13/10/2011 Introduction Considered: Existing Conditions Ambient air quality data REMASCO Proposal Kingsville Local sources Emission Test Data from REMASCO Modelled Existing and REMASCO sources to: Determine Cumulative Effects of Project Point of Impingement Results for REMASCO Compared POI values to Standards Transferred results to Human Health Risk Assessment Existing Air Quality Ozone Data for 2008 Southwestern Ontario under influence of trans ‐ 60 1 hour Concentration [ppb] boundary flow of contaminants results in elevated 50 levels of ozone [O 3 ], fine particulate [PM 2.5 ], oxides of 40 nitrogen [NO x ] Local sources: building heating; power generation; 30 Annual Mean vehicles; and, industrial processes also contribute to 1 ‐ hr 90th Percentile 20 Air Quality conditions 10 Ministry of Environment [MoE] monitors O 3 , PM 2.5 , NO x in Windsor and Chatham 0 Windsor Windsor Chatham Port O 3 and PM 2.5 in Port Stanley Downtown West Stanley 1
13/10/2011 Oxides of Nitrogen as NO 2 Fine Particulate [PM 2.5 ] 140 40 35 120 Concentration [ug/m 3 ] Concentration [ug/m 3 ] 30 100 25 80 Annual Mean 24 ‐ hr Mean 20 1 ‐ hr 90th % 60 24 ‐ hr 90th Percentile 15 1 hour Maximum 24 hr Maximum 40 24 hour Maximum 10 20 5 0 0 Windsor Windsor West Chatham Windsor Windsor Chatham Port Downtown Downtown West Stanley Emissions Data Emissions for Existing Sources Cumulative Assessment considered other greenhouse REMASCO has been tested since operations started heating systems: April 2008; May 2009; April, July & Dec 2010 Various fuels used in these facilities (wood, oil, coal, Testing parameters set by MoE Guideline A ‐ 7 and listed in natural gas) the Certificate of Approval issued to REMASCO by MoE. No controls required on these facilities Testing completed by Independent Testing Firm No testing done on these facilities Testing Firm obtains approval for testing from MoE Used literature data to estimate emissions Testing is witnessed by MoE who also review the final report Emissions from existing facilities compared to Data for REMASCO emissions for this study from 2010 REMASCO on the basis of energy generated Report [mass/MMBtu input] 2
13/10/2011 Figure 2 Comparison PCDD/F Emission Factors [lb/MMBtu] by Fuel Figure 1 Metals Emission Factor [lb/MMBtu] by Fuel 1.20E ‐ 10 1.00E ‐ 10 1.8E ‐ 03 1.6E ‐ 03 Emission Factor [lb/MMBtu] 8.00E ‐ 11 1.4E ‐ 03 1.2E ‐ 03 1.0E ‐ 03 6.00E ‐ 11 8.0E ‐ 04 6.0E ‐ 04 [MMBtu/lb] 4.0E ‐ 04 4.00E ‐ 11 2.0E ‐ 04 0.0E+00 2.00E ‐ 11 0.00E+00 Coal Oil Wood Gas REMASCO Actual Emissions from UNEP Standardardized Toolkit & REMASCO Testing Figure 3 Criteria Contaminant Emission Factors [lb/MMBtu] by Fuel Proposed Installed Capacity 6.0E ‐ 01 Greenhouse heating systems sized for 30 Boiler HP per 5.0E ‐ 01 acre with storage systems Emission Factor [lb/MMBtu] 4.0E ‐ 01 Electrical needs 10 kWe per acre 3.0E ‐ 01 Gasifiers currently sized for 500 Boiler HP each but 2.0E ‐ 01 can be enlarged to 600 Boiler HP each 1.0E ‐ 01 Plan for ultimate systems will be 3300 boiler HP at 0.0E+00 Southshore and 2000 boiler HP at Agriville Will NOT operate at maximum output continuously 3
13/10/2011 Modelling Procedures Operating Scenarios Computerized model uses wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and solar insolation values to predict TURBULENCE in the atmosphere Greenhouse heating requirements vary by season Introduce sources into the wind field and the model simulated the January and February 100% EMISSIONS as they are transported downwind March 82% As the emissions are moved downwind the wind STRETCHES the plume in the downwind direction April and December 60 – 70% Atmospheric turbulence May, October and November 40 – 50% SPREADS the plume in the June – September 27 – 35% vertical and cross wind Co ‐ generation system >90% except July & August 72% directions Emissions related to input levels These effects REDUCE adjusted emissions to reflect operating situation for the CONCENTRATIONS both REMASCO and existing greenhouse systems as the plume moves downwind Study Area showing Sensitive Receptors Modelling Receptors Model predicts concentrations at locations Overall 100 m x 100 m spacing over 10 square kilometres centered on a point between Agriville and Southshore Additional receptors around sources with tighter spacing brought total to 11,300 receptors 4
13/10/2011 Meteorological Data Sources Model uses hourly data for 5 years REMASCO sources Wind Speed 3 stacks at Southshore Wind Direction 2 stacks at Agriville Temperature Existing Greenhouse Sources Solar Insolation 25 greenhouse complexes included 365 days per year x 24 hours per day x 5 years = 43,800 Size of boiler input based upon area of greenhouse hours Assumed large diameter low velocity exhaust point Combined with receptors means nearly 495 million values calculated Sources modelled at different rates for all each month Results Results Compared to Standards Generates a value at each receptor for each hour 1000 1000 Data is used to define: Concentration [ug/m3] 1 Hr Max Concentration [ug/m3] 1 Hr Max The maximum hourly value at each receptor 100 100 The maximum 8 hour, 24 hour averages at each receptor 1 Hr 1 Hr Std Standard Model allows comparison of effects of different groups 24 Hr Max 24 Hr Max of sources – REMASCO and the existing greenhouses 10 10 Given the amount of data generated typically reduce to 24 Hr Std 24 Hr Std maximum values at each receptor and plot results as Annual Annual lines of equal concentration [isopleths] Max x 10 Max 1 1 Values transferred to Intrinsik for HHRA Sulphur Nitrogen Dioxide Oxides 5
13/10/2011 Results 24 Hour Maxima Results 24 Hour Maxima 1.0E+06 1.00E+07 24 Hour 24 Hour Concentration [ug/m3] Concentration [g/m3] 1.00E+06 1.0E+05 Maximum Maxima 1.00E+05 1.0E+04 1.00E+04 1.0E+03 1.00E+03 O.Reg 419 O.Reg 419 1.0E+02 Criteria Criteria 1.00E+02 Levels Levels 1.0E+01 1.00E+01 24 Hour 24 Hour Average Average 1.0E+00 1.00E+00 REMASCO Results Summary Sensitive Receptors Maxima predicted for all contaminants were below the At the sensitive receptors specific values were applicable guideline value for both 1 hour and 24 hour determined for the maximum value over the period averages: Since the absolute maxima for all receptors is on the NOx values closest to standard at 21 – 22% both 1 hour Southshore site and 24 hour averages Not surprising maxima at the sensitive receptors are all Sulphur Dioxide and Particulate matter 1 – 2% of lower than those shown previously standard The further the sensitive receptor is from the REMASCO HCl at the emission limit of A ‐ 7 produces 24 hour average that is 29% of the standard sites the lower the maximum concentration Maxima occur on Site at Southshore – values at Can conclude levels at sensitive receptors low sensitive receptors are lower compared to standards 6
13/10/2011 Upset Conditions Results Upset Conditions Sometimes people suggest that stacks are sampled All results at the sensitive receptors under upset under ideal conditions conditions were less than the MoE guideline values: This implies that worse emission levels could be NOx hourly maxima was 33% of standard missed by testing – typically these would be UPSETS HCl hourly maxima was 41% of the standard This effect was evaluated at the Sensitive Receptors for NOx daily maxima was 7% of the standard all contaminants using US EPA approaches: Increase in hourly emission rate 10 times except NOx at Can conclude that even under Upset conditions the 2.15 times and SO2 at 7 times concentrations are below the MoE guideline values Daily and Annual values 2.8 times the hourly emission rate Guideline Values Cumulative Effects Assessment Based upon extensive scientific study of effects of Combines: contaminants The existing air quality in the community Take into consideration typical background levels of If there is monitoring data in the community this can define the existing air quality contaminants in atmosphere in the province If no monitoring use data from other communities and Regardless there are questions about the potential combine with the effects of existing sources in the community effects of adding a new source to emissions in the 90 th percentile accepted as a conservative community representation of background concentrations Used Chatham and Windsor data This is typically called the Cumulative Effect Need to look at existing major sources ‐ greenhouses 7
13/10/2011 Cumulative Assessment (2) Existing Maximum 1 Hr NOx Used same computer model Modelled NOx and particulate matter emissions for: Existing situation for 25 greenhouse complexes in the study area including existing Southshore and Agriville Future situation replacing Southshore and Agriville existing emissions with REMASCO emissions Reviewed output Graphical comparison of levels Numeric comparison at critical receptors for HHRA study Combined Maximum 1 Hr NOx REMASCO Maximum 1 Hour NOx 8
Recommend
More recommend
