Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 25

# Pg. 7.

1
SOLUTIONS FOR CHAPTER 7
7.1 From (1.9), mg / m
3
=
ppm x mol wt
24.465
(at 1 atm and 25
o
C)
a. CO
2
mg / m
3
=
5000ppm x 12 + 2x16 ( )
24.465
= 8992mg/m
3
9000mg / m
3
b. HCHO ppm =
24.465 x 3.6 mg/m
3
2x1 + 12 + 16 ( )
= 2.94ppm
c. NO mg / m
3
=
25ppm x 14 +16 ( )
24.465
= 30.7mg/m
3
7.2 70% efficient scrubber, find S emission rate:
600 MWe

= 0.38
600/0.38=1579 MWt
9000 Btu/lb coal 1% S
Input =
600, 000 kWe
0.38
x
3412 Btu
kWhr
x
lb coal
9000Btu
x
0.01 lb S
lb coal
= 5986 lb S/hr
70% efficient, says release 0.3 x 5986 lbS/hr = 1796 lb S/hr 1800 lbS/hr
7.3 If all S converted to SO
2
and now using a 90% efficient scrubber:
SO
2
= 0.1 x
5986 lbS
hr
x
(32 + 2x16) lb SO
2
32 lb S
= 1197 lb SO
2
/ hr 1200 lb SO
2
/ hr
7.4 70% scrubber, 0.6 lb SO
2
/10
6
Btu in, find % S allowable:
a.
X lbs S
lbs coal
x
0.3 lbs S out
1 lb S in
x
2 lbs SO
2
lb S
x
lb coal
15, 000Btu
=
0.6 lb SO
2
10
6
Btu
X =
15, 000x0.6
0.3x2x10
6
= 0.015 = 1.5% S fuel
b.
X lbs S
lbs coal
x
0.3 lbs S out
1 lb S in
x
2 lbs SO
2
lb S
x
lb coal
9, 000Btu
=
0.6 lb SO
2
10
6
Btu
X =
9, 000x0.6
0.3x2x10
6
= 0.009 = 0.9% S fuel
Pg. 7.2
7.5 Compliance coal:
1.2 lbs SO
2
10
6
Btu
=
lb coal
12, 000 Btu
x
X lb S
lb coal
x
2 lb SO
2
lb S
X =
1.2x12, 000
2x10
6
= 0.0072 = 0.7%S
7.6 Air Quality Index:
_________________________________________________________
Pollutant Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
_________________________________________________________
O
3
, 1-hr (ppm) 0.15 0.22 0.12
CO, 8-hr (ppm) 12 15 8
PM
2. 5
, 24-hr (g/m
3
) 130 150 10
PM
10
, 24-hr (g/m
3
) 180 300 100
SO
2
, 24-hr (ppm) 0.12 0.20 0.05
NO
2
, 1-hr (ppm) 0.4 0.7 0.1
___________________________________________________________
Using Table 7.3:
a. Day 1: Unhealthy, AQI 151-200 triggered by PM
2. 5
.
b. Day 2: Very Unhealthy, AQI 201-300, triggered by both O
3
and NO
2
c. Day 3: Moderate, AQI 51-100, triggered by CO, PM
10
and SO
2
7.7 8 hrs of CO at 50 ppm, from (7.6):
%COHb = 0.15%1 e
0.402/ hr x 8hr
( )
x50 = 7.2%
7.8 Tractor pull at 436 ppm CO:
a. 1 hr exposure: %COHb = 0.15%1 e
0. 402t
( )
ppm ( ) = 0.15% 1 e
0.402x1
( )
x436 = 21.6%
b. To reach 10% COHb,
10 = 0.15 1 e
0.402t
( )
x436 = 65.4 65.4e
0. 402t
e
0.402t
=
55.4
65.4
= 0.871 so t = -
1
0.402
ln 0.871 ( ) = 0.41 hr
7.9 RH to produce HCHO:
RO +O
2
HO
2
+R' CHO (7.19)
for R' CHO to be HCHO, R' must be H so that
RO +O
2
HO
2
+HCHO
for the reaction to balance , R = CH
3
which says RH in (7.16) must be CH
4
(methane)
Pg. 7.3
7.10 RH = propene = CH
2
=CH-CH
3
= C
3
H
6
so, R = C
3
H
5
so the sequence of reactions (7.16) to (7.19) is:
C
3
H
6
+ OH C
3
H
5
+H
2
O
C
3
H
5
+O
2
C
3
H
5
O
2

C
3
H
5
O
2
+NOC
3
H
5
O +NO
2
C
3
H
5
O +O
2
HO
2
+C
2
H
3
CHO
The end product is acrolein, CH
2
CHCHO.
7.11 A 20-m particle blown to 8000 m. From (7.24) its settling velocity is
v =
d
2
g
18
=
(20x10
6
m)
2
x 1.5x10
6
g / m
3
x 9.80m/s
2
18 x 0.0172g/m - s
= 0.019m/ s
Time to reach the ground =
8000m
0.019m / s x 3600s/hr x 24hr/d
= 4.87days
Horizontal distance = 4.87 days x 10 m/s x 3600s/hr x 24hr/d x 10
-3
km/m = 4200 km
7.12 Residence time for 10-m particle, unit density, at 1000m:
Settling velocity = v =
d
2
g
18
=
(10x10
6
m)
2
x 10
6
g / m
3
x 9.80m/s
2
18 x 0.0172g/m - s
= 0.00317m/ s
Residence time = =
h
v
=
1000m
0.00317m/ s x 3600s/hr
= 87.6hrs
7.13 Settling velocity and Reynolds numbers:
a. 1 m: v =
d
2
g
18
=
(1x10
6
m)
2
x 10
6
g / m
3
x 9.80m/s
2
18 x 0.0172g/m - s
= 3.2x10
5
m/ s
Re =

air
dv

=
1.29x10
3
g/ m
3
x 1x10
-6
m x 3.17x10
-5
m/s
0.0172 m/s
= 2.4x10
6
b. 10 m: v =
d
2
g
18
=
(10x10
6
m)
2
x 10
6
g / m
3
x 9.80m/s
2
18 x 0.0172g/m - s
= 3.2x10
3
m/ s
Re =

air
dv

=
1.29x10
3
g/ m
3
x 10x10
-6
m x 3.17x10
-3
m/s
0.0172 m/s
= 2.4x10
3
c. 20 m: v =
d
2
g
18
=
(20x10
6
m)
2
x 10
6
g / m
3
x 9.80m/s
2
18 x 0.0172g/m - s
= 0.0127m/ s
Pg. 7.4
Re =

air
dv

=
1.29x10
3
g/ m
3
x 20x10
-6
m x 0.0127m/s
0.0172 m/s
= 0.02
So for all of these particles, the Reynolds number is much less than 1, which means (7.24) is
a reasonable approximation to the settling velocity.
7.14 Finding the percentage by weight of oxygen and the fraction (by weight) of oxygenate
needed to provide 2% oxygen to the resulting blend of gasoline.
a. Ethanol, CH
3
CH
2
OH

Oxygen
Ethanol
=
16
2x12 + 6x1+1x16
= 0.347 = 34.7%

0.02 =
Xg oxygenate x %O in oxygenate
Yg fuel

Ethanol
Fuel blend
=
X
Y
=
2%
%O
=
2%
34.7%
= 0.058 = 5.8% by weight
b. Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), CH
3
OC(CH
3
)
3

Oxygen
MTBE
=
16
5x12 +12x1+1x16
= 0.182 =18.2%

MTBE
Fuel
=
2%
%O
=
2%
18.2%
= 0.11=11%
c. Ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), CH
3
CH
2
OC(CH
3
)
3

Oxygen
ETBE
=
16
6x12 +14x1+1x16
= 0.157 =15.7%

ETBE
Fuel
=
2%
%O
=
2%
15.7%
= 0.127 =12.7%
d. Tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME), CH
3
CH
2
C(CH
3
)
2
OCH
3

Oxygen
TAME
=
16
6x12 +14x1+1x16
= 0.157 =15.7%

TAME
Fuel
=
2%
%O
=
2%
15.7%
= 0.127 =12.7%
7.15 Ethanol fraction CH
3
CH
2
OH (sg = 0.791) in gasoline (sg = 0.739) to give 2% O
2
:

Oxygen
Ethanol
=
16
2x12 + 6x1+1x16
= 0.347 = 34.7%

0.02 =
X (mL eth) x 0.791 g eth /mL x 0.347 gO/g eth
X (mL eth) x 0.791 g eth/mL + Y (mL gas) x 0.739 g gas/mL

0.02 =
0.2745X
0.791X + 0.739Y
=
0.2745
0.791+ 0.739Y / X
Pg. 7.5

Y
X
=
0.2745 0.02x0.791
0.02x0.739
=17.50

ethanol
fuel blend
=
X(mL eth)
X(mL eth) +Y(mL gas)
=
1
1+Y / X
=
1
1+17.50
= 5.4% by volume
7.16 The CAFE fuel efficiency for flex-fuel cars that get:
a. 18 mpg on gasoline and 12 mpg on ethanol.
b. 22 mpg on gasoline and 15 mpg on ethanol
c. 27 mpg on gasoline and 18 mpg on ethanol

a. CAFE mpg =
1 mile
0.5 mile
18 mile/gal gas
+
0.5 mile
12 mile/gal alcohol
x
0.15 gal gas
1 gal alcohol
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
= 29.4 mpg

b. CAFE mpg =
1 mile
0.5 mile
22 mile/gal gas
+
0.5 mile
15 mile/gal alcohol
x
0.15 gal gas
1 gal alcohol
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
= 36.1 mpg

c. CAFE mpg =
1 mile
0.5 mile
27 mile/gal gas
+
0.5 mile
18 mile/gal alcohol
x
0.15 gal gas
1 gal alcohol
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
= 44.1 mpg
7.17 At 25 miles/100 ft
3
of natural gas, 0.823 gallons of gasoline equivalents per 100 ft
3
,
and each equivalent gallon counting as 0.15 gallons of gasoline gives a CAF rating of

100 ft
3
ngas
25 mile
x
0.823 equiv. gal gasoline
100 ft
3
ngas
x
0.15 gal gasoline
1 equiv. gal gasoline
= 0.004938 gal gasoline/mile

CAFE mpg =
1
0.004938 gal/mile
= 202.5 miles/gallon 203 mpg
7.18 The break-even price of E85 with gasoline at \$3.50/gallon:
From Table 7.5, the energy ratio E85/gasoline = 81,630/115,400 = 0.70736
So E85 should cost no more than 0.70736 x \$3.50 = \$2.48/gallon.
7.19 On an energy-content basis, the cheapest would be:
a. E85 at \$2/gallon or gasoline at \$3/gallon
E85 < \$3/gallon x 0.71 = \$2.13. E85 is cheaper.
b. E85 at \$2.50/gallon or gasoline at \$3.30/gallon
E85 < \$3.30/gallon x 0.71 = \$2.34. Gasoline is cheaper
c. E85 at \$2.75/gal or gasoline at \$4/gal
E85 < \$4.00/gallon x 0.71 = \$2.84 E85 is cheaper
Pg. 7.6
7.20 With a 15-gallon fuel tank and 25 mpg on gasoline.
a. E10 = 0.10 x 75,670 Btu/gal + 0.90 x 115,400 Btu/gal = 111,427 Btu/gal

111, 427
115, 400
x 25 mpg = 24.14 mpg
Range = 15 gal x 24.14 mi/gal = 362 miles
b. E85 = 0.85 x 75,670 + 0.15 x 115,400 = 81,630 Btu/gal

81,630
115, 400
x 25 mpg =17.7 mpg
Range = 15 gal x 17.7 mi/gal = 266 miles
c. E85/gasoline = 0.5 x 81,630 + 0.5 x 115,400 = 98,515 Btu/gal

98,515
115, 400
x 25 mpg = 21.3 mpg
Range = 15 gal x 21.3 mi/gal = 320 miles
7.21 A 45-mpg PHEV, 30-mile/day on electricity at 0.25 kWh/mile; 50 mi/d, 5 days per
week, 2 days @ 25 mi /d .
a. At \$3.50 per gallon and \$0.08/kWh:
.

Electric = (30 mi/d x 5 d/wk +25 mi/d x 2 d/wk) x 0.25 kWh/mi x \$0.08/kWh = \$4/wk

Gasoline =
(20 mi/d x 5 d/wk)
45 mi/gal
x \$3.50/gal = \$7.78/wk

PHEV cost/mile =
\$7.78 +\$4.00
(50x5 +25x2) mi
= \$0.0393 = 3.93/mile
Original 50 mpg

HEV cost/mile =
\$3.50/gallon
50 mi/gal
= 7/mile
b. On an annual basis:
PHEV annual cost = \$0.0393/mi x 52 wk/yr x 300 mi/wk = \$612/yr

HEV annual cost =
\$3.50/gallon
50 mi/gal
x52wk/yr x 300mi/wk = \$1092/ yr
Annual savings = \$1092 - \$612 = \$480/yr
c. At \$3000 for batteries:

Simple payback =
Extra 1st cost
Annual savings
=
\$3000
\$480/yr
= 6.25 yr
Batteries would need to last 6.25 yr x 300 mi/wk x 52 wk/yr = 97,500 miles

Pg. 7.7
7.22 From Figure 7.28 the well-to-wheels CO
2
/mile are:
a. 25 mpg car:

11.2 kg CO
2
/gal x 1000 g/kg
25 mi/gal
= 448 gCO
2
/mile
b. 50 mpg car:

11.2 kg CO
2
/gal x 1000 g/kg
50 mi/gal
= 224 gCO
2
/mile
c. PHEV:

gasoline :
11.2 kg CO
2
/gal x 1000 g/kg
45 mi/gal
= 248 gCO
2
/mile

electricity : 0.25 kWh/mi x 640 gCO
2
/mi =160 gCO
2
/mile

Half gas, half electricity : 0.5 x 248 + 0.5 x 160 = 204 gCO
2
/mile
d. EV:

electricity : 0.25 kWh/mi x 640 gCO
2
/mi =160 gCO
2
/mile
e. FCV:

14.4 gC/MJ
0.36 mi/MJ
x
(12 +2x16)gCO
2
12gC
x
MJ CH
4
0.61 MJ H
2
= 240 gCO
2
/mile
7.23 At 0.25 kWh/mi from a 60%-efficient NGCC plant with a 96%-efficient grid, 14.4
gC/MJ of n. gas and 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ:
a. The EV carbon emissions would be

14.4 gC/MJ in
1 MJ CH
4
x
44 gCO
2
12gC
x
1 MJ in
0.6 MJ out
x
3.6 MJ out
kWh
x 0.96 grid = 304 gCO
2
/kWh
0.25 kWh/mi x 304 gCO
2
/kWh = 76 gCO
2
/mi
b. For the PHEV, half miles on gasoline and half on electricity:

gasoline :
11.2 kg CO
2
/gal x 1000 g/kg
45 mi/gal
= 248 gCO
2
/mile
electricity : 0.25 kWh/mi x 304 gCO
2
/kWh = 76 gCO
2
/mi

Half gas, half electricity : 0.5 x 248 + 0.5 x 76 = 162 gCO
2
/mile
7.24 With 5.5 hr/day of sun, 17%-efficient PVs, 75% dc-ac, 0.25 kWh/mile, 30 mi/day:
Electricity needed = 0.25 kWh/mile x 30 miles/day = 7.5 kWh/day

Area =
7.5 kWh/d
5.5 h/d x 1 kW/m
2
x 0.17 x 0.75
=10.7 m
2
=116 ft
2
Pg. 7.8
7.25 A 50%-efficient SOFC, 50% into electricity, 20% into useful heat, compared to 30%-
efficient grid electricity and an 80% efficient boiler:
Assume 100 units of input energy to the SOFC, delivering 50 units of electricity and 20
units of heat.
For the grid to provide 50 units of electricity: Input energy = 50/0.30 = 167 units
For the boiler to provide 20 units of heat: Input energy = 20/0.80 = 25 units
Total for the separated system = 167 + 25 = 192 units
Energy savings = (192-100)/192 = 0.48 = 48%
7.26 NG CHP versus separated systems; Natural gas 14.4 gC/MJ, grid 175 gC/kWh. The
joule equivalent of one kWh of electricity is 3.6 MJ.
a. CHP with 36% electrical efficiency and 40% thermal efficiency versus an 85%-
efficient gas boiler for heat and the grid for electricity.
CHP: Assume 100 MJ input to the CHP delivering 36 MJ electricity and 40 MJ heat.
Carbon emissions would be 14.4 gC/MJ x 100 MJ = 1,440 gC
Separate: Grid electricity = 36 MJ/(3.6 MJ/kWh) = 10 kWh x 175 gC/kWh = 1750 gC
Boiler = 40 MJ/0.85 = 47 MJ x 14.4 gC/MJ = 677 gC
Total carbon = 1750 + 677 = 2427 gC
Savings: (2427 1440)/2427 = 0.41 = 41%
b. CHP with 50% electrical & 20% thermal efficiency vs a 280 gC/kWh, coal-fired
power plant for electricity and an 80% efficient gas-fired boiler for heat.
CHP: Assume 100 MJ input to the CHP:
Carbon emissions would be 14.4 gC/MJ x 100 MJ = 1,440 gC
Separate: Coal 50 MJ/(3.6 MJ/kWh)=13.89 kWh x 280 gC/kWh = 3889 gC
Boiler = 20 MJ/0.80 = 25 MJ x 14.4 gC/MJ = 360 gC
Total carbon = 3889 + 360 = 4249 gC
Savings: (4249 1440)/4249 = 0.66 = 66%
Pg. 7.9
7.27 Power plants emitting 0.39 x 10
12
g particulates from 685 M tons coal with a heat content
of 10,000 Btu/kWh while generating 1400 billion kWh/yr.
heat input = 685x10
6
tons x 2000
lb
ton
x 10, 000
Btu
lb
= 1.37x10
16
Btu
efficiency =
output
input
=
1400x10
9
kWh x 3412Btu/kWh
1.37x10
16
Btu
= 0.349 35%
At NSPS of 0.03 lb particulates per 10
6
Btu input, emissions would have been:
emissions =
0.03 lb
10
6
Btu heat input
x 1.37x10
16
Btu in x
1000g
2.2 lb
=1.87x10
11
g
For comparison,
emissions at NSPS
actual emissions
=
1.87x10
11
g
0.39x10
12
= 0.48 = 48%
7.28 Derivation for the dry adiabatic lapse rate:
dQ= dU+ dW where dU = C
v
dt and dW= PdV
dQ= C
v
dt + PdV (1)
ideal gas law says PV = nRT
so, d(PV) = PdV + VdP = nRT
or, PdV = nRT- VdP
plugged into (1) gives:
dQ= C
v
dT + nRdT VdP

dQ
dT
= C
v
+ nR V
dP
dT
(2)
at constant pressure :

dQ
dT
= C
v
+ nR = C
p
putting that into (2) gives,

dQ
dT
= C
p
V
dP
dT
or,
dQ = C
p
dT VdP which is (7.37)
Pg. 7.10
7.29 Plotting the data, extending from ground level to crossing with ambient profile at the
adiabatic lapse rate, and extending from the stack height gives:
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14
0
200
400
600
800
Temperature (C)
A
l
t
i
t
u
d
e

(
m
)
plume rise mixing depth
a) mixing depth (projecting from 20
o
C at 0-m at slope -1
o
/100m) = 400 m
b) plume rise (projecting from 21
o
C at 100m) = 500m
7.30 From Problem 7.29, projection from the ground at 22
o
C crosses ambient at 500m.
Need the windspeed at 250 m (halfway up) using (7.46) and Table 7.6 for Class C,
u
H
u
a
=
H
z
a

p
so,
u
250
4m/ s
=
250m
10m

0. 20
= 1.90
u
250
=1.90x4 = 7.6m / s
Ventilation coefficient = 500m x 7.6m/s = 3.8x10
3
m
2
/s
7.31 Below the knee, the plume is fanning which suggests a stable atmosphere, which could be
profile (a), (b) or (d).
Above the knee, the plume is looping, which suggests superadiabatic, which is d.
7.32 H=50m, overcast so Class D, A at 1.2km, B at 1.4km.
a. From Fig 7.52, Class D, H=50m, max concentration occurs at 1km.
Beyond 1 km, concentration decreases so the "A" will be more polluted than B.
b. Clear sky, wind < 5m/s: Class is now A, B or C. At 50m, Class A, B, or C, Fig 7.52
shows us that the maximum point moves closer to the stack.
c. It will still be house at site "A that gets the higher concentration of pollution.
Pg. 7.11
7.33 Bonfire emits 20g/s CO, wind 2 m/s, H=6m, distance = 400m. Table 7.7, clear night,
stability classification = F
C x, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

(7.49)
a. From Table 7.9 at 400m,
y
= 15m,
z
= 7m
C =
20x10
6
g / s
2m/s x15m x 7m
exp
6
2
2x7
2

= 21x10
3
g / m
3
= 21mg / m
3
b. At the maximum point, Fig. 7.52 we can get a rough estimate of the key parameter
Cu
H
Q

max
3.8x10
3
/ m
2
C
max
=
Q
u
H
Cu
H
Q

max
=
20x10
3
mg / s
2m/ s
x
3.8x10
3
m
2
= 38 40mg / m
3
7.34 H=100m, Q=1.2g/s per MW, u
H
=4m/s, u
Anemometer
=3
+
m/s, C<365g/m
3
.
The more unstable the atmosphere, the higher the peak downwind concentration (see Fig.
7.51). From Table 7.7, with wind > 3m/s, B is the most unstable.
From Fig. 7.52, X
max
= 0.7 km;
Cu
H
Q

max
1.5x10
5
/ m
2
C
max
=
Q
u
H
Cu
H
Q

max
= 365x10
6
g / s =
Q
4m / s
x
1.5x10
5
m
2
Q
4x365x10
6
1.5x10
5
= 97g / s
Maximum power plant size = 97 g/s x
MW
1.2 g/s
= 80MW
7.35 Atmospheric conditions, stack height, and groundlevel concentration restrictions same as
Prob. 7.34 so that:
Emissions Q 97 g/s
97g / s =
0.6 lb SO
2
10
6
Btu in
x
1 Btu in
0.35 Btu out
x
3412 Btu out
kWh
x
1hr
3600s
x
10
3
g
2.2 lb
xP
kW
P
kW
=
97x10
6
x0.35x3600x2.2
0.6x3412x1000
= 131, 000KW =130MW
Pg. 7.12
7.36 H = 100m, u
a
= 4 m/s, Q = 80g/s, clear summer day so Class B:
First, find the windspeed at the effective stack height using (7.46) and Table 7.7:
u
H
= u
a
H
z
a

p
= 4m / s
100
10

0. 15
= 5.65m/ s
a. At 2 km, Table 7.9:
y
= 290 m,
z
= 234 m
C x, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

C =
80x10
6
g/ s
5.65m/s x290m x 234m
exp
100
2
2x234
2

= 61g / m
3
b. At the maximum point, 0.7 km (Fig. 7.52),
Cu
H
Q

max
1.5x10
5
/ m
2
C
max
=
Q
u
H
Cu
H
Q

max
=
80x10
6
g/ s
5.65m / s
1.5x10
5
m
2

= 212g/ m
3
c. At x = 2km, y = 0.1 km:
C x, y ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

exp
y
2
2
y
2

= 61g / m
3
x exp
-100
2
2x290
2

= 57g / m
3
7.37 For class C, notice from (7.47) and (7.48) with Table 7.9 and f =0

z
=
ax
0. 894
cx
d
+ f
=
104x
0. 894
61x
0. 911
= 1.7x
0. 017
So, assume
y
= k
z
, then from (7.49)
a. C x, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

=
Q
uk
z
2
exp
H
2
2
z
2

To find the maximum concentration, differentiate and set equal to zero:
Pg. 7.13
dC
d
z
=
Q
uk
1

z
2
H
2
2
[
\
|

)
j
2

z
3
[
\
|

)
j e

H
2
2
z
2
+ e

H
2
2
z
2 2

z
3
[
\
|

)
j
|

|
|
|
|

|
|
|
= 0
Multiply through by
z
5
and cancel lots of terms to get,
2H
2
2

2
z
2
= 0 or
z
=
H
2
= 0.707H
b. Substituting the newly found value for
z
,
C
max
=
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
H
2
2
( )

=
Q
u
y

z
e
1
=
0.117Q
u
y

z
c. Using
y
= k
z
C
max
=
0.117Q
uk
z
2
=
0.117Q
uk 0.707H ( )
2
=
f(Q, u)
H
2
(varies as inverse of H
2
)
7.38 Find the effective stack height of the Sudbury stack:
130 C 20 m/s
15.2m
380m
10 C
o o
8 m/s
Using (7.52) for the buoyancy flux parameter
F = gr
2
v
s
1
T
a
T
s

= 9.8
m
s
2
x
15.2m
2

2
x20
m
s
x 1
10 + 273
130 + 273

= 3370m
4
/ s
3
The distance downwind to final plume rise x
f
is given on page 464 (with F>55),
x
f
= 120F
0. 4
= 120x 3370 ( )
0. 4
= 3092 m
For stability classification C, use (7.54) for plume rise,
h =
1.6F
1 3
x
f
2 3
u
h
=
1.6x 3370 ( )
1 3
3092 ( )
2 3
8
= 635m plume rise
H = effective stack height = h + h = 380 + 635 = 1015 m
Pg. 7.14
7.39 Repeat Problem 7.38 with a stable, isothermal atmosphere:
F = 3370 m
4
/s
3
from Prob. 7.38. For isothermal atmosphere we can use (7.51) along a
stability parameter to estimate plume rise. The stability parameter (7.53) is
S =
g
T
a
T
a
z
+ 0.01K/ m

=
9.8m/ s
2
10 + 273 ( )K
0 + 0.01K/ m ( ) = 3.46x10
4
/ s
2
Putting that into (7.51) for plume rise under these conditions gives
h = 2.6
F
u
h
S

1 3
= 2.6
3370m
4
/ s
3
8m/ s x 3.46x10
-4
/ s
2

1 3
= 278m
H = effective stack height = h + h = 380 + 278 = 657 m
(Notice the atmospheric stability lowered effective stack height vs Prob. 7.38)
7.40 Cloudy summer day, stability classification C (Table 7.7),
120 C 10 m/s
2m
100m
6.0 C
o o
5 m/s
Using (7.52) for bouyancy flux parameter
F = gr
2
v
s
1
T
a
T
s

= 9.8
m
s
2
x
2m
2

2
x10
m
s
x 1
6 + 273
120 + 273

= 28.4m
4
/ s
3
and distance downwind to final plume rise x
f
given on page 464 (with F<55),
x
f
= 50F
5 8
= 50x 28.4 ( )
5 8
= 406
For stability classification C, use (7.54) for plume rise,
h =
1.6F
1 3
x
f
2 3
u
h
=
1.6x 28.4 ( )
1 3
406 ( )
2 3
5
= 54m plume rise
H = effective stack height = h + h = 100 + 54 = 154 m
Pg. 7.15
7.41 Power plant, find groundlevel pollution 16 km away. Need first find H.
200 MWe
100m
r=2.5m
13.5 m/s
145 C
o 15 C
o
5m/s
Class E
lapse rate=5 C/km
o
Q=300g/s SO2
16km
First, find bouyancy flux parameter (7.52),
F = gr
2
v
s
1
T
a
T
s

= 9.8
m
s
2
x 2.5m ( )
2
x13.5
m
s
x 1
15 + 273
145 + 273

= 257m
4
/ s
3
plume rise for stable (Class E) atmosphere needs S from (7.53),
S =
g
T
a
T
a
z
+ 0.01K/ m

=
9.8m/ s
2
15 + 273 ( )K
5
o
1000m
+ 0.01K/ m

= 5.1x10
4
/ s
2
plume rise is given by (7.51),
h = 2.6
F
u
h
S

1 3
= 2.6
257m
4
/ s
3
5m/ s x 5.1x10
-4
/ s
2

1 3
= 121m
So, the effective height is H = 100m + 121m = 221 m
Concentration downwind at 16km: (Table 7.9)
y
= 602m,
z
= 95m
C x, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

(7.49)
C =
300x10
6
g / s
5 m/s x602m x 95m
exp
221
2
2x95
2

= 22g / m
3
7.42 A 20 g/s source, 5 m/s, H = 50 m want peak concentrations Class A, C, F..
C
max
=
Q
u
H
Cu
H
Q

=
20x10
6
g / s
5m/ s
Cu
H
Q

= 4x10
6
Cu
H
Q

g / s
50m
A,C,F
5 m/s
20 g/s
Using Fig. 7.52 with 50 m and varying stability classifications gives:
Pg. 7.16
"A"
Cu
H
Q

6x10
5
at 0.25km, C
max
= 4x10
6
x 6x10
-5
= 240g / m
3
"C"
Cu
H
Q

5.8x10
5
at 0.55km, C
max
= 4x10
6
x 5.8x10
-5
= 230g / m
3
"F"
Cu
H
Q

2.4x10
5
at 3.7km, C
max
= 4x10
6
x 2.4x10
-5
= 96g/ m
3

x (km)
C ( g/m )
3
240
230
96
0.25 0.55 3.7
7.43 H = 50m, 100m, 200m; Class C, 20 g/s, 5 m/s wind:
C
max
=
Q
u
H
Cu
H
Q

=
20x10
6
g / s
5m/ s
Cu
H
Q

= 4x10
6
Cu
H
Q

g / s
Using Fig. 7.52,
@50m: C
max
4x10
6
x 5.7x10
-5
= 228 g/m
3
@100m: C
max
4x10
6
x 1.5x10
-5
= 60 g/m
3
@200m: C
max
4x10
6
x 3.4x10
-6
= 14 g/m
3
Do they drop as (1/H)
2
? That is,

expectation is
C(2H)
C(H)
=
1
4
and
C(4H)
C(H)
=
1
16
Test them:
C(100m)
C(50m)
=
6
22.8
= 0.26
C(200m)
C(100m)
=
1.4
6
Expect
C(200m)
C(50m)
=
1
16
= 0.0625
C(200m)
C(50m)
=
1.4
22.8
Pg. 7.17
7.44 Paper mill emitting H
2
S, 1km away want 0.1 x odor threshold:
1 km
40 g/s
4-10m/s
Class B
0.01 mg/m
3
Class B, at 1 km, (Table 7.9)
y
= 156m,
z
= 110m
C x, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

0.01x10
3
g / m
3
=
40g / s
u m/s x156m x 110m
exp
H
2
2x110
2

Rearranging: e
H
2
24, 200
=
40
u 156 x 110 x 0.01x10
-3
=
74.2
u
or, H = 24, 200 ln
74.2
u
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
0. 5
so, at each end of the wind speed range we can find the height needed:
H
u= 4
= 24, 200 ln
74.2
4
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
= 265m
H
u=10
= 24, 200 ln
74.2
10
[
\
|

)
j
|
|
|
|
|
|
0. 5
= 220m
says to be conservative use H=265m
From Fig 7.52 at H=265, Class B, X
max
1.8km.
Therefore, with the peak occurring beyond the 1 km house, the concentration will rise for
buildings located > 1km away. YES there could be a problem.
7.45 Stack under an inversion:
45m
150 g/s
5 m/s
Class C
X
L
L=100m
At x = X
L

z
= 0.47 (L-H) = 0.47 (100 - 45) = 26 m
Pg. 7.18
For class C,
z
= 26m at x = 0.4 km (Table 7.9), therefore X
L
= 0.4 km, and also
from Table 7.9,
y
= 46m.
At x = X
L
: C X
L
, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

(7.49)
=
150x10
3
mg / s
5 m/s x 46m x 26m
exp
45
2
2x26
2

=1.8mg / m
3
At x = 2X
L
:
y
= 85m (Table 7.9), so using (7.55) gives
C 2X
L
, 0 ( ) =
Q
2 u
y
L
=
150x10
3
mg / s
2 x 5m/s x 85m x 100m
= 1.4mg / m
3
7.46 Stack under an inversion layer:
50m
80 g/s
5 m/s
X
L
L=250m
4 m/s
x=4km
C=?
We need the stability classification: Clear summer day, 4m/s, Table 7.7 says Class B.
at x = X
L
, (7.56) gives us
z
= 0.47 (L-H) = 0.47 (250 - 50) = 94 m
a. From Table 7.9, at
z
= 94m Class B, X
L
0.9km. Since our point of interest is
at 4 km, we are well past the point at which reflections first occur so we can use
(7.55). We need
y
at 4km, which is given in Table 7.9 as 539m:
C 4km, 0 ( ) =
Q
2 u
y
L
=
80x10
6
g / s
2 x 5m/s x 539m x 250m
= 47g / m
3
b. Without the inversion layer, at 4km
z
= 498m,
y
= 539m so,
C 4km, 0 ( ) =
Q
u
y

z
exp
H
2
2
z
2

=
80x10
6
g / s
x 5m/s x 539m x 498m
exp
50
2
2x498
2

= 19g / m
3
Pg. 7.19
7.47 Agricultural burn. Clear fall afternoon, winds 3 m/s, so stability class "C" (Table 7.7),
and
z
= 26m (Table 7.9). Using (7.57),
C 0.4km ( ) =
2q
2 u
z
=
2x300mg / m s
2 x 3m/s x 26m
= 3.0mg / m
3
0.3g/s-m
u=3m/s
400m
7.48 A freeway modelled as a line source:
10,000
vehicles/hr u=2m/s
200m
1.5 g/mi
Clear summer, 2 m/s, Table 7.7 suggests Class A or A-B.
At 0.2 km,
z
= 29m for Class A;
z
= 20m for Class B. What should we use? Since it
is somewhere between Class A and Class B, but closer to A, let's use
z
26m:
To find the linear emission rate:
q =10, 000
vehicles
hr
x
1 hr
3600s
x
1.5g
mi vehicle
x
mi
5280ft
x
ft
0.3048m
= 2.58x10
3
g / m s = 2.58mg / m s
Then, using (7.57),
C 0.2km ( ) =
2q
2 u
z
=
2x2.58mg / m s
2 x 2m/s x 26m
= 0.04mg / m
3
7.49 Box model, 250,000 vehicles between 4 and 6pm, driving 40km ea, emitting 4g/km
CO.
a. q
s
= 250, 000veh. x
40km
veh
x
4gCO
km
x
1
2hrs
x
hr
3600s
x
1
15x80x10
6
m
2
= 4.6x10
6
gCO/ m
2
s
b. Using (7.61) with t= 2hrs x 3600s/hr =7200s,
C t ( ) =
q
s
L
uH
1 e
ut / L
( )
Pg. 7.20
=
4.6x10
6
g / m
2
s x 15, 000m
0.5m/ s x 15m
1 e
0.5m / s7200s / 15000m
( )
= 0.002g / m
3
= 2mg / m
3
c. With no wind, go back to (7.58) and solve the differential equation:

LWH
dC
dt
= q
s
LW
dC =
q
s
LW
LWH
dt so, C =
q
s
H
t
C =
q
s
H
t =
4.6x10
6
gCO/ m
2
s
15m
x 2hrs x
3600s
hr
= 0.0022gCO/ m
3
= 2.2mg / m
3
7.50 Box model, 10
5
m on a side, H=1200m, u=4m/s, SO
2
4m/s
Cin=0
10 m
5
5
10 m
1200m
20 k g/s
input rate = output rate
20
kg
s
x
10
9
g
kg
= 4
m
s
x 10
5
m x 1200m x C
g
m
3
( )
C =
20x10
9
4x10
5
x1200
= 41.7g / m
3
7.51 Assume steady-state conditions were achieved by 5pm Friday so that from Problem
7.50, C(0) = 41.7 g/m
3
.
With q
s
= 0, and C
in
= 0, (7.60) gives us C(t) = C 0 ( )e
ut / L
.
a. At midnight, t=7hrs x 3600s/hr = 2.52x10
4
s
C(t) = C 0 ( )e
ut / L
= 41.7g/ m
3
e
-4m/s 2.52x10
4
s 10
5
m
=15.2g / m
3
b. Starting up again at 8am on Monday, by 5pm (9hrs later):
first check to see concentration left from Friday at 5pm (63 hrs earlier):
C(t) = C 0 ( )e
ut / L
= 41.7g/ m
3
e
-4m/s 63hrx3600 s / hr 10
5
m
= .005g / m
3
0
Pg. 7.21
so we can ignore that and let C(0) = 0 at 8am Monday. First find the emissions per
unit area,
q
s
=
emission rate
area
=
20kg / s x 10
9
g / kg
10
5
m x 10
5
m
= 2.0g/ m
2
s
Then use (7.57) with C
in
= 0:
C t ( ) =
q
s
L
uH
1 e
ut / L
( )
=
2.0g/ m
2
s x 10
5
m
4m/ s x 1200m
1 e
( 4m / s x 9hr x 3600s/hr/10
5
m)
( )
= 30.2g / m
3
7.52 Steady-state conditions from Prob 7.50, wind drops to 2 m/s, 2hrs later:
From Prob. 7.50, emission rate qs = 2.0 g/m
2
-s, and C = 41.7g/m
3
. Using (7.60),
C t ( ) =
q
s
L
uH
1 e
ut / L
( ) + C(0)e
ut / L
C 2hr ( ) =
2.0g / m
2
s x 10
5
m
2m/ s x 1200m
1 e
( 2m / s x 2hr x 3600s/hr/10
5
m)
( )
+ 41.7e
2m / s x 2hr x3600s/hr /10
5
m ( )
= 47.3 g/m
3
7.53 Modified Prob. 7.50, now incoming air has 5 g/m
3
and there are 10 g/m
3
there at 8am. Find the concentration at noon:
4m/s
Cin=5 g/m3
10 m
5
5
10 m
1200m
2 g/m2-s

C t ( ) =
q
s
L
uH
+ C
in

1 e
ut / L
( )
+ C(0)e
ut / L
(7.60)
C 4hr ( ) =
2.0g / m
2
s x 10
5
m
4m/ s x 1200m
+ 5g / m
3

1 e
( 4 m/ s x 4hr x 3600s/hr/10
5
m)
( )
+ 10e
4m / s x 4hr x3600s/hr /10
5
m ( )
C(4hr = noon) = 26.1 g/m
3
.
Pg. 7.22
7.54 Now using conditions of Prob 7.50, but for a nonconservative pollutant with
K=0.23/hr:
Rate into box = Rate out of box + Rate of decay
S = u W H C + K C V
20
kg
s
x
10
9
g
kg
= 4
m
s
x 10
5
m x 1200m x C
g
m
3
( )
+
0.23
hr
x C
g
m
3
x
1hr
3600s
x10
5
m x 10
5
m x 1200m

20x10
9
= 4.8x10
8
C + 7.6x10
8
C
C = 16 g/m
3
7.55 Starting with (7.64) and using the special conditions of this tracer-gas study; that is, a
conservative tracer (K=0), no tracer in the air leaking into the room (C
a
=0), and the
tracer source turned off at t=0 (S=0) gives the exponential decay of tracer as:

C t ( ) = C
0
e
nt
and then taking the log:

ln C t ( ) [ ]
= ln C
0
( ) nt
which is of the form y = mx + b, where y = lnC, m = n(ach), and b = lnC
o
time (hr) C (ppm) ln C
0 10.0 2.303
0.5 8.0 2.079
1.0 6.0 1.792
1.5 5.0 1.609
2.0 3.3 1.194
3 2 1 0
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
time (hr)
l
n

C
From the graph, the slope is about: slope
2.11.3 ( )
2.0 0.5
= 0.53
Thus, the infiltration rate is about 0.53 air changes per hour.
Pg. 7.23
7.56 Infiltration 0.5ach, 500m
3
volume, 200 m
2
2
s:
0.5 ach
V=500m
3
0.6pCi/m s
2
K=7.6x10 /hr
- 3
Using (7.63) with K = 7.6x10
-3
/hr (Table 7.14),
S =
S
V
( )
I + K
=
0.6pCi / m
2
s x 200m
2
500m
3

0.5 / hr + 7.6x10
3
/ hr
( )
x
1hr
3600s
= 1700pCi / m
3
=1.7pCi / L
7.57 Same as Problem 7.56 but have half as much ground-floor area to let radon in, so:
S =
S
V
( )
I + K
=
0.6pCi / m
2
s x 100m
2
500m
3

0.5 / hr + 7.6x10
3
/ hr
( )
x
1hr
3600s
= 850pCi / m
3
= 0.85pCi / L
7.58 From Problem 7.56, the radon concentration is 1.7 pCi/L. Using a residential
exposure factor of 350 days/yr from Table 4.10

Exposure =
1.7pCi/L x 350
day
yr
x30yr
365day/yr x 70yr
= 0.70 pCi/L average over 70 yrs
From Problem 4.10 we are given a cancer death rate of 1 per 8000 rems exposure. From
Problem 4.12 a 1.5 pCi/L radon concentration yields an exposure of about 400 mrem/yr.

Risk = 0.70 pCi/L x
400mrem/yr
1.5pCi/L
x
1 cancer death
8000 rem
x
rem
10
3
mrem
x70yr = 0.0016 0.16%
Pg. 7.24
7.59 A 300m
3
house, 0.2ach, oven+2burners 6pm to 7pm, find CO at 7pm and and 10pm.
For these circumstances, (7.65) is appropriate:

C t ( ) =
S
IV
1e
n t
( )
(7.65)
From Table 7.13, the source strength S is
6 7 pm: Oven + 2 burners = 1900 mg/hr + 2 x 1840 mg/hr = 5580 mg/hr CO
solving for C after 1 hr:
C 1hr, 7pm ( ) =
5580mg/hr
0.2
airchange
hr
x300
m
3
ac
1 e
0. 2/ hr x 1hr
( ) = 16.8mg / m
3
Now turn off the burners and watch CO coast down until 10pm, 3hrs later:

C(10pm) = C(7pm) x e
n t
=16.8 e
0.2/hr x 3hrs
= 9.3mg/m
3
7.60 n = 0.39 ach, V = 27m
3
, after 1-hr NO = 4.7ppm. Find source strength, S:
First convert NO in ppm to mg/m
3
using (1.9) and assuming T=25
o
C,
mg / m
3
=
ppm x mol wt
24.465
=
4.7 x 14 +16 ( )
24.465
= 5.76mg / m
3
a. To find the NO source strength, rearrange (7.65)

S =
n V C
1e
n t
( )
=
0.39
ac
hr
x27
m
3
ac
x5.76
mg
m
3
1e
0.39/hr x 1hr
( )
=188 mgNO/hr
b. 1-hr after turning off the heater,

C = C
0
e
n t
= 4.7ppm x e
-0.39/hr x 1hr
= 3.2 ppmNO
c. In a house with 0.2 ach, 300m
3
,

C ( ) =
S
n V
=
188 mg/hr
0.2
ac
hr
x 300
m
3
ac
= 3.1 mg/m
3
NO
Using (1.9) again gives

ppm=
24.465
ppm x mol wt
=
24.465
3.1 x (14 +16)
= 2.6 ppm NO
Pg. 7.25
7.61 Find the settling velocity of 2.5-micron particles having density 1.5x10
6
g/m
3
. In a
room with 2.5-meter-high ceilings, use a well-mixed box model to estimate the
residence time of these particles.
From (7.24) the settling velocity is

v =
d
2
g
18
=
2.5x10
6
m
( )
2
1.5x10
6
g/m
3
( )
9.8m/s
2
( )
18x0.0172g/m s
= 2.97x10
4
m/s
From Example 7.4, the residence time is

=
h
v
=
2.5 m
2.97 x 10
4
m/s x 3600 s/hr
= 2.3 hours

7.62 100,000 kW coal plant, 33.3% efficient, CF = 0.70,
a. Electricity generated per year,

100,000 kW x 24 hr/day x 365 day/yr x 0.70 = 613x10
6
kWh/yr
b. heat input = 613x10
6
kWh / yr out x
3 kWh
t
in
1 kWh
e
out
x
3412Btu
kWh
= 6.28x10
12
Btu / yr
c. Shut it down and sell the allowances,
SO
2
saved by shutting down = 6.28x10
12
Btu
yr
x
0.6 lb SO
2
10
6
Btu
x
ton
2000 lb
= 1883 tons/yr

1883
tons
yr
x
1 allowance
ton
x
\$400
allowance
= \$753,200/yr