(iv) Limit values at least as stringent as those specified in annex IV to each existing stationary source within a category mentioned in that annex, insofar as this is technically and economically feasible, taking into consideration annex V. A Party may, as an alternative, apply different emission reduction strategies that achieve equivalent overall emission reductions; (v) Effective measures to control emissions from mobile sources, taking into consideration annex VII.
\n
6.In the case of residential combustion sources, the obligations set out in paragraph 5 (b) (i) and (iii) above shall refer to all stationary sources in that category taken together.
\n
7.Where a Party, after the application of paragraph 5 (b) above, cannot achieve the requirements of paragraph 5 (a) above for a substance specified in annex III, it shall be exempted from its obligations in paragraph 5 (a) above for that substance.
\n
8.Each Party shall develop and maintain emission inventories for the substances listed in annex III, and shall collect available information relating to the production and sales of the substances listed in annexes I and II, for those Parties within the geographical scope of EMEP, using, as a minimum, the methodologies and the spatial and temporal resolution specified by the Steering Body of EMEP, and, for those Parties outside the geographical scope of EMEP, using as guidance the methodologies developed through the work plan of the Executive Body. It shall report this information in accordance with the reporting requirements set out in article 9 below.
\n
Article 4EXEMPTIONS
\n
1.Article 3, paragraph 1, shall not apply to quantities of a substance to be used for laboratory-scale research or as a reference standard.
\n
2.A Party may grant an exemption from article 3, paragraphs 1 (a) and (c), in respect of a particular substance, provided that the exemption is not granted or used in a manner that would undermine the objectives of the present Protocol, and only for the following purposes and under the following conditions: (a) For research other than that referred to in paragraph 1 above, if: (i) No significant quantity of the substance is expected to reach the environment during the proposed use and subsequent disposal; (ii) The objectives and parameters of such research are subject to assessment and authorization by the Party; and (iii) In the event of a significant release of a substance into the environment, the exemption will terminate immediately, measures will be taken to mitigate the release as appropriate, and an assessment of the containment measures will be conducted before research may resume; (b) To manage as necessary a public health emergency, if: (i) No suitable alternative measures are available to the Party to address the situation; (ii) The measures taken are proportional to the magnitude and severity of the emergency; (iii) Appropriate precautions are taken to protect human health and the environment and to ensure that the substance is not used outside the geographical area subject to the emergency; (iv) The exemption is granted for a period of time that does not exceed the duration of the emergency; and (v) Upon termination of the emergency, any remaining stocks of the substance are subject to the provisions of article 3, paragraph 1 (b); (c) For a minor application judged to be essential by the Party, if: (i) The exemption is granted for a maximum of five years; (ii) The exemption has not previously been granted by it under this article; (iii) No suitable alternatives exist for the proposed use; (iv) The Party has estimated the emissions of the substance resulting from the exemption and their contribution to the total emissions of the substance from the Parties; (v) Adequate precautions are taken to ensure that the emissions to the environment are minimized; and (vi) Upon termination of the exemption, any remaining stocks of the substance are subject to the provisions of article 3, paragraph 1 (b).
\n
3.Each Party shall, no later than ninety days after granting an exemption under paragraph 2 above, provide the secretariat with, as a minimum, the following information: (a) The chemical name of the substance subject to the exemption; (b) The purpose for which the exemption has been granted; (c) The conditions under which the exemption has been granted; (d) The length of time for which the exemption has been granted; (e) Those to whom, or the organization to which, the exemption applies; and (f) For an exemption granted under paragraphs 2 (a) and (c) above, the estimated emissions of the substance as a result of the exemption and an assessment of their contribution to the total emissions of the substance from the Parties.
\n
4.The secretariat shall make available to all Parties the information received under paragraph 3 above.
\n
Article 5EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY
\n
The Parties shall, in a manner consistent with their laws, regulations and practices, create favourable conditions to facilitate the exchange of information and technology designed to reduce the generation and emission of persistent organic pollutants and to develop cost-effective alternatives, by promoting, inter alia: (a) Contacts and cooperation among appropriate organizations and individuals in the private and public sectors that are capable of providing technology, design and engineering services, equipment or finance; (b) The exchange of and access to information on the development and use of alternatives to persistent organic pollutants as well as on the evaluation of the risks that such alternatives pose to human health and the environment, and information on the economic and social costs of such alternatives; (c) The compilation and regular updating of lists of their designated authorities engaged in similar activities in other international forums; (d) The exchange of information on activities conducted in other international forums.
\n
Article 6PUBLIC AWARENESS
\n
The Parties shall, consistent with their laws, regulations and practices, promote the provision of information to the general public, including individuals who are direct users of persistent organic pollutants. This information may include, inter alia: (a) Information, including labelling, on risk assessment and hazard; (b) Information on risk reduction; (c) Information to encourage the elimination of persistent organic pollutants or a reduction in their use, including, where appropriate, information on integrated pest management, integrated crop management and the economic and social impacts of this elimination or reduction; and (d) Information on alternatives to persistent organic pollutants, as well as an evaluation of the risks that such alternatives pose to human health and the environment, and information on the economic and social impacts of such alternatives.
\n
Article 7STRATEGIES, POLICIES, PROGRAMMES, MEASURES AND INFORMATION
\n
1.Each Party shall, no later than six months after the date on which this Protocol enters into force for it, develop strategies, policies and programmes in order to discharge its obligations under the present Protocol.
\n
2.Each Party shall: (a) Encourage the use of economically feasible, environmentally sound management techniques, including best environmental practices, with respect to all aspects of the use, production, release, processing, distribution, handling, transport and reprocessing of substances subject to the present Protocol and manufactured articles, mixtures or solutions containing such substances; (b) Encourage the implementation of other management programmes to reduce emissions of persistent organic pollutants, including voluntary programmes and the use of economic instruments; (c) Consider the adoption of additional policies and measures as appropriate in its particular circumstances, which may include non-regulatory approaches; (d) Make determined efforts that are economically feasible to reduce levels of substances subject to the present Protocol that are contained as contaminants in other substances, chemical products or manufactured articles, as soon as the relevance of the source has been established; (e) Take into consideration in its programmes for evaluating substances, the characteristics specified in paragraph 1 of Executive Body decision 1998/2 on information to be submitted and procedures for adding substances to annex I, II or III, including any amendments thereto.
\n
3.The Parties may take more stringent measures than those required by the present Protocol.
\n
Article 8RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND MONITORING
\n
The Parties shall encourage research, development, monitoring and cooperation related, but not limited, to: (a) Emissions, long-range transport and deposition levels and their modelling, existing levels in the biotic and abiotic environment, the elaboration of procedures for harmonizing relevant methodologies; (b) Pollutant pathways and inventories in representative ecosystems; (c) Relevant effects on human health and the environment, including quantification of those effects; (d) Best available techniques and practices, including agricultural practices, and emission control techniques and practices currently employed by the Parties or under development; (e) Methodologies permitting consideration of socio-economic factors in the evaluation of alternative control strategies; (f) An effects-based approach which integrates appropriate information, including information obtained under subparagraphs (a) to (e) above, on measured or modelled environmental levels, pathways, and effects on human health and the environment, for the purpose of formulating future control strategies which also take into account economic and technological factors; (g) Methods for estimating national emissions and projecting future emissions of individual persistent organic pollutants and for evaluating how such estimates and projections can be used to structure future obligations; (h) Levels of substances subject to the present Protocol that are contained as contaminants in other substances, chemical products or manufactured articles and the significance of these levels for long-range transport, as well as techniques to reduce levels of these contaminants, and, in addition, levels of persistent organic pollutants generated during the life cycle of timber treated with pentachlorophenol.
\n
Priority should be given to research on substances considered to be the most likely to be submitted under the procedures specified in article 14, paragraph 6.
\n
Article 9REPORTING
\n
1.Subject to its laws governing the confidentiality of commercial information: (a) Each Party shall report, through the Executive Secretary of the Commission, to the Executive Body, on a periodic basis as determined by the Parties meeting within the Executive Body, information on the measures that it has taken to implement the present Protocol; (b) Each Party within the geographical scope of EMEP shall report, through the Executive Secretary of the Commission, to EMEP, on a periodic basis to be determined by the Steering Body of EMEP and approved by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body, information on the levels of emissions of persistent organic pollutants using, as a minimum, the methodologies and the temporal and spatial resolution specified by the Steering Body of EMEP. Parties in areas outside the geographical scope of EMEP shall make available similar information to the Executive Body if requested to do so. Each Party shall also provide information on the levels of emissions of the substances listed in annex III for the reference year specified in that annex.
\n
2.The information to be reported in accordance with paragraph 1 (a) above shall be in conformity with a decision regarding format and content to be adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body. The terms of this decision shall be reviewed as necessary to identify any additional elements regarding the format or the content of the information that is to be included in the reports.
\n
3.In good time before each annual session of the Executive Body, EMEP shall provide information on the long-range transport and deposition of persistent organic pollutants.
\n
Article 10REVIEWS BY THE PARTIES AT SESSIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE BODY
\n
1.The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, pursuant to article 10, paragraph 2 (a), of the Convention, review the information supplied by the Parties, EMEP and other subsidiary bodies, and the reports of the Implementation Committee referred to in article 11 of the present Protocol.
\n
2.The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, keep under review the progress made towards achieving the obligations set out in the present Protocol.
\n
3.The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, review the sufficiency and effectiveness of the obligations set out in the present Protocol. Such reviews will take into account the best available scientific information on the effects of the deposition of persistent organic pollutants, assessments of technological developments, changing economic conditions and the fulfilment of the obligations on emission levels. The procedures, methods and timing for such reviews shall be specified by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body. The first such review shall be completed no later than three years after the present Protocol enters into force.
\n
Article 11COMPLIANCE
\n
Compliance by each Party with its obligations under the present Protocol shall be reviewed regularly. The Implementation Committee established by decision 1997/2 of the Executive Body at its fifteenth session shall carry out such reviews and report to the Parties meeting within the Executive Body in accordance with the terms of the annex to that decision, including any amendments thereto.
\n
Article 12SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
\n
1.In the event of a dispute between any two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Protocol, the Parties concerned shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice. The parties to the dispute shall inform the Executive Body of their dispute.
\n
2.When ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the present Protocol, or at anytime thereafter, a Party which is not a regional economic integration organization may declare in a written instrument submitted to the Depositary that, in respect of any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Protocol, it recognizes one or both of the following means of dispute settlement as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any Party accepting the same obligation: (a) Submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice; (b) Arbitration in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body, as soon as practicable, in an annex on arbitration.
\n
A Party which is a regional economic integration organization may make a declaration with like effect in relation to arbitration in accordance with the procedures referred to in subparagraph (b) above.
\n
3.A declaration made under paragraph 2 above shall remain in force until it expires in accordance with its terms or until three months after written notice of its revocation has been deposited with the Depositary.
\n
4.A new declaration, a notice of revocation or the expiry of a declaration shall not in any way affect proceedings pending before the International Court of Justice or the arbitral tribunal, unless the parties to the dispute agree otherwise.
\n
5.Except in a case where the parties to a dispute have accepted the same means of dispute settlement under paragraph 2, if after twelve months following notification by one Party to another that a dispute exists between them, the Parties concerned have not been able to settle their dispute through the means mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the dispute shall be submitted, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to conciliation.
\n
6.For the purpose of paragraph 5, a conciliation commission shall be created. The commission shall be composed of equal numbers of members appointed by each Party concerned or, where the Parties in conciliation share the same interest, by the group sharing that interest, and a chairperson chosen jointly by the members so appointed. The commission shall render a recommendatory award, which the Parties shall consider in good faith.
\n
Article 13ANNEXES
\n
The annexes to the present Protocol shall form an integral part of the Protocol. Annexes V and VII are recommendatory in character.
\n
Article 14AMENDMENTS
\n
1.Any Party may propose amendments to the present Protocol.
\n
2.Proposed amendments shall be submitted in writing to the Executive Secretary of the Commission, who shall communicate them to all Parties. The Parties meeting within the Executive Body shall discuss the proposed amendments at its next session, provided that the proposals have been circulated by the Executive Secretary to the Parties at least ninety days in advance.
\n
3.Amendments to the present Protocol and to annexes I to IV, VI and VIII shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body, and shall enter into force for the Parties which have accepted them on the ninetieth day after the date on which two thirds of the Parties have deposited with the Depositary their instruments of acceptance thereof. Amendments shall enter into force for any other Party on the ninetieth day after the date on which that Party has deposited its instrument of acceptance thereof.
\n
4.Amendments to annexes V and VII shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body. On the expiry of ninety days from the date of its communication to all Parties by the Executive Secretary of the Commission, an amendment to any such annex shall become effective for those Parties which have not submitted to the Depositary a notification in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5 below, provided that at least sixteen Parties have not submitted such a notification.
\n
5.Any Party that is unable to approve an amendment to annex V or VII shall so notify the Depositary in writing within ninety days from the date of the communication of its adoption. The Depositary shall without delay notify all Parties of any such notification received. A Party may at any time substitute an acceptance for its previous notification and, upon deposit of an instrument of acceptance with the Depositary, the amendment to such an annex shall become effective for that Party.
\n
6.In the case of a proposal to amend annex I, II, or III by adding a substance to the present Protocol: (a) The proposer shall provide the Executive Body with the information specified in Executive Body decision 1998/2, including any amendments thereto; and (b) The Parties shall evaluate the proposal in accordance with the procedures set forth in Executive Body decision 1998/2, including any amendments thereto.
\n
7.Any decision to amend Executive Body decision 1998/2 shall be taken by consensus of the Parties meeting within the Executive Body and shall take effect sixty days after the date of adoption.
\n
Article 15SIGNATURE
\n
1.The present Protocol shall be open for signature at Aarhus (Denmark) from 24 to 25 June 1998, then at United Nations Headquarters in New York until 21 December 1998, by States members of the Commission as well as States having consultative status with the Commission pursuant to paragraph 8 of Economic and Social Council resolution 36 (IV) of 28 March 1947, and by regional economic integration organizations, constituted by sovereign States members of the Commission, which have competence in respect of the negotiation, conclusion and application of international agreements in matters covered by the Protocol, provided that the States and organizations concerned are Parties to the Convention.
\n
2.In matters within their competence, such regional economic integration organizations shall, on their own behalf, exercise the rights and fulfil the responsibilities which the present Protocol attributes to their member States. In such cases, the member States of these organizations shall not be entitled to exercise such rights individually.
\n
Article 16RATIFICATION, ACCEPTANCE, APPROVAL AND ACCESSION
\n
1.The present Protocol shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by Signatories.
\n
2.The present Protocol shall be open for accession as from 21 December 1998 by the States and organizations that meet the requirements of article 15, paragraph 1.
\n
Article 17DEPOSITARY
\n
The instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary- General of the United Nations, who will perform the functions of Depositary.
\n
Article 18ENTRY INTO FORCE
\n
1.The present Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date on which the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession has been deposited with the Depositary.
\n
2.For each State and organization referred to in article 15, paragraph 1, which ratifies, accepts or approves the present Protocol or accedes thereto after the deposit of the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit by such Party of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.
\n
Article 19WITHDRAWAL
\n
At any time after five years from the date on which the present Protocol has come into force with respect to a Party, that Party may withdraw from it by giving written notification to the Depositary. Any such withdrawal shall take effect on the ninetieth day following the date of its receipt by the Depositary, or on such later date as may be specified in the notification of the withdrawal.
\n
Article 20AUTHENTIC TEXTS
\n
The original of the present Protocol, of which the English, French and Russian texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
\n
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed the present Protocol. Done at Aarhus (Denmark), this twenty-fourth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-eight.
\n
ANNEX I SUBSTANCES SCHEDULED FOR ELIMINATION Unless otherwise specified in the present Protocol, this annex shall not apply to the substances listed below when they occur: (i) as contaminants in products; or (ii) in articles manufactured or in use by the implementation date; or (iii) as site-limited chemical intermediates in the manufacture of one or more different substances and are thus chemically transformed. Unless otherwise specified, each obligation below is effective upon the date of entry into force of the Protocol.
\n
Substance Implementation requirements Elimination of Conditions Aldrin CAS: 309–00–2 Production None Use None Chlordane CAS: 57–74–9 Production None Use None Chlordecone CAS: 143–50–0 Production None Use None DDT CAS: 50–29–3 Production 1. Elimination production within one year of consensus by the Parties that suitable alternatives to DDT are available for public healt protection from diseases such as malaria and encephalitis.2. With a view to eliminationg the production of DDT at the earliest opportunity, the Parties shall, no later than one year after the data of entry into force of the present Portoról and periodically thereafter as necessary, and in consultation with the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Orgnization of the United Nations and the United Nations Environment Programme, review the availability and feasibility of alternatives and, as appropriate, promote the commercialization of safer and economically viable aternatives to DDT.
\n
Use None, except as identified in annex II.
\n
Dieldrin CAS: 60–51–1 Production None Use None Endrin CAS: 72–20–8 Production None Use None Heptachlor CAS: 76–44–8 Production None Use None, except for use by certified personnel for the control of fire ants in closed industrial electrical junction boxes. Such use shall be re-evaluated under this Protocol no later than two years after the date of entry into force.
\n
Hexabromobiphenyl Production None CAS: 36355–01–8 Use None HexachlorobenzeneCAS: 118–74–1 Production None, except for production for a limited purpose as specified in a statement deposited by a country with an economy in transition upon signature or accession.
\n
Use None, except for a limited use as specified in a statement deposited by a country with an economy in transition upon signature or accession.
\n
Mirex CAS: 2385–85–5 Production None Use None PCB * Production None, except for countries with economies in transition which shall eliminate production as soon as possible and no later than 31 December 2005 and which state in a declaration to be deposited together with their instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, their intention to do so.
\n
Use None, except as identified in annex II.
\n
Toxaphene CAS: 8001–35–2 Production None Use None ANNEX II SUBSTANCES SCHEDULED FOR RESTRICTIONS ON USE Unless otherwise specified in the present Protocol, this annex shall not apply to the substances listed below when they occur: (i) as contaminants in products; or (ii) in articles manufactured or in use by the implementation date; or (iii) as site-limited chemical intermediates in the manufacture of one or more different substances and are thus chemically transformed. Unless otherwise specified, each obligation below is effective upon the date of entry into force of the Protocol.
\n
Substance Implementation requirements Restricted to uses Conditions DDT CAS: 50–29–3 1. For public health protection from diseases such as malaria encephalitis.2. As a chemical intermediate to produce Dicofol.
\n
1.Use allowed only as a component of an integrated pest management strategy and only to the extent necessary and only until one year after the date of the elimination of production in accordance with annex I.2. Such use shall be reassessed no later than two years after the date of entry into force of the present Protocol HCH CAS: 608–73–1 Technical HCH (i.e. HCH mixed isomers) is restricted to use as an intermediate in chemical manufacturing.
\n
Products in which at least 99% of the HCH isomer is in the gamma form (i.e. lindane, CAS: 58–89–9) are restricted to the following uses:1. Seed treatment.2. Soil applications directly followed by incorporation into the topsoil surface layer3. Professional remedial and industrial treatment of lumber, timer and logs4. Public health and veterinary topical insecticide.5. Non-aerial application to tree seedlings, small-scale lawn use, and indoor and outdoor use for nursery stock and ornamentals.6. Indoor industrial and residential applications All restricted uses of lindane shall be reassessed under the Protocol no later than two years after the date of entry into force PCB * PCBs in use as of the date of entry into force or produced up to 31 December 2005 in accordance with the provisions of annex I.
\n
Parties shall make determined efforts designed to lead to:(a) The elimination of the use of identifiable PCBs in equipment (i.e. transformers, capacitors or other receptacles containing residual liquid stocks) containing PCBs in volumes greater than 5 dm3 and having a concentration of 0.05% PCBs or greater, as soon as possible, but no later than 31 December 2010, or 31 December 2015 for countries with; (b) The destruction or decontamination in an environmentally sound manner of all liquid PCBs referred to in subparagraph (a) and other liquid PCBs containing more than 0.005% PCBs not in equipment, as soon as possible, but no later than 31 December 2015, or 31 December 2020 for countries with economies in transition; and(c) The decontamination or disposal of equipment referred in subparagraph (a) in an environmentally sound manner.
\n
ANNEX III SUBSTANCES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 3, PARAGRAPH 5 (a), AND THE REFERENCE YEAR FOR THE OBLIGATION Substance Reference year PAHs * 1990; or an alternative year from 1985 to 1995 inclusive, specified by a Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession Dioxins/furans * 1990; or an alternative year from 1985 to 1995 inclusive, specified by a Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.
\n
Hexachlorobenzene 1990; or an alternative year from 1985 to 1995 inclusive, specified by a Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.
\n
ANNEX IV LIMIT VALUES FOR PCDD/F FROM MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES I. INTRODUCTION 1. A definition of dioxins and furans (PCDD/F) is provided in annex III to the present Protocol.
\n
2.Limit values are expressed as ng/m3 or mg/m3 under standard conditions (273.15 K, 101.3 kPa, and dry gas).
\n
3.Limit values relate to the normal operating situation, including start-up and shutdown procedures, unless specific limit values have been defined for those situations.
\n
4.Sampling and analysis of all pollutants shall be carried out according to the standards laid down by the Comité européen de normalisation (CEN), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), or the corresponding United States or Canadian reference methods. While awaiting the development of CEN or ISO standards, national standards shall apply.
\n
5.For verification purposes, the interpretation of measurement results in relation to the limit value must also take into account the inaccuracy of the measurement method. A limit value is considered to be met if the result of the measurement, from which the inaccuracy of the measurement method is subtracted, does not exceed it.
\n
6.Emissions of different congeners of PCDD/F are given in toxicity equivalents (TE) in comparison to 2,3,7,8-TCDD using the system proposed by the NATO Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (NATO–CCMS) in 1988.
\n
II. LIMIT VALUES FOR MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES 7. The following limit values, which refer to 11% O2 concentration in flue gas, apply to the following incinerator types: Municipal solid waste (burning more than 3 tonnes per hour) 0.1 ng TE/m3 Medical solid waste (burning more than 1 tonne per hour) 0.5 ng TE/m3 Hazardous waste (burning more than 1 tonne per hour) 0.2 ng TE/m3 ANNEX V BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES TO CONTROL EMISSIONS OF PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FROM MAJOR STATIONAER SOURCES I. INTRODUCTION 1. The purpose of this annex is to provide the Parties to the Convention with guidance in identifying best available techniques to allow them to meet the obligations in article 3, paragraph 5, of the Protocol.
\n
2.„Best available techniques” (BAT) means the most effective and advanced stage in the development of activities and their methods of operation which indicate the practical suitability of particular techniques for providing in principle the basis for emission limit values designed to prevent and, where that is not practicable, generally to reduce emissions and their impact on the environment as a whole:
\n
–’Techniques’ includes both the technology used and the way in which the installation is designed, built, maintained, operated and decommissioned;
\n
–’Available’ techniques means those developed on a scale which allows implementation in the relevant industrial sector, under economically and technically viable conditions, taking into consideration the costs and advantages, whether or not the techniques are used or produced inside the territory of the Party in question, as long as they are reasonably accessible to the operator;
\n
–’Best’ means most effective in achieving a high general level of protection of the environment as a whole.
\n
In determining the best available techniques, special consideration should be given, generally or in specific cases, to the factors below, bearing in mind the likely costs and benefits of a measure and the principles of precaution and prevention:
\n
–The use of low-waste technology;
\n
–The use of less hazardous substances;
\n
–The furthering of recovery and recycling of substances generated and used in the process and of waste;
\n
–Comparable processes, facilities or methods of operation which have been tried with success on an industrial scale;
\n
–Technological advances and changes in scientific knowledge and understanding;
\n
–The nature, effects and volume of the emissions concerned;
\n
–The commissioning dates for new or existing installations;
\n
–The time needed to introduce the best available technique;
\n
–The consumption and nature of raw materials (including water) used in the process and its energy efficiency; The need to prevent or reduce to a minimum the overall impact of the emissions on the environment and the risks to it;
\n
–The need to prevent accidents and to minimize their consequences for the environment.
\n
The concept of best available techniques is not aimed at the prescription of any specific technique or technology, but at taking into account the technical characteristics of the installation concerned, its geographical location and the local environmental conditions.
\n
3.Information regarding the effectiveness and costs of control measures is based on documents received and reviewed by the Task Force and the Preparatory Working Group on POPs. Unless otherwise indicated, the techniques listed are considered to be well established on the basis of operational experience.
\n
4.Experience with new plants incorporating low-emission techniques, as well as with retrofitting of existing plants, is continuously growing. The regular elaboration and amendment of the annex will therefore be necessary. Best available techniques (BAT) identified for new plants can usually be applied to existing plants provided there is an adequate transition period and they are adapted.
\n
5.The annex lists a number of control measures which span a range of costs and efficiencies. The choice of measures for any particular case will depend on a number of factors, including economic circumstances, technological infrastructure and capacity, and any existing air pollution control measures.
\n
6.The most important POPs emitted from stationary sources are: (a) Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins/furans (PCDD/F); (b) Hexachlorobenzene (HCB); (c) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).
\n
Relevant definitions are provided in annex III to the present Protocol.
\n
II. MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES OF POP EMISSIONS 7. PCDD/F are emitted from thermal processes involving organic matter and chlorine as a result of incomplete combustion or chemical reactions. Major stationary sources of PCDD/F may be as follows: (a) Waste incineration, including co-incineration; (b) Thermal metallurgical processes, e.g. production of aluminium and other non-ferrous metals, iron and steel; (c) Combustion plants providing energy; (d) Residential combustion; and (e) Specific chemical production processes releasing intermediates and by-products.
\n
8.Major stationary sources of PAH emissions may be as follows: (a) Domestic wood and coal heating; (b) Open fires such as refuse burning, forest fires and after-crop burning; (c) Coke and anode production; (d) Aluminium production (via Soederberg process); and (e) Wood preservation installations, except for a Party for which this category does not make a significant contribution to its total emissions of PAH (as defined in annex III).
\n
9.Emissions of HCB result from the same type of thermal and chemical processes as those emitting PCDD/F, and HCB is formed by a similar mechanism. Major sources of HCB emissions may be as follows: (a) Waste incineration plants, including co-incineration; (b) Thermal sources of metallurgical industries; and (c) Use of chlorinated fuels in furnace installations.
\n
III. GENERAL APPROACHES TO CONTROLLING EMISSIONS OF POPs 10. There are several approaches to the control or prevention of POP emissions from stationary sources. These include the replacement of relevant feed materials, process modifications (including maintenance and operational control) and retrofitting existing plants. The following list provides a general indication of available measures, which may be implemented either separately or in combination: (a) Replacement of feed materials which are POPs or where there is a direct link between the materials and POP emissions from the source; (b) Best environmental practices such as good housekeeping, preventive maintenance programmes, or process changes such as closed systems (for instance in cokeries or use of inert electrodes for electrolysis); (c) Modification of process design to ensure complete combustion, thus preventing the formation of persistent organic pollutants, through the control of parameters such as incineration temperature or residence time; (d) Methods for flue-gas cleaning such as thermal or catalytic incineration or oxidation, dust precipitation, adsorption; (e) Treatment of residuals, wastes and sewage sludge by, for example, thermal treatment or rendering them inert.
\n
11.The emission levels given for different measures in tables 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 are generally case-specific. The figures or ranges give the emission levels as a percentage of the emission limit values using conventional techniques.
\n
12.Cost-efficient considerations may be based on total costs per year per unit of abatement (including capital and operational costs). POP emission reduction costs should also be considered within the framework of the overall process economics, e.g. the impact of control measures and costs of production. Given the many influencing factors, investment and operating cost figures are highly case-specific.
\n
IV. CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR THE REDUCTION OF PCDD/F EMISSIONS A. Waste incineration 13. Waste incineration includes municipal waste, hazardous waste, medical waste and sewage sludge incineration.
\n
14.The main control measures for PCDD/F emissions from waste incineration facilities are: (a) Primary measures regarding incinerated wastes; (b) Primary measures regarding process techniques; (c) Measures to control physical parameters of the combustion process and waste gases (e.g. temperature stages, cooling rate, O2 content, etc.); (d) Cleaning of the flue gas; and (e) Treatment of residuals from the cleaning process.
\n
15.The primary measures regarding the incinerated wastes, involving the management of feed material by reducing halogenated substances and replacing them by non-halogenated alternatives, are not appropriate for municipal or hazardous waste incineration. It is more effective to modify the incineration process and install secondary measures for flue-gas cleaning. The management of feed material is a useful primary measure for waste reduction and has the possible added benefit of recycling. This may result in indirect PCDD/F reduction by decreasing the waste amounts to be incinerated.
\n
16.The modification of process techniques to optimize combustion conditions is an important and effective measure for the reduction of PCDD/F emissions (usually 850°C or higher, assessment of oxygen supply depending on the heating value and consistency of the wastes, sufficient residence time – 850°C for ca. 2 sec – and turbulence of the gas, avoidance of cold gas regions in the incinerator, etc.). Fluidized bed incinerators keep a lower temperature than 850°C with adequate emission results. For existing incinerators this would normally involve redesigning and/or replacing a plant – an option which may not be economically viable in all countries. The carbon content in ashes should be minimized.
\n
17.Flue gas measures. The following measures are possibilities for lowering reasonably effectively the PCDD/F content in the flue gas. The de novo synthesis takes place at about 250 to 450°C. These measures are a prerequisite for further reductions to achieve the desired levels at the end of the pipe: (a) Quenching the flue gases (very effective and relatively inexpensive); (b) Adding inhibitors such as triethanolamine or triethylamine (can reduce oxides of nitrogen as well), but side-reactions have to be considered for safety reasons; (c) Using dust collection systems for temperatures between 800 and 1000°C, e.g. ceramic filters and cyclones; (d) Using low-temperature electric discharge systems; and (e) Avoiding fly ash deposition in the flue gas exhaust system.
\n
18.Methods for cleaning the flue gas are: (a) Conventional dust precipitators for the reduction of particle-bound PCDD/F; (b) Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) or selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR); (c) Adsorption with activated charcoal or coke in fixed or fluidized systems; (d) Different types of adsorption methods and optimized scrubbing systems with mixtures of activated charcoal, open hearth coal, lime and limestone solutions in fixed bed, moving bed and fluidized bed reactors. The collection efficiency for gaseous PCDD/F can be improved with the use of a suitable pre-coat layer of activated coke on the surface of a bag filter; (e) H2O2-oxidation; and (f) Catalytic combustion methods using different types of catalysts (i.e. Pt/Al2O3 or copper-chromite catalysts with different promoters to stabilize the surface area and to reduce ageing of the catalysts).
\n
19.The methods mentioned above are capable of reaching emission levels of 0.1 ng TE/m3 PCDD/F in the flue gas. However, in systems using activated charcoal or coke adsorbers/filters care must be taken to ensure that fugitive carbon dust does not increase PCDD/F emissions downstream. Also, it should be noted that adsorbers and dedusting installations prior to catalysts (SCR technique) yield PCDD/F-laden residues, which need to be reprocessed or require proper disposal.
\n
20.A comparison between the different measures to reduce PCDD/F in flue gas is very complex. The resulting matrix includes a wide range of industrial plants with different capacities and configuration. Cost parameters include the reduction measures for minimizing other pollutants as well, such as heavy metals (particle-bound or not particle-bound). A direct relation for the reduction in PCDD/F emissions alone cannot, therefore, be isolated in most cases. A summary of the available data for the various control measures is given in table 1.
\n
Table 1: Comparison of different flue-gas cleaning measures and process modifications in waste incineration plants to reduce PCDD/F emissions Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Primary measures by modification of feed materials:
\n
–Elimination of precursors and chlorine-containing feed materials; and– Management of waste streams.
\n
Resulting emission level not quantified; seems not to be linearly dependent on the amount of the feed material.
\n
Pre-sorting of feed material not effective; only parts could be collected; other chlorinecontaining material, for instance kitchen salt, paper, etc., cannot be avoided. For hazardous chemical waste this is not desirable.Useful primary measure and feasible in special cases (for instance, waste oils, electrical components, etc.) with the possible added benefit of recycling of the materials.
\n
Modification of process technology:
\n
–Optimized combustion conditions;
\n
Retrofitting of the whole process needed.
\n
–Avoidance of temperatures below 850°C and cold regions in flue gas;– Sufficient oxygen content; control of oxygen input depending on the heating value and consistency of feed material; and– Sufficient residence time and turbulence.
\n
Flue gas measures:Avoiding particle deposition by:
\n
Soot cleaners, mechanical rappers, sonic or steam soot blowers.
\n
Steam soot blowing can increasePCDD/F formation rates.
\n
Dust removal, generally in waste incinerators: < 10 Medium Removal of PCDD/F adsorbed onto particles. Removal methods of particles in hot flue gas streams used only in pilot plants.
\n
Fabric filters;
\n
1–0.1 Higher Use at temperatures < 150°C.
\n
Ceramic filters;
\n
Low efficiency Use at temperatures 800–1000°C.
\n
Cyclones; and Low efficiency Medium Primary measures by modification of feed materials:
\n
Electrostatic precipitation.
\n
Medium efficiency Use at a temperature of 450°C; promotion of the de novo synthesis of PCDD/F possible, higher NOx emissions, reduction of heat recovery.
\n
Catalytic oxidation.
\n
Use at temperatures of 800–1000°C. Separate gas phase abatement necessary.
\n
Gas quenching.
\n
High-performance adsorption unit with added activated charcoal particles (electrodynamic venturi).
\n
Selective catalytic reduction (SCR).
\n
High investment and low operating costs NOx reduction if NH3 is added; high space demand, spent catalysts and residues of activated carbon (AC) or lignite coke (ALC) may be disposed of, catalysts can be reprocessed by manufacturers in most cases, AC and ALC canbe combusted under strictly controlled conditions.
\n
Different types of wet and dry adsorption methods with mixtures of activated charcoal, open-hearth coke, lime and limestone solutions in fixed bed, moving bed and fluidized bed reactors:
\n
Fixed bed reactor, adsorption with activated charcoal or open- hearth coke; and < 2(0.1 ng TE/m3) High in- vestment, medium operating costs Removal of residuals, high demand of space.
\n
Entrained flow or circulating fluidized bed reactor with added activated coke/lime or limestone solutions and subsequent fabric filter. < 10(0.1 ng TE/m3) Low in- vestment, medium operating costs Removal of residuals.
\n
Addition of H2O2. < 2–5(0.1 ng TE/m3) Low in- vestment, low operating costs 21. Medical waste incinerators may be a major source of PCDD/F in many countries. Specific medical wastes such as human anatomical parts, infected waste, needles, blood, plasma and cytostatica are treated as a special form of hazardous waste, while other medical wastes are frequently incinerated on-site in a batch operation. Incinerators operating with batch systems can meet the same requirements for PCDD/F reduction as other waste incinerators.
\n
22.Parties may wish to consider adopting policies to encourage the incineration of municipal and medical waste in large regional facilities rather than in smaller ones. This approach may make the application of BAT more cost-effective.
\n
23.The treatment of residuals from the flue-gas cleaning process. Unlike incinerator ashes, these residuals contain relatively high concentrations of heavy metals, organic pollutants (including PCDD/F), chlorides and sulphides. Their method of disposal, therefore, has to be well controlled. Wet scrubber systems in particular produce large quantities of acidic, contaminated liquid waste. Some special treatment methods exist. They include: (a) The catalytic treatment of fabric filter dusts under conditions of low temperatures and lack of oxygen; (b) The scrubbing of fabric filter dusts by the 3-R process (extraction of heavy metals by acids and combustion for destruction of organic matter); (c) The vitrification of fabric filter dusts; (d) Further methods of immobilization; and (e) The application of plasma technology.
\n
B. Thermal processes in the metallurgical industry 24. Specific processes in the metallurgical industry may be important remaining sources of PCDD/F emissions.
\n
These are: (a) Primary iron and steel industry (e.g. blast furnaces, sinter plants, iron pelletizing); (b) Secondary iron and steel industry; and (c) Primary and secondary non-ferrous metal industry (production of copper).
\n
PCDD/F emission control measures for the metallurgical industries are summarized in table 2.
\n
25.Metal production and treatment plants with PCDD/F emissions can meet a maximum emission concentration of 0.1 ng TE/m3 (if waste gas volume flow > 5000 m3/h) using control measures.
\n
Table 2: Emission reduction of PCDD/F in the metallurgical industry Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Sinter plants Primary measures:
\n
–Optimization/encapsulation of sinter conveying belts;
\n
Low Not 100% achievable
\n
–Waste gas recirculation e.g. emission optimized sintering (EOS) reducing waste gas flow by ca. 35% (reduced costs of further secondary measures by the reduced waste gas flow), cap. 1 million Nm3/h;
\n
40 Low Secondary measures:
\n
–Electrostatic precipitation + molecular sieve;
\n
Medium efficiency Medium
\n
–Addition of limestone/activated carbon mixtures;
\n
High efficiency(0.1 ng TE/m3) Medium
\n
–High-performance scrubbers- existing installation: AIRFINE (Voest Alpine Stahl Linz) since 1993 for 600 000 Nm3/h; second installation planned in the Netherlands (Hoogoven) for 1998.
\n
High efficiency emission reduction to0.2–0.4 ng TE/m3 Medium 0.1 ng TE/m3 could be reached with higher energy demand; no existing installation Non-ferrous production (e.g. copper) Primary measures:
\n
Sinter plants
\n
–Pre-sorting of scrap, avoidance of feed material like plasticsand PVC-contaminated scrap, stripping of coatings and use of chlorine-free insulating materials;
\n
Low Secondary measures:
\n
–Quenching the hot waste gases;
\n
High efficiency Low
\n
–Use of oxygen or of oxygen-enriched air in firing, oxygen injection in the shaft kiln (providing complete combustion and minimization of waste gas volume);
\n
5–7 (1.5–2 TE/m3) High
\n
–Fixed bed reactor or fluidized jet stream reactor by adsorption with activated charcoal or open-hearth coal dust; (0.1 ng TE/m3) High
\n
–Catalytic oxidation; and (0.1 ng TE/m3) High
\n
–Reduction of residence time in the critical region of temperature in the waste gas system.
\n
Iron and steel production Primary measures:
\n
–Cleaning of the scrap from oil prior to charging of production vessels;
\n
Low Cleaning solvents have to be used.
\n
–Elimination of organic tramp materials such as oils, emulsions, greases, paint and plastics from feedstock cleaning;
\n
Low
\n
–Lowering of the specific high waste gas volumes;
\n
Mdeium
\n
–Separate collection and treatment of emissions from loading and discharging;.
\n
Low Secondary measures:
\n
–Separate collection and treatment of emissions from loading and discharging; and Low
\n
–Fabric filter in combination with coke injection. < 1 Medium Secondary aluminium production Primary measures:
\n
Sinter plants
\n
–Avoidance of halogenated material (hexachloroethane);
\n
Low
\n
–Avoidance of chlorine- containing lubricants (for instance chlorinated paraffins); and Low
\n
–Clean-up and sorting of dirty scrap charges, e.g. by swarf decoating and drying, swim-sink separation techniques and whirling stream deposition;
\n
Secondary measures:
\n
–Single- and multi-stage fabric filter with added activation of limestone/ activated carbon in front of the filter; < 1(0.1 ng TE/m3) Medium/high
\n
–Minimization and separate removal and purification of differently contaminated waste gas flows;
\n
Medium/high
\n
–Avoidance of particulate deposition Medium/ from the waste gas and promotion of rapid passing of the critical temperature range; and high
\n
–Improved pretreatment of aluminium scrap shredders by using swim-sink separation techniques and grading through whirling stream deposition.
\n
Medium/high Sinter plants 26. Measurements at sinter plants in the iron and steel industry have generally shown PCDD/F emissions in the range of 0.4 to 4 ng TE/m3. A single measurement at one plant without any control measures showed an emission concentration of 43 ng TE/m3.
\n
27.Halogenated compounds may result in the formation of PCDD/F if they enter sinter plants in the feed materials (coke breeze, salt content in the ore) and in added recycled material (e.g. millscale, blast furnace top gas dust, filter dusts and sludges from waste water treatment). However, similarly to waste incineration, there is no clear link between the chlorine content of the feed materials and emissions of PCDD/F. An appropriate measure may be the avoidance of contaminated residual material and de-oiling or degreasing of millscale prior to its introduction into the sinter plant.
\n
28.The most effective PCDD/F emission reduction can be achieved using a combination of different secondary measures, as follows: (a) Recirculating waste gas significantly reduces PCDD/F emissions. Furthermore, the waste gas flow is reduced significantly, thereby reducing the cost of installing any additional end-of-pipe control systems; (b) Installing fabric filters (in combination with electrostatic precipitators in some cases) or electrostatic precipitators with the injection of activated carbon/open-hearth coal/limestone mixtures into the waste gas; (c) Scrubbing methods have been developed which include pre-quenching of the waste gas, leaching by high-performance scrubbing and separation by drip deposition. Emissions of 0.2 to 0.4 ng TE/m3 can be achieved. By adding suitable adsorption agents like lignite coal cokes/coal slack, an emission concentration of 0.1 ng TE/m3 can be reached.
\n
Primary and secondary production of copper 29. Existing plants for the primary and secondary production of copper can achieve a PCDD/F emission level of a few picograms to 2 ng TE/m3 after flue-gas cleaning. A single copper shaft furnace emitted up to 29 ng TE/m3 PCDD/F before optimization of the aggregates. Generally, there is a wide range of PCDD/F emission values from these plants because of the large differences in raw materials used in differing aggregates and processes.
\n
30.Generally, the following measures are suitable for reducing PCDD/F emissions: (a) Pre-sorting scrap; (b) Pretreating scrap, for example stripping of plastic or PVC coatings, pretreating cable scrap using only cold/mechanical methods; (c) Quenching hot waste gases (providing utilization of heat), to reduce residence time in the critical region of temperature in the waste gas system; (d) Using oxygen or oxygen-enriched air in firing, or oxygen injection in the shaft kiln (providing complete combustion and minimization of waste gas volume); (e) Adsorption in a fixed bed reactor or fluidized jet stream reactor with activated charcoal or open-hearth coal dust; and (f) Catalytic oxidation.
\n
Production of steel 31. PCDD/F emissions from converter steelworks for steel production and from hot blast cupola furnaces, electric furnaces and electric arc furnaces for the melting of cast iron are significantly lower than 0.1 ng TE/m3. Cold-air furnaces and rotary tube furnaces (melting of cast iron) have higher PCDD/F emissions.
\n
32.Electric arc furnaces used in secondary steel production can achieve an emission concentration value of 0.1 ng TE/m3 if the following measures are used: (a) Separate collection of emissions from loading and discharging; and (b) Use of a fabric filter or an electrostatic precipitator in combination with coke injection.
\n
33.The feedstock to electric arc furnaces often contains oils, emulsions or greases. General primary measures for PCDD/F reduction can be sorting, de-oiling and de-coating of scraps, which may contain plastics, rubber, paints, pigments and vulcanizing additives.
\n
Smelting plants in the secondary aluminium industry 34. PCDD/F emissions from smelting plants in the secondary aluminium industry are in the range of approximately 0.1 to 14 ng TE/m3. These levels depend on the type of smelting aggregates, materials used and waste gas purification techniques employed.
\n
35.In summary, single- and multi-stage fabric filters with the addition of limestone/activated carbon/open-hearth coal in front of the filter meet the emission concentration of 0.1 ng TE/m3, with reduction efficiencies of 99%.
\n
36.The following measures can also be considered: (a) Minimizing and separately removing and purifying differently contaminated waste gas flows; (b) Avoiding waste gas particle deposition; (c) Rapidly passing the critical temperature range; (d) Improving the pre-sorting of scrap aluminium from shredders by using swim-sink separation techniques and grading through whirling stream deposition; and (e) Improving the pre-cleaning of scrap aluminium by swarf decoating and swarf drying.
\n
37.Options (d) and (e) are important because it is unlikely that modern fluxless smelting techniques (which avoid halide salt fluxes) will be able to handle the low-grade scrap that can be used in rotary kilns.
\n
38.Discussions are continuing under the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-east Atlantic regarding the revision of an earlier recommendation to phase out the use of hexachloroethane in the aluminium industry.
\n
39.The melt can be treated using state-of-the-art technology, for example with nitrogen/chlorine mixtures in the ratio of between 9:1 and 8:2, gas injection equipment for fine dispersion and nitrogen pre- and post-flushing and vacuum degreasing. For nitrogen/chlorine mixtures, a PCDD/F emission concentration of about 0.03 ng TE/m3 was measured (as compared to values of > 1 ng TE/m3 for treatment with chlorine only). Chlorine is required for the removal of magnesium and other undesired components.
\n
C. Combustion of fossil fuels in utility and industrial boilers 40. In the combustion of fossil fuels in utility and industrial boilers (>50 MW thermal capacity), improved energy efficiency and energy conservation will result in a decline in the emissions of all pollutants because of reduced fuel requirements. This will also result in a reduction in PCDD/F emissions. It would not be cost-effective to remove chlorine from coal or oil, but in any case the trend towards gas-fired stations will help to reduce PCDD/F emissions from this sector.
\n
41.It should be noted that PCDD/F emissions could increase significantly if waste material (sewage sludge, waste oil, rubber wastes, etc.) is added to the fuel. The combustion of wastes for energy supply should be undertaken only in installations using waste gas purification systems with highly efficient PCDD/F reduction (described in section A above).
\n
42.The application of techniques to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and particulates from the flue gas can also remove PCDD/F emissions. When using these techniques, PCDD/F removal efficiencies will vary from plant to plant. Research is ongoing to develop PCDD/F removal techniques, but until such techniques are available on an industrial scale, no best available technique is identified for the specific purpose of PCDD/F removal.
\n
D. Residential combustion 43. The contribution of residential combustion appliances to total emissions of PCDD/F is less significant when approved fuels are properly used. In addition, large regional differences in emissions can occur due to the type and quality of fuel, geographical appliance density and usage.
\n
44.Domestic fireplaces have a worse burn-out rate for hydrocarbons in fuels and waste gases than large combustion installations. This is especially true if they use solid fuels such as wood and coal, with PCDD/F emission concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.7 ng TE/m3.
\n
45.Burning packing material added to solid fuels increases PCDD/F emissions. Even though it is prohibited in some countries, the burning of rubbish and packing material may occur in private households. Due to increasing disposal charges, it must be recognized that household waste materials are being burned in domestic firing installations.
\n
The use of wood with the addition of waste packing material can lead to an increase in PCDD/F emissions from 0.06 ng TE/m3 (exclusively wood) to 8 ng TE/m3 (relative to 11% O2 by volume). These results have been confirmed by investigations in several countries in which up to 114 ng TE/m3 (with respect to 13% oxygen by volume) was measured in waste gases from residential combustion appliances burning waste materials.
\n
46.The emissions from residential combustion appliances can be reduced by restricting the input materials to good-quality fuel and avoiding the burning of waste, halogenated plastics and other materials. Public information programmes for the purchasers/operators of residential combustion appliances can be effective in achieving this goal.
\n
E. Firing installations for wood (<50 MW capacity) 47. Measurement results for wood-firing installations indicate that PCDD/F emissions above 0.1 ng TE/m3 occur in waste gases especially during unfavourable burn-out conditions and/or when the substances burned have a higher content of chlorinated compounds than normal untreated wood. An indication of poor firing is the total carbon concentration in the waste gas. Correlations have been found between CO emissions, burn-out quality and PCDD/F emissions. Table 3 summarizes some emission concentrations and factors for wood-firing installations.
\n
Table 3: Quantity-related emission concetrations and factors for wood-firing installations Fuel Emission concentration (ng TE/m3) Emission factor (ng TE/kg) Emission factor (ng/GJ) Natural wood (beech tree) 0.02–0.10 0.23–1.3 12–70 Natural wood chips from forests 0.07–0.21 0.79–2.6 43–140 Chipboard 0.02–0.08 0.29–0.9 16–50 Urban waste wood 2.7–14.4 26–173 1400–9400 Residential waste 114 3230 Charcoal 0.03 48. The combustion of urban waste wood (demolition wood) in moving grates leads to relatively high PCDD/F emissions, compared to non-waste wood sources. A primary measure for emission reduction is to avoid the use of treated waste wood in wood-firing installations. Combustion of treated wood should be undertaken only in installations with the appropriate flue-gas cleaning to minimize PCDD/F emissions.
\n
V. CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR THE REDUCTION OF PAH EMISSIONS A. Coke production 49. During coke production, PAHs are released into the ambient air mainly: (a) When the oven is charged through the charging holes; (b) By leakages from the oven door, the ascension pipes and the charging hole lids; and (c) During coke pushing and coke cooling.
\n
50.Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) concentration varies substantially between the individual sources in a coke battery. The highest BaP concentrations are found on the top of the battery and in the immediate vicinity of the doors.
\n
51.PAH from coke production can be reduced by technically improving existing integrated iron and steel plants. This might entail the closure and replacement of old coke batteries and the general reduction in coke production, for instance by injecting high-value coal in steel production.
\n
52.A PAH reduction strategy for coke batteries should include the following technical measures: (a) Charging the coke ovens:
\n
–Particulate matter emission reduction when charging the coal from the bunker into the charging cars;
\n
–Closed systems for coal transfer when coal pre-heating is used;
\n
–Extraction of filling gases and subsequent treatment, either by passing the gases into the adjacent oven or by passing via a collecting main to an incinerator and a subsequent dedusting device. In some cases the extracted filling gases may be burned on the charging cars, but the environmental performance and safety of these charging-car-based systems is less satisfactory. Sufficient suction should be generated by steam or water injection in the ascension pipes; (b) Emissions at charging hole lids during coking operation should be avoided by:
\n
–Using charging hole lids with highly efficient sealing;
\n
–Luting the charging hole lids with clay (or equally effective material) after each charging operation;
\n
–Cleaning the charging hole lids and frames before closing the charging hole;
\n
–Keeping oven ceilings free from coal residuals; (c) Ascension pipe lids should be equipped with water seals to avoid gas and tar emissions, and the proper operation of the seals should be maintained by regular cleaning; (d) Coke oven machinery for operating the coke oven doors should be equipped with systems for cleaning the seals’ surfaces on the oven door frames and oven doors; (e) Coke oven doors:
\n
–Highly effective seals should be used (e.g. spring-loaded membrane doors);
\n
–Seals on the oven doors and door frames should be cleaned thoroughly at every handling operation;
\n
–Doors should be designed in a manner that allows the installation of particulate matter extraction systems with connection to a dedusting device (via a collecting main) during pushing operations; (f) The coke transfer machine should be equipped with an integrated hood, stationary duct and stationary gas cleaning system (preferably a fabric filter); (g) Low-emission procedures should be applied for coke cooling, e.g. dry coke cooling. The replacement of a wet quenching process by dry coke cooling should be preferred, so long as the generation of waste water is avoided by using a closed circulation system. The dusts generated when dry quenched coke is handled should be reduced.
\n
53.A coke-making process referred to as „non-recovery coke-making” emits significantly less PAH than the more conventional by-product recovery process. This is because the ovens operate under negative pressure, thereby eliminating leaks to the atmosphere from the coke oven doors. During coking, the raw coke oven gas is removed from the ovens by a natural draught, which maintains a negative pressure in the ovens. These ovens are not designed to recover the chemical by-products from raw coke oven gas. Instead, the offgases from the coking process (including PAH) are burned efficiently at high temperatures and with long residence times. The waste heat from this incineration is used to provide the energy for coking, and excess heat may be used to generate steam.
\n
The economics of this type of coking operation may require a cogeneration unit to produce electricity from the excess steam. Currently there is only one non-recovery coke plant operating in the United States, and one is in operation in Australia. The process is basically a horizontal sole-flue non-recovery coke oven with an incineration chamber adjoining two ovens. The process provides for alternate charging and coking schedules between the two ovens. Thus, one oven is always providing the incineration chamber with coke gases. The coke gas combustion in the incineration chamber provides the necessary heat source. The incineration chamber design provides the necessary dwell time (approximately 1 second) and high temperatures (minimum of 900°C).
\n
54.An effective monitoring programme for leakages from coke oven door seals, ascension pipes and charging hole lids should be operated. This implies the monitoring and recording of leakages and immediate repair or maintenance. A significant reduction of diffuse emissions can thus be achieved.
\n
55.Retrofitting existing coke batteries to facilitate condensation of flue gases from all sources (with heat recovery) results in a PAH reduction of 86% to more than 90% in air (without regard to waste water treatment). Investment costs can be amortized in five years, taking into account recovered energy, heated water, gas for synthesis and saved cooling water.
\n
56.Increasing coke oven volumes results in a decrease in the total number of ovens, oven door openings (amount of pushed ovens per day), number of seals in a coke battery and consequently PAH emissions. Productivity increases in the same way by decreasing operating and personnel costs.
\n
57.Dry coke cooling systems require a higher investment cost than wet methods. Higher operating costs can be compensated for by heat recovery in a process of pre-heating the coke. The energy efficiency of a combined dry coke cooling/coal pre-heating system rises from 38 to 65%. Coal pre-heating boosts productivity by 30%. This can be raised to 40% because the coking process is more homogeneous.
\n
58.All tanks and installations for the storage and treatment of coal tar and coal tar products must be equipped with an efficient vapour recovery return and/or vapour destruction system. The operating costs of vapour destruction systems can be reduced in an autothermal after-burning mode if the concentration of the carbon compounds in the waste is high enough.
\n
59.Table 4 summarizes PAH emission reduction measures in coke production plants.
\n
Table 4: PAH emission control for coke production Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Retrofitting of old plantswith condensation of emitted flue gases from all sources includes the following measures:
\n
Total < 10 (without waste water) High Emissions to waste water by wet quenching are very high. This method should be applied only if the waste is reused in a closed cycle.
\n
–Evacuation and after-burning of the filling gases during charging of ovens or passing the gases into the adjacent oven as far as possible;
\n
5 (Amortization of investment costs, taking into account energy recovery, heated water, gas for synthesis and saved cooling water, may be 5 years.)
\n
–Emissions at charging hole lids should be avoided as far as possible, e.g. by special hole lid construction and highly effective sealing methods. Coke oven doors with highly effective sealings should be used. Cleaning of charging hole lids and frames before closing the charging hole; < 5
\n
–Waste gases from pushing operations should be collected and fed to a dedusting device; < 5 Higher investment costs than for wet cooling (but lower costs by preheating of coke and use of waste heat.)
\n
–Quenching during coke cooling by wet methods only if properly applied without waste water.
\n
Low emission procedures for coke cooling, e.g. dry coke cooling.
\n
No emissions into water Higher investment costs than for wet cooling (but lower costs by preheating of coke and use of waste heat.) Increasing the use ofhigh-volume ovens to lower the humber of openings and the surface of sealing areas.
\n
Considerable Investment about 10% higher than conventional plants In most cases total retrofitting or the installation of a new cokery is needed.
\n
B. Anode production 60. PAH emissions from anode production have to be dealt with in a similar fashion as those from coke production.
\n
61.The following secondary measures for emission reduction of PAH-contaminated dust are used: (a) Electrostatic tar precipitation; (b) Combination of a conventional electrostatic tar filter with a wet electrostatic filter as a more efficient technical measure; (c) Thermal after-burning of the waste gases; and (d) Dry scrubbing with limestone/petroleum coke or aluminum oxide (Al2O3).
\n
62.The operating costs in thermal after-burning can be reduced in an autothermal after-burning mode if the concentration of carbon compounds in the waste gas is high enough. Table 5 summarizes PAH emission control measures for anode production.
\n
Table 5: PAH emission control for anode production Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Modernization of old plants by reducing diffuse emissions with the following measures:
\n
3–10 High
\n
–Reduction of leakages;
\n
–Installation of flexible sealants at the oven doors;
\n
–Evacuation of filling gases and subsequent treatment, eitherby passing the gases into the adjacent oven or by passing the gases via a collecting main to an incinerator and a subsequent dedusting device on the ground;
\n
–Operating and coke oven cooling systems; and
\n
–Evacuation and purification of particulate emissions from coke.
\n
Established technologies for anode production in the Netherlands:
\n
45–50 Implemented in the Netherlands in 1990. Scrubbing with limestone or petroleum cokes is effective for reducing PAH; with aluminium not know.
\n
–New kiln with dry scrubber (with limestone / petroleum cokes or with aluminium)
\n
–Effluent recycling in paste unit.
\n
BAT:
\n
–Electrostatic dust precipitation; and 2–5 Regular cleaning of tar is needed.
\n
–Thermal after-burning.
\n
15 Lower operating costs in an autothermal mode.
\n
Operating in autothermal mode only if the concentration of PAH in the waste gas is high.
\n
C. Aluminium industry 63. Aluminium is produced from aluminium oxide (Al2O3) by electrolysis in pots (cells) electrically connected in series. Pots are classified as prebake or Soederberg pots, according to the type of the anode.
\n
64.Prebake pots have anodes consisting of calcined (baked) carbon blocks, which are replaced after partial consumption. Soederberg anodes are baked in the cell, with a mixture of petroleum coke and coal tar pitch acting as a binder.
\n
65.Very high PAH emissions are released from the Soederberg process. Primary abatement measures include modernization of existing plants and optimization of the processes, which could reduce PAH emissions by 70–90%. An emission level of 0.015 kg B(a)P/tonne of Al could be reached. Replacing the existing Soederberg cells by prebaked ones would require major reconstruction of the existing process, but would nearly eliminate the PAH emissions. The capital costs of such replacements are very high.
\n
66.Table 6 summarizes PAH emission control measures for aluminium production.
\n
Table 6: PAH emission control for aluminium production using the Soederberg process Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Replacement of Soederberg electrodes by:– Prebaked electrodes (avoidance of pitch binders);– Inert anodes.
\n
3–30 Higher costs for electrodes about US$ 800 million Soederberg electrodes are cheaper than prebaked ones, because no anode baking plant is needed. Research is in progress, but expectations are low.Efficient operation and monitoring of emission are essential parts of emission control. Poor performance could cause significant diffuse emissions.
\n
Closed prebake systems with point feeding of alumina and efficient process control, hoods covering the entire pot and allowing efficient collection of air pollutants.
\n
1–5 Soederberg pot with vertical contact bolts and waste gas collection systems. > 10 Retrofit of Soederberg technology by encapsulation and modified feeding point: US$ 50,000–10,000 per furnace Diffuse emissions occur during feeding, crust breaking and lifting of iron contact bolts to a higher position Sumitomo technology (anode briquettes for VSS process).
\n
Low–Medium Gas cleaning:
\n
–Electrostatic tar filters;
\n
2–5 Low High rate of sparking and electrical arcing;
\n
–Combination of conventional electrostatic tar filters with electrostatic wet gas cleaning; > 1 Medium Wet gas-cleaning generates waste water.
\n
–Thermal after-burning.
\n
Pitch use with higher melting point (HSS+VSS) High Medium Low–medium Use of dry scrubbing in existing HSS+VSS plants.
\n
Medium–high D. Residential combustion 67. PAH emissions from residential combustion can be detected from stoves or open fireplaces especially when wood or coal is used. Households could be a significant source of PAH emissions. This is the result of the use of fireplaces and small firing installations burning solid fuels in households. In some countries the usual fuel for stoves is coal. Coal-burning stoves emit less PAH than wood-burning ones, because of their higher combustion temperatures and more consistent fuel quality.
\n
68.Furthermore, combustion systems with optimized operation characteristics (e.g. burning rate) effectively control PAH emissions from residential combustion. Optimized combustion conditions include optimized combustion chamber design and optimized supply of air. There are several techniques which optimize combustion conditions and reduce emissions. There is a significant difference in emissions between different techniques. A modern wood-fired boiler with a water accumulation tank, representing BAT, reduces the emission by more than 90% compared to an outdated boiler without a water accumulation tank. A modern boiler has three different zones: a fireplace for the gasification of wood, a gas combustion zone with ceramics or other material which allow temperatures of some 1000°C, and a convection zone. The convection part where the water absorbs the heat should be sufficiently long and effective so that the gas temperature can be reduced from 1000°C to 250°C or less. There are also several techniques to supplement old and outdated boilers, for example with water accumulation tanks, ceramic inserts and pellet burners.
\n
69.Optimized burning rates are accompanied by low emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), total hydrocarbons (THC) and PAHs. Setting limits (type approval regulations) on the emission of CO and THCs also affects the emission of PAHs. Low emission of CO and THCs results in low emission of PAHs. Since measuring PAH is far more expensive than measuring CO, it is more cost-effective to set a limit value for CO and THCs. Work is continuing on a proposal for a CEN standard for coal- and wood- fired boilers up to 300 kW (see table 7).
\n
Table 7: Draft CEN standards in 1997 Class 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 Effect (kW) CO CO CO Manual < 50 5000 8000 25000 150 300 2000 150/125 180/150 200/180 50–150 2500 5000 12500 100 200 1500 150/125 180/150 200/180 >150–300 1200 2000 12500 100 200 1500 150/125 180/150 200/180 Automatic < 50 3000 5000 15000 100 200 1750 150/125 180/150 200/180 50–150 2500 4500 12500 80 150 1250 150/125 180/150 200/180 > 150–300 1200 2000 12500 80 150 1250 150/125 180/150 200/180 Note: Emission levels in mg/m3 at 10% O2.
\n
70.Emissions from residential wood combustion stoves can be reduced: (a) For existing stoves, by public information and awareness programmes regarding proper stove operation, the use of untreated wood only, fuel preparation procedures and the correct seasoning of wood for moisture content; and (b) For new stoves, by the application of product standards as described in the draft CEN standard (and equivalent product standards in the United States and Canada).
\n
71.More general measures for PAH emission reduction are those related to the development of centralized systems for households and energy conservation such as improved thermal insulation to reduce energy consumption.
\n
72.Information is summarized in table 8.
\n
Table 8: PAH emission control for residential combustions Management options Emission level (%) * Estimated costs Management risks Use of dried coal and wood (dried wood is wood stored for at least 18–24 months).
\n
High effectiveness Use of dried coal.
\n
High effectiveness Design of heating systems for solid fuels to provide optimized complete burning conditions:– Gasification zone;– Combustion with ceramics;– Effective convection zone.
\n
55 Medium Negotiations have to be held with stove manufacturers to introduce an approval scheme for stoves.
\n
Water accumulation tank.
\n
Technical instructions for efficient operation.
\n
30–40 Low Might be achieved also by vigorous public education, combined with practical instructions and stove type regulation.
\n
Public information programme concerning the use of wood-burning stoves.
\n
E. Wood preservation installations 73. Wood preservation with PAH-containing coal-tar products may be a major source of PAH emissions to the air. Emissions may occur during the impregnation process itself as well as during storage, handling and use of the impregnated wood in the open air.
\n
74.The most widely used PAH-containing coal-tar products are carbolineum and creosote. Both are coal tar distillates containing PAHs for the protection of timber (wood) against biological attack.
\n
75.PAH emissions from wood preservation, installations and storage facilities may be reduced using several approaches, implemented either separately or in combination, such as: (a) Requirements on storage conditions to prevent pollution of soil and surface water by leached PAH and contaminated rainwater (e.g. storage sites impermeable to rainwater, roof cover, reuse of contaminated water for the impregnation process, quality demands for the material produced); (b) Measures to reduce atmospheric emissions at impregnation plants (e.g. the hot wood should be cooled down from 90°C to 30°C at least before transport to storage sites. However, an alternative method using pressure steam under vacuum conditions to impregnate the wood with creosote should be highlighted as BAT); (c) The optimum loading of wood preservative, which gives adequate protection to the treated wood product in situ, can be regarded as a BAT as this will reduce the demand for replacements, thereby reducing emissions from the wood preservation installations; (d) Using wood preservation products with a lower content of those PAHs that are POPs:
\n
–Possibly using modified creosote which is taken to be a distillation fraction boiling between 270°C and 355°C, which reduces both the emissions of the more volatile PAHs and the heavier, more toxic PAHs;
\n
–Discouraging the use of carbolineum would also reduce PAH emissions; (e) Evaluating and then using, as appropriate, alternatives, such as those in table 9, that minimize reliance on PAH-based products.
\n
76.Burning of impregnated wood gives rise to PAH emissions and other harmful substances. If burning does take place, it should be done in installations with adequate abatement techniques.
\n
Table 9: Possible alternatives to wood preservation involving PAH-based products Management options Management risks Use of alternative materials for application in construction:
\n
Other environmental problems have to be evaluated such as:
\n
–Sustainably produced hardwood (riverbanks, fences, gates);
\n
–Availability of suitably produced wood;
\n
–Plastics (horticulture posts);
\n
–Emissions caused by the production and disposal of plastics, especially PVC.
\n
–Concrete (railway sleepers);
\n
–Replacement of artificial constructions by natural ones (such as riverbanks, fences, etc.);
\n
–Use of untreated wood.
\n
There are several alterntive wood-preserving techniques in development which do not inlcude impregnation with PAH-based products.
\n
ANNEX VI TIMESCALES FOR THE APPLICATION OF LIMIT VALUES AND BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES TO NEW AND EXISTING STATIONARY SOURCES The timescales for the application of limit values and best available techniques are: (a) For new stationary sources: two years after the date of entry into force of the present Protocol; (b) For existing stationary sources: eight years after the date of entry into force of the present Protocol.
\n
If necessary, this period may be extended for specific existing stationary sources in accordance with the amortization period provided for by national legislation.
\n
ANNEX VII RECOMMENDED CONTROL MEASURES FOR REDUCING EMISSIONS OF PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS FROM MOBILE SOURCES 1. Relevant definitions are provided in annex III to the present Protocol.
\n
I. ACHIEVABLE EMISSION LEVELS FOR NEW VEHICLES AND FUEL PARAMETERS A. Achievable emission levels for new vehicles 2. Diesel-fuelled passenger cars Limit values Year Reference mass Mass of hydrocarbons and NOx Mass of particulates 01.1.2000 All 0.56 g/km 0.05 g/km 01.1.2005 (indicative) All 0.3 g/km 0.025 g/km 3. Heavy-duty vehicles Year/test cycle Limit values Mass of hydrocarbons Mass of particulates 01.1.2000/ESC cycle 0.66 g/kWh 0.1 g/kWh 01.1.2000/ETC cycle 0.85 g/kWh 0.16 g/kWh 4. Off-road engines Step 1 (reference: ECE regulation No. 96) * Net power (P) (kW) Mass of hydrocarbons Mass of particulates P > 130 1.3 g/kWh 0.54 g/kWh 75 < P < 130 1.3 g/kWh 0.70 g/kWh 37 < P < 75 1.3 g/kWh 0.85 g/kWh Step 2 Net power (P) (kW) Mass of hydrocarbons Mass of particulates 0 < P < 18 18 < P < 37 1.5 g/kWh 0.8 g/kWh 37 < P < 75 1.3 g/kWh 0.4 g/kWh 75 < P < 130 1.0 g/KWh 0.3 g/kWh 130 < P < 560 1.0 g/kWh 1.2 g/kWh B. Fuel parameters 5. Diesel fuel Limits Parameter Unit Minimum value(2000/2005) * Maximum value(2000/2005) * Test method Cetane number 51/N.S. – ISO 5165 Density at 15<C kg/m3 – 845/N.S.
\n
ISO 3675 Evaporated 95% < C – 360/N.S.
\n
ISO 3405 PAH mass% – 11/N.S. prIP 391 Sulphur ppm – 350/50 * ISO 14956 N.S.: Not specified.
\n
II. RESTRICTION OF HALOGENATED SCAVENGERS, ADDITIVES IN FUELS AND LUBRICANTS 6. In some countries, 1,2-dibromomethane in combination with 1,2-dichloromethane is used as a scavenger in leaded petrol. Moreover, PCDD/F are formed during the combustion process in the engine. The application of three-way catalytic converters for cars will require the use of unleaded fuel. The addition of scavengers and other halogenated compounds to petrol and other fuels and to lubricants should be avoided as far as possible.
\n
7.Table 1 summarizes measures for PCDD/F emission control from the exhaust from road transport motor vehicles.
\n
Table 1: PCDD/F emission control for the exhaust from road transport motor vehicles Management options Management risks Avoiding adding halogenated compounds to fuels
\n
–1,2-dichloromethane
\n
–1,2-dichloromethane and corresponding bromo compounds as scavengers in leaded fuels for spark ignition engines (Bromo compounds may lead to the formation of brominated dioxins or furans.) Halogenated scavengers will be phased out as the market for leaded petrol shrinks because of the increasing useof closed-loop three-way catalytic converters with spark ignition engines Avoiding halogenated additives in fuels and lubricants.
\n
III. CONTROL MEASURES FOR EMISSIONS OF POPs FROM MOBILE SOURCES A. POP emissions from motor vehicles 8. POP emissions from motor vehicles occur as particle-bound PAHs emitted from diesel-fuelled vehicles. To a minor extent PAHs are also emitted by petrol-fuelled vehicles.
\n
9.Lubrication oil and fuels may contain halogenated compounds as a result of additives or the production process. These compounds may be transformed during combustion into PCDD/F and subsequently emitted with the exhaust gases.
\n
B. Inspection and maintenance 10. For diesel-fuelled mobile sources, the effectiveness of the control of emissions of PAHs may be ensured through programmes to test the mobile sources periodically for particulate emissions, opacity during free acceleration, or equivalent methods.
\n
11.For petrol-fuelled mobile sources, the effectiveness of the control of emissions of PAHs (in addition to other exhaust components) may be ensured through programmes to test periodically the fuel metering and the efficiency of the catalytic converter.
\n
C. Techniques to control PAH emissions from diesel- and petrol-fuelled motor vehicles 1. General aspects of control technologies 12. It is important to ensure that vehicles are designed to meet emission standards while in service. This can be done by ensuring conformity of production, lifetime durability, warranty of emission-control components, and recall of defective vehicles. For vehicles in use, continued emission control performance can be ensured by an effective inspection and maintenance programme.
\n
2.Technical measures for emission control 13. The following measures to control PAH emissions are important: (a) Fuel-quality specifications and engine modifications to control emissions before they are formed (primary measures); and (b) Addition of exhaust treatment systems, e.g. oxidizing catalysts or particle traps (secondary measures). (a) Diesel engines 14. Diesel-fuel modification can yield two benefits: a lower sulphur content reduces emissions of particles and increases the conversion efficiency of oxidizing catalysts, and the reduction in di- and tri- aromatic compounds reduces the formation and emission of PAHs.
\n
15.A primary measure to reduce emissions is to modify the engine to achieve more complete combustion. Many different modifications are in use. In general, vehicle exhaust composition is influenced by changes in combustion chamber design and by higher fuel injection pressures. At present, most diesel engines rely on mechanical engine control systems. Newer engines increasingly use computerized electronic control systems with greater potential flexibility in controlling emissions. Another technology to control emissions is the combined technology of turbocharging and intercooling. This system is successful in reducing NOx as well as increasing fuel economy and power output. For heavy- and light-duty engines the use of intake manifold tuning is also a possibility.
\n
16.Controlling the lubricating oil is important to reduce particulate matter (PM), as 10 to 50% of particulate matter is formed from engine oil. Oil consumption can be reduced by improved engine manufacturing specifications and improved engine seals.
\n
17.Secondary measures to control emissions are additions of exhaust treatment systems. In general, for diesel engines the use of an oxidizing catalyst in combination with a particulate filter has been shown to be effective in reducing PAH emissions. A particle trap oxidizer is being evaluated. It is located in the exhaust system to trap PM and can provide some regeneration of the filter by burning the collected PM, through electrical heating of the system or some other means of regeneration. For proper regeneration of passive system traps during normal operation, a burner-assisted regeneration system or the use of additives is required. (b) Petrol engines 18. PAH-reduction measures for petrol-fuelled engines are primarily based on the use of a closed-loop three-way catalytic converter, which reduces PAHs as part of the HC emission reductions.
\n
19.Improved cold start behaviour reduces organic emissions in general and PAHs in particular (for instance start-up catalysts, improved fuel evaporation/atomization, heated catalysts).
\n
20.Table 2 summarizes measures for PAH emission control from the exhaust from road transport motor vehicles.
\n
Table 2: PAH emission control for the exhaust from road transport motor vehicles Management options Emission level (%) Management risks Spark ignition engines:
\n
–Closed-loop three-way catalytic converter, 10–20 Availability of unleaded petrol.
\n
–Catalysts for reducing cold start emissions.
\n
5–15 Commercially available in some countries.
\n
Fuel for spark ignition engines:
\n
Availability of refinery capacity.
\n
–Reduction of armoatics,
\n
–Reduction of sulphur.
\n
Diesel engines:
\n
Management options Emission level (%) Management risks
\n
–Oxidizing catalyst, 20–70
\n
–Trap oxidizer/particulate filter.
\n
Management options Emission level (%) Management risks Diesel fuel modification:
\n
Availability of refinery capacity.
\n
–Reduction of sulphut to reduce particulate emissions.
\n
Improvement of diesel engine specifications:
\n
Existing technologies.
\n
–Electronic control system, injection rate adjustment and high-pressure fuel injection,
\n
–Turbocharging and intercooling,
\n
–Exhaust gas recirculation.
\n
ANNEX VIII MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCE CATEGORIES I. INTRODUCTION Installations or parts of installations for research, development and the testing of new products are not covered by this list. A more complete description of the categories may be found in annex V.
\n
II. LIST OF CATEGORIES Category Description of the category 1 Incineration, including co-incineration, of municipal, of municipal, hazardous or medical waster, or of sewage sludge.
\n
2 Sinter plants.
\n
3 Primary and secondary production of copper.
\n
4 Production of steel.
\n
5 Smelting plants in the secondary aluminium industry.
\n
6 Combustion of fossil fuels in utility and industrial boilers with a thermal capacity above 50 MWth.
\n
7 Residential combustion.
\n
8 Firing installations for wood with a thermal capacity below 50 MWth.
\n
9 Coke production.
\n
10 Anode production.
\n
11 Aluminium production using the Soederberg process.
\n
12 Wood preservation installations, except for a Party for which this category does not make a significant contribution to its total emissions of PAH (as defined in annex III) 3. melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez * 4. melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez * 5. melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez * 6. melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez * 7. melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez 2009/3. számú határozatA környezetben tartósan megmaradó szerves szennyező anyagokról szóló 1998. évi jegyzőkönyv V. és VII. mellékletének módosításáról A környezetben tartósan megmaradó szerves szennyező anyagokról szóló 1998. évi jegyzőkönyv részes felei a végrehajtó testület huszonhetedik ülésszakán úgy határoztak, hogy módosítják a nagy távolságra jutó, országhatárokon átterjedő levegőszennyezésről szóló egyezménynek a környezetben tartósan megmaradó szerves szennyező anyagokról szóló 1998. évi jegyzőkönyvét („POP-jegyzőkönyv”) a következők szerint: „1. CIKK: MÓDOSÍTÁS A. V. melléklet 1. A jegyzőkönyv V. mellékletének 1. pontja helyébe a következő szöveg lép: „1. Ezen melléklet célja útmutatást adni az egyezmény részes felei számára az elérhető legjobb technikák azonosításához, lehetővé téve számukra a jegyzőkönyv 3. cikkének 5. bekezdésében foglalt kötelezettségeik teljesítését. Az elérhető legjobb technikák további ismertetését és az ezekkel kapcsolatos útmutatást a felek által a végrehajtó testület ülésén elfogadott útmutató dokumentum tartalmazza, amelyet szükség esetén a felek a végrehajtó testület ülésein konszenzussal frissíthetnek.”
\n
2.A jegyzőkönyv V. mellékletének 4. pontja helyébe a következő szöveg lép: „4. A kis kibocsátású technikákat alkalmazó új üzemekkel, valamint a meglévő üzemek átépítésével szerzett tapasztalatok folyamatosan gyarapodnak. Ezért szükséges lesz az 1. bekezdésben említett útmutató dokumentum rendszeres kidolgozása és módosítása. Az új üzemekhez megállapított elérhető legjobb technikákat (BAT) rendszerint meglévő üzemekre is lehet alkalmazni, feltéve, hogy megfelelő átmeneti idő áll rendelkezésre, és hogy azokat adaptálják.”
\n
3.A jegyzőkönyv V. mellékletének 5. pontja helyébe a következő szöveg lép: „5. Az 1. bekezdésben említett útmutató dokumentum több ellenőrző intézkedést sorol fel, amelyek a költség és hatékonyság széles tartományát ölelik fel. Az intézkedések megválasztása bármely adott esethez számos tényezőtől függ, beleértve a gazdasági körülményeket, a technológiai infrastruktúrát és kapacitást, valamint minden meglévő légszennyezés-csökkentő intézkedést.”
\n
4.Az V. melléklet III., IV. és V. része törlésre kerül.
\n
B. VII. melléklet A jegyzőkönyv VII. melléklete törlésre kerül.
\n
2.CIKK: HATÁLYBALÉPÉS A jegyzőkönyv 14. cikkének (4) bekezdésével összhangban ez a módosítás azon Felek tekintetében lép hatályba, amelyek a jegyzőkönyv 14. cikkének (5) bekezdésével összhangban nem nyújtottak be értesítést a letéteményeshez a Bizottság ügyvezető titkára által az összes Féllel történő közléstől számított kilencven nap elteltével.”
\n
8.melléklet a 2023. évi XLVII. törvényhez Decision 2009/3Amendment of annexes V and VII to the 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants The Parties to the 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants meeting within the twenty-seventh session of the Executive Body, Decide to amend the 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants („the Protocol”) to the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution as follows: „ARTICLE 1: AMENDMENT A. Annex V 1. Paragraph 1 of annex V to the Protocol shall be replaced by the following: „1. The purpose of this annex is to provide the Parties to the Convention with guidance in identifying best available techniques to allow them to meet the obligations in article 3, paragraph 5, of the Protocol. Further description of, and guidance regarding, such best available techniques is provided in a guidance document adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body and may be updated as necessary by a consensus of the Parties meeting within the Executive Body.”
\n
2.Paragraph 4 of annex V to the Protocol shall be replaced by the following: „4. Experience with new plants incorporating low-emission techniques, as well as with retrofitting of existing plants, is continuously growing. The regular elaboration and amendment of the guidance document referred to in paragraph 1 above will therefore be necessary. Best available techniques (BAT) identified for new plants can usually be applied to existing plants provided there is an adequate transition period and they are adapted.”
\n
3.Paragraph 5 of annex V to the Protocol shall be replaced by the following: „5. The guidance document referred to in paragraph 1 above lists a number of control measures which span a range of costs and efficiencies. The choice of measures for any particular case will depend on a number of factors, including economic circumstances, technological infrastructure and capacity, and any existing air pollution control measures.”
\n
4.Parts III, IV and V of annex V are deleted.
\n
B. Annex VII Annex VII to the Protocol is deleted.
\n
ARTICLE 2ENTRY INTO FORCE
\n
In accordance with article 14(4) of the Protocol, this Amendment shall become effective for those Parties which have not submitted a notification to the Depositary in accordance with article 14(5) of the Protocol on the expiry of ninety days from the date of its communication to all Parties by the Executive Secretary of the Commission.”
\n
Vissza az oldal tetejére -->