis· of the air

flow rate, expressed in N m3 /hr mainta.ined in the kiln. It is also expected

that emissions from cement plants of capacity less . that 200 tpd would be

comparatively lesser than a large cemen,t plant. Also keeping in view that

certain areas would haxe to environmentally protected because it is already . , ·

polluted or is a sensitive area, the fo!Jow ing standards are adopted :

Capacity

200 tpd and less

Greater than 200 tpd

Protected area

250 mg/Nm3

150 mg/Nm3

Other area

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ..... ...,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O"' CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 7 -

The concentration should not exceed under normal operation. The standards

shall apply to rotary kiln, raw mill, packaging, storage (silos) and finish grind­

ing. Mui ticyclone shall be fitted to clinker cooler.

Emission limits from pulverisation of coal are not prescribed for the present.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

ANNEXURE - I

LIST OF EXISTING CONTROL EQUIPMENT IN SOME CEMENT PLANTS

Cement Plant Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8 Unit 9 m z <

1. Year of Trial (/)

Commissioning 1970 1972 1977 1980 1982 1981 1982 1981 run ()

CD started :::l

....... ...,

CD

2. Crusher Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone () ""U

3. Raw Mill Bag type () OJ

dust ESP ESP ESP ESP ESP ,..........

collector

�� 4. Rotary Kiln Cyclone ESP ESP ESP ESP Cyclone ESP 0

"O Multi- Multi Multi- Multi- ()

Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone O'" CD :::l <

5. Coal mill Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone Cyclone c;;· :::l

6. Cement mill Bag Bag Bag ESP ESP ESP ESP Bag ESP 9 :::l

Filter Filter Filter Collec- "-""

ESP tors

7. Packing plant Bag Bag Bag Bag Bag Bag Bag Bag Bag Filter Filter Filter Filter Filter Filter Filter Filter Filter

- 9 -

THERMAL POWER

For the present, control equipment will be required in thermal power stations

to limit the particulate matter emission. For keeping the sulph\Jr dioxide

level in the ambient within the air quality standards, the method required

shall be by maintaining a minimum stack height.

Basis

1. Separate limits have be'en laid down for each of the following categories

of boilers :

2.

Description

less than 200 MW

200 MW and above

Category

(a)

(b)

It is considered that category (a) will comprise mainly captive power

plants of industries, and existing thermal power plants (Utilities) oper­

ated by State Electiricity Boards. Category (b) will comprise large

thermal power stations operated by Central Agencies.

The limits would also vary depending upon the ash content of coal

used. Emission factors for different types of boilers are furnished

in Table 2.1 .

Type

Table 2.1 Emission Factors for Large Industries Boilers

(EPA: AP-42)

Particulates kg/t of coal burned

Sulphur dioxide kg/t of coal burned

Pulverised Central

wet bottom

8.0 (A)

5.5 (A)

19 (S)

1 9 (S)

Dry bottom cyclone

spreader stoker

8.5 (A)

1 .0 (A)

6.5 (A)

A = Percent Ash content of coal

S = Percent Sulphur content of coal

1 9 (S)

19 (S)

1 9 (S)

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� (")

"'O (") O'" CD :J < (/) :J (") :J

-

- l 0 -

Sampling conducted at a recently commissioned 200 MW Thermal

Power Station showed that 99.78% removal of particulate matter

can be achieved with ESPs of latest indigenous design. The details

are provided in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 : Electrostatic Precipitator Efficiency

Type A B c

Inlet concentration of dust gm/Nm 3 15.5 l 20.95 21 .29

Outlet concentration of dust 3 mg/Nm. 30.6 46.7 44.6

Efficiency % 99.75 99.70 99.79

Source : Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL)

ln developing the standards it is considered that category (b) plaAts

must install ESPs to achieve 99.78% removal as demonstrated at the

above plant. A standard of 1 50 mg/Nm 3

is proposed in these cases.

3.(a) In addition to the size of the boilers, qualified above, additional consi­

der a ti on should be given to its age and its location. The age is impor­

tant fr:om the point of view of the cost-benefit aspect and the location

from its en"4ironmental impact.

3.(b) BHEL came out with ·their improved ESP design in 1979. Therefore,

all plants commissioned after 31st December, 1979 are being classified

as new plants. Even if the boiler has been installed prior to 1979,

the plant will be· classified as new, in this standard, if the ESP has

been installed after December, 1979. New plants should meet an

emission level of 350 mg/Nm3

(equivalent to about 99.4% collection

efficiency). This is more relaxed than the standard for boilers greater

than 200 MW because the emission load from the smaller boilers will

be less. Further, for older plants, a standards of 600 mg/N m3

is

proposed because these plants may have constraints on both funds

Finally in areas where the environmental quality has to be protected

a standard of 1 50 mg/Nm3 is being adopted.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 11 -

4. The· standards adopted for the Thermal Power Plants are :

Boiler size Old New Protected area (after 1979)

Less than 200 MW 600 mg/Nm 3 350 mg/Nm 3

150 mg/Nm 3

200 MW and above 150 mg/Nm 3 150 mg/Nm 3

Stade Height Requirement for Sulphurdioxide Control

To maintain a healthy ambient air quality the stack height for boilers

should be as follows

Boiler size Stack height

200 MW and More to Less than 500 .MW 220 Metres

500 MW and More 275 Metres

Less than 200 MW H = 14 (Q)0.3

Q = Sulphur dioxide emission in kg/hr

H = Stack height in metres

Flue Gas Desulphurization

No s.tandards for sulphur dioxide emission is being prescribed, the control

being effected through the height of the stack.

For plants having boilers of 500 MW and more, necessary space has to be

provided for installing flue gas desulphurization device, should there be a

requirement in the future.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 12 -

INTEGRATED IRON AND STEEL

l. Sources of emissions

2.

The sources of pollutant emissions are :

i. Sintering

ii. Coke Oven

rn. Blast furnace

iv. Steel making (oxygen lancing)

There will also be emissions from captive power plant and coal handling

operations which are not considered here.

Sintering plant

From the sintering plant, dust emission is expected to be 2.5 percent

of product. A survey of the steel plants in the country reveals that

flue gas collection system in the sintering plants are such that it

is not possible to correctly measure the flow rate and the dust concen­

tration. No data otherwise is available to estimate the raw emission

in terms of concentration.

In the absence of any monitoring data it• is considered that we will

have to go by the achiev$ibility of venturi scrubber, bag filter or ESP,

preceded by cyclones if necessary, in which case it is possible to achieve

an outlet emission of 150 mg/Nm3. Therefore the emission limit

for sintering plant is adopted as 150 rng/Nm3.

3. Coke Oven

In the coke oven, process coal is heated in a battery to drive away

the organic matter and other impurities to obtain coke.

Heat source is coal or gas. About 60% of the total coke plant parti­

culate emissions are accounted. for b'y coke oven charging and about

30% by discharging (WHO: ESP/83.49). Attempt should be made to

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

- 13 -

control emissions both from coke oven charging as well as from dis­

charging. No limit is proposed for the coke oven section.

4. Blast furnace

5.

6.

The top gas from the furnace which contains significant concentration

of particulates, after necessary cleaning, is used as a source of energy

in all the steel plants. Tapping is also a source of particulate emission

which may be required to be controlled. Considering the amount

of emission from the Blast furnace, no limit is proposed.

Steel making process with oxygen lancing

The emission from this section would be normally high only during

oxygen lancing. The gas would contain iron particles and be of high

temperature. In view of the above, high energy venturi scrubber

or bag filter is the recommended control equipment. However, it

is noted that ESP can also be used. In the absence of any monitoring

data, a limit is adopted based on achievability. During non-lancing

period the emission can be controlled to 150 mg/N m3

or so, the figure

of 400 mg/N m3 is adopted to take care of the lancing period.

The

i.

11.

iii.

l v.

following standards are adopted :

Process

Sinter ing P iant

Coke Oven

Blast Furnace

Steel Making

a. During l\lormal Operation

b. During Oxygen Lancing

Emission limit for particuJa te matter

3 J 50 mg/Nm

3 150 mg/Nm

3 400 mg/Nm

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD ::J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD ::J < (/) ::J ("')

- 14 -

FERTILIZER (UREA)

1 . Background

2.

3.

There are a number of nitrogenous, phosphatic and complex fertilizer .

manufacturing plants in the country. Some of the plants have captive

sulphuric acid and nitric acid (intermediates) manufacturing uni ts;

the emission limits for these units will be as per those developed

separately for the respective acid plants. Emission limits for fluoride

in case of phosphatic fertilizer plants is under preparation. The various

nitrogenous fertilizers are ammonium sulphate, ammonium nitrate,

calcium ammonium nitrate, ammonium chloride and urea. Plants

manufacturing urea are taken up for the present.

Source of emission

() "U () OJ m z < (j)

The source ·-of emission of particulate matter urea dust from the urea () CD

plants is the prilling tower. Prilling tower use cooling air for the urea � ....,

prills and are mostly discharged from the top. In this process, the CD -

molten urea is sprayed from the top of the prilling tower and the

cold air flows counter current, which picks up fine particles of urea

alongwith moisture. The size of the particles range from 2 to 200

mJCrons.

Emission limits

� ("')

'"O ("') 0-CD ::J < (/) ::J

The air flow rate through the prilling tower is 400 - 500 m3 /hr per : tpd (tonne per day) of urea (Fertilizer Association, India). The dust

content of exhaust air could be around 300 - 500 mg/N m3. In order

to arrest these particles a scrubber followed by a demister should

be provided. The expected efficiency of removal is around 90%.

Therefore the limit for particulate emission urea dust through the

vent of the prilling tower adopted as :

Process

Pr illing Tower

Emission limit for particulate matter

50 mg/Nm3

-

- 15 -

NITRIC ACID

I • Background

2.

The ammonia oxidation processes account for 90% of the nitric acid

production in the country. The processes are divided into four basic

steps :

Oxidation of NH3 to NO

Oxidation of NO to N02

Absorption of N02 in water

Concentration of HN0 3

Sources of emission

The main source of emission is the spent (tail) gas from the absorption

tower in which N02 is absorbed in water to produce weak (50%-70%)

nitric acid. The pollutants are primarily nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide

and trace amounts of nitric acid mist. The spent gas after energy

recovery and acid mist removal is normally emitted through a stack.

The uncontrolled emission is estimated to be 25 to 27.5 kg of i'Y.O/ tonne of weak HN03 produced. (EPA:AP-42, Part A). As per data

reported by an Indian plant the uncontrolled emission level 1s in the

range of 2000-4000 pp rn.

In general, the quantity of NO emission is x kinetics of the nitric acid formation reaction.

variables that increase tail gas NO emission are x

directly related to the

The specific operating

I. insufficient air supply, which results in incomplete oxidation

of NO

2. low pressure in the abosorber

3. high temperature in the cooler-condenser and absorber

4. production of an excessively high-strength acid and

() "U () IJJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("') :J

-

16

5. operation at high throughput rates, which results in decreased

residence ti me in the absorber.

There will also be emission from the tower in which concentration

of the weak acid 1s carried out and is estimated at 0.1 to 2.5 kg/tonne

(EPA: AP-42, Part A).

3. Control of Emission

The stack gas before release to the atmosphere can be treated by

a catalytic combuster or on an alkaline scrubber. In the catalytic

combustor tail gases are heated to ignition temperature, mixed with

fuel (natural gas, hydrogen, or a rnix ture of both), and passed over

a catalyst. The reactions that occur result in the successive reduction

of N02 to NO. The ex tent of reduction of N02 to NO in the combustor

is, in turn, a function of plant design, type of fuel used, combustion

temperature and pressure, space velocity through the combustor, type

and amount of catalyst used and reactant concentrations.

The expected efficiencies of control in the case of catalytic combustor

are as follows (EPA: AP-42)

Type of fuel Control efficiency

Natural gas 78.97

Hydrogen 97 - 99.8

75% Hydrogen + 25% Natural gas 98 - 98.5

The other method of NO removal is by scrubbing. As per data reported x

by an Indian plant, from an inlet concentration of 2000-4000 ppm,

NO can be reduced to about 300 ppm, providing an efficiency of x

about 90%.

4. Emission standard

Considering 90% as the achievable control, an emission limit of 3

kg NO /tonne of weak acid produced (before concentration) averaged x

ovt. ,· a 2 - hour period, is adopted.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O"' CD :J < (/) :J ("')

:J -

17 -

No limits for acid mist is envisaged because it is considered as insig­

nificant. The standard is as follows :

NO emission from Nitric Acid Plant x

3 kg of NO per tonne of weak acid (before concentration) produced x

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("')

:J -

l. Background

- 18 -

SULPHURIC ACID

Sulphuric acid is produced mainly by the Contact Process. This involves

the catalytic conversion of sulphur dioxide, produced by burning sulphur,

into sulphur trioxide, which is then absorbed in strong sulphuric acid.

2. Source of Emission

Pollutants emitted from the plants are so2, so3 and acid mist. Nearly

all sulphur dioxide emission from sulphuric acid plants are found in

the exit gases of the so2 to so3 converter. The amuunt of so2 emitted

is inversely proportional to the conversion efficiency. The conversion

is affected by the following :

i. number of stages in the catalytic converter

ii. the amount of catalyst used

iii. the temperature and pressure and

1v. the concentration of reactants (502 and 02).

Uncontrolle,d em1ss1on for var10us conversion efficiencies are furnished

in Table l.

Table l : Conversion Efficiency and Sulphur Dioxide Emission

Conversion of

l 93

94

95

96

97

98

99

99.5

99.7

1 00 (Source: EPA: AP-42)

so2 emission, Kg/ MT of

l 00% H 2so 4 produced

2

48.0

41 .0

35.0

27.0

29.5

1 3.0

7.0

3.5

2.0

oo.o

() "U () OJ m z < CJ) () CD :J ....... ..,

CD

19 -

In addition to exit gases, small quantities of sulphur ox ides are also

emitted from storage tank vents, loading operation, sulphuric acid

concentrarbrs and through leaks.

3. Emission limits

Recent monitoring carried out by the Central Board at two plants

one double absorption and the other single, is furnished in Table 2.

Table 2: Sulphur Dioxide and Acid Mist Emission from Sulphuric

Acid P !ants

Type of plant and capacity, tpd

so2 emission

Quantum Kg/t of H2So4

Single* absorption 100

Double absorption 300

25

7

Concen:ration mg/m3

1775

1250

Acid mist

Quantum Concentration

29

12

860

1400 at l00°c

* with mist eliminator

In both the plants the so2 emiss10ns are uncontrolled. From the emis­

s10n data and conversion efficiencies (Table 1) it may be presumed

that 99% and 96.5% conversion efficiencies are achieved in double

and single absorption processes, respectively. But the double absorption

process is expected to achieve 99.7% conversion, the corresponding

so2 emission being 2 kg/tonne of H25o4 (100%). Adopting 99.4%

as the stable average efficiency, an emission limit of 4 kg/tonne of

H2so4 averaged over 2 hour, in case of double contact double absorption

process.

Plants having single absorption process are required to reduce 502 emission

for instance, by absorption in sodium sulphite or bisulphite and recycling

the same. A limit of 1 0 kg/tonne of H 2so 4 ( 100%) averaged over

2 hours is suggested as the limit for 502

em1ss10n for these plants.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("')

:J -

- 20 -

A mist eliminator can achieve 97.5% acid mist removal. Thus an

outlet concentration of 50 mg/Nm3 can be achieved with an inlet

concentration of 14-00 mg/Nm3 of acid mist. The following standards

are adopted :

l.

2.

Process

Single conversion

Single absorption

Double conversion

Double absorption

Sulphur dioxide emi s sion

1 0 kg/ tonne of

100% H2so4 produced

4 kg/ tonne of

100% H2so4 produced

Acid mist emission

3 50 mg/Nm 3 50 mg/Nm

3 50 mg/Nm

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ...... ...,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O" CD :J < (/) :J ("')

:J -

1.

- 21 -

GUIDELINES FOR MINI MU M STACK. HEIGHT

Plant Type

For all plants except Thermal Power Plant

Stack Height

30 m

2. For plants where the sulphur dioxide emission is estimated as Q(kg/hr)

the stack height, H in metres is given by

3.

4.

H = 14 (Q)0.3

For plant� where the particulate matter emission 1s estimated as Q

(tonnes/hr) the stack heigt1t, H in metres is given by

H = 74 (Q)0.27

If by using the formula given m 2 or 3 above, the stack height arrived

at, is more than 30 m then this higher stack height should be used.

In no case should the height of the stack be less than 30 m.

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� (")

"'O (") O'" CD :J < (/) :J (")

:J -

2.

3.

4

5

6

7.

8

9

l.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

L

2.

3

4.

5

6.

CENTRAL BOARD'S PUBLICATIONS

COMPREHENSIVE INDUSTRY DOCUMENT SERIES: COINDS

Comprehensive Industry Document Mon Mode Fibre Industry. (Comprehensive Industry Document Senee: COINDS! l / 1979-80) Mmimol Notionol Stondorde Mon Mode Fibre Industry. (Comprehensive Industry Document Series: COINDS/211979-80). Comprehensive Industry Document Oil Refinenee. (Comprehensive Industry Document Serie•: COINDS/311981·82). M1mmol Notional Stondo?"de Oil Refineries. (Comprehensive lnduetiy Document Series: COINDS/4/1981-82). Comp:ehensive Industry Document Chlor-Alkoli IAbrtd9ed) Industry. (Comprehensive [nduetry Document Series; COINDS/5/1979-80). Minimal Notional Standa.tcle Couetic Soda Industry (Comprehensive Industry Document Series: COINDS/611979-80) Comprehensive Industry Document Khondaori (SuQor) Industry (Comprehensive Industry Document Seriee: COINDS/7/1980-81). Mintmol Notional Stondon.ie, SuQor Jnduetry. iCom:>reheneive !ndueb-y Document Seriee: COINDS/911980-Bll. Comprehensive Industry Document Fermentction (Molt�riea. Breveriee ond Dietillenee) Industry. (Comprehen6lve Industry Document Seri.,.: COINDS/10/1981-82).

CONTROL OF URBAN POLLUTION SERIES: CUPS

Union Temtory of Delhi (Abnd9ed) (Control ol Urbon Pollution Senee: CUPS/l/1978-79). U mon Temtory ol Delhi IDetoiled). iControl of Urban Pollution Senea: CUPS/2/1978-79). lnduetiial Survey Union Temtory of Delhi (Control ol Urban Pollutton Series: CUPS/3/1978-79) Waeter Water Collection Treatment & Diepoeol in Clop I Cttieo.

(Control ol Urban Pollution Series: CUPS/4/1978-79). Statue of Water Supply a.nd Wastewater Collection Treatment & Diapoa<1l m Close II Towne of India (Control ol Urban Pollution Senee: CUPS/6/1979.80). U.T. ol ChondrQarh. Preliminary Report (Control ol Urban Pollution Series: CUPS/811981-82). Inventory & Aeeeument of Pollution Emieelon In dnd Arourd Aora-Mathurn Re91on iAbridQed) (Control of Urban Pollution Setiee: CUPS/7/1981-82).

ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT STUDY OF RIVER BASIN SERIES: ADSORBS

Umon Territory of Daman, Dadra and NaQ1n Haveli (AbridQed). (Aeeeeement ond Development Study ol River Baein Sertea: ADSORBS/111978-79). Scheme for ZoninQ and C1a1aificotion of Indian Rivera Eetuariee tmd Coaetdl W dtera (Pt One: Sweet Water). (Aeeeeement and Development Study ol River Baein Serieo; ADSORBS/311978-79). Bosin eub-Boein Inventory of Water Pollution: The GdnQa Basin Pt 1-Yomund sub-basin (Aeeeoement ond Development Study of River Baein Series: ADSORBS/3/1980-81). Comprehensive Pollution Survey end Studiee ol GanQa River Boein in Weat BenQdl. IAeeeeement and Developntent Study ol River Bo.in Series: ADSORBS/4/1980-81). Union Territory ol Goo. Doman & Diu (Dietl Goo) AbridQed. IAeseeement ond Development Study ol River Boain Series: ADSORBS/5/1982-83). Stream Water Ouality m Ma1or Rivers'" Gujarat DurinQ Biennium 1979-81 (Aeeeeement and Development Study ol River Boein Series. ADSORBS/6/1981-82).

PROGRAMME OBlECrIVE SERIES: PROBES

1. 0rQcniaation dnd Activitiee of State Water Pollution Control Boards.

(ProQromme Objective Series: PROBES/3/1978-79). 2. Industrial Eetote PlonntnQ:

(ProQramme Objective Series; PROBES/411979-80). 3. Epieodal Pollution A Coee Study Union Teriitory of Goo.

(Proqromme Obiective Series: PROBES/511979-80). 4. PJ'OC'eedinqe of the Workshop on Biolcq1cal lndicatore and Indices on Environmental Pollution.

iPro9romme Obiective Senee: PROBES/6/1980-81). 5. Ocean-Outlall for Pondicherry Papers Ltd. A Coee Study Union Territory of Pond1cheny.

(ProQramme Objective Series: PROBES/711982-83). 6. Initial Evaluation-Oil DrillinQ & Group GathetinQ Stdtion.

iProQromme Objective Series: PROBES/8/!'981-82). 7 Simple Guide Code ol Procilice for better Houee-KeepmQ and Pollution Control in ElectroplatinQ

Industry (EnQlieh/Hindl) (ProQramme Objective Series: PROBES/911981-82).

Pri=

Re. 100/.

Ra. 40/-

Ra 100/-

Ra. 40/.

Ra SQ/.

Re. 40/.

Ra. 401·

Ra. SQ/.

Ra. 40/-

Ra BO/.

Ra. 40/.

Ra. 100/.

!l-- 100/.

Ra SOI·

Ra SO/.

Ra. 40/·

Ra. 40/·

Ra. 100/.

Ra. 200/.

Not !or &le

Ra. 100/-

Ra. 151·

Ra 65/·

Ra 301·

Ra. S/.

CENTRAL BOARD FOR THE PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WATER POLLUTION STH & 6TH FLOORS, SKYLARK BUILDING, 60 NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI-19

() "U () OJ m z < (j) () CD :J ....... ....,

CD -

� ("')

"'O ("') O'" CD :J < (/) :J ("')

:J -