Un~ted States Office of Air Quality EPA-450/2-78-033 

Environmental Protection Plannrng and Standards OAQPS NO. 1.2- 109 

Agency Research Triangle Park NC 2771 1 December 1978 

Air 

OAQPS Guideline GRAPH (GENERAL) IC ARTS

AP-42 Section 4.9 Series Reference Number 

Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions 

from Existing 

Stationary Sources -


Volume VIII: Graphic 


Arts - ~otogravure 


and Flexography 
EPA-450/2-78-033 

OAQPS NO.1.2-109 

Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions 

from 

Existing Stationary Sources -

Volume VIII: Graphic Arts -

Rotogravure and Flexography 

Second Printing 

(First printing errata corrected) 

Emission Standards and Engineering Division 

Chemical and Petroleum Branch 

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Office of Air and Waste Management 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 2771 1 

December 1978 
OAQPS GUIDELINE SERIES 

The guideline series of reports is being issued by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to 

provide information to state and local air pollution control agencies; for example, to provide guidance on the 

acquisition and processing of air quality data and on the planning and analysis requisite forthe maintenanceof air 

quality. Reports published in this series will be available - as supplies permit - from the Library Services Office 

(MD-35), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 2771 1, or, for a nominal 

fee, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 221 61. 

Publication No. EPA-450/2-78-033 

(OAQPS NO. 1.2-109) 
CONVERSION FACTORS FOR METRIC UNITS 


Metric Unit Metric Name 

Equivalent 

English Unit 

3 kilogram (10grams) 

1iter 

meter 

cubic meter 

Mg 

b megagram (10 grams) 

metric ton 6 metric ton (10grams) 

In keeping with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy, metric 


units are used in this report. These units may be converted to common 


English units by using the above conversion factors. 


Temperature in degrees Celsius (cO) can be converted to temperature 


in degrees Farenheit (OF) by the following formula: 


tof = temperature in degrees Farenheit 

to = temperature in degrees Celsius or degrees Centigrade C 


i'i i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 


CONVERSION FACTORS FOR METRIC UNITS .................................. iii 


1.Q INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ....................................... 1-1 


1.1 General Discussion ........................................ 1-1 


1.2 Achievable Control Levels ................................. 1-7 


1.2.1 Available Add-on Control qevices ........................ 1-2 


1.2.2 Water Borne and High-Solids Inks ........................ 1-3 


1.2.3 Alternative Control Methods ............................. I-? 


1.3 Cost Effectiveness ........................................ 1-5 


1.2.4 Qifferentiation of Coating and Printing ................. 1-fl 


2.0 SOURCES AND TYPES OF EMISSIONS ............................... 2-1 


2.1 General Discussion ........................................ 2-1 


2.2 Printing Processes ........................................ 2-1 


2.2.1 Flexography ............................................. 2-2 


2.2.2 Gravure ................................................. 2-2 


2.2.2.1 Uses for Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing 


and Coating ........................................ 2-a 


2.2.2.2 Nature of the Flexographic and Gravure Printing 


Industries ......................................... 2-5 


2.3 Stock Feeding Methods ..................................... 2-5 


2.4 Printing Inks ............................................. 2-5 


2.5 Emmission Points .......................................... 2-5 


2.5.1 Dryer Types ............................................. 2-7 


2.6 National Emmissions ....................................... 2-7 


2.7 References ................................................ 2-4 

3.0 APPLICABLE SYSTEMS OF EMMISSION REDUCTION ....................... 3-1 


3.7 Introduction .............................................. 


3.2 Add-on Equipment .......................................... 


3.2.1 Carbon Adsorption ....................................... 


3.2.2 Incineration ............................................ 


3.2.2.1 Heat Recovery ......................................... 


3.3 Use of Low Solvent Inks for Packaging Gravure 


and Flexographic Printing .............................. 


3.3.1 Water-Borne Inks ........................................ 


3.4 Summary of Applicability of Control Methods ............... 


3.4.1 Rotogravure ............................................. 


3.4.2 Flexography ............................................. 


3.5 References ................................................ 


0 COST ANALYSIS ................................................... 


1 Introduction .............................................. 


4.1.1 Purpose ................................................. 


4.1.2 Scope ................................................... 


4.1.3 Use of Mode1 Plants ..................................... 


4.1.A Bases for Capital Costs ................................. 


4.1.5 Bases for Annualized Costs .............................. 


4.2 VOC Control in the Printing Industry ...................... 


4.2.1 Model Plant Parometers .................................. 


4.2.2 Control Costs ........................................... 


4.2.3 Cost-effectiveness ...................................... 


4.2.4 References .............................................. 

5.0 ADVERSE AND BENEFICIAL EFFECTS OF APPLYING CONTROL 

METHODS..................................................... 5-1 


5.1 Incineration .............................................. 5-1 


5.2 Carbon Adsorption ......................................... 5-1 


6.q MONITORING TECHNIQUES AND ENFORCEMENT ASPECTS ................... 6-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 


1.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION 


This report is one of a continuing series designed to assist State 


and local jurisdictions in the development of air pollution control 


regulations for volatj le organic compounds. (VOC) which contribute to the 


formation of photochemical oxidants. Thereport deals with VOC 


emissions from the graphic arts operations which utilize inks containing 


volatile organic solvents. 


The graphic arts industry encompasses printing operations which fall 


into four principal categories, namely: letterpress, offset lithography, 


rotogravure and flexography. This guideline is applicable to both the 


flexographic and rotogravure processes as applied to both publication 


and packaging printing. It does not apply to offset lithography or 


letterpress printing. 


1.2 ACHIEVABLE CONTROL LEVELS 


Rotogravure and flexography utilizes inks which contain large 


fractions (50to 80 percent or higher) of volatile organic solvents. 


Certain applications are as high as 96 percent solvent. 


Below are provided emission limitations that represent the presumptive 


norm that can be achieved through the application of reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) . Reasonably available control technology is 

defined as the lowest emission limit that a particular source is 

capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is 


reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. 


It may require technology that has been applied to similar, but not 


necessarily identical source categories. It must be cautioned that the 


limits reported in this section are based on capabilities and problems 


which are general to the industry, but may not be applicable to every 


plant. 


1.2.1 Avai lable Add-on Control Devices 


The vast majority of rotogravure and flexographic printing units use 


organic solvent-borne inks. Emission reduction can be achieved by use 


of carbon adsorption or incineration sytems. A reduction efficiency of 


90 percent of the VOC delivered to these devices can and should be achieve-. 

In addition, it is implicit the RACT requires installation of the best 


practicable capture system to assure that the VOC is directed to the controi 

dev~~ce.A number of carbon adsorption systems at publication and rotogravure plants have been reported to achieve overall recovery efficiencies 


of 75 percent or more, based on material balances. Assuming adsorber 


efficiencies of 90 to 95 percent, capture efficiencies of 75 to 85 percent 


were being realized. There is no avai 1 able method of measurins capture 


efficiency directly. 


Large packaging rotogravure presses could be expected to have capture 


efficiencies somewhat less than publication plants because of shorter 


runs and other factors. A capture efficiency of 75 percent would appear 


to be reasonable, with an overall VOC recovery/control efficiency oi- about 

65 percent for either adsorption on incineration systems. 


1-2 
The capture problem for flexographic presses is more difficult than 

for rotogravure presses because of the manner of construction of 

fllexographic presses. The printing units and dryers are mounted on a 

vertical circular axis such that effective hooding and ducting are 

difficult to construct. A capture efficiency of 70 percent appears 

to be reasonable for these presses for an overall VOC control efficiency 

of 60 percent. 

1.2.2 Water-Borne and High Solids Inks 

Water-borne inks are available which will meet some printing 

requirements of both rotogravure and flexography. Ink manufacturers 

are working to develop water-borne inks which will meet additional 

requirements. EPA desires to encourage such developments because of 

the material and energy saving potentials. It is recommended that 

printing systems in which all printing units utilize a water-borne 

ink whose volatile portion consists of 75 volume percent water and 25 

volume percent organic solvent (or a lower VOC content) be considered 

equivalent to the exhaust treatment systems described in Section 1.2.1. 

Some printing systems may be able to utilize water-borne inks for 

heaviest coverage, but still require some solvent-borne inks for light 

coverage.* For such systems, if a 70 volume percent overall reduction 

of solvent usage is achieved (compared to a11 solvent-borne ink usage), 

the complete operation can be considered equivalent to the exhaust treatment systems described in 5ection 1.2.1. -

There are no high solids inks now in use in rotogravure or 

flexographic printing operakions. However, ink manufacturers have stated 

that they will continue development work in this area. It is recommended 

that, inks which contain 60 percent or more non-volatile material be exemp.: 

from emission limitations in order to encourage development of high 

solids inks. 

*Heavy coverage means large areas of a given color. A thin strip of a 

given color is an example of light coverage. 
1.2.3 Alternative Control Methods 


Publication rotogravure uses inks with solvent mixtures of water- 


immiscible solvents. The vapor can be recovered with carbon adsorption 


systems and reused by ink manufacturers and printers. Some systems 


yield a net profit after amortization and operating expenses. 


Printing of packaging materials by rotogravure and f lexography 


requires inks with more complex solvent mixtures. Many of the solvents 


are water-soluble. Conventional carbon adsorption systems using steam 


for regeneration may not be a viable control method because the 


recovered solvents cannot be reused. Reformulation of the inks may, in 


some cases, make carbon adsorption a viable control technique. A new 


fluidized bed carbon adsorption system uses nitrogen for desorption and 


may provide a viable method for recovering solvents from packaging inks, 


as well as publication inks. Incineration systems with heat recovery 


may bea morepractical solution for some packaging operations. 


Incineration has been shown to provide 90 percent and greater removal 


of VOC in many similar applications. 


1.2.4 Differentiation of Coating and Printing Operations 


The production of packaging materials involves twa principal 


operations which emit volatile organic compounds: 1) coating and 


laminating of paper, film, and foil; 2) printing of words, designs, and 


pictures upon webs of paper, film, and foil. For the purposes of this 


document, coating is defined as the application of a uniform layer of 


material across the entire width of a web. Printing is the formation 


of words, designs and pictures, usually by a series of application rolls 


each with only partial coverage. 

-- 

The recommended emission limits for coatingand laminating operations 

in the production of packaging materials are given in Volume I1 of this 

series.* The emission limits in this document apply to printing 

operations in the production of packaging materials and to publication 

rotogravure printing operations. However, all units in a machine which 

has both coating and printing units will be considered as performing 

a printing operation. A typical operation is as follows: The first unit 

applies a uniform background color; subsequent units print addtiional 

colors; the final unit applies a varnish overcoat. Such a machine would 

be subject to the guideline for graphic arts. 

1.3 COST EFFECTIVENESS 

The cost effectiveness of carbon adsorption is influenced strongly 

by VOC concentration and tonnage and by the value of recovered solvent. 

Where VOC concentration is 1200 ppm, cost effectiveness range from 

$51 to $38/Mg ($46 to $34/ton) of VOC recovered over the range of 

2000 Mg (2200 tons) to 4000 Mg (4400 tons) of VOC input per year. At a 

VOC concentration of 2400 ppm and 2000 Mg/yr input the recovery system 

pays for itself, and at 4000 Mg/yr input yields a $15/Mg profit. 

Thesevalues are typical of a large operation where the wlvent :an be 

reused in the process or sold to an ink manufacturer. No cki;;l are 

available for smaller carbon systems. 

The cost effectiveness of incineration systems are strongly influenced 

by annual tonnage of the VOC controlled and by the VOC concentration and 

degree of heat recovery. For a VOC input rate of about 90 Mg/yr 

(100 tons/yr) the cost of effectiveness ranges from $600/Mg ($600/ton) 

of VOC controlled at a concentration of 1500 ppm and 85 percent heat 

*Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources - Volume I1 : Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, 

and Light-Duty Trucks. EPA-450/2-77-008, May 1977. 
recovery to $2000/Mg ($1800/ton) at a VOC concentration of 500 pprn and 


no heat recovery. For a VOC input rate of about 1500 Mg/yr (1650 tonlyr) 


the cost effectiveness ranges from $120 per ton of VOC at concentrations 


of 1500 ppm and 85 percent heat recovery to $1500/Mg ($1650/ton) for 


concentrations of 500 ppm and no heat recovery. 


The greatest VOC control costs are associated with small flexo- 


graphic printing operations having relatively low VOC levels and often 


operated intermittedly. In many cases, it may be possible to improve 


capture systems resulting in higher VOC levels and lower ventilation rates. 


Even with improved capture systems, it may not be reasonable to require 

exhaust gas treatment at many small printing installations. 

2.0 SOURCES AND TYPES OF EMISSIONS 


2.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION 


Originally the term graphic arts meant only such fine arts as painting 


and drawing. In time the meaning expanded and shifted to various picture 


reproduction methods, such as engraving, etching, and lithographing. 


Finally, the graphic arts industry has become simply a different name for 


the printing industry. 1 


This diverse industry is characterized by a large number of small 


plants and a small number of large plants. Approximately 80 percent of 


commercial printing establishments employ fewer than 20 people.2 The 


largest publication gravure plants employ hundreds of people and have 


a daily potential VOC emission rate of 20 Mg (22 tons). 


Printing establishments are scattered throughout the country but the 


vast bulk of the printing has historically been done in the large 


metropolitan areas. Most periodicals are published in New York, Chicago, 


Philadelphia and Los ~n~e1es.l However, in the last few years several 


new large plants have been built in non-urban areas. This appears to be a 


new trend. 


2.2 PRINTING PROCESSES 


Printing operations of any sizeable volume utilize presses in which 


the image carrier is curved and mounted on a cylinder which rotates, 


(rotary presses) or the image is engraved or etched directly on a cylinder. 

In direct printing the image is transferred directly from the image to 

the print surface. In indirect printing the image is transferred to an 

intermediate roll (called a blanket) and thence to the print surface. 

2.2.1 Flexography 

In flexographic printing, the image areas are raised above the nonimage surface. The distinguishing feature is that the image carrier is 

made of rubber and other elastomeric materials. A feed cylinder rotates 

in a trough of ink (called an ink fountain), and delivers ink to the 

plate (image), cylinder, through a distribution roll, as shown in Figure 2.1. 

Flexographic presses are usually of rotary web design, i.e., roll-fed. 

Presses printing upon corrugated paperboard are a major exception. 

Flexography uses very fluid inks, (low viscosity) typical ly about 

75 volume percent organic solvent. The inks dry by solvent absorption into 

the web and evaporation, usually in high velocity air dryers at temperatures 

below 120~~. Sol vents compati ble with rubber or other plate materials 

must be used. Typical solvents are alcohols, glycols, esters, hydrocarbons 

and ethers. 

2.2.2 Gravure 

In the gravure method printing, image areas are recessed relative to 

non-image area. The image carrier is a copper-plated steel cylinder 

usually also chrome plated to enhance wear resistance. The image is in 

the form of cells or cups mechanically or chemically etched in the surface. 

Typically, a gravure cell is 35 (.0014 inches) deep by 125 lrl (.005 inches) 

square, with 22,500 cells to the square inch.3 The gravure cylinder rotates 

in an ink trough or fountain. Excess ink is removed by a steel doctor 

blade. The ink in the cells is then transferred to the web when it is 

pressed against the cylinder by a rubber-covered impression roll, as 

shown in Figure 2-2. Rotary gravure presses are called rotogravure presses. 

Rotogravure also requires very fluid inks. Solvent content ranges 

from 50 to 85 percent or higher. Typical solvents, include alcohols, 

aliphatic napthas, aromatic hydrocarbons, esters, glycol ethers, ketones, 

nitroparaff ins and water .3 Solvent is evaporated in low temperature driers, 

38' to 93'~ (loo0 to 200'~). The hot air impringement dryers usually are 

indirectly heated by steam or hot air. Steam drum dryers are also used. 

2.2.2.1 Uses for Flexographic and Rotogravure Printing and Coating 

Flexographic and gravure printing and coating applications fall into 

three major cateogries: publication, packaging and specialties. In the 

publ~ications field, magazines, mail order catalogues, brochures, newspaper 

supplements, comics and other commercial printing are printed by the 

gravure process. Packaging products predominantly printed by gravure, 

include cigarette cartons and labels, can labels, detergent cartons, and 

many other folding cartons. Flexography is typically used for bread bags, 

multi-wall bags, milk cartons, corrugated paper board, paper cups and plates, 

labels, tags, tapes and envelopes. Both printing processes are used for 

flexible film and foil to be used for overwraps or laminates, composite 

cans, carrier cartons, frozen food wraps, and gift wraps. 

In the specialty field, both flexography and gravure are used for wall 

covering and decorating household paper products such as towels and tissue. 

Gravure is used for floor covering, cigarette filter tips, vinyl upholstery, 
woodgrains, and a variety of other products. Gravure is also used for 

applying accurately metered quantities of coatings to paper and other 

kinds of webs in various manufacturing operations where its fast-drying 

inks and the ability to print well on a wide variety of surfaces are 

advantageous.3 Recommended emissions 1 imitations from the coating uses 

of gravure are covered in other volumes of this guideline series, such 

as Volume 11: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabric, Automobiles, 

and Light-Duty Trucks, and Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood 

Paneling. The recommended emission limitations given in this volume do not 

apply to these operations. 

2.2.2.2 Nature of the Flexographic and Gravure Printinq Industries -

Publication printing is done in large printing plants, numbering less than 

50 in total .3 Package and specialty printing by flexography and gravure is 

done by a considerably larger number of companies, ranging from large 

integrated packaging companies with many press units of small captive 

operations with only one or two press units.3 It is estimated that there 

n 

are from 13 to 14 thousand gravure printing units7 and 30,000 flexographic 

printing units. 5 

2.3 STOCK FEEDING METHODS 

Presses are divided into two classes by feeding methods: 

sheet-fed and roll-fed. Stock fed from a roll is referred to as a web. 

High volume roll presses are significant sources of VOC. 

2.4 PRINTING INKS 

Printing inks are composed of the same type of ingredients as surface 

coatings: pigments, vehicles and solvents. Of course, they are tailored 

to have different properties than coatings. In addition to regulatory 
limitations required by EPA, OSHA, FDA, and USDA, the specifications 


for an ink are governed by a number of considerations such as: (1) 


printing processes and methods; (2) kind of press; (3) paper or other 


substrate; (4)drying process; (5) desired finish, matte, gloss, etc., 


(6) end use of the printed product; (7) color; (8) fabrication method to 


which the printed stock will be subjected; (9) sequence of ink application, 


in multicolor printing. 1 


The solvent content of inks varies widely. Flexograph and gravure ink 


contain 50 to 85 percent solvent and dry by solvent evaporation. Water-


borne inks are used for special applications; they contain 5 to 30 percent 


VOC solvent. 


The following solbents are representative of those used in printing 

inks, usually in combinations: 


To1 uene Ethanol 


Xylene Butanol 


Heptane Glycols


Isooctane Glycol ether esters 


Mineral Spirits Glycol esters 


Naphtha Acetone 


Hexane Methyl ethyl ketone 


Propanol Isopropyl acetate 


Isopropanol Normal propyl acetate 


Methanol Ethyl acetate 


POINTS 


Roll-fed printing presses require dryers to evaporate solvent in 


order to produce a product with immediate handleability. Solvent vapors 


are emitted from printing units and dryers. Some printing operations 


which utilize air pollution control equipment have the printing units 


hooded and vented to the control device. 


2-6 
2.5.1 Dryer Types 

A variety of dryer types are used including steam-heated and other 

indirectly heated designs. Direct-fired dryers are mainly high velocity/ 

hot air dryers. Steam-heated dryers are the principal type of indirectly 

heated dryers. 

Steam-heated dryers are of two types: drum and forced circulation 

dryers. Drum dryers are cylinders to which steam is applied. The printed 

web is brought around the drum with the printed surface on the outside. 

The web is heated by conduction. In forced circulation dryers, air is 

heated by passing over steam coils or tubes and is circulated through the 

drying chamber by a fan(s). 

2.6 NATIONAL EMISSIONS 

Data for a direct determination of the total national emissions from 

the printing industry are not available. However, a report by Gadomski 2 

contained data on the ink and solvent usage for 1968 from plants estimated 

to have 32 percent of the nat ional total. Total ink usage for these 

p1an.t~was 141 million pounds . Additional solvent for ink dilution 

and clean-up totaled 21 million gallons. Total solvent usage was 95,000 

tons (87,000 Mg). From this the study suggested a 1968 national total 

usage of 300,000 tons (270,000 Mg). Assuming a three percent annual growth 

rate, the 1976 solvent usage rate would be 380,000 tons (340,000 Mg). The 

average degree of control is estimated to be 30 percent leaving uncontrolled 

emissions of 270,000 tons per year (240,000 Mg/yr) . 

The above report separated the ink consumption into a percentage for 

each printing process by the survey results and by a survey conducted by 

the National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers. The additional 
solvent figures were also separated by printing process type. The three 

sets of figures were averaged to give the following breakdown: 

Percent of Emissions 

Process Emissions Mg/yr 

Gravure 

Lithography 

Letterpress 

F1 exography 
2.7 REFERENCES 

1. Strauss, Vi ctor, The Printing Industry. Printing Industries of 

America, Inc., Washington, D.C. 1967. 

2. Gadomski, R. R., et. a1 . Evaluations of Emissions and Control 

Technologies in the Graphic Arts Industries, Phase I,Graphic Arts 

Techni cal Institute. August 1970. 

3. George, H. F., Gravure Industry's Environmental Program. In 

conference on Envi ronmental Aspects of Chemical Use in Printing 

Operations. EPA-5601/1-005. Office of Toxic Substances, 

Envi ronmental Protection Agency, January 1976. pp 204-216 

4. Long, R. P., and W. R. Daum, "Gravure Survey," Packaqe Printing 

Diecutting, January 1975, pp 12-14. Cited in Reference 3. 

5. Comment letter from the Flexographi c Technical Associati on, 

November 27, 1978. 
3.0 APPLICABLE SYSTEMS OF EMISSION REDUCTION 

3.1 INTRODUCTION 

Emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) can be reduced by 

add-on control devices and by the use of water-borne and low solvent 

inks. In this chapter the applicability of these methods to the 

various printing processes wi 11 be reviewed. 

3.2 ADD-ON EQUIPMENT 

Fume incinerators and carbon adsorbers are the only devices which 

have proven to have a high efficiency in controlling vapors from rotogravure 

and flexographi c printing operations. 

3.2 .'l Carbon Adsorpti on 

Recovery of solvents by use of carbon adsorption systems has been 

successfu1 at a number of large publication rotogravure plants. The presses 

in question used a single, water immiscible solvent (toluene) or a mixture 

which is recovered in approximately the proportions used in the ink. Three 

such plants were reported to have systems which recover 6,000 to 7,000 

gal lons (20 to 23 Mg) per day of solvent each. '* '3 These recovery systems 

were installed for economic and regulatory reasons. Solvent is evaporated 

from the web in indirect steam heated dryers which precludes any solvent 

decomposition. Regeneration is accomplished by use of steam, followed by 

condensation and a simple decantation. Because the solvents are waterimmiscible a re1 atively simple system for separating condensed water and 

solvent is possible. 
Some rotogravure operations, such as printing and coating of packaging 

materials, uti lize inks and coatings containing complex solvent mixtures. 

Many of the solvents are water soluble. The solvents required for a folding 

carton operation, for example, consists of to1 uene, heptane, ethyl acetate, 

methyl ethyl ketone, and isopropyl alcohol. The last three are soluble 

in water. If a carbon recovery system with steam regeneration were used, a 

disti 11 ati on system would be required to recover and separate the watersoluble solvents. Since azeotropes (constant boi ling mixtures) are formed, 

adequate separation would be very difficult. In addition, frequent product 

changes result in varying solvent combinations, making solvent recovery 

for reuse di ffi cul t and costly. 

However, reformulation of inks offers a possible method of avoiding 

the above difficulties. Many of the present solvent mixtures were developed 

to comply with Rule 66 of Los Angeles County and similar legislation. Because 

of EPA's 1977 policy statement on reactivity, it is now possible to revert 

to the simpler solvent mixtures used in the past. Many printers will be 

able to revert to a mixture of immiscible hydrocarbons and a single ester 

or MEK, which could be reused as a mixture after dewatering. It will be 

practical for many packaging type printers to solve a large percentage of 

their emission control requirements by the use of carbon adsorption and 

relatively simple dewatering techniques. 4 

A new type of carbon adsorption system offers another method of 

avoiding trouble with water soluble solvents. A fluidized bed carbon 

system, developed in Japan, is being marketed in the United States. The 

carbon is in the form of highly abrasion resistant carbon beads. In the 
adsorbing section the beads cascade in the fluidized state down a tray 

tower. Solvent laden air enters the bottom of the tower and leaves at the 

top. The beads then flow through the desorbing section in a dense bed where 

they are heated indirectly in the presence of nitrogen which acts as a 

desorbing gas. The nitrogen is then cooled in indirect heat exchangers to 

condense the sol vent. The nitrogen is then recycled to the desorber. 

The following advantages are claimed for the fluidized bed system, 

relative to fix bed systems: 

. Better thermal efficiency 

. Lower blower power consumption 

. No mixing with water at desorption 

. No valves or cycling equipment 

. less space required 

. Less susceptible to blinding 

. Can be regenerated at higher temperatures to remove high boiling 

materi a1 s 

A disadvantage of this system is that relatively constant air volume 

must be maintained. Also the capital cost may be higher. 

Additional informati on on theory, design and practi ces concerning 

carbon adsorption systems is given in Volume I [EPA-450/2-76-028) of this 

gui deli ne series .

5 

3.2.2 rnci nerati on 

Incineration destroys organic emissions by oxidizing them to carbon 

dioxide and water vapor. Incineration is a technically feasible method of 
control ling emissions from all printing operations. Both direct flame 

(thermal) and catalytic incinerators are potenti a1 methods of control ling 

emissions from fl exography and packaging gravure printing. 

3.2.2.1 Heat Recovery 

The cost of operating an incineration system can be substanti a1 ly 

reduced by the use of heat recovery equipment. Primary heat recovery uses 

the hot incinerator exhaust gases to preheat the dryer exhaust gases prior 

to incineration. A secondary heat exchanger can sometimes supply the heated 

air required to operate the dryer. Cost data is given in Chapter 4 for 

incineration systems with and without heat recovery. Incineration and 

heat recovery systems are described in Volume I (EPA-450/2-76-028) of this 

5 series . 

In addi ti on to di rect-fl ame and catalytic incinerators , a thi rd 

type is available. Pebble bed incinerators combine the functions of a 

heat exchanger and a combusti on device. A diagram of such a system 

is shown in Figure 3-3. The solvent 1 aden exhaust from the dryers and 

floor sweeps enter one of the pebble beds which has been heated by the 

combustion chamber exhaust in the previous cycle. Oxidation of the 

vapors starts in the preheat bed and is completed in the combustion 

chamber. The exhaust gases exit through a second pebble bed transferring 

heat to the pebbles. The dampers are reversed periodically, thereby 

alternating the functions of the two pebble beds. 

An incinerator having three or more pebble beds wi 11 a1 low one 

pebble bed to be removed from the process while the other two pebble beds 

are acting as both the energy recovery after incineration and as air 

preheat prior to incineration. The use of the third pebble bed wi 11 further 

a1 low the residual fumes in that chamber to be flushed to the combustion 

zone prior to flow reversal, thus providing the highest level of combustion 

efficiencies. Such flushing is not possible if there are only two pebble 

beds. A diagram of a five bed system is shown in Figure 3-4. 

Pebble bed systems have been designed to achieve a heat recovery 

efficiency of 85 percent. When the vapor concentration is about 10 percent 

of the LEL, the burner throttles to a pi lot light condition, the VOC fumes 

furnishing vi rtual 1 y a1 1 of the fuel requi rement during periods of continuous 

operati on. 

Recovery of heat from incineration exhaust gases can also be 

accomplished by the use of liquid media heat exchangers. A system using 

hot oi 1 to transfer heat from the incinerator exhaust to the dryers has 

been installed on a number of rotogravure presses at paperboard and bag 

printing plants. This system utilizes an organic vapor sensing device to 

control dampers in dryer exhaust so as to maintain a preset percentage of 

the Lower Explosive Limit (L.E.L.). Thus the exhaust rate is minimized, and 

the VOC furnishes the greater part of the heat to operate the incinerator. 

Also the incinerator furnishes the heat to operate the dryers. A sketch of 

such a system is shown in Figure 3-5. 

3.3 USE OF LOW SOLVENT INKS FOR PACKAGING GRAVURE AND FLEXOGRAPHIC PRINTING 

Low solvent inks are of three types: water-borne, high-solids and 

radiation curable inks. Only water-borne inks are widely used at the present 

time and are discussed in the following section. 

3-6 


3.3.1 Water-Borne Inks 

These inks are not completely solvent-free, as the vof ati le portion 

contains up to 35 percent water so1 uble organi c compounds. Water-borne inks 

are used extensively in printing of corrugated paperboard for containers, 

or multi-wall bags and other packaging materials made of paper and paper 

products. There is a limit upon the amount of water-borne ink that can be 

printed upon thin stock before paper will be seriously weakened. Thus, 

the expandeduse of water-borne inks faces this severe limitation. 

3.4 SUMMARY OF APPLICABILITY OF CONTROL METHODS 

The available control methods for each of the printing methods are 

summarized in the fol lowing sections. 

3.4.1 Rotoqravure 

Pub1 i cation rotogravure operations can be control led by carbon 

adsorption systems with a capture efficiency of 75-85 percent of the VOC 

emitted from the printing units and the dryers. The carbon recovery system 

can be operated with a recovery efficiency of 90 percent of the VOC entering 

the carbon beds. An overall emission reduction efficiency of 75 percent 

can thus be achieved. 

Packaging rotogravure pri nti ng operations can be control led by 

incineration systems with an expected capture effi ciency of 70-80 percent 

and a combustion efficiency of 90 percent. An overall emission reduction 

efficiency of 65 percent can thus be achieved. 

Some rotogravure packaging printing operations with less demanding 

qua1 i ty requi rements can use water-borne inks. Most water-borne inks 

contain some VOC as a co-solvent. Emission limits comparable to carbon 

adsorption and incineration can be achieved if the solvent portion of the 

ink consists of 75 volume percent water and 25 volume percent organic solvent. 
3.4.2 Flexography 

Flexographic printing operations can be control led by incineration 

systems with an expected capture efficiency of 65-70 percent and a combustion 

efficiency of 90 percent. Thus an overall emission reduction efficiency of 

60 percent can be achieved. 

Some flexographi c packaging printing operations can uti 1ize waterborne inks. Emi ssi on 1imi ts comparable to incineration can be achieved 

when the solvent portion of the ink consists of 75 volume percent water 

and 25 volume percent organic solvent. 
3.5 REFERENCES 

George H. F. , Gravure Industry's Envi ronmen tal Program. In conference on Envi ronmental Aspects of Chemi cal Use in Printing Operati ons . - EPA-5601/1-75-005. Office of Toxic Substances, Environmental 

Protection Agency, January 1976. pp 204-21 6 

Watki ns , 8.G., and P. Marnel 1 , Sol vent Recovery in a Modern 

Rotogravure Printing Plant. In conference on Environmental Aspects 

of Chemical Use in printing Operations, EPA 5601/1-75-005. Office 

of Toxi c Substances ,Envi ronmen tal Protecti on Agency. January 1976. 

pp. 344-355. 

Harvin, R. L., Recovery and Reuse of Organic Ink Solvents. In 

conference on Environmental Aspects of Chemical Use in Printing 

Operations. EPA 5601/1-75-005 Offi ce of Toxic Substances, 

Environmental Protecti on Agency. pp 367-387. January 1976. 

Comment letter from Mi chael J. Worral , Ameri can Ceca Corporation. 

November 30, 1978. 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources - Volume I: Control Methods for Surface Coating Operations. 

U. S. Envi ronmental Protecti on Agency. Research Tri angl e Park, N .C. 

2771 1. November 1976. 

Study of Systems for Heat Recovery from Afterburners. Prepared 

for U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency by Industri a1 Gas Cleaning 

Institute, Inc. Stamford, Connecticut. Apri 1 1978. 
4.0 COST ANALYSIS 


4.1 INTRODUCTION 

4.1.1 Purpose 

This section presents estimated installed capital and annualized costs 

for control of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from that portion of the 

graphic arts industry involved in flexographic and rotogravure packaging 

printing and rotogravure publication printing. The section also includes 

an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the control methods. 

4.1.2 Scope 

The analysis includes all the printing operations involved, i.e., the 

application and drying or curing of inks. Cost estimates have been developed 

on the basis of retrofitting VOC controls on existing plants. Two groups of 

printing processes are analyzed. The first uses flexographic and rotogravure 

processes on packaging. The second uses the rotogravure processes to print 

publications. Light hydrocarbon emissions are generated by both groups. 

Various typical plant sizes (based on annual ink use) are analyzed for both 

packaging and publication printing. Tables 4-1 and 4-2 present the process 

parameters of the model sizes selected for the packaging and pub1 ications 

groups, respectively. These parameters include exhaust gas volumetric 

flow rates and temperatures, control devices, and control efficiencies 

for each model plant. (Flow diagrams showing the plant configurations 

are presented in Chapter 2.) 

4 .1 .3 Use of Model Plants 

Cost estimates developed for this analysis are based solely on model 

plant configurations. Yearly ink usage of the mode1 plant sizes selected for 

packaging printing are 7 Mg (7.7 tons), 40 Mg (44 tons), 150 Mg (165 tons), 
__;f__-

VOC VOC capture 

UdS flow. concentration, Uncontrolled VOC,. rate. 

PI"" Mg/yr (tons/yr) Mglyr (tonslyr) 

28 (1000) 500 4.10 (4.50) 3.31 (3.65) 

9 ( 330) 49 (120) 1500 4.10 (4.50 3.31 3.65) 

28 (1000) 49 (120) 500 4.10 (4.501 3.31 13.65) 

9 ( 330) 49 (120) I500 4.10 (4.50) 3.31 (3.65) 

'Control etf~~iency 

Volatilr Organic Compounds. 

IS 90 percent across ~nc~nerator. 

Ttlt.se Pdr-dlWterS dl so apply to pebble-bed Inc Inerato, 

a td~hprt.5~ 1, d>bullled to operate 30. ot the pldnt operatlny tl~le. 

lh5rd oft soivrlt content of the 1111, 65 percent by VOIUII~ and 58.5 percent by welght. Nulrculdr welytlr of solvent. 92. 
TABLE 4-2. PROCESS PARAMETERS AND FLOW RATES FOR MODEL PLANT - CONFIGURATIONS, 

PUBLICATION ROTOGRAVURE, w ITH CARBON ABSORPTION FOR VOC~ CONTROL^ 

- -. -

Y OC VOC capture 

Gas temp.. concentrat~orr. Uncontrolled VOCd. rate , OC (OF) DD~I Wyr (tons/vr) Wyr ( tons/yr)

( 3860) I rmo 11420 (io.000) 

a Volatlle Organlc Compounds. 

Control efflcirncy 1s 90 percent across tn'lnerator. 

Each press 1s assumed to operate 50 percent of the plant operating tlme. 

Bdsed on solvent content of Ink, 65 percent by volume and 58.5 percent by welght. Molecular weight of solvent, 92. 
400 Mg (440 tons), and 2500 Mg (2750 tons). For publication printing, 

the yearly ink usages are 3500 Mg (3860 tons) and 7000 Mg (7720 

tons). Because factors such as width and operating speed of the printing 

machinery influence control costs at actual facilities, actual costs for 

specific plant sizes will vary. Nevertheless, cost estimates based on model 

plants are useful for comparing control a1 ternati ves. 

4.1.4 Bases for Capital Costs 

Installed capital costs represent the total investment required for 

installing retrofit emission control systems on existing presses; they 

include the cost of equipment, material, labor for equipment erection, and 

other associated costs. These estimated costs reflect mid-1978 dollars and 

are based on equipment costs obtained from equipment vendors. 1-6, 8-10 The 

control equipment is assumed to be mounted on structural steel above grade 

or roof; the ducting requirement is based on equipment that is installed 

within 100 meters (350 ft) of the press.' The installation costs have 

been estimated on instal 1 ed material requi rements. No attempt has 

been made to include either production losses during installation and 

startup, or research and development costs. Table 4-3 presents the 

bases and assumptions used in estimating capital costs. 

4.1.5 Bases for Annualized Costs 

Annualized costs represent the cost of operating and maintaining control 

systems and the cost of recovering the capital investment required for these 

systems. They include direct costs such as utilities, materials, labor, and 
- - 

TABLE 4-3. BASES FOR CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES 

All costs are expressed in mid-1978 dollars. 


The afterburners have a 0.5-second residence time and a 746°C (1375°F) 


incineration temperature. 


Afterburners and carbon adsorption systems have a VOC emission 


reduction efficiency of 90 percent. 


The initial carbon for bedding is included in capital costs. 


Capital investment includes: 


Basic control equipment 


Auxiliary equipment (e.g., hoods, ducts) 


Fuel oil storage for 10 days operation 


Installation of basic and auxiliary equipment 


Removal of existing equipment, as required 


Contingencies 


Contractor's fee, taxes, and other indirect costs 

maintenance; indirect costs such as taxes, insurance, depreciation, interest 

rate, administration, and permits; and adjustments such as credits for recovered solvents. Table 4-4 presents bases and assumptions used to estimate 

annualized costs. 

4.2 VOC CONTROL IN THE PRINTING INDUSTRY 

4.2.1 Model Pl ant Parameters 

Costs were developed for thermal incinerators with and without 40 

percent primary heat recovery on flexographic and rotogravure packaging, 

and for carbon adsorption control on rotogravure publication printing 

processes. In addition, the costs for thermal incinerators with heat 

recovery were compared to costs for identically sized pebble bed incinerators. 

4.2.2 Control Costs 

The capital and annualized costs and cost-effectiveness ratios of 

thermal incinerators for VOC control on flexographic and rotogravure 

packaging model plants are presented in Tables 4-5 through 4-9; costs of carbon 

adsorption systems on rotogravure publication model plants are presented in 

Table 4-10. The respective cost data are plotted against mode7 plant ink usage 

in Figures 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. Finally, Table 4-1 1 displays these data for 

pebble bed incinerators. 

In packaging printing, the incinerator with a primary heat recovery 

system requires a larger capital investment than one without primary heat 

recovery. Because primary heat recovery reduces fuel costs, the savings 

therefrom increase proportionately with volumetric flow rate and VOC concentration. 

In packaging printing, incineration for each model plant size has been evaluated at two gas flow rates, the smaller rate being one third of the larger. 

These 1ower rates are considered attainable with minor modifications to press 
-- 

TABLE 4-4. 


Description 


Annualized costs 


Installation type 


Press operating time 


Utilities 


No. 2 fuel oila 


Electricity 


Steam 


Operating labor 


Maintenance 


Labor 


Material 


Unit cost 


0.105/liter 


(S0.3961gal) 


0.0266/kWh 


59.02/Mg 


($4.10/103 lb) 


$8.66/h 


S9.53/h 


89.53 


BASES FOR ANNUALIZED COST ESTIMATES 


Basts for costs and other comnents 


One year period comnencing mid-1978 


Retrofit 


1000 h/yr or 250 dayslyr at 4 hlday; 


2000 h/yr or 250 dayslyr at 8 h/day; 


3000 h/yr or 250 days/yr at 12 h/day; 


4000 h/yr or 250 days/yr at 16 hlday 


$O.l05/liter ($0.396/gal); based upon 


transport lots of 27,250 liters (7200 


gal ) delivered from Midwest terminal 

EPA-23013-77-015b report cost for 


iron and steel industry 


Based on 80% efficiency ; includes I&' 

for facilities, maintenance, depreciation, 


and othersb 


Includes 20% for fringes 


Hourly rate at 10: premium over operating 


labor $9.53/h 


Average (over 1 ife of equipment) material 

costs equal to labor costs 


Carbon beds: annual allowance for 5-year 


1 ife, 10% of the equipment capital cost 

10% interest rate and 10 years equip- 


ment 1ife 

Reclaimed solvent for use of diesel or 


fuel oil 


1000 Btu/lb x S0.396/gal t (140,000 Btu/gal x 0.8 eff.) 

$4.10/103 lb steam. 


Misc. maint., parts 


and material 


Capital recovery 


factor 16.275% of 


capital cost 


Taxes and insurance 2% of capital 


cost 


Administration and 


permits 2% of capital 

cost 


Adjustment 


credi tc 


a Assumed to be the only fuel used by all systems. 


In other words: 1000 Ib steam x 

= $354/103 lb steam plus 16; = 

Where applicable. 


C 

TABLE 4-6. COST OF VOC CONTROL BY THERMAL INCINERATOR AT 

PLANT USING 40 Mg (44 tons) OF INK PER YEAR 

(Mid-1978 dollars) 

Without heat With 40% primary 

recovery heat r covery 

1500 ppma 500 ppma 1500 ppma 

Equipment costb 

Installed capital costb 

Di rec t operating cost 

Annual ized capi tal charges 

Total annualized cost 

Pollutants controlled at 90% 

control device efficiency, Mglyr 

(tonsly r 

Cost-effectiveness of 

pollutant controlled, 

$/Mg ($/ton) 

a VOC concentration by volume in emissions gas stream. 

References 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. 

Primary heat recovery reduces fuel consumption. 
TABLE 4-7. COST OF VOC CONTROL BY THERMAL INCINERATOR AT 

PLANT USING 150 Mg (165 tons) OF INK PER YEAR 

(Mid-1978 dollars) 

Without heat With 40% primary 

recovery heat recovery 

Equipment cos tb 

Installed capital costb 

Direct operating cost 

Annual ized capital charges 

P 

-

I Total annualized cost 

0 


Pollutants controlled at 90% 

control1 device efficiency, Mg/yr 

(tonslyr) 

Cost-effectiveness of 

pol 1 utant control led, 

BIMg ($1 ton) 

a VOC concentration by volume in emissions gas stream. 

b References 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. L Primary heat recovery reduces fuel consumption. 
-- - 

I 

TABLE 4-8. COST OF VOC CONTROL BY THERMAL INCINERATOR AT 


Equipment cos tb 

Instal 1 ed capital costb 

Direct operating cost 

Annualized capital charges 

P Total annualized cost 4 

4 

Pollutants controlled at 90% 

control device efficiency, 

(tonslyr) 

Cost-effectiveness of 

pollutant controlled, 

$/Mg ($/ton) 

PLANT USING 400 Mg (440 tons) OF INK PER YEAR 

(Mid-1978 do1 lars) 

Without heat With 40% primary 

recovery heat recovery 

500 ppma -- 1500 ppma 

77,000 95,000 

228,000 224,000 

247,300 33,600C 

46,200 45,400 

293,500 79,000 

-

Mglyr 

L 

a VOC concentration by volume in emissions gas stream. 

References 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. 

C Primary heat recovery reduces fuel consumption. 
TABLE 4-9. COST OF VOC COUTROL BY THERMAL INCINERATOR AT 

PLANT USIAG 2500 My (2753 tons) !IF INK PER YEAR 

(Mid-1978 do1 lars) 

Without heat With 40% primary 

recovery heat recovery 

500 ppma 1500 ppma 500 ppma -- 1500 ppma 

Equipment cmtb 351,000 24O,OOO 

Installed capital costb 1,110,000 568,000 

Direct operating cost 1,440,500 168,300C 

Annualized capital charges 225,000 115,200 

Total annualized cost 1,665,500 283,500 

-.-

Pollutants controlled at 90% 1,008 

control device efficiency, Mg/yr 

(tons/yr) (1,125) 

Cost-effectiveness of 1,650 

pollutant controlled, 

$/My ($ton) (1,4801 

-

a VOC concentration by volume in emissions gas stream. 

References 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. 

Primary heat recovery reduces fuel consumption. 
TABLE 4-10. COST OF VOC CONTROL BY CARBON ADSORBER 

FOR PUBLICATIONS ROTAGRAVURE PRINTING 

(Mid-1978 dollars) 

Plant using 3500 Mg Plant using 7000 Mg 

(3860 tons) of ink per yr (7720 tons) of ink per yr 

Equi pment costb 

Instal led capital costb 

Direct operating cost 

Recovered sol vent (credit) 

f

- Annualized capital charges 

Csr 


Total annualized cost 

Pollutants controlled at 90% 

control device efficiency, Mg/yr 

( tonslyr) 

Cost-effectiveness of 

pollutant controlled, 

$/Mg ($/ton) 

a VOC concentration by volume in emissions gas stream. 

References 3, 4. 
ANNUAL PLANT INK USAGE, Hg/yr ( ton/yr) 

Figure 4-1. Capital and annualized costs of thermal incinerator 

without heat recovery for VOC control at existing graphic arts 

plant using flexographlc and rotogravure printing process 

for packaging. 
Figure 4-2. Capital and annualized costs of thermal incinerator with 

50% primary heat recovery for VOC control at existing graphic 

arts plant using fl exographic and rotogravure printing 

process for packaging. 

1000 * 

L 

- * 

- 

0 

0 

'0 

E 

m 

ul 

¶ 

0 c U 

cD 

1 1 1 I I I ' 

- - 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

h 

- cn 

V) 

IV) 

0 

v 100- W 

N 

I 

2 

3 2 

3 

a 

0 

2 

2 II. 

Q 

5 

...a 

... ............. ....... ... (I" ..a - .... - 

O'.'' - .... ......... - ..... ................ .... - .......... a - - .* ............ 0""" 

........ - CAPITAL COST - 

*' .d* .----- ANNUAL1 ZED COST . - 

d.' EMISSIONS AT 500 ppn VOC 

0 EMISSIONS AT 1500 ppn YOC - 

- 
enclosures. Significant modifications to enclosures or the addition of highvelocity air jets could reduce ventilation rates to one-sixth that of the 

unimproved, and could increase VOC concentration proportionately. This reduction 

in flow rates significantly reduces the control system capita1 cost for all 

plants. The capital cost reductions for the model plant sizes of 7 Mg/yr 

(7.7 tonslyr) , 40 Mg/yr (44 tons/yr) , 150 Mg/yr ( 165 tons/yr) , 400 Mg/yr (440 

tons/yr), and 2500 Mg/yr (2750 tons/yr) are, respectively: lo%, lo%, 41%, 36%, and 

67% for incinerators without heat recovery; and €4, 13%,23%, 31%,and 67% for 

incinerators with 40% primary heat recovery. 

For all model plants, these lower capital costs effect proportional 

reductions in annualized capital charges. This 66% reduction in the 

volumetric flow rate (with an accompanying trebl ing of VOC concentration) 

causes reductions in the direct annual operating costs (fuel , electricity, 

etc.) for the respective model plant sizes of: 50%, 65%, 70%, 72%, and 

74% for incinerators without heat recovery; and 37%, 60%, 78%, 75%, and 

78% for incinerators with 40% primary heat recovery. In other words, 

for a given model plant size, smaller incinerators are less expensive 

than larger ones to buy and operate. 

The addition of primary heat recovery equipment to incinerators increases 

the capital cost, but reduces annual fuel consumption proportionately with 

the operating hours. Neither the 7 Mg/yr (7.7 tons/yr) plant nor the 40 Mg/yr 

(44 tons/yr) plant operates enough hours per year to realize an annualized cost 

savings from heat recovery, relative to the corresponding thermal incinerator 

without heat recovery. For the larger plants operating more hours per year, 

however, the incinerators with heat recovery have lower annualized 

costs than those without heat recovery. 
The effect of heat recovery on total annualized cost is also illustrated 

by Figures 4-1 and 4-2. As these figures show, the annualized costs are 

less than 25% of the capital costs of incinerators with or without heat 

recovery for the smallest model plant. As the plant size increases to 

the largest model plant size, however, the annualized costs exceed 

capital costs for those without heat recovery, but the addition of heat 

recovery reduces the annualized costs to less than the corresponding 

capital costs. 

Table 4-10 lists capital and annualized costs for carbon adsorption 

systems. Although the capital cost increases with plant size, smaller 

volumetric flow rates may effect reductions in both capital and operating 

costs for a given model plant size. For example, a 50 percent reduction in 

volumetric flow rate for the 3500 Mg/yr (3860 tonslyr) plant reduces the 

capital cost from $701,000 to $435,000, and reduces the annual ized 

capital charges from $1 42,100 to $88,200. The sol vent recovery credits 

are $170,100 for both volumetric flow rates, since the VOC emissions 

from the presses are based on the same hourly emission rate and the same 

annual operating hours. The direct operating costs are reduced from 

$100,800 and $82,900 solely because less electric power is required for 

the lower volumetric flow rate. It is important to note that neither 

the steam requirements for desorbing nor the cooling water required for 

condensing the steam and desorbed VOC is reduced, because both are 

related to the VOC collected and not the volumetric flow rate. In all, 

the total annual ized cost is reduced from $72,800 to $1000 for a 3500 Mg/yr (3860 
tons/yr) model plant. If this model plant were operated more hours per 

year, or at a faster line speed, the recovery credits could result in 

negative total annualized costs. For example, the 7000 Mg/hr (7720 tonslyr) 

plant, operating 4000 hours per year and emitting VOC at a concentration of 

2400 ppm, has a negative annualized cost of $41,700. (See Figure 4-3. ) 

Installed and annualized costs for pebble bed units are shown in 

Table 4-11. Installed and operating costs for these units were obtained 

from a vendor. '-lo However, because the vendor's estimates did not include 

ductwork, foundations, or fuel oil storage, his figures were adjusted to 

include costs for these auxi 1 iaries. 11 

Costs for labor, fuel, power, and maintenance were computed using 

parameters supplied by the vendor and unit costs from Table 4-4. As with 

thermal incinerators, a ten-year operating life was assumed. 

As Table 4-11 shows, the installed costs for pebble bed units range 

from $118,000 to $1,500,000 for the 7.0 Mg/yr (1500 ppm stream) and 2500 

Mg/yr (500 ppm stream) model plants, rexpectively. For most plant sizes, 

these costs are 10 to 34 percent lower than those for incinerators with 

primary heat recovery (see Tables 4-5 to 4-9). The cost differences, 

however, are not significant relative to the precision of these study 

estimates. 

The annual ized costs, which vary widely, depend, in general , on the 

plant size, but on the gas flowrate and VOC emission rate in particular. 

As with thermal incinerators, the annualized capita1 charges 'accounts 

for more than one-half of the total annualized cost. Nonetheless, it must 
CAPITAL COST 

ANNUALIZED COST 

EMISSIONS AT 1200 

0 EMISSIONS AT 2400 bpn( 

NOTE - THESE HAY NOT BE 

STRAIGHT-LINE RELATIOHS. 

A STRAIGHT LINE IS USED 

BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY 

TWO DATA POINTS. i

ANNUAL PLANT INK USAGE, Mg/yr ( ton/yr) 

Figure 4-3. Capital and annualized costs of carbon 

adsorption VOC control at existing graphic arts plant 

using rotogravure printing process for publications. 
(Hid-1978 do1 lars) 

-. ----- -..-

- -

Plant size installed Direct Annualized Total 

ink use, VOC capi tal operating capital annualized VOC Cost-effectiveness, 

Ilg/~r concentrat ion, cost, cost, charges, cost, control led, $/Mg ($/ton) 4 tonslyr) PP $ $/Yr $/yr S/Y r Wyr ( tons/yr) VOC controlled 7-


7.0 (7.7) 500 121,000 

1,500 1 18,000 

l46.000 

1 35,000 

268.000 

167,000 

391,OOO 

202,000 

1.500,OOO 

585,000 

a References 8 to 11. 

Designed for 85% primary heat recovery. 

Costs based on 90% device control efflclency; however, according to a vendor, a pebble bed 

incinerator can remove as much as 98 to 99% of the VOC. 
be emphasized that the pebble bed incinerator vendor claims a very high 

primary heat recovery (85 to go%), versus 40% for the thermal incinerator. 

Thus, the pebble bed's fuel cost constitutes an even lower percentage of 

its total annualized cost. Indeed, in some cases, the fuel requirements-- 

and costs--are negl i gi bl e. 

Shown in Table 4-1 1, the annual ized cost ranges from $26,600 to $478,000 

per year for the smallest and largest plant sizes. These costs are significantly lower than those for the thermal incinerator with primary heat 

recovery. The incinerator costs range from $33,700 to $1,117,000 per year. 

Now, the costs in Table 4-11 correspond to an 85% heat recovery, a fairly 

typical value. If the recovery were boosted to 90%, the annualized costs 

would decrease modestly in most cases. However, in some instances the 

annualized costs would increase, because the higher heat recovery units would 

require larger pebble beds which would, in turn, drive up their installed 

costs . 

4.2.3 Cost-effectiveness 

The cost-effectiveness ratio (in this report) is defined as the total 

annualized cost per annual unit of pollutant controlled. The annual amount 

of pollutant controlled depends on control device efficiency and total 

operating hours. By definition, the lower the ratio, the better the costeffectiveness. 

The cost-effectiveness ratios and efficiencies of the control systems 

and the quantities of pollutant controlled are shown in Tables 4-5 through 

4-10 for thermal incinerators and carbon adsorbers, and in Table 4-11 for 

pebble bed incinerators. Figures 4-4, 4-5, and 4-6 present cost-effectiveness 

curves for thermal incinerators on packaging printing processes and carbon 

adsorbers on publication printing processes. 
EMISSIONS AT 500 ppcn VOC 

o EMISSIONS AT 1500 ppn VOC 

Figure 4-4. Cost-effectiveness of thermal incineration without heat 

recovery for VOC control of rotogravure printing process 

at graphic arts plant. 
EMISSIONS AT 500 ppm VOC 

0 EMISSIONS AT 1500 ppn VOC 

12 

3 

m 

L 

U 

E 

9 

U 

E 

-- 10- Y 

C 

Y 

a 

C - 

8 

Figure 4-5. Cost-effectiveness of thermal incineration control with 

40 percent heat recovery for VOC of rotogravure printing process 

at graphic arts plant. 

I I I 1 I I I 

? 

- 

Q 

- - 

I I 

W'S a 

$1 r - -x 

1 I I I I x:s 7 0 , 

100 200 300 400 500 

(110) ( 220 (330) (550) (16%) (2750) 

1500 

( 440 

2500 

ANNUAL PLANT INK USAGE, Mg/yr (ton/yr) 
EMISSIONS AT 1200 PPm VOc 

o EMISSIONS AT 2400 PPm VOC 

NOTE - THESE MAY NOT BE 

STRAIGHT-LINE RELATIONS. 

A STRAIGHT-LINE IS USED 

BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY ' 

TWO DATA POINTS. 

ANNUAL PLANT INK USAGE. M/yt (tonlyr) 

Figure 4-6. Cost-effectiveness of carbon adsorption control for 

rotogravure printing process at graphic arts plant. 
Data show that the cost-effectiveness of control systems improves with 

plant size. Because thermal incinerator costs are based on the same 

efficiency for all plant sizes, their cost-effectiveness is enhanced by 

increased plant operation and control utilization. As shown in Figure 

4-5 and discussed in Section 4.2.2, the incinerator with heat recovery 

is less cost-effective than a system without heat recovery for the two 

smaller packaging printing plants analyzed, and is more cost-effective 

for the three larger plants. The cost-effectiveness ratio for thermal 

incinerators with heat recovery decreases from $1 2,5OO/Mg ($1 1,37O/ton) 

at the smallest plant to $280/Mg ($250/ton) at the largest plant, based 

on the 90% control device efficiency. 

The cost-effectiveness of controlling the publication printing process 

also improves as the plant size increases. Specifically, the costeffectiveness ratio decreases from $51 /Mg ($46/ton) at the srnal 1 est pl ant 

to a negative $15/Mg ($13/ton) at the largest plant, based on this same 

90% control device efficiency. 

Lastly, because its annualized costs are consistently lower than 

those for identically-sized thermal incinerators with heat recovery, the 

cost-effectiveness of pebble bed incinerators is also better. Its costeffectiveness ratio decreases from $9,26O/Mg ($8,40O/ton ) to $1 30/Mg 

($120/ton) as the plant size goes from smallest to largest. 
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4 

Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute, Stamford, Connecticut. Study of 

Systems for Heat Recovery from Afterburners. Prepared for Chemical and 

Petroleum Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina, under Contract No. 68-02-1473, Task No. 23. 

October 1977. 

C-E Air Preheater, Combustion Engineering, Wellsville, New York. Report 

of Fuel Requirements, Capi ta1 Cost, and Operating Expense for Catalytic 

and Thermal Afterburners. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency 

under Contract No. 68-02-1473, Task No. 13. December 1973. 

Personal communication from Derek Oaks, Hoyt Manufacturing Corporation, 

Westport, Massachusetts, to Art Knox, PEDCo Environmental, 

Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. August 1978. 

Personal communication from K. A1 len Napier, Oxy-Catalyst, Inc. , ResearchCottrell, Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania, to Art Knox, PEDCo Environmental, 

Inc. , Cincinnati, Ohio. February 23, 1978. 

Personal communication from Dennis Snyder of Smith Environmental, South 

Elmonte, California, to Art Knox, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., 

Cincinnati, Ohio. August 23, 1978. 

Personal communication from Carol Paulette of C-E Preheater Division, 

Wellsville, New York, to Art Knox, PEDCo Environmental, lnc., Cincinnati, 

Ohio. August 30, 1978. 

R.S. Means Company. Building Construction Cost Data - 1978; and Mechanical 

and Electrical Cost Data - 1978. Duxburn, Massachusetts. 

Personal communication from R.L. Pennington, REECo, Inc., Morris Plains, 

New Jersey, to E.J. Vincent, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, 

N.C., October 27, 1978. 

Personal communication from W.M. Vatavuk, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle 

Park, N.C., to R.L. Pennington, REECo, Inc., Morris Rlains, New Jersey. 

November 13, 1978. 

10. Ibid. November 20, 1978. 

11. Personal communication from W.M. Vatavuk, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle 

Park, N.C., to Art Knox, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. 

November 22, 1978. 
5.0 ADVERSE AND BENEFICIAL EFFECTS OF APPLYING 

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY 

5.1 INCINERATION 

Incineration is appl i cab1 e to packaging gravure and f lexographi c 

printing operations whi ch use conventional solvent-borne inks. The principal 

disadvantage is the use of scarce and increasingly expensive fuel. Fuel 

consumption can be minimized by the inclusion of heat recovery equipment in 

the design. Primary heat exchangers can reduce fuel usage to some extent. 

Hypothetically, the use of pebble bed incinerators with their inherently 

effective heat recovery systems can reduce fuel usage substantially. At 

current fuel prices the annualized cost of the heat recovery system will be 

greater than the fuel saving and there wi 11 be a net increase in operating 

cost. 

5.2 CARBON ADSORPTION 

Carbon adsorption systems can recover solvent for reuse in ink manufacture. 

Thus, a valuable and increasingly scarce material can be conserved. Steam 

stripping is the usual method for removing adsorbed solvent from the carbon 

beds. If water soluble solvents are used in the inks, the condensed steam 

wi 11 contain organi cs whi ch wi 11 require the additional expense of pretreatment 

faci 1 i ties. This disadvantage is not present in the recently developed 

fluidized bed carbon adsorption system in which desorption is achieved by 

indirect heat and nitrogen gas. 
6.0 MONITORING TECHNIQUES AND ENFORCEMENT ASPECTS 

In the majority of cases the suggested emission limits will probably 

be met by incineration and carbon adsorption systems. The basic problem of 

the control official is determining that the control device is operating 

correctly. A measurement of efficiency across the device could be required 

when the unit is instal led. (One test may be adequate when several identical 

units are instal 1ed) . 

A thermal incinerator which initial ly shows a high combustion efficiency 

wi 11 probably continue to perform we1 1 if operated at the same or greater 

temperature. A1 1 i nci nerators should be equipped with temperature i ndi cators ; 

recorders shoul d be requi red for 1arger instal 1 ati ons . The range i nstrument 

of 1200~to 1800~~ wi 11 cover thermal incinerators; catalytic units seldom 

operate at less than 600' or more than 1200~~. The sensing elements should 

be shiel ded from di rect f 1 ame radi ati on. Other i nci nerator parameters are 

fixed by the design, e.g., there is no need to monitor residence time or 

mixing velocity. 

For catalyti c i nci nerators , the temperature rise across the catalyst 

bed should be measured during the initial test for combustion efficiency. 

This temperature rise reflects the activity of the catalyst (but may also 

vary with process variables and materi a1 input changes in the process) . 

Temperature sensors should be installed on both the inlet and outlet of the 

catalyst bed to provide a continuous indi cation of catalyst activity. 
To assure satisfactory operation of carbon adsorbers, it is necessary 

to regenerate the carbon beds at intervals sufficient to prevent "breakthrough". 

Breakthrough is the point at which VOC starts to appear in the exit gases 

in significant concentrations. The regeneration cycle is controlled by 

three methods: 1) a sequence timer, 2) a vapor detector, 3) both a 

sequence timer and a vapor detector. 

A sequence timer is the simplest control method. The length of the 

adsorption period is determined by trial at the highest VOC concentrations 

likely to occur. This method can be wasteful of steam, as regeneration will 

often be performed before the bed is fully loaded. On the other hand, if 

the cycle is made too long , breakthrough wi 11 often occur. 

A vapor detector sensitive to 50 to 100 ppm is sufficient for most 

applications. The detector may actuate an audible or visible alarm only, with 

the regeneration operations being performed manually. Or the detector 

may actuate an automatic control mechanism for performing the regeneration 

operation. This method is the more economical of steam, as regeneration is 

done only when the bed is loaded to the maximum allowable level. However, 

if the detector malfunctions extended breakthroughs could occur. 

The combination system is always fully automatic. The sequence timer 

is set for a period of average VOC concentration. During periods of higher 

than average VOC concentration the vapor detector wi 11 ini tlate the 

regeneration. The timer wi 11 act as a back-up device in case of a malfunction of the vapor detector. Most system at publi cation rotogravure plants 

are of this type. 
I 

TECHNICAL REPORT DATA 

:Please read Insnuctions on rhe reverse belore completing) 

1. REPORT NO. 13. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION 1\10. 

!4. TITLE . ... - - Control of Volatile Orqanic Emissions trom txisting 1 December 1978 I stationary Sources - Volume VIII: Graphic : Arts - 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 

Rotogravure and F1 exography 


7. AUTHOR(S) 18. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. 

Edwin J. Vincent OAQPS No. 1.2-109 
 William M, Vatavuk 


9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO. 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 


Office of Air, Noise and Radiation 


Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards I

11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO. 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 


12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED 

I 

14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE 

I 

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

16. ABSTRACT 

This document provides guidance for development of regulations to limit 


emi ssions of vol ati 1e organi c compounds from rotogravure and f lexographic printing 

operations. This guidance includes recommended control requirements for carbon 


adsorption and incineration systems which represent Reasonably Avai 1able Control 


Technology for these operations, Provisions for the potential compliance by use 

of water-borne and high-solids inks are recommended. The industry is described, 


methods for reducing organic emissions are reviewed, and monitoring and enforcement 


aspects are discussed. 


1 

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS 

a. DESCRI PTORS Ib. IDENT lFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS Ic. COSATI Field/Group 

I I 

Air Pollution Air Pollution Control 

Pub1i cation Rotogravure Printing 

Packaging Printing Industry 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

Limits 

Stationary Sources 

Organic Vapors 

Regulatory Guidance 

18. OlSTRlEUTlON STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Reporr) 21. NO. OF PAGES 

Unclassified 52 

Un1imi ted 20. SECURITY CLASS /This page) 22. PRICE

Unclassified I 

€PA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE