Impact of Brickkiln Pollution on Dhaka Citycenters.iub.edu.bd/chpd/Pres_Sem_Ijaz Hossain_Aprl...
Transcript of Impact of Brickkiln Pollution on Dhaka Citycenters.iub.edu.bd/chpd/Pres_Sem_Ijaz Hossain_Aprl...
Impact of Brickkiln Pollution on Dhaka City
Presented by: Ijaz Hossain Chemical Engineering Department BUET [email protected]
Snapshot of the Brick Making Industry in Bangladesh
Parameter Value (approximate) All Types of Coal-fired Kilns 5000 Natural Gas Fired Kilns 26 Kilns Within 25 kilometers of Dhaka 1200 Kilns in the Dhaka North Cluster 550 Annual Brick Production 15 Billion Value of Output in Taka 450 Billion Value of Output in US$ 640 Million Contribution to GDP 1% Coal Consumption 2.2 Million Tons Import Value of Coal 140 Million US$ Firewood Consumption 1.9 Million Tons GHG (CO2) Emission 8.75 Million Tons Clay 45 Million Tons Total Employment including supply of clay/coal, transport of bricks and marketing
Close to 1 million
Database of Brick KilnsBased on field surveys and interviews
with random brick field owners
Database of Brick Kilns
Database of Brick Kilns
Database of Brick Kilns
Database of Brick Kilns
2005-2006 Brick-burning season
Total Number of Brick Kilns = 4140
This is the minimum number – actual probably 10-15%
higher
Source: GEF-UNDP Study (2006)
Modeling:Ground level particulate concentration as
a result of emissions of 550 kilns in the North Dhaka Cluster were modeled
Technical Options:Alternative cleaner technologies were
identified and assessed
Main Data Requirement
Particulate emission from a typical kiln
Exact position of each kiln in the modeling domain
Chimney dimensions and flow of flue gas (collected and/or assumed)
Gas properties (assumed)
Meteorological data (WMO)
Stack Emissions Monitoring
Stack Emissions Monitoring
25'
Stack Emissions MonitoringTo improve understanding of the actual emissions from the industry
Stack Emissions Monitoring
Figure1:Total Hydrocarbon Concentration Vs. Time (Hours)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
1300
1303
1306
1309
1312
1315
1318
1321
1324
1327
1330
1333
1336
1339
1342
1345
1348
1351
1354
1357
1400
Time (Hours)
Tota
l Hyd
ro C
arbo
n C
once
ntra
tion,
(ppm
)
THC Concentration 500 ppm
Stack Emissions Monitoring
Figure2: CO Concentration Vs. Time (Hours)
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
1258
1301
1304
1307
1310
1313
1316
1319
1322
1325
1328
1331
1334
1337
1340
1343
1346
1349
1352
1355
1358
1401
Time (Hours)
CO
Con
cent
ratio
n, (p
pm)
CO Concentration 4000 ppm
Stack Emissions MonitoringParticulate Measurement
Stack Emissions MonitoringParticulate Measurement
Sampling Date Sampling Time SPM(mg/m3)
March 18, 2006 2:30 PM-5:20 PM 663.94
March 23, 2006 3:16 PM-6:35 PM 1173.77
Stack Emissions MonitoringParticulate Measurement
Bangladesh = 1000
Google Earth –Dhaka North Cluster
Hand Held GIS Meters
Modeling Domain –Dhaka North Cluster
Wind Direction In winter
(µg/m3)
Four-month (December-March) Average Particulate Profile [in micrograms/cubic meter]
SEASONAL AVERAGE OF WORST CASE SCENARIOOn a particular day/week, the pollution may be much more
(µg/m3)
December January
February March
Baseline
20% Less than Baseline
50% less than baseline
75% less than baseline
Particulate Concentration in µg/m3 % More or Less Than Baseline
LOCATION Baseline 20%
more
20%
less
50%
less
75% less
Baseline with
wind at 170o
1ZIA AIRPORT 27 32 21 13 7 81
2 UTTARA 53 64 42 27 13 171
7 GABTOLI 224 269 179 112 56 324
11
CITY CENTER 26 32 21 13 7 71
BAEC Apportionment Study
Found 15% of TSP to be from coal fired brickkilns
This study: 26 – 53 µg/m3 (except Gabtoli)
BAEC: Total TSP = 150 – 200 µg/m3
Therefore, 22% using BAEC’s total
1. Clamps – Very old traditional technology 2. BTK – Bull’s Trench Kilns (less than 10%) 3. FCK – Fixed Chimney Kilns (Baseline) 4. Improved FCK (gravity settling chamber, etc.) 5. Zigzag Kilns (less than 20% of existing kilns) 6. Hoffman Kilns (natural gas – only 26 kilns) 7. VSBK – Vertical Shaft Kilns 8. Hoffman (coal) + Internal Fuel (UNOPS) [HHK] 9. Tunnel Kilns
Clamps – Does not exist in Bangladesh BTK – Banned in Bangladesh
Market Share of the Four Types of Kilns (2005-06 season)
Kiln Type Number Percent of Kilns
Brick Production
(Billion)
Brick Production
(%)
FCK 3123 75.4 9.4 75.8
BTK 794 19.2 2.0 16.1
Zigzag Kiln 197 4.8 0.7 5.7
Hoffmann Kiln
26 0.6 0.3 2.4
Total 4140 100 12.4 100
Source: GEF-UNDP Study (2006)
FCK
FCK – Assessment
Simple and convenient technology
Ideally suited to the level of the present owners and workers
Is constructed in low lying land (cheap and abundant)
Profitability – High, IRR > 30%
Pollution – Very polluting
Zigzag Kiln
Zigzag Kiln – Assessment
The construction technology is not readily available, and expertise has to be procured from India Scrubbing water is not changed regularlyOperation procedure is more sophisticated than FCK – a badly operated kiln has the same energy consumption and hence pollution Requires electricity and standby diesel generatorPollution – 50% less assuming good design and proper operation
HOFFMAN KILN(30 Kilns use 5.5 MMcfd of Natural Gas )
Natural Gas Hoffman Kiln
Hoffman – Assessment
Initial investment 10 times that of the FCK (50% for land) Requires high land, natural gas connection, electricity and standby generator Requires more land compared to the FCK or Zigzag (at least 5 acres of high land close to a main road) Profitability low (IRR ~ 20%, 12-months operation needed to recover costs) Pollution – 80-90% reduction compared to the FCK
FCK – Modifications
Existing FCKs can be improved with one or all of the following – Gravity settling chambers– Improved coal feeding– Internal fuel (up to 50%)– Plugging air leakage
All of these options will require technical assistance in the early years. Once tried and tested, these can be easily replicated
Operation and maintenance aspect is not known
Some Indian data is available for gravity settling chamber modification along with improved coal feeding. The particulate emission can be reduced below 400 mg/m3 that would meet present and future emission standard
Coal Hoffman Hybrid Hoffman Kiln (HHK)
Coal Hoffman Hybrid Hoffman Kiln (HHK)
Permanent Roof and ID Fan +
Internal Fuel (up to 80%)
Hoffman Coal (HHK) –Assessment
The technology provider claims 80% coal can be mixed with clay. This needs to be demonstrated
Operational and maintenance issues from Bangladesh perspective is not known yet
Technology provider claims that the quality of the brick is better than FCK 1st class brick (but using extruder and drying chamber)
It is claimed that Hoffman (coal) can reduce pollution by 50% to 80% compared to the FCK
VSBK – Assessment According to available literature sources the bricks are of good quality. But, Bangladeshi brick makers have the following perception problems: – Existence of cracks in bricks
– Bricks do not make a good ringing sound when banged
About 70-80% reduction in emission compared to the FCK. Current standard is 1000 mg/m3 for 120-feet chimney. Emission is 200-300 mg/m3 for VSBK, but total height including chimney around 60 feet
Comparison of Particulate Emission of Different Kilns
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
FCK Zigzag (medium) NG Hoffman FCK (+GSC+IF) Coal Hoffman VSBK Zigzag (good)
Part
icul
ates
(mg/
m3 )
Present Emission Standard
Probable Future Emission Standard
Cement Block Plant
Summary – Technology Options 1. Internal fuel
This appears to be a very promising option for reducing pollution. Both the HHK and VSBK employ this practice
+
Gravity Settling Chamber
FCK will be able to meet future emissions standard if it is set at 500 mg/m3 or more
2. Zigzag Kilns
Many operating in Bangladesh have notbeen constructed according to the design standards. As a result these will not be able to meet the 500 mg/m3 standard.
3. Coal Hoffman (HHK)
The HHK can meet future emissions standard. It will also lower coal consumption, but the exact amount will only be known after its commercial operation in Bangladesh.
5. VSBK
In terms of emissions the VSBK is the best coal burning option. But this is totally new, and there appears to be some hesitation and resistance from existing FCK owners in shifting to this technology.
6. Cement Blocks
In terms of service cement blocks are comparable to bricks, but there exists consumer resistance. Blocks use imported cement, while bricks use imported coal. However, the financial burdenfor importing Cement is 50 to 100% greaterthan that for importing coal from India.
• The DoE should use dispersion modeling for Permitting industries. Compliance only with stack standards is not enough.
• Significant efforts are underway for transforming the brick industry. Many of these will yield positive results in the next 2-3 years. The DoE should initiate a study to update standards, and gradually introduce tighter standards, and not hastily ban technologies and practices.
• Undertake project to determine the viability of using Gravity Settling Chambers and Internal Fuel in FCKsbecause if these options prove successful then FCKs may be able to meet future emission standards.
• Undertake study to evaluate the popular Zigzag Kiln’s design and emission.
• Undertake pilot projects of new technology (like VSBK) and assess operational (including product quality) and financial viability.