Air Pollution Monitoring & Sampling Abstracts

December 2009

MO 09 12 01 “Detecting Airborne Mercury by Use of Polymer/Carbon Films” by Abhijit Shevade, Margaret Ryan, Margie Homer, Adam Kisor, April Jewell, Shiao-Pin Yen, Kenneth Manatt, Mario Blanco and William Goddard, Caltech. NASA Tech Briefs, November 2009,
1 p.

Films made of certain polymer/carbon composites have been found to be potentially useful as sensing films for detecting airborne elemental mercury at concentrations on the order of tens of parts per billion or more. That is to say, when the polymer/carbon composite films are exposed to air containing mercury vapor, their electrical resistances decrease by measurable amounts.

IM 121 MERCURY

 

MO 09 12 02 “EPA’s GHG Reporting Rule Raises the Bar on Monitoring” by Vincent Valk. Chemical Week, October 12/19, 2009, 1 p.

EPA’s recently finalized greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting rule will present a significant challenge to chemical companies, even those that currently report emissions experts say. The main difference is that “you can’t just make a calculation, you have to verify it,” says Lorraine Krupa Gershman, ACC’s director of regulatory affairs.

IM 174 GREENHOUSE GASES

 

MO 09 12 03 “HOWTO:  Pick an EPA Protocol Gas” by Air Liquide Group. Pollution Engineering, November 2009, 1 p.

Offered by a dozen or so suppliers, they seem to be growing on trees these days. Are they all pretty much the same? Not according to recent EPA blind audit. It disclosed that among 87 cylinders of tri-blends from 14 suppliers, of the 261 components contained, 28 (11%) did not meet Acid Rain Program accuracy criterion*.

IM 340 EPA PROTOCOL GASES

 

MO 09 12 04 “HOWTO:  Use Transmissometry for PM CEMS” by Ametek Land Inc. Pollution Engineering, November 2009, 1 p.

Some in the industrial market have voiced concerns over technologies used for particulate matter continuous emissions monitoring (PM CEMS); specifically, as they regard monitoring particulate matter (PM) concentration, in lieu of percent opacity. The primary question has been:  Must the permitted source install new equipment to meet a PM CEMS requirement, or can the source somehow use its existing technology for the new requirement? If its existing technology employs transmissometry (light extinction), applicable regulation language and technology requirements indicate the source can, indeed, use its existing technology.

IM 132 PARTICULATE, IM 261 CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITOR,

IM 281 TRANSMISSOMETER

 

MO 09 12 05 “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources:  Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing; Final Rule” by U.S. EPA. Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 230, December 2, 2009, 32 p.

EPA is promulgating national emissions standards for the control of emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from the asphalt processing and asphalt roofing manufacturing area source category. These final emissions standards for new and existing sources are based upon EPA’s final determination as to what constitutes the generally available control technology or management practices (GACT) for the source category.

IM 760 LEGISLATION & REGULATION, S 2950/00 ASPHALT

 

MO 09 12 06 “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:  Area Source Standards for Paints and Allied Products Manufacturing; Final Rule” by U.S. EPA. Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 231, December 3, 2009, 28 p.

EPA is issuing national emission standards for control of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) for the Paints and Allied Products Manufacturing area source category. The final rule establishes emission standards in the form of management practices for volatile HAP, and emission standards in the form of equipment standards for particulate HAP. The emissions standards for new and existing sources are based on EPA’s determination as to what constitutes the generally available control technology or management practices (GACT) for the area source category.

IM 760 LEGISLATION & REGULATION, S 3950/03 PAINTS

 

MO 09 12 07 “Nebraska City Station Unit 2, Nebraska City, Nebraska” by Robert Peltier, Editor. Power, October 2009, 3 p.

Omaha Public Power District commissioned Unit 2 at its Nebraska City Station in May of this year. The new 682-MW unit joins Unit 1. The project is outfitted with all the requisite air quality control systems and sports a very good thermal efficiency. More importantly, the plant will provide reasonably priced power for customers of eight municipal utilities that share ownership of the plant’s electrical output.

IM 261 CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITOR, S 4911/23 UTILITY, COAL-FIRED