university of texas at austin - michigan technological university - rowan university - us epa 1...
TRANSCRIPT
Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of the Fayette Power
ProjectUniversity of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological
University - Rowan University - US EPA
Topic 1. Introduction to Environmental Issues
Green Chemical Engineering Workshops
University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
David R. Shonnard
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Presentation Outline
Pedagogical Approach - how to teach environmental issues to chemical engineering students
Introduce environmental issues and establish linkages to chemical manufacturing activities
Present environmental data trends over time
Model environmental processes and compare to data trends
Relate chemical properties to environmental impacts
Discuss implications for environmental issues / problems
Discuss potential solutions to minimize impacts
Assign outside reading to students in key areas
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Educational goals and topics
be introduced to major environmental issues related to chemical processing
understand the contribution of the chemical industry to these environmental issues
Faculty will:
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Potential uses of the module in
chemical engineering courses
Freshman Engineering: Introduction to issues regarding environment / society / industry
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Scope of environmental impacts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
U.S. energy flows, 1997
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
U.S. industry manufacturing
SIC Code 1015 BTUs/yr
29 Petroleum/Coal Products 6.34
Numbers represent roughly the % of US annual energy consumption
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Global warming and related impacts
Chemical
Processing
Energy
Materials
Products
greenhouse
http://www.snre.umich.edu/nppc/
Climate Change 1995, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, WMO and UNEP, Cambridge University Press, 1996.
climate change;
Pie NOx
Pie SO2
Pie GHGs
CO2
CH4
O3
N2O
50
20
17
8
5
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Homework problem - emphasizing
chemical engineering concepts
S = 1,300 W/m2
A = average Albedo = .30, e = emissivity of the surface = 0.97
S = Stefan-Boltzman Constant = 5.67x10-8 Watts/( m2K4)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Homework Problem - Emphasizing
Chemical Engineering Concepts
Irradiance In = Irradiance Out
absorptivity for IR = 0.80
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Possible adverse effects of
Melting of glaciers / polar ice and sea level rise
Increased incidence of diseases such as malaria due to warmer temperatures
Changing climate and altered weather patterns
Disruption of land use due to droughts
Migration of human populations
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Discuss potential solutions to
Increase energy efficiency of chemical production and electricity generation (cogeneration)
Reduce fossil fuels usage (increase gas mileage for vehicles, more insulation for homes, etc.)
Utilize renewable energy resources to a greater extent such as biomass, solar, hydroelectric, wind, ..
Capture and sequester CO2 from combustion gas streams
Create chemicals with lower global warming potential
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion (cont.)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion (cont.)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance: Atmosphere
response to CFC phase-out
2. Annual CFC production is emitted to atmosphere (assumed)
yCFC = mole fraction of CFC in the troposphere
ECFC (t) = emission rate of CFC (g/yr) = ECFC eat (AFEAS web site)
MCFC = molecular weight of CFC (g/mole)
mATM = atmosphere content (1.5x1020 moles) (Wallace/Hobbs, 1977, pg6)
t = CFC residence time in the troposphere (yr)
yCFC,o = mole fraction of CFC in 1988 (Figure 1.4.3)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance model prediction
CFC-11. ECFCo = 3.14x1011 g/yr, a = 0.1796 yr-1, MCFC = 137.4 g/mole
CFC-12. ECFCo = 3.93x1011 g/yr, a = 0.1250 yr-1, MCFC = 120.9 g/mole
ppt = yCFC x 1012
10-Jun-98
CFC-11
Year
0
2.50E-10
4.50E-10
1988
250.00
450.00
0.1
2.51E-10
4.52E-10
1988.1
251.09
451.78
0.2
2.52E-10
4.54E-10
1988.2
252.16
453.53
0.3
2.53E-10
4.55E-10
1988.3
253.19
455.25
0.4
2.54E-10
4.57E-10
1988.4
254.20
456.94
0.5
2.55E-10
4.59E-10
1988.5
255.18
458.61
0.6
2.56E-10
4.60E-10
1988.6
256.13
460.24
0.7
2.57E-10
4.62E-10
1988.7
257.06
461.86
0.8
2.58E-10
4.63E-10
1988.8
257.96
463.44
0.9
2.59E-10
4.65E-10
1988.9
258.84
465.00
1
2.60E-10
4.67E-10
1989
259.69
466.54
1.1
2.61E-10
4.68E-10
1989.1
260.52
468.05
1.2
2.61E-10
4.70E-10
1989.2
261.33
469.54
1.3
2.62E-10
4.71E-10
1989.3
262.11
471.00
1.4
2.63E-10
4.72E-10
1989.4
262.87
472.43
1.5
2.64E-10
4.74E-10
1989.5
263.60
473.85
1.6
2.64E-10
4.75E-10
1989.6
264.31
475.23
1.7
2.65E-10
4.77E-10
1989.7
265.01
476.60
1.8
2.66E-10
4.78E-10
1989.8
265.68
477.94
1.9
2.66E-10
4.79E-10
1989.9
266.33
479.26
2
2.67E-10
4.81E-10
1990
266.96
480.56
2.1
2.68E-10
4.82E-10
1990.1
267.56
481.84
2.2
2.68E-10
4.83E-10
1990.2
268.15
483.09
2.3
2.69E-10
4.84E-10
1990.3
268.72
484.32
2.4
2.69E-10
4.86E-10
1990.4
269.27
485.53
2.5
2.70E-10
4.87E-10
1990.5
269.81
486.72
2.6
2.70E-10
4.88E-10
1990.6
270.32
487.89
2.7
2.71E-10
4.89E-10
1990.7
270.82
489.04
2.8
2.71E-10
4.90E-10
1990.8
271.29
490.17
2.9
2.72E-10
4.91E-10
1990.9
271.75
491.27
3
2.72E-10
4.92E-10
1991
272.20
492.36
3.1
2.73E-10
4.93E-10
1991.1
272.62
493.43
3.2
2.73E-10
4.94E-10
1991.2
273.03
494.48
3.3
2.73E-10
4.96E-10
1991.3
273.43
495.51
3.4
2.74E-10
4.97E-10
1991.4
273.81
496.52
3.5
2.74E-10
4.98E-10
1991.5
274.17
497.52
3.6
2.75E-10
4.98E-10
1991.6
274.52
498.49
3.7
2.75E-10
4.99E-10
1991.7
274.85
499.45
3.8
2.75E-10
5.00E-10
1991.8
275.17
500.39
3.9
2.75E-10
5.01E-10
1991.9
275.48
501.31
4
2.76E-10
5.02E-10
1992
275.77
502.21
4.1
2.76E-10
5.03E-10
1992.1
276.04
503.10
4.2
2.76E-10
5.04E-10
1992.2
276.30
503.97
4.3
2.77E-10
5.05E-10
1992.3
276.55
504.82
4.4
2.77E-10
5.06E-10
1992.4
276.79
505.66
4.5
2.77E-10
5.06E-10
1992.5
277.01
506.48
4.6
2.77E-10
5.07E-10
1992.6
277.22
507.28
4.7
2.77E-10
5.08E-10
1992.7
277.42
508.07
4.8
2.78E-10
5.09E-10
1992.8
277.61
508.84
4.9
2.78E-10
5.10E-10
1992.9
277.79
509.60
5
2.78E-10
5.10E-10
1993
277.95
510.34
5.1
2.78E-10
5.11E-10
1993.1
278.10
511.07
5.2
2.78E-10
5.12E-10
1993.2
278.24
511.78
5.3
2.78E-10
5.12E-10
1993.3
278.37
512.47
5.4
2.78E-10
5.13E-10
1993.4
278.49
513.16
5.5
2.79E-10
5.14E-10
1993.5
278.60
513.83
5.6
2.79E-10
5.14E-10
1993.6
278.70
514.48
5.7
2.79E-10
5.15E-10
1993.7
278.78
515.12
5.8
2.79E-10
5.16E-10
1993.8
278.86
515.75
5.9
2.79E-10
5.16E-10
1993.9
278.93
516.36
6
2.79E-10
5.17E-10
1994
278.99
516.96
6.1
2.79E-10
5.18E-10
1994.1
279.04
517.54
6.2
2.79E-10
5.18E-10
1994.2
279.08
518.11
6.3
2.79E-10
5.19E-10
1994.3
279.11
518.67
6.4
2.79E-10
5.19E-10
1994.4
279.13
519.22
6.5
2.79E-10
5.20E-10
1994.5
279.14
519.76
6.6
2.79E-10
5.20E-10
1994.6
279.15
520.28
6.7
2.79E-10
5.21E-10
1994.7
279.14
520.79
6.8
2.79E-10
5.21E-10
1994.8
279.13
521.28
6.9
2.79E-10
5.22E-10
1994.9
279.11
521.77
7
2.79E-10
5.22E-10
1995
279.08
522.24
7.1
2.79E-10
5.23E-10
1995.1
279.05
522.71
7.2
2.79E-10
5.23E-10
1995.2
279.00
523.16
7.3
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.3
278.95
523.59
7.4
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.4
278.89
524.02
7.5
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.5
278.83
524.44
7.6
2.79E-10
5.25E-10
1995.6
278.76
524.84
7.7
2.79E-10
5.25E-10
1995.7
278.68
525.24
7.8
2.79E-10
5.26E-10
1995.8
278.59
525.62
7.9
2.79E-10
5.26E-10
1995.9
278.50
526.00
8
2.78E-10
5.26E-10
1996
278.40
526.36
8.1
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.1
278.30
526.71
8.2
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.2
278.19
527.06
8.3
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.3
278.07
527.39
8.4
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.4
277.95
527.71
8.5
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.5
277.82
528.03
8.6
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.6
277.68
528.33
8.7
2.78E-10
5.29E-10
1996.7
277.54
528.62
8.8
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1996.8
277.40
528.91
8.9
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1996.9
277.24
529.19
9
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1997
277.09
529.45
9.1
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.1
276.93
529.71
9.2
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.2
276.76
529.96
9.3
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.3
276.59
530.20
9.4
2.76E-10
5.30E-10
1997.4
276.41
530.43
9.5
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.5
276.23
530.65
9.6
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.6
276.04
530.87
9.7
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.7
275.85
531.07
9.8
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.8
275.66
531.27
9.9
2.75E-10
5.31E-10
1997.9
275.46
531.46
10
2.75E-10
5.32E-10
1998
275.25
531.64
yCFC = mole fraction of CFC in the troposphere ECFC (t) = emission rate of CFC (g/yr) = ECFCo eat (AFEAS web site) MCFC = molecular weight of CFC (g/mole) mATM = atmosphere content (1.5x1020 moles) (Wallace/Hobbs, 1977, pg6) t = CFC residence time in the troposphere (yr) yCFC,o = mole fraction of CFC in 1988 (Figure 1.4.3)
Sheet2
Sheet3
MBD00834C69.unknown
MBD00371042.unknown
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance model: Conclusions
Conclusions
Mole balance model captures the main trends in the data from Figure 1.4.4
Assumption of well-mixed atmosphere is good
Model predicts peak concentrations well
Shorter residence time for CFC-11 (60 yr) caused its peak to occur earlier than CFC-12 (residence time = 120 yr)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Effects of chemical properties on
ozone depletion (Chapter 5)
Summary of Environmental Properties/Behavior
CFCs, HCFCs, Halons partition to atmosphere nearly 100%
Water solubility (v. low), Sorption to natural organic matter (v. low), vapor pressure and Henry’s constant (v. high)
Persistence in the atmosphere is v. high (v. small hydroxyl radical (•OH) rate constant)
Reactivity increases with addition of Hydrogen to molecule, e.g. HCFCs
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Smog formation and related impacts
Chemical
Processing
Energy
Materials
Products
5 - Solvent Utilization, 6 - Storage & Transportation
7 - Waste Disposal & Recycling
VOCs
NOx
1997
1997
National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1997, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, http://www.epa.gov/oar/aqtrnd97/chapter2.pdf
Fuel Combustion
Industrial Processes
Pie NOx
Sheet1
Pie NOx
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Acid rain / Acid deposition
Cause and Effect Chain
National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1997, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, http://www.epa.gov/oar/aqtrnd97/chapter2.pdf
SO2
Pie NOx
Pie SO2
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Human health toxicity
Hazardous Waste Generated by US Industry (1986 data).
Chemical / Allied Products
Transport-ation 5%
Hazardous Waste Generated by US Industry (1986 data).
Chemical / Allied Products
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Hazardous Waste
Management Options
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Ecology Concepts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Ecological
Impacts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Short written report from external reading
(1-2 page memorandum from students)
Potential Environmental Topics Information Sources
Global Warming Scientific/Eng. Journals
Acidification Environmental Progress
Toxic Chemicals in Commerce
Superfund Sites Clean-up US Environmental Protection Agency
Pollution Prevention Technologies State Environmental Quality Office
Endocrine Disruptors
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Presentation Summary
Pedagogical Approach - how to teach environmental issues to chemical engineering students
Introduce environmental issues and establish linkages to chemical manufacturing activities
Present environmental data trends over time
Model environmental processes and compare to data trends
Relate chemical properties to environmental impacts
Discuss implications for environmental issues / problems
Discuss potential solutions to minimize impacts
Assign outside reading to students in key areas
Topic 1. Introduction to Environmental Issues
Green Chemical Engineering Workshops
University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
David R. Shonnard
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Presentation Outline
Pedagogical Approach - how to teach environmental issues to chemical engineering students
Introduce environmental issues and establish linkages to chemical manufacturing activities
Present environmental data trends over time
Model environmental processes and compare to data trends
Relate chemical properties to environmental impacts
Discuss implications for environmental issues / problems
Discuss potential solutions to minimize impacts
Assign outside reading to students in key areas
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Educational goals and topics
be introduced to major environmental issues related to chemical processing
understand the contribution of the chemical industry to these environmental issues
Faculty will:
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Potential uses of the module in
chemical engineering courses
Freshman Engineering: Introduction to issues regarding environment / society / industry
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Scope of environmental impacts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
U.S. energy flows, 1997
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
U.S. industry manufacturing
SIC Code 1015 BTUs/yr
29 Petroleum/Coal Products 6.34
Numbers represent roughly the % of US annual energy consumption
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Global warming and related impacts
Chemical
Processing
Energy
Materials
Products
greenhouse
http://www.snre.umich.edu/nppc/
Climate Change 1995, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, WMO and UNEP, Cambridge University Press, 1996.
climate change;
Pie NOx
Pie SO2
Pie GHGs
CO2
CH4
O3
N2O
50
20
17
8
5
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Homework problem - emphasizing
chemical engineering concepts
S = 1,300 W/m2
A = average Albedo = .30, e = emissivity of the surface = 0.97
S = Stefan-Boltzman Constant = 5.67x10-8 Watts/( m2K4)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Homework Problem - Emphasizing
Chemical Engineering Concepts
Irradiance In = Irradiance Out
absorptivity for IR = 0.80
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Possible adverse effects of
Melting of glaciers / polar ice and sea level rise
Increased incidence of diseases such as malaria due to warmer temperatures
Changing climate and altered weather patterns
Disruption of land use due to droughts
Migration of human populations
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Discuss potential solutions to
Increase energy efficiency of chemical production and electricity generation (cogeneration)
Reduce fossil fuels usage (increase gas mileage for vehicles, more insulation for homes, etc.)
Utilize renewable energy resources to a greater extent such as biomass, solar, hydroelectric, wind, ..
Capture and sequester CO2 from combustion gas streams
Create chemicals with lower global warming potential
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion (cont.)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Stratospheric ozone depletion (cont.)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance: Atmosphere
response to CFC phase-out
2. Annual CFC production is emitted to atmosphere (assumed)
yCFC = mole fraction of CFC in the troposphere
ECFC (t) = emission rate of CFC (g/yr) = ECFC eat (AFEAS web site)
MCFC = molecular weight of CFC (g/mole)
mATM = atmosphere content (1.5x1020 moles) (Wallace/Hobbs, 1977, pg6)
t = CFC residence time in the troposphere (yr)
yCFC,o = mole fraction of CFC in 1988 (Figure 1.4.3)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance model prediction
CFC-11. ECFCo = 3.14x1011 g/yr, a = 0.1796 yr-1, MCFC = 137.4 g/mole
CFC-12. ECFCo = 3.93x1011 g/yr, a = 0.1250 yr-1, MCFC = 120.9 g/mole
ppt = yCFC x 1012
10-Jun-98
CFC-11
Year
0
2.50E-10
4.50E-10
1988
250.00
450.00
0.1
2.51E-10
4.52E-10
1988.1
251.09
451.78
0.2
2.52E-10
4.54E-10
1988.2
252.16
453.53
0.3
2.53E-10
4.55E-10
1988.3
253.19
455.25
0.4
2.54E-10
4.57E-10
1988.4
254.20
456.94
0.5
2.55E-10
4.59E-10
1988.5
255.18
458.61
0.6
2.56E-10
4.60E-10
1988.6
256.13
460.24
0.7
2.57E-10
4.62E-10
1988.7
257.06
461.86
0.8
2.58E-10
4.63E-10
1988.8
257.96
463.44
0.9
2.59E-10
4.65E-10
1988.9
258.84
465.00
1
2.60E-10
4.67E-10
1989
259.69
466.54
1.1
2.61E-10
4.68E-10
1989.1
260.52
468.05
1.2
2.61E-10
4.70E-10
1989.2
261.33
469.54
1.3
2.62E-10
4.71E-10
1989.3
262.11
471.00
1.4
2.63E-10
4.72E-10
1989.4
262.87
472.43
1.5
2.64E-10
4.74E-10
1989.5
263.60
473.85
1.6
2.64E-10
4.75E-10
1989.6
264.31
475.23
1.7
2.65E-10
4.77E-10
1989.7
265.01
476.60
1.8
2.66E-10
4.78E-10
1989.8
265.68
477.94
1.9
2.66E-10
4.79E-10
1989.9
266.33
479.26
2
2.67E-10
4.81E-10
1990
266.96
480.56
2.1
2.68E-10
4.82E-10
1990.1
267.56
481.84
2.2
2.68E-10
4.83E-10
1990.2
268.15
483.09
2.3
2.69E-10
4.84E-10
1990.3
268.72
484.32
2.4
2.69E-10
4.86E-10
1990.4
269.27
485.53
2.5
2.70E-10
4.87E-10
1990.5
269.81
486.72
2.6
2.70E-10
4.88E-10
1990.6
270.32
487.89
2.7
2.71E-10
4.89E-10
1990.7
270.82
489.04
2.8
2.71E-10
4.90E-10
1990.8
271.29
490.17
2.9
2.72E-10
4.91E-10
1990.9
271.75
491.27
3
2.72E-10
4.92E-10
1991
272.20
492.36
3.1
2.73E-10
4.93E-10
1991.1
272.62
493.43
3.2
2.73E-10
4.94E-10
1991.2
273.03
494.48
3.3
2.73E-10
4.96E-10
1991.3
273.43
495.51
3.4
2.74E-10
4.97E-10
1991.4
273.81
496.52
3.5
2.74E-10
4.98E-10
1991.5
274.17
497.52
3.6
2.75E-10
4.98E-10
1991.6
274.52
498.49
3.7
2.75E-10
4.99E-10
1991.7
274.85
499.45
3.8
2.75E-10
5.00E-10
1991.8
275.17
500.39
3.9
2.75E-10
5.01E-10
1991.9
275.48
501.31
4
2.76E-10
5.02E-10
1992
275.77
502.21
4.1
2.76E-10
5.03E-10
1992.1
276.04
503.10
4.2
2.76E-10
5.04E-10
1992.2
276.30
503.97
4.3
2.77E-10
5.05E-10
1992.3
276.55
504.82
4.4
2.77E-10
5.06E-10
1992.4
276.79
505.66
4.5
2.77E-10
5.06E-10
1992.5
277.01
506.48
4.6
2.77E-10
5.07E-10
1992.6
277.22
507.28
4.7
2.77E-10
5.08E-10
1992.7
277.42
508.07
4.8
2.78E-10
5.09E-10
1992.8
277.61
508.84
4.9
2.78E-10
5.10E-10
1992.9
277.79
509.60
5
2.78E-10
5.10E-10
1993
277.95
510.34
5.1
2.78E-10
5.11E-10
1993.1
278.10
511.07
5.2
2.78E-10
5.12E-10
1993.2
278.24
511.78
5.3
2.78E-10
5.12E-10
1993.3
278.37
512.47
5.4
2.78E-10
5.13E-10
1993.4
278.49
513.16
5.5
2.79E-10
5.14E-10
1993.5
278.60
513.83
5.6
2.79E-10
5.14E-10
1993.6
278.70
514.48
5.7
2.79E-10
5.15E-10
1993.7
278.78
515.12
5.8
2.79E-10
5.16E-10
1993.8
278.86
515.75
5.9
2.79E-10
5.16E-10
1993.9
278.93
516.36
6
2.79E-10
5.17E-10
1994
278.99
516.96
6.1
2.79E-10
5.18E-10
1994.1
279.04
517.54
6.2
2.79E-10
5.18E-10
1994.2
279.08
518.11
6.3
2.79E-10
5.19E-10
1994.3
279.11
518.67
6.4
2.79E-10
5.19E-10
1994.4
279.13
519.22
6.5
2.79E-10
5.20E-10
1994.5
279.14
519.76
6.6
2.79E-10
5.20E-10
1994.6
279.15
520.28
6.7
2.79E-10
5.21E-10
1994.7
279.14
520.79
6.8
2.79E-10
5.21E-10
1994.8
279.13
521.28
6.9
2.79E-10
5.22E-10
1994.9
279.11
521.77
7
2.79E-10
5.22E-10
1995
279.08
522.24
7.1
2.79E-10
5.23E-10
1995.1
279.05
522.71
7.2
2.79E-10
5.23E-10
1995.2
279.00
523.16
7.3
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.3
278.95
523.59
7.4
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.4
278.89
524.02
7.5
2.79E-10
5.24E-10
1995.5
278.83
524.44
7.6
2.79E-10
5.25E-10
1995.6
278.76
524.84
7.7
2.79E-10
5.25E-10
1995.7
278.68
525.24
7.8
2.79E-10
5.26E-10
1995.8
278.59
525.62
7.9
2.79E-10
5.26E-10
1995.9
278.50
526.00
8
2.78E-10
5.26E-10
1996
278.40
526.36
8.1
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.1
278.30
526.71
8.2
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.2
278.19
527.06
8.3
2.78E-10
5.27E-10
1996.3
278.07
527.39
8.4
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.4
277.95
527.71
8.5
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.5
277.82
528.03
8.6
2.78E-10
5.28E-10
1996.6
277.68
528.33
8.7
2.78E-10
5.29E-10
1996.7
277.54
528.62
8.8
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1996.8
277.40
528.91
8.9
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1996.9
277.24
529.19
9
2.77E-10
5.29E-10
1997
277.09
529.45
9.1
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.1
276.93
529.71
9.2
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.2
276.76
529.96
9.3
2.77E-10
5.30E-10
1997.3
276.59
530.20
9.4
2.76E-10
5.30E-10
1997.4
276.41
530.43
9.5
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.5
276.23
530.65
9.6
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.6
276.04
530.87
9.7
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.7
275.85
531.07
9.8
2.76E-10
5.31E-10
1997.8
275.66
531.27
9.9
2.75E-10
5.31E-10
1997.9
275.46
531.46
10
2.75E-10
5.32E-10
1998
275.25
531.64
yCFC = mole fraction of CFC in the troposphere ECFC (t) = emission rate of CFC (g/yr) = ECFCo eat (AFEAS web site) MCFC = molecular weight of CFC (g/mole) mATM = atmosphere content (1.5x1020 moles) (Wallace/Hobbs, 1977, pg6) t = CFC residence time in the troposphere (yr) yCFC,o = mole fraction of CFC in 1988 (Figure 1.4.3)
Sheet2
Sheet3
MBD00834C69.unknown
MBD00371042.unknown
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
CFC mole balance model: Conclusions
Conclusions
Mole balance model captures the main trends in the data from Figure 1.4.4
Assumption of well-mixed atmosphere is good
Model predicts peak concentrations well
Shorter residence time for CFC-11 (60 yr) caused its peak to occur earlier than CFC-12 (residence time = 120 yr)
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Effects of chemical properties on
ozone depletion (Chapter 5)
Summary of Environmental Properties/Behavior
CFCs, HCFCs, Halons partition to atmosphere nearly 100%
Water solubility (v. low), Sorption to natural organic matter (v. low), vapor pressure and Henry’s constant (v. high)
Persistence in the atmosphere is v. high (v. small hydroxyl radical (•OH) rate constant)
Reactivity increases with addition of Hydrogen to molecule, e.g. HCFCs
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Smog formation and related impacts
Chemical
Processing
Energy
Materials
Products
5 - Solvent Utilization, 6 - Storage & Transportation
7 - Waste Disposal & Recycling
VOCs
NOx
1997
1997
National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1997, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, http://www.epa.gov/oar/aqtrnd97/chapter2.pdf
Fuel Combustion
Industrial Processes
Pie NOx
Sheet1
Pie NOx
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Acid rain / Acid deposition
Cause and Effect Chain
National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1997, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, http://www.epa.gov/oar/aqtrnd97/chapter2.pdf
SO2
Pie NOx
Pie SO2
Sheet1
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Human health toxicity
Hazardous Waste Generated by US Industry (1986 data).
Chemical / Allied Products
Transport-ation 5%
Hazardous Waste Generated by US Industry (1986 data).
Chemical / Allied Products
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Hazardous Waste
Management Options
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Ecology Concepts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Ecological
Impacts
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Short written report from external reading
(1-2 page memorandum from students)
Potential Environmental Topics Information Sources
Global Warming Scientific/Eng. Journals
Acidification Environmental Progress
Toxic Chemicals in Commerce
Superfund Sites Clean-up US Environmental Protection Agency
Pollution Prevention Technologies State Environmental Quality Office
Endocrine Disruptors
University of Texas at Austin - Michigan Technological University - Rowan University - US EPA
Presentation Summary
Pedagogical Approach - how to teach environmental issues to chemical engineering students
Introduce environmental issues and establish linkages to chemical manufacturing activities
Present environmental data trends over time
Model environmental processes and compare to data trends
Relate chemical properties to environmental impacts
Discuss implications for environmental issues / problems
Discuss potential solutions to minimize impacts
Assign outside reading to students in key areas