p.1 

OAR Box 1313 

Prepped by LaTeia Shed 

Document Number: 

93) ll-B-67 

Docket Number: 

A-88-02 

Printed 6/12/2008 9:03:31 AM Sheet 93 of 99 
MRI lfl 

P.2 

MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

Suite 350 

401 Harrison Oaks Boulevard 

Cary, North Carolina 27513 

Telephone (919) 467-5215 

FAX (919) 467-8060 

A-88-02 

TT-fc-feT 

Date: July 6, 1989 

Subject: Summary of Mesh-Pad Mist Eliminator Cost Data for Hard and 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromic Acid Anodizing 

Model Plants 

Chromium Electroplating NESHAP 

EPA Contract No. 68-02-3817; ESD Project 85/02a 

MRI Project 7717-K 

From: Mary Jd Caldwell , '7j 

Robin Barker^ ' .j 

To: Andrew M. Smith 7' j JAN I 8|99l u 8 

ESD/ISB/SSS (MD-13) ; :-^-« — ] i 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency t 5?& A!R SV)fW f | 

Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711 7 : — — ' — J 

I. Introduction 

This memorandum presents the capital and annualized costs of meshpad mist eliminators used to control chromium emissions from the hard and 

decorative chromium electroplating and chromic acid anodizing model 

plants. Each model plant is composed of various sizes of model tanks. 

The model tanks are arranged in six control device configurations. 

Figures 1 through 6 present the ventilation system schematic and ductwork 

specifications for each control device configuration. Table 1 presents 

the model plant parameters on which the installed capital and annualized 

costs are based. 

For model tanks that require more than 340 cubic meters per minute 

(m /min) (12,000 cubic feet per minute [ft /min]) of ventilation air, two 

or more mesh-pad mist eliminators in parallel were used to control 

emissions from the plating tanks because mesh-pad mist eliminators are 

designed to handle maximum airflows of 340 m /min (12,000 ft /min). 

However, the vendor of the control device, ChromeTech, Inc., of Bedford, 

Ohio, indicates there may be design problems with mesh-pad mist 

eliminators sized for flow rates above 230 m /min (8,000 ft /min). The 

construction of the frame holding the mesh pads on units designed to 

handle airflows in excess of 230 m /min (8,000 ft /min) will probably 

require structural modifications so that the pads will not be pulled out 

of the frame. Currently, there are no units in service that are designed 

for airflows over approximately 170 m /min (6,000 ft /min). 

ChromeTech, Inc., provided capital cost estimates and operating 

parameters used to calculate annualized cost data for mesh-pad mist 

/ 
P.3 

eliminators based on the model plant information presented above.2 -4 

Capital cost estimates and operating parameters were obtained for four 

different sizes of mesh-pad mist eliminators specified in the model 

plants. Operating parameters provided by ChromeTech, Inc., include the 

fan and washdown water pump horsepower requirements, washdown frequency, 

water consumption rates, maintenance and operating hours, and the life 

expectancy of the units. All cost data are presented in November 1988 

dollars. Data sources and cost factors used to calculate capital and 

annualized costs of mesh-pad mist eliminators are presented in Table 2. 

II. Capital Costs of Mesh-Pad Mist Eliminators 

Table 3 presents the capital costs for the four sizes of mesh-pad 

mist eliminators specified in the model plants. The capital costs include 

the purchase cost of the control device and auxiliaries such as inlet and 

outlet transition zones, exhaust fans and motors, washdown pumps and 

motors, and stack; direct installation costs for erection, electrical 

panels and wiring, instrumentation and controls, and piping; and startup 

costs. Installation costs are based on the assumptions that the control 

device would be installed on the roof of the plating shop, that the roof 

is 6.1 meters (m) (20 feet [ft]) high, and that the roof would require no 

major structural modifications to support the weight of the control 

device. The purchased equipment cost also includes taxes and freight 

costs, which are assumed to be 3 and 5 percent of the' base equipment cost, 

respectively. The startup cost is assumed to be 1 percent of the 

purchased equipment cost. 

III. Annualized Costs of Mesh-Pad Mist Eliminators 

Table 4 presents annualized costs for the four sizes of mesh-pad 

mist eliminator units specified in the model plants. The annualized costs 

include direct operating costs such as utilities; operator, supervisor, 

and maintenance labor and materials; mesh-pad replacement; indirect 

operating costs such as overhead, property taxes, insurance and 

administration; and capital recovery costs. 

Utility costs include the costs of electricity and water required to 

operate the mesh-pad mist eliminators. The annual electrical cost results 

from both the additional horsepower requirement needed by the fan to 

overcome the pressure drop added to the ventilation system by the control 

device, and the horsepower needed to operate the washdown water pumps. 

The incremental fan electrical costs were calculated based on the 

following equation: 

Fan electrical cost, $/yr = [(0.746 kW/hp)(hp)(t)](c) 

where, 

kW = kilowatt 

hp = horsepower requirement 

t = operating time, h/yr 

c = electrical cost, $0.0461/kilowatt-hour(kWh)6 

<=£-
P.4 

The washdown water pumps are operated for approximately 5 minutes 

per 8-hour shift to wash down the pads in the mist eliminator. The pump 

electrical costs were calculated based on the following equation: 

Pump electrical cost, $/yr = [(0.746 kW/hp)(hp)(tp)(tcd) ](c) 

where, 

kW = kilowatt 

hp = horsepower requirement 

tn = operating time of pump per hour of control device operation, 

v

 0.010 h/h 

tC(j = operating time of control device, h/yr 

c = electrical cost, $0.0461/kilowatt-hour(kWh) 

The total annual electrical cost of the mist eliminator is equal to the 

sum of the fan and washdown water pump electrical costs. 

Water consumption costs are associated with the washdown of the 

mesh-pad mist eliminator. For the purposes of this analysis, it was 

assumed that the washdown water is recycled to the process, as is 

typically the case. The amount of washdown water required and the 

frequency of the washdown was provided by ChromeTech, Inc., for each size 

of mesh-pad unit. The water costs for mesh-pad mist eliminators were 

calculated using the following equation: 

Water cost, $/yr = [(v)(f)(s)](c) 

where, 

v = volume of water per washdown, liters (gallons) 

f = frequency of washdown, No. of times/8-hour shift 

s = number of 8-hour shifts per year, No./yr 

c = water cost, $0.20/1,000 liters ($0.77/1,000 gallons) 

Mesh pad replacement costs were included because the estimated life 

of the pads is less than the estimated life of the control device. 

ChromeTech, Inc., estimates that most facilities will need to replace the 

mesh pads every 4 years. The mesh pad material is estimated to cost 

approximately $10,600/m ($300/ft ) of material.4 Mesh pad replacement 

costs include the replacement cost of the pads and the transportation and 

disposal costs associated with the used pads. The annualized replacement 

costs of the mesh pads were calculated using the following equation: 

Replacement cost, $/yr = [(v)(c)](CRFp) 

where, 

v = volume of pad material required for each control device, m (ft ) 

c = cost of pad material, $10,600/m ($300/ft ) 

CRF-, = capital recovery factor of 0.3154, based on an interest rate 

of 10 percent and a depreciable life of 4 years for the mesh pads. 

The transportation and disposal costs for the mesh pad material were 

calculated based on the following equation: 

•*3 
P.5 

Disposal and transportation cost, $/yr = [(N)(dc) + (N)(tc)](CRF_) 

where, 

N = number of 55-gallon drums, V/V^, rounded up to the nearest whole 

number 

V = volume of pad material disposed for each control device, 01 

(ft ) (see Table 4) 3 

Vd = volume of 55-gallon drum, §.21 m (7.35 ft ) 

dc = disposal cost, $50.00/drum 

tc = transportation cost, $40.00/drum 

CRF- = capital recovery factor of 0.3154, based on an interest rate 

of 10 percent and a depreciable life of 4 years for the mesh pads. 

The annual cost of operating labor is based on the amount of labor 

required to operate the control device plus supervision. The operator 

labor is based on vendor estimates for labgr hours required per day of 

operation, and a labor rate of $8.37/hour. The operator labor is 

independent of both the control device size and the number of operating 

hours per day. The supervisor labor cost is assumed to be 15 percent of 

the operator labor cost. 

The annual cost of maintenance labor for each control device is 

based on vendor estimates of the maintenance hours required per 

2,000 hours of operation, and a maintenance labor rate of 

$9.21/hour. » The maintenance labor is independent of the control 

device size. The annual cost of maintenance materials is assumed to be 

100 percent of the maintenance labor cost. 

Indirect costs include overhead, property taxes, insurance, and 

administration. The overhead cost was calculated based on 60 percent of 

the sum of the operator, supervisor, and maintenance labor plus any 

material costs. Property taxes, insurance, and administrationewere 

collectively assumed to be 4 percent of the total capital cost. 

5 

Capital recovery costs associated with the mesh-pad mist eliminator 

unit(s), which are the costs of capital spread over the depreciable life 

of the control device, were calculated using the following equation: 

CRC = [TCC][.(i(l+i}n)/((l+i}n-l)l 

where, 

CRC = capital recovery cost, $/yr 

TCC = total capital cost of control device(s), $ 

i = annual interest rate, 10 percent 

n = depreciable life, 10 years 

IV. Model Plant Capital Costs 

This section presents the installed capital and annualized costs of 

mesh-pad mist eliminators for the hard and decorative chromium plating and 

chromic acid anodizing model plants. The model plant costs are representative of control costs for new sources. The capital costs for 

f 
P.6 

ventilation hoods and ductwork were not included in the capital costs for 

control devices because plants must typically install ventilation hoods 

and ductwork to comply with occupational health standards that regulate 

employee exposure to chromium emissions in the workplace. However, 

additional ductwork is required for mesh-pad mist eliminator systems, 

compared to typical ventilation systems. Typical ventilation systems have 

multiple tanks connected via short runs of ductwork that carry large 

airflows. The mest*i-pad mist eliminator vendor indicated that for airflows 

greater than 340 m /min (12,000 ft /min), the exhaust stream should be 

split and directed to multiple, small, mesh-pad units. This splitting of 

the exhaust stream requires additional ductwork. Therefore, the cost of 

additional ductwork is included in the model plant capital cost estimates 

for mesh-pad mist eliminator systems. 

Table 5 presents the purchased equipment, additional ductwork, 

installation, startup, and total capital costs of mesh-pad mist 

eliminators for the hard and decorative chromium plating and chromic acid 

anodizing model plants. The capital cost estimates, with the exception of 

the additional ductwork costs and installation costs, were compiled from 

Table 3 as described below. 

Hard Chromium Plating 

Small model plant = Column D costs 

Medium model plant = Column A + B + 2(Column C) costs 

Large model plant = 2[Column A+ B +2(Column C) costs] 

Decorative Chromium Plating 

Small model plant = Column D costs 

Medium model plant = 2(Column D costs) 

Large model plant = 5(Column C costs) 

Chromic Acid Anodizing 

Small model plant = Column D costs 

Large model plant = 4(Column C costs) 

The additional ductwork expense for each model plant was estimated 

by comparing the total ductwork expense associated with the ventilation 

systems specially designed to accomodate installation of the mesh-pad mist 

eliminators at each model plant (Figures 1-6) with the ventilation systems 

designed based on typical plant practices. Schematics of these typical 

systems are shown in Chapter 5 of the Chromium Electroplating Background 

Information Document. 

Installation costs for each model plant include the direct 

installation costs of each unit and an indirect cost of $7,000 that covers 

the cost of engineering services, contractors fees, and contingencies. 

The mesh-pad mist eliminator vendor provided the amount of the indirect 

costs on a per-model-plant basis. Therefore, model plant installation 

costs were assumed to be $7,000 plus the cost of the direct installation 

-<£>" 
P.7 

of the unit, calculated as described above for the other capital cost 

estimates. 

V. Model Plant Annualized Control Costs 

The annualized costs for the model plants are presented in 

Table 6. The annualized cost estimates, with the exception of the labor 

requirements, indirect costs and chromic acid recovery credits, were 

compiled from Table 4 as described below. 

Hard Chromium Plating 

Small model plant = Column Dt costs 

Medium model plant = Column kx + Bt + 2(Column Ct) costs 

Large model plant = 2[Column A2 + B2 + 2(Column C2 ) costs] 

Decorative Chromium Plating 

Small model plant = Column Di costs 

Medium model plant = 2(Column D2 costs) 

Large model plant = 5(Column C2 costs) 

Chromic Acid Anodizing 

Small model plant = Column U* costs 

Large model plant = 4(Column C2 costs) 

The operator, supervisor, and maintenance labor requirements for 

each model plant were calculated based on the assumption that the labor 

required to operate and maintain more than one control device increased 

the labor requirement by only 30 percent for each additional control 

device, instead of increasing the labor requirement by 100 percent. For 

example, for the medium hard chromium plating model plant, which requires 

a total of four control devices, the operator and maintenance labor 

requirement was calculated as follows: 

Operator and maintenance labor, $/yr = 1,240+0.3(1,240)+0.3(1,240)+ 

0.3(1,240) = ($1,240)(1.9) = $2,400; instead of ($1,240)(4) = $5,960 

The maintenance material cost, which is based on 100 percent of the 

maintenance labor for each control device, was assumed to increase 

100 percent for each additional control device for the model plants and 

can be computed from Table 4. 

The indirect costs for each model plant include overhead, property 

taxes, insurance, and administration. The overhead cost is based on 60 

percent of the sum of the operator, supervisor, and maintenance labor plus 

the material costs for each model plant. The property taxes, insurance, 

and administration are equal to 4 percent of the total capital cost for 

^ 
P.8 

each model plant. For example, for the medium hard chromium plating model 

plant, the indirect costs were calculated as follows: 

overhead taxes, ins., adm. 

Indirect costs, $/yr = 0.60 [(1.9)($l,240)+4($640) ] + [0.04($66,000)] 

= $2,950+$2,640 = $5,600 

The chromic acid recovery credits are calculated based on the 

estimated removal efficiency for mesh-pad mist eliminators and 100 percent 

recovery of the chromic acid captured by the control device. The chromic 

acid recovery credit is calculated using the following equation: 

Chromic acid recovery credit, $/yr = [ER][Eff][1.923][C] 

where, 

ER = uncontrolled hexavalent chromium emission rate per plant, 

kg/yr (lb/yr) 

Eff = efficiency of control device, decimal percent 

1.923 = ratio of chromic acid molecular weight (100) to hexavalent 

chromium molecular weight (52) 

C = cost of chromic acid (Cr03), $3.28/kg ($1.49/lb) 

The critical variables influencing mesh-pad mist eliminator 

annualized costs are the labor and materials, and indirect costs. 

7 
P.9 

1 

yi 

fl —9-m— 8 

•12' 

" ^ 3: 

->*- 8 

> 

B 

Duct Cosoonent 

1 Specification 

iGas flCM rate, cfa 

IDuct diaaeter, in. 

IDuct length, ft. 

INo. of 30 degree entries 

No. of one step tapers 

No. of 90 degree elbows ' 

Duct Section Location 

A 

2,625 

12 

12 

0 

.a 

0 

0 

B 

5,250 

13 

27 

3 

2 

1 

C 

10,500 

24 . 

£0 : 

o : 

i : 

l : 

Figure 1. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for 

the 12-ft model tank used in the small hard chromium, small and 

medium decorative chromium, and small chromic acid anodizing 

model plants. 

7 
1 

* -V5YYY:Z5' l-

EEi:3:ii>i«sttlii:iEi::s::;:s:33::3iS3:iaEt£iaEiSSilai:::::: 

Duct Component I Duct Section location 

Specification | A B C D C F 

iiItittiitiiit3Bi:c-i::3::i::ic:i:ti:3ilittait:EsaiitE::cii::: 

Cas flow rate, cfm 

Duct diameter, in. 

Duct length, ft 

No. of 30 degree elbows 

No. of one-step tapers 

No. of 90 degree elbows 

S3::it:tt:ttieii:it;::t:: 

3000 

12 

10 

1 

0 

0 

: = = = » 

1000 

12 

s 

0 

1 

0 

sssss 

6000 

IB 

20 

0 

0 

* 

:t:st3 

6000 

iiis 

0 

0 

1 

t:::>: 

6000 

IS 

6 

0 

0 

0 

6000 

IB 

(. 

0 

0 

1 

6000 

10 

10 

0 

0 

0 

Figure 2. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for one of the 12-ft model tanks 

used in the medium and large hard chromium plating model plants 

^ 
r/. -ii x 

/' 

-+- >HO 

fa 

, > 

IZ' 

u 

J 

71 

- :^ 4 

i:Ei:iJiit:33ti::::::::-=1 

Ouct Component 

Specification 

tsllllltllltiltiii::*::::: 

Cas flow rate, cfm 

Ouct diameter, in. 

Duct length, ft 

No. of 30 degree elbows 

No. of one-step tapers 

No. of 90 degree elbows 

A 

33133 

3000 

12 

10 

1 

0 

5. 

Ouct 

B 

a:.::: 

3000 

12 

a 

0 

1 

0 

Sect 

C 

= s:a: 

6000 

1B 

12 

0 

1 

0 

:::::::::::! 

on location 

D E 

:t:ntli:i : 

2000 eooo 

10 

10 

1 

0 

0 

20 

15 

0 

1 

1 

f 

BOOO 

20 

15 

0 

0 

1 

G 

BOOO 

20 

6 

0 

0 

n 

II 

BOOO 

20 

1* 

0 

0 

1 

1 

eooo 

20 

10 

n 

0 

n 

Figure 3. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for the 12-ft and 4-ft model tanks 

used in the medium and large hard chromium plating model plants. 

fc 
+ B tk- C--4«-D-4»v 

f~8Z 

^ C - £10-1 

n 

K. 

25' 

t::iitii:iiiiti:::::a::: i 

Ouct Coaponent 

Specification 

laiiitiit.ita::::::::::: 

Cat Mow rate, cin 

Ouct diameter, in. 

Ouct length, ft 

Ho. of 30 degree elbows 

No. of one-step tapers 

Ho. of 90 degree elbows 

ac::ai:ti:aaa::i:ttaa:i: 

Duct Section Location 

ABCDEFGH I 

2500 2500 5000 7500 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 

12 

8 

0 

1 

0 

20 

5 

0 

1 

0 

22 

20 

0 

0 

22 

15 

0 

0 

1 

22 

6 

0 

0 

0 

22 

; 

o 

o 

i 

22 

10 

n 

n 

o 

Figure 4. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for the 25-ft model tank used 

in the medium and large hard chromium plating model plants. 

- ^ 
P.13 

12 

/ \ 

» • V* V It I I V * v 

OeVic e 

\_ 

! Duct Coaponent 

! Specification 

I Gas flow rate, cfn 

IDuct diaaeter, in. 

IDuct length, ft. 

INo. of 30 degree entries 

INo. of one steo tapers 

INo. of 90 degree elboits 

Ouct Section . 

Location ! 

0 8 

4,500 9,000 : 

16 22 : 

6 £9 : 

1 1 1 

o i : 

o 2 : 

Figure 5. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for 

the 12-ft model tank used in the large decorative chromium 

plating model plant. 

/**-
ta 

G —-H^^Zg 

^7 

y 

C VC /A 

^"-MYHIV*-' 

5 

:::3Sisasacass:.B:s:a::::a:::: 

Duct Component I 

Specification | A 

::::3:::aa:Baaaaaaaaia:aa::::::: 

Duct Section location 

B C D E f G 

Gat flow rate, cfm 

Duct diameter, in. 

Duct length, ft 

Ho. of 30 degree elbows 

Ho. of one-step tapers 

Ho. of 90 degree elbows 

Ho. of T-comectort 

SOOO 

16 

10 

1 

0 

0 

0 

5000 

16 

a 

0 

1 

0 

0 

10000 

22 

8 

0 

1 

0 

0 

15999 20000 20000 

28 

a 

,0 

1 

0 

0 

32 

20 

0 

0 

1 

0 

32 

15 

0 

0 

1 

0 

20000 1 

32 

6 

0 

0 

0 

1 

H I J 

3l333Ittt3:t3t:>: 

22 

<* 

0 

0 

0 

22 

<* 

0 

0 

1 

22 

10 

0 

0 

0 

iiiiitii^iiaiiiiiiiMjtttijssissssasssssisiBtxitisiiisisssisisssisssssiss:!:!:::::-!: 

GO 

Figure 6. Ventilation system schematic and ductwork specifications for the 30-ft model tank used 

in the large chromic add anodizing model plant. 

fc 
TABLE 1. MODEL PLANT PARAMETERS FOR THE HARD AND DECORATIVE CHROMIUM PLATING AND CHROMIC 

ACID ANODIZING MODEL PLANTS 

Model operation Smal I 

Plant size 

Medium Large 

Hard chromium plating 

Operating time, h/yr 

Percent time electrodes are energized 

Total ampere-hours per year 

No. of tanks 

Dimensions of tanks, (l,w,d) in (ft) 

Ventilation rate per tank, m/min (ft/mln) 

No. of control devices 

Control device configuration , 

Size of each control device, m/min (ft/min) 

Uncontrolled hexavalent chromium emission rate, kg/yr (lb/yr) 

Decorative chromium plating 

Operating time, h/yr 

Percent time electrodes are energized 

Total ampere-hours per year 

No. of tanks 

Dimensions of tanks, (l,w,d,) m (ft) 

Ventilation rate per tank, m/min (ft/min) 

No. of control devices 

Control device configuration , 

Size of each control device, m/min (ft*vmin) 

Uncontrolled hexavalent chromium emission rate, kg/yr (lb/yr) 

Chromic acid anodizing 

Operating time, h/yr 

Percent time electrodes are energized 

No. of tanks 

Dimensions of tanks, (l,w,d,) m (ft) 

Ventilation rate per tank, m/min (ft/min) 

No. of control devices 

Control device configuration , , 

Size of each control device, m/min (ft/min) 

Uncontrolled hexavalent chromium emission rate, kg/yr (lb/yr) 

2,000 

7 0 fi 

5.0x10° 

I 

3.6, 1.1, 1.8 

(12.0, 3.5, 6.0) 

297 (10,500) 

Figure 1 

297 (10,500) 

50 (110) 

2,000 

6 0 fi 3.0x106 

1 

3.6, 1.1, 1.8 

(12.0, 3.5, 6.0) 

297 (10,500) 

1 

Figure 1 

297 (10,500) 

6.0 (13.0) 

2,000 

70 

1 

3.6, 1.1, 1.8 

(12.0, 3.5, 6.0) 

297 (10,500) 

1 

Figure 1 

297 (10,500) 

3.3 (7.2) 

3,500 

7 0 fi 42x10° 

4 

1.2, 1.2, 3.0 

(4.0, 4.0, 10.0) 

2 fi 3.6, 1.2, 1.8 

(12.0, 4.0, 6.0) 

7.6, 0.9, 1.8 

(25.0, 3.0, 6.0) 

57 (2,000) 

2 fi 170 (6,000) 

531 (18,750) 

4 

Figures 2, 3, and 4 

170 (6,000) 

230 (8,000) 

2 fi 280 (10,000) 

420 (925) 

4,000 

6 0 fi 12x10° 

2 

2 fi 3.6, 1.1, 1.8 

(12.0, 3.5, 6.0) 

2 fi 297 (10,500) 

2 

Figure 1 

2 fi 297 (10,500) 

24 (53) 

6,000 

8 0 fi 160x10° 

8 

2 fi 1.2, 1.2, 3.0 

(4.0, 4.0, 10.0) 

4 fi 3.6, 1.2, 1.8 

(12.0, 4.0, 6.0) 

2 fi 7.6, 0.9, 1.8 

(25.0, 3.0, 6.0) 

2 fi 57 (2,000) 

4 fi 170 (6,000) 

2 fi 531 (18,750) 

8 

Figures 2, 3, and 

2 fi 170 (6,000) 

2 fi 230 (8,000) 

4 fi 280 (10,000) 

1,600 (3,530) 

6,000 

6 0 fi 120x10° 

5 

5 fi 3.6, 1.8, 2.7 

(12.0, 6.0, 9.0) 

5 fi 255 (9,000) 

5 

Figure 5 

5 fi 297 (10,500) 

240 (530) 

6,000 

40 

2 

2 fi 9.1, 1.5, 2.7 

(30.0, 5.0, 9.0) 

2 § 531 (18,750) 

4 

Figure 6 

4 fi 280 (10,000) 

40 (88) 

Tl 

in 
P.16 

15 

TABLE 2. ANNUAL OPERATING COST FACTORS 

Cost categories Cost factors 

Direct operating costs 

1. Operating la^or 

a. Operator 5 

b. Supervisor 

2. Maintenan§e10 

a. Labor ' 

b. Materials 

i 

3. Replacement parts (mesh pad) 

4. Transportation and disposal 

of used mesh pads 

$8.37/h 

15 percent of la 

$9.21/h 

100 percent of 3a 

31.5 percent of capital cost of 

mesh pad material @ $300/ft

 a 

$50/drum disposal (plus 10 percent 

tax) 

$40/drum transportation (plus 

10 percent tax) 

5. Utilities 6 

a. Electricity 

b. Water 

Indirect operatinq costs 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

Credi 

Overhead 

Property tax 

T 5 

Insurance 

Administration 

Capital recovery 

ts 

Chromic acid recovery 

$0.0461/kWh 

$0.77/1,000 gal 

60 percent of la+lb+3a+3b 

1 percent of capital cost 

1 percent of capital cost 

2 percent of capital cost 

16.3 percent of capital cost of 

mesh-pad mist eliminator 

$3.28/kg 

11 

j*Based on an interest rate of 10 percent and a mesh pad life of 4 years. 

Based on an interest rate of 10 percent and an equipment life of 

10 years. 

A 
16 

TABLE 3. CAPITAL COSTS OF MESH-PAD MIST ELIMINATOR 

Mist eliminator size 

B C~ 

Control device parameters 

Oesissigc q gas flow rate, actual m/min 

(ft-Vmin)1-' 

Pressure drop, kPa (in. w.c.) 

Fan static pressure, kPa 

(in. w.c.) 

Fan motor size, hp (kw)c 

Cost datad 

1. Basic mist eliminator 

2. Inlet and outlet transition 

3. Fan and motor 

4. Washdown water pump and motor 

5. Stack 

6. Base equipment6 . 

7. Sales taxes and freight 

8. Total purchased equipment, $3 

9. Installation 

10. Startup1 

170 

(6,000) 

0.75 

(3.0) 

1.2 (5) 

7.5 (5.6) 

4,000 

3,600 

700 

300 

57503 

690 

9,290 

2,000 

90 

230 

(8,000) 

0.75 

(3.0) 

1.2 (5) 

10 (7.5) 

5,300 

Included in basic 

3,900 

800 

400 

10,400 

830 

11,230 

2,000 

110 

280 

(10,000) 

0.75 

(3.0) 

1.2 (5) 

15 (11) 

5,500 

mist eliminator 

4,500 

900 

700 

11,600 

930 

12,530 

2,000 

130 

340 

(12,000) 

0.75 

(3.0) 

1.2 (5) 

15 (11) 

6,000 

5,100 

1,000 

800 

12,900 

1,040 

I3;§40 

2,000 

140 

11. TotaI cap i taI cost, $J 11,400 13,300 14,700 16,100 

aMist eliminator sizes are ranked from the lowest gas flow rate (Column A) to the highest gas 

flow rate (Column D) . 

Gas stream temperature is 27"C (80"F), gas stream moisture content is 2 percent, and 

altitude is 305 m (1,000 ft). 

^Parameter provided by ChromeTech, Inc. 

Capital costs presented in this table are based on ChromeTech, Inc., estimates only. 

ChromeTech, Inc., provided base equipment and installation costs in November 1988 dollars. 

Costs were rounded to nearest $10. 

eSum of 1 through 5. 

Sales taxes and freight costs are 3 and 5 percent, respectively, of base equipment costs. 

9Sum of 6 and 7. 

Includes all costs associated with installing instrumentation, electrical components, and 

piping; and erection. Ooes not include cost of engineering services, contractor fee, or 

contingencies. Assumed that control devices are installed on the roof of a plant that is 

.6.1 m (20 ft) high and no structural modifications are necessary. 

'.One percent of total purchased equipment cost. 

JSum of 8, 9, and 10. Costs were rounded to nearest $100. 

# 
TABLE 4. ANNUALIZED COSTS OF MESH-PAD MIST ELIMINATOR 

Mist eliminator size* 

Aj A2 BJ 82 Cj C

2 D

l °2 

Control device parameters 

Gas flow rate, actual nr/min (ft/min) 

Operating hours/yr 

Frequency of washdown. No. times/8 h of operation 

Volume of water per washdown, liters (gal) 

Incremental fan motor size, kW (hp) 

Operator hours/yr 

Maintenance hours/yr 

Life expectancy of pad material, yrb 

Life expectancy of unit, vr 

Volume of pad material, m (ft ) 

b c 

170 

(6.000) 

3,500 

1 

38 (10) 

.9 (2.5) 

62.5 

70 

4 

10 

13 (4.7) 

170 

(6,000) 

6,000 

1 

38 (10) 

1.9 (2.5) 

62.5 

120 

4 

10 

0.13 (4.7) 

230 

(8,000) 

3,500 

1 

76 (20) 

3.7 (5) 

62.5 

70 

4 

10 

0.17 (6.0) 

230 

(8,000) 

6.000 

1 

76 (20) 

3.7 (5) 

62.5 

120 

4 

10 

0.17 (6.0) 

280 

(10,000) 

3,500 

1 

95 (25) 

5.6 (7.5) 

62.5 

70 

4 

10 

0.21 (7.4) 

280 

(10.000) 

6,000 

1 

95 (25) 

5.6 (7.5) 

62.5 

120 

4 

10 

0.21 (7.4) 

340 

(12,000) 

2,000 

1 

95 (25) 

5.6 (7.5) 

62.5 

40 

4 

10 

0.26 (9.2) 

340 

(12,000) 

4.000 

1 

95 (25) 

5.6 (7.5) 

62.5 

80 

4 

10 

0.26 (9.2) 

Cost data" 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

Utilities 

Operator, supervisor and maintenance labor 

Maintenance material 

Mesh-pad replacement6 

Indirect costs 

Capital recovery 

300 

1,240 

640 

470 

1,590 

1.860 

530 

1,710 

1.110 

470 

2.150 

1.860 

610 

1,240 

640 

590 

1.660 

2.170 

1.040 

1.710 

1.110 

590 

2,220 

2.170 

910 

1,240 

640 

750 

1.720 

2,400 

1.560 

1.710 

1.110 

750 

2,280 

2,400 

520 

970 

370 

930 

1,440 

2.620 

1,040 

1,340 

740 

930 

1,890 

2,620 

7. Total annualized cost, $9 6,100 7.800 6,900 8.800 7,700 9,'800 6.900 ,600 

*V(ist eliminator sizes are ranked from the lowest gas flow rate (Column A ) to the highest gas flow rate (Column D ). Columns A. and A present annualized costs for the 

170 m/min (6,000 ft/min) unit based on operating times of 3,500 and 6,000 h/yr, respectively. Columns B and B present annualized costs for the 230 nr/raln 

(8,000 ft/mln) unit based on operating times of 3.500 and 6,000 h/yr, respectively. Columns C. and C present annualized costs for the 280 nr/min (10,000 ft/min) unit 

based on operating times of 3,500 and 6,000 h/yr. respectively. Columns 0 and D, present annualized costs for the 340 nr/min (12,000 ft/min) unit based on operating times 

of 2,000 and 4,000 h/yr, respectively. 

fyalue for parameter provided by ChromeTech, Inc. 

c

The Incremental fan motor size Is the additional horsepower required to operate with the control device over the horsepower required to operate the ventilation system only. 

Annualized costs are presented in November 1988 dollars and were calculated from the control device parameters provided by ChromeTech, Inc., and the operating hours 

specified above. Cost factors are presented in Table 2. All costs were rounded to the nearest SIO. 

e

Includes pad replacement and transportation and disposal costs for used pads. 

Includes overhead, property tax, insurance, and administration. 

^All costs were rounded to the nearest $100. Numbers may not add exactly due to independent rounding. 

^ 3 
P.19 

-

• 

18 

TABLE 5. MOOEL PLANT CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES FOR MESH-PAD MIST 

ELIMINATORS* 

(November 

Type of operation 

Hard chromium plating 

Total purchased equipment (TPE) 

Incremental ductwork costc 

Installation cost 

Startup (1 percent of TPE) 

Total capital cost, $ 

Decorative chromium platinge 

Total purchased equipment (TPE) 

Incremental ductwork costc 

Installation cost 

Startup (1 percent of TPE) 

Total capital cost, $ 

Chromic acid anodizing 

Total purchased equipment (TPE) 

Incremental ductwork costc 

Installation cost 

Startup (1 percent of TPE) 

Total capital cost, $ 

|*A11 cost data were rounded to the 

Small model plant costs are equal 

medium model plant costs are equa' 

times Column C in Table 3. Large 

the medium model plant. 

1988 Dollars) 

Model plant size 

Small 

13,900 

0 

9,000 

100 

23,000 

13,900 

0 

9,000 

100 

23,000 

13,900 

0 

9,000 

100 

23,000 

nearest $100. 

to 

to 

Medium 

45,600 

4,900 

15,000 

500 

66,000 

27,900 

0 

11,000 

300 

39,200 

the costs presented in Column 

sum of Columns A and B plus 

model plant costs 

Estimated cost of additional ductwork 

.system to accommodate installation of 

Installation costs include the direct 

unit plus an indirect cost of $7,000 

engineering services, contractors 

eSmall model plant costs are equal 

are twice the 

required to modify typical c 

mesh-pad mist 

cost for the i 

per plant that 

eliminator. 

nstallation of 

covers the cos 

fees, and contingencies. 

to the costs presented in Column 

Large 

91,200 

9,800 

23,000 

900 

124,900 

62,700 

6,800 

17,000 

700 

87,200 

50,100 

26,100 

15,000 

500 

91,700 

D; and 

two 

cost of 

apture 

each 

t of 

D; 

medium model plant costs are two times the costs presented in Column D; 

large model plant costs are equal 

-Column C in Table 3. 

Small model plant costs are equal 

large model plant costs are equal 

Column C in Table 3. 

to 

to 

to 

five times the costs presented in 

the costs presented in Column 

four times the 

D; and 

costs presented in 

/ * 
19 

TABLE 6. MODEL PLANT ANNUALIZED COSTS ESTIMATES FOR MESH-PAD MIST 

ELIMINATORS* 

(November 1988 Dollars) 

Type of operation Small 

Model plant size 

Medium Large 

Hard chromium plating 

Utilities -. 

Operator and maintenance labor 

Maintenance materials 

Mesh-pad replacement1' 

Indirect costs 

Capital recoverye 

Annualized cost, $ f 

Chromic acid recovery 

Net annualized cost, $ 

Decorative chromium plating 

Utilities *. 

Operator and maintenance labor 

Maintenance materials 

Mesh-pad replacement 

Indirect costs0 

Capital recoverye 

Annualized cost, $ a 

Chromic acid recovery--1 

Net annualized cost , $ 

Chromic acid anodizing 

Utilities h 

Operator and maintenance labor 

Maintenance materials 

Mesh-pad replacement 

Indirect costs 

Capital recovery 

Annualized cost, $ 

Chromic acid recovery9 

Net annualized cost, $ 

500 

1,000 

400 

900 

1,700 

3,800 

8.300 

(300) 

a, uuu 

500 

1,000 

400 

900 

1,700 

3,800 

8,300 

0 

8,300 

500 

1,000 

400 

900 

1,700 

3,800 

8,300 

0 

a,3uu 

2,700 

2,400 

2,600 

2,600 

5,600 

10,800 

26,/UO 

(2,600) 

24;iuu 

2,100 

1,700 

1,500 

1,900 

3,500 

6,400 

1/,1UU 

(200) 

ib.yuu 

9,400 

5,300 

8,900 

5,100 

13,500 

20,400 

62;600 

(10,000) 

52.6UU 

7,800 

3,800 

5,600 

3,800 

9,100 

14,200 

44J3UU 

(1,500) 

4Z,8UU 

6,200 

3,200 

4,400 

3,000 

8,300 

15,000 

4U IOU 

(300) 

39,800 

*A11 costs are rounded to the nearest $100. 

Includes operator, supervisor and maintenance labor. 

cMesh-pad replacement costs are based on a 4 year life for the pad 

material. Includes cost of mesh pad replacement and transportation and 

.disposal costs of used pads. 

Includes overhead, property tax, insurance, and administration. 

eCapital recovery includes cost of capital for mesh-pad mist eliminator 

funit(s) plus cost of capital for incremental ductwork. 

Chromic acid recovery credits are based on a removal efficiency of 

99 percent for mesh-pad mist eliminators used in hard chromium plating 

processes. Parentheses indicate negative values. 

•^Chromic acid recovery credits are based on a removal efficiency of 

97 percent for mesh-pad mist eliminators used in decorative chromium and 

chromic acid anodizing operations 

/9 
P.21 

20 

VI* References 

.1. Letter and cost enclosure from L. Zitko, ChromeTech, Inc., to 

R. Barker, Midwest Research Institute. November 24, 1988. p. 1. 

2. Reference 1, pp. 3-6. 

3. Letter and cost enclosure from L. Zitko, ChromeTech, Inc., to 

R. Barker, Midwest Research Institute. January 24, 1989. pp. 1-4. 

4. Telecon. Barker, R., MRI, to Zitko, L., ChromeTech, Inc. 

February 21, 1989. Information concerning mesh-pad mist eliminator 

cost data. 

5. EAB Control Cost Manual (Third Edition), U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. 

Publication No. EPA 450/5-87-001A. February 1987. 

6. Monthly Energy Review. Energy Information Administration. 

Department of Energy. Washington, D.C. October 1988. 

7. Telecon. Caldwell, M. J., MRI, with Kraft, G., American Water Works 

Association. March 13, 1989. Information concerning nationwide 

residential and commercial water rates for January 1989. 

8. Telecon. Caldwell, M. J., MRI, with Glovenor, S., Chemical Waste 

Management. April 13, 1989. Information on disposal and 

transportation costs for solid hexavalent chromium waste. 

9. Supplement to Employment and Earnings, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

August 1988. p. 55. 

10. Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Volume 112, 

Number 1. January 1989. 

11. Telecon. Barker, R., MRI, to Jones, R., Ashland Chemical Corp. 

Raleigh, North Carolina. June 1, 1989. Information concerning 

industrial grade chromic acid costs. 

^•O