conversion of calcium sulfite to calcium sulfate. will be able to work better or will be able to

73 Pages·2005·3.14 MB·English

precipitate out so severely in your actual scrub-
--
bing system so there is there are soma reasons
why it worked out better, And one of the main
reasons is in that they get a much more effective
conversion of calcium sulfite to calcium sulfate.
And there you can actually separate out the excess
calcium sulfate quicker and not carry as much in
excess.
Is it therefore your opinion that scrubbers on
low sulfur coal work better than scrubbers on
high sulfur coal?
It appears that the limestone-lime slurry scrubbers
w i l l be able to work better or will be able to
--
work at a greater reliability than a on a low
sulfur coal than a high sulfur coal. You would be
getting into a more problematic operation with the
higher sulfur coal.
MR, FRAWXIEY:
Thank you, that is a l l ,
COMMISSIONER DOWNIE:
May 1 ask a question? Doctor Vickers,
tell me j i I misunderstood you but I understood and I think
in refere me to Item Three of your prepared testhciny and
1 may be rrong on that, in your answer you indicated to me I
1 that it w s totally jmpractical to tq to identifl the
percentag of pollution emitted by individual industries,
4
paper m i l s or power plants or any other.industry?
rn
WIrnSS:
I There are emission studies that have
c been done you know, there have been studies of how much,
how many ounds have been emitted and there are, ycu can
1
E get pies ike they do on the tax dollars how much cf this
5 type indu try is responsible for and how much power genera-
I( tion and 0: forth but these are roughly figure and for any
--
11 specific rea you really have to have the Pollution
Ii Control C ,mission 3: understand has done this emission on
12 le emissi In i n an article and puts out why but to say where
14 it goes a .d who is responsible for what particular damage
1s once it i done, that becomes a problem of allocating it
?E and then dentifying why your paint on the house has to be
17 redone gu cker instead of five years it has to be done every
IE three yea s and who is responsible for it or why. There
1s are a who e bunch of things happening, but high levels of
2c
pollution tends to cause deterioration on paint and other
21
things an it is just hard to pin it on anybody. SQ whoever
22 1 owns the tem that is damaged, pays the cost. Whoever owns I
I
23
1 the plant that is damaged, will pay the cost. They cantt
1
24
i court and prove definitively that someone put
25 go into a
3242
out poll ition that has caused the paint to go bad. It would
be a ver r diEficult job.
COMMISSIONER WWNIE:
Well, assuming, Doctor Vickers, that
you can .denti@ the souxce of a possible pollution emission
that WOK .d damage the quality of air that we breathe, is it
your opi kion that steps could be taken to prevent €urther
po 1 lut i c t or should you go and just permit it and let it
contribu ,e to the deterioration of the quality of the air?
THE WITNESS:
--
1 You are well, when you get into
1 health a :fects and I think we should strive to do what is
1 best ava lable, best that we can do and even accept some
1 problems on trying to keep the levels low, Now whqt we
--
1 know abo t sulfur oxides is the fate of what happens to
I
1 Ii .ot very clear and it indicates that they could do
emi is
1 or would do quite a bit of damage and therefore, it would
'
1 in my ow philosophy would be that we should take an extra
1 little m asure and try to reduce the amount and what really
2
concerns me more than anything else, is that if we continue
2
to go to tall stacks and law sulfur coal and if we continue
2
t to have great use of power we are giving our grandchildren
I
2 I
or our c ildren a tremendous headache in twenty yegrs,
2 --
i e won't have a local pollution problem that we
Because
2
3243
1
through the region. Some information says that s;zlfur
1
1
--
sulfates they take sulfates but the actual forrr. of sul-
fate, thsy are not saying it is all sulfates but yet it might
be a spezific sulfate problem but they don't know. And that';
where it is you know so it comes down to a point they Eind.
the damage and they find that it is related to certain
3244
I
comes ou as a sulfate. It is pretty well that it: fs going
I
to come dut in sane form of sulfate. Well how it gets there
is not tl at well known. There are various oxidation rates,
it is really not well defined and the atmosphere fis vexy
complex and no one really has a good handle on it,
COMMISSIONEX DOWNIE:
Thank you for that long and ltmgthy
and learred discourse but i s the answer to my queskion "yes"
or l'no''?
THE WImss:
what is the question, I think I have
forgotter. it at this point? 1 am sorry.
COMMISSIONER DOWNIE:
Where you identify a Lsource of emission
I
in our air in your judgment, should you before
goes into effect take steps to sae that
are not made or should you let
THE WITNESS:
I
I .thidc past history says if you want
I
1
to preve t damage or if you want to get control of damage
I the most effective way of doing it is to prevent the emission.
COMMISSIONER DOWNfE:
Thank you,
3245
CHAIRMAN Mom :
The hearing will be in recess for
ten minu e9.
(whereup n, a short recess was taken after which the
hearing as resumed and testimony given as follows.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
1
4
3246
I
I
i
c
I
I
!
i
I
1 CHA RMAN M O M : 1i
I
A Let the hearing come to order, please. I
Mr. Fur, do you have any questions? i
d MR. FURR:
I
!!
I
No questions, Mr. Chairman.
t CHAIRMAN MORAN:
1 will be e cused. Thank you.
I (WITNESS EXCUSED)
11
CHAIRMAN M O W :
1
Mr. Goodloe, do you have another Witness?
1
MR, GOODLOE:
1 Yes, I have one Witness and I have some
1 additione . testimony that I believe by agreement there is n
1
cros s-ex: xination and I wish to submit the testimony of Mr.
I
1 !
Brian Thr npsonmncerning the land-use map which I w i l l intro-
1
duce too lihich is the preparation of the land-use map and the
1
land-use :lassification system, the number of acres for each
1
individu; L land-use as obtained from the U.S.G.S., the abstract
4 from the 1970 Census data of the twenty-five mile zadius of
4 White 311 €E and the existing pollution levels as obtained from
4 the Arka: sa6 Department of Pollution Control. There is one
correctk n that needs to be made on the sheet: *ich is stating
the poll tion levels from the pollution control. xt is the
next to he last, third from the back sheet which is on Arkansi
3247
I
Ecology c mter stationary wherein it lists sulfur dioxide level;
for Pine Iluff on mrch 24 for stations one, two, and three
and says 10.1 milograms and at the t i m e I prepared this 1
thought n .crogram was mg and it should be ug for micrograms
and so tk ! 30.1 should be micrograms per cubic meter for
station c le, station two at 78.3 micrograms per cuhic meter
and statj m three 89.5 micrograms per cubic meter. I submit
this and :he land-use map,
- - - - -
(REPORTEE : NOTE: The following pages are the direct testimony
of Mr. Br .an Thompson and so forth given the reporter to be
copied ir :o the record as if given orally:)
-
' -
I
I
51 I
i
-
DIRECT TI 3TIMONY OF MR. BRIAN THOMPSON BEFORE THE ARKANSAS
PUBLIC SI WICE COMMISSION ON JUNE 17, 1974.
My name : : Brian Thompson and 1 am employed by the Arkansas I
Ecology ( ?nter, 1919 West 7th Street, Little Rock, Arkansas.
I:
The purpc 3e of my testiaony is to present the chain of
prepara t: >n of the pine tree samples obtained for the Dept.
of Plann: ig and the preparation of the land-use map.
-
De t c ils of Pine Tree samples taken by the Arktinsas
Ecology C inter at the request of the Dept. of Planning
On E :iday, May 3rd, 1974, at rhe request of the Dept.
I
1 of Plannj ig, Ted Goodloe, Tom Foti, and Brian Thompson
I (staff m~ ibers of the Arkansas Ecology Center) collected
1 three pir tree limb samples from separece trees on the Whil-e
!
1 Bluff sit (AP&L's weather station), one pine tree limb sample
!
1 from a tr !e approximately 3 miles N/NE of the site, and
1 three pin tree limb samples from separate trees on the
!
1 per h et ex of the Weyerhauser kraft paper mi11 on the outskirts
1 of Pine B uff, approximately 15 miles S/SE of the Fuhite Bluff
L site.
r
1 All amples were taken between the hours of 12 noon aod
Id 3 p.m. on the 3rd of May, 1974. The day was sunny, with light
-
L cloud cov r, the temperature was 85 degrees F, humidity around
!
i 65-70%, v ry little wind.
2 A l l amples were taken from the most mature pine trees I
I
3249
I
~
i I
available A l l samples taken from Loblolly Pines.
A l l amples were sealed on the spot in double air-tight
plastic b gs and double labelled,
A l l ample trees were marked with red tape and photo-
graphs we 'e taken of a l l sample Lrees.
Sample 1 100 yards E. of AP&L' s on-site weathei 1a0-1I L)L lri
tower. 40 fee; high Cree, :I.A..~Z-C- :.t' I2.i c
-ree 1 inches Limb sample :a-s::i Ira.?; . <>rt
4, '-3;:
Sample 2 100 yards k of monitoring cower. (Tree and limb
sample as with Sample 1)
Sample 3 300 yards S. of monitoring tower. 50 feet tal1
tree. Diameter at base of tree 8 inches. Limb
sample taken from 30 feet up,
Sample 4 3 miles N/NE of monitoring tower. 90 year old
pine tree located on land of Buddy Hardimg. 100
feel tall tree. Diameter at base 3 feet. Limb
sample taken from 40 feet up.
Sample A 300 yards E. of Weyerhauser paper m i l l . 40 feet
tall Cree. Diameter ar: base 7 inches, Limb samplc
taken from 10 feet up.
Sample B 50 feet from Sample A. Same tree size and Sample
he€ght as Sample A.
Sample C 300 yards W. of paper mill. 45 feet ta1.1 tree.
Diameter a t base 7 inches. Limb sample taken from
15 feet up.
32%