Chris lowe

download Chris lowe

If you can't read please download the document

  • date post

  • Category


  • view

  • download


Embed Size (px)


Dust from Mineral and Waste sites

Transcript of Chris lowe

  • 1. Tackling PM10 Pollution Horn Lane, Acton Chris Lowe EPR Installations & COMAH Team Hertfordshire and North London

2. Other possible sources of PM10 Traffic on Horn Lane & on the A40 caused by traffic lights and mini-roundabouts Buses using the bus stand & bus stop on Horn Lane Trains on the adjacent railway lines Crossrail construction works Horn Lane Metals (Exempt scrap metal merchants) Regional & Trans-Boundary PM10 Pollution 3. Ealing 8 - Local Air Quality Monitoring Station Installed September 2005 PM10 Annual Mean (ug/m3) Limit 40ug/m3 2006 Value 60ug/m3 PM10 24hr mean (days) Limit 50ug/m3 x 35 times 2006 Value 205 times 4. Where is it coming from? Ealing 8 shows the PM10 source on a bearing suggesting Gowing & Pursey, Hanson Concrete, Horn Lane Metals and Yeoman Aggregates are principle sources Turnkey optical system installed on two of the waste sites 5. Monitoring challenges Poor data capture Poor data reporting Calibration Maintenance Heathrow wind data Operator competence Location 6. Way forward Variation Monitoring, Reporting, Review & Improve Ensured appropriate measures Buildings Damping down Mist suppression systems Wheel wash Screening/Sheeting No idling zones Reduce/Remove the source Reduced tonnage No treatment processes Exemptions Max volume on site at any time 7. End of 2012 ...... PM10 Annual Mean (ug/m3) Limit 40ug/m3 2006 Value 60ug/m3 2012 Value 34ug/m3 PM10 24hr mean (days) Limit 50ug/m3 x 35 times 2006 Value 205 times 2012 Value 48 times 8. Supporting Actions Emission Management Plans Quick Guide Sharing experiences R & D Project - To enclose or not enclose? 9. Emission Management Plans Get a good Emission Management Plan for dust and particulates in place (We have a template that we can share!) In this they need to list sources List the pathways List the receptors Detail what abatement they intend to use and when And importantly what they will do when all this doesnt work! 10. Quick Guide Information on how to control dust and particulates was very thin on the ground so we created guidance. We came up with 26 options and split them into Preventative and Abatement measures. 11. R+D Project How effective are the established abatement technologies? They often require active management oversight and are regularly forgotten Are passive options more effective? Are the costs proportionate? 12. R+D Project - continued Project to demonstrate the long term efficacy of enclosures compared to traditional water based spray methods. Two sites, four monitoring locations (upwind & downwind) Influence NPS to require full enclosure of waste management sites in AQMAs. 13. R+D Project - continued Site 1 Heathrow 1. Water spray systems, 2. C+D waste, 3. Transfer & treatment, 4. No enclosures, 5. 100,000 tpa. 14. R+D Project - continued Site 2 Willesden 1. Large fully enclosed site 2. C+D waste, 3. Transfer & treatment, 4. Some inert treatment outside, 5. 900,000 tpa. 15. R+D Project - continued Results 1. Significantly lower PM10/PM2.5 emissions at enclosed site 2. Cost benefit analysis still to be carried out to compare initial purchase and running cost of traditional water based suppression vs initial construction and running cost of building. 3. Other cost to consider in CBA? Enhanced regulation Health costs Impacts on other services Engagement Monitoring 16. R+D Project - continued Final report is available. It is being used to influence the next generation of Standard Rule Permits and to develop an enclosure policy for new waste transfer stations located in AQMAs with small entry/exits.