Baghouse.com

EPA Administrator Resigns Over “Crucify” Comments Regarding Enforcement Philosophy

dominickdalsanto — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:26:21 +0000

EPA chief resigns after outrage over comments saying EPA should figuratively “crucify” EPA offenders to set an example.

April 30 2012 – Baghouse.com News | A top EPA regional administrator resigned today over controversial comments regarding his views of how the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) should enforce its environmental regulations, saying that the EPA should do like the ancient Romans who would crucify conquered villagers to set an example. Al Armendariz, the administrator for the EPA’s 6th region tendered his resignation after his remarks draw the ire of various members of Congress and the media.

In his letter of resignation to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, he expressed his regret over his statements, and claimed they did not reflect his work as an EPA administrator, or the EPA’s views general. However, he acknowledged that with the controversy his continued work at the EPA cause an undue distraction, and therefore he felt it necessary to resign.

At a local government meeting in Texas in 2010, Armendariz liked his “philosophy of enforcement” of EPA policy to how the Romans would use crucifixion to intimidate recently conquered lands. “It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean,” he said. “They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they’d crucify them. And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years,” he added.

Armendariz went on to related that “you make examples out of people who are in this case not complying with the law … and you hit them as hard as you can” — to act as a “deterrent” to others. He went on to say that the oil and gas industry needed to be an “enforcement priority” for the agency. The oil and gas industry along with the power generation industry have been coming under increased pressure from new and tougher environmental regulations such as the Cross-State rule, Mercury MACT, NESHAPs, and more. Many companies will need to make extensive investments in pollution control technologies such as dust collection systems, air scrubbers and mercury capture systems to comply with the new rules.

In accepting his resignation, EPA Administrator Jackson reiterated earlier sentiments that the EPA did not agree with Armendariz comments or views as expressed in his speech. “I respect the difficult decision he made and his wish to avoid distracting from the important work of the agency,” she said, thanking him for his service.

Critics Claim Remarks Are Evidence of Obama-EPA’s “Assault On Energy”

Critics of the EPA have taken the controversy as the latest proof that the “Obama-EPA” is playing partisan politics and is acting in bad faith to further the Administration’s alleged vendetta against the U.S. energy industry.

The controversy began earlier this week when Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a vehement critic of the Obama Administration (particularly on environmental issues) referenced the remarks in a speech on the Senate floor. Sen. Inhofe then proposed to launch an investigation into alleged politically-motivated bias on the part of the “Obama-EPA”.

Sen. Inhofe was not the only member of Congress to weigh in on the controversy. Several Republican lawmakers also expressed outrage and called for Armendariz to be fired including Reps. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Pete Olson (R-Texas).

Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), called the comments “enviro-fascism at its worst.” The EPA’s Region 6 includes Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, and Oklahoma.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reached out on Twitter, stating that the “Obama admin admits ‘crucify’ strategy for energy job creators.”

And Texas Gov. and recent Republican Presidential Primary candidate Rick Perry took the comments as “another reason to all-but-eliminate EPA” called the comments “unacceptable & offensive”.

Another top Republican, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), plans to question EPA about the remarks. “He’s writing to EPA to seek clarification and express outrage with comments that are clearly at odds with the president’s prior comments on domestic energy production and that are clearly anathema to the cause of job creation,” a spokesman for Issa said.

In addition to lawmakers, several business and trade organizations are taking aim at the EPA over the controversy. Energy in Depth, an oil-and-gas industry group, is also highlighting the comments over Twitter and on its website, providing updates on the controversy including the calls for GOP members for his resignation. Other groups including the Business Roundtable and the Institute for Energy Research also took to Twitter to vent their feelings on the matter, criticizing the EPA and the Obama Administration.

The White House Denies Link To Armendariz Controversy – Cites Record As Proof

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Thursday called the comments at odds with the administration’s record of promoting oil-and-gas development and EPA’s approach. He pointed to increased oil and natural gas production in recent years as proof.

“The president’s approach, his all-of-the-above approach to our energy needs, I think documents and proves that those comments do not reflect his policy or the approach that the EPA has taken,” Carney said.

Carney also reiterated that the regional EPA official has apologized for the remarks. “What he said is clearly not representative of either this president’s belief in the way that we should approach these matters, or in the way that he has approached these matters, either from this office here in the White House or at the EPA,” Carney said at a press briefing.

While the ousting of Armendariz from his position is likely to be sufficient to reassure most, it is not likely to be the end of the matter. Given the serious implications of these words from a top level EPA administrator (one of the most important regions, the oil-rich South and Southwest), the Obama Administration’s tough stance on environmental issues, and role the booming U.S. oil fracking industry has in the nation’s future, ensure this issue will not go away. Republicans are likely to use this experience as a part of a continuing rally against Obama’s energy and environmental agenda…a fight that does not have a clear victor in sight.

Follow Meon

Dominick DalSanto is an Author & Environmental Technologies Expert, specializing in Dust Collection Systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as Online Marketing Director & Content Manager at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

CSB Nine Years Later, Still No Dust Regulation – Urges OSHA To Finalize Combustible Dust Safety Standard

dominickdalsanto — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:04:41 +0000

Nine years after the first of a series of deadly combustible dust explosions in the U.S., the CSB (Chemical Safety Board) is imploring OSHA to take decisive action and finalize its court-ordered Combustible Dust Standard. Investments in plant dust collection systems will be vital to meeting the new proposed standards.

April 4, 2012 – Baghouse.com News | Fed. 20, 2003, CTA Acoustics plant in Corbin, Ky, 7 dead; Feb. 7, 2008 Imperial Sugar Refinery in Port Wentworth, Ga, 14 dead, 38 injured; various dates in 2011, Hoeganaes powdered iron metal manufacturing plant in Gallatin, Tn, 5 dead in 3 separate incidents in 5 months. These are just a few of the deadly industrial dust explosions to occur in the U.S. over the last decade. In each of these incidents, the lives of these workers were tragically cut short by the seemingly-innocuous dusts present in the facilities.

The Chairperson of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) Rafael Moure-Eraso, in a recent article has called attention to the fact that despite several deadly incidents occurring in the nine years since the CTA explosions, OSHA still has yet to follow through with its pledge to issue a comprehensive combustible dust safety standard for general industry.

Chairperson Moure-Eraso relates the progression of events that lead to the CSB calling for OSHA to implement a comprehensive standard for combustible dust. “The safety board launched a study into the hazards of combustible dust. Our 2006 report revealed there is no national regulation that adequately addresses combustible dust explosion hazards in general industry. Although many states and localities have adopted fire codes that have provisions related to combustible dust, a CSB survey found that fire code officials rarely inspect industrial facilities to enforce the codes. The board clearly stated that American industry needs a comprehensive federal combustible dust regulation.”

While the explosion at the CTA Acoustics plant in Corbin, Ky did lead the CSB to issue a number of recommendations to both plant management, local and state regulators, it was not until the 2008 Imperial Sugar Refinery explosion in Port Wentworth, Ga, that left 14 dead and 38 injured, that the CSB made its recommendation to OSHA to issue a “comprehensive combustible dust standard for general industry”.

The CSB is an independent governmental agency charged with investigating industrial chemical accidents. And while they do have limited authority to investigate and issue recommendations, they do not have the power to enforce safety regulations.

Despite its repeated recommendations to OSHA for the urgent need for hazardous dust standards, he relents: “ Yet, nine years after the CTA catastrophe, and more than five years after our recommendation to OSHA, there is still no comprehensive OSHA standard to prevent these accidents.”

After the CSB’s recommendations, OSHA in April, 2009 announced that it planned on issuing a comprehensive dust standard for general industry. However, its recent 2012 agenda does not include any specific mention of goals or targets for the development of the standard during the course of this year.

Will There Ever Be a Comprehensive Combustible Dust Safety Standard?

While the U.S. is still struggling to prevent these kinds of incidents from occurring, the rest of the world is not immune from them either. In fact, major manufacturers such as China, which often lack extensive safety regulations, are even more prone to experience these kinds of incidents. According to recent reports, last year saw two electronics manufacturers in China that produce parts for Apple Computer products experienced dust explosions when fine particles of aluminum ignited, killing four workers and injuring dozens of others. Apple’s Supplier Responsibility documents state that the company is now requiring improved ventilation, inspections and cleaning methods for dust deposits.

Without a standard that comprehensively addresses the hazards of combustible dust, American workers will continue to be put at risk for future catastrophic explosions and fires.

“I don’t know what steps China is taking to prevent its dust explosions, but I do know what can be done here in the U.S. It’s time for OSHA to move on a comprehensive regulation to adequately address combustible dust hazards” – stated CSB Chairperson Moure-Eraso.

What Does This Mean For U.S. Manufacturers?

While the current status of combustible dust regulation is not fixed on a federal level, (i.e. OSHA) the dangers of combustible dust still present a clear and present danger to both the financial interests of U.S. manufacturers and the lives of U.S. workers.

As a result of the long history of combustible dust explosions in the U.S. many state and municipal fire codes and other regulatory agencies already have combustible dust regulations for most industries. In addition, many insurance providers are requiring plants as part of regular safety audits to improve dust hazard protection in their facilities as a condition of maintaining their coverage.

Maintaining a sufficiently-sized dust collection system is vital to prevent combustible dust explosions.

The first step to preventing these incidents is recognizing the dangers combustible dusts present in an industrial setting. Measures to control or mediate combustible dust hazards include maintaining a adequate dust collection system (i.e. a baghouse), good house-keeping practices and good facility design.

A main contributing factor in all of the above mentioned incidents was an improperly operated or maintained dust collection system. From inefficient collection pickup points, to bucket elevators that were not properly cleaned and sealed, to conveyor systems that were overloaded to baghouses of insufficient size and fire protection. A relatively minor investment in a facility’s dust collection system, such as changing to a sufficiently sized collector (i.e. larger CFM, larger baghouse with more dust collector bags) or additional baghouses will prevent the kind of massive capital loss and loss of life seen in these past incidents.

While governmental regulation will not ensure that these tragic incidents are the last of their kind, it is hoped that along with increase corporate awareness and ever-improving dust collection technology, these incidents will become rarer and rarer. Saving not only billions of dollars for companies, but safeguarding millions of workers in these industries.

More Reasons Not To Store Dust In Your Dust Collector Hopper

dominickdalsanto — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:26:27 +0000

Clogged machinery, exposure to hazardous chemicals, and disruptions in plant processes, are just a few of the problems that come from using your dust collector hopper for dust storage.

February 25, 2012 | Baghouse.com News – One of the most common baghouse operation practices that we find when we send a dust collector technical advisor out to various facilities is that many plant unwisely use the hopper on their dust collector for storage of the collected dust. Sometimes this is done unwittingly, as maintenance staff simply overlook emptying the hopper on a regular basis. Other times, this is more or less included (unwisely), into the design but neglecting to install a discharge system, such as a screw conveyor, or slide gate mechanism.

"You dust collector is NOT designed to store collected material for extended periods of time."

However, whether this course of action is planned or not, using your dust collector hopper for storage of any collected material for an extended period of time can cause a myriad of problems. Among the various problems that can arise are damage to dust collector bags, increased emissions, increased pressure drop (i.e. increased system airflow resistance), and clogging and damage to dust discharge systems (conveyor systems, slide gates, etc.).

In addition, in some instances involving compounds that may be considered hazardous, storing collected materials in the hopper can lead to extensive fines and prosecution from governmental regulators such as OSHA or the EPA.

A Foundry Runs Afoul of OSHA and The EPA, Lands President and Company in Criminal Court

Recently, a Franklin, New Hampshire metal parts manufacturer and its president pleaded guilty to charges stemming from what OSHA found to be unlawful storage of hazardous compounds. The hazardous or toxic compounds in question were byproducts of the plants manufacturing process, that contained high levels of lead and cadmium. The plant and its president according to court records, knowingly stored the waste with the hazardous levels of lead and cadmium in unapproved containers throughout the plant for longer than the 90 days allowed by law without notifying OSHA and the EPA.

During an inspection of the plant by OSHA in 2009, the plant was found to be in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which requires a permit to store hazardous waste on site for longer than 90 days. OSHA notified the EPA of their findings, and then a few months later, the EPA executed a search warrant on the plant found drums of hazardous waste being stored at the plant.

In the end, a federal grand jury indicted Wiehl and Franklin Non-Ferrous Foundry for unlawfully accumulating and storing lead and cadmium hazardous waste at the foundry site since July 2005. Wiehl faces a possible maximum sentence of two years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000. Under the terms of a plea agreement filed with the court, the United States Attorney’s Office has agreed to recommend that he serve two years of probation, six months of house arrest, and that he publish a public apology. Franklin Non-Ferrous Foundry, Inc is facing a possible maximum fine of $500,000.

Ensure your dust collection system regularly discharges into a dust conveyor system, such as a screw conveyor.

What’s The Lesson? Store Collected Dust Properly!

While the situation with manufacturer discussed above did not involve storing material in the dust collector, it does demonstrate that the EPA, and OSHA (and other safety organizations) do not take kindly to the storing of chemicals and compounds in inappropriate ways. You dust collector is NOT designed to store collected material for extended periods of time.

As already mentioned, using your hopper to store dust will lead to a score of problems that adversely affect not only the efficiency of your dust collection system, but your entire plant. These problems drastically increase if the collected dusts contain hazardous materials (lead, mercury, etc.), are an explosion hazard (food products, metal powders, fertilizer, etc.) or are corrosive to machinery. In these instances it is imperative that proper dust transportation, storage and disposal methods are implemented. These include the use of continuous hopper cleaning (such as timed or sense actuated slide gates, pneumatic locks, etc.). It is also vital to regularly check these systems, specially those components most prone to wear and failure such as slide gates, seals, etc.

CSB Video Report On Series Of Combustible Dust Explosions At Tennessee Powdered Metals Plant

dominickdalsanto — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:06:02 +0000

The Chemical Safety Board issued a final report on a series of deadly combustible dust explosions in Tennessee. It highlights dust collection systems as the only way to prevent deadly combustible dust explosions. Recommends OSHA issue new comprehensive dust regulations within one year.

January 6th, 2012 Baghouse.com News | The Chemical Safety Board has issued its final report regarding a series of deadly industrial dust explosions accidents that occurred at the Hoeganaes powdered metals plant in Gallatin, Tennessee in 2011. The main cause of these three deadly explosions and fires that claimed five lives and injured many others was determined to be negligence regarding combustible dust hazards. The CSB further noted that a main factor in these accidents was the constant neglect of the plant’s dust collection system.

All three of the incidents occurred when large amounts of accumulated highly combustible iron dust where dispersed into the air and then ignited. The plant manufactures various metal powders for industrial use, the most produced of which is iron powder.

Picture of combustible dust accumulations near a bucket elevator that killed 2 workers when the dust was ignited by the motor.

The CSB investigation found that iron dust was present in high enough concentrations in the air to be clearly visible, and had accumulated on nearly all surfaces including elevated ledges, rafters, and other overhead spaces in amounts of 4 inches or greater. In addition the CSB clearly documented through photos and videos how dust handling equipment such as bucket elevators, conveyor belts, etc. were not adequately sealed, regularly leaking large amounts of dust into the air when in operation, and were not connected to the plant’s dust collection system. Additionally, plant workers told investigators that the dust collection system was regularly out of service due to maintenance.

Three Combustible Dust Incidents At One Plant In Six Months

The CSB investigation begin after the first of the three incidents occurred on January 31st, 2011 when fine iron dust particles coming from a broken bucket elevator were ignited while two maintenance personnel were performing repairs. The airborne particles were ignited by a spark from the bucket elevator’s electrical motor when it engaged. The resulting explosion and fire severely burned both workers, and eventually proved fatal for both men.

Just two months later, while the CSB was still conducting an investigation into the first incident, another flash fire occurred on March 29th when a maintenance worker used a hammer while reconnecting a gas line on the side of one of the plant’s furnaces. When he struck the side of the furnace with the hammer it lofted accumulated iron dust into the air, which then ignited, severely burning him, and causing him to fall from elevated working position further injuring him. According to CSB officials, “the build up of so much iron dust near a furnace with open flames and hot surfaces was a recipe for disaster. A fire was basically inevitable the moment the dust was dispersed into the air.”

March 29, 2011 Combustible dust fire in Gallatin, Te Hoeganaes powdered metals plant. The second of two serious dust fires/explosions in six months at the plant

Even with two such incidents within two months of each other, Hoeganaes management and its parent company still failed to take action to address the combustible dust safety issues at the Gallatin, Tennessee plant.

This failure proved to be catastrophic as just a few months later on May 27th when the an even deadlier third incident took place. Workers were repairing a corroded furnace pipe containing extremely flammable hydrogen gas caught fire when workers used a forklift to raise a metal floorplate to access the pipe. Workers has assumed the leaking gas was non-flammable nitrogen. After the initial explosion, the leaking gas continued to burn as a continues jet fire. The force of the initial explosion shook loose largeamounts of accumulated iron dust from overhead rafters. As the large plumes of iron dust fell they were ignited by the jet fire causing massive explosions further injuring workers and damaging the plant. One worker stated that so much iron dust was lofted into air, that even with a flashlight he was only able to see two to three feet in front of him as he tried to escape.

The aftermath of the third Hoeganaes combustible dust explosion in 2011. Notice the dislodged metal floor grating.

Evidence of Danger Present Well Before

All of these incidents were easily preventable. However plant management refused to take appropriate action to improve dust collection at the plant.

Even before the series of incidents, the plant had twice tested its dusts for combustibility. They ever were warned of the potential for a dust explosion after an insurance audit, which cited the potential for a such an accident due to the plant’s poor dust collection system policies, and housekeeping.

In addition to these warnings, the plant had firsthand knowledge of the combustibility hazards present in the plant, when on several occasions flash fires had occurred when workers performed maintenance using welding torches on dust covered conveyor belts. In fact the Gallatin Fire Department Hoeganaes facility in the last 12 years. These included one in June of 1999 where an iron dust fire in the baghouse lead to the hospitalization of one worker for smoke inhalation.

The CSB found that part of the core problem was that the plant, which was built over thirty years ago, was not designed according to good practice guidelines for combustible dust hazards, such as those set forth by the NFPA (National Fire Protection Association). “During its decades of operation, [the plant] was never redesigned to address the serious dust hazards” states CSB investigator Johnnie Banks.

Accumulated combustible iron dust on rafters at the Hoeganaes plant lead to several deaths when a series of dust fires and explosions occurred in 2011.

The plant has numerous flat elevated surfaces that easily accumulate large amounts of dust, and are difficult or impossible to clean with regularity. NFPA 484, which covers combustible metals safety, recommends that “floors elevated platforms, and gratings be designed to prevent dust accumulations and facilitate cleaning.” The same standard also requires that any machinery that emits combustible dust be connected to a dust collection system. Both of these recommendations were not followed by the Hoeganaes plant.

Many have asked how is it that these accidents were allowed to happen, even when plant management had all of these warnings and was in clear violation of best industry standards?

The city of Gallatin requires industrial facilities, including the Hoeganaes plant, to comply with the International Fire Code, which includes a brief chapter on combustible dust standards and references the more detailed NFPA standards. However the code does not require compliance with the more stringent NFPA standards. As a result the plant was not directly in violation of the International Fire Code that it was mandated to follow.

CSB Recommendations Based On Its Investigation

As a result of the CSB investigation, the CSB has proposed several actions be taken to reduce the risk of more combustible dust incidents from occurring elsewhere.

First, the CSB recommended that the International Code Counsel “revise the International Fire Code to mandate compliance with the combustible dust safety standards set forth by the NFPA.”

Secondly, in its 2006 report on the dangers of combustible dust hazards in industry, the CSB recommended that OSHA (Occupational Health and Safety Administration) issue a comprehensive combustible dust safety standard for general industry. As a result in 2007 OSHA instituted a national emphasis program for combustible dust, with the stated goal of eventually issuing a comprehensive combustible dust standard in the near future. In 2009 OSHA announced that it would begin the rule making process for combustible dust hazards. However, in 2011 at the time of these accidents, no standard had yet been proposed, or completed.

As a result, in its final report on the incidents, the CSB recommended that OSHA issue its long awaited combustible dust standards “within one year”, and that the standard include combustible iron and steel powders. In the meantime, the CSB recommended that plants that manufacture steel and iron powders be included in the national emphasis program. for combustible dust.

What This Means For Facilities With Combustible Dust Hazards

The continued loss of life due to combustible dust hazards is no longer being ignored by the CSB, OSHA, or other governmental agencies. The only way to prevent the loss of additional lives is for industry to begin following best industry standards as set forth by the NFPA and eventually the comprehensive standard by OSHA.

In the meantime, plant mangers and operators can educate themselves on the dangers of combustible dusts by reviewing educational articles on the subject such as those published here on Baghouse.com (http://www.baghouse.com/2011/01/19/the-potential-for-dust-explosions-in-dust-collection-systems/). They can also seek the assistance of experts in the dust collection industry to identify areas where improvement can be made, and make suggestions of ways to increase dust collection efficiency at their facilities.

For more information about the dangers of combustible dusts, please see the following links:

The CSB video reports on the Hoeganes incidents:

The following LinkedIn groups work specifically to raise awareness of combustible dust hazards, and lobby for comprehensive standards for general industry:

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1184577&goback=%2Egmp_1184577

http://www.linkedin.com/groupRegistration?gid=2076996&csrfToken=ajax%3A2562522142432018780&goback=%2Eanb_2076996_*2

China To Start Using PM 2.5 Standard In Air Quality Measurements

dominickdalsanto — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 19:10:16 +0000

Next year the Chinese government will update its method of measuring particulate pollution (dust pollution). However these figures will not be released to the public until “an appropriate time” according to the government.

December 30th, 2011 Baghouse.com News | After years of being derided for its views on air pollution by international and domestic environmentalists, as well as its own people, the Chinese government has conceded to change the way it measures particulate matter pollution (the amount of dust particle pollution in the air) to a stricter standard known as PM 2.5.

The PM 2.5 standard, which is used by most industrialized countries including the U.S. and the E.U., measures airbourne dust particles that are 2.5 microns in size or larger. Currently, China uses the older PM 10 standard that only measures particles larger than 10 microns in size.

Research has shown that the smaller particles are the ones that pose the greatest danger to humans, since their small size allows them to penetrate deep into the lungs.

Particulate matter is generated in many ways, the largest of which are from automobile exhaust and heavy industrial sites.

In the U.S. large industrial sources of PM 2.85 such as coal-fired power plants are required to install and maintain dust collection systems such as baghouses to capture dust pollution before it escapes into the atmosphere.

China, ever the target of environmental criticism, has regularly been attacked by environmental NGOs, as well as foreign governments for allegedly underreporting its air quality situation. The difference is highlighted in its capital of Beijing by the stark contrast between the official government reports, and the regular readings taken by the U.S. embassy which, it then publishes daily on Twitter. The official government air quality reports are consistently orders of magnitude lower than the readings issued by the U.S. embassy. At times the government reports the air pollution as being only “slight” while the U.S. embassy reports readings of “very hazardous” or “beyond index” on the same day. Needless to say, this is somewhat of a sore spot between the two countries, one that might see improvement once the Chinese government adopts the new measurement standards.

Is Changing To The PM 2.5 Standard The First Step?

While the change to PM 2.5 is encouraging, it alone does not signal a new environmental resolve on behalf of the government. The new measurement system will only be used in large cities, and then the entire country starting in 2015 stated Environment Minister Zhou Shengxian in state owned the People’s Daily. The environmental ministry claims the timeframe is required to prepare for new equipment and personnel.

So while this step is encouraging, and does signal a acknowledgment of the complaints of residents and environmental activists alike, until China adopts stricter air pollution control policies, and pushes for the adoption of pollution control equipment such as dust collection systems in its factories, the amount of particulate pollution in China, no matter how its measured, will continue to adversely affect the lives of all who reside there.

EPA Issues Revised Boiler & Incinerator Rules After Extensive Public Input

dominickdalsanto — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 20:34:14 +0000

The EPA has issued proposed revisions to emissions standards for boilers and solid waste incinerators. These new rules once finalized will lead to increased demand for dust collection systems throughout industry.

December 23, 2011 Baghouse.com News – The Environmental Protection Agency proposed several revisions to its emissions standards for boilers and solid waste incinerators. The EPA rules set emissions limits for several different hazardous air pollutants, including mercury, particulate matter 2.5 (PM2.5) dioxins, cadmium, nitrogen dioxide and lead among others.

The rules, The Air Toxics Standards For Industrial Commercial and Institutional Boilers (Major and Source Facilities) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Emissions Guidelines (EG) for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (CISWI), were originally proposed back in March 2011. The reason for the revisions according to the EPA was to address concerns raised by the public, and owners/operators during the public comment period. According to the EPA the proposed changes will still result in significant reductions in most pollutants, and even larger reductions in some, while limiting the financial burden from implementation as much as possible.

The revised rules will require only a small percentage of the total boilers in the U.S. to install pollution control equipment such as dust collection systems. The vast majority (86%) of boilers will not be covered by the rules at all, others (13%) will only be required to perform regular maintenance, and tune-ups to stay in compliance (also termed “workplace practices”). The remaining less than 1% of boilers are responsible for the vast majority of air pollution in this sector. They are mainly found in chemical processing, oil refineries, and other heavy industries. By retooling the rules to focus only on the largest emitters, the EPA hopes to improve flexibility in reaching compliance for smaller institutions.

The new regulations will result in over 8,100 premature deaths, 5,100 heart attacks, and 52,000 asthma attacks being avoided each year starting by 2015. The EPA estimates that for every $1 spent complying with these new regulations, the public will see $12 to $30 in health benefits. These results will be realized by reducing emission levels of compounds like mercury and lead, which are proven to cause developmental problems in young children and nervous system damage in adults and children, as well as by reducing particulate matter i.e. dust pollution, which is a severe asthma aggravator.

Existing major source boilers will have three years to come into compliance with the new regulations, with an additional year if needed technologies cannot be installed by then. CISWI units will have five years to comply.

The estimated annualized cost of the rule, as amended based on the reconsideration proposal, would be $1.49 billion, compared with $1.40 billion for the final rule. The estimated annualized cost would increase by about $90 million due to the addition of approximately 300 affected units to the revised inventory of units. This is the case even with a decrease in the stringency of some emission limits and less stringent PM control requirements for biomass units in the proposal.

Different Regulations For “Area Source” and “Major Source” Boilers

Boilers which only produce small amounts of air pollution are classified as “area source” boilers, and are mainly found in places like churches, hospitals, and commercial buildings. The majority of these burn natural gas (1.3 million), as such they are not covered by this rule. The remaining 187,000 area source burners that do not use natural gas would be covered by the new rules, of these only approximately 2% would have emissions limits, the other 98% would only need to follow workplace practices to stay in compliance.

Boilers that create large amounts of air pollution are classified as “major source” boilers. Of these approximately 14,00 boilers, most of which are found at heavy industrial sites such as refineries, and chemical processing plants, an estimated 88% (about 12,300) would only need to follow best work place practices, while the remaining 12% (about 1,750) will be required to reduce emissions, as well as increased monitoring, and record keeping.

Revisions Based On Public Comments

After allowing several months for public and industry comments regarding the original proposal, the EPA has included several of these suggestions into its revised proposal. Many of these are in response to claims that the original proposal was to restrictive in requiring the same standards across many different types of boilers in many different locations, applications, and that use different fuel sources. Among the proposed changes to make compliance easier, and fairer are the following:

Major Source Boilers:

Subcategories for different types of light and heavy liquid fuels

To reflect the real world differences in operating standards and requirements between the fuels

Different limits for PM 2.5 for different fuels

Different limits for boilers using biomass, coal, etc.

Revised limits for carbon monoxide

Subsequent studies have been provided that show that CO emissions vary greatly between boilers, and one universal limit is not practical

Allow for a alternative total selective metals emissions limit for select air toxics

To ease compliance costs, and improve flexibility

Remove dioxin limits and replace with work place practice requirements

Based on subsequent analysis showing dioxin levels in boilers are often well below accurately detectible levels

Increased flexibility in compliance monitoring requirements

Allow for monitoring from stack or continuous monitoring, and remove continuous monitoring requirement for biomass boilers

Remove emissions limits for units outside continental United States

To deal with unique operating circumstances and requirements for these units

Allow “clean gas” boilers to continue to be exempt from new standards

To improve flexibility and ease of compliance

Area Source Boilers:

Alter Initial tuneup schedule

Change compliance timeframe to two years, instead of one, create new categories of boilers and increase overall flexibility in compliance requirements

Alter tuneup schedule/requirements for seasonal units

Change from every other year to every five years for these infrequently employed units

Revisions To Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (CISWI) Standards

A CISWI unit is any device that is used to burn solid waste at a commercial or industrial facility. Examples of CISWI units include incinirators used to burn solid waste (i.e. garbage), energy recovery units designed to recover heat that combust solid waste; and kilns designed to manufacture products and also combust solid waste.

The revised CISWI standards provide for stricter emissions limits on nine major air pollutants regulated by the EPA (mercury, PM 2.5, lead, etc.). In addition, the new standards provide for new definitions of what exactly qualifies as solid waste, hazardous waste, etc. Many of the revisions for the new standards requested increased clarification in these areas. The subsequently revised standards have increased clarification on what materials are categorized as, allow for certain “non-hazardous secondary materials” to not be classified as solid waste when used as a fuel (e.g. certain wood products that are used as part of biomass fuel sources) and allow for plant operators to request the EPA to clarify, and reclassify certain materials based on site specific considerations.

The EPA estimates that, for some units, it would be more cost-effective to use an alternative disposal option. If those units use alternative disposal options, and the remainder use add-on controls, the total nationwide cost would be approximately $270 million. If all 95 CISWI units currently in operation use add-on controls, the total nationwide cost for complying with the rule, as amended, would be approximately $284 million per year.

What This Means For The Future

The EPA believes these newly revised standards will provide both added health benefits, and environmental protection while still not creating an unbearable burden for operators. “With this action, EPA is applying the right standards to the right boilers,” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. “Gathering the latest and best real-world information is leading to practical, affordable air pollution safeguards that will provide the vital and overdue health protection that Americans deserve.”

WIth these new standards set to take effect in the near future, dust collection systems, baghouses, baghouse filters, etc. will be in high demand as many existing plants require extensive upgrades in order to reach compliance. In addition to these standards, the EPA’s newly issued mercury rule will also in many technologies (such as activated carbon injection) require upgrades to existing dust collection systems, or at minimum investments in more efficient baghouse filters or system tuneups.

High Dust Pollution Lands New Delhi Worst Air of World Capitals

dominickdalsanto — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:06:16 +0000

With increasing industrialization outpacing investment in pollution control technology (such as newer dust collector filter technology) and pollution control regulations , New Delhi has now replaced Beijing as the national capital city with the worst air quality in the world.

Concentrations of particulate matter pollution (dust pollution) in New Delhi, India on Monday reached dangerously high levels, with levels of particulate matter 2.5 (PM 2.5) over 10 times the level deemed "Very Unhealthy" by the EPA. Levels this high in the US are considered a public health emergency, with warnings for elderly ones, infirm, and children to avoid exposure by going outside.

November 25, 2011 | Baghouse.com – The 16 million inhabitants of New Delhi, India on a normal day can raise their eyes to look over their beautiful city, only to have it obscured by a think layer of smog and haze that hangs over the city. With a rapidly industrializing economy, increasing numbers of cars on its roads, and extensive construction taking place within its borders, the city’s air quality has become so polluted that it is now classified from hazardous to so severe that a public health emergency needs to be declared.

According to measurements taken by US and Indian governmental agencies, the AQI (Air Quality Index) for Particulate Matter 2.5 was over 300 on Monday. According to US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) anything 201 on the scale, which rates pollution concentrations on a scale of 0 to 500, is termed “very unhealthy” and should be considered dangerous for older persons, and children to be outside. In India the levels found on Monday of over 300 are currently classified only as “very poor” as opposed to “hazardous” by the standards of most other countries.

The main troublesome pollutant in the city (and throughout the country) is PM 2.5, a term for small dust particles that measure less than 2.5 microns in size. These particles have been proven to have a detrimental effect on the health of those exposed to them, due to their ability to penetrate deep into the lungs. Depending on the exact source material (coal-fired power plants, metals, plastics, chemicals, etc.) a myriad of illnesses such as cancers, asthma, brain and neurological damage can result.

At a time when the United States, and most other developed countries are tightening clean air regulations and mandating large investments in newer pollution control technologies such as newer PTFE membrane dust collector filter technology, countries like China and India are making only minimal investments in such areas.

With lower environmental clean air standards than other industrialized nations, China and India both are suffering the effects. Most nations enforce tough regulations for PM 2.5, requiring extensive pollution control equipment known as dust collection systems to be installed and maintained at most facilities that generate even small amounts of dust pollution. A common dust collection system, known as a baghouse, works by passing the dirty exhaust (or dirty air collected from various points throughout the facility) through a series of fabric dust collector filters that capture the dust particles down to the sub-micron level. The now dust free air is then exhausted into the atmosphere.

On average Beijing, China has the worst air quality of any national capital in the world. Recently, this dubious honor is being challenged by New Delhi, India. Both cities' air quality problems such as smog, and haze are due to excessive dust pollution from increasing industrial presence, and limited dust control regulations, little to no regulatory process, and insufficient investment in dust collection systems i.e. Baghouses.

Until recently, China’s capital of Beijing held the dubious title of world’s most polluted capital, with regular pm 2.5 concentrations in the hazardous range. Monday marks the first time that Beijing has been surpassed by New Delhi in AQI levels. However, unlike India, which publishes figures for PM2.5 regularly, and whose numbers are trusted by most international sources, China still measures its air quality on the outdated PM 10 (particles 10 microns in size) standard, and their reported levels are often questions by locals and others alike. This has lead the US embassy in Beijing to install a monitoring station on the roof of ht embassy. It maintains a Twitter feed with its readings (which are PM 2.5) for the public to view.

Whether or not the famously polluted air in Beijing is only going to earn the city the number 2 spot on the list, or if this is merely a one time occurrence will depend upon the resolve of these respective cities’/nations’ to take the necessary steps to improve air quality.

About The Author

3 Cheap Ways to Increase Efficiency in Dust Collection Systems

dominickdalsanto — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:42:46 +0000

Dust collection systems are often overlooked when it comes to plant improvements due to the often high capital costs involved. We here at Baghouse.com have prepared this small list of improvements that can be made to your dust collection system with minimal investment.

October 26th 2011 | Baghouse.com – Corporate executives are looking for any conceivable way to lower operating costs in our struggling economy, plant operators are being pushed by the corporate brass to find someway of doing more with less, and maintenance managers are trying to make sure all of these cutbacks do not compromise process operation. One area that many industrial plants can easily increase efficiency, and therefore lower operating costs is to look to their pulse jet baghouse dust collection systems.

Here are three small tweaks for your pulse jet dust collection system to increase operating efficiency without a major overhaul or great expense.

1. Ensure Filter Bags Are Installed Correctly
2. Install a Clean-On-Demand System
3. Integrate All System Controls (Clean-on-Demand, timer boards, manometers, etc.)

1. Correctly Install Filter Bags

Filter Bags are the heart and soul of a baghouse. If they are not installed correctly the entire system will suffer, efficiency will go down, filters will fail prematurely, system downtime will ensue and affect the entire process. Check that filters with flanges and cuff are folded over and smooth and not wrinkled around the cage to prevent leakage, and premature failure due to bag abrasion. Bottom-loading filters should be installed with seams 180° from the cage collar gap.

An example of how a snapband filter bag should be installed to maximize your dust collection system efficiency.

Additionally, there are several specific issues to watch out for depending on the exact design of filter bags being used. For snapband construction, check that the seams are set properly in the tubesheet. This can be done running your fingers along the edge of each bag during installation/maintenance checking that each one is smooth, with no wrinkles, gaps, or binds in the snapband. For designs with gaskets or rubber o-rings make sure these are not pinched by the clamps in a way that will allow leaks, or cause accelerated wear.

Additionally, with all bag types, all seams should be at a 45° angle from the aisle to minimize fraying due to increased can velocity, all clamps should be set 90° from the seams, and all filters need to be set properly in the cage groves.*

*Additional Tip: Have everything as uniform (clamps, seams, etc. all set in the same direction) as possible to make it easier to diagnose and remedy problems.

2. Clean-On-Demand System

Manually having a technician initiate the cleaning cycle for your dust collection systems can consume a large amount of time, and lead to less than desirable results such as over/under cleaning, operating at higher differential pressure (raising system resistance, and fan load), and lower collection efficiency. Simplify the process and remove the need to be a industrial filtration expert out of the equation by installing a clean-on-demand system.

Using a clean-on-demand timer board for your baghouse will simplify the cleaning process, and result in more effective cleaning of your dust collection system.

These systems are comprised of a differential pressure gauge, and a control board. The DP gauge monitors the difference in pressure between the clean-air and dirty-air sections of the baghouse (thus giving you the pressure drop over the filters at any given time). DP gauge is connected to the control board, which has a high and low pressure setting which serve as the start and stop markers for the system. When the DP in the baghouse rises past your high setting (indicating the bags need to be cleaned), the controller starts the pulse-jet cleaning cycle, once the pressure reaches the preset low, the pulse-jet system is disengaged.

For a relatively small capital investment clean-on-demand systems can dramatically improve your system efficiency by ensuring the minimum amount of cleaning cycles necessary are initiated, which in turn leads to lower compressed air usage, lower operating differential pressures, and less filter wear. These benefits will lower system operating maintenance costs, while seeing improvement in collection efficiency, and extended filter bag life.

3. Integrate Dust Collection System Controls

Maintaining the correct amount of dustcake on your filters is essential to achieve the maximum collection potential of your filter bags. In fact it is the dustcake itself that does the filtering in a baghouse, not the filter bags! * When the pulse-jet cleaning system engages, it removes the excess dust from the filter surface. Essentially what this does is rearrange the dustcake on the filters, removing a portion of it, and leaving behind the minimum amount needed to reform the dustcake for optimum efficiency. When cleaning cycles are carried out, if each row is pulsed one after another in sequential order, high internal air velocities between the filters (can velocity) can cause the recently dislodged dust to be redeposited on the recently cleaned bags in the previous rows. Since the dust is carried at higher than normal velocities, it can penetrate the fabric (instead of settling on top and forming part of the dustcake) and embed itself therein. This will eventually lead to filter blinding, and a reduction of filter service life.

Installing a sequential controller can help you avoid this problem. This device controls the order in which the bags are cleaned, staggering the cleaning pulse pattern between non-adjacent rows. For example, in a baghouse with 10 rows of bags, you can set the cleaning pattern to first clean rows 1,4,7,10 then 2,5,8, and finally, 3,6,9. You can also set the controller to only fire when the pressure in the compressed air header is at full, providing a consistent pulse force that will properly clean the bags every time. Additionally, to further promote longer filter life, see that each pulse duration is set as short as possible, generally around 0.1 sec.

If you do not currently have a DP clean-on-demand system, an alternative is to use a timer control to regulate system cleaning. When using a timer board setup, it is vital to set the intervals to match your system parameters, ensuring that the filters are neither over, or under cleaned. Maintaining a sufficient level of dustcake is vital to achieving a high system efficiency.

Finally, it is possible to integrate all of these different systems into one unified control panel for operator convenience. You can have all of your controllers relayed to a central LED controller, which then is connected to an external PLC controller or computer for remote monitoring, and recording of all system activity. From here it is then possible to configure all control parameters e.g. timer settings, clean-on-demand DP points, pulse-jet firing order, etc. Additionally, having all operating data in one convenient location will allow for quickly pinpointing problems before they become major issues.

*This does not apply to filter bags with membrane such as ePTFE. In that case, the membrane itself acts as a sort of permeant filter cake while surface dust provides no additional filtering.

Save Money By Increasing Dust Collection System Efficiency

These three tips are just a few of the many ways to increase the operating efficiency of your baghouse dust collection systems with only limited investment of time, material, and capital. Without a doubt, these improvements will pay for themselves many times over throughout the life of the system. At a time when new environmental regulations are requiring pollution control equipment to function at higher and higher efficiencies, not only will turing your attention to improving your dust collection systems lower your operating expenses, but it will also ensure that facilities stay in compliance and avoid costly fines and forced closures.

Dominick DalSanto is an Author & Environmental Technologies Expert, specializing in dust collection systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com, but also on other industry related blogs and sites. He is currently serving as Online Marketing Director & Content Manager at Baghouse.com. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs. Born in San Bernardino County California, raised in Chicago Illinois, he currently resides in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

California Recycling Plant Fined Millions For Lacking Baghouse

dominickdalsanto — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:17:35 +0000

October 17, 2011, Baghouse.com News – A California recycling company has been accessed millions in fines by the EPA for failing to install and maintain baghouses at several of its plants. SA Recycling LLC was primarily fined for failure to repair/reinstall a baghouse dust collector at its Terminal Island, California, plant after a dust explosion there destroyed the original collector in 2007. The company continued to operate the facility, which includes industrial smelters used to recycle metals such as steel, aluminum, and lead from junkyard cars, without a baghouse after the 2007 explosion.

Upon further investigation, the EPA ordered the company to install additional baghouses and other air pollution controls at several of its locations throughout California. All together the settlement will cost the company over $3 million, $2.9 million to upgrade the various facilities, and over $690,000 for fines and other costs.

For more information, see the article here: http://eponline.com/Blogs/Environmental-Protection-Blog/2011/10/Air-Pollution-Control-Technology-or-EPA-Fines-You-Decide.aspx

5 Baghouse Safety Precautions

dominickdalsanto — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:59:02 +0000

Performing any kind of work on a baghouse can be hazardous work. Often set in industrial locations, dealing with baghouse systems can present a number of dangers to personnel. Thankfully, these maintenance tasks can be accomplished safety if proper safety precautions are followed.

A new article authored by Baghouse.com that has been published on a leading environmental and safety magazine EHSToday.com that offers 5 often overlooked baghouse safety proceedures for performing any type of work on dust collection systems. You can read the article here: 5 Essential Baghouse Maintenance Safety Precautions I encourage all of our readers to take a moment and read this article and consider how well are you doing regarding baghouse safety.

Direct URL: http://ehstoday.com/industrial_hygiene/news/baghouse-safety-precautions/