Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing technologies for reducing dust emissions from sintermaking based on cross-media effects and economic analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Industrial Emission Directive (IED) requires industrial establishments to apply the best available techniques (BATs), and competent environmental authorities to set permit conditions based on the emission levels associated with BATs. However, the Directive provides no tools for the assessment of BATs leading to the determination of BAT at the installation level. This study applies the cross-media effects assessment methodology to assess BATs at the installation level, applicable to all industrial sectors. The methodology considers cross-media impacts, economic evaluations such as initial and operation and maintenance cost, and cost-effectiveness as the assessment criteria and relies on emission data both from the local level and operating installations. As an example of application, the methodology was applied to the BAT selection for reducing dust emissions from the sintering process of the iron and steel production. The BAT options of the integrated bag filter system (BFS) and advanced electrostatic precipitator (ESP) were compared. The results suggested that ESP has lower impacts in the impact categories of acidification potential, photochemical ozone creation potential, and eutrophication potential than BFS. In contrast, BFS has lower impacts on the other categories. However, the results from the economic analyses revealed a remarkable advantage of ESP over BFS. With these findings, it was concluded that the identification of the best abatement option for dust emissions with a particular reference to BAT is a complex issue. Industrial establishments and the competent environmental authorities must consider not only the environmental impacts and economic evaluations but also legal obligations in developing their approach to emission control.

Graphic Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AP:

Acidification potential

APi :

Acidification potential of pollutant i

AP-I:

Acidification potential index

AT:

Aquatic toxicity potential

AT-I:

Aquatic toxicity index

BAT:

Best available techniques

BAT-AEL:

BAT-associated emission level

BAT-AEPL:

BAT-associated environmental performance level

BFG:

Blast furnace gas

BREF:

Best available techniques reference document

BREF-IS:

Best available techniques (BATs) reference document for iron and steel production

BFS:

Bag filter system

COG:

Coke oven gas

EC:

European Commission

EP:

Eutrophication potential

EPi :

Eutrophication potential of pollutant i

EP-I:

Eutrophication potential index

ESP:

Electrostatic precipitator

EU:

European Union

GWP:

Global warming potential

GWPi :

Global warming potential of pollutant i

GWP-I:

Global warming potential index

HCB:

Hexachlorobenzene

HTP:

Human toxicity potential

HTPi :

Human toxicity potential of pollutant i

HTP-I:

Human toxicity potential index

IED:

Industrial emissions directive

IPPC:

Integrated pollution prevention and control directive

I-TEQ:

International toxic equivalent

m i :

Mass of pollutant i emitted

NPV:

Net present value

PAH:

Poly aromatic hydrocarbon

PCB:

Polychlorinated biphenyl

PCDD/F:

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofuranes

PNEC:

Predicted no-effect concentration

POCP:

Photochemical ozone creation potential

POCPi :

Photochemical ozone creation potential of pollutant i

POCP-I:

Photochemical ozone creation potential index

REF:

Reference document

REF-ECM:

Reference document on economics and cross-media effects

SMEs:

Small- and medium-sized enterprise

US-EPA:

United States Environmental Protection Agency

References

  • Almeida SM, Lage J, Fernández B, Garcia S, Reis MA, Chaves PC (2015) Chemical characterization of atmospheric particles and source apportionment in the vicinity of a steelmaking industry. Sci Total Environ 521–522:411–420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Branchini L, Cagnoli P, De Pascale A, Lussu F, Orlandini V, Valentini E (2015) Environmental assessment of renewable fuel energy systems with cross-media effects approach. Energy Procedia 81:655–664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cakir N, Alp E, Yetis U (2016) Evaluation of environmental performance based on proximity to BAT associated resource utilization and emission values: a case study in a steelmaking industry. Waste Biomass Valori 7(4):975–993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalier P (2016) Iron making and steelmaking processes: greenhouse emissions, control, and reduction. Springer, Basel, Switzerland

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cui S, Hao R, Fu D (2018) An integrated system of dielectric barrier discharge combined with wet electrostatic precipitator for simultaneous removal of NO and SO2: key factors assessments, products analysis and mechanism. Fuel 2211:12–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Czech T, Marchewicz A, Sobczyk A, Krupa A, Rosiak D (2020) Heavy metals partitioning in fly ashes between various stages of electrostatic precipitator after combustion of different types of coal. Process Saf Environ 133:18–31

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dellise M, Villot J, Gaucher R, Amardeil A, Laforest V (2020) Challenges in assessing Best Available Techniques (BATs) compliance in the absence of industrial sectoral reference. J Clean Prod 2631: Article 121474

  • Dijkmans R (2000) Methodology for selection of best available techniques (BAT) at the sector level. J Clean Prod 8:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dogan B, Kerestecioglu M, Yetis U (2010) Assessment of the best available wastewater management techniques for a textile mill: cost and benefit analysis. Water Sci Technol 61(4):963–970

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dors M, Mizeraczyk J, Czech T, Rea M (2018) Removal of NOx by DC and pulsed corona discharges in a wet electrostatic precipitator model. J Electrostat 45(11):25–36

    Google Scholar 

  • European Central Banks (ECB) (2020) Manual on MFI interest rate statistics. http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/reports.do?node=1000002883. Accessed 22 June 2020

  • European Commission (EC) (2006) Integrated pollution prevention and control, reference document on economics and cross-media effects. http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/. Accessed 21 June 2020

  • European Commission (EC) (2010) Directive 2010 (75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) OJ L334

  • European Commission (EC) (2012) Commission Implementing Decision 2012/135/EU of 28 February 2012 establishing the best available techniques (BAT) conclusions under Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions for iron and steel production [2010] OJ L70/63

  • European Commission (EC) (2013) Integrated pollution prevention and control, reference document on best available techniques for iron and steel production. http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/. Accessed 27 June 2020

  • Eurostat (2020) Commercial property price indicators: sources, methods and issues. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database?node_code=sts_inpp_m. Accessed 20 June 2020

  • Evrard D, Laforest V, Villot J, Gaucher R (2016a) Best available technique assessment methods: a literature review from sector to installation level. J Clean Prod 121:72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evrard D, Villot J, Armiyaou C, Gaucher R, Laforest V (2016b) Best available techniques: an integrated method for multicriteria assessment of reference installations. J Clean Prod 1761:1034–1044

    Google Scholar 

  • Geldermann J, Jahn C, Spengler T, Rentz O (1999) Proposal for an integrated approach for the assessment of cross-media aspects relevant for the determination of “best available techniques” BAT in the European Union. Int J Life Cycle Ass 4:94–106

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gielen D (2003) CO2 removal in the iron and steel industry. Energy Convers Manag 44:71027–71037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giner-Santonja G, Calvo VV, Lepe GR (2019) Application of AHP and corrective factors for the determination of best available techniques and emission limit values at installation level: a case study in four cement installations. Sci Total Environ 66010:834–840

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ibáñez-Forés V, Bovea MD, Azapagic A (2013) Assessing the sustainability of best available techniques (BAT): methodology and application in the ceramic tiles industry. J Clean Prod 51:162–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lanzerstorfer C (2015) Mechanical properties of dust collected by dust separators in iron ore sinter plants. Environ Technol 24:3186–3193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lau LL, Castro LFA, Dutra FD, Cantarino MV (2016) Characterization and mass balance of trace elements in an iron ore sinter plant. J Mater Res Tehnol 5(2):144–151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leung CC, Yu ITS, Chen W (2012) Silicosis. Lancet 379(983026):2008–2018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Masaguer V, Oulego P, Collado S, Villa-García MA, Díaz M (2018) Characterization of sinter flue dust to enhance alternative recycling and environmental impact at disposal. Waste Manag 79:251–259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Menad N, Tayibi H, Carcedo FG, Hernández A (2006) Minimization methods for emissions generated from sinter strands: a review. J Clean Prod 14(8):740–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sammut ML, Noack Y, Rose J, Hazemann JL, Proux O, Depoux M, Ziebel A, Fiani E (2010) Speciation of Cd and Pb in dust emitted from sinter plant. Chemosphere 78:45–450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Silvo K, Jouttijärv T, Melanen M (2009) Implications of regulation based on the IPPC Directive–A review on the Finnish pulp and paper industry. J Clean Prod 17:713–723

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tang L, Xue X, Jia M, Jing H, Wang S, Zhen R, Huang M, Tian J, Guo J, Li L, Bo X, Wang S (2020) Iron and steel industry emissions and contribution to the air quality in China. Atmos Environ 237, Article 117668

  • Turconi R, Boldrin A, Astrup T (2013) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: overview, comparability and limitations. Renew Sust Energ Rev 26:555–565

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turkish Electricity Generation Company (EÜAŞ) (2020) Electricity generation sector report 2019. https://www.euas.gov.tr/tr-TR/yillik-raporlar. Accessed 20 June 2020

  • Turkish Steel Producers Association (TCUD) (2019). http://celik.org.tr/category/sektorel-degerlendirme/. Accessed 20 June 2020

  • USEPA (1986) AP-42: compilation of air emissions factors. https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch12/final/c12s05.pdf. Accessed 15 April 2020

  • USEPA (1999) Economic and cost analysis for air pollution regulations. https://www.epa.gov/economic-and-cost-analysis-air-pollution-regulations. Accessed 25 June 2020

  • USEPA (2014) Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/emission-factors_2014.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2020

  • Wang X, Lei Y, Yan L, LiuT He K (2019) A unit-based emission inventory of SO2, NOx and PM for the Chinese iron and steel industry from 2010 to 2015. Sci Total Environ 6761:18–30

    Google Scholar 

  • World Steel Association (2019) World steel in figures. https://www.worldsteel.org/en/dam/jcr:96d7a585-e6b2-4d63-b943-4cd9ab621a91/World%2520Steel%2520in%2520Figures%25202019.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2020

  • Yasuyuki Z, Hogarh JN, Masunaga S (2012) Progress and perspective of perfluorinated compound risk assessment and management in various countries and institutes. Clean Technol Environ 14:9–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhan G, Guo Z (2013) Basic properties of sintering dust from iron and steel plant and potassium recovery. J Environ Sci 25(6):1226–1234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) for supporting this study (Grant Number 107G126).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Engineering, Middle East Technical University, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Nur Cakir, Emre Alp & Ulku Yetis

Authors
  1. Nur Cakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emre Alp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ulku Yetis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulku Yetis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 69 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cakir, N., Alp, E. & Yetis, U. Assessing technologies for reducing dust emissions from sintermaking based on cross-media effects and economic analysis. Clean Techn Environ Policy 22, 1909–1928 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01933-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01933-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation