Author
MOORE, THOMAS - Oklahoma State University | |
BUSER, MICHAEL - Oklahoma State University | |
Whitelock, Derek | |
HAMILTON, DOUG - Oklahoma State University |
Submitted to: ASABE Annual International Meeting
Publication Type: Proceedings Publication Acceptance Date: 7/13/2014 Publication Date: N/A Citation: N/A Interpretive Summary: EPA’s particulate emission factors for cotton gins that were published in 2006 were given a poor quality rating. ARS and Oklahoma State University researchers conducted a four-year study to improve those ratings. Emission factors for particulate smaller than 10 microns (a human hair is about 60 microns in diameter) were developed for individual processing systems from seven cotton gins across the U.S. This paper used the data from the study and the current AP-42 data, and new EPA guidelines to develop new emission factors for 17 cotton gin systems. Emission factors for all but two systems increased from the current AP-42, and factors for six additional systems were developed. All of the emission factors received a rating of “moderately representative” except for the 1st stage seed-cotton cleaning system, which received a rating of “highly representative.” Better, more representative data will ensure that the ginning industry is more equitably regulated. Technical Abstract: The Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42) emission factors are assigned ratings, from A (Excellent) to E (Poor), based on the quality of data used to develop them. All current PM10 cotton gin emission factors received quality ratings of D or lower. In an effort to improve these ratings, a national cotton gin particulate matter emissions study was conducted from 2008 to 2011, in which PM10 emission factors were developed for individual processing systems from seven cotton gins across the U.S. This paper used data from the gin stack sampling study and the current AP-42 and EPA guidelines to develop proposed PM10 emission factors for 17 cotton gin systems for EPA’s AP-42. Three methods of calculating the emission factors were compared. These methods were compared to each other, the current AP-42, and the National Study technical reports. The method that used average method ITRs and test values (ITR Design 2) was determined to be the best for calculating emission factors as it takes into account variation across tests and methods, has a built-in mechanism for screening outliers, and reasonably prevents a single facility from biasing an emission factor. Using ITR Design 2, all but two emission factors increased from the current AP-42, and factors for six additional systems were developed. All of the emission factors received a rating of “moderately representative” except for the 1st stage seed-cotton cleaning system, which received a rating of “highly representative.” |