To date, the state Department of Health has received one report on emissions at H-POWER. The tests were run last February, shortly after H-POWER began burning refuse-derived fuel.
The results show no emission exceeding the established limits. Still, the report concedes a few problems. In one test, “the reported particulate catch was -70.7 milligrams” – an impossible result. “The cause for the discrepancy could not be determined; therefore, the particulate results for this run cannot be used.” The report also notes “sampling problems with the EPA Method 3 flue gas samples” for three more test runs.
Altogether, 24 tests were run on emissions from the boiler stacks (12 tests for each boiler). Three repetitions of each of four different tests – for organics, stack gases, hydrogen fluoride, and particulate metals – were carried out.
Not all the tests were conducted under optimal conditions. In fact, from a review of the test logs, one might reasonably infer that nine tests were conducted under such adverse conditions as to cast doubt on the validity and utility of the readings obtained.
For example, on February 12, three tests were begun on Boiler 1 at 10:30 a.m. The test for hydrogen fluoride ended 86 minutes later, but before the other two tests – for flue gases and organic chemicals – were finished, at 1:25 p.m., the data collector notes: “SO2 high, SDA [spray dryer absorber] out, temp. high, operators think restricted slurry flow, possibly the strainer.”
At 1:30, a second hydrogen fluoride test was begun. Ten minutes later, “Operator checked strainer/strainer is not clogged, SO2 spike could be due to SO2 into scrubber.” At 1:50, the logo entry reads: “Boiler operator was having trouble getting fuel to the boiler; waste processing facility did not feed his train – auger speed picked up, causing rapid RDF feed into the boiler. Steam flow 277 kpph. Operator thinks SO2 high readings due to boiler feed.”
At 2:05, “operators want to flush scrubber system.” One minute later, the tests for flue gases and organics were pronounced finished, while the ongoing test for hydrogen fluoride was interrupted. At 2:10, “flush system. Add water to system Lime slurry to concentrators.”
At 4:01, the hydrogen fluoride test was resumed, and two more tests (for organics and flue gases) were begun. The log notes: “Resumed testing because SDA temp down. Found problem: Recirc. line w/out orafice [sic] was inadvertently left open. Water went through recirc. line instead of to the scrubber. Discovered at 1600.”
Boiler No. 2 behaved no better when a battery of tests was run on it on February 15. Testing began at 6:47 p.m. At 7:34, the log shows an “interrupt” – “Probe pulled on 2-M5/MMTL-3 [the test for metals and particulates], port change was taking place on 2-MM5-3 [test for dioxins and furans] and both tests were stopped because boiler #1 tripped due to empty metering bin & monitoring camera malfunction. Boiler No. 2 took erratic swings due to Boiler No. 1 tripping off line.”
At 8:45, “Boiler No. 2 stabilized and both tests resumed.”
At 10:57 p.m., “RDF feed conveyer trip” is noted. The conveyor is reported back in service two minutes later, and at 11:00 p.m., the test for metals is ended.
However, the log notes that since 10:30, “heavy duty electrical wire in building Entropy [the testing firm] is using for analyzers smoldering.” At 11:09, the notation is made: “Analyzers losing power – reading seems inaccurate.”
23:10: “Interrupt. All power to Entropy’s equipment lost.”
23:10: “Test 2-MM5-3 & 2-CEM-3 on hold.”
24:41: “Power restored – all equipment working except hydrocarbon analyzer which was apparently damaged during power outage. – Test 2-MM5-3 & 21-CEM-3 (except for THC) resumed.”
At 12:21 a.m., “test completed.” The log shows. Boiler No. 1 was tested again on February 16. Among the problems noted were: low feedwater temperature (feedwater heater was reported out): tripped conveyer, with RDF feed stopped; a broken RDF feed conveyor coupling; oil in the boiler; and a plug on Auger #5, resulting in a backup.
Wilfred Nagamine is the engineer at the state Department of Health responsible for overseeing H-POWER’s compliance with emissions standards. When asked about the test logs, Nagamine noted that in some cases, the emissions values obtained might actually work against H-POWER.
In the letter from HRRV that covered the test report, J.M. Smith, HRRV Project Manager, told Nagamine that “Observers from HDOH witnessed testing and cleanup procedures at the site.”
Environment Hawai`i asked Nagamine whether the Department of Health observers were in fact on site February 15 for the battery of tests that lasted past midnight. Nagamine indicated it was unlikely that the Health Department’s observers were there.
“The testing was difficult to monitor,” he said. “There was the length of tests, the complexity, and the fact we had different people going out there all the time.
“Many times they had to stop and restart. We had calls coming in during the tests. I recall the conveyor belt with RDF did break down several times.”
There are no plans to retest for emissions compliance until next year.
Volume 1, Number 4 October 1990
Leave a Reply