analysis of targeted emission-reduction possibilities in the el paso del norte
DESCRIPTION
Analysis of Targeted Emission-Reduction Possibilities in the El Paso del Norte. Teresa Montoya 1 , Ph.D., P.E .; Arturo Woocay 2 , Ph.D.; Jose Mares 3 , Ph.D.; Wen-Whai Li 1 , Ph.D., P.E. 1 Dept. Of Civil Eng. UTEP; 2 ITCJ; 3 UACJ . - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Analysis of Targeted Emission-Reduction Possibilities in the El Paso del Norte
Teresa Montoya1, Ph.D., P.E.; Arturo Woocay2, Ph.D.; Jose Mares3, Ph.D.; Wen-Whai Li1, Ph.D., P.E.
The 59th Meeting of the Joint Advisory Committee for the Improvement of Air Quality in theCiudad Juárez, Chihuahua / El Paso, Texas / Doña Ana County, New México Air Basin
Cd. Juarez, Chihuahua/El Paso, Texas
January 23, 2014
1Dept. Of Civil Eng. UTEP; 2ITCJ; 3UACJ
AcknowledgementsThis study was supported by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). We thanks the following persons for making this study possible:
• Stephen M. Niemeyer, P.E., TCEQ• Victor Valenzuela, Ph.D., formerly TCEQ• Gerardo Tarin, SEMARNAT• Julio Enrique Flores, Grupo de Cementos de Chihuahua (GCC)• Erick Ayala, Fernando Perez, and Samuel Hernandez; ITCJ• Marina Mendoza Fong, Eduardo Aguirre Zavala, Jesús Alarcón Reyes, and
José Manuel Pacheco Varela of UACJ• Mayra Chavez, UTEP Air Quality Research Group
The contents of this report are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the TCEQ or UTEP
Four Targeted Source Categories
1. Fugitive PM emissions from unpaved roads2. Fugitive PM emissions from a cement plant3. VOC emissions from gasoline fueling stations4. VOC emissions from automotive paint and
body shops
1. PM Emission form Unpaved Roads in Ciudad Juárez
1.1 Objective: Develop an estimate of PM contributions to ambient air as a result of traffic on unpaved roads in Ciudad Juarez and estimate the cost of paving and maintaining such roads.
1.2 Road Dust Emission Scenarios
i) Vehicle –enhanced dust emissions from major streets
ii) Vehicle –enhanced dust emissions from minor streets in residential neighborhoods
iii) Direct emissions from vehicle tail pipes, tire and brake wear
iv) Wind erosion from unprotected surface of unpaved roads
1.3 Unpaved Roads Inventory
63% paved37% unpaved
TDM roadway networkIMIP unpaved/paved roads network
TDM network was aligned with the IMIP network. Minor arterial unpaved roads were identified
1.4 Silt Loading Content and Soil Moisture
• 10 soil sampling sites
• 10 soil sampling sites• Samples analyzed at UACJ Soil Lab and Grupo LEC Laboratory
1.5 PM10 Emission Estimates
Total PM10 Emissions (ton/day)
Wind Erosion TAZ roads emissions Major roads emissions Direct Vehicle
5.75 57.61 266.98 0.016296
1.7 Mitigation Strategies and Cost • Water or chemicals to increase moisture content• Paving – Paving costs estimated utilizing tables from IMIP– Two paving options: 5-cm and 15-cm depth asphalt– $482/m2 for 5-cm flexible pavement (Pesos)– $640/m2 for 15-cm concrete pavement (Pesos)
Pavement Option Roads Total Area (m2) Total Cost (US dollars)
Flexible Pavement 1,285,276 $49,521,700
Concrete 1,285,276 $65,664,772
2. PM Emission from the Ciudad Juárez Cement Plant
2.1 Objective: Develop an estimate of emissions from all PM generating processes at the combined quarry and rock-crushing facility and estimate possible reduction in PM emission considering operational modifications as control strategies.
2.2 The Facilities
2.3 The Operations
2.4 The Process Flow Chart
2.6 Itemized PM10 Emissions
– Cement Plant Process PM Emissions– PM Emissions from Vehicle Movement on
Unpaved Industrial Roads– PM Emissions from Vehicle Movement on Paved
Roads– PM Emissions from Aggregate Handling and
Storage Piles
2.7 Summary of PM10 EmissionsActivity
Particle SizePM2.5 PM5 PM10 PM15 PM30
1
Unpaved Quarry Dump-Truck (52.5 tons, 1.6 km, 3,530 trips) 0.98 9.77 29.85
Cement Production Processes 0.01 4.31 2.82
Paved Outside Sale Heavy -Load Trucks (36.8 tons, 2.6 km, 2,290 trips) 0.33 1.34 1.67 7.00
Unpaved Heavy-Load Trucks (36.8 tons, 0.15 km Unpaved, 2,290) 0.05 0.51 1.55
Paved Lim-Prod Dump-Truck (52.5 tons, 3.5 km, 290 trips) 0.08 0.33 0.41 1.71
Active Storage Pile Area 2 and 3 0.21 0.45
Inactive Storage Pile Area 2 and 3 0.08 0.16
Unpaved Conveyor System Dump-Truck (52.5 tons, 0.15 km, 290 trips) 0.01 0.08 0.23
Unpaved Aggregate Dump-Truck (39.75 tons, 210 meters, 176 trips) 0.005 0.05 0.15
Active Storage Pile Area 1 0.04 0.09
Aggregate Handling to Pettibon Crusher 0.004 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06
Unpaved Mirosilax Clinker Dump Truck (52.5 tons, 0.21 km, 52 trips) 0.002 0.02 0.06
Inactive Storage Pile Area 1 0.02 0.03
Paved Average Heavy Load Trucks (36.8 tons, 0.54km, 132 trips) 0.004 0.02 0.02 0.08
Paved Average Mirosilax Clinker Dump Truck (52.5 tons, 0.32 km, 52 trips) 0.001 0.01 0.01 0.03
Paved Average Heavy Load Trucks (36.8 tons, 0.09km, 33 trips) 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.003
TOTAL [Tons in Peek Month] 1.46 0.02 16.80 2.14 44.29
2.8 Possible Mitigation Strategies• Sanders et al 1997 reported that the use of dust
suppressants reduced fugitive dust emissions from unpaved roadways by 50 to 75% and was more protective of the roadway surface by reducing aggregate losses by 42 to 61%.
• Depending on the cost of aggregates, the breakeven point for the ADT varies slightly.
• The three recommended chemicals are: Lignosulfonate, CaCl2, and MgCL2
2.9 Costs of Possible Strategies• Using this figure and an estimated of 1 mile of
unpaved road within the Juarez cement plant, dust emissions from the unpaved road sections within the plant can be reduced by ~50% for a cost of $6,000.
Costs for application of dust suppressants on unpaved roads in terms of average daily traffic (ADT), reproduced from Sanders et al (1997).
3. VOC Emissions from Gasoline Fueling Stations
3.1 Objective: Update information on VOC emissions from gasoline fueling stations in Ciudad Juárez using new survey on 10 percent of the stations.
3.2 Gasoline Station SurveyBackground Information• PEMEX 2011 COA• ERG 2011 Study• Lorena Mendoza (MS Thesis, ITCJ;
2012)• A total of 171 stations
Gasoline Station Survey• 17 stations• Information Collected
– Interviewer’s basic information– Description and location of the
fuel station– Operations information– Emission control practices– Notes and comments from the
interviewer– Explanations of emission
control practice
3.4 VOC Emissions from OperationsGas
Station
PEMEX Survey (Daily Reports)
Balanced Submerged
Filling
Underground tank breathing and emptying
Displacement losses
(uncontrolled)
Spillage Balanced Submerged
Filling
Underground tank breathing and emptying
Displacement losses
(uncontrolled)
Spillage
1248 0.232 0.696 7.656 0.464 0.128 0.383 4.213 0.255
3485 0.149 0.446 4.910 0.298 0.154 0.461 5.069 0.307
4331 0.140 0.420 4.620 0.280 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4571 0.307 0.922 10.138 0.614 0.117 0.351 3.865 0.234
5704 0.117 0.350 3.854 0.234 0.030 0.089 0.982 0.060
6269 0.079 0.238 2.614 0.158 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6515 0.110 0.329 3.617 0.219 0.040 0.119 1.305 0.079
6643 0.067 0.202 2.217 0.134 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6912 0.114 0.343 3.775 0.229 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
6977 0.164 0.492 5.412 0.328 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
8076* 3.091* 0.269 2.957 0.179 0.755* 0.066 0.722 0.044
8546 0.162 0.485 5.333 0.323 0.069 0.207 2.281 0.138
8669 0.258 0.773 8.501 0.515 0.012 0.036 0.393 0.024
8792 0.085 0.254 2.798 0.170 0.036 0.109 1.204 0.073
9123 0.118 0.353 3.881 0.235 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
9138 0.218 0.653 7.181 0.435 0.038 0.113 1.248 0.076
9962 0.263 0.790 8.685 0.526 0.269 0.806 8.870 0.538
Totals 2.671 8.013 88.148 5.342 1.647 2.741 30.153 1.827
1 VOC annual emissions at every stage (tons/year), developed using AP-422 Emissions calculated based on Magna gasoline sales data reported by PEMEX and in the surveys (in liters per month)
3.5 VOC Emissions From Idling Vehicles
Number of vehicles waiting as well as vehiclewaiting time as reported in the surveys
StationTotal Sale
(Liters)No. of Gasoline
pumpsVehicles waiting
Service time (min)
1248 5,800,002 16 3 2
3485 3,719,989 4 2 1
4331 3,500,050 8 0 0
4571 7,679,990 12 2 5
5704 2,920,027 4 2 1
6269 1,979,951 4 2 1
6515 2,740,008 4 2 3
6643 1,679877 4 1 0
6912 2,859,871 8 1 0
6977 4,099,909 6 N/A N/A
8076 2,240,008 4 2 3
8546 4,039,841 6 6 5
8669 6,440,024 3 4 1
8792 2,119,815 4 1 2
9123 2,939,909 N/A N/A N/A
9138 5,439,830 16 4 1
9962 6,579,876 6 4 3
Mean 3,928,175 6.81 2.33 1.87
Median 3,500,050 5.00 2.00 1.00
SD 1,819,873 4.25 1.59 1.64
Process Vehicle Type Emission
(tons/year)
Running Exhaust LDGV 2.60
Evaporative Emissions LDGV 3.56
Total 6.16
Total VOC Emissions from Idling vehicles at Gasoline Stations, estimated using USEPA MOVES 2010 Model
3.6 Summary of VOC Emissions from Gasoline Stations
• Stage 1 control reduces ~95% of the VOC emissions at a gas station
• Most of the Juarez gas stations are equipped with Stage 1 control.
• Cost for installing Stage 1 control is ~$10-15K per station• Juarez gas stations are not equipped with Stage 2 control• $40K per station for a maximum of 18 refueling guns for Stage
2 control (or ~$2.2K for installing 1 gas refueling gun)
4. VOC Emissions from Automobile Paint and Body Shops
4.1 Objective: • Identify and quantify the VOC emissions from
automotive paint and body shops in Ciudad Juárez
• Recommend methods to reduce VOC emissions
4.2 Auto Body Paint Shop SurveyPaint Shop Survey• 50 shops identified• 14 shops surveyed• Information Collected
– Interviewer’s basic information
– Description and location of the shop
– Operations information– Emission control
practices– Notes and comments
from the interviewer– Explanations of
emission control practice
Background Information• UACJ 2011• ERG 2011• US EPA 1999• Varying shop number and locations• Mostly small, family oriented operations
4.3 Use of Paint Guns and Booths
Paint Shop Operation Conditions Taller Lopez Painting booth and Hood Auto climas mult. Carrocería y pintura Painting booth and Hood Body Work Paint Painting booth and Hood Carrocería L.A. Body Shop Open air Taller Meny Open air MM Competición Painting booth and Hood Carrocería Lalos Open air Vucano Painting booth and Hood Hummer Painting booth and Hood Segaso Painting booth and Hood Hummer Automotriz Painting booth, filter and Hood Automax Painting booth and filter Impacto Painting booth and filter Multiservicios RT Painting booth and filter
Paint shop Standard paint gun
LVLP paint guns
Taller Lopez ●Auto climas mult. Carrocería y pintura ● ●
Body Work Paint ● Carrocería L.A. Body Shop ●
Taller Meny ●
MM Competición ●
Carrocería Lalos ● Vucano ●
Hummer ●
Segaso ●
Hummer Automotriz ●
Automax ●
Impacto ●
Multiservicios RT ●
4.4 VOC Emissions from Paint Shops
Scenario
Total Enamel
used (lts/mo.)
Total Urethane used
(lts/mo.)
Total other used
(lts/mo.)
Enamel VOC
Emissions (gr/mo.)
Urethane VOC
Emissions (gr/mo.)
Other VOC Emissions (gr/mo.)
VOC Emissions (Kg/mo.)
VOC Emissions (tons/mo.)
First Scenario 43.49 435.58 27.66 27794.02 241838.38 23201.49 292.83 0.3228Second Scenario 113.00 879.50 85.50 72217.17 488307.2 71718.26 632.24 0.696
Third Scenario 36 383.5 31.5 23007.24 212923.04 26422.52 262.35 0.289
Scenario Total solvent used (lts/mo.)
VOC Emissions (Kg/mo.)
VOC Emissions (tons/mo.)
First scenario 1345 1033.72 1.14
Second Scenario 3771 2896.54 3.19
Third Scenario 417 320.30 0.35
• VOC Emissions from Painting in Ciudad Juarez
• VOC Emissions from Solvent Use in Ciudad Juarez
Three Emissions Scenarios
1. Average Amount of paints and distillates as estimated from the survey
2. Maximum amount
3. Minimum amount
4.5 Summary of VOC Emissions from Auto Paint and Body Shops
• Relatively insignificant emissions• Difficult to regulate and control• Participation of local and State environmental authorities are
critical for a timely, reliable shop emissions inventory• Good housekeeping at the shops is required• Financial subsidies would be most effective in promoting use of
solvent recovery systems and paint guns
Questions and Comments?
Thank [email protected]