p.1 

OAR Box 1252 

Prepped by Candice Davis 

Document Number: 

69) II-A-2 

Docket Number: 

A-90-22 

Printed 5/21/2008 11:46:01 AM Sheet 69 of 184' 
1 

^ ^ 

1 

United States Office of Air Quality 

Environmental Proiect.o-n \ Planning and Standards 

Agency Research Triangle Park 

• • 

SERA COMPILATION 

AIR POLLUTANT 

EMISSION FACTORS 

Volume I: 

Stationary Point 

And Area Sources 

FOURTH EDITION 
P.3 

4.4 TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETING OF PETROLEUM LIQUIDS1"

3 

4.4.1 General 

The transportation and marketing of petroleum liquids involve many 

distinct operations, each of which represents a potential source of evaporation loss. Crude oil is transported from production operations to a 

refinery by tankers, barges, rail tank cars, tank trucks and pipelines. 

Refined petroleum products are conveyed to fuel marketing terminals and 

petrochemical industries by these same modes. From the fuel marketing 

terminals, the fuels are delivered by tank trucks to service stations, 

commercial accounts and local bulk storage plants. The final destination 

for gasoline is usually a motor vehicle gasoline tank. Similar distribution paths exist for fuel oils and other petroleum products. A general 

depiction of these activities is shown in Figure 4.4-1. 

4.4.2 Emissions and Controls 

Evaporative emissions from the transportation and marketing of 

petroleum liquids may be separated, by storage equipment and mode of 

transportation used, into four categories: 

1. Rail tank cars, tank trucks and marine vessels: Loading, transit 

and ballasting losses. 

2. Service stations: . Bulk fuel drop losses and underground tank 

breathing losses. 

3. Motor vehicle tanks: Refueling losses. 

4. Large storage tanks: Breathing, working and standing storage 

losses. These are discussed in Section 4.3. 

Evaporative and exhaust emissions are also associated with motor 

vehicle operation, and these topics are discussed in AP-42, Volume II: 

Mobile Sources. 

Rail Tank Cars, Tank Trucks and Marine Vessels - Emissions from these 

sources are due to loading losses, ballasting losses and transit losses. 

Loading Losses - Loading losses are the primary source of evaporative 

emissions from rail tank car, tank truck and marine vessel operations. 

Loading losses occur as organic vapors ln "empty" cargo tanks are 

displaced to the atmosphere by the liquid being loaded into the tanks. 

These vapors are a composite of (1) vapors formed in the empty tank by 

evaporation of residual product from previous loads, (2) vapors transferred 

to the tank in vapor balance systems as product is being unloaded, and 

(3) vapors generated in the tank as the new product is being loaded. The 

quantity of evaporative losses from loading operations is, therefore, a 

function of the following parameters. 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-1 
f f i 

I 

to 

i 

OIL FIELD 

CRUDE 

STORAGE 

TANKS 

CRUDE OIL PRODUCTION TANK CAR 

1 

CRUDE 

STORAGE 

TANKS 

REFINERY 

1 

PROOUCT 

STORAGE 

TANKS 

CA 

cn 

M 

o 

as 

2 

o 

CA TANKER/B 

TANK CAR 

1 

MARKETING 

TERMINAL 

STORAGE 

TANKS 

PETROCHEMICALS 

SERVICE 

STAUONS 

i 

COMMERCIAL 

ACCOUNTS 

STORAGE 

TANKS 

AUTOMOBILES 

AND 

OTHER MOf OR 

VEHICLES 

oo 

Figure 4.4-1 . Flowsheet of petroleum production, refining, and distribution systems. (Sources of organic evaporative 

emissions are indicated by vertical arrows.) 

Tl 
P.5 

O Physical and chemical characteristics of the previous cargo. 

O Method of unloading the previous cargo. 

O Operations to transport the empty carrier to a loading terminal. 

O Method of loading the new cargo. 

O Physical and chemical characteristics of the new cargo. 

The principal methods of cargo carrier loading are illustrated in 

Figures 4.4-2 through 4.4-4. In the splash loading method, the fill pipe 

dispensing the cargo is lowered only partway into the cargo tank. Significant turbulence and vapor/liquid contact occur during the splash loading 

operation, resulting in high levels of vapor generation and loss. If the 

turbulence is great enough, liquid droplets will be entrained in the vented 

vapors. 

A second method of loading is submerged loading. Two types are the 

submerged fill pipe method and the bottom loading method. In the submerged 

fill pipe method, the fill pipe extends almost to the bottom of the cargo 

tank. In the bottom loading method, a permanent fill pipe is attached to 

the cargo tank bottom. During most of both methods of submerged loading, 

the fill pipe opening is below the liquid surface level. Liquid turbulence 

is controlled significantly during submerged loading, resulting in much 

lower vapor generation than encountered during splash loading. 

The recent loading history of a cargo carrier is just as important a . 

factor in loading losses as the method of loading. If the carrier has 

carried a nonvolatile liquid such as fuel oil, or has just been cleaned, 

it will contain vapor free air. If it has just carried gasoline and has 

not been vented, the air in the carrier tank will contain volatile organic 

vapors, which are expelled during the loading operation along with newly 

generated vapors. 

Cargo carriers are sometimes designated to transport only one product, 

and in such cases are practicing "dedicated service". Dedicated gasoline 

cargo, tanks return to a loading terminal containing air fully or partially 

saturated with vapor from the previous load. Cargo tanks may also be 

"switch loaded" with various products, so that a nonvolatile product being 

loaded may expel the vapors remaining from a previous load of a volatile 

product such as gasoline. These circumstances vary with the type of cargo 

tank and with the ownership of the carrier, the petroleum liquids being 

transported, geographic location, and season of the year. 

One control measure for gasoline tank trucks is called "vapor balance 

service", in which the cargo tank retrieves the vapors displaced during 

product unloading at bulk plants or service stations and transports the 

vapors back to the loading terminal. Figure 4.4-5 shows a tank truck in 

vapor balance service filling a service station underground tank and taking 

on displaced gasoline vapors for return to the terminal. A cargo tank 

in vapor balance service normally is saturated with organic vapors, and the 

presence of these vapors at the start of submerged loading results in 

greater loading losses than encountered during nonvapor balance, or 

"normal", service. Vapor balance service is usually not practiced with 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-3 

•MVUMIMU uHH 
P.6 

•FILL w e 

HATCH COVER 

| * CARGO TANK 

Figure 4.4-2. Splash loading method. 

FILL W E 

HATCH COVER 

CARGO TANK 

Figure 4.4-3. Submerged fill pipe. 

mm® VEOT 

TAKJK 

Figure 4.4-4. Bottom loading. FILL PIPS 

4.4=4 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 

tmmmmumlmlmumiattum 
P.7 

marine vessels, although some vessels practice emission control by means of 

vapor transfer within their own cargo tanks during ballasting operations (see 

page 4.4-10). 

MANIFOLD FOR RETURNING VAPORS 

fl 

VAPOR VENT LINE 

UNDERGROUND 

STORAGE TANK 

Figure 4.4-5. Tank truck unloading into a service station 

underground storage tank and practicing "vapor balance" 

form of emission control. 

Emissions from loading petroleum liquid can be estimated (with a 

probable error of ±30 percent)4 using the following expression: 

L L = 12.46 SPM (D 

where: L^ => Loading loss, lb/103 gal of liquid loaded 

M =• Molecular weight of vapors, lb/lb-mole (see Table 4.3-2) 

P = True vapor pressure of liquid loaded, psla (see Figures 

4.3-5 and 4.3-6 and Table 4.3-2) 

T =« Temperature of bulk liquid loaded, °R (°F + 460) 

S

 s A saturation factor (see Table 4.4-1) 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-5 

UM 
? I 

P.8 

The saturation factor, S, represents the expelled vapor's fractional 

to saturation, and it accounts for the variations observed in emission 

from the different unloading and loading methodso Table 4o4=l Uses 

saturation factors•> 

TABLE 4.4-1. SATURATION (S) FACTORS FOR CALCULATING 

PETROLEUM LIQUID LOADING LOSSES 

Cargo carrier Mode of operation S factor 

Tank trucks and 

rail tank cars Submerged loading of a clean 

cargo tank 0.50 

Submerged loading: dedicated 

normal service 0.60 

Submerged loading: dedicated 

vapor balance service 

Splash loading of a clean 

cargo tank 

Splash loading: dedicated 

normal service 

1.00 

1.45 

1-45 

Marine vessels3 

Splash loading: dedicated 

vapor balance service 

Submerged loading: ships 

Submerged loading: barges 

IcOO 

0.2 

0.5 

aFor products other than gasoline and crude oil. Use factors 

from Table 4.4-2 for marine loading of gasoline. Use Equations 

2 and 3 and Table 4<>4-3 for marine loading of crude oil. 

Emissions from controlled loading operations can be calculated by multiplying the uncontrolled emission rate calculated in Equation 1 by the control 

efficiency term: 

\ 100 / • 

Measures to reduce loading emissions include selection of alternat e 

loading methods and application of vapor recovery equipment. The latte r 

captures organic vapors displaced during loading operations and recovers 

4.4-6 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 

imnmimM ySJ 
P.9 

the vapors by the use of refrigeration, absorption, adsorption and/or compression. The recovered product is piped back to storage. Vapors can also 

be controlled through combustion in a thermal oxidation unit, with no 

product recovery. Figure 4,4-6 demonstrates the recovery of gasoline vapors 

from tank trucks during loading operations at bulk terminals. Control 

efficiencies of modern units range from 90 to over 99 percent, depending on 

the nature of the vapors and the type of control equipment used.5"

6 

VAPOR RETURN LINE —-

VAPOR-FREE 

AIR VENTED 

TO 

ATMOSPHERE 

PROOUCT FROM 

LOADING TERMINAL 

STORAGE TANK 

Figure 4.4-6. Tank truck loading with vapor recovery. 

Sample Calculation - Loading losses (LL) from a gasoline tank truck in 

dedicated vapor balance service and practicing vapor recovery would be calculated as follows, using Equation 1: 

Design basis -

Cargo tank volume is 8,000 gallons 

Gasoline RVP is 9 psia 

Product temperature is 80°F 

Vapor recovery efficiency is 95% 

Loading loss equation -

12.46 

where: S ° Saturation factor (see Table 4.4-1) <=> 1.00 

P = True vapor pressure of gasoline (see Figure 4.3-6) ° 6.6 psia 

M *- Molecular weight of gasoline vapors (see Table 4.3-2) = 66 

T » Temperature of gasoline » 540°R 

eff ° Control efficiency

 s 95% 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-7 

y^JjJUJ 
P.10 

L o 12.46 (1.00)(6.6)(66) 

L 540 \ 100/ 

° 0.50 lb/103 gal 

Total loading losses are: 

(0.50 lb/103 gal)(8.0 x IO3 gal) ° 4.0 lb 

Measurements of gasoline loading losses from ships and barges have led 

to the development of emission factors for these specific loading operaeionso7 

These factors are presented in Table 4.4-2 and, for gasoline loading operations at marine terminals, should be used instead of Equation 1. 

In addicion to Equation 1, which estimaCes emissions from the loading 

of petroleum liquids, Equation 2 has been developed specifically for estimating the emissions from the loading of crude oil inco ships and ocean 

barges: ~ 

CL ° CA * CG (2) 

where: CL ° ToCal loading loss, lb/103 gal of crude oil loaded 

C^ ° Arrival emission factor, contributed by vapors in the empty 

Cank compartment prior to loading, lb/103 gal loaded (see 

Note) 

CQ ° Generated emission factor, contributed by evaporation 

during loading, lb/103 gal loaded 

This equation was developed empirically based on tese measurements of 

several vessel

 — 

Equation 3: 

compartments</ The quantiCy CQ can be calculated using 

CQ " 1.84 (0.44 P - 0.42) MJJ 

T 

(3) 

where: P *> True vapor pressure of loaded crude oil, psia (see 

Figure 4.3-5 and Table 4„3-2) 

M ° Molecular weight of vapors, lb/lb-mole (see Table 4.3-2) 

G = Vapor growth factor ° 1.02 (dimensionless) 

T ° Temperature of vapors, °R (°F + 460) 

Note - Values of C^ for various cargo Cank conditions are listed in 

Table 4.4-3. 

Emission facCors derived from Equation 3 and Table 4c4-3 represent 

total organic compounds. Nonmethane-noneChane volatile organic compound 

(VOC) emission factors for crude oil vapors have been found Co range from 

approximately 55 to 100 weight percent of Chese total organic factors. 

When specific vapor composition information is noe available, ehe VOC 

emission factor can be estimated by taking 85 percenc of Che total organic 

factor.3 

4.4-8 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 

5H 
p.11 

TABLE 4.4-2. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSION FACTORS FOR 

GASOLINE LOADING OPERATIONS AT MARINE TERMINALS3 

Veoool 

conk 

condition 

Uncleaned 

BallooCod 

Cleaned 

Goo-frood 

Any condition 

Gao-£racd 

Typical 

ovarall 

olcuatlon' 

.Provlouo 

cargo 

Volatile* 

Volatile 

Volatile 

Volatile 

Nonvolatile 

Any cargo 

Any cargo 

Total organic 

Shlpo/ocean bargeo0 

og/1 Iter lb/10' gal 

transferred transferred 

315 

205 

180 

85 

85 

e 

215 

2.6 

1.7 

1.5 

0.7 

0.7 

a 

1.8 

etal oo Ion factoro 

Bargeo0 

og/llcer lb/101 gal 

transferred transferred 

465 

d 

e 

e 

e 

245 

410 

3.9 

d 

e 

a 

0 

2.0 

3.4 

0&oferenceo 2, 8. Factors represent noncachane-nonQthano VOC eoloolono baccuoo 

cathana and ethane have been found to constitute a negligible veight fraction of 

the avaporatlve eoloolono froa gaoollno. 

''Ocean bargeo (conk coopartcant depth about 40 feet) eshlblt eaission levelo similar 

Co cantt ohlpo. Shallow draft bargeo (cosparccant depth 10 to 12 feet) eshlblt 

higher eaiooion levelo. 

Volatil e cargoeo are thooe wich a true vapor preooure greater than 1.5 pola. 

^BorgQO are not uouolly ballooted. 

"^Unavailable. 

'Baood on obaervatlon Chat 412 of teotod ohlp coaparccsnco wore uncleaned, 11% 

ballaotod, 24% cleaned, and 24% gao-froad. Por bargeo, 76% ware uncleaned. 

.'/• ' 

TABLE 4.4-3. AVERAGE ARRIVAL EMISSION FACTORS, CA, FOR CRUDE 

OIL LOADING EMISSION EQUATIONS 

Ship/ocean barge 

tank condition 

Uncleaned 

Ballasted 

Cleaned or 

gao-freed 

Any condition 

Previous 

cargo 

Volatile^ 

Volatile 

Volatile 

Nonvolatile 

Arrival emission 

factor, lb/103 gal 

0.86 

0.46 

0.33 

0.33 

aArrival emission factors (C^) to be added to generated emission 

factors calculated in Equation 3 to produce total crude oil 

loading loss. These factors represent total organic compounds; 

nonissthane-nonethane VOC emission factors average about 15% lower. 

^Volatile cargoes are those with a true vapor pressure greater 

than 1.5 psia. 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-9 

a a Mn I 111 M M 
P.12 

Ballasting Losses - Ballasting operations are a major source of 

evaporative emissions associated with Che unloading of petroleum liquids ac 

marine terminals. Ie is common pracCice Co load several cargo tank compartmsncs wich sea water afCer the cargo has been unloadedo This water, termed 

"ballast10, improves the stability of Che empty canker during Che subsequent 

voyage. Although ballasting practices vary, individual cargo tanks are 

ballasted typically about 80 percent, and Che total vessel is ballasted 15 to 

40 percent, of capacity. Ballasting emissions occur as vapor laden air in 

the "empty" cargo tank is displaced to the atmosphere by ballast water being 

pumped into the tank. Upon arrival at a loading port, the ballast water is 

pumped from the cargo tanks before the new cargo is loaded. The ballasting 

of cargo tanks reduces the quantity of vapors returning in ehe empty Cank, 

Chereby reducing ehe quantity of vapors emitted during subsequent Canker 

loading. Regulations administered by Che U. S. Coast Guard require Chat, at 

marine terminals located in ozone nonattainment areas, large cankers with 

crude oil washing syseems coneain organic vapors froa ballasting.* This is 

accomplished principally by displacing the vapors during ballasting into a 

cargo Cank being simultaneously unloaded. Marine vessels in other areas emit 

organic vapors directly Co Che atmosphere. 

Equation 4 has been developed from test data to calculate the ballasting 

emissions from crude oil ships and ocean barges7: 

LB o 0.31 + 0.20 P -t- 0.01 PUA (4) 

where: Lg ° Ballasting emission factor, lb/103 gal of ballast water 

P ° True vapor pressure of discharged crude oil, 

psia (see Figure 4.3-5 and Table 4„3=2) 

UA ° Arrival cargo true ullage, prior Co dockside discharge, 

msasured from ehe deck, feee. The term "ullage" refers to 

ehe distance between the cargo surface level and the deck 

level 

Table 4.4-4 lists average total organic emission factors for ballasting 

into uncleaned crude oil cargo compartmentst. The first category applies eo 

"full" compartments wherein ehe crude oil true ullage just prior eo cargo 

discharge is less Chan 5 feec. The second category applies eo lightered, or 

shore-loaded, compartments (part of cargo previously discharged or original 

load a partial fill), with an arrival true ullage greater Chan 5 feet. Ic 

should be remembered ChaC Chese tabulated emission factors are examples 

only, based on average conditions, Co be used when crude oil vapor pressure 

is unknown. Equation 4 should be used when informacion about crude oil 

vapor pressure and cargo compartment condition is available. The sample 

calculation illustrates the use of Equation 4. 

Sample Calculation - Ballasting emissions from a crude oil cargo ship 

would be calculated as follows, using Equation 4: 

Design basis -

Vessel and cargo description: 

80,000 dead-weight-ton tanker, crude oil capacity 500,000 barrels; 

20 percent of the cargo capacity is filled with ballast water after 

4.4-10 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 
P.13 

TABLE 4.4-4. TOTAL ORGANIC EMISSION FACTORS 

FOR CRUDE OIL BALLASTING* 

Average emission factors 

By category Typical overallb 

Compartment mg/liter lb/103 gal mg/liter lb/103 gal 

condition before ballast ballast ballast ballast 

cargo discharge water water water water 

Fully loadedc 

Lightered or 

previously 

shore -loaded** 

111 

171 

0.9 

1.4 

129 1.1 

&AssuESS crude oil temperature of 60°F and RVP of 5 psia. Nonmethanenonethane VOC emission factors average about 85% of these total 

organic factors. 

t>Based on observation that 70% of tested compartments had been fully 

loaded before ballasting. May not represent average vessel practices. 

CAssuEed typical arrival ullage of 2 ft. 

^Assumed typical arrival ullage of 20 ft. 

a 

cargo discharge. The crude oil has an RVP of 6 psia and is discharged at 

75°F. 

Compartment conditions: 

70 percent of the ballast water is loaded into compartments that had 

been fully loaded to 2 feet ullage, and 30 percenc is loaded into 

compartments that had been lightered to 15 feet ullage before arrival 

ae dockside. 

Ballasting emission equation -

LB o 0.31 + 0.20 P •!• 0.01 PUA 

where: P ° True vapor pressure of crude oil (see Figure 4.3-5) 

° 4.6 psia 

UA <=> True cargo ullage for the full compartments ° 2 feet, and 

true cargo ullage for the lightered compartments ° 15 feet 

LB ° 0.70 [0.31 + (0.20)(4.6) + (0.01)(4.6)(2)] 

+ 0.30 [0.31 + (0.20)(4.6) •«• (0.01)(4o6)(15)] 

° 1.5 lb/103 gal 

ToCal ballasting eoissions are: 

(1.5 lb/103 gal)(0.20)(500,000 bbl)(42 gal/bbl) ° 6,300 lb 

SIQCG VOC emission® average about 85% of these total organic eoissions, 

eoiQQieao of VOC are about: (0.85)(6,300 lb) <=> 5,360 lb 

9/85 Bvaporaeion Loss SourCSG 4.4-11 

umi 
P.M 

Transit Losses - In addition to loading and ballasting losses, losses 

occur while Che cargo is in transit. Transit losses are similar ln many 

ways to breaching losses associated with petroleum storage (see Section 4.3). 

Experimental tests on ships and barges have indicated Chac transit losses 

can be calculated using Equation 54: 

LT =» 0.1 PW (5) 

where: Lx 

P 

w 

Transit loss from ships and barges, lb/week-103 gal transported 

True vapor pressure of the transported liquid, psia 

(see Figures 4.3-5 and 4.3-6 and Table 4.3-2) 

Density of the condensed vapors, lb/gal (see Table 4.3-2) 

Emissions from gasoline truck cargo tanks during transit have been studied 

by a combination of theoretical and experimental techniques, and typical 

emission values are presented in Table 4.4-5 10-n Emissions depend on the 

extent of venting from the cargo tank during transit, which in turn depends 

on the vapor tightness of the tank, the pressure relief valve settings, the 

pressure in the tank at the start of the trip, the vapor pressure of the 

fuel being transported, and the degree of fuel vapor saturation of Che 

space in the tank. The emissions are not directly proportional to the time 

spent in transit. If the vapor leakage rate of the tank increases, emissions 

increase up to a point, and then the rate changes as other determining 

factors take over. Truck tanks in dedicated vapor balance service usually 

contain saturated vapors, and this leads to lower emissions during transit, 

because no additional fuel evaporates to raise ehe pressure in ehe Cank Co 

cause venting. Table 4.4-5 lists "typical" values for transit emissions and 

"extreme" values that could occur in the unlikely event ehae all determining 

factors combined eo cause maximum emissions. 

In ehe absence of specific inputs for Equations 1 through 5, ehe 

Cypical evaporative emission factors presented in Tables 4.4-5 and 4.4-6 

should be used. It should be noted that, although the crude oil used to 

calculate the emission values presented in these tables has an RVP of 5, 

the RVP of crude oils can range from less than 1 up to 10. Similarly, the 

RVP of gasolines has a range of approximately 7 to 13. In areas where 

loading and transportation sources are major factors affecting air quality, 

lt is advisable to obtain the necessary parameters and calculate emission 

estimates using Equations 1 through 5. 

Service Stations - Another major source of evaporative emissions is Che 

filling of underground gasoline storage tanks at service stations. Gasoline is usually delivered eo service stations in large (8,000 gallon) tank 

trucks or smaller account trucks. Emissions are generated when gasoline 

vapors in Che underground storage tank are displaced to the atmosphere by 

the gasoline being loaded into the tank. As wich ocher loading losses, Che 

quantity of ehe service station tank filling loss depends on several variables, including the method and rate of filling, the tank configuracion, 

and the gasoline temperature, vapor pressure and composition. Using Equation (1), an average emission rate for submerged filling is 880 milligrams 

per liter of transferred gasoline, and the rate for splash filling is 1,380 

milligrams per liter of transferred gasoline (see Table 4.4-7).s 

4.4-12 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 
TABLE 4.4-5 TOTAL ORGANIC EMISSION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM 

LIQUID RAIL TANK CARS AND TANK TRUCKS 

P.15 

Eaiooion oourco Gaoollna0 

Crudo 

oil 0 

Jot DiOtillOtO OOOi^BQl 

naphtha Jot oil oil 

(JP-4) Uorcoona Bo. 2 Ga. 6 

Loading oparatlonox 

Subarged loading -

dedicated norcal oorvlcod 

ng/lltor tranofarrod 

lb/103 gal tranofarrod 

Subcorgod loading -

vopor bal an co oarvico" 

•g/11 tar. tranofarrod 

lb/103 gal tranoferrod 

Splaoh loading -

dedlcatod norcal oorvica 

ag/HCor cranaforrod 

lb/103 gal tranofarrod 

Splaoh loading -

vopor balance oorvica 

ng/lltor tranofarrod 

lb/103 gal tranofarrod 

Tranait 1ooooo 

Loadod ulth product 

ng/lltor t rano por ted 

typical 

aaerotr) 

lb/103 gal tronoportcd 

cypical 

astratn 

Roturn with vapor 

cs/litar tronoportcd 

typical 

entrain 

lb/103 oal tronoportcd 

typical 

estrptn 

590 

5 

980 

8 

1,430 

12 

980 

8 

0 - 1.0 

0 - 9.0 

0 - 0.01 

0 - 0.08 

0 - 13.0 

0 - 44.0 

0 - 0.11 

0 - 0.37 

240 

2 

400 

3 

580 

5 

400 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

f 

180 

1.3 

300 

2.5 

430 

4 

300 

2.3 

£ 

£ 

2 

2 

2 

f 

f 

f 

1.9 

0.16 

0 

0 

5 

0.04 

0 

0 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

i 

2 

1.7 

0.016 

0 

0 

6 

0.03 

0 

0 

t 

2 

2 

£ 

2 

2 

£ 

£ 

0.01 

0.0001 

0 

0 

0.03 

0.0003 

0 

0 

£ 

2 

£ 

£ 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Q

ttoferenco 2. Gaoollna factoro roprooant ooloolono of nonnthano-noaothaBo VOC, oSnco caehaaa 

and ethane conotltute a nagllQlblo wight fraction of tho ovoporativo oaiooiouo 2rca QOOOHCO. 

Tha esanplo gaoollna hao an RVP of 10 polo. 

°Tho oaanple crudo oil hao an HVP of 3 polo. 

hooding oaiooion factoro oro caleuiatad uoing Equation 1 for a dioponocd produce eazjaroeiMto of 

60oP. 

^Raforenco 2. 

^ o t norcally uood. 

'Unavailable. 

9/85 Evaporation LOGS Sourcoo 4o4>=13 
P.16 

TABLE 4.4-6 . TOTAL ORGANIC EMISSION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM 

MARINE VESSEL SOURCES3 

Eaiooion source Gasoline0 

Crude 

oil c 

Jet 

naphtha 

(JP-4) 

Jet 

harooene 

Distillat e 

oil 

Ho. 2 

tteoldual 

oil 

Ho. 6 

Loading operations 

Ships/ocean barges 

og/llte r cransferred 

lb/103 gal cransferred 

Bargeo 

•g/1Iter transferred 

lb/103 gal cransferred 

Tanker ballasting 

og/llte r ballast Hater 

lb/103 gal ballast water 

Transit 

ng/week-11ter transported 

lb/week-103 gal transported 

d 

d 

d 

d 

100 

0.8 

320 

2.7 

73 

0.61 

120 

1.0 

e 

e 

ISO 

1.3 

60 

0.50 

150 

1.2 

f 

f 

84 

0.7 

0.63 

0.005 

1.60 

0.013 

f 

f 

0.60 

0.005 

0.55 

0.005 

1.40 

0.012 

f 

f 

0.54 

0.005 

0.004 

0.00004 

0.011 

0.00009 

f 

f 

0.003 

3 s 10"5 

"Eaission factors are calculated for a dispensed product teaperature of 60°?. 

^Factors ahown for gasoline represent noncsthane-nonethane VOC emissions. The esasple 

gaoollne has an RVP of 10 pole, 

^loncathane-nonethane VOC eaiooion factoro for a typical crude oil are 152 lo»er than 

the total organic factoro ohoun. The eaaaple crude oil haa an RVP of 5 pola. 

d

See Table 4.4-2 for these eaiooion factoro. 

e

See Table 4.4-4 for these eoission factors. 

f, Unavailable. 

Emissions from underground tank filling operations at service stations 

can be reduced by Che use of a vapor balance syscem such as in Figure 4.4-5 

(termed Stage I vapor control). The vapor balance system employs a hose that 

returns gasoline vapors displaced from Che underground Cank. eo Che tank cruck 

cargo compartments being emptied. The control efficiency of Che balance syscem 

ranges from 93 Co 100 percent. Organic emissions from underground Cank 

filling operations at a service station employing a vapor balance system and 

submerged filling are not expected to exceed 40 milligrams per liter of 

transferred gasoline. 

A second source of vapor emissions from service stations is underground tank breathing. Breaching losses occur daily and are attributable 

Co gasoline evaporation and barometric pressure changes. The frequency 

with Hhich gasoline is withdrawn from Che Cank, allowing fresh air Co 

enter to enhance evaporation, also has a major effect on ehe quantity of 

these emissions. An average breathing emission race is 120 milligrams 

per liter of throughput. 

4.4-14 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 
P.17 

TABLE 4.4-7. EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS FROM GASOLINE 

SERVICE STATION OPERATIONS 

Emission source 

Filling underground tank 

Submerged filling3 

Splash filling3 

Balanced submerged filling 

Underground tank breathing 

and emptying'5 

Vehicle refueling operaeions 

Displacement losses 

(uncontrolled) 

Displacement losses 

(controlled) 

Spillage 

Emission rate 

mg/liter 

throughout 

880 

1,380 

40 

120 

1,320 

132 

80 

lb/103 gal 

throughput 

7.3 

11.5 

0.3 

1.0 

11.0 

1.1 

0.7 

aThese factors are calculated using Equation 1 for a gasoline 

temperature of 60°F and RVP of 10 psia. 

^Includes any vapor loss between underground tank and gas pump. 

Motor Vehicle Refueling - Service station vehicle refueling activity also 

produces evaporative emissions. Vehicle refueling emissions come from vapors 

displaced from the automobile tank by dispensed gasoline and from spillage. 

The quantity of displaced vapors depends on gasoline temperature, auto tank 

temperature, gasoline RVP and dispensing rate. It is estimated that the 

uncontrolled emissions from vapors displaced during vehicle refueling average 

1,320 milligrams per liter of dispensed gasoline.5'" 

Spillage loss is made up of contributions from prefill and postfill 

nozzle drip and from spit-back and overflow from the vehicle's fuel tank 

filler pipe during filling. The amount of spillage loss can depend on several 

variables, including service station business characteristics, tank configuration, and operator techniques. An average spillage loss is 80 milligrams 

per liter of dispensed gasoline.5' 

Control methods for vehicle refueling emissions are based on conveying 

the vapors displaced from the vehicle fuel tank to the underground storage 

tank vapor space through the use of a special hose and nozzle, as depicted 

in Figure 4.4-7 (termed Stage II vapor control). In "balance" vapor control 

systems, the vapors are conveyed by natural pressure differentials established 

during refueling. In "vacuum assist" systems, the conveyance of vapors from 

the auto fuel tank to the underground storage tank is assisted by a vacuum 

pump. Although vapor control systems for vehicle refueling activity are not 

currently in widespread operation at service stations, tests on a few systems 

have indicated overall system control efficiencies in the range of 88 to 92 

percent.5' 

9/85 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-15 

i,tAJHI 
P.18 

r\ SEHVieS 

STAT10C3 

Figure 4.4-7. Automobile refueling vapor recovery system. 

References for Section 4.4 

1. C. E. Burklln and R. L. Honercamp, Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon 

Emission Factors, EPA-450/3-76-039, U. S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1976. 

2. G. A. LaFlam, S. Osbourn and R. L. Norton, Revision of Tank Truck 

Loading Hydrocarbon Emission Faceors, Pacific Environmental Services, 

Inc., Durham, NC, May 1982. 

3. G. A. LaFlam, Revision of Marine Vessel Evaporative Emission Factors, 

Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC, November 1984. 

4. Evaporation Loss from Tank Cars, Tank Trucks and Marine Vessels, 

Bulletin No. 2514, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC, 1959. 

5. C. E. Burklln, et al., A Study of Vapor Control Methods for Gasoline 

Marketing Operations, EPA-450/3-75-046A and -046B, U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1975. 

6. Bulk Gasoline Terminals - Background Information for Promulgated 

Standards, EPA-450/3-80-038b, U. So Environmental Proeection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1983. 

7. Atmospheric Hydrocarbon Emissions from Marine Vessel Transfer Operations, Publication 2514A, American Petroleum InseieuCe, Washingeon, DC, 

1981. 

4.4-16 EMISSION FACTORS 9/85 

iiiii 
8. C. E. Burklln, et al., Background Information on Hydrocarbon Baissions 

froa Marine Terminal Operations. EPA-450/3-76-038a and -038b. U. S. 

Environmental Proteetion Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 

November 1976. 

9. Rules for the Protection of the Marine Environment Relating to Tank 

Vessels Carrying Oil ifl Bulk, 45 FR 43705, June 30, 1980. 

10. R. A. Nichols, Analytical Calculation of Fuel Transit Breathing Loss, 

Chevron USA, Inc., San Francisco, CA, March 21, 1977. 

11. R. A. Nichols, Tank Truck Leakage Measurements, Chevron USA, Inc., 

San Francisco, CA, June 7, 1977. 

12. Investigation of Payaaager Car Refueling Losses: Final Report, 

2nd Year Progfam, APtP-1453, U. S. Envlronaental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC, Septeaber 1972. 

9/85 Evaporation Loaa Sources 4.4-17