p. 1



# OAR Box 1828 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 294 ) IV-A-

4
Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:58 AM Sheet 294 of 325Unite d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency Offic e o f Ai r Quality

Plannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Par k N C 2 '



# • 

# Surve y of Ne w

Industria l Boile r Project s — 1981-198 4

..isixsiu s ;ionia::ii::iiLiniiii n r ; H E I : ;imr.m E : it : i u - t m1 : i

iP. 3

EPA-450/3-87-00 6


# Surve y of Ne w Industria l Boile r Project s — 198 1 -198 4

Emissio n Standard s an d Engineerin g Divisio n

U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Offic e o f Ai ran d Radiatio n Offic e o f Ai rQualit yPlannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Par k N C 2771 1 Apri l 198 7P. 4

Thi s repor t ha s bee n reviewe d b yth e Emissio n Standard s an d Engineerin g Divisio n o f th e Offic e o f Ai rQualit yPlannin g an d Standards , EPA , an d approve d fo rpublication

. Mentio n o f trad e name s o rcommercia l product s i s no t intende d t o constitut e endorsemen t o rrecommendatip n fo ruse
. Copie s o f thi s repor t ar e availabl e throug h th e Librar yService s Offic e (MD-35) , U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agency , Researc h Triangl e Par k N C 27711 , o rfro m Nationa l Technica l Informatio n Services , 528 5 Por t Roya l Road , Springfiel d V A 22161

.P. 5

TABL E O F CONTENT S
Sectio n Pag e

LIS T O F TABLE S i v
EXECUTIV E SUMMARYv
1. 0 INTRODUCTIO N

1

2. 0 COLLECTIO N

O F DAT A

1 Descriptio no f th e Surve y For m 2 Developmen t o f th e Mailin g Lis t ;... . 2 Dat a Managemen t Procedure s 3
3. 0 DESCRIPTIO N

O F NE W BOILE RPROJECT S : 3 Descriptio no f Al l Project s Surveye d3 Representat i venes s o f Dat a Bas e 5
4. 0 ANALYSI S O F NE W BOILE RPROJECTS. ; ; ... ' 7 Primar y Reason s fo r New

Boile r Projects.... . 7 Factor s Affectin g Boile r Decision s 1 1 Cos t Sensitivit y

o f Project s 1 2 Existin g Boile r Dat a an dStatu s Change s 1 5

5. 0 " SULFU RDIOXID E EMISSION S FRO M CATEGOR YI BOILE RPROJECTS... . 1 8 Emissio nRat e 1 8 Tota l Annua l Emission s 2 0
6. 0 IMPAC T O F LOWE RENERG YPRICE S 2 4

APPENDI X1 : BOILE RREPLACEMEN T SURVE YQUESTIONNAIR E APPENDI X2 : EMISSIO N CALCULATIO N

PROCEDURE S



### mP. 6

LIS T O F TABLE S
Tabl e Pag e
1 Descriptio no f Al l New Boiler s Covere d b

y Surve y 4

2 Descriptio no f New Boile r Project s >10 0 MMBtu/h r an d Usin g
Coal , Oil , Natura l Gas , o r Woo d a s Primar y Fue l 6

3 Primar y

Reaso nfo r Projec t (Al l Projects). . 8

4 Primar y

Reaso nfo r Projec t (Categor y I Projects ) 9

5 Factor s Affectin g Decision s fo r Categor y I Project s 1 3

6 Percen t o f Project s Tha t Woul d Hav e Proceede d a s Designe d

I f Cos t Increase d 1 4

7 Existin g Boile r Informatio nfo r Categor y I Project s 1 6
8 Change s inStatu s o f Existin g Boiler s (Categor y I Projects ) 1 7 9 SOp Emissio nRate s Fro m New an d Existin g Boiler s (Categor y

I Projects ) 1 9 1 0 Annua l S0 2 Emissio nImpac t (Categor y I Projects ) 2 1

i vP. 7

EXECUTIVE . SUMMARY

Thi s repor t present s a nanalysi s o f dat a collecte dthroug ha writte n surve y o f firm s purchasin g new industria l boiler s betwee n198 1 an d1984 . Th e purpos e o f th e surve y wa s t o collec t dat a whic hcoul db e use dt o asses s th e reason s fo r new

industria l boile r purchases , th e percentag e o f thes e boiler s whic har e use dfo r new application s versu s replacemen t o f existin g boilers , an

dth e impac t o f new

boile r purchase s o

nS0 2 emissions . A tota l o f 16 8 survey s coverin g 22 9 new industria l boiler s wit h47,75 0 millio nBtu/hou r hea t inpu t capacit y wer e collecte dan

dentere dint o a computerize ddat a base . O f these , 15 1 unit s wer e equa l t o o r large r tha n 10 0 millio nBtu/hou r an ddesigne dt o fir e coal , oil , natura l gas , o r woo da s th e primar y

fuel ; aggregat e hea t inpu t capacit y o f thes e boiler s wa s 38,65 7 millio nBtu/hour . Mos t o f th e analysi s inth e repor t i s base do nthes e 15 1 units . Compariso nwit hboile r sale s dat a gathere db y th e America nBoile r Manufacturer s Associatio n(ABMA ) suggest s tha t thes e unit s represen t greate r tha n9 5 percen t o f th e industria l boiler s i nthi s categor y sol dbetwee n198 1 an d1984 . Analysi s o f th e dat a identifie dfiv e primar y reason s fo r installatio n o f new boilers : 1 ) desir e t o us e fuel s othe r tha nthos e currentl y use db y existin g boiler s (3 4 percen t o f th e total) , 2 ) nee dfo r additiona l boile r capacit y a t a nexistin g plan t (2 2 percent) , 3 ) poo r conditio no f a nexistin g boile r (1 6 percent) , 4 ) nee dfo r stea m a t a new

plan t (1 4 percent) , an d5 ) desir e t o cogenerat e electricit y (1 4 percent) . Factor s affectin g th e desig n o f th e new

boile r an

dth e cos t sensitivit y o f th e boile r purchas e decisio n wer e evaluate da s a functio no f thes e fiv e reasons . Les s tha n1 0 percen t o f th e purchaser s indicate dthe y woul dhav e change dth e projec t i f cost s had increase db

y 1 0 percent ; i f cost s increase db y 3 0 percen t roughl y

one-hal f o f th e boile r project s woul dhav e bee nchanged . Boiler s installe dfo r th e primar y purpos e o f fue l switchin g an dcogeneratio nwer e th e mos t cos t sensitive , whil e boiler s installe ddu e t o poo r conditio no f th e existin g boile r wer e th e leas t sensitive .P. 8

Dat a on29 1 existin g boiler s tha t wer e insom e wa y affecte db

y installatio no f th e new boiler s wer e als o examined . Thes e boiler s tendt o b e muc hsmalle r insiz e an dfir e relativel y

greate r amount s o f oi l an d natura l ga s tha nth e ne w boilers . Roughl y

5 0 percen t o f th e existin g boiler s wer e shutdow no r dismantle da s par t o f th e new boile r projec t whil e th e remainin g 5 0 percen t continue doperating , generall y a t reduce dload . O f th e 5 0 percen t reporte da s shutdow no r dismantled , th e boile r owner s indicate dtha t abou t one-thir d coul dhav e bee nrebuil t t o exten dthei r usefu l life . Th e abov e fiv e reason s wer e als o use dt o classif y boiler s a s replacemen t versu s ne w applicatio nan

da s mandator y

versu s discretionar y purchases . Base do

nthi s analysis , th e numbe r o f replacemen t an dnew applicatio nboiler s ar e almos t equa l (5 0 percen t each ) whil e discretionar y purchase s accoun t fo r roughl y 6 0 percen t o f sale s versu s 4 0 percen t fo r mandator y

purchases . Analysi s o f S0 2 emission s foundtha t althoug hth e new coal - an

d oil-fire dboiler s hav e averag e emissio nrate s tha t ar e 4 0 t o 5 0 percen t lowe r tha nth e existin g boiler s firin g th e same fuel , th e averag e emissio n rat e fo r al l boiler s remaine dvirtuall y unchange dbecaus e o f change s inth e mi xo f fuel s fired , specificall y increase dus e o f coa l an ddecrease dus e o f natura l gas . Thi s fac t combine dwit hth e overal l increas e intota l boile r capacit y result s ina

nincreas e intota l annua l SO - emission s o f roughl y 7 0 percen t compare dt o baselin e emission s befor e th e new boiler s wer e installed . Thi s increas e result s fro m 1 ) installatio no f new boiler s tha t ar e no t replacin g existin g boilers , 2 ) replacemen t o f existin g boiler s wit h ne w boiler s tha t ar e significantl y larger , 3 ) fue l switche s fro m natura l ga s an doi l t o coal , an

d4 ) continue doperatio no f th e existin g boilers , althoug ha t reduce dload . O f th e tota l annua l S0 2 emission s occurrin g afte r installatio no f al l th e new boiler s (i.e. , replacemen t an dnew installations) , roughl y one fourt hwer e emitte db y existin g boiler s tha t remaine dinoperatio nafte r installatio no f th e new boilers . O f th e emission s increase , roughl y one-hal f came fro

m project s wher e th e new boile r wa s installe da s a replacement , wit hth e othe r hal f comin g fro m new applications . I f onl y

v iP. 9

thos e boiler s define da s mandator y (i.e. , drive nb

y factor s largel y independen t o f boile r cost ) wer e installed , emission s woul dhav e increase d b y roughl y 2 0 percent . Base doncurren t fue l prices , th e numbe r o f coal-fire d boile r purchase s associate dwit hfue l switchin g i s expecte dt o b e lowe r inth e futur e tha nin th e 1981-8 4 time period . T o evaluat e th e impac t o f lowe r oi l an dnatura l ga s price s onpotentia l S0 2 emissions , dat a fro m project s installe dfo r reason s othe r tha nfue l switchin g project s wer e tabulated . Significantly , whe nfue l switchin g i s exlude dfro m th e analysis , th e percentag e o f new boiler s installe da s replacement s fo r existin g boiler s decrease s fro m roughl y one-hal f (a s discusse dabove ) t o abou t one-fourt han dth e increas e inemission s decline s fro m abou t 7 0 percen t t o abou t 4 Q percent . I f curren t lo w fue l price s wer e t o als o discourag e constructio no f cogeneratio nboiler s (als o foundt o b e sensitiv e t o projec t economics ) a s wel l a s fue l switchin g boilers , replacemen t boiler s woul drepresen t roughl y one-thir do f new

boile r installations ; tota l S0 2 emission s woul db e about'2 0 percen t highe r tha n fro m th e existin g boiler s alone . I nsummary , unde r al l o f th e situation s examined , th e surve y dat a indicate s tha t total ' emission s o f SO xar e highe r afte r installatio no f new boiler s tha nthe y

wer e previously . Majo r reason s fo r thi s ar e 1 ) instal latio no f new

boiler s t o satisf y

increase dstea

m demand s a t new

an dexistin g plants , 2 ) change s inth e relativ e us e o f coa l versu s natura l gas , an d3 ) continue doperatio no f many existin g boiler s (althoug ha t reduce dloads ) afte r th e new

boiler s ar e installed . Becaus e o f thi s increase dstea m deman d (an dassociate denerg y

use) , tota l annua l S0 2 emissio nincreas e despit e th e fac t tha t new

coal - an

doil-fire dboiler s hav e lowe r averag e emissio nrate s pe r millio nBt uo f fue l fire dtha ndi dth e existin g boilers .



### v nP.1 0

SURVE YO F NE

W INDUSTRIAL BOILE RPROJECT S 1981-198 4

1. 0 INTRODUCTIO N Thi s repor t present s th e analysi s o f dat a collecte dthroug ha writte n surve y o f firm s purchasin g ne w industria l boiler s betwee n198 1 an d1984 . Th e purpos e o f th e surve y wa s t o collec t dat a whic hcoul dbe use dt o asses s th e reason s fo r new

industria l boile r purchases , th e percentag e o f thes e boiler s whic har e use dfo r new application s versu s replacemen t o f existin g boilers , an

dth e impac t o f new

boile r purchase s o

nS0 2 emissions . Sectio n2 o f th e repor t review s th e dat a collectio nan dmanagemen t procedures . Sectio n3 summarize s genera l statistic s onth e boiler s surveyed ; thi s informatio ninclude s boile r size , fue l use , fabricatio n methods , an

dmethod s o f S0 2 control . A compariso no f th e surveye dboiler s relativ e t o boile r sale s dat a gathere db y th e America nBoile r Manufacturer s Associatio n(ABMA ) fo r th e same time perio di s als o presented . Sectio n4 present s a

nanalysi s o f why

thes e new

boiler s wer e .built , factor s influencin g boile r decisionmaking , th e sensitivit y o f th e boile r purchas e t o increase dcosts , an

dth e impac t o f th e new boile r o

nexistin g boiler s a t th e same site . Sectio n5 evaluate s change s inS0 2 emissio nrate s an dtota l annua l emission s resultin g fro m th e overal l new

boile r project , includin g operationa l change s inexistin g boiler s already a t th e site . Sectio n6 examine s possibl e impact s o nth e survey' s finding s resultin g fro m curren t energ y price s whic har e lowe r tha nthos e durin g th e 1981-8 4 time period .
2. 0 COLLECTIO N

O F DAT A Informatio no

nboile r replacement s wa s collecte dusin g a writte nsurve y for m sen t t o recen t purchaser s o f industria l boilers . Th e followin g thre e section s describ e th e surve y for m use dt o obtai ndata , th e developmen t o f a mailin g lis t o f recen t boile r purchasers , an ddat a managemen t procedure s use dt o handl e th e surve y form s afte r the y

wer e completed .p.1 1

Descriptio no f th e Surve y For m A surve y form (Appendi x1 ) wa s develope dt o collec t dat a oneac hne w boile r project ; a projec t ca nconsis t o f on e o r mor e new boilers . Th e surve y form i s divide d int o fou r majo r sections :
o Par t I , containin g genera l informatio nonth e boile r purchaser ;
o Par t II , describin g th e reason(s ) fo r undertakin g th e new boile r project ;
o Supplemen t A , providin g detaile dinformatio no neac hne w

boile r installe da s par t o f th e overal l project ; and , o Supplemen t B , providin g detaile dinformatio no neac hexistin g boile r locate da t th e sit e o f th e new boile r projec t (o r a n adjacen t sit e inth e cas e o f severa l "third-party " cogenerators ) whic hwa s affecte dinsome wa y b y installatio no f th e new boiler(s) . Part s I an

dI I wer e complete dfo r th e entir e project , whil e separat e Supple ment s A an dB wer e complete d fo r eac hindividua l boile r include dinth e project . Developmen t o f th e Mailin g Lis t Informatio nonne w

boile r order s wa s obtaine dfro m two dat a listing s collecte db

y th e U . S . Departmen t o f Energy (DOE) : For

m ERA-9 7 (Boile r Manufacturer s Report ) an dFor m EIA-9 7 (Boile r Orde r Report) . Thes e tw o report s contai nessentiall y th e same information ; EIA-9 7 i s th e mor e recen t o f th e two an

dha s supersede dERA-97 . Thes e form s ar e use db y DO E t o collec t quarterl y dat a fro

m U . S . boile r manufacturers , thei r foreig naffiliate s an dsubsidiaries , an

dU . S . boile r renta l companie s o

norder s receive dfro m electri c utilitie s an dindustria l firm s operatin g inth e U.S . (includin g territorie s an dadministere dareas) . Informatio ni s require d t o b e submitte dfo r al l boiler s havin g a rate d capacit y o f 40,00 0 o r mor e pound s o f stea m pe r hou r (approximately 5 0 millio nBtu/h r hea t inpu t capacity ) an dincludes : boile r function , rate d capacity , fuel s burned , dat e ordered , dat e delivered , an dth e nam e an

d addres s o f th e purchasing/operatin g company . A lis t o f th e name , address , an dtelephon e numbe r o f companie s orderin g boiler s rate da t 80,00 0 pound s o f stea m an dlarge r betwee nJanuar y 198 2 an

dP.1 2

Septembe r 198 4 wa s obtaine dfro m th e For

m EIA-9 7 database . Simila r informatio nwa s obtaine d fro m For m ERA-9 7 fo r boiler s ordere dbetwee n Januar y 197 7 an

dMarc h1982 . Bot hdat a set s wer e presorte dt o eliminat e non-industria l purchaser s (e.g. , electri c utilitie s an dinstitutiona l user s suc ha s hospital s an

duniversities ) an

dwast e hea t boilers . Fo r us e i nth e survey , th e databas e wa s furthe r sorte dt o eliminat e boiler s ordere dprio r t o Januar y

1981 . A s anadditiona l check , th e boile r inventor y wa s screene dt o eliminat e boiler s sol dt o renta l companies , whic hwoul dno t b e permanentl y installe d a t a site . Informatio no nth e remainin g boiler s wa s confirme dthroug h telephon e call s t o eac hpurchase r listed . Thi s wa s don e t o verif y installatio no f th e boile r an dt o obtai na correc t name and * addres s fo r surve y mailou t purposes . Surve y form s wer e the nsen t t o 18 5 companies . Dat a Managemen t Procedure s Response s wer e receive dfro m al l 18 5 companie s receivin g th e surve y form . Severa l o f th e respondent s di dno t complet e th e survey , indicatin g tha t th e boile r wa s ordere dprio r t o 1981 , ha dbee ncancelled , o r wa s below th e 10 0 millio nBt upe r hou r threshol destablishe dfo r th e survey . Dat a fro m th e remainin g 16 8 surve y form s wer e entere dint o a computerize ddat a base , an dthe nmanuall y

reviewe dfo r missin g dat a an dkeypunc herror s t o eliminat e possibl e problem s i nsubsequen t analysis . Statistica l analyse s o f th e dat a wer e conductin g usin g MICRO-SA S softwar e develope db y SAS , Inc . (locate di nCary , NC) .
3. 0 DESCRIPTIO N

O F NE W BOILE RPROJECT S Descriptio no f Al l Project s Surveye d A tota l o f 16 8 survey s wer e entere dint o th e dat a base , coverin g 22 9 boiler s wit ha tota l hea t inpu t capacit y o f 47,75 0 millio nBtu/hou r (assumin g 1,17 6 Bt uo f fue l fire dpe r poun do f steam generated) . Summar y statistic s fo r th e new boiler s include di nthes e project s ar e provide din Tabl e 1 . Not e tha t 7 percen t o f th e tota l capacit y an d2 3 percen t o f th e numbe r o f boiler s surveye d ar e les s tha n10 0 millio nBtu/hour . Coal-fire dP.1 3



### TABL E 1 . DESCRIPTIO N

O F AL L NE

W BOILER S COVERE D BYSURVE Y

Tota l Numbe r o f Projects : Tota l Numbe r o f New

Boilers : Tota l New

Boile r Capacit y

(MMBtu/hr Averag e Siz e o f New

Boile r (MMBtu/hr -

hea t input) : hea t input) : Frequenc y

Distributio n(Percentage ) by : Capacit y (MMBtu/hr) : Caoacit v (%) No . <10 0 100-15 0 150-20 0 200-25 0 250-40 0 400-60 0 >60 0 Primar y Fuel : Coa l 

### Oi l Natura l Ga s Woo d Othe r Fabricatio nMethod :

Packag e Fiel d Numbe r o f Boiler s Pe r Project :



### 1 2 3 4 5 Metho d o f S0 2 Control : Low-Sulfu r Fue l Flu e Ga s Desulfurizatio n Fluidize d Bed Combustio n N o Respons e 

### 7. 0 12. 7 12. 4 

### 5. 8 13. 8 21. 0 27. 3

42. 6 

### 2. 0 23. 4 16. 6 15. 2

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- - 

### 4

7

Unit s 23. 1 25. 3 17. 0 

### 6. 6 10. 0 10. 9 

### 7. 0

39. 0 

### 3. 9 29. 8 13. 6 13. 6
36. 8 63. 2

76. 2 16. 7 

### 2. 4 4. 2 0. 6

74. 2 

### 1. 7 13. 5 10. 5 

### 168 22 9 ,75 0 

### 20 9

(% )P.1 4

boiler s predominat e (accountin g fo r 4 3 percen t o f th e capacit y an d3 9 percen t o f th e units) . Thes e wer e followe dindecendin g orde r b y natura l gas , wood , othe r (consistin g primaril y o f byproduc t fuel s suc ha s blac k liquo r an

drefiner y

off-gas) , an

doil . Almos t 9 0 percen t o f th e respondent s indicate dthe y

practice dsome for

m o f SO - control , primaril y us e o f low-sulfu r fuel s (7 4 percen t o f th e boilers ) followe db y fluidize dbe d combustio n(1 4 percent) . A subse t o f th e dat a bas e wa s constructe dcontainin g onl y thos e project s (hereafte r referre dt o a s Categor y I projects ) tha t include don e o r mor e new

boiler s equa l t o o r greate r tha n10 0 millio nBtu/hou r hea t inpu t capacit y (85,00 0 pound s o f steam/hour ) an dtha t burne dcoal , oil , natura l gas , o r woo da s th e primar y fuel . Th e Categor y I dat a bas e i s summarize din Tabl e 2 . I t include s 15 8 new boiler s wit ha tota l capacit y o f 38,65 7 millionBtu/hour . O f thes e 15 8 boilers , 15 1 mee t th e abov e siz e an dprimar y fue l criteria . Th e remainin g seve nboiler s wer e installe da s par t o f project s involvin g on e o r mor e o f thes e 15 1 units , bu t ar e smalle r tha n10 0 millio nBtu/hou r o r fir e byproduc t fuels . Unit s greate r tha n25 0 millio n Btu/hou r accoun t fo r 6 4 percen t o f th e capacit y an d3 4 percen t o f th e new boiler s b

y number . Fue l us e i s generall y simila r t bth e large r dat a base , bu t contain s a somewha t large r percentag e o f coa l an dwood-fire dunits . Sulfu r dioxid e contro l statistic s ar e als o simila r t o th e large r dat a base . Representativenes s o f Dat a Bas e Th e surve y

wa s designe dt o gathe r informatio no nnew industria l boiler s sol dbetwee n198 1 an

d1984 . T o evaluat e th e completenes s o f th e survey , th e Categor y I dat a bas e (excludin g th e seve nnew boiler s smalle r tha n10 0 millionBtu/h r capacity ) wa s compare dt o boile r sale s dat a compile db y th e America nBoile r Manufacturer s Associatio n(ABMA ) fo r th e correspondin g time perio d(Januar y

1981-Septembe r 1984) . Th e ABM A dat a wer e adjuste dt o exclud e electri c utilit y auxilliar y

boiler s an

drenta l boiler s (estimate da t 2 0 an d1 5 boilers , respectively , base do ninformatio nprovide db y ABMA ) t o provid e a commo nbasi s fo r comparison . Th e adjuste dABM

A sale s dat a include s a tota l o f 15 6 boilers : 7 9 coal-fired , 5 0 oil - an dgas-fired , an

d2 7 wood-fired . Th e Categor y I boiler s fo r th e same fuel s tota l 151 : 7 6 coal-fired , 4 9 oil - an dgas-fired ,P.1 5



### TABL E 2 . DESCRIPTIO N

O F NE W BOILE RPROJECT S >10 0 MMBTU/H RAN D USINGCOAL , OIL , NATURAL GAS , O RWOO D A S PRIMARYFUE L

Tota l Numbe r o f Projects : Tota l Numbe r o f Ne

w Boilers : Tota l Ne w Boile r Capacit y

(MMBtu/hr hea t input) : Averag e Siz e o f Ne

w Boile r (MMBtu/hr hea t input) : Frequenc y

Distributio n(Percentage ) by : Capacit y (MMBtu/hr) : <10 0 100-15 0 150-20 0 200-25 0 250-40 0 400-60 0 >60 0 Primar y Fuel : Coa l 

### Oi l Natura l Ga s Woo d Othe r Fabricatio nMethod :

Packag e Fiel d Numbe r o f Boiler s Pe r Project :



### 1 2 3 4 5 Metho d o f S0 2 Control : Low-Sulfu r Fue l Flu e Ga s Desulfurizatio n Fluidize d Bed Combustio n No Respons e Caoacit v {%. No . 0. 6

* • 12. 9 15. 4 

### 7. 2 14. 0 21. 5 28. 5

49. 2 

### 2. 3 24. 6 19. 9 

### 3. 9

TM TM

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- - 

### 3 8

Unit s 1. 9 30. 4 24. 7 

### 9. 5 12. 0 12. 6 

### 8. 9

48. 1 

### 5. 1 27. 2 16. 5 

### 3. 2

25. 3 74. 7

76. 5 15. 7 

### 2. 6 4. 3 0. 9

72. 2 

### 1. 9 15. 8 10. 1 11 5 15 8 ,65 7 24 5

(%)
.

-P.1 6

an d2 6 wood-fired . Base d o nthes e almos t identica l 'numbers , result s derive d fro m th e surve y

dat a ar e expecte dt o closel y reflec t th e tota l populatio no f industria l boiler s sol dbetwee n198 1 an d1984 .
4. 0 ANALYSI S O F NE

W BOILE RPROJECT S Primar y Reason s fo r Ne w

Boile r Project s On e o f th e principa l question s inth e surve y deal t wit hwhy

th e boile r wa s purchased . Thi s questio nwa s aske dbot ha s a n"essay " questio n (Questio nI1-6 ) an

db y askin g respondent s t o ran k a lis t o f factor s o na scal e o f 0 (unimportant) , 1 (somewha t important) , an d 2 (very

important ) (Questio nII-9) . Base do nrevie w o f th e response s t o thes e tw o questions , fiv e primar y

reason s wer e identifie dtha t accounte dfo r al l o f th e project s surveyed :

o desir e t o chang e bas e fuel ;
o nee dfo r additiona l boile r capacit y a t a nexistin g plant ;
o conditio no f th e existin g boiler ;
o nee dfo r stea

m a t a new

plan t site ; an

d
o desir e t o cogenerat e electricity . Eac ho f thes e primar y reason s i s briefl y

describe dbelow . Table s 3 an d4 presen t th e percen t o f boiler s fallin g int o eac hprimar y reaso ncategor y

fo r th e entir e dat a bas e an dCategor y

I boilers , respectively .
Fue l Switching- - Give nrelativ e fue l price s an davailabilit y

durin g th e tim e perio d covere db

y th e survey , many

boile r owner s wer e face dwit hth e decisio nt o continu e operatio nwit ha fue l considere dt o b e expensiv e an dunreliabl e (e.g. , oil ) o r conver t t o a fue l considere dcheape r an dmor e secur e (e.g. , coal) . A s show

ninTable s 3 an

d4 , respectively , th e surve y respondent s indicate d2 8 percen t of'al l project s an d3 4 percen t o f th e Categor y I project s wer e fo r th e primar y reaso no f fue l switching--th e mos t frequen t respons e give nfo r an y o f th e abov e reasons .P.1 7

TABL E 3 . PRIMAR

YREASO N FO RPROJEC T (ALL PROJECTS )



### 1 .CVI


### 3 .

4 . 5 . Fue l Switc h Additiona l Capacit y

Neede d

- Primar y

(36 )

- Backup (7 ) Boile r Conditio n

- Unreliabl e (29 )

- Unsaf e (2 )

- Unabl e t o Compl y

wit hAi r Reg s New Plan t Cogeneratio n 

### (3 ) Numbe r o f Project s


### 47 4 3

3 4

2 5 1 9 16 8 Percen t

o f Tota l
28. 0 25. 6

20. 2

14. 9 11. 3 100. 0

REPLACEMEN T (Fue l Switch , Boile r Condition ) NE W APPLICATIO N

(Additiona l Capacity , New Plant , Cogeneration) . 8 1 8 7
16 8 48. 2

51. 8 

# To O

DISCRETIONARY(Fue l Switch , Backup Capacity , Repairabl e Boile r Condition , Cogeneration ) MANDATORY(Primary

Capacity , Unrepairabl e Boile r Condition , New Plant ) 8 6
8 2
16 8 51. 2

48. 8 

## 10 O

8P.1 8

TABL E 4 . PRIMAR

YREASO N FO RPROJEC T (CATEGOR

YI PROJECTS )



### 1 .CVI



### 3 .

4 . 5 . Numbe r o f Project s

Fue l Switc h3 9 Additiona l Capacit y

Neede d 2 5

- Primar y

(19 )

- Backu p (6 ) Boile r Conditio n1 9

- Unreliabl e (16 )

- Unsaf e (2 )

- Unabl e t o Compl y

wit hAi r Reg s (1 ) New Plan t 1 6 Cogeneratio n1 6 

# t n Percen t

o f Tota l

33. 9 21. 7

16. 5

13. 9 13. 9 100. 0

REPLACEMEN T (Fue l Switch , Boile r Condition ) NE W APPLICATIO N

(Additiona l Capacity , Ne w Plant , Cogeneration ) 5 8 5 7 

### Tl 5 50. 4

49. 6
100. 0

DISCRETIONAR Y(Fue l Switch , Backup Capacity , 6 7 Repairabl e Boile r Condition , Cogeneration ) MANDATORY(Primary

Capacity , Unrepairabl e Boile r Condition , Ne

w Plant ) 4 8



### TT 5 58. 3

41. 7 

# To OP.1 9

Additiona l Capacity- - Th e nee dfo r additiona l boile r capacity—eithe r t o mee t increase dstea m deman da t anexistin g industria l plan t (define da s primar y capacit y

i n Table s 3 an

d4 ) o r t o increas e th e flexibility/reliabilit y o f stea

m generatio na t th e plan t (define da s backu pcapacity)--wa s th e secondmos t frequen t reaso nfo r installin g new boilers .
Boile r Condition Replacemen t o f existin g boiler s du e t o thei r conditio nwa s th e thir d mos t frequen t reaso ngive nfo r new boile r projects . Thi s categor y include s project s i nwhic hth e existin g boile r wa s unreliabl e (e.g. , hig hpercentag e o f downtime , highO& M costs) , unsaf e (e.g. , unabl e t o pas s a safet y ' inspection) , o r unabl e t o compl y wit hexistin g environmenta l regulations . Thi s categor y

wa s furthe r subdivide dint o si xproject s i nwhic hth e boile r owne r sai dth e existin g boile r coul dhav e bee nrepaire do r rebuil t (bu t wa s replace dwit ha new

boile r anyway ) an

dthirtee nproject s inwhic hth e boile r owne r state drepai r o r rebuil dwa s no t economicall y feasibl e (Questio n •8-10) .
New Plant- - Th e fourt hmos t frequen t reaso nfo r installatio no f new boiler s wa s stea m deman da t ne w

manufacturin g plant s wher e a boile r di dno t previousl y exist . Cogeneration- - Partiall y

a s a resul t o f economi c incentive s provide dunde r th e Publi c Utilit y Regulator y

Polic y Ac t (PURPA) , th e desir e t o cogenerat e bot h electricit y

an dproces s stea

m wa s th e fift hmos t frequen t reaso ngive nfo r constructin g new

boile r projects . Boiler s installe dfo r thes e fiv e reason s wer e the ncombine dan d redivide daccordin g t o tw o alternativ e groupings : first , whethe r th e new boile r replace da

nexistin g boile r o r wa s a new applicatio nan

dsecond ,



### 1 0P.2 0

whethe r installatio no f th e boile r wa s discretionar y (i.e. , decisio nwa s base donth e economic s o f a new versu s existin g boiler ) o r mandator y (i.e. , require db

y factor s othe r tha nboile r economics) . Th e firs t o f thes e alternativ e grouping s wa s mad e base donth e followin g interpretatio no f th e primar y reaso nfo r eac hproject :
o Replacement--fue l switchin g an dboile r condition , * o New application—additiona l capacity , new plant , an

dcogeneration . Th e secondo f thes e alternativ e grouping s wa s base do nth e followin g interpretatio no f th e primar y reason :
o Discretionary—fue l switching , backu pcapacity , repairabl e boile r condition , an

dcogeneration , o Mandatory--primar y capacity , unrepairabl e boile r condition , an d new plant . A s show ninTabl e 3 , o f al l th e project s surveyed , replacemen t project s an d new applicatio nproject s wer e roughl y equa l in . numbe r (4 8 percen t versu s 5 2 percent) . A

simila r spli t als o occurre dbetwee ndiscretionar y versu s mandator y

project s (5 1 percen t versu s 4 9 percent) . Fo r th e Categor y I project s (se e Tabl e 4) , th e spli t betwee nreplacemen t versu s new applicatio n remaine droughl y

equa l (50. 4 percen t versu s 49. 6 percent ) whil e th e frequenc y

o f discretionar y

project s increase dt o 5 8 percen t versu s 4 2 percen t fo r mandator y projects . Factor s Affectin g Boile r Decision s Informatio nwa s als o provide db y th e surve y

respondent s o

nth e factor s affectin g th e desig no f th e new boile r projec t (Questio n11-10) . Thi s informatio nwa s provide db y rankin g th e liste dfactor s a s eithe r 0 , 1 , o r 2 (using th e same definition s discusse dabove) . Th e individua l response s o n eac hfacto r wer e the naverage dfo r th e project s withi neac ho f th e fiv e
* NOTE : I

na few cases , existin g boiler s wer e affecte db y cogeneration , bu t inmos t case s wer e not . I nal l cases , however , a primar y facto r inth e projec t desig nwa s th e productio no f electricity , rathe r tha nsimpl y replacemen t o f existin g boilers .



### 1 1P.2 1

primar y reason s discusse dabove . Th e result s o f thi s analysi s ar e presente d inTabl e 5 . Capita l cos t an

dfue l cos t wer e amon g th e thre e highes t rate dfactor s fo r eac ho f th e primar y reaso ncategorie s excep t boile r condition . Compa tibilit y wit hexistin g fue l handlin g facilitie s wa s th e primar y facto r affectin g th e desig no f project s undertake ndu e t o poo r conditio no f th e existin g boile r (thi s facto r wa s als o important—scorin g fourth—fo r additiona l capacit y

projects) . Frequentl y mentione da s unimportan t wer e * corporat e polic y

an denvironmenta l regulations . Cos t Sensitivit y

o f Project s T o estimat e th e economi c sensitivit y o f project s t o change s inprojec t cost , th e respondent s wer e aske dwhethe r thei r decisio nt o buil dth e projec t woul dhav e change di f th e projecte dcos t o f stea m increase db

y 10 , 20 , 30 , o r 5 0 percen t (Questio n11-8) - Th e dat a inTabl e 6 indicat e th e percentag e o f industria l boile r project s tha t woul dcontinu e a s designe deve ni f th e cost s wer e increase db y thes e percentages . Ingeneral , mos t project s wer e insensitiv e t o a 1 0 percen t increas e i n cos t (onl y

7 ou t o f 8 9 projects— 8 percent--woul dhav e change dthei r decision) . I f cost s increase db y 2 0 t o 3 0 percent , a nincreasin g numbe r o f project s woul dhav e changed ; roughl y one-hal f o f th e project s woul dhav e bee naltere di f projec t cost s increase db y 3 0 percent . However , additiona l increase s incos t u

pt o 5 0 percen t resulte dinfew additiona l changes . Th e two mos t cos t sensitiv e projec t group s wer e thos e undertake n primar y t o fue l switc h(6 0 percen t woul dhav e change dthei r decisio ni f cost s increase db

y 3 0 percent ) an

dcogeneratio n(6 4 percent) . Th e leas t cos t sensitiv e wer e thos e undertake nprimaril y becaus e o f th e conditio no f th e existin g boile r (3 5 percent) . Thes e result s tendt o suppor t th e view tha t fue l switchin g an dcogeneratio nar e highl y discretionary , an

dar e therefor e mos t sensitiv e t o cos t increases . Onth e othe r hand , boile r project s tie dt o th e existin g boile r conditio no r nee dfo r additiona l

* NOTE : Th e lo

w ratin g o f corporat e polic y ma y hav e reflecte dth e lac k o f corporat e policie s relate dt o boile r purchas e decisions , rathe r tha nth e unimportanc e o f policie s whic hdi dexist .



### 1 2P.2 2

TABL E 5. * FACTOR S AFFECTIN GBOILE RDECISION S FO RCATEGOR YI PROJECT S

Reaso n To pThre e Factor s Bottom Thre e Factor s

Ne w Plan t Fue l Cost s

Fue l Security/Reliabilit y Capita l Cost s Existin g Syste m Component s Compatibilit y

w/Existin g Fuel s Space/Lan dAvailabl e

Additiona l Capacit y

Boile r Conditio n

Fue l Switc h

Cogeneratio n Fue l Cost s Operatin g Flexibilit y Capita l Cost s
Compatibilit y

w/Existin g Fuel s Maintenanc e Cost s Boile r Efficienc y
Capita l Cost s Fue l Cost s Corporat e Fund s Availabilit y Capita l Cost s Fue l Cost s Boile r Efficienc y Interes t Rate s Corporat e Polic y Space/Lan dAvailabl e

Corporat e Polic y Interes t Rate s Environmenta l Regulation s

Corporat e Polic y Environmenta l Regulation s Existin g System

Component s

Corporat e Polic y Environmenta l Regulation s Minimiz e Personne l
NOTE : Th e low

ratin g o f corporat e polic y ma y hav e reflecte dth e lac k o f corporat e policie s relate dt o boile r purchas e decisions , rathe r tha nth e unimportanc e o f policie s whic hdi dexist .



### 1 3P.2 3

TABL E 6 . PERCEN T O F PROJECT S THA T WOUL D HAVE PROCEEDE D A S

DESIGNE D I F COS T INCREASE D

Primar y Reaso n

New Plan t
Additiona l Capacit y
Boile r Conditio n

Fue l Switc h Cogeneratio n Numbe r o f

Project s (100% )


### 1 2
1 9

1 7

30
1 1 Percen t o f Project s Proceedin g

I f Cost s Increase d B

v 

### 10 % 20 % 30 % 50 %
92
10 0

9 4

90
82 67

79

7 1

77
6 4 4

2
5 3

6 5

4 0
3 6 4

2
47

6 5

30
3 6

TOTAL 

### 8

9 9

2 7

3 4

7 4

3
2 6 o f th e 11 5 respondent s di d no t answe r thi s question .



### 1 4P.2 4

capacit y ar e undertake nfo r mandator y reasons , an

da s a resul t wer e th e leas t sensitiv e t o cos t increases . Thes e result s ar e consisten t wit hth e result s presente dpreviousl y inTabl e 5 . Existin g Boile r Dat a an dStatu s Change s A tota l o f 11 5 project s mak e u pth e Categor y

I dat a base . Thes e project s includ e 15 8 ne w boiler s an

d29 1 existin g boiler s tha t wer e i nplac e an daffecte dinsome wa y b y th e new

boiler . Dat a o

nthes e existin g boiler s ar e presente dinTabl e 7 . Thes e dat a includ e existin g boiler s affecte db y "third-party " cogenerator s wh o sol dstea m t o a nexistin g plant . Althoug hmos t o f th e existin g boiler s (5 3 percent ) covere db y th e surve y ar e ove r 10 0 millio nBt upe r hour , thei r averag e siz e i s signifi cantl y smalle r tha nth e new boilers—10 9 millio nBtu/hou r fo r th e existin g boiler s versu s 24 5 millio nBtu/hou r fo r th e new Categor y

I boilers . Also , a muc hgreate r percentag e o f th e existin g boiler s fir e oi l an dnatura l gas . Oil-fire dboiler s mak e u ponl y 5 percen t o f th e new boilers , bu t compris e 2 4 percen t o f th e existin g boilers . Natura l ga s wa s use din2 7 percen t o f th e new boiler s an

d5 6 percen t o f th e existin g boilers . Correspondingly , coal fire dboiler s compris e onl y 1 0 percen t o f th e existin g boiler s compare dt o 4 8 percen t o f th e new boilers . O f th e existin g plant s installin g new boilers , 8 6 percen t ha dexistin g boiler s whic hwer e i nsome wa y affecte db

y installatio no f a ne w boiler . Tabl e 8 present s dat a o nho w an dwhy th e statu s o f th e existin g boiler s change da s a resul t o f th e new boile r installation . Th e summatio no f individua l percentage s t o mor e tha n10 0 percen t reflect s respondent s checkin g mor e tha non e answer . Almos t 5 0 percen t o f th e existin g boiler s tha t wer e affecte dwer e eithe r shu t dow nwithou t bein g dismantle d(2 0 percent ) o r wer e dismantle d(2 9 percent) . Th e remainin g 5 0 percen t continue doperatin g afte r installatio no f th e new boiler , bu t generall y fo r fewe r hour s o r a t lowe r loa dtha nbefore . Th e majo r reaso ngive nfo r change s inth e statu s o f existin g boiler s wa s th e nee dt o reduc e fue l cost s associate dwit hth e operatio no f th e existin g boile r (6 3 percent) . Thirtee npercen t o f th e existin g boiler s had thei r statu s change ddu e t o highoperatin g an dmaintenanc e costs . Exces s



### 1 5P.2 5



### TABL E 7 . EXISTINGBOILE RINFORMATIO N FO RCATEGORYI PROJECT S

Tota l Numbe r o f Projects : 7 9 Tota l Numbe r o f Existin g Boilers : 29 1 Tota l Existin g Boile r Capacit y (MMBtu/h r hea t input) : 31,61 7 Averag e Siz e o f Existin g Boile r (MMBtu/hr hea t input) : 10 9 Frequenc y

Distributio n(Percentage ) by : Capacit y (MMBtu/hr) : <10 0 100-15 0 150-20 0 200-25 0 250-40 0 400-60 0 >60 0 Fue l type : Coa l 

### Oi l Natura l Ga s Woo d Othe r Fabricatio nMethod : Packag e Fiel d Numbe r o f existin g boiler s Numbe r o f Boiler s Pe r Projec t 

### 1 2 3 4 5-1 0 

### >1 0 Caoacit v (% ) 17. 8 22. 3 18. 7 15. 9 ' 12. 0 

### 8. 0 5. 3

13. 1 28. 5 42. 9 

### 7. 4

, 8. 0

pe r project :

Freq 1 0 

### 2 3 2 1 1 4 8 3 No . Unit s (%)

46. 7 22. 7 13. 7 

### 8. 9 4. 8 2. 1 1. 0
9. 6 23. 7 56. 0 

### 6. 5

. 4. 1
40. 2 59. 8

Percen t 12. 7 29. 1 26. 6 17. 7 10. 0 

### 3. 8

Percen t o f existin g plan t project s tha t involve dchange s inon e o r mor e existin g boilers : 86. 0

1 6P.2 6

TABL E 8 . CHANGE S I

N STATU S O F EXISTINGBOILER S (CATEGORYI PROJECTS )

How di dstatu s chang e (fo r boiler s tha t di dchange ) % Yes * Shutdow n(w/ o dismantling ) Dismantle d Use da s backup/peakin g boile r Reduce dhour s o f operatio n Switche dfuel s Othe r idstatu s chang e (fo r boiler s
Hig hfue l cost s HighO& M Cost s Exces s boile r capacit y Mechanica l problem s Obsolet e (age , operatin g pressure , size , poo r ' reliability ) Environmenta l restriction s Inadequat e spac e Othe r 19. 6 29. 2 43. 0 

### 3. 1 1. 0 8. 2 tha t d % Ye s 62. 5 13. 0 12. 4 

### 7. 9
6. 5 5. 2 2. 4 1. 7 Fo r thos e boiler s tha t wer e shutdown/dismantle d percen t tha t coul dhav e hadusefu l lif e extended : 34. 7 * % b y numbe r o f units. .

1 7P.2 7

boile r capacit y

afte r installatio no f th e new boile r wa s th e reaso nfo r 1 2 percen t o f th e changes . Environmenta l restrictions , primaril y relate dt o S0 2 emissions , accounte dfo r anothe r 5 percent . Othe r individua l response s accounte dfo r les s tha n1 0 percen t o f th e changes . Inorde r t o gai nsom e insigh t a s t o th e option s availabl e t o th e boile r owner/operator , a questio n(Questio nB-11 ) wa s pose da s t o whethe r thos e boiler s tha t wer e shu t dow no r dismantle dcoul dhav e hadthei r usefu l lif e extended . Accordin g t o th e surve y respondents , onl y

abou t one-thir d (3 5 percent ) o f th e existin g boilers.tha t wer e shu t dow no r dismantle dcoul d hav e bee neconomicall y repaire do r rebuil t t o exten dthei r usefu l life .
5. 0 SULFURDIOXID E EMISSION S FRO M CATEGOR YI BOILE RPROJECT S Sulfu r dioxid e emission s fro m bot hth e new

an dexistin g boiler s involve dineac hprojec t wer e estimate do na "befor e project " an d"afte r project " basis . Emissio nestimate s ar e presente dintw o ways : pound s pe r millio nBt uo f hea t inpu t an dtota l annua l emission s (i.e. , tons/year) . Calculatio no f annua l emission s fro m eac hboile r i s base donth e quantit y an dsulfu r conten t o f bot hth e bas e fue l an dbacku pfuel . Emissio nRat e Tabl e 9 summarize s sulfu r dioxid e emissio nrat e dat a fo r th e existin g an dne w Categor y

I boiler s firin g coal , oil , an dal l fuel s (whethe r firin g coal , oil , natura l gas , o r wood ) a s a bas e fuel . Averag e emissio nrate s fo r th e existin g coal-fire d boiler s afte r completio no f th e ne w boile r project s wer e lowe r tha nthe y wer e befor e th e projects : 2.4 9 compare dt o 2.8 9 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu . Whethe r thi s decreas e resulte dfro m shuttin g dow

nexistin g boiler s wit hhig hemissio nrate s o r changin g th e qualit y o f th e coa l use din th e existin g boiler s wa s no t examined . Ne w coal-fire d boile r emissio nrate s average d1.4 7 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu , significantl y lowe r tha nth e averag e emissio n rat e fo r th e existin g boilers . O f thes e new boilers , 6 7 percen t hav e a n emissio nrat e equa l t o 1. 2 lb s S0 2 /MMBt u o r les s (thi s rat e equal s th e federall y

regulate dlimi t [4 0 C.F.R . Par t 60 , Subpar t D ] the nineffec t fo r S0 2 emission s fro

m coal-fire d industria l boiler s >25 0 millio nBtu/hour) . Anothe r 2 6 percen t hav e a nemissio nrat e o f 1.3-2. 4 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu . Th e



### 1 8P.2 8

TABL E 9 . SO , EMISSION RATE S FRO

M NE W AN D EXISTINGBOILER S c (CATEGORYI PROJECTS ) . .

Coal-Fire d Boiler s

Existin g Boiler s

-- - Befor e th e Projec t

-- - Afte r th e Projec t Ne w Boiler s Oil-Fire dBoiler s

Existin g Boiler s

-- - Befor e th e Projec t

-- - Afte r th e Projec t New Boiler s Numbe r o f Boiler s



### 2 8 1 6 7 6

7 3 37 7 Averag e Emissio nRat e

(#S02/MMBtu )

2.8 9 2.4 9 1.4 7

1.9 9 1.9 2 1.1 4

AI T Boiler s (Coal , Oil , Natura l Gas , and " Wood )

Existin g Boiler s

— - Befor e th e Projec t 27 9 " -- - Afte r th e Projec t 14 1 New Boiler s 15 1 0.8 1 0.7 9 0.8 0
Frequenc y

Distributio n(Percent ) o f New Boiler s b

y Emissio nRate : #S02/MMBt u <0. 8 0.9-1. 2 1.3-1. 8 1.9-2. 4 2.5-3. 0 3.1-4. 0 Coa l 

### 5 6 2 1 7 9 1 5 Oi

l 4 3 2 9 0 2 9 0 0
NOTE : Se e Appendi x2 fo r discussio no f calculatio nprocedure s an dnumbe r o f boiler s include dinanalysis . * Percentage s d o no t su m t o 10 0 du e t o independen t rounding .



### 1 9P.2 9

remainin g 7 percen t hav e a nemissio nrat e greate r tha n2. 4 lb s SO^/MMBtu . Averag e emissio nrate s fo r th e existin g oil-fire dboiler s afte r th e project s wer e also-lowe r tha nthe y wer e befor e th e projects : 1.9 2 compare d t o 1.9 9 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu . Ne w boile r emissio nrate s average d1.1 4 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu , wit h4 3 percen t (thre e ou t o f seve nboilers ) a t 0. 8 lb s S0 2 /MMBt u o r les s (thi s rat e equal s th e federall y regulate dlimi t [4 0 C.F.R . Par t 60 , Subpar t D ] the ni neffec t fo r S0 2 emission s fro m oil-fire dindustria l boiler s >25 0 millio nBtu/hour ) an d7 2 percen t a t 1. 2 lb s S0 2 /MMBt u o r less . Non e o f th e ne w

oil-fire dboile r emissio nrate s exceede d2. 4 lb s S0 2 /MMBtu . A s note dinSectio n4 , however , th e primar y fuel s fire db

y th e new boiler s i s significantl y differen t fro

m tha t o f th e existin g boilers . Specifically , natura l gas-fire dboiler s (whic hcaus e essentiall y n o S0 2 emissions ) decreas e fro m 5 6 percen t o f th e existin g boiler s t o 2 7 percen t o f th e new boilers . A t th e sam e time , th e percentag e o f coal-fire d boilers , whic hrepresente d1 0 percen t o f th e existin g boilers , increase dt o 4 8 percen t o f th e new

boilers . A s a result , althoug hnew coal - an

doil-fire d boiler s hav e lowe r emissio nrate s tha nexistin g boiler s firin g th e sam e fuel , th e averag e emissio nrat e fo r al l th e new boiler s (i.e. , th e composit e emissio nrat e fo r boiler s firin g coal , oil , natura l gas,'an d wood ) i s virtuall y

th e sam

e a s fo r th e existin g boilers . Tota l Annua l Emission s Tabl e 1 0 summarize s th e numbe r o f new an dexistin g boiler s include din th e analysi s an

dth e tota l annua l S0 2 emission s befor e an dafte r th e project s a s a functio no f primar y reaso nfo r th e project , fue l type , an dnew versu s existin g boile r classification . Th e numbe r o f boiler s i s classifie d b y bas e fue l type , wherea s S0 2 emission s ar e base do nth e fuel' s us e bot ha s th e bas e an

dbacku pfuel . Fo r example , S0 2 emission s fro m oi l reflect s bot h it s firin g a s a bas e fue l a s wel l a s a backu pfue l i nboiler s primaril y firin g coal , natura l gas , o r wood . Th e fa r righ t colum no f Tabl e 1 0 indicate s th e ne t chang e i nth e S0 2 emissions . Th e numbe r o f ne w boiler s an dth e annua l emission s associate dwit hreplacemen t versu s ne w applicatio n an ddiscretionar y

versu s mandator y

boile r project s (a s previousl y defined ) ar e summarize da t th e botto m o f th e table .



### 2 0P.3 0

TABL E 10 . ANNUA

L S0 2 EMISSIO

N IMPAC T (CATEGORYI PROJECTS )

REASO N

NE W PLAN T

ADDITIONAL CAPACIT Y

BOILE R CONDITION

FUE L SWITC H

COGENERATION



### AL L

REPLACEMEN T NE W APPLICATIO N DISCRETIONAR Y MANDATORY BOILE R

NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL NE W EXISTIN G TOTAL FUE L

COAL OI L COA L OI L

COA L OI L COAL OI L

COA L ' OI L COA L OI L

COAL OI L COAL OI L

COA L OI L COAL OI L

COAL OI L COAL OI L NO . O F BOILER S

1 3 0 0 0 1 3 7 1 1 7 1 2 4 5 6 1 0 2 3 4 4 3 9 0 0 4 4 8 3 ' 1 0 1 1 2 1 4 7 4 8 2 8 7 0 17 8

. .

- - BEFOR E

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4285 4 251 2 4536 6 0 0 1633 1 905 1 2538 2 0 0 0 3003 7 3003 7 0 0 272 0 33 3 305 3 0 0 6190 5 4193 3 10383 8
5541 9 4841 9 4982 8 5401 0 •TONS S02/YEA

R AFTE RCHANG E
1867 6 24 8 0 0 1892 4 945 8 13 0 3342 7 103 4 4404 9 963 3 287 1 754 0 25 0 2029 4 6081 6 1075 6 0 232 5 7389 7 1572 0 2 8 204 7 1 1779 6 11430 3 1403 3 4301 4 361 0 17496 0
9419 1 8076 9 11122 3 6373 7 1892 4

-131 7

-508 8

4386 0

• 1474 3

7112 2
3877 2 3235 0 6139 5 972 7
NOTE : Se e Appendi x2 fo r discussio no f calculatio nprocedure s an d numbe r o f boiler s include d inanalysis .


### 2 1P.3 1

Overal l S0 2 emission s increase db y 71,12 2 ton s o f S0 2 pe r year— a ne t increas e o f 6 8 percen t a s a resul t o f ne w boile r projects . O f th e tota l emission s afte r th e project s wer e completed , 7 3 percen t (128,33 6 tons ) wa s from th e ne w

boilers ; th e remainin g 2 7 percen t (46,62 4 tons ) wa s fro m continue doperatio no f th e existin g boilers . Emissio nchange s associate d wit heac ho f th e primar y reason s fo r th e project s ar e discusse dbelow .
Ne w Plants — Ne w plant s ar e a majo r sourc e o f sulfu r dioxid e emissions . Becaus e boiler s installe da t ne w plant s ar e no t replacement s fo r existin g boilers , the y ad dcapacit y

an demission s wher e non e existe dpreviously . Th e tota l S0 2 emission s fro

m th e surveye dne w

plant s i s 18,92 4 ton s pe r year ; thi s represent s 2 6 percen t o f th e tota l S0 2 emissio nincreas e fro m al l boile r groups .
Additiona l Capacity Ne w boiler s wer e installe dprimaril y t o increas e th e stea m capacit y

o f existin g plants ; inmos t cases , th e fue l choic e fo r th e new boile r wa s th e same a s tha t o f th e existin g boiler s a t th e sam e plant . Severa l o f thes e project s als o consolidate do r otherwis e modifie dth e operatio no f existin g boilers , thereby

reducin g emission s fro m th e existin g boilers. * I nmor e tha n hal f th e cases , th e existin g boile r remaine dinoperation . Th e ne t chang e i nemission s fro

m th e new

an dexistin g boiler s wa s a reductio no f 1,31 7 ton s o f S0 2 pe r year , o r roughl y 3 percen t les s tha nth e emissio nleve l existin g befor e installatio no f th e new boiler . Boile r Condition — Thes e project s installe don e o r mor e new boiler s becaus e o f th e poo r conditio no f th e existin g boilers . O f th e 3 3 existin g boiler s affected , onl y 6 continue doperatio nafte r th e new boile r wa s installed . Althoug hth e new boiler s generall y

fir e th e same fue l a s th e origina l boile r an dhav e

Se e Appendi x2 fo r exampl e calculation s o f S0 2 tonnage s an dpercentages ,


### 2 2lowe r emissio nrate s pe r millio nBt uo f hea t input , the y ar e als o generall y large r tha nth e boiler s the y replaced . Overall , ne t emission s fro m thi s categor y decrease db

y 5,08 8 ton s o f S0 2 pe r year , o r roughl y 2 0 percent .
Fue l Switch — Th e larges t singl e categor y o f boile r project s wer e undertake nt o chang e th e bas e fue l o f th e plant . I nmos t cases , th e chang e wa s fro m oi l o r natura l ga s t o coa l o r coal-woo d mixtures . Th e ne t resul t wa s an increas e o f 43,86 0 ton s o f S0 2 pe r year , representin g 6 1 percen t o f th e tota l annua l emission s increas e an da nincreas e o f 15 2 percen t relativ e t o th e emission s o f th e existin g boiler s befor e thes e project s wer e undertaken . (Se e Sectio n6 for.additiona l discussio no f thi s issue. ) Cogeneration — Cogeneratio nproject s generall y involve daddin g a new boile r an

d increasin g fue l consumptio n.a t th e plan t (or a t a

nadjacen t sit e inth e cas e o f third-part y

cogenerators) . Coa l wa s th e primar y fuel . I

nsome cases , stea m productio nfrom

existin g boiler s wa s replace dinwhol e o r inpar t b y th e new cogeneratio nboiler . Th e ne t chang e inemission s wa s anincreas e o f 14,74 3 ton s o f S0 2 pe r year , representin g abou t 2 1 percen t o f th e tota l increas e inannua l S0 2 emission s fro m al l categories . Thi s represent s a n almos t six-fol dincreas e inemission s compare dt o th e existin g boiler s tha t wer e affecte db

y th e cogeneratio nprojects . (Se e Sectio n6 fo r additiona l discussio no f thi s issue. )

New Applicatio nvs . Replacemen t Boilers — Th e annua l emission s wer e als o categorize dfo r new applicatio nboiler s versu s thos e primaril y installe dt o replac e existin g boile r capacity . A s mentione dabove , new application s includ e new plants , cogeneratio n facilities , an

dboiler s buil t t o satisf y additiona l stea

m deman da t a

n existin g plant . O f th e tota l ne t increas e inS0 2 emissions , new applicatio n boiler s accounte dfo r 32,35 0 ton s o f S0 2 pe r yea r (4 5 percent ) compare dt o 38,77 2 ton s o f S0 2 pe r yea r (5 5 percent ) fo r replacemen t boilers .


### 2 3P.3 3

Discretionar y

vs . Mandator y

Boilers Annua l emission s impact s wer e als o calculate donth e basi s o f discre tionar y versu s mandator y

boile r projects . Discretionar y project s (fue l switching , backu pcapacity , replacemen t o f a repairabl e boiler , and cogeneration ) accounte dfo r 61,39 5 ton s (8 6 percent ) o f th e tota l ne t increas e inannua l S0 2 emissions . Mandator y project s (additio no f primar y capacity , replacemen t o f a nunrepairabl e boiler , an dnew plants ) accounte d fo r th e remainin g 9,72 7 ton s (1 4 percent ) o f ne t annua l S0 2 emissions . I f onl y thos e project s define d a s mandator y hadbee nbuilt , S0 2 emission s woul d hav e increase db

y 1 8 percent . Discretionar y boile r project s increase d emission s b

y 12 3 percen t relativ e t o th e tota l befor e th e project .
6. 0 IMPAC T O F LOWE RENERGYPRICE S Two o f th e majo r reason s give ninth e surve y fo r ne w

boile r purchase s wer e fue l switchin g an d cogeneration , inaggregat e accountin g fo r 4 8 percen t o f al l Categor y

I project s (se e Tabl e 4) . Bot ho f thes e reason s wer e heavil y influence db

y th e perception s o f futur e energ y price s andnationa l energy policie s durin g th e 1981-198 4 tim e period . Durin g thi s period , futur e oi l an

dnatura l ga s price s wer e generall y expecte dt o b e quit e high—an d th e reliabilit y o f thei r suppl y

low . I

naddition , economi c incentive s unde r th e Publi c Utilit y Regulator y

Policie s Ac t (PURPA ) mad e cogeneratio nproject s attractiv e t o many investors . Give ncurren t perception s o f lowe r oi l an dnatura l ga s price s inth e future , constructio no f new boiler s fo r reason s o f fue l switchin g i s expecte dt o b e significantl y reduced . Lowe r fue l price s wil l als o reduc e th e economic s o f som e cogeneratio nproject s an dthereby

decreas e th e numbe r o f new cogeneratio nboile r installations . T o ai di ninterpretin g th e futur e directio no f boile r replacemen t decision s an dS0 2 emissions , thi s sectio n briefl y summarize s th e surve y result s i f fue l switchin g project s singl y an d i ncombinatio nwit hcogeneratio nproject s ar e exclude dfro m th e analysis . First , i f onl y

fue l switchin g project s ar e excluded , th e tota l numbe r o f Categor y

I-project s decrease s fro m 11 5 t o 7 6 (se e Tabl e 4) . Th e spli t betwee nreplacemen t an dnew applicatio nboiler s change s fro m roughl y

50/5 0
2 4P.3 4

t o 2 5 percen t fo r replacemen t (due t o boile r condition ) an d7 5 percen t fo r new application s (ne

w plants , capacit y

addition s a t existin g plants , an d cogeneration) . Eliminatio no f fue l switchin g project s reduce s tota l S0 2 emission s t o 73,80 1 ton s befor e th e project s an d101,06 3 ton s afterward . O f thes e 101,06 3 tons , 56,76 4 ton s (5 6 percent ) ar e fro m new boiler s an

d44,29 9 ton s (4 4 percent ) ar e fro m existin g boilers . Excludin g fue l switchin g projects , th e ne t increas e i nemission s i s 27,26 2 ton s (3 7 percent) . Th e emission s increas e attributabl e t o boiler s tha t wer e buil t fo r mandator y reason s (primary

capacity , unrepairabl e boile r condition , an

dnew plants ) i s 9,72 7 ton s (3 5 percent) . Emission s fro m th e remainin g discretionar y boiler s (backupcapacity , repairabl e boile r condition , an

dcogeneration ) increase db y 17,53 5 tons . Second , i f bot hfue l switchin g an dcogeneratio nproject s ar e exclude d fro m th e analysis , th e tota l numbe r o f Categor y I project s decrease s fro m 11 5 t o 6 0 (se e Tabl e 4) . Th e spli t betwee nreplacemen t an dnew applicatio n boiler s change s fro

m roughl y 50/5 0 t o 3 3 percen t fo r replacemen t an d6 7 percen t fo r ne w

applications . Tota l annua l SO , emission s increas e fro m 70,74 8 ton s befor e th e project s t o 83,26 7 ton s afterward . O f th e 83,26 7 ton s o f S0 2 afterward , 41,016 ' ton s (4 9 percent ) ar e fro m new boiler s an

d 42,25 1 ton s (5 1 percent ) ar e fro m existin g boilers . Th e ne t increas e i

nemission s fro

m new project s excludin g fue l switchin g an

dcogeneratio nproject s i s 12,51 9 ton s pe r yea r (1 8 percent) . Th e emission s increas e attributabl e t o boiler s tha t wer e buil t fo r mandator y reason s i s 9,72 7 ton s (7 4 percent) . Emission s fro m th e remainin g discretionar y

boiler s (no

w limite dt o backu pcapacit y an drepairabl e boile r condition ) increase db y 2,79 2 tons . Thus , althoug hth e increas e i nS0 2 emission s i s smalle r whe nfue l switchin g b

y itsel f o r fue l switchin g i nconjunctio nwit hcogeneratio nar e exclude dfro

m th e analysis , th e remainin g new boiler s woul dstil l resul t i n ne t S0 2 emissio nincrease s o f 1 8 t o 3 7 percen t compare dt o emissio nlevel s prio r t o thei r installation .



### 2 5P.3 5



### APPENDI X1

BOILE RREPLACEMEN T SURVE YQUESTIONNAIR EP.3 6

OM B Clearanc e No . 2060-013 6

GENERA L INSTRUCTION S 1 . Thi s "questionnair e i s designe dt o obtai ninformatio nabou t industria l boile r projects . I t focuse s on th e factor s tha t influenc e th e decisio n t o undertak e a boile r projec t an d th e factor s tha t ar e considere di n th e selectio no f boile r typ e an d fuel . Therefore , i t i s importan t tha t th e individual(s ) completin g thi s questionnair e b e th e person(s ) wh o actuall y mad e thes e kinds o f decision s [o r a s clos e t o th e person(s ) a s possibl e fo r th e projec t covere db y thi s questionnaire] . I f thi s perso n i s no t you , pleas e rout e thi s questionnair e t o th e mos t appropriat e individua l i n you r organization . 2 . Th e questionnair e i s designe dt o obtai ninformatio no n eac hboile r project . Fo r th e purpose s o f thi s survey , a boile r projec t i s define d a s a serie s o f activitie s tha t wer e begu ndu e t o a decisio nan d pla n t o alter , expand , o r i n some wa y modif y th e boile r facilitie s a t a particula r plan t site . Consequently , a boile r projec t ma y involv e a numbe r o f boiler s an d ma y includ e constructio no f severa l ne w boiler s a s wel l a s reconstructio no r rebuildin g o f severa l existin g boilers . I f yo u hav e undertake nmor e tha non e boile r projec t ove r th e las t fiv e year s (sinc e Januar y 1 , 1981) , pleas e fil l ou t a separat e questionnair e fo r eac hboile r project . 3 . This questionnair e consist s o f tw o parts an

d two supplements . I t i s necessar y

t o carefull y

revie w bot hparts an

d bot hsupplement s o f th e questionnaire . Pleas e readth e introductio nt o eac hpar t an d eac h supplemen t carefull y

an d follow th e instruction s include di n th e questionnair e itself . Items a- d below addres s eac ho f thes e sections . a . Par t I cover s genera l information . Eve nthoug hth e Par t I informatio nwil l no t b e use di n th e analysis , th e informatio n requeste di s necessar y i f additiona l communicatio ni s appropriat e t o understan do r clarif y answer s t o variou s question s involve di n th e questionnaire . b . Par t I I i s th e mai npar t o f th e survey . Pleas e answe r eac hquestio n completely . Wher e spac e i s provide dfo r comment s o r additiona l information , pleas e tak e th e time t o provid e informatio ntha t wil l provid e a goo dunderstandin g o f th e reason s fo r you r decisio nt o undertak e a boile r project . c . Supplemen t A

i s t o provid e detaile dinformatio nabou t eac hne w boile r involve di n th e boile r project . Supplemen t A ha s on e genera l informatio npag e (pag e A-1 ) an d a one-pag e questionnair e (pag e A-2 ) fo r eac hne w boile r involve di n th e project . Pleas e complet e Supplemen t A b y fillin g ou t th e genera l informatio npag e an dthe nphotocopyin g an d completin g a pag e A- 2 fo r eac hne w boile r i n th e project .P.3 7



### . d . Supplemen t B i s t o provid e detaile dinformatio nabou t eac hexistin g boile r whic hma y

hav e bee nreconstructed , rebuilt , modified , o r changed ' i nan

y wa y a s par t o f th e overal l boile r project . Eve ni f anexistin g boile r wa s onl y operate di na differen t manne r o r jus t shutdown , a s a resul t o f th e boile r project , pleas e identif y an dinclud e thi s boile r i nSupplemen t B . Supplemen t B ha s a genera l informationpag e (pag e B-1 ) an da thre e pag e questionnair e (page s B- 2 throug hB-4 ) fo r eac hexistin g boile r involve di nth e boile r project . Pleas e complet e Supplemen t B b y fillin g ou t th e genera l informationpag e an

dthe nphotocopyin g an dcompletin g page s B-2 throug hB- 4 fo r eac hexistin g boile r involve di nth e boile r project . 4 . Th e questionnair e shoul db e complete dan dreturne db

y Jul y 18 f 

### 1986 . 5 . I f yo uhav e an

y question s o r anticipat e difficultie s ineithe r full y respondin g o r respondin g withi nth e allotte dtime , pleas e cal l th e followin g individual :

M s Diann e Byrn e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y (919 ) 541-557 8 6 . Whe nth e questionnair e i s completed , pleas e mai l to :

M s Diann e Byrn e Environmenta l Protectio nAgenc y OAQPS , ESED , SD B (MD-13 ) Researc hTriangl e Park , NC 2771 1P.3 8
OM B Clearanc e No : 2060-013 6

PAR T I : SURVE YOF INDUSTRIA L BOILE RPROJECT S Thi s surve y

questionnair e i s bein g sen t t o firm s who.hav e undertake n on e o r mor e boile r project s withi nth e las t fiv e (5 ) years . Th e result s o f thi s surve y

ar e intende d t o provid e informatio non wh y boile r project s ar e undertaken , th e factor s influencin g th e selectio no f th e typ e o f boile r an d th e fuel , and whethe r existin g equipmen t ca n b e use d i n thes e projects . Pleas e read th e genera l instruction s carefull y befor e completin g th e questionnaire . Pleas e complet e th e followin g questions . Thi s informatio ni s necessar y i f additiona l communicatio ni s require d t o clarif y answer s provide d t o variou s question s i n th e questionnaire . Th e link betwee nth e nam e o f th e particula r plan t an

d th e informatio ni n th e surve y wil l no t b e provide d t o th e publi c i n an

y typ e o f summary

repor t tha t ma y

b e generate d fro

m th e responses .

1

. Nam e o f firm : 2

. Two-digi t Standar d Industria l Classificatio n (SIC ) Code : 3

. Nam e o f perso n completin g form : 4

. Phon e Number(includ e are a code) : ( ) 5 . Position : 6 . Plan t sit e addres s Stree t address : City : State : Zi p Code : 7 . Projec t numbe r [A s mentione d i n th e genera l instructions , a complet e questionnair e need s t o b e complete d fo r eac hseparat e boile r projec t (i.e. , no t eac hboile r bu t eac hproject). ] Consequently , i f yo u ar e completin g mor e tha non e questionnaire , identif y separat e project s b y a projec t number , i.e. , 1 , 2 , 3 , etc .



### I- lP.3 9



### PAR T II : SURVE YO F INDUSTRIAL BOILE RPROJECT S 1 . Projec t numbe r (Se e instruction s i nPar t I) : 2 . I s thi s new

boile r locate da t a new "greenfield " manufacturin g plant ? Ye s N o 3 . Pleas e complet e Supplemen t A fo r eac hne

w boiler(s ) include di n th e boile r project . 4 . Di dthi s boile r projec t involv e o r includ e reconstruction , rebuilding , modifying , o r change s o f an y sor t i nan

y existin g boilers , includin g operatio no f existin g boiler s a t lowe r capacit y o r shuttin g dow

no f existin g boilers ? Ye s N o I f yes , ho

w man y existin g boiler s wer e affecte di nsome wa y a s a resul t o f thi s boile r project ? 5 . Pleas e complet e Supplemen t B fo r eac hexistin g boile r tha t wa s change d o r affecte di nan

y wa y as- a resul t o f thi s boile r project . 6 . Pleas e describ e you r mai nreaso nfo r buildin g a new boiler :

7 . I f you r decisio nwa s base do na cos t analysis , pleas e includ e a copy o f th e cos t analysi s i f on e i s available . I f you r decisio nwa s base d oncos t considerations , bu t a nanalysi s isn' t available , pleas e describ e th e majo r cos t consideration s tha t influence dyou r decision .

II- lP.4 0



### 8 . Woul dyou r decisio nt o buil da ne w boile r chang e i f projecte dcost s t o produc e stea

m increase dby : 10 % 20 % 30 % 50 % Ye s

Ye s . Ye s Ye s No

N o No No 9 . T o supplemen t you r answe r t o questio n6 , Whic ho f th e followin g factor s wer e als o considere di ndecidin g tha t ther e wa s a nee dfo r thi s boile r project ? Pleas e rat e EAC H facto r fro m 0 t o 2 ( 0 - no t considere do r relativel y unimportant ; 1 - moderatel y important ; 2 - ver y important) . I f yo uconsidere dfactor s tha t ar e no t onth e list , pleas e ad

dthe m t o th e botto

m o f th e lis t an

drat e them . Facto r Ratin g a . additiona l boile r capacit y wa s neede dove r an

d abov e wha t th e existin g boiler s coul dprovid e b . insuranc e companie s wer e no longe r willin g t o provid e insuranc e coverag e fo r existin g boiler s ( 

### c . existin g boiler(s ) coul dno t b e operate dsafel y withou t extensiv e repair s d . existin g boiler(s ) coul dno t b e operate dreliabl y withou t extensiv e repair s e . existin g boiler(s ) coul dno longe r b e operate din • complianc e wit hai r pollutio nregulation s f . th e boile r projec t allowe du s t o chang e ou r bas e fue l (e.g. , coal , oil , natura l gas , wood , wast e fuels , etc. ) g . th e boile r projec t allowe du s t o us e multipl e fuel s * h . boile r allowe du s t o consolidat e boile r operation s (ie. , replac e severa l smalle r boiler s wit hon e o r mor e larg e boilers ) i . new boile r provide s u s wit hmor e backu pboile r capacit y j . th e mod e o f operatio nfo r th e boiler s change d(bigge r loadswings , mor e baseload , etc. ) k . stea m qualit y (pressure , temperature ) requirement s change d 1 . desir e t o cogenerat e electricit y fo r on-sit e us e o r resal e m . othe r (specify) : ' ;

II- 2P.4 1



### PAR T I I (continued ) 10 . Inconsiderin g a boile r projec t o r selectin g th e typ e o f boiler/fue l t o use , a numbe r o f factor s ar e weighe di nth e decision . Some o f th e mos t commonl y

considere dfactor s ar e liste dbelow . Pleas e rat e how importan t eac ho f thes e factor s wer e i nyou r boile r project . Pleas e rat e EAC H facto r fro

m 0 t o 2 ( 0 - no t considere do r relativel y unimportant ; 1 - moderatel y

important ; 2 - ver y

important) . I f yo uconsidere dfactor s tha t ar e no t onth e 11st , pleas e addthem t o th e bottom

o f th e lis t an

d rat e them . Facto r Ratin g
a . operatin g cost s excludin g fue l b . maintenanc e cost s excludin g fue l
c . fue l cost s d . interes t rate s
e . capita l cos t o f projec t .

. f . availabilit y

o f corporat e fund s for capita l improvement s g . operatin g flexibilit y o r backu pboile r capacit y h . boile r efficienc y i . compatibilit y

wit hexistin g fuel s a t plan t j . securit y

o r reliabilit y

o f fue l suppl y k . spac e o r lan

davailabilit y 1 . abilit y

t o us e existin g system component s *
m . abilit y

t o minimiz e nee dfo r additiona l operatin g o r maintenanc e personne l n . corporat e polic y

(specify) :
o . environmenta l regulation s (specify) : p . othe r (specify) :

II- 3P.4 2



### 11 . O f th e followin g syste m component s tha t wer e presen t on-sit e a t th e tim e o f constructio no f th e boile r project , whic hcoul dcontinu e t o be use dt o servic e eithe r new boiler s involve di nth e boile r projec t o r existin g boiler s tha t wer e modifie do r change di nan y wa y a s par t o f th e boile r project . ( 0 - coul dno t b e use da t all ; 1 - coul dus e a s i s o r wit hmino r modification ; 2 - coul dus e onl y wit h majo r modification ) I f th e boile r projec t wa s par t o f a new "greenfield " plant , ski pthi s question . Ca nServic e Ca nContinu e t o Servic e New Boiler s Existin g Boiler s Change d System Componen t Adde do r Modifie di nSom e Wa y a . fue l storag e b . fue l handlin g •
c . boile r hous e
^^^~m~mm& t

- ^an******-*-^H****H * 

### d . boile r feedwate r treatmen t
e . condensat e retur n f . boile r blowdownan

dtreatmen t g . soli dwast e handlin g an d disposa l h . ai r pollutio ncontro l equipmen t i . wast e wate r treatmen t system

II- 4P.4 3



### SUPPLEMEN T A

•- - NE W BOILER S INVOLVE D I

N BOILE RPROJEC T
Thi s supplemen t i s intende dt o collec t informatio nabou t th e new boile r o r boiler s include di nth e projec t covere db y thi s questionnaire . Thi s Supplemen t A

consist s o f tw

o (2 ) pages . Thi s pag e (pag e A-1 ) contain s question s abou t aVl ^ th e new boiler s installed . Th e followin g pag e (pag e A-2 ) request s informatio nabou t eac hne w boiler . Consequently , pleas e photocopy an dcomplet e a s man y

copie s o f pag e A- 2 a s necessar y t o identif y

an d describ e eac hnew

boiler . Fo r eac hnew boiler , pleas e complet e a separat e pag e A-2 .
1 . Projec t numbe r (sam e a s Questio n# 6 o f Par t I) : 2 . Numbe r o f new

boiler s include di nthi s project : 3 . Maximu

m (design ) capacit y

o f eac hnew

boiler : Boile r # 1 thousan dpound s steam/h r Boile r # 2 thousan dpound s steam/h r Boile r # 3 thousan dpound s steam/h r Boile r # 4 thousan dpound s steam/h r Tota l NOTE : I f mor e tha nfou r ne w boiler s wer e installed , pleas e identif y a t th e botto

m o f thi s pag e th e maximu m desig ncapacit y

o f eac hadditiona l ne

w boiler. )
Wha t wa s th e tota l capacit y o f th e boiler s tha t wer e shu t dow n o r modifie dinan

y wa y a s a resul t o f th e ne w boile r project ? thousandpound s steam/hr .P.4 4

SUPPLEMEN T A

« INFORMATION

FO REAC H NE

W BOILE R
(Fo r eac hne

w boiler , pleas e answe r th e followin g questions . Us e on e pag e fo r eac hboiler. ) 1 . Thi s pag e i s fo r boile r number : [I f yo u hav e mor e tha non e new boile r i nthi s project , identif y eac h new boile r b

y a separat e numbe r (i.e. , 1 , 2 , 3 , etc.)] : 2 . Typ e o f boiler : Packag e o r Field-erecte d 3 . Maximu

m capacit y

o f thi s boiler : (thousand pound s steam/hr ) 4 . Bas e fue l fo r thi s boile r (coal , oil , natura l gas , woo d bark , etc.) :

5 . Bas e fue l characteristics :
a . Weigh t % as h
c . Hea t conten t b . Weigh t % sulfu r
(Btu/lb , Btu/gal , o r Btu/sc f - pleas e state ) d . Annua l fue l consumptio n: ton s coa l ton s othe r soli d fue l gallon s oi l cubi c fee t ga s 6 . Backu p fue l fo r thi s boile r (coal , oil , natura l gas , woo d bark , etc. )

7 . Backu p fue l characteristics :
a . Weigh t % ash
c . Hea t conten t (Btu/lb , Btu/ga l o r b . Weigh t % sulfu r d . Averag e annua l fue l consumptio n ton s coa l ton s othe r soli d fue l gallon s oi l Btu/sc f - pleas e state ) cubi c fee t ga s 8 . Regulator y

limi t fo r SO 2 tha t applie s t o thi s boiler : 9 . Emissio ncontro l techniqu e use d t o contro l SO 2 emissions : (pleas e check )
a . Lo w sulfu r fue l b . Flu e ga s desulfurizatio n
c . Othe r (pleas e specify ) 10 . I f thi s i s a coa l boiler , typ e o f fue l firin g system :
a . Pulverize d coa l b . Stoke r coa l c . Othe r (specify )



### A- 2P.4 5



### SUPPLEMEN T B —

EXISTINGBOILER S INVOLVE D IN BOILE RPROJEC T
Thi s Supplemen t i s intende dt o collec t informatio nabou t th e existin g boile r o r boiler s tha t wer e involve di nth e boile r projec t i nsom e way . Thi s ma y hav e bee nreconstructio no r rebuildin g o f a nexistin g boile r o r a chang e i nth e manne r o f it s operation . Consequently , eve ni f a n existin g boile r wa s onl y operate da t a lowe r capacity , shutdown , o r place di na standb

y o r back-u pposition , a s a resul t o f th e boile r project , pleas e identif y

an dinclud e thi s existin g boile r i ncompletin g thi s supplement . Thi s firs t pag e (pag e B-1 ) contain s question s abou t ^V [ th e existin g boiler s tha t wer e involve di nth e boile r projec t i nsome way . Th e remainin g page s (page s B- 2 throug hB-4) , reques t informatio nabou t eac hexistin g boile r tha t wa s involve di nth e boile r project . Consequently , pleas e photocop y

an dcomplet e a s man y

copie s o f page s B- 2 throug hB- 4 a s necessar y t o identif y

eac hexistin g boile r involve di nth e boile r project . Fo r eac hexistin g boiler , pleas e complet e a separat e se t o f page s B- 2 throug h 

## F4 T 1 . Projec t numbe r (sam e a s Questio n# 6 o f Par t I) : 2 . Numbe r o f existin g boiler s involve di nthi s boile r project : 3 . Maximu

m (design ) capacit y

o f eac hexistin g boile r affecte d b y th e boile r project : Boile r # 1 thousan dpound s steam/h r Boile r # 2 thousandpound s steam/h r Boile r # 3 thousandpound s steam/h r Boile r # 4 thousan dpound s steam/h r Tota l NOTE : I f mor e tha nfou r existin g boiler s wer e involve dinthi s boile r projec t i nsom

e way , pleas e identif y th e maximu

m desig ncapacit y

o f eac hadditiona l existin g boile r tha t wa s involve da t th e botto m o f thi s page . 4 . At th e conclusio no f th e boile r project , wha t percen t o f thi s tota l capacit y

wa s replaced , shut-down , o r place di na stand-by position : % replace do r shut-dow n % place di nstand-by

positio n

B- 1P.4 6



### SUPPLEMEN T B —

INFORMATION

FOREAC H EXISTINGBOILE R

(Fo r eac hexistin g boiler , pleas e answe r th e followin g questions . Pleas e photocopy

an dcomplet e a s man y

copie s o f th e followin g page s (i.e. , B-2 , B-3 , an dB-4 ) t o provid e informatio no neac hexistin g boiler. )
1 . Thi s pag e i s fo r boile r number : (I f yo uhav e mor e tha non e existing boile r whic hwa s involve di nth e boile r project , pleas e identif y eac hboile r b

y a separat e number , i.e. , 1 , 2 , 3 , etc.) :
2 . Ag e o f boiler :
3 . Typ e o f boiler : Packag e o r Field-erecte d
4 . Maximu

m capacit y

o f thi s boiler : thousan dpound s steam/h r
5 . Bas e fue l fo r thi s boile r (coal , oil , natura l gas , woo dbark , etc.) :
a . Befor e project : ' b . Followin g project :

c . Bas e fue l characteristics : Befor e Projec t Afte r Projec t i . Weigh t % as h ii . Weigh t % sulfu r iii . Hea t conten t (Btu/lb , Btu/ga l o r Btu/scf - pleas e state ) iv . Annua l fue l consumptio n ton s coa l ton s othe r soli dfue l - gallon s oi l cubi c fee t ga s

B- 2P.4 7

Supplemen t B (continued ) 6 . Backu p fue l fo r thi s boile r (pleas e identify) :
a . Befor e project : b . Afte r project :
c . Backu p fue l characteristics : Befor e Projec t Afte r Projec t i . Weigh t % as h ii . Weigh t % sulfu r iii . Hea t conten t (Btu/lb , Btu/ga l o r Btu/sc f - pleas e state ) iv . Annua l fue l consumptio n ton s coa l • ton s othe r soli d fue l . gallon s oi l cubi c fee t ga s 7 . Regulator y

limi t fo r SO 2 tha t applie s t o thi s boiler : 8 . Emissio ncontro l techniqu e use d b y boile r t o mee t SO 2 emissio nlimit : (Pleas e chec k contro l techniqu e used. ) Befor e Projec t Afte r Projec t
a . Lo w sulfu r fue l b . Flu e ga s desulfurizatio n
c . Othe r (pleas e specify )
9 . Ho w di d th e statu s o f thi s boile r chang e becaus e o f th e boile r project ? (Yo u ma y chec k mor e tha none )

Shu t dow n Use d a s backu p boile r onl y Use d a s a peakin g uni t onl y Reductio ni nhour s o f operatio n Chang e t o a differen t fue l Dismantle d Othe r (specify : )

B- 3P.4 8



### 10 . Wh y wa s thi s boiler' s statu s change d(Youma y chec k mor e tha none) ? Boile r faile dsafet y

inspectio n Insuranc e coul dno t b e obtaine d

' Maintenanc e cost s to o hig h

Estimate dannua l cost s (optional ) Non-fue l operatin g cost s to o high Estimate dannua l cost s (optional )

. Fue l cost s to o high

Estimate dannua l cost s (optional )

• Othe r (specify : )
11 . Fo r a boile r tha t wa s dismantle do r completel y shu t down , coul dthi s boile r hav e bee nrebuil t t o extendit s usefu l life ?

Ye s N

o I f yes , wha t kindo f repair s woul dhav e bee nnecessary ?

12 . (Optional ) Pleas e provid e an

y additiona l informatio nabou t thi s boile r projec t tha t yo ubeliev e woul db e helpfu l fo r u s t o kno w inorde r t o full y understan dthe natur e o f th e project .

B- 4P.4 9



### APPENDI X2 EMISSION CALCULATIO N

PROCEDURE S

TABL E 9 Averag e emissio nrate s fo r coal - an doil-fire dboiler s wer e calculate d b y dividin g th e fue l sulfu r conten t fo r eac hboile r b y it s hea t conten t an

d the nmultiplyin g b

y tw o t o conver t pound s o f sulfu r t o SO, . Emissio nrate s fo r individua l boiler s wer e the nsumme dan ddivide db

y th e numbe r o f unit s t o obtai naverag e rate s fo r coal - an doil-fire dboilers . Averag e emissio n rate s fo r al l boiler s wer e calculate db y multiplyin g th e averag e emissio n rate s fo r for eac hfue l (coal , oil , natura l gas , an dwood ) b

y it s percentag e o f th e tota l boile r capacit y (fro m Table s 2 an

d7 ) afte r excludin g "other " fuels ; natura l ga s an

dwoo dwer e assume dt o b e sulfu r free .
TABL E 1 0 Annua l emission s fro

m coa l an doi l firin g a s bot ha bas e an dbacku p fue l wer e calculate dfo r eac hboile r b y convertin g fue l sulfu r conten t t o th e equivalen t amoun t o f SO , an dthe nmultiplyin g b

y th e quantit y

o f fue l use d(t o conver t th e quantit y o f oi l fro

m gallons--a s reporte donth e surve y form—t o pounds , a conversio nfacto r o f eigh t pound s pe r gallo nwa s used) .
CALCULATIO N

O F EMISSION

CHANGE S BEFOR E AND AFTE RTH E PROJECT S Annua l emission s ar e subdivide dinTabl e 1 0 b y fue l typ e (coa l an

doil ) an dag e (ne

w an dexisting) . Man

y o f th e ke

y number s use dinth e tex t ar e composite s o f thes e subsets . Fo r example , th e reporte dtota l emission s fro m new boiler s a t th e topo f pag e 2 2 o f 128,33 6 toni s th e composit e o f emission s fro

m new coal - an

doil-fire dboiler s (114,30 3 plu s 14,033 , respectively) . Percentag e change s wer e calculate db y subtractin g th e "before " emission s fro m th e "after " emission s an dthe ndividin g b

y th e "before " level . Fo r example , th e 6 8 percen t increas e intota l emission s resultin g fro

m th e new project s wa s calculate db y dividin g th e differenc e in emission s "before " an

d"after " (174,960-103,838=71,122 ) b y th e emission s "before " (103,838) .P.5 0



### NUMBE RO F BOILER S INCLUDE D I N ANALYSI S Becaus e o f incomplet e fue l dat a o nthre e surve y

form s (representin g si x boilers) , smal l difference s exis t i nth e numbe r o f boiler s reporte don Table s 9 an

d10 . Fo r fiv e o f thes e si xunit s (tw o ne w coal-fire dboiler s an dthre e exisitn g oil-fire dboiler s include do nTabl e 9 , bu t no t Tabl e 10) , fue l sulfu r conten t neede dt o estimat e th e S0 2 

### emissio nrat e pe r millio nBt u wa s reported , bu t th e quantit y o f fue l use dwa s omitted . Th e sixt hboile r (include donTabl e 10 , bu t no t Tabl e 9 ) wa s a new oil-fire dboile r installe d a s emergenc y

backu pfo r two existin g coal-fire dboilers ; onthi s unit , oi l sulfu r conten t wa s omitte dwhil e th e fue l usag e wa s reporte da s zero . Emission s from

thi s uni t wer e assume dt o b e zero .P.5 1

TECHNICA L REPOR

T DAT A (Please read Instructions

on the reverse before completing)

' * 1
. REPOR T NO
. EPA-450/3-87-00 6 2
.
4
. TITL E AN O SUBTITL E Surve yo f Ne

w Industria l Boile rProject s 198 1 - 198

4

7 . AUTHOR(S ) Davi d M

. White , Radia n Corporatio n

Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 2770 9 9
. PERFORMIN G ORGANIZATIO N NAM E AN O AOORES S Offic e o f Ai rQualit yPlannin g an d Standard s U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 2771 1

12
. SPONSORIN G AGENC Y NAM E AN D ADDRES S Offic e o f Ai ran d Radiatio n U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y 40 1 M Street , S.W

. Uachinn+rm , n r ItMLfiCi „ , 3
. RECIPIENT' S ACCESSIO N NO
.
5
. REPOR T DAT E Apri l 198

7 6
. PERFORMIN G ORGANIZATIO N CODE 8
. PERFORMIN G ORGANIZATIO N REPOR T NO
.

10
. PROGRA M ELEMEN T NO
.
11
. CONTRACT/GRAN T NO
. 68-02-381 6
13
. TYP E O F REPOR T AN O PERIO D COVERE D Fina l 14
. SPONSORIN G AGENC Y COD E EPA/200/0 4
15
. SUPPLEMENTAR Y NOTE S

16
. ABSTRAC T

Thi s repor t present s an analysi s o f ne w industria l boiler s sol d betwee n 198 1 an d 1984

. Th e analysi s focuse s o n 15 1 ne w coal- , oil- , natura l gas- , an d wood-fire d boiler s large rtha n 10 0 m i 1.1 io n Btu/hou r an d 29 1 existin g boilers

. Specifi c issue s examine d i n th e repor t includ e th e reason s fo rpurchasin g ne w industria l boilers , th e percentag e o f ne w boiler s use d fo rne

w application s versu s replacemen t o f existin g boilers- , an d th e impac t o f ne

w boile rpurchase s o n sulfu rdioxid e emissions

.

17
. KE Y WORD S AN D OOCUMEN T ANALYSI S ~ ~ a . DESCRIPTOR S Ai rPollutio n Stea m Generatin g Unit s Sulfu rDioxid e

18
. DISTRIBUTIO N STATEMEN T Releas e Unlimite d b.lOENTIFIERS/OPE N ENDE D TERM S Industria l Boiler s Ai rPollutio n Contro l

19
. SECURIT Y CLAS S (This Report) Unclassifie d 20
. SECURIT Y CLAS S (Thispage) Unclassifie d c . COSAT I Field/Grou p 13 B

2 1
. NO
. O F PAGE S
22
. PRIC E

EP A For m 2220- 1 (Rev
. 4-77 ) PREVIOU S EDITIO N I S OBSOLET EUnite d State s

Environmenta l Protectio n Agency Offic e o f Ai r an d Radiatio n Offic e o f Ai r Qualit y Plannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Park
. Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

Officia l Busines s Penalt y fo r Private Us e S30 0

If you r addres s i s incorrect , pleas e chang e o n th e above label ; tea r off ; an d retur n t o th e above address
. I f yo u d o not desir e t o continu e receivin g thi s technica l repor t series , CHEC KHER E • ; tea r of f label ; an d retur n i t t o th e above address
.

0 1 r*o