Anotec - Foundries Overview

ANOTEC PTY LIMITED PO BOX 292 BOTANY NSW 1455 TEL: (02) 9700 1222 FAX: (02) 9700 1771 FREECALL AUSTRALIAWIDE: 1-800-636-877 (1-800-ODOURS)

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY- POLLUTION

Odours - An Overview

1

SECTION 1 – ........................................................................................................... 5 WHO & WHAT ARE ANOTEC? ............................................................................... 5 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6 Odour Control Technologies ..................................................................................... 7 Anotec – Mode of Action........................................................................................... 7 Engineered misting................................................................................................... 9 Testing of Anotec Odour Control............................................................................. 10 SECTION 2 – ......................................................................................................... 11 ODOUR COMPLAINTS? WHAT COMPLAINTS? .................................................. 11 Understanding Odours ........................................................................................... 12 Odour Complaints .................................................................................................. 13 What is a nuisance? ............................................................................................... 14 SECTION 3 – ......................................................................................................... 16 SO, FOUNDRIES POLLUTE, NOW WHAT? .......................................................... 16 Benefits Of Control................................................................................................. 18 Controls on emissions of particulates...................................................................... 18 Controls on emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) ................................. 18 Practical Emission Reduction Measures ................................................................. 19 Assessing the impact of odours .............................................................................. 20 Odour Measurement Methodologies ....................................................................... 20 Process (emission)-based Assessments................................................................. 21 Monitoring and Predictive Modelling Assessments .................................................. 21 Community-based Assessments............................................................................. 21 Assessment based on process emissions ............................................................... 21 Dispersion modelling .............................................................................................. 22 Assessment of Community Exposure...................................................................... 23 Complaint Records................................................................................................. 24 Attitude surveys ..................................................................................................... 25 Extent of an Odour Problem ................................................................................... 25 Identify the sources ................................................................................................ 26 Odour Impact Assessments.................................................................................... 26 Measuring Odours.................................................................................................. 27 Practical Considerations......................................................................................... 27 Subjectivity............................................................................................................. 27 Variability ............................................................................................................... 27 Concentration in ambient air ................................................................................... 27 Use of surrogate substances for monitoring ............................................................ 28 Summary of Odour Measurement Methodologies:................................................... 28 Chemical Techniques............................................................................................. 29 Sensory Techniques............................................................................................... 31 Preventing and Reducing Emissions....................................................................... 33 An Odour Control Strategy ..................................................................................... 33 General considerations........................................................................................... 33

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

2

SECTION 4 – ......................................................................................................... 34 FOUNDRIES – HEY! WHAT GOES ON THERE?................................................... 34 Summary of a foundry’s activities............................................................................ 35 Processes .............................................................................................................. 35 Air Quality Management ......................................................................................... 35 Emission sources ................................................................................................... 36 Mould & Core Preparation ...................................................................................... 37 Casting Moulding or Pouring................................................................................... 37 Casting Practices ................................................................................................... 38 Static Sand Casting................................................................................................ 38 Pipe Casting .......................................................................................................... 38 Roll Casting ........................................................................................................... 38 Knockout & reclamation.......................................................................................... 38 Fettling, dressing or finishing of castings................................................................. 39 Fettling................................................................................................................... 39 SECTION 5 – ......................................................................................................... 40 GIVING FOUNDRIES THE BAT ............................................................................. 40 Fumes evolved from current foundry processes ...................................................... 41 Preparation of cores and moulds ............................................................................ 42 Environmental Impact............................................................................................. 42 BAT for Preparation of cores and moulds................................................................ 42 CASTING, POURING & MOULDING ...................................................................... 43 Environmental Impact............................................................................................. 43 BAT for Casting, pouring & moulding ...................................................................... 43 KNOCK OUT AND RECLAMATION........................................................................ 44 Environmental Impact............................................................................................. 44 BAT for Knockout................................................................................................... 44 SAND RECLAMATION........................................................................................... 45 Environmental Impacts........................................................................................... 45 BAT for sand reclamation ....................................................................................... 45 DRESSING OR FINISHING OF CASTINGS ........................................................... 46 Environmental Impact............................................................................................. 46 BAT for dressing and finishing castings................................................................... 46 WASTE HANDLING ............................................................................................... 47 Environmental Impact............................................................................................. 47 BAT for waste handling .......................................................................................... 47 CONTROL OF POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS TO AIR ............................................ 48 DECOMMISSIONING OR CLOSURE OF A FOUNDRY .......................................... 48 SECTION 6 – ......................................................................................................... 49 SO? FOUNDRIES SMELL – WHERE DOES ANOTEC FIT IN?.............................. 49 Anotec Procedures................................................................................................. 50 ODOUR EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT & ANALYSIS PROCEDURES ................... 50 CASE STUDY: TYCO WATER - QLD .................................................................... 52 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 52

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

3

Background............................................................................................................ 52 Evaluation of the following took place ..................................................................... 52 Validity and Source of Results ................................................................................ 52 TESTING ............................................................................................................... 54 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 55 OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................................... 55 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 56 CALCULATED ODOUR UNITS .............................................................................. 56 FIGURES Figure 1 Tyco Water set up: Anotec Odour Control nozzles..................................... 67 TABLES Table 1. Odour Control Technologies.................................................................. ……7 Table 2 Emissions from foundry processes .............................................................. 41 Table 3 Environmental Impact: Preparation of Cores & Moulds................................. 42 Table 4 Environmental Impact: Casting, pouring & moulding .................................... 43 Table 5 Environmental Impact: Knockout ................................................................. 44 Table 6 Environmental Impact: Sand reclamation..................................................... 45 Table 7 Environmental Impact: Dressing & Finishing castings .................................. 46 Table 8 Environmental Impact: Waste handling........................................................ 47 Table 9 Tyco Water GC/MS results.......................................................................... 58 Table 10 Tyco Water Vs Anotec Treatment removal Efficiency ................................. 58 CHARTS Chart 1 Sum of Concentration levels – Odours Vs Anotec ....................................... 59 Chart 2 : Ethanol Vs Anotec..................................................................................... 60 Chart 3 Acetone Vs Anotec ..................................................................................... 60 Chart 4 Methyl Acetate Vs Anotec ........................................................................... 61 Chart 5 Toluene Vs Anotec..................................................................................... 61 Chart 6 m,p-xylenes Vs Anotec............................................................................... 62 Chart 7 Benzene Vs Anotec..................................................................................... 62

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

4

SECTION 1 – WHO & WHAT ARE ANOTEC?

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

5

Introduction

The product recommended for effective control of fugitive emissions from foundry operations (ferrous & non-ferrous) is Anotec 0307. Anotec 0307 is a scientifically developed technology formulated specifically to control and treat malodours, a range that includes products for cleaning surfaces effectively every time without relying on strong perfumes and harsh chemicals. Anotec is an Australian technology supplied nationally and exported worldwide. Premium quality formulations have been supplied and been available for Industrial, Commercial and Domestic Applications since 1991.

To date, in the absence of an Australian Standard dealing specifically with the method of odour control to be implemented in each industry, Anotec Pty Limited have researched and developed proven methods that will ensure the significant reduction and / or elimination of most volatile organic compounds (VOCs) identified. Anotec Pty Limited deals solely with Odour Issues. This means that Anotec odour control formulations are implemented where chemical analysis has identified the chemical components in a malodorous stream to be present in low concentrations, well within the allowable TLV, but, synergistically constitute an odour nuisance as evidenced by community complaints or via the use of an olfactometer. With reference to the latter, these odours are perceptible but harmless – they tend to be annoying rather than detrimental to the community or the environment. Chemical Issues arise when the emissions exceed the allowable threshold limits and are therefore deemed as a toxic chemical emission. Anotec Pty Limited does not recommend any odour control for Chemical Issues as the treatment required in these cases may involve structural changes to the building, specialist engineering to improve the performance of the existing operation, re-assessment of raw materials used, manufacturing processes etc.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

6

foundry odours

Anotec Pty Ltd are an Environmental Consultant firm (Odours and Sanitation) involved in Odour Testing and Odour Control formulations for optimum Removal Efficiency as well as being committed members of the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand. Validity and effectiveness of our testing and any odour control device has been determined via qualitative and quantitative methods conducted by ANSTO, Environmental Science Program at Lucas Heights and the University of New South Wales respectively.

Of course, there is no such thing as a broad-spectrum odour control product. However, Anotec Pty Limited have researched and

formulated odour control solutions for a wide variety of industries including the commercial and domestic sectors.

Odour Control Technologies The various methods to control odours include those presented in the following table. Selection of control alternatives is very source-and odour-type-specific. Also, the point(s) of effectiveness monitoring, such as stack emission, plant property line, or other locations, should be determined. Odour Control Technologies Method Source control Absorption Adsorption Biological Chemical Condensation Containment Counteraction Dilution Incineration Masking

Process Replace or modify operating systems Capture by water or other fluids Capture by activated carbon Oxidation by micro-organisms Oxidation of odour components Cooling of odorous steam Hold or retain for treatment Diminished in presence of another odour Dispersion below threshold levels Combustion of odour agent Superimpose a fragrance

Table 1. Odour Control Technologies

By combining chemical, counteraction, condensation, adsorption and absorption technologies (not necessarily in that order), Anotec have formulated, developed, scientifically evaluated and successfully marketed the product identified as Anotec 0307. Anotec 0307 and its mode of action are discussed further on in this document.

Anotec – Mode of Action Anotec 0307 is formulated as a hyper-concentrated solution. In the case of odour profiling, Anotec 0307 is used in this form as an additive to treat and control odours in a liquid mix. When treatment calls for atomisation, whether it is for fugitive,

confined or stack emissions, the hyper-concentrate is diluted with water. The water component used is an integral part of the overall performance of the Anotec 0307 formulation.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

7

Initially, when the malodorous molecules comes into contact with the Anotec 0307 droplets, physical adsorption takes place which is caused mainly by electrostatic forces. Therefore adsorbents are characterised first by surface properties such as surface area and polarity. Gas molecules locked up in a solute do not smell. Anotec 0307 as a surfactant induced absorption technology, also incorporating the principles of counteraction and condensation, achieves unprecedented results in the removal of odorous gases from an airstream. Anotec 0307 succeeds by employing engineering and chemistry that works with nature. To further explain, an easily identifiable analogy to describe this principle is well demonstrated by the phenomenon of acid rain where the result of components of sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, for

instance from a power plant, being absorbed into water and falling as rain. Both of these acids are extremely water-soluble. Hydrogen sulphide and many of the other odorous gases produced by sewage treatment are, on the other hand, only slightly so. Anotec 0307 enhances this effect by using the tandem effect of one surfactant on another to achieve what can be termed as a hydrophile-lipophile balance that is not chemically nor pH selective, but is extremely effective in promoting the absorption of many different compounds. It is the opinion of the company that Anotec 0307 alters the solubility of compounds it comes into contact with by having its hydrophilic end in the water and its hydrophobic end in the air. This can increase the absorbency of the water droplets by a factor of approximately 500,000. Immediately the droplets are formed, they can simultaneously absorb acidic, alkaline and neutral odorous gases, effectively locking up the offending odour molecules.

When diluted according to the type of application, Anotec 0307 uses the kinetic laws of matter to trap the gas molecules in two different ways: 1. Energy is transferred from the normally hotter gas phase to the colder droplets when they meet, this reduces their kinetic energy. 2. The laws of mechanics, which apply to the collisions of molecules, indicate that the molecules will have the same kinetic energy, a function of mass and velocity. Therefore, at a particular temperature, a heavy molecule moves more slowly than a light molecule, because, as mass increases velocity decreases. When a VOC or gas pollutant molecule collides with an Anotec 0307 droplet (molecules in a liquid state), it meets a mass millions of times its own, and is absorbed to form a solute.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

8

Engineered misting. Achieving the correct droplet size is fundamental to the efficiency of Anotec 0307. As with other odour control technologies such as scrubbing or an extraction system, to achieve the maximum extraction rate it is extremely important to have the largest practical surface area or interface area in relationship to the mass or volume of the agent. For the same volume there are 216 x 50micron water droplets for one 300micron droplet, and a 600% increase in surface area and efficiency. A litre of water misted at 50 microns produces some 426 million droplets.

malodorous molecule such as Skatoles, which has a strong faecal odour and is found in beetroot with a molecular weight of 131.17, is still very small by comparison. When the gas molecules collide with the Anotec 0307 droplets they are captured and at this stage counteraction and dissociation of the malodour takes place, and at the same time, forming a solute. As the absorbent droplets become saturated, they become denser and drop to the ground where they are degraded by the natural bacteria present.

Multiply this figure by the number of litres per minute times the number of minutes of operation per day and some very large numbers result. Compared with conventional scrubbing techniques, when one appreciates this remarkable increase in physical area available for absorbing gases by correctly engineered misting, it is then easier to understand how, with the further benefit of no back pressure, Anotec 0307 can reduce resource and energy requirements by 90% and do an effective and efficient job.

Anotec commissions the use of specialist engineers involved in developing and manufacturing odour control spray application devices / equipment which are engineered and programmed to deliver the Anotec 0307 in a mist appropriate to a particular problem. Similarly, once chemical fingerprinting results are received, the concentration of the proprietary surfactant blend in the Anotec 0307 formulation is matched to the type and strength of the malodorous gases. It is most effectively delivered at the point of emission.

The mass of the water absorbent is huge in comparison to a gas. Consider the size of malodorous molecules. Hydrogen Sulphide, for example, has an atomic mass of 34.08; this means that it is less than 1,000,000,000th of the size of a 50 micron droplet. Even a very big

There are, however, limitations. A stable gas such as pure methane is not absorbed and, as Anotec 0307 requires water; high temperatures need to be controlled to prevent evaporation.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

9

Tests have revealed that the solute after treatment, although no longer Anotec 0307, is non-toxic and can be emitted to atmosphere where it will fall and biodegrade naturally using bacteria present in the surrounding environment, thus avoiding the costs normally associated with the disposal of spent filters and chemicals.

Testing of Anotec Odour Control Evaluation of the Anotec Odour Control technology has been carried out by numerous organisations such as Australia’s ANSTO Environmental Science Program (ongoing), The University of New South Wales Australia, Odour Science & Engineering USA, Korea Heavy Industries Corp Korea, Dow Corning New Zealand, Samsung Corporation

Korea and Ch2MHill to mention a few. Anotec’s engineers have been continuing throughout the last three years to innovate and develop further application devices for this technology. Once such device is the Cirrus Misting System engineered and manufactured in Australia.

In summary: An important part of the Anotec 0307 is that it has within its formulation the unique ability to alter the properties of the water droplets it is mixed in to absorb, significantly reduce or remove odours in an airstream. This technology is extremely beneficial where extraction, filtering and scrubbing systems are not economically feasible or impossible to apply.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

10

SECTION 2 – ODOUR COMPLAINTS? WHAT COMPLAINTS?

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

11

Understanding Odours Odours, once considered simply an inconvenience to sectors such as the foundry industry, now threaten the survival of some operations. The future clearly demands that operators and producers learn to understand and manage odours more effectively, and better appreciate community concerns. This document serves the purpose of assisting operators, managers and the community in understanding that an issue of such complexity does not subscribe to the one-size-fits-all solution. Resolving odour issues requires creative solutions that are both highly effective as well as equitable. Key to this process is the development of mutual understanding for both operators and neighbours. Anotec’s hope is that the information in this document will promote a broader understanding so that business owners can deal effectively with odours while maintaining profitable and sustainable operations. The rise in odour nuisance complaints has occurred, in part, due to the demand for housing and migration of people into an area that was once predominantly an “industrial zone”. Once there, the residents complain that odours are

more than just annoying. They claim that such odours diminish their comfort, quality of life, and property values. There are practical limits to what producers can do. Some odour is unavoidable in certain foundry related operations. Producers argue that they have as much right to the air as the newcomers, and since they were there first, they should be allowed to continue doing their work in the same fashion. After all, odour was not an issue until the residents (or more of them) began to live near them. Odour problems often arise from a lack of understanding and tolerance from both sides. Differences in the perceptions of odours play a role too. Due to odour detection and evaluation varying among individuals, one person cannot determine whether a smell is offensive for an entire population. A person whose livelihood depends on metal casting and has been working around a certain smell for years may not regard the odour as offensive. It is important to realise that people tend to adjust to smells over time. A person acclimatised to a particular smell doesn't even notice a routine odour while a new resident will become immediately aware of a smell.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

12

Odour Complaints All complaints registered by the general public are dealt with seriously and with the genuine intention of implementing the most effective mitigation program available. Odour complaints are more common when the humidity is high and the air is still or when the prevailing breezes carry odours toward populated areas. When the air is still, odours may flow down slopes much as water does. It has been established during discussions with the consultants on various projects that odours emanating from foundries, including deliveries from trucks and waste disposal of spent sand has lead to complaints. For this reason, site selection and control of a large area surrounding foundry operations to minimise close proximity of downwind neighbours are of utmost importance. Perception of nuisance odours at a given distance from a confinement facility is less common with “normal” foundry operations and approach to this problem needs careful attention. In this early planning stage for deciding upon the best implementation of odour control techniques, it would be pertinent to investigate any set regulations for separation distances as applied to “normal” foundry operations. Odour problems often occur when an existing foundry facility dramatically increases the size of the operation. Perhaps the most difficult situation occurs when a new large-scale foundry operation moves into an area where it had not previously existed. These situations require the highest degree of odour emission control.

Odour problems often arise from a lack of understanding from both sides of the issue

The general community views odours as strictly a nuisance. A foundry worker or trainer however sees odours as an unavoidable consequence of their livelihood. In order to live as neighbours, each side must first acknowledge the other’s point of view. Neighbours need to be more tolerant of the odours from foundries and related activities. However, foundry operators must take decisive action as well. There are ways to limit odours escaping from production operations, and reasonable control measures need to be employed. Addressing this issue requires that operators better understand the generation, behaviour, and management of odours. This document, compiled from many sources, provides an overview of odours and their management in foundry operations. Emphasis is given to providing up to date information on the range of approaches to odour control.

Foundry operators are also given guidance on selecting the most appropriate options for their operations. The ultimate goal is to promote a better understanding of odour generation and control strategies and, in turn, enhance the sustainability of metal casting operations at the industrialresidential interface.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

13

Foundry (ferrous and non-ferrous) odour emissions are becoming a contentious issue in some areas, spurring increased efforts to address the problem. Virtually all administrative initiatives aimed at addressing the problem have been at the state and local level. Upon request, Anotec can supply literature on the section that provides an

overview of current administrative approaches to manage nuisance complaints and examines how the courts have handled odour complaint suits. The section concludes with a recommended method for responding to and resolving foundry odour complaints that has been particularly successful in parts of Australia.

Summary: Odour nuisance from an industrial process may occur as a result of a single odorant or more commonly, particular for metal casting facilities, from the generation of a mixture of odorous compounds. The generation and control of odours is rapidly becoming a key concern for local residents, regulators and developers with regard to the foundry industry.

What is a nuisance? When common law was first developed, an overriding principle was that a landowner had the right to use and enjoy his land as he wished. The concept of nuisance had no legal basis. With time it became obvious that neighbouring landowners might choose incompatible property uses. The use of land by one landowner can clearly conflict with the responsibility not to interfere with another’s right to enjoy his own property. Nuisance laws attempts to solve this conflict with the concept of “reasonableness”. An unreasonable interference with a person’s right to enjoy their property is now legally a nuisance. The rules governing unreasonable interference are similar in most countries. (Sweeten and Levi, 1996). There are two basic types of nuisance lawsuits, a private nuisance claim filed by a single neighbour, or a public nuisance claim filed by a group of people such as the residents of a subdivision. A nuisance lawsuit will not succeed in most jurisdictions unless that complaining party (the plaintiff) can demonstrate one or more of the following (Fershtman, 1999):

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

14

1. The action in question was carried out in a wrongful or unreasonable manner, for example, a legitimate activity in an unsuitable location; 2. The action resulted in substantial harm to the plaintiff or his property; or 3. The action materially impeded the use and enjoyment of the plaintiff’s property.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

15

SECTION 3 – SO, FOUNDRIES POLLUTE, NOW WHAT?

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

16

Many foundry processes result in the generation of significant emissions of particulates and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This document outlines the processes where such pollutants may be emitted, the potential environmental impact of the emissions and suggested BATNEEC (Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Costs) or BAT (Best Available Technology). This document was prepared and intended as a reference guide for foundry operators involved in the preparation or implementation of an Odour Mitigation Program or Environmental Quality System. The importance of preventing and minimising pollution has increased progressively throughout the 20th century. Particulates, including smoke, dust and fume, have always been a major constituent of air pollution, although the control of such pollutants has improved enormously following the imposition of a wide range of regulatory controls on industrial, domestic and traffic sources. The reasons why such pollutants require control are as follows: Particles may be inhaled by people or animals, leading to respiratory and other diseases, and, in some cases, are believed to be responsible for premature deaths. Deposition of particles can interfere with the rate of photosynthesis in plants, and also their rate of gas exchange. Dust deposition can cause local damage and nuisance, including soiling of buildings, abrasion to building fabric, damage to vehicle finishes, and nuisance to people. Volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, are a large class of carbon-containing compounds, which vary in their effects on human health and the environment. They are under considerable scrutiny internationally, and it is understood that work is being coordinated between countries to reduce emission levels. Currently, the main concern about VOC pollution relates to its contribution to the formation of ozone at ground level. Ozone is an aggressive ground level pollutant that is formed by a reaction between VOCs and nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight. In addition, some VOC emissions can cause odour nuisance to the localities around a foundry. The most notorious substance in this respect is the amine used to catalyse phenolic urethane cores. Breakdown products from the casting of moulds made with phenol-based chemical binders have also been implicated in some cases. Other organic compound emissions are of concern due to their toxic effects on humans and animals (eg dioxins) or their contribution to global warming (eg chlorofluorocarbons).

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

17

Benefits Of Control Good control of pollution from foundry processes not only enables companies to comply with legislative requirements, but also:

° ° ° °

prevents nuisance to neighbours improves the internal work atmosphere and reduces risks to worker health minimise the environmental impact of the operations improves the company image.

Controls on emissions of particulates The general requirement is to prevent any releases of persistently visible emissions, where persistent is defined as continuous and/or trailing past the process boundary. Where particulate generation is significant, control of such emissions can only be achieved by capture and abatement. However, where only clean charge materials are melted and the method of melting is electric or gas, some melting operations may not require capture or abatement.

Controls on emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) VOCs are considered to be the source of significant environmental problems, in the past, it was not considered cost-effective to capture or abate the VOCs produced from most foundry processes. One of the main sources in foundries is the casting process, and, in jobbing foundries in particular, containment of such emissions was deemed impractical. Anotec Pty Ltd found that where containment and capture is possible, e.g. at shake-out or cooling, the cost of abatement is reduced significantly as treatment of fugitive emission, although possible, is considered excessive relative to the concentration of VOCs emitted. Emission limits for VOCs have been set for two foundry processes that we are aware of: 1. investment shelling processes and 2. Thermal sand reclamation plants.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

18

Investigations show that the application of a VOC limit to solvent-based investment shelling is deemed appropriate as there are alternative water-based shelling systems available that have been widely adopted within the industry. Most thermal sand reclamation plants are gas-fired, and some VOCs will be emitted as a result of the process of burning off the binder resin. However, provided that the plant is operated correctly, including good temperature control and burner maintenance, emissions should be easily controllable to below 20 mg/ m-3.

Practical Emission Reduction Measures There is usually more than one way of eliminating or reducing emissions of particulates and VOCs, and it does not always have to involve abatement, which is the 'end of pipe' solution. Some alternative 'cleaner technologies' are shown below. Process General Mould coating Investment shelling Melting Calcium silicate ladle additions to steel Magnesium treatment of ductile iron Casting painting

Cleaner technology/method of improved control Good materials management to avoid losses and releases to air Water-based coatings Water-based shelling system Use of clean scrap. Replacement of oil-fired furnaces with gas or electric furnaces Wire injection Use of tundish cover, in-mould treatment or flow through treatment box Water-based coatings

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

19

Assessing the impact of odours The aim of an odour impact assessment should be some or all of the following:

° ° ° ° °

to predict the exposure of sensitive receptors to odour and to apply a test of acceptability in some form. This could relate to new or existing plant to indicate the amount of abatement (or additional abatement) required to look at trends – improvement or worsening performance over a period of time to determine compliance with a Permit condition, and investigating complaints.

Where an existing installation has a history of odour complaints and obvious problems, a detailed odour assessment as part of the odour investigation should be conducted. If odour impact has never been systematically assessed before, the starting point should be a simple walk over survey of the foundry during normal operations. A simple screening assessment should provide a clear indication of whether any potentially significant odour sources exist and whether further more detailed assessment is required. The “worst case” should

also be considered - under what operating conditions are odour emissions worst? Meteorological conditions can also affect odour exposure at receptors and it is useful to walk around beyond the foundry’s boundary under the most adverse conditions - light winds / stable conditions - to see if odour is detectable.

Odour Measurement Methodologies Odour impact methodologies can be broadly classified into two main “types” based upon whether emissions at source can be measured or estimated or, where this information is not available, the effect at receptors has to be assessed:

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

20

Process (emission)-based Assessments Monitoring and Predictive Modelling Assessments: These estimate the “footprint” of effect of the activity by mathematical modelling of actual or estimated/predicted emissions:

° °

Olfactometry: such as The Odour Unit’s Dynamic Olfactometry Mathematical atmospheric dispersion modelling.

Assessments based upon measurements around the source and/or conditions in the community (where measurement of emissions at source is not feasible)

Community-based Assessments: Those that use information collected at the receptor(s), based on the opinions and judgement of those exposed, to estimate the extent of the footprint and the magnitude of the exposure. There are two sub-sets: 1. Assessment of community response

° ° ° ° °

complaint histories (based on past and present experiences) attitude surveys (based on past exposures) population panels (on-going assessment of the current situation) assessing the extent and magnitude of the exposure in the community field judges/panels

2. Odour mapping

Assessment based on process emissions Emissions can be measured or predicted by:

°

collecting and analysing odour samples

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

21

° ° °

using emission factors using mass balance data comparison to a similar operation.

Dispersion modelling Where the odour emission rate from a source is known by measurement, or can be estimated, the odour concentration in the vicinity can be predicted by means of dispersion modelling. A dispersion model attempts to describe the effects of atmospheric turbulence on the emission(s) as they undergo dilution and dispersion in the surrounding environment. Concentration is one of the factors that determine the impact of a given odour on sensitive receptors. The modelling of odour is still a developing field when compared to other pollutants. A range of different models have been used for odour modelling and have a number of common features, but there are differences in the way that data is dealt with between the older Gaussian models and the new generation model such as AUSPLUME. To visualise the extent of odour impact it is useful to produce contour plots showing odour concentrations around the source or highlighting where concentrations exceed the appropriate exposure benchmark which relates to acceptability. In some cases it will not be possible to measure or to predict emissions at the source in any meaningful way. The emission points may not be well defined – for example there may be a number of fugitive release points, or the emission rate may vary a lot from day to day or hour to hour. It is possible to measure the emission from area sources, but only if the surface is homogeneous. In such cases an assessment may be based upon:

°

the reaction of the people exposed to the odour emission

Or, where emissions are not too variable:

°

measurements taken in a pattern around the source odour mapping

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

22

Assessment of Community Exposure There are a number of situations where an assessment of the community exposure or response might be required:

° ° °

to substantiate complaints or identify/confirm a source to provide a correlation between community response and certain processes or activities to determine the extent of the area, the “footprint”, over which an odour problem is occurring.

Assessment of the extent of community exposure can be approached in two ways: 1. by gauging the magnitude of the community response

° ° °

public attitude surveys (based on past exposures) population panels & odour diaries (on-going assessment of current situation). complaint records (which are based on past and current experiences)

2. by assessing the magnitude of the exposure

° °

analysis of ambient air samples using field panel tests or field judges.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

23

Complaint Records Odour complaints are widely used as indicators of the existence of an odour problem and the severity of the problem. However, it is not certain how accurately the number of odour-related complaints accurately reflects the general level of annoyance in the community and how complaints can best be used in support of an investigation. Complaints are a good indicator of an incident such as an accidental release or the sudden onset of a new source of annoyance. The resulting complaints can be used for investigative purposes; to identify the source and to map out the extent of the affected area from which some estimate of the odour emission rate can be made.

Such records do not however provide an ongoing picture of the general underlying level of dissatisfaction, neither is it sufficient to rely on the number of complaints alone to act as an indicator of regulatory compliance. A reduction in the number of complaints can, over a period of time (which will allow meteorological variation to be taken into account), demonstrate that there has been an improvement following changes to a process or installation of abatement equipment. A reduction in complaints may, however, occur because people get used to the odour, or get fed up with lack of improvement and do not bother to report any more.

In order to maximise the benefit of a complaint record, good quality data are essential. Whilst there is no standard methodology for collecting complaint data, it is suggested that the following should be recorded:

° ° ° ° ° ° °

location where odour was detected date time duration (or frequency of recurrence) a description of the odour – what does it smell like weather conditions at the time, particularly wind direction a description of any visible activity occurring at the time.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

24

Where possible it is often useful to not only record odour incidents, but also record odour impact at regular intervals during the day. This is likely to record many occasions of “no odour”, but can provide a very useful data set for identification of sources when analysed along with wind direction data. This is the basis of an “odour diary” as implemented by Anotec Pty Limited. Once odour diaries have been distributed a Freecall number is issued (1800-ODOURS, 1-800 636 877) and all calls are logged. Whilst differentiation may not be an issue, in a locality with a number of potential sources it is helpful to be able to characterise the odour, i.e. “it smells like….”, rather than “it smells horrible”.

Attitude surveys (public opinion surveys) - measuring the degree of

annoyance.

This form of survey involves interviewing on a single occasion a selected sample of the population about their past experiences. Interviews can be conducted in person, by telephone or by questionnaire designed to conceal the primary interest in odour-related annoyance. This form of questioning, together with modelling of odour emissions, forms the basis of the dose-effect studies conducted overseas. The survey must be designed and the results interpreted by specialists to avoid inadvertent bias and to give a representative picture a sufficiently large sample must be recruited. The cost will therefore be relatively high, although it will give an installation-specific confirmation of whether emissions lie within the band of acceptability for that particular population. It must also be remembered that the record will comprise a cumulative perception and individual incidents will probably be lost, as will any variation in the level of annoyance over time. However, if executed effectively it will give a more unbiased picture than if relying on complaints alone.

Extent of an Odour Problem A history of local odour-related complaints will indicate whether offensive odours are detectable beyond the installation boundary. The Operator or regulatory authority could also carry out periodic subjective testing (“sniff testing”) to identify potential problems or to ascertain any pattern to the emissions. Differentiating between odour emissions arising from neighbouring plants is often relatively easy. However where odorous processes are located close together and the nature of emissions is similar more detailed investigation may be required - community-based subjective assessment and comparison with detailed process logs may be indicated.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

25

“Fingerprinting” of a particular odour is a routine procedure at Anotec using gas chromatography mass spectroscopy (GC-MS) whereby individual odorous compounds may be identified from a sample of air collected from a particular source. This is also a useful tool when formulating any odour control solutions. Where the source cannot be clearly identified, or the impact needs to be assessed in more detail, it may be necessary to undertake a more in-depth investigation.

Identify the sources Once a particular activity has been identified as the origin of odorous emissions, specific sources or emission points should be identified. This can often be accomplished by a systematic “walk-around”. Some source(s) may be immediately apparent, but it is important to consider associated release points which may be less obvious - these might be identified by running through process flow diagrams and mass balance data, i.e. considering all inputs and outputs.

Odour Impact Assessments Whilst each assessment will be different and necessarily installationspecific, there are a number of common features which should be covered in a well-planned and executed survey. Unless the assessment is deliberately targeted at specific events only, or at defined parameters, there will be a need to quantify the emissions in a way which accounts for any cyclical variation as well as any seasonal or

day/night changes. The impact, in terms of concentration, of those emissions on receptors will then be predicted by means of dispersion modelling and the outcome interpreted in terms of the likelihood of causing annoyance. It is usual to consider both “normal” operation and also “worst case”. The frequency with which worst case conditions arise is also relevant. In some assessments the odour will be “characterised” in addition to a quantitative assessment.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

26

Measuring Odours Practical Considerations There are a number of factors that set odorous emissions apart from other pollutants in terms of the methods which are available for “measurement” and also the ease of measurement. These include:

Subjectivity Most odours are mixtures of compounds and knowledge of the chemical compounds present in a mixture does not necessarily give an indication of the human response. A subjective view - what it smells like to those who are actually exposed (i.e. what people may actually complain about) - can be obtained by using olfactometry and/or characterising the odour. Anotec strongly recommends the use of this odour measurement technique.

Variability Seasonal variation in the level of annoyance caused by a particular source is fairly common. This may relate to differences in the process or the raw materials, degradation of putrescible materials during hot weather, or it may be simply because local residents are outside when the weather is better or have the windows open in summer. Worst case is therefore a valid consideration – and may be relevant for more than just infrequent odour events; it may occur for a considerable period of time.

Concentration in ambient air The collection of meaningful samples of ambient air (e.g. at an affected area in the community, or at the installation boundary) for assessment by olfactometry is subject to a number of difficulties. The main problem relates to low concentration - generally too low for olfactometry - and so it is not commonly undertaken. Collection of samples for instrumental analysis is sometimes possible but fluctuation in concentration is often rapid and only direct reading instruments can give an indication of the exposure profile. A result that is averaged over a long period is rarely useful as it is the peaks which tend to cause annoyance, even if very transient. This would not normally be undertaken for routine compliance monitoring.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

27

Use of surrogate substances for monitoring In some cases it may be possible to set up continuous or frequent monitoring of surrogates, i.e. a single substance which is representative of the odour characteristics of the emission. Once the relationship is established, there must be a linear response to changes in total odour concentration to enable quantitative information to be obtained. Linearity is rarely maintained across the whole scale such that a near zero value for the surrogate may still leave a strong residual odour (this is often found in the waste water or sewage industry). Sometimes “calibration” values can be established to adjust for systematic nonlinearity.

Summary of Odour Measurement Methodologies: In general terms odour can be “measured” in terms of: Analytical (“chemical”) techniques

° °

Chemical analysis - indirect assessment involving the collection of a sample which, when analysed, will give the concentration of the various chemical species present. This includes wet chemistry, as well as sample collection followed by instrumental analysis by means such as gas chromatography (GC). Direct reading instrumental analysis - provides information on the concentration of specific chemical species or their concentrations relative to each other. This includes portable analysers (including portable GCs and GC-MS) and the “electronic nose”, as well as colorimetric tubes.

Sensory methods (relating to human response):

°

A sensory assessment - which gives an assessment of the physiological response to a particular mixture - strength, quality, characteristics which provides information on the likely population response. This is obtained by exposing trained individuals to samples of the odorous air, either in the laboratory or in the field.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

28

The following considers the techniques discussed and shows the context within which their use might be appropriate: Chemical analysis –

° °

Gas chromatography and GC-MS, Substance-specific wet chemistry methods.

Direct reading instruments -

° ° °

Colorimetric tubes, The “electronic nose”, Portable analysers.

Sensory assessment

° °

Dynamic Olfactometry, Simplified olfactometric screening - “sniff tests”.

Chemical Techniques Chemical and/or instrumental analysis can provide quantitative (giving a numerical concentration value) information on the compounds present. This information may be required for the following reasons:

° ° ° °

to assist in source identification determination of compliance with substance-specific emission limits profiling changes in emissions during a process cycle to assist in identifying where process modifications might be made to set optimum operating parameters for abatement equipment (for example reagent strength, determination of breakthrough or exhaustion point of absorbents or adsorbents).

As discussed, Anotec utilises the services of ANSTO for GC/MS analysis. Gas Chromatography (GC) is a widely used analytical technique for separating the components of an odorous air sample for identification and quantification. The majority of odorous organic species can be identified in this way.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

29

The basic steps are:

° ° ° °

sampling - which may involve pre-concentration of a gaseous sample onto a solid adsorbent or absorption in a reagent thermal desorption or solvent extraction separation of the components by passing through a GC column detection and identification.

There are a variety of detectors available, however the most commonly used for mixtures of organic compounds is the Flame Ionisation Detector (FID). Anotec’s use of a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GC-MS) is more widely used for situations where the emission has an unknown composition and for formulating purposes. Identification of the resulting mass spectrographic pattern is made with reference to a computer based spectrum library, although identification of compounds with similar structures and/or masses can be difficult. Application The GC-MS is used for “fingerprinting”, i.e. to analyse air samples at the complainant’s location in order to ascertain the identity and concentration of the main odorous components. If this information does not allow positive identification of the source from existing knowledge of the activities carried out, then sampling of those potential sources using the same technique can enable a match to be made. Occasionally the odour is found to be a product of more than one source, overlaid on top of each other. The extent of dilution and the need for sampling at receptors to coincide with periods of exposure (particularly if they are brief) can restrict the usefulness of this method. The cost of the instrument and the expertise required for analysis and subsequent evaluation also limit its use as a “quick check” method for everyday use. It can however be useful where there is on-going uncertainty regarding the source and who is responsible. Disadvantages

° ° °

Direct calibration for analysing odours is difficult because the composition mixture will often be unknown. The concentration in ambient air of individual compounds may be below or close to the lower limit of detection. Longer term samples will average out any peaks, although this may be of secondary importance in source/compound identification.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

30

Sensory Techniques It should be noted that although Anotec favour the use of chemical techniques based solely on formulating rather than odour measurement, sensory assessment of odours should not be thought of as less robust or less defensible than chemical analysis. It has a number of advantages. A complex mixture of compounds where identification is difficult, and composition variable, sensory assessment provides the only reliable method of accurately quantifying the “strength” of odour. Sensory assessment provides a measure of the total strength of odour which may be under estimated if just a single component compound is measured. The sensory impact of a mixture of odorants and non-odorants can only rarely be predicted from existing knowledge of its component parts. Sensory data provide a direct link between a particular odour and the human response to it - this is particularly important when considering annoyance issues. The most widely used techniques are:

° °

dynamic dilution olfactometry - “olfactometry” simplified olfactometry - also referred to as “sniff tests”

Sensory assessment of odours can be undertaken at source, close to source or in the community, although increasing dilution and variability make the collection of meaningful samples for lab-based olfactometry progressively more difficult with increasing distance. It is possible however to take the assessment part of the procedure out into the field with perhaps a mobile laboratory or

similar. A simplified form of olfactometry - “Sniff testing” - is a very useful method of assessment that can be undertaken almost anywhere. The data obtained from a lab-based olfactometric assessment will be in the form of an odour concentration – “dilutions to threshold” or “odour units”.

Dynamic Dilution Olfactometry It is Anotec’s opinion that the only reliable form of measuring odour units is by use of Dynamic Olfactometry. Dynamic Olfactometry involves the step-wise dilution of a sample of odorous gas with odour-free air and subsequent presentation to a panel of observers in order to determine the number of dilutions required for odour to be just perceived by 50% of the members of the panel. The most commonly used form of olfactometry is “dynamic dilution olfactometry”.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

31

Sampling Determine the sample locations which best meet the purpose of the investigation. This could entail collection at:

° ° ° ° ° °

specific locations on a process order to identify the point at which a specific odour arises a particular processing step or operation release points - stacks, ducts, vents, surface emitters in a grid pattern across an installation to establish an installation-wide “map” at, or close to, the installation boundary in the community (although the dilution of the sample can be prohibitive).

In certain circumstances emissions from point sources have to be measured from ventilation grilles (typical of general building ventilation) or roof stacks. If this occurs, gas samples are collected from a point as far into the duct as possible to exclude ingress of clean air which would artificially dilute the sample. Samples collected from area (surface) sources usually give a true representation of the emission provided that any variability across the surface is taken into account. The most common surface source requiring odour measurement is a biofilter and when monitoring it is recommended that samples are taken: (a) close to the inlet of the bed (b) along the retaining walls, and (c) at the centre of the bed. At each location a velocity measurement should be made to ensure that there is gas flow. For example, in Singapore and the UK newer biofilters are designed with a cover and release to atmosphere via a stack, where samples can be taken.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

32

Preventing and Reducing Emissions Ideally, or rather realistically, measures for preventing or reducing odour need to be considered on an operation by operation basis. Emphasis should be on:

° ° ° °

good process design or redesign. Utilising “clean technology”, i.e. design the problem out rather than relying on “end-of-pipe” technology to clean up afterwards good operating and management practice backed up by an environmental management system

An Odour Control Strategy An odour control strategy should aim to prevent odour from being generated, but where this is not practicable, the rate of odour generation should be minimised and end-of-pipe abatement considered, as appropriate to the nature of the

gas stream and the source type. Specialist advice should be sought and/or trials undertaken to determine the suitability and efficiency of a particular option prior to committing capital expenditure.

General considerations A reduction in the volume of gas to be treated can reduce abatement costs considerably. For each potential treatment technique consider the nature and strength of the residual odour after treatment - will subsequent dispersion in the atmosphere cause annoyance and will it meet required acceptable limit or EPA condition? Does the chosen technology have the ability to deal with fluctuations in input stream (where appropriate)? Equipment must be appropriately sized - it should be able to deal with existing maximum throughput plus any envisaged expansion, but over-sized plant is a waste of money. A separate document outlining abatement techniques and appropriateness of use in various industries is available upon request.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

33

SECTION 4 –

FOUNDRIES – HEY! WHAT GOES ON THERE?

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

34

Summary of a foundry’s activities

Processes Following are aspects of processes that take place within a foundry (excluding melting and refining) and considered to be “foundry” operations, namely operations that occur after the melt has been tapped from the furnace:

° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °

Storage and handling of raw materials (only those associated with the following foundry operations) launders desulphurisation of molten iron in ladles nodularisation of SG iron in ladles preparation of moulds and cores casting, pouring or moulding knocking out fettling, dressing or finishing of castings sand reclamation waste handling and recycling facilities

Air Quality Management The potential for air pollution is a major problem associated with foundries. Potentially significant pollutants are:

° ° °

particulate matter; nitrogen oxides; carbon oxides;

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

35

° ° ° ° °

iron and its oxides; heavy metals; ammonia; VOCs including formaldehyde, phenols and esters, and Dioxins, where dirty scrap is used

Many of these pollutants are malodorous.

Emission sources. Dust and fume from refining in ladles may include: a) from desulphurisation of molten iron in ladles – magnesium oxide or calcium oxide, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide b) from nodularisation of SG iron in ladles – magnesium oxide (in large quantities). Preparation of moulds and cores gives rise to dust from sand handling and gases from any resin, hardener and catalyst used (the binder system) and their reactions during mixing and curing. The different binder systems give rise to different emissions, but the main types emit two or more of the following gases: ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, sulphur dioxide, methyl diisocyanate, phenol, formaldehyde and a range of other VOCs including amines and esters. Mould and core storage areas may have high concentrations of VOCs such as triethylamine (TEA) and dimethyethylamine (DMA), which exude from the cores. Casting, pouring, moulding and knocking out give rise to emissions relating to the pyrolisation of the moulds. They include all of those mentioned above for the preparation of moulds and cores, as well as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and some PAHs such as cresols and xylenol that are malodorous. Fettling, dressing or finishing give rise to particulate matter and some fume if techniques involving heat are used. In particular, metallic dusts from shot blasting operations are highly aggressive and damaging to paintwork. Sand reclamation gives rise to dust from mechanical reclamation and fume from thermal reclamation. (An aqueous stream is created by wet reclamation techniques.)

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

36

Mould & Core Preparation The most important issues from mould and core preparation and storage are as follows:

° ° ° ° ° ° °

° ° °

Odour; Dust from sand handling; Resin handling; VOC emissions including amines, aldehydes and phenol; Emissions of oxides of carbon; Fume; Leaks of gases being used as a gassing agent in certain mould and core making processes, such as sulphur dioxide; Leaks of gases being used as catalysts, such as triethylamine (TEA) and dimethyethylamine (DMEA). Both gases have unpleasant odours. These gases exude from the cores in storage; Emissions of ammonia arising from the thermal decomposition of hexamethylene tetramine which is a catalyst used in the shell process; Particulate emissions.

Casting Moulding or Pouring Fume generated during casting arises from two sources. Fine iron oxide is generated at the surface of the molten metal as it is poured, and the organic products are expelled from the mould as the resins and binders decompose. The former only occurs as the metal is being poured, whilst smoke and fumes caused by decomposition of the binder will continue to be evolved as the mould cools.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

37

Casting Practices

Static Sand Casting This is the simplest technique whereby the sand moulds are arranged on the shop floor and filled from a ladle. The castings are then left to solidify. It is generally impracticable to have fixed extraction hoods and ductwork in the casting area. In more automated foundries the moulds may be moved by conveyor into the pouring position where local extraction can be employed.

Pipe Casting Pipe casting is carried out by pouring hot metal from a ladle, via a tundish and runner into the rapidly rotating horizontal mould. The metal is forced out on to the inner cooling surface

where it solidifies. The mould is stopped and the casting withdrawn.

Roll Casting This can be carried out centrifugally or statically. In the centrifugal system the vertical mould is placed in a machine and spun at high speed while the hot metal is bottom poured into it. Some time after filling, the mould is lifted from the machine, and is left for several days before stripping. Fume extraction is normal on the machine although not in the cooling pit. In the static system the mould is mounted vertically and bottom poured from the ladle. It remains stationary while it cools and solidifies. Typically no fume extraction is required.

Knockout & reclamation Knocking out or stripping is the practice of removing the casting from the mould. Smaller castings may be removed from the casting box manually or by use of a vibrating table which dislodges the casting from the box and allows any sand to fall through the open surface of the table. Dust from these operations is usually collected and cleaned by bag filters. Large moulds will be broken up and castings removed in-situ, using an overhead crane or bucket excavator. Although large quantities of dust may be generated, local extraction and filtration is impractical. Pipes are removed from their rotary moulds by mechanical means. The sand from the knocking-out area is excavated, normally by mechanical digger and is either recycled or disposed of to landfill. During knockout the mould is broken open and the surface area from which organic compounds may be liberated is significantly increased. Pyrolysis products adsorbed onto the resin coated sand, such as phenols for example, volatilise, and are emitted to the foundry atmosphere. Formaldehyde will be

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

38

present in the knockout section as it exists in the resin binder. Dust is emitted on which organic compounds may be adsorbed.

Fettling, dressing or finishing of castings Fettling After the castings have cooled they are subjected to a number of finishing processes in order to obtain the final finish required for the product. These operations, some of which are referred to as fettling or dressing include:-

° ° ° °

Cleaning by shot blasting or other means to remove core and mould materials and scale. Removal of excess metal such as feeder heads, runner or gating systems and any other superfluous metal. Removal of blemishes and defects. Smoothing over of welded parts, areas from which metal has been cut, and any other rough areas on the surface of the casting, generally is grinding.

Fettling is generally achieved by flame cutting, grinding or chiselling, and usually results in the generation of dust and fume. Small items may be finished by grinding in tumbling drums together with ceramic chips. This is usually carried out in water to which surfactants may be added. In the case of pipes the internal surface is dressed by extending a rotating grinding wheel or burr the full length of the pipe. Another method uses an electric arc to selectively remelt unwanted small areas of the casting.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

39

SECTION 5 – GIVING FOUNDRIES THE BAT

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

40

Fumes evolved from current foundry processes System Name and Binder Constituents

Setting Method

Fumes during Mixing and Setting

Fumes during Casting

Pressure

Dust

Carbon oxides Aromatics (inc polycyclics) Nitro aromatics

Heat

Formaldehyde Ammonia Phenol Aromatics

Carbon oxides Phenols Ammonia Aldehydes Aromatics (inc polycylics)

ALKALI PHENOLIC Alkaline phenol’ Formaldehyde resin Self-Setting, eg. Alphaset

Cold set with esters

Formaldehyde Phenol Esters

Gas hardened eg. Betaset

Gas hardened with methyl formate vapour

Carbon oxides Formaldehyde Phenol Aromatics

PHENOLIC URETHANE Gas hardened eg. Cold box, isocure

Amine vapour

Solvents Isocyanate Amine

Self set with substituted pyridine

Solvents Isocyanates

Cold set with acids

Formaldehyde Phenol Furfuryl alcohol Hydrogen sulphide Sulfur dioxide Acid mists

Heat

Formaldehyde Acids Furfuryl alcohol Phenol

Heat

Acrolein Complex organics

Carbon oxides Butadiene Ketones Acrolein

Gas hardened with CO2 gas

None

Carbon oxides

Cold set with esters

Esters

Carbon oxides Alkanes Acetone Acetic acid Acrolein

GREEN SAND Clay Coal dust or substitute Water SHELL SAND Phenol Formaldehyde (Novalak) Resin

Formaldehyde Phenol Methyl formate

Self Setting

FURANE Combination resins of: Phenol Urea Furfuryl alcohol Formaldehyde

HOT BOX Combination of resins: Phenol Urea Furfuryl alcohol Formaldehyde OIL SAND Linseed oil and starch

CO2 process Sodium silicate SILICATE ESTER Self set Sodium silicate

Carbon oxides Nitrogen oxides Monoisocyanates Formaldehyde Phenol Aromatics Anilines Napthalenes Ammonia Carbon oxides Phenol Formaldehyde Aromatics Sulphur dioxide Ammonia Aniline Carbon oxides Nitrogen oxides Formaldehyde Phenol Aromatics Aniline Ammonia

Table 2 Emissions from foundry processes

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

41

Preparation of cores and moulds Green Sand Method Shell Sand Method Cold Setting Techniques Mould Coating Oil Sand Process Pattern Release & Carriers

Environmental Impact Water Land Air

Not significant Not significant The most important issues from mould and core preparation and storage are as follows: Odour; the sources of which are the gases mentioned below Dust from sand handling Resin handling VOC emissions including amines, aldehydes and phenol; Emissions of oxides of carbon Fume; Leaks of gases being used as a gassing agent in certain mould and core making processes, such as sulphur dioxide; Leaks from gases being used as catalysts, such as triethylamine and dimethylethylamine. Both gases have unpleasant odours. These gases exude from the cores in storage; Emissions of ammonia arising from the thermal decomposition of hexamethylene tetramine which is a catalyst used in the shell process; Particulate emissions. Waste Choice of binder system affects potential for recycling and recovery. Energy Not significant Accidents Mixing and blending problems can impact upon recovery Noise Not significant Table 3 Environmental Impact: Preparation of Cores & Moulds

BAT for Preparation of cores and moulds Minimise consumption of binder chemicals through good process control. Control amine emissions from gasses phenolic urethane systems where necessary for control of odour nuisance, using techniques such as chemical scrubbing, Anotec systems or an effective incineration method.

Where gas-fired heating systems are used (resin shell or oil sand), particular attention should be given to good housekeeping and maintenance of burner systems. Solvent-based mould coatings should be torched off as soon as it is safe to do so after application.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

42

In most cases, scrap moulds and cores should be segregated from other waste to facilitate reclamation. Use of carrier organic solvents for pattern release agents or elsewhere

should be avoided. If avoidance is not possible, non-chlorinated solvents should be employed and the amount used should be minimised.

CASTING, POURING & MOULDING Static Sand Casting Pipe Casting Roll Casting

Environmental Impact Water Land Air Waste Energy Accidents Noise

Not significant Not significant Fume Slag Not significant Not significant Not significant

Table 4 Environmental Impact: Casting, pouring & moulding

BAT for Casting, pouring & moulding For certain types of casting operation, eg. Green sand and automotive casting foundries, and where a relatively large number of similar castings are being manufactured, BT will normally include the use of a fixed pouring station with the moulds moving past on a conveyor belt system. Where possible, moulds should be totally enclosed or fully enclosed casting machines used. This will enable all the casting fume to be extracted efficiently and treated. Where there are significant fumes emitted after pouring then the conveyor should be enclosed and extracted. For large items such as rolls, machine too, beds etc, it may be necessary to carry the hot metal in a ladle to mould in a casting pit or casting bay. Here a movable or extendable extraction hood connected to fixed arrestment plant installed in the most advantageous position to collect casting fume should be considered. Where suction hoods are used, there should be placed as close to the sources of the fume as possible to reduce dilution of the fumes caused by large volumes of air being drawn into the hoods. Suction hoods should not hinder process operations or compromise safety; considerations should be given to push-pull systems to improve efficiency. © Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

43

Part of the improvement programme to update operations should be a quantitative assessment of the emissions so that a further improvement programme can be established to reduce them if possible within the BAT considerations. This is particularly important where an odour problem has occurred.

KNOCK OUT AND RECLAMATION Environmental Impact Water Land Air

Waste Energy Accidents Noise

Not significant Contaminated sand During knockout the mould is broken open and the surface from which organic compounds may be liberated is significantly increased. Pyrolysis products adsorbed onto the resin coated sand, such as phenols for example, volatise, and are emitted to the foundry atmosphere. Formaldehyde will be present in the knock out section as it exists in the resin binder. Dust emitted on which organic compounds may be adsorbed. Contaminated sand Not significant Not significant Many parts of the machine are very noisy and require acoustic shelters for worker protection. Standard noise protection measures should be taken to minimise disturbance in the local neighbourhood.

Table 5 Environmental Impact: Knockout

BAT for Knockout Cooling of the mould before knockout reduces the mass of organic released. Knockout area should be enclosed and connected to arrestment plant. Knockout should not be done by hand. Fixed vacuum cleaning system around the knockout area.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

44

SAND RECLAMATION Environmental Impacts Water Land Air Waste Energy

Accidents Noise

Not significant Contaminated sand, fugitive dust Fume, products of combustion Contaminated sand Afterburners are significant energy users, and temperature settings should be the minimum compatible with acceptable emissions control Not significant Many parts of the machine are very noisy and require acoustic shelters for worker protection. Standard noise protection measures should be taken to minimise disturbance in the local neighbourhood.

Table 6 Environmental Impact: Sand reclamation

BAT for sand reclamation The main control issues are: Use of afterburner by bag filtration of the waste gases when thermal reclamation used; Effective and reliable temperature control systems on the afterburner.

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

45

DRESSING OR FINISHING OF CASTINGS Environmental Impact Water Land Air Waste Energy Accidents Noise

Sludge where wet techniques are used Fugitive dust Dust and fume Collected dust Not significant Not significant Many of these processes are very noisy and require acoustic shelters for worker protection. Standard noise protection measures should be taken to minimise disturbance in the local neighbourhood.

Table 7 Environmental Impact: Dressing & Finishing castings

BAT for dressing and finishing castings Containment and extraction Effective means of detection for filter failure

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

46

WASTE HANDLING The most important issues from waste handling and recycling facilities are as follows: Slag from ladles Collected dust Collected sludge Refractory waste

Environmental Impact Water Land Air Waste Energy Accidents Noise

Not significant Slag, contaminated sand Fume Slag Not significant Not significant Not significant

Table 8 Environmental Impact: Waste handling

BAT for waste handling The main control issues are: Water efficiency techniques should be employed Waste should be recovered

© Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

47

CONTROL OF POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS TO AIR Steam Plume Elimination: Releases from wet scrubber vents should not be hot enough to avoid visible plume formation in the vicinity of the vent. This is to prevent the condensation or adsorption of environmentally harmful substances by the condensing water vapour. Exhaust gases from a wet scrubber can be heated by the use of waste heat to raise the temperature of the exhaust gases and prevent immediate condensation on the exit from the vent. This procedure also aids the thermal buoyancy of the plume.

DECOMMISSIONING OR CLOSURE OF A FOUNDRY A site closure plan should be maintained to demonstrate that, in its current state, the installation can be decommissioned to avoid any pollution risk and return the site of operation to a satisfactory state. The plan should be kept updated as material changes occur. Common sense should be used in the level of detail, since the circumstances at closure will affect the final plans. However, even at an early stage, the closure plan should include:

° ° ° ° ° ° °

either the removal or the flushing out of pipelines and vessels where appropriate and their complete emptying of any potentially harmful contents; plans of all underground pipes and vessels; the method and resource necessary for the clearing of lagoons; the method of ensuring that any on-site landfills can meet the equivalent of surrender conditions; the removal of asbestos or other potentially harmful materials unless agreed that it is reasonable to leave such liabilities to future owners; methods of dismantling buildings and other structures, the protection of surface and groundwater at construction and demolitionsites;

°

testing of the soil to ascertain the degree of any pollution caused by the activities and the need for any remediation to return the site to a satisfactory state as defined by the initial site report. Recommendations for Odour Abatement and Best Available Technologies for the various processes within foundries are available upon request. The data is extensive and all requests must be in writing. © Anotec Pty Limited. COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE

48

SECTION 6 –

SO? FOUNDRIES SMELL – WHERE DOES ANOTEC FIT IN?

49

Included in this document is an example of an assessment and our comments and procedures are outlined therein. It should be noted that all documents submitted are to be treated as confidential and are not for publication. Please use these documents as a reference guide only.

Anotec Procedures Briefly – recommendations prior to any assessment (where applicable): At this stage, we recommend that a visit is arranged so that Anotec personnel can conduct an odour assessment and audit. Anotec strongly recommend that during the course of any scientific analysis that Dynamic Olfactometry is conducted. Experts in this field are The Odour Unit, Mr. Terry Schulz. Assess ventilation and investigate whether air supply into the building is adequate. Collect data relating to odour complaints from residents.

ODOUR EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT & ANALYSIS PROCEDURES

° °

° °

A Site Assessment Survey/Questionnaire is filled in by the enquiring company and returned to Anotec Laboratory Services. A visit to the site is then organised. Anotec personnel will use organoleptic (physical method / smell) methods to determine the hedonic tone of the odour in the first instance to identify the source and type of odour. If odour source and type are determined at this stage a recommendation will be made to the client for treatment or for further investigation. If odours are undetermined, it may be applicable at this time to establish appropriate sampling sites. In some cases photographs of site sampling areas are taken for inclusion in report. In the case of high level odour emissions a collection of gaseous samples is performed. Not less than two samples are collected. Wet Chemistry methods are used to determine preliminary results of specific chemical components (usually the predominant odour perceived) and gas samples are sent to the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation for the breakdown of the gaseous mixture. Analysis takes place well within 24 hours of collection.

50

° °

Once analysis is complete, results are deciphered and recorded by Anotec Pty Ltd technical staff and a draft report is prepared. Upon all results recorded a report is submitted to the enquiring company along with any recommendations.

Informational: The services provided by our company are solely to identify the composition of the odours/gas and to determine the concentrations in the air at that particular time. It is advisable that collection of gas samples be at the “worst” time in the day or night or manufacturing processes. Identification and concentration of odorous components (VOCs) enable Anotec to determine the best possible solution or recommendations. Analysis of the site does not always mean the implementation of odour control equipment. In some cases recommendation for cover or extra housekeeping may curb the problem. Experience with foundry odour emissions have revealed that odour emissions, although within detectable limits are well within acceptable threshold limits for exposure. This means that the odour chemical concentrations identified do not pose a chemical or toxic issue. Therefore, foundry odours, in our experience, constitute an odour nuisance rather than a health issue.

51

CASE STUDY: TYCO WATER - QLD CONFIDENTIAL – NOT FOR PUBLICATION OR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

INTRODUCTION Background Anotec Pty Limited was commissioned to evaluate, identify and treat any malodours being emitted from the Tyco Water Foundry located in QLD using an Anotec odour control formulation.

Evaluation of the following took place: (a) (b) (c) (d)

Perceived odour sources: mould cooling down area and exhaust stack. Chemical odour and concentration of components in raw odour emitted from stack and cooling shed. Effect of product ANOTEC 0307 on malodours emitted. Performance of installed odour control application equipment for product ANOTEC 0307.

Validity and Source of Results All results herein were obtained by Dr David Stone, of the Environmental Science Program at ANSTO Lucas Heights Research Laboratories. Dr Stone is an expert in his field and has extensive experience identifying chemical components within a gaseous mix. 2. 2.1

ODOUR SOURCES EVALUATED

Time started: 10.10am

AREAS OF COLLECTION: COOLING SHED STACK (PART 1) STACK (PART 2) SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM PERCEIVED ODOUR SOURCES 1. RAW ODOUR from Cooling Shed 2. RAW ODOUR from STACK (PART 1) Anotec Fans Turned Off. 3. RAW ODOUR from STACK (PART 2) ANOTEC 0307 Fans Turned On. 52

COMMENTS: Sample collection was performed in exactly the same way in areas of perceived odours. In the case of the cooling shed, the sample was taken from directly above the cooling mould not exceeding 1 metre. The area is enclosed and unaffected by drafts. Each sample bag took approximately three minutes to fill. All samples were taken in duplicate. SAMPLE # 1 SAMPLE # 2 SAMPLE # 3

RAW ODOUR – Cooling Shed STACK (PART 1) – Fans Off STACK (PART 2) – Anotec & Fans On

Sample # 1 – Chemical fingerprinting to show values (ppb) for each constituent within the Raw Odour mix. Sample # 2 – Chemical fingerprinting to show values (ppb) for each constituent within the raw odour mix as it exits the stack. The fans that assist in application of the Anotec odour control solution were turned off. Sample # 3 – Chemical fingerprinting to show values (ppb) for each constituent within the raw odour mix as it mixes with the Anotec odour control solution and exits the stack. The fans were turned on and the Anotec odour control system was operational at the time of sample collection.

3.

APPARATUS & PROCEDURES 3.1. Laboratory Facilities All equipment for sampling were used on site. Air samples were subsequently transported to the ANSTO laboratories at Lucas Heights for chemical analysis well within 24 hours of collection. 3.2. Apparatus and sample collection All samples were collected in proprietary air quality sampling bags constructed of “Tedlar” (Teflon). Sampling line was Teflon. Fittings of sampling drum were stainless steel, brass or PVC. 3.2.1. Samples were not passed through the pump but were collected by using a sampling drum to enclose the bags. Evacuation of ambient air from the drum caused the bags to be filled with the odour samples.

53

3.2.2. A cherry picker was hired for the day to allow sample collection from the exit point of the stack. 3.2.3. The cooling shed is an enclosed area that significantly reduces the dispersion of fugitive emission during the cooling down stage. The cooling shed was chosen as a sampling site as it will represent the highest concentration of chemical constituents emitted during the cooling down stage and prior to further dilution as it travels up the vent stack. 3.3 Evaluation procedure/method 3.3.1 Tyco Water’s Mr. Michael Brown was present and conducted sample collection from the exit point of the stack as it involved climbing into a cherry picker that was raised up to 20 metres in height. A total of six samples (duplicates for each sampling site) were collected and labelled accordingly. (a) (b)

(c)

Sample No. 1 – “Raw Odour”, referred to in the results section as RO, was collected approximately 25 minutes after the pour by holding the sampling line directly above the visible emission. Sample No. 2 – “Stack (Part 1)”, referred to in the results as S1, was collected after checking that the fans and Anotec Odour Control system servicing the stack were switched off. The samples were collected from the exit point of the stack. Sample No. 3 – “Stack (Part 2), herein referred to as S2, was collected once the fans and Anotec odour control system was operational in the same manner described in (c).

3.4 The Tedlar bags took approximately three minutes to fill and there an interval of about six minutes between collection times.

was

TESTING 4.1 Chemical Analysis Testing of all samples was completed well within 24 hours of collection by Dr David Stone of ANSTO. 4.2 The technique of Thermal desorption GC-MS was employed using the most advanced equipment currently available in Australia. 4.3 Table 1 represents the chemical odour concentration level detected for each sampling site. 4.3.1 The first column shows values for each constituent within the raw odour mix.

54

4.3.2 The second column in the table shows the values of each constituent within the raw odour mix as it exits the exhaust stack leading from the cooling shed. The fan in this area was switched off. 4.3.3 The third column in the table shows the value of each constituent within the raw odour mix after it is treated with Anotec 0307, an odour control formulation. 4.3.4 It is self-evident that there was a significant reduction of ppb in the major components of the raw odour after treatment with Anotec 0307. It is also interesting to note that residual Anotec 0307 within the stack also reduced the raw odour concentration levels of odour. 4.3.5 Graph 1 presents the sum of the concentrations of all chemical components identified for each test performed at each sampling site. It also shows the effectiveness of the existing spray system when turned on compared to the system when it is off.

RESULTS 5.1 The results and tables presented herein were comprised by using the data as submitted by Dr David J M Stone, ANSTO. 5.2 Explanation of results The author of this report has endeavoured to be as concise and clear as possible. However, in the event that explanations for any material herewith are required, please direct all queries to Anotec requesting contact details for Dr David Stone of ANSTO, Lucas Heights. 5.2.1 Table 1 presents the averaged results of duplicate chemical analysis for the three odour sources selected, using 3 litre tedlar bags. A small volume of odour, typically 100ml is used in each case. The concentration of each component (in ppb) is displayed for the various conditions at each sampling site.

OBSERVATIONS 6.1

Accuracy All sample collections were performed in exactly the same way. Methods used by Dr Stone to determine chemical components and calculations are reproducible and obtained by using quality precision equipment. The use of odour standards ensures accurate results.

6.2

There is a vast difference in odour concentrations being emitted from the odour sources tested.

6.3

The Cooling Shed results show a high concentration of chemical components ideal for formulating purposes. There is no evidence of a chemical issue in this

55

area. The odour immediately detected, via simple olfactometric means, can be described as “blackcurrant” that quickly changed to an obnoxious “burnt resin” type odour. The results in this set are not indicative of the levels detected outside this area. Due to the enclosure housing the cooling shed there was no evidence to suggest that emissions during cooling were escaping into the adjoining building or outside. 6.4

Stack (Part 1) – Fan Off results show a significant reduction in chemical odour concentration levels. The analysis showed that traces of the Anotec odour control formulation were present in this set of samples. It should be noted that the Anotec product is sprayed within the stack in pre-determined intervals. This is due to the residual effect that the solution has when sprayed into and onto a surface. The results clearly show that although the fans were switched off, the Anotec product was still present within the stack. These results are indicative of what is exiting the stack to atmosphere when the system is turned off for short periods of time.

6.5

Stack (Part 2) – Fan On results also show a significant reduction in chemical odour concentration levels. The results show that when the system is operational odour reduction for this area is at its optimum level.

CONCLUSION 7.1

Based on the testing and subsequent results, we feel that the product ANOTEC 0307 (Tyco Water) would significantly reduce the concentration of odours being emitted from the exhaust stack leading from the cooling shed if used as recommended. According to results in this report, as well as preliminary bench tests performed, ANOTEC 0307 reduces odour concentrations significantly to a point where there is a low calculated olfactometry number.

7.2

Based on the results of this evaluation, it is our opinion that if ANOTEC 0307 is atomised into the exhaust stack and used in the testing throughout for each sample, odour concentrations will be reduced by greater than 80%. Therefore, emissions treated with the Anotec odour control solution will be extremely low in odour concentration and will not transverse the boundary causing an odour nuisance to the general public and/or neighbours.

CALCULATED ODOUR UNITS A calculation of the chemical odour of each component can be produced by dividing the concentration of each chemical by its odour threshold. Odour thresholds were derived from components as determined by Dynamic Olfactometry at the UNSW CWWT and from odour thresholds is determined by J.E. Amoore & E. Hautala (Journal of Applied Toxicology).

56

The summation of this type of data is an approximation and guesstimate only calculating the odour level as would have been determined by Dynamic Olfactometry. These calculations do not negate the need for conducting Dynamic Olfactometry at this site. Unit = chemical odour concentration Odour threshold 7.3

The Tyco Water Plant is a well kept and efficient facility. It is in our opinion, based on the results from our testing, that the odour control device installed to treat odours in the stack is effective in controlling and reducing the malodour. Issues regarding the possible blocking of nozzles should be addressed and the system upgraded accordingly.

7.4

A point to consider: It is in our opinion that the malodour problem experienced from the foundry will be vastly improved if specifications from Anotec Pty Ltd are met. It is also our opinion that in the event that any malodours still perceived and documented via complaints to council or management after the above is in force, may well be coming from other areas within the foundry that were not assessed in this evaluation.

7.5

Anotec 0307 conclusively eliminates or significantly reduces the odour chemical concentration levels of ethanol, acetone, methyl acetate, toluene, m,p-xylenes and benzene, the major sources of odour annoyance.

One of the major reasons that the Anotec Odour Control formulation works at the Tyco Water foundry is directly attributable to Tyco’s excellent Housekeeping Regime and total awareness of emission points around their foundry. This coupled with the low level; non-toxic concentration of odour compounds identified ensures effective odour control of the site. Prior to treatment with Anotec Odour Control, and upon chemical fingerprinting, it was revealed that emissions do not pose a health risk to the community. However, the test results revealed that the emissions analysed posed an odour issue that may have been evidenced by odour complaints from the community. The Anotec Odour Control formulation applied has significantly reduced / or eliminated the odours from that site.

57

Chemical Component (ppb) ethanol i-propanol propanol butanol acetone 2-butanone 3-buten-2-one methylisobutylketone ethylacetate methylacetate benzene methylhexanes toluene ethylbenzene m,p-xylenes o-xylenes hexane

RO 1,829.8 141.4 1.4 184.5 1,165.2 6.1 2.6 1.7 236.5 2,598.8 159.4 33.7 1,553.8 149.9 2,770.8 89.9 4.0

S1 1204.9 51.3 0.2 8.4 84.4 5.1 2.3 0.1 27.7 269.4 14.0 0.3 209.6 76.3 295.8 13.8 3.2

S2 106.2 24.4 0.2 2.6 16.9 0.8 2.1 0.1 7.8 75.6 3.2 0.3 31.3 17.1 85.3 4.1 1.9

Table 9 Tyco Water GC/MS results

RE (RO + S1) 34.15 63.73 83.50 95.46 92.76 17.22 11.54 94.12 88.27 89.63 91.19 99.02 86.51 49.08 89.32 84.65 19.56

RE (S1 & S2) 91.19 52.43 18.18 69.03 80.00 84.25 8.70 94.12 71.83 71.95 77.40 7.59 85.06 77.59 71.18 69.94 40.41

RE (RO + S2) 94.2 82.7 86.5 98.6 98.6 87.0 19.2 94.1 96.7 97.1 98.0 99.1 98.0 88.6 96.9 95.4 52.1

Table 10 Tyco Water Vs Anotec Treatment removal Efficiency

KEY

RO S1 S2 RE

Raw Odour Stack Part 1 – Fan Off Stack Part 2 – Fan On Removal Efficiency %

58

SUM OF CONCENTRATION LEVELS 12,000.0

10,000.0

ppb

8,000.0

TOTAL

6,000.0

4,000.0

2,000.0

0.0 RO

S1

S2

SAMPLES

Chart 1 Sum of Concentration levels – Odours Vs Anotec

59

Major odour contributors: Raw Odour Vs Anotec 0307

ethanol 2,000.0 1,800.0 1,600.0 1,400.0

ppb

1,200.0 1,000.0 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 2 : Ethanol Vs Anotec

acetone 1,400.0

1,200.0

1,000.0

ppb

800.0

600.0

400.0

200.0

0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 3 Acetone Vs Anotec

60

methylacetate 3,000.0

2,500.0

ppb

2,000.0

1,500.0

1,000.0

500.0

0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 4 Methyl Acetate Vs Anotec

toluene 1,800.0 1,600.0 1,400.0 1,200.0

ppb

1,000.0 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 5 Toluene Vs Anotec

61

m,p-xylenes 3,000.0

2,500.0

ppb

2,000.0

1,500.0

1,000.0

500.0

0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 6 m,p-xylenes Vs Anotec

benzene 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0

ppb

100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0

RO

S1

S2

Sampling Site

Chart 7 Benzene Vs Anotec

62

TYCO WATER - RAW ODOUR Vs ANOTEC TREATMENT

2,000.0 1,800.0 1,600.0 1,400.0 1,200.0 ethanol i-propanol propanol butanol

ppb 1,000.0 800.0

acetone

600.0 400.0 200.0 0.0 RO

S1 SAMPLES

S2

Graph 1 Raw Odour Vs Anotec (Set 1)

63

TYCO WATER - RAW ODOUR Vs ANOTEC TREATMENT 3,000.0

2,500.0

2,000.0 2-butanone 3-buten-2-one methylisobutylketone

ppb 1,500.0

ethylacetate methylacetate benzene

1,000.0

500.0

0.0 RO

S1 SAMPLES

S2

Graph 2 Raw Odour Vs Anotec (Set 2)

64

TYCO WATER - RAW ODOUR Vs ANOTEC TREATMENT

3,000.0

2,500.0

2,000.0 methylhexanes toluene

ppb 1,500.0

ethylbenzene m,p-xylenes o-xylenes hexane

1,000.0

500.0

0.0 RO

S1 SAMPLES

S2

Graph 3 Raw Odour Vs Anotec (Set 3)

65

TYCO WATER - RAW ODOUR Vs ANOTEC TREATMENT

3,000.0

2,500.0

2,000.0 ethanol acetone methylacetate toluene m,p-xylenes

ppb 1,500.0

benzene

1,000.0

500.0

0.0 RO

S1 SAMPLES

S2

Graph 4 Raw Odour Vs Anotec (Set 4)

66

Anotec Odour Control Nozzles are introduced into the stack to effectively “scrub” odorous emissions in the vapour phase

Figure 1 Tyco Water set up: Anotec Odour Control nozzles

67

REFERENCES

References Abdelrahman Dr. M., (1999) Integrated Industrial Process Sensing and Control System Applied to and Demonstrated on Cupola Furnaces, Prepared by the Tennessee Technological University for the Sensors and Controls ’99, Information Exchange Meeting, May. Allborg University (1998), The Cosworth Process, Available at: http://www.iprod.auc.dk/procesdb/cosworth/intro/cosworth.htm (Last accessed, August 1999). American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy Home Page (ACEEE, 1999) Making Business Sense of Energy Efficiency and Pollution Prevention, The Integrated Approach: Case Studies Available at: http://www.aceee.org/p2/p2cases.htm#decatur (Last accessed, August 1999). Brown, J (1994), Foseco Foundryman’s Handbook, Tenth Edition, Foseco International Ltd., UK. Cast Metal Coalition (CMC,1998), Metalcasting Industry Technology Roadmap, Sponsored by the CMC or the American Foundrymen’s Society, North America Die Casting Association and Steel Founders’ Society of America, January. Clegg, A., (1991) Precision Casting Processes, Loughborough University of Technology, Leicestershire, UK, Pergamon Press, Oxford. Commonwealth of Australia (CoA, 1985), Australian Ferrous Foundry Industry, Final Report, Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce in association with the Metal Trades Industry Association, October. CRC for Alloy and Solidification Technology (CAST, 1999), Corporate Homepage, http://mama.minmet.uq.edu.au/cast/service.html (Last accessed, August 1999). Dravnieks A, Masurat T, Lamm R A, “Hedonics of Odours and Odour Descriptors”: in Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, July 1984, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp 752-755 Durham M., and T. Grimm (1996) SLS and SLA: Different Technologies for Different Applications, Prepared by Accelerated Technologies, Inc. USA, April. Environment Agency for England and Wales and Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and the Northern Ireland Environment and Heritage Service (EHS). IPPC – Horizontal Guidance for Odour 2001.

Environment Canada (1997) Technical Pollution Prevention Guide for Foundries in the Lower Fraser Basin of British Columbia, Fraser River Action Plan, Prepared by Kent Engineering Ltd. West Vancouver, B.C. for the Environmental Protection Fraser Pollution Abatement Office, North Vancouver, March 1997. Environmental Technology Best Practice Program (ETBPP, 1995b), Foundry greensand: use and reclamation, Guide EG5, prepared by Castings Technology International. Foundry Online (1999). Moulding and Casting Processes, Available at: http://www.implog.com/foundry/foundvpr.htm (Last accessed, August 1999). Foundry Trade Journal (FTJ, 1996b), End-of-pipe abatement or process change? The case of cupola melting, Vol. 170, Number 3514, January, p 34-38. Foundry Trade Journal (FTJ, 1997g), How to reduce the impact of foundry waste arisings, Vol. 171, Number 3531, June, p 242-243. Foundry Trade Journal (FTJ, 1998o), Smoking can seriously damage your wealth, Vol. 172, Number 3549, December, p 443-446 Foundry Trade Journal (FTJ, 1999d), Getting the best from binder systems, Vol. 173, Number 3551, February, p 27-28. Guidance for the Regulation of Odour at Waste Management Facilities under the Waste Management Licensing Regulations, July 2001, Version 2.3 Hurst, S (1996) Metal Casting, Appropriate technology in the small foundry, Intermediate Technology Publications. Knowlton J and Pearce S, “Handbook of Cosmetic Science and Technology”. Leonardos G, Kendall D and Bernard N, “Odour threshold determinations of 53 odorant chemicals” JAPCA Volume 19, No 2, 1969. Queensland Government Environmental Protection Authority (EPA, 1999), Environmental Guideline: Beneficial re-use of ferrous foundry by-products draft guidelines. The Royal Society of Chemistry, “Chemical Safety Data Sheets” Volumes 1 and 5. Turk, “Atmospheric gases and vapors” Annals New York Academy of Sciences.