Collie Urea Project Air Quality Report Final

Perdaman Chemicals and
Fertilisers
Report for Collie Urea Project
Air Quality Assessment
November 2009
ii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Project Description 1
1.2 Scope of Assessment 5
2. Coal to Urea Process 6
2.1 Process by Islands 7
2.2 Logistics and Infrastructure 14
2.3 Emission Sources Collie Urea Plant 15
2.4 Emission Sources Collie Airshed Context 23
2.5 Emission Sources Export Facility 25
3. Ambient Air Quality Criteria 26
3.1 Air NEPM 26
3.2 Kwinana Environmental Protection Policy 27
3.3 Victorian Environment Protection Authority 27
3.4 Air Pollution Species Assessed 28
4. Existing Conditions Shotts Industrial Park 30
4.1 Topography and Land Use 30
4.2 Meteorology 30
4.3 Meteorological Modelling 32
4.4 Background Air Quality 41
4.5 Sensitive Receptors 43
5. Existing Conditions - Bunbury Port 48
5.1 Topography and Land Use 48
5.2 Meteorology 48
5.3 Background Air Quality 50
6. Construction Assessment Shotts and Bunbury Port 51
6.1 Emission Sources 51
6.2 Management Framework 52
7. Operational Assessment Shotts 57
7.1 Emissions Sources 57
7.2 Airshed Modelling 66
iii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.3 Collie Urea Plant Modelling 68
7.4 Modelling Results 69
8. Recommended Monitoring 141
9. Conclusions 142
10. Limitations 145
References 146
Table Index
Table 1 Estimated emissions from Collie Urea Plant (tpa) 16
Table 2 Estimated emissions of volatile organic compounds
and heavy metals from Collie Urea Plant 21
Table 3 Contribution of emission sources within the Collie
airshed 23
Table 4 National Environment Protection (Ambient Air
Quality) Measure standards 27
Table 5 State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality
Management) design criteria 28
Table 6 Mean monthly temperatures, rainfall, wind speeds
and number of cloudy days recorded at Collie AWS 31
Table 7 Summary of available sulphur dioxide and nitrogen
dioxide monitoring data 41
Table 8 Summary of available sulphur dioxide monitoring
data 42
Table 9 Summary of available particulate monitoring data 43
Table 10 Sensitive receptors 44
Table 11 Mean monthly temperatures, rainfall, wind speeds
and number of cloudy days recorded at Bunbury
PO AWS 49
Table 12 Recommended requirements for control of dust
emissions 54
Table 13 Recommended dust monitoring program
requirements 55
Table 14 Source characteristics and emission rates for
existing sources 60
Table 15 Source characteristics and emission rates for
approved (under construction) and proposed
sources 61
iv 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 16 Source characteristics and emission rates for Collie
Urea Plant sources 63
Table 17 Scenarios modelled 65
Table 18 Summary of compliance with criteria 72
Table 19 Predicted SO
2
concentrations at sensitive receptors
(Scenario 3) 78
Table 20 Predicted incremental SO
2
concentrations at
sensitive receptors 89
Table 21 Predicted PM
10
and PM
2.5
concentrations at
sensitive receptors (Scenario 3) 110
Table 22 Predicted incremental concentrations at sensitive
receptors 120
Table 23 Compliance with SEPP-AQM for VOC species 137
Table 24 Compliance with SEPP-AQM for heavy metals 139
Table 25 Predicted worse case maximum concentration
under flaring (g/m
3
) (percent relevant criteria) 140
Figure Index
Figure 1 Location of the Collie Urea Plant site at Shotts
Industrial Park 3
Figure 2 Location of export facility at Berth 5 at Bunbury Port 4
Figure 3 Block flow diagram of the major processing units 8
Figure 4 Indicative reduction of criteria pollutants and heavy
metals for Gasification compared with modern coal
fired power stations in the Collie Airshed 23
Figure 5 Annual and seasonal wind roses for TAPM
synthesised meteorological data at Shotts (2001) 35
Figure 6 Annual and seasonal stability classes for TAPM
synthesised meteorological data at Shotts (2001) 36
Figure 7 Annual and seasonal wind roses for TAPM
synthesised meteorological data at Collie East
AWS (2001) 38
Figure 8 Annual and seasonal wind roses for BoM observed
meteorological data at Collie East AWS (2003) 39
Figure 9 Annual and seasonal wind roses for BoM observed
meteorological data at Collie East AWS (2004) 40
Figure 10 Sensitive receptors Collie Urea Plant 47
Figure 11 Predicted maximum 1-hour SO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 79
v 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
2
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 80
2
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 81
2
concentrations
(Scenario 6) 82
Figure 15 Predicted 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 83
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 84
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 85
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 6) 86
Figure 19 Predicted annual SO
2
concentrations - Contribution
from Collie Urea Plant 91
2
from Bluewaters III and IV 92
2
from Muja A and B 93
Figure 22 Predicted maximum 1-hour NO
2
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 95
2
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 96
2
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 97
Figure 25 Predicted maximum 1-hour O
3
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 99
3
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 100
3
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 101
3
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 102
3
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 103
3
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 104
Figure 31 Predicted maximum 8-hour CO concentrations
(Scenario 1) 106
vi 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
(Scenario 2) 107
(Scenario 3) 108
Figure 34 Predicted maximum 24-hour PM
10
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 112
10
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 113
10
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 114
2.5
concentrations
(Scenario 1) 115
2.5
concentrations
(Scenario 2) 116
2.5
concentrations
(Scenario 3) 117
Figure 40 Predicted annual PM
10
concentrations -
Contribution from Collie Urea Plant 122
10
concentrations -
Contribution from Bluewaters III and IV 123
10
concentrations -
Contribution from Muja A and B 124
2.5
concentrations -
Contribution from Collie Urea Plant 125
2.5
concentrations -
Contribution from Bluewaters III and IV 126
2.5
concentrations -
Contribution from Muja A and B 127
Figure 46 Predicted nitrogen dioxide deposition (Collie Urea
Plant in isolation) 129
th
highest 3 minute NH
3
concentrations
(Collie Urea Plant in isolation) 131
th
highest 3 minute H
2
S concentrations
1o
(as urea)
concentration (Collie Urea Plant in isolation) 135
Figure 50 Predicted urea deposition (Collie Urea Plant in
isolation) 136
th
highest 3minute VOC concentrations
vii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Appendices
A TAPM Predicted Concentrations
B Sample TAPM Files and Outputs
C Sample AUSPLUME Files and Outputs
viii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Glossary of Acronyms and Terms
Air NEPM National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure
Alcoa Alcoa World Alumina Australia
AGRU Acid Gas Recovery Unit
ASU Air Separation Unit
AWS Automatic weather station
Barg Gauge pressure or pressure above atmospheric pressure (which is around 1 bar)
BHPB BHP Billiton
BoM Bureau of Meteorology
BOOT Build Own Operate Transfer
BPA Bunbury Port Authority
CCGT Combined cycle gas turbine
CH
4
Methane
CO Carbon monoxide
CO
2
Carbon dioxide
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
DEC Department of Environment and Conservation
ENVIRON ENVIRON Australia Pty Ltd
GHD GHD Pty Ltd
H
2
Hydrogen
H
2
O Water
ha Hectare; 10,000 m
2
HRSG Heat recovery steam generator
km kilometre
kt kilo tonne, thousand tonnes
ktpa Thousand tonnes per annum
MGA Map Grid of Australia
Mtpa Million tonnes per annum
MW Megawatt
N
2
Nitrogen
ix 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
NH
3
Ammonia
NO
2
Nitrogen dioxide
NO
x
Oxides of nitrogen
O
2
Oxygen
O
3
Ozone
PCF Perdaman Chemicals and Fertilisers (formerly North West Chemicals and Fertilisers)
PER Public Environmental Review
Perdaman Perdaman Industries Pty Ltd
PM
10
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometres
PM
2.5
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometres
ppm parts per million
SEPP-AQM State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management)
SKM Sinclair Knight Merz
SO
2
Sulphur dioxide
SWIS South West Interconnected System
t tonne
TAPM The Air Pollution Model
TEOM Tapered element oscillating microbalance
tpd Tonnes per day
tph Tonnes per hour
m Micrometre
g/m
3
Microgram per cubic metre
US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
Verve Verve Energy Pty Ltd, formerly Western Power Corporation
Vic EPA Victorian Environmental Protection Authority
Worsley Worsley Alumina Pty Ltd
x 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Executive Summary
Introduction
Perdaman Chemicals and Fertilisers (PCF), a wholly owned subsidiary of Perdaman Industries
(Perdaman), propose to construct the Collie Urea Plant in the Shotts Industrial Park to convert sub
bituminous coal to urea fertiliser. The Industrial Park is located about 7.5 km east of Collie and has a
total area of 246 hectares (ha). The Plant footprint covers an area of approximately 120 ha. The Plant is
expected to produce approximately 2 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of urea.
The Project involves conveying coal from the nearby Griffin coal mine to the Shotts Industrial Park,
converting this to urea and transporting the final product by rail to the Bunbury Port for export. Some
urea may also be supplied by road to the local market from truck loading facilities at the Collie Urea
Plant, or alternately by rail.
This project is being developed on a commercial basis using proven process technology units and scale.
The Plant will incorporate Shells gasification and gas treatment technology, Haldor Topsoe ammonia
synthesis technology and Stamicarbon urea melt and granulation technologies.
The project consists of:
A number of process units, comprising:
Coal Preparation facility;
Coal Gasification plant;
Acid Gas Removal plant;
Ammonia synthesis plant;
Urea synthesis and Granulation; and
Utility Islands for water, power and industrial gas generation.
A coal conveyor to be located in existing Western Power owned electricity transmission corridors
connecting the plant and the Griffin Coal Mine;
A water supply pipeline to supply water from Wellington Dam to the Plant.
A rail siding connected to the existing rail network to facilitate loading of urea within the project site;
A Urea storage shed, adjacent to the rail siding at Collie; and
A urea storage shed, railcar unloading facilities, conveyor and ship loading facilities at Bunbury Port.
This report assesses the potential air quality impacts from constructing and operating the Collie Urea
Plant at Shotts Industrial Park and the export facility at Bunbury Port. This reports scope is to:
Assess the likely level generation of dust and other pollutants associated with construction of the
Collie Urea Plant and export facilities;
Assess the likely air emissions during operation of the Plant and the export facility; and
Specify intended air quality management and mitigation measures during construction and operation
of the Plant and export facility to ensure compliance with relevant air quality criteria.
xi 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Overview Urea Production Process
The conversion of coal to urea is a seven step process:
1. (Coal Preparation): Initially the raw coal is milled and dried, making it suitable for gasification.
Drying improves the thermal conversion efficiency of the coal. The enclosed coal powder is
pressurized with nitrogen (from air separation) to be injected in the gasifiers.
2. (Gasification): Gasification converts coal to (synthesis) gas at a high efficiency under pressure (i.e.
closed to atmosphere) by partial oxidation of coal with oxygen, to mainly carbon monoxide (CO) and
hydrogen (H
2
). The coal ash melts during the gasification process and is recovered as a marketable
stable glassy slag. The oxygen is obtained from an Air Separation Unit (ASU) which concentrates
oxygen from air for efficient use in coal Gasification.
3. (Gas Adjustment): The hydrogen concentration in the syngas is maximized by converting the carbon
monoxide with steam to hydrogen and carbon dioxide (CO
2
). This also hydrolyses various trace
contaminants.
4. (Acid Gas Cleanup): The carbon dioxide and sulphur components are removed from the synthesis
gas. Sulphur compounds are recovered as a saleable sulphur by-product. The cleaned synthesis
gas (mainly hydrogen) is blended with nitrogen (N
2
) from the ASU to the correct mixture required for
ammonia synthesis. A fuel gas side-stream for internal power generation will be substantially (>
95%) desulphurised, leading to very low sulphur dioxide (SO
2
) emissions during power generation.
Over 30% of the carbon dioxide is used during urea synthesis. The remaining carbon dioxide is
carbon capture ready.
5. (Ammonia Synthesis): The hydrogen and nitrogen mixture is compressed and reacted (with the help
of a catalyst) to form ammonia (NH
3
). This chemical reaction releases heat which is recovered as
steam which improves the overall process thermal efficiency, consequently lowering emissions.
6. (Urea Synthesis): Ammonia and carbon dioxide are reacted to form urea (solution) in a two stage
process which includes a carbamate intermediate. The urea solution is concentrated to over 95%.
7. (Urea Granulation): The concentrated urea solution is dried and granulated. Urea granules are a
strong, easily handled product, which minimises potential dust formation during the logistics process
of taking the urea from the plant to its end use point.
8. Storage and Warehousing: The urea granules are cooled and stored in a shed before being loaded
on a rail wagon and transported to Bunbury Port. Here the urea is unloaded from the train into a
second storage shed and then loaded onto bulk cargo ships for export.
The nominal plant urea production capacity is 6,200 tonnes per day (tpd) equating to 2.1 million tonnes
per annum (Mtpa). Approximately 2.6 Mtpa of coal is required to produce this volume of urea (the 500
tpa difference in tonnages being primarily water).
Atmospheric Emissions
Construction Phase
Potential air quality impacts during construction of the Collie Urea Plant and export facility at Bunbury
Port will be emissions from heavy vehicle exhausts and dust generation from heavy equipment during
earthworks and erosion from disturbed soil surfaces.
xii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Based on the isolated nature of the Collie Urea Plant site and surrounding land uses, dust emissions are
not considered to represent a significant source of emissions. As the extent of earthworks at the export
facility will be relatively minor, dust emissions at this site are not considered to be significant.
For the construction phase of the Plant and export facility, a framework which includes a comprehensive
range of mitigation measures for the management of dust emissions will be developed as a part of
construction dust management measures.
Emissions from heavy vehicles would consist of products of combustion, including nitrogen dioxide
(NO
2
), sulphur dioxide (SO
2
), particulate matters less than 10 micrometres (PM
10
) and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).
Vehicle emissions will arise from diesel powered equipment used during construction. Emissions from
heavy equipment will be minimised by ensuring all vehicles on-site are well maintained and operated in
an efficient manner. Construction equipment will be fuelled using biodiesel or a biodiesel blend, where
available locally in the Collie region.
Emissions from vehicles on-site are not considered to represent a significant source of emissions.
Operational Phase
The estimated emission sources and pollutants from the Collie Urea Plant are shown in Table A. Each of
the major emissions sources from the Collie Urea Plant are outlined below.
Table A Estimated emissions from Collie Urea Plant (tpa)
Plant Section SO2 NOx PM10 CO VOC CH4 NH3
Coal milling and drying 50 5 <1 166 15 <1 <1
Gasification (Flare) 31 3 <1 102 - <1 <1
Gas clean up 20 (as
H2S)
<1 - 494 - 18 <1
Ammonia synthesis - <1 - <1 - - 12
Urea synthesis and
granulation
- <1 505 - - - 1364
Power Island 6 350 56 368 - <1 <1
Air separation - - - - - - -
Estimated emissions were used as input for air dispersion modelling.
Ambient Air Quality Criteria
Air quality impacts are assessed by comparing monitoring results or model predictions with appropriate
ambient air criteria. The criteria referred to in this assessment include:
National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure;
Kwinana Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) Standards; and
Victorian Environmental Protection Authority (Vic EPA) Design Criteria.
xiii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Dispersion Modelling
Cumulative airshed modelling of emissions from the Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved (under
construction) and proposed sources was conducted using The Air Pollution Model (TAPM) (v4.0.3).
TAPM was developed by the CSIRO and consists of coupled prognostic meteorological and air pollution
dispersion model components.
Previous studies have identified SO
2
as the main pollutant of concern for the Collie airshed. In line with
the requirements for assessment specified in the DEC Air Quality Modelling Guidance Notes, SO
2
impacts arising from the Collie Urea Plant in isolation and cumulatively with other airshed sources have
been assessed, as outlined below:
Scenario 1: Existing, approved (under construction) and proposed sources in the Collie airshed;
Scenario 2: Collie Urea Plant in isolation (normal, steady state operation); and
Scenario 3: Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources.
In order to assess the incremental contribution of selected existing or proposed facilities on the Collie
airshed, the following additional scenarios were included in this assessment:
Scenario 4: Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources, excluding Bluewaters III
and IV; and
Scenario 5: Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources, excluding Muja A and B.
An additional scenario has been provided to allow comparison with the base case operating scenario
from the assessment of Bluewaters I and II, at the request of DEC (Scenario 6).
The assessment included a scenario to consider the likely impacts of the Collie Urea Plant operating
under start up/shut down/upset conditions (Scenario 7).
The air quality impacts arising from emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), NO
2
, ozone (O
3
) and
particulates as PM
10
and PM
2.5
have been assessed for Scenarios 1, 2 and 3, to demonstrate compliance
with the relevant air quality standards. For pollutants where compliance with relevant air quality
standards cannot be shown at all sensitive receptors, examination of the incremental contribution of each
existing or proposed facility on the Collie airshed has been completed.
Other pollutants emitted from the Collie Urea Plant and included in this assessment include ammonia
(NH
3
), hydrogen sulphide (H
2
S), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals and urea (as dust
and deposited). Impacts arising for these pollutants have only been assessed for Scenario 2 (Collie
Urea Plant in isolation). An assessment of these pollutants was made using the AUSPLUME (v6)
dispersion model. The modelled results were compared against relevant Air NEPM and SEPP-AQM
criteria.
An air quality assessment has been completed for emissions to air resulting from construction and
operation of the Collie Urea Plant and the export facilities at Bunbury Port. The assessment includes
quantification of emission sources, air dispersion modelling and assessment against relevant air quality
criteria, for existing, approved (under construction) and proposed emission sources and emissions from
the Plant.
The major emission sources assessed and the results of the assessment are provided as follows:
xiv 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Emissions from vehicles on-site during construction are not considered to represent a significant
source of emissions. Emissions from heavy equipment will be minimised by ensuring all vehicles on-
site are well maintained and operated in an efficient manner. Construction equipment will be fuelled
using biodiesel or a biodiesel blend, where available locally.
A framework for management of dust emissions during construction of the Collie Urea Plant and
export facilities at Bunbury Port has been developed and would be applied as part of construction
dust management measures.
Emissions from the Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved (under construction) and proposed
sources in the Collie region were assessed using the TAPM air dispersion model for airshed impacts,
using the following Scenarios:
Scenario 1: Existing (Muja - Stages A, B, C and D, Collie and Worsley power stations), approved
(under construction) (Worsley Boiler Extension and Bluewaters power station - Stages I and II)
and proposed (Bluewaters power station - Stages III and IV) sources in the Collie airshed;
The airshed modelling, inclusive of adopted ambient background levels, shows for:
Scenario 1 and 3, exceedances are predicted for:
o Air NEPM standards across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
,
1-hour NO
2
, 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
; and
o Kwinana EPP standard across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour
SO
2
.
Scenario 2, no exceedances are predicted for any pollutant across the model domain.
Modelling was conducted for Collie Urea Plant in isolation for:
Operation under start-up/shut down/upset conditions;
Emissions of PM
10
(as urea), ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic compounds and
heavy metals; and
Deposition of nitrogen dioxide and urea (as nitrogen).
This modelling shows:
There are no exceedances of relevant Air NEPM standards predicted from start-up/shut
down/upset conditions;
There are no exceedances of the Air NEPM standard for PM
10
(as urea) predicted;
There are no exceedances of the SEPP-AQM criteria for ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, PAHs,
VOCs (benzene, cumene, cyclohexane, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde, n-Hexane, toluene and
xylene) and heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel and mercury) predicted; and
The total deposited nitrogen contributed from urea and nitrogen dioxide is predicted at 9.1
kg/ha/year, within relevant goals and criteria.
As exceedances of the Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP standards were predicted to occur at sensitive
receptors for SO
2
, PM
10
and PM
2.5
, the incremental contribution across the airshed was compared for
three facilities, Collie Urea Plant, Bluewaters power station (Stages III and IV) and Muja power station
(Stages A and B).
xv 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
The incremental contribution for the three facilities is calculated as the difference between the predicted
concentrations for the following scenarios:
Collie Urea Plant - Scenario 3 (Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources) and
Scenario 1 (existing, approved and proposed sources);
Bluewaters III and IV - Scenario 3 and Scenario 4 (Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and
proposed sources excluding Bluewaters III and IV); and
Muja A and B - Scenario 3 and Scenario 5 (Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed
sources excluding Muja A and B).
Annual concentrations have been used to examine incremental contribution from each facility as there
will be less spatial and temporal variation with annual averages compared to shorter averaging periods.
Examination of the incremental impacts of the three facilities showed:
Sulphur dioxide:
Muja A and B was predicted as the main contributor at all but two sensitive receptors for 1-hour
SO
2
, all but two sensitive receptors for 24-hour SO
2
and the main contributor at all receptors for
annual and 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2.
Muja A and B was predicted as the largest contributor to annual SO
2
concentrations across the
model domain, contributing a maximum 4.3 g/m
3
.
Bluewaters was predicted as the main contributor at two sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
and
two sensitive receptors for 24-hour SO
2.
Bluewaters III and IV was predicted to reduce annual SO
2
concentrations by up to 3.5 g/m
3
.
Bluewaters III and IV will include installation of two new 150m tall stacks which will accept flue
gases from the existing Bluewaters I and II. Increasing the stack height will lead to decreased
concentrations due to improved dispersion of emissions from Bluewaters I and II.
Collie Urea Plant was not predicted as the main contributor at any sensitive receptor for any
averaging period.
Collie Urea Plant was predicted as a minor contributor to annual SO
2
concentrations, contributing
a maximum of 1.0 g/m
3
.
Particulate matter as PM
10
and PM
2.5
:
Muja A and B was predicted as the main contributor at all sensitive receptors for 24-hour and
annual PM
10
and 24-hour and annual PM
2.5
.
Muja A and B was predicted as the largest contributor to annual PM
10
and annual PM
2.5
concentrations, contributing 8.3 and 2.2 g/m
3
, respectively.
Bluewaters and the Collie Urea Plant were not predicted as the main contributor at any sensitive
receptor for any averaging period.
Bluewaters III and IV was predicted as a very minor contributor to annual PM
10
and annual PM
2.5
3,
respectively.
Collie Urea Plant was predicted as a minor contributor to annual PM
10
and annual PM
2.5
3
, respectively.
xvi 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Mitigation Measures
Various design features have been incorporated to minimise atmospheric emissions and safely process
coal to syngas to urea, including:
Coal is dried to reduce moisture and increase process efficiency;
Gasification is not combustion (using limited oxygen converts coal to syngas) and a pressurised
closed system allows containment of various contaminants. Scale assists with the ability to
economically capture small contaminants in large streams;
Slagging gasification melts the ash (>1500C) which eliminates polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and retains most heavy metals unlike fly ash which is >1150C. The slag is non-leaching;
Nearly all sulphur in the coal is recovered as a saleable product, not emitted as sulphur dioxide.
Gasification allows sulphur removal from a concentrated syngas which is not contaminated with
excess air;
Waste heat is extensively recovered in the process improving efficiency and reducing coal energy
input, thereby reducing emissions;
A combined cycle gas turbine is used for internal power generation, which has a higher efficiency
and low oxides of nitrogen emissions compared to pulverised coal boilers. The syngas fuel will be
desulphurised;
Ammonia is produced and used internally and combusted (to water and nitrogen) during process
upsets at a flare; and
Urea granulation has been selected which results in substantially less dust and stronger particles for
transport than traditional prilling technology.
Monitoring
The EPA may require that in-stack monitoring be conducted post-commissioning. In this instance, PCF
recommends to the EPA that any monitoring apply to the significant emission species only, as
determined from the modelling assessment.
A continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) would be installed to measure air flow characteristics
and in-stack emission concentrations, as a minimum, of SO
2
and NO
2
.
Stacks could be designed to incorporate emission sampling ports with consideration to AS 4323.1 such
that emission testing can be conducted as per any EPA requirements.
Conclusion
Overall, results of the cumulative modelling assessment show:
There are significant exceedances of the Air NEPM standards predicted at sensitive receptors within
the Collie airshed for 1-hour SO
2,
24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
;
There are significant exceedances of the Kwinana EPP standard predicted at sensitive receptors
within the Collie airshed for 1-hour SO
2,
;
In each case, emissions from Muja A and B are the main contributor to concentrations predicted and
Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP exceedances;
Bluewaters III and IV and the Collie Urea Plant contribute very little to predicted concentrations and
Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP exceedances at sensitive receptors in the Collie airshed;
xvii 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Collie Urea Plant is a source of ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic compounds, heavy
metals and urea in the Collie airshed, with predicted concentrations compliant with relevant criteria;
and
Collie Urea Plant is predicted to increased deposition of nitrogen in the form of urea and nitrogen
dioxide, with total deposited nitrogen complying with relevant criteria.
This report provides an air quality assessment for the Collie Urea Project as described and should be
read based on the limitations presented in Section 10.
1 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
1. Introduction
Perdaman Chemicals and Fertilisers (PCF), a wholly owned subsidiary of Perdaman Industries
(Perdaman), propose to construct the Collie Urea Plant in the Shotts Industrial Park to convert sub
bituminous coal to urea fertiliser. The Industrial Park is located about 7.5 km east of Collie and has a
total area of 246 hectares (ha). The Plant footprint covers an area of approximately 120 ha. A small
quantity of urea may be supplied to local markets but the majority of production will be transported by rail
to the Bunbury Port where it will be exported, from Berth Five, to overseas markets. Coal will be
supplied by Griffin Coal. The Plant is expected to produce approximately 2 million tonnes per annum
(Mtpa) of urea.
1.1 Project Description
The Project involves conveying coal from the nearby Griffin coal mine to the Shotts Industrial Park,
converting this to urea and transporting the final product by rail to the Bunbury Port for export. Some
urea may also be supplied by road to the local market from truck loading facilities at the Collie Urea
Plant, or alternately by rail.
PCF is potentially the major tenant of the 246 ha Shotts Industrial Park occupying 120 ha or 49% of the
park area. The subject land at Shotts Industrial Park is shown in Figure 1 and the location of the export
facility at Bunbury Port is shown in Figure 2.
This project is being developed on a commercial basis using proven process technology units and scale.
The Plant will incorporate Shells gasification and gas treatment technology, Haldor Topsoe ammonia
synthesis technology and Stamicarbon urea melt and granulation technologies.
The project consists of:
A number of process units, comprising:
Coal Preparation facility;
Coal Gasification plant;
Acid Gas Removal plant;
Ammonia synthesis plant;
Urea synthesis and Granulation; and
Utility Islands for water, power and industrial gas generation.
A coal conveyor to be located in existing Western Power owned electricity transmission corridors
connecting the plant and the Griffin Coal Mine;
A water supply pipeline to supply water from Wellington Dam to the Plant.
A rail siding connected to the existing rail network to facilitate loading of urea within the project site;
A Urea storage shed, adjacent to the rail siding at Collie; and
A urea storage shed, railcar unloading facilities, conveyor and ship loading facilities at Bunbury Port.
Construction and operation of the port rail infrastructure, storage shed, conveyor and ship loader at
Bunbury Port will be undertaken by PCF.
2 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
1.1.1 Overview urea production process
The conversion of coal to urea is a seven step process:
1. (Coal Preparation): Initially the raw coal is milled and dried, making it suitable for gasification.
Drying improves the thermal conversion efficiency of the coal. The enclosed coal powder is
pressurized with nitrogen (from air separation) to be injected in the gasifiers.
2. (Gasification): Gasification converts coal to (synthesis) gas at a high efficiency under pressure (i.e.
closed to atmosphere) by partial oxidation of coal with oxygen, to mainly carbon monoxide (CO) and
hydrogen (H
2
). The coal ash melts during the gasification process and is recovered as a marketable
stable glassy slag. The oxygen is obtained from an Air Separation Unit (ASU) which concentrates
oxygen from air for efficient use in coal Gasification.
3. (Gas Adjustment): The hydrogen concentration in the syngas is maximized by converting the carbon
monoxide with steam to hydrogen and carbon dioxide (CO
2
). This also hydrolyses various trace
contaminants.
4. (Acid Gas Cleanup): The carbon dioxide and sulphur components are removed from the synthesis
gas. Sulphur compounds are recovered as a saleable sulphur by-product. The cleaned synthesis
gas (mainly hydrogen) is blended with nitrogen (N
2
) from the ASU to the correct mixture required for
ammonia synthesis. A fuel gas side-stream for internal power generation will be substantially (>
95%) desulphurised, leading to very low sulphur dioxide (SO
2
) emissions during power generation.
Over 30% of the carbon dioxide is used during urea synthesis. The remaining carbon dioxide is
carbon capture ready.
5. (Ammonia Synthesis): The hydrogen and nitrogen mixture is compressed and reacted (with the help
of a catalyst) to form ammonia (NH
3
). This chemical reaction releases heat which is recovered as
steam which improves the overall process thermal efficiency, consequently lowering emissions.
6. (Urea Synthesis): Ammonia and carbon dioxide are reacted to form urea (solution) in a two stage
process which includes a carbamate intermediate. The urea solution is concentrated to over 95%.
7. (Urea Granulation): The concentrated urea solution is dried and granulated. Urea granules are a
strong, easily handled product, which minimises potential dust formation during the logistics process
of taking the urea from the plant to its end use point.
8. Storage and Warehousing: The urea granules are cooled and stored in a shed before being loaded
on a rail wagon and transported to Bunbury Port. Here the urea is unloaded from the train into a
second storage shed and then loaded onto bulk cargo ships for export.
The nominal plant urea production capacity is 6,200 tonnes per day (tpd) equating to 2.1 million tonnes
per annum (Mtpa). Approximately 2.6 Mtpa of coal is required to produce this volume of urea (the 500
tpa difference in tonnages being primarily water).
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 E permail@ghd.com.au Wwww.ghd.com.au
E
To Collie
~7.5km
P
R
E
M
IE
R
R
D
S
H
A
W
S

R
D
SHOTTS RD
COALFIELDS RD
S
H
O
T
T
S
R
IV
E
R
R
D
S
O
U
T
H
S
T
O
C
K
T
O
N

L
A
K
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
MAHONEY ST
428,750
428,750
430,000
430,000
431,250
431,250
432,500
432,500
6
,3
0
5
,0
0
0
6
,3
0
5
,0
0
0
6
,3
0
6
,2
5
0
6
,3
0
6
,2
5
0
6
,3
0
7
,5
0
0
6
,3
0
7
,5
0
0
G:\61\23685\GIS\mxds\612368503-G001.mxd
2009. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and LANDCORP, LANDGATE make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and LANDCORP, LANDGATE cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage)
which are or may be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason.
LEGEND
0 125 250 375 500
Metres
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator
Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 50
Perdaman Industries
Shotts Industrial Park
Figure 1
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23685-03
23 MAR 2009
Proposed Fertiliser Plant Site
o
Date
Data Source: Harvey Survey Group: Proposed Fertiliser Plant Boundary - 200903; GHD: Proposed Industrial Park Boundary - 20090317; Landgate: Collie 2131 2006 Mosaic - March 2006, Cadastre - SLIP 20090320. Created by: xntan
1:12,500 (at A3)
!
!
!
!
!
INDIAN
OCEAN
CAPEL
COLLIE
BUNBURY
BINNINGUP
DONNYBROOK
Locality Map
Proposed Fertiliser Plant Boundary
Proposed Industrial Park Boundary
Cadastre
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 E permail@ghd.com.au Wwww.ghd.com.au
Berth 5
373,000
373,000
374,500
374,500
376,000
376,000
377,500
377,500
6
,3
1
0
,5
0
0
6
,3
1
0
,5
0
0
6
,3
1
2
,0
0
0
6
,3
1
2
,0
0
0
6
,3
1
3
,5
0
0
6
,3
1
3
,5
0
0
G:\61\23685\GIS\mxds\612368503-G003.mxd
2009. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and LANDGATE make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and LANDGATE cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may
be incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason.
LEGEND
0 150 300 450 600
Metres
Map Projection: Transverse Mercator
Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 50
Perdaman Industries
Port of Bunbury
Figure 2
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23685-03
23 MAR 2009
Location Map
o
Date
Data Source: Landgate: Bunbury Street Directory Aug 2006 - SLIP 20090317. Created by: xntan
1:15,000 (at A3)
!
!
!
!
!
INDIAN
OCEAN
CAPEL
COLLIE
BUNBURY
BINNINGUP
DONNYBROOK
Locality Map
5 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
1.2 Scope of Assessment
GHD Pty Ltd (GHD) was commissioned by PCF to complete environmental approvals for the Collie Urea
Project. As part of this commission, GHD was required to prepare an air quality assessment.
This report assesses the potential air quality impacts from constructing and operating the Collie Urea
Plant at Shotts Industrial Park and the export facility at Bunbury Port. This reports scope is to:
Assess the likely level generation of dust and other pollutants associated with construction of the
Collie Urea Plant and export facilities;
Assess the likely air emissions during operation of the Plant and the export facility; and
Specify intended air quality management and mitigation measures during construction and operation
of the Plant and export facility to ensure compliance with relevant air quality criteria.
6 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
2. Coal to Urea Process
This section describes in greater detail the processes involved in conversion of coal to urea. Information
from this section is taken largely from Project Description Document Collie Coal to Urea Plant (GHD
2009b) (updated to be consistent with Public Environmental Review (PER) documentation).
Proven technology underpins each of the key stages of this project. The technologies to be used in the
Plant are the global industry best for the specific applications and are successfully operating elsewhere
in the world.
The selected technologies recover much of the energy generated at various stages of the process and
re-use this energy in the process.
The project can be broadly divided into four sections, or Islands, namely:
1. Syngas Island consisting of:
Coal storage and preparation;
Gasification;
Shift (syngas is adjusted to maximise hydrogen production); and
Acid gas cleanup and sulphur recovery.
2. Product Island consisting of:
Ammonia synthesis;
Urea synthesis and granulation; and
Product storage and rail car loading.
3. Utility Islands consisting of:
Air separation;
Power generation;
Water and wastewater treatment;
Cooling water;
Flare;
Fire fighting facilities; and
Other utilities.
4. Infrastructure and Logistics, including:
Administration buildings;
Operations control room;
Maintenance workshops;
Parts and materials warehousing; and
Plant security.
7 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
2.1 Process by Islands
A Block Flow Diagram of the major processing units described above is shown in Figure 3. Each of the
Process Islands is made up of a number of process units or physical sections of the Plant. The major
process sections are discussed below.
2.1.1 Syngas Island
The Syngas Island consists of various plant sections which prepare raw coal for gasification, producing
raw syngas. The raw syngas is put through clean-up steps such that the gas is in a form that is suitable
for downstream conversion to ammonia, urea and process power demand.
The Syngas Island includes the following units:
Unit 100 Coal Preparation
Unit 200 Gasification
Unit 300 Shift
Units 400/410 Gas Treatment
Unit 440 Sulphur Recovery
Syngas is a term used to describe synthetic gas production (as opposed to natural gas). The gasified
product consists of a mixture that is mainly carbon monoxide, hydrogen, some carbon dioxide, traces of
methane (CH
4
), sulphur compounds and other components (such as inert nitrogen and argon).
In the following descriptions, units are physical sections of the specified Island.
Unit 100 Coal Preparation
Receiving and Storage
Coal is continuously supplied via a conveyor from a nearby coal mine (Griffin Coal). As a contingency,
the Plant has a minimum of six weeks site storage of coal that will be kept as a strategic reserve against
any disruptions in the coal supply system. This reserve is about 300,000 tonnes in capacity. The
preliminary required coal quantity is 2.6 Mtpa on an as received basis.
Collie coal is a sub-bituminous (Permian) coal with a moderately high moisture content, (approximately
25% moisture, as received), low sulphur and modest ash content. The coal mined from different coal
seams (containing variations in moisture and compositions) will be blended to average out seam / inter-
seam variances, to ensure reasonably consistent quality coal feed for the urea plant.
8 61/23685/06/87117 Collie Urea Project
Figure 3 Block flow diagram of the major processing units
9 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Coal Milling and Drying
The coal is milled and dried to reduce the coal moisture content to approximately 5%. This improves the
overall gasification process conversion efficiency. Coal milling and drying techniques will be such that
the specifications for the coal particle size distribution and powdered coal moisture content are met.
Typically the coal is milled to a very fine consistency (approximately 250 microns).
Pressurisation
The dried coal is pressurised with nitrogen to meet the Gasifier injection pressure requirement. The
pressurised nitrogen is the off gas from the air separation unit (ASU). The ASU is required to produce a
near pure stream of oxygen (O
2
) for gasification and nitrogen for ammonia synthesis. The remaining
nitrogen is used to push the dried milled coal into the gasifier.
Lock hoppers are widely used in these applications. They have proven to be a safe and reliable method
for transferring solids under pressure. Sufficient spare capacities will be built into the system to allow for
online maintenance without total syngas production loss.
Unit 200 Gasification
Gasification is partial oxidation of a carbonaceous feedstock in the presence of oxygen and or steam, to
produce syngas. The gasification process chosen by PCF is a high temperature process that effectively
destroys any contaminants. The main products from gasification are carbon monoxide and hydrogen
which is synthesis gas (syngas). The coal feed is gasified with a blast, consisting of a mixture of oxygen
and process steam. Here an almost complete carbon conversion (>99%) is achieved. Moreover, the
high temperature (1500C) ensures that essentially no organic components heavier than C
1
are present
in the raw syngas. The insulation of the gasifier wall is provided by the partially solidified slag layer in the
gasifier. Three pairs of opposed burners will be used in the gasifier. During normal operation load all six
burners will be balanced. Two gasifiers will be used in this section.
Main (intermediate) product streams are:
Partially cooled syngas stream;
Slag; and
Partially treated wastewater stream containing slag fines.
Following gasification of the coal, the raw syngas is quenched with water. This rapidly cools the gas
mixture, solidifying ash as slag and absorbing the process heat in the gaseous mixture. Much of the
gasifier heat loss is captured as steam.
The raw gas is also scrubbed with water to remove traces of carry over ash. The grey water resulting
from this is pre-processed in the Gasifier section to a quality that is suitable for a conventional
wastewater plant.
The slag is a vitreous matrix that effectively captures any heavy metals released from coal. Slag density
is twice that of conventional fly ash meaning that slag occupies less volume than coal ash. It has very
low, if any leaching characteristics (slag is accepted by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (US EPA) as a non-toxic product). It will be used as a backfill in the mines. In future, markets
can be developed for this material for grit blasting and road construction.
10 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Unit 300 Shift
The raw syngas is cleaned to remove impurities and adjusted to maximise hydrogen content for
ammonia production.
The Carbon Monoxide Shift Unit:
The intention of the Carbon Monoxide Shift Unit is to convert carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide and
maximise the total hydrogen production.
The water gas shift reaction increases the hydrogen content by shifting carbon monoxide to carbon
dioxide with steam as per the following reversible reaction:
CO + H
2
O H
2
+ CO
2
(slightly exothermic)
The heat generated from the exothermic reaction is recovered back by generating steam and/or
preheating Boiler Feed Water.
Any COS present reacts with some of the water and is converted mostly to hydrogen sulphide (H
2
S) and
carbon dioxide. Similarly, hydrogen cyanide (HCN) is hydrolysed to produce ammonia and carbon
monoxide.
COS + H
2
O CO
2
+ H
2
S
HCN + H
2
O CO + NH
3
Unit 400 Acid Gas Treatment
Acid Gas Treatment takes shifted syngas and removes the hydrogen sulphide as well as carbon dioxide
A high pressure carbon dioxide stream (at approximately 6 Barg (the gauge pressure or pressure above
atmospheric pressure (which is around 1 bar)) for the Urea plant is generated out of the Acid Gas
Recovery Unit (AGRU) with the remainder of the carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide generated at
similar pressure (acid gas). The feed is contacted counter-currently with lean solvent in the main
absorber column. The lean solvent is supplied to the absorber under flow and temperature control. Rich
solvent leaves the absorber column under level control and is routed to the solvent regeneration system.
The solvent regeneration system consists of a 2-stage flash and associated heat exchangers, the
lean/rich solvent heat exchanger, solvent cooler, overhead condenser and solvent heater.
The sulphur components are selectively recovered in a concentrated stream sent to Unit 440, the
Sulphur recovery plant. Carbon dioxide is also selectively recovered with a solvent and with solvent
recovery, high purity carbon dioxide is available for use in urea synthesis. The remaining carbon dioxide
is available for sequestration.
The purified syngas is essentially sulphur free, but still contains traces of carbon monoxide, carbon
dioxide and methane. The fuel gas used for power generation will be desulphurised to eliminate sulphur
dioxide emissions.
Unit 410 Syngas polishing unit
A polishing unit is used to further reduce trace impurities in the syngas resulting in a pure
hydrogen/nitrogen mixture.
11 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Unit 440 Sulphur Recovery - Shell-Paques unit:
The Shell-Paques Process is an established proven environmentally friendly biological process for
hydrogen sulphide removal and recovery as elemental sulphur from sour gas streams. The most unique
aspect of the process is its use of a living biocatalyst to oxidize hydrogen sulphide to elemental sulphur.
These are autotrophic organisms, which means that carbon dioxide is required as their sole carbon
source. The energy needed for growth is obtained from the sulphide oxidation process. These
organisms are naturally occurring and are not genetically manipulated or modified.
This process converts the hydrogen sulphide in both the carbon dioxide stream to Urea Plant and the
AGRU acid gas stream into biosulphur. The carbon dioxide rich gases shall contain less than 4 parts per
million (ppm) of hydrogen sulphide. The hydrophilic (water attracting) nature of the recovered biosufhur
gives it excellent fertilizer properties, enabling it to be directly sold as an agricultural grade fertiliser
product. The elemental sulphur typically has a purity of 95-98% on dry basis. This conversion is
achieved in aerobic bioreactors containing Thiobacilli micro-organisms that oxidize the dissolved
sulphides into elemental sulphur.
All the sulphur content in the coal is recovered as a saleable by-product and will be sold to the domestic
market.
2. Product Island
The Product Island takes clean syngas and converts this to ammonia, followed by conversion of the
ammonia to urea.
Unit 500 Ammonia Synthesis
Ammonia is produced by reacting a mixture of hydrogen and nitrogen over a conventional Magnetite
based catalyst.
N
2
+ 3H
2
2NH
3
(exothermic)
This reaction is exothermic, implying that it releases heat, which is recovered as steam. The reaction
takes place in a closed loop at high pressure (195 Barg approx.) and high temperature (Inlet 360C and
outlet 440C approx). The ammonia is condensed and separated out and the unreacted gases are
recirculated back to the converter. The ammonia plant will produce approximately 3,500 tpd which is
required for urea production. A cryogenic atmospheric pressure storage tank with capacity for up to 10
kilo tonnes (kt) of liquefied ammonia will be provided as intermediate on-site storage in order to minimise
the impact on urea production if there are stoppages in the upstream processes. All ammonia
requirements are produced at the plant. It is not envisaged that there will be external ammonia sales.
Unit 550 Urea Synthesis
The technology adopted for the Urea is Stamicarbon Urea 2000 plus
TM
with a high pressure pool
condenser and a vertical reactor. This is a leading technology and is operating successfully across the
globe.
Urea is produced by reacting ammonia and carbon dioxide at elevated pressure, in two reaction stages.
In the first reaction, carbon dioxide and ammonia are converted to ammonium carbamate.
2NH
3
+ CO
2
NH
3
-CO
2
-NH
3
(exothermic) (Reaction 1)
In the second reaction ammonium carbamate dehydrates to produce urea and water. This reaction
water is recovered and cleaned by a stripping process for internal re-use.
12 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
NH
3
-CO
2
-NH
3
NH
2
-CO-NH
2
+ H
2
O (endothermic) (Reaction 2)
The major functional blocks in the urea plant are:
1. Synthesis:
The carbon dioxide stripping process is used. This has a very good efficiency because it uses
carbon dioxide as the stripping medium.
2. Low-Pressure Recirculation:
In this recirculation section, the unconverted ammonia and carbon dioxide are removed from the
main product stream, condensed into carbamate again and recycled to the synthesis section using a
high pressure carbamate pump.
3. Evaporation:
The urea solution leaving the recirculation section is further concentrated in the evaporation section
to meet the requirements of the granulation process. Vacuum evaporation is chosen to minimise the
biuret formation. A urea solution tank is provided to collect the solution during the periodical cleaning
period of the granulator.
4. Desorption and hydrolysis:
In the first desorption column, ammonia and carbon dioxide are expelled from the process
condensate, which is then pumped to the hydrolysis column where any urea still present therein is
dissociated.
The liberated ammonia and carbon dioxide are desorbed in the second desorption column with the
aid of steam.
Unit 560 Urea Granulation
Urea solution at a concentration of approximately 98.5% by weight is dried and granulated. Granulation
technology results in a stronger and more consistent urea particle size. This assists with simpler
transport (minimal particulates) and easier application by farmers.
The Stamicarbons fluid-bed Granulation technology will be used. Urea solution is atomized into fine
droplets and sprayed onto the seed particles in the granulator.
Granulation uses air as a fluidising and cooling medium. The exhaust air treatment is discussed further
below.
A small amount of urea formaldehyde (less than 0.33% per mass) is added to the urea to improve the
particle strength and reduce urea particulate dust formation during transport. Urea formaldehyde will be
imported as UF85 by road in accordance with road transportation regulations.
Dust Emission and Recovery
The exhaust air containing some amount of urea particulates, (typically ~ 4 - 5%) is cleaned in
commercially available scrubbers. The recovered urea is recycled to the urea synthesis section as 45%
urea solution.
5. Utility Island
The Utility Island delivers process utility requirements such as oxygen, nitrogen, power and water.
13 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Unit 650 Air Separation
Air is compressed and separated in a conventional cryogenic Air Separation Unit (ASU).
The project oxygen requirement is such that the ASU will be world scale, delivering 99.5% purity oxygen;
with sufficient nitrogen compression to supply coal feed pressurisation, nitrogen make-up for ammonia
synthesis and inert duties.
Air is fed to an ASU where the water and carbon dioxide is initially dropped out in an Alumina and
Molecular sieve bed; the clean air is then cryogenically separated into oxygen, nitrogen and argon in a
rectification column. The oxygen is about 99.5% pure and is fed to the gasification unit. This helps in
reducing the volume of gas produced.
Unit 600/650 Power Island
The internal power requirements are anticipated to be generated onsite on a combined cycle basis using
high efficiency gas turbines and heat recovery steam generation turbines. For normal operation, internal
generation will match internal demand (i.e. power neutral). The power generated on site would be up to
about 200 MW.
There may be linking to high voltage lines at the project site for back-up or start-up conditions. The base
case assumes no South West Interconnected System (SWIS) grid link, however there are four power
stations within 20 km of the project site with a combined capacity of over 1,500 MW.
The process gas turbine will normally operate on de-sulphurised syngas from the process plant. The gas
turbine will achieve low nitrogen oxides (NO
x
) emissions by using a modified burner with nitrogen
dilution.
Unit 700 Water Systems
The main water uses in the facility will be:
Raw water filtering and desalination;
Cooling water demand and losses;
Process water balance;
Steam balance makeup via demineralised water;
Ancillary water (potable, fire water);
Wastewater treatment; and
Stormwater collection and management.
Cooling Water Demand
Cooling water is circulated to the process with a design supply temperature of 26C and a return
temperature of 36C.
The water is contacted with air in forced/cross flow draft cooling tower modules. This results in
evaporation of some of the water and cooling of the recycled stream.
A blowdown of water concentrated with salts is required to maintain cooling water quality. The blowdown
will be treated in the waste water treatment section, to recover part of the water before discharging to the
existing Verve Energy outfall pipeline or further concentration of the concentrated brine for landfill
disposal at a licensed third party landfill site.
14 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Unit 660 Steam System
Steam is required for driving the turbo compressors, various heating duties and other uses. Process
steam is generated by removing excess heat from various process units such as Gasification, Shift and
Ammonia synthesis. Excess steam is generated with a standby boiler or removed from the heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG) section in the Power Island.
Various steam pressures are provided, with excess steam (above process requirements) exported to the
Steam turbine in the Unit 600 Power island, to generate power.
2.2 Logistics and Infrastructure
2.2.1 Logistics
Rail Collie Bunbury
The urea granules are transferred from the Granulator section to the site storage shed. The urea will be
loaded onto covered rail cars and transported to Bunbury Port for unloading. Two rail trips (return) are
envisaged per day.
Storage Bunbury
A rail car unloader and storage shed is to be constructed by PCF at Bunbury Port adjacent to Berth 5.
The shed will have the capacity to store at least one Panamax shipload of urea, which is approximately
50,000 tonnes but may be as large as 100,000 tonnes. The shed atmosphere will be maintained to
minimise moisture ingress to the urea product.
Ship Loading
A conveying ship loader will be constructed on Berth 5 at Bunbury Port to allow ship loading from the
storage shed. PCF will provide suitable loading facilities.
The ship loader will incorporate weather protection to prevent ingress of moisture (rain) and minimise
particulate emissions.
2.2.2 Other Utilities
Other utilities and infrastructure associated with the production of urea include:
Process chemicals;
Demineralised water;
Safety Flare;
Control room facilities;
Fuel gas/liquid fuel supply;
Site water management; and
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS).
The plant will be self sufficient for all utilities including heat-up, start-up, normal operation and shut down
(including emergency shutdown).
15 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Part of the facility would be a dedicated Control Room, with associated switchgear and terminals for the
entire Collie Urea Plant complex.
2.2.3 Associated Infrastructure
The main infrastructure components outside the plant boundary are as follows:
A rail spur, to be connected to the existing rail line on the most northern boundary of the
proposed plant site;
A conveyor, to be constructed in existing corridors from the southern boundary of the site to
Griffin Coal's coal storage area about 7 km to the south;
A water supply pipeline to supply water along existing corridors from Wellington Dam to the site;
Administration Facilities, Spare parts and Materials Warehouse, Storage areas for slag and Flux;
and
Bunbury Port Berth 5 Urea unloading, storage and offloading facilities.
Power
The base case for the plant assumes no SWIS grid link. The plant is expected to be power neutral for
normal operations.
There may be linking to a diesel fuelled gas turbine at the project site for back-up or start-up conditions
or a direct link outside the grid to an adjacent local power supplier.
Water Supply
The project requires raw water to make up losses and consumption from:
Closed circuit cooling water make-up (blowdown and drift losses);
Process water make-up;
Demineralised water make-up (for steam/condensate losses); and
Potable and fire water use.
Internal re-use of water includes recovery of process condensate and urea reaction water. This will
cover a portion of the net overall water demand.
2.3 Emission Sources Collie Urea Plant
The Collie Urea Plant will be a world scale plant and comparable to the largest operating urea plants in
Saudi Arabia, India and Qatar. The plant will use world class technologies from leading Licensors:
Gasification Island will be provided by Shell; and
Product Island will feature Haldor Topsoe for ammonia and Stamicarbon for both urea synthesis and
granulation.
Most emissions (>97%) from the plant originate at seven sources:
Coal milling and drying vent - Train 1;
Coal milling and drying vent - Train 2;
Acid gas recovery - Gas clean up vent;
16 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Urea granulation stack Train 1;
Urea granulation stack Train 2;
Flare - Main and ammonia flare;
Gas turbine stack Power Island.
The estimated emission sources and pollutants from the Collie Urea Plant are shown in Table 1. Each of
the major emissions sources from the Collie Urea Plant are outlined below. Information for this section
has been provide by PCF, from information obtained from the Licensors.
Table 1 Estimated emissions from Collie Urea Plant (tpa)
Plant Section SO2 NOx PM10 CO VOC CH4 NH3
Coal milling and drying 50 5 <1 166 15 <1 <1
Gasification (Flare) 31 3 <1 102 - <1 <1
Gas clean up 20 (as
H2S)
<1 - 494 - 18 <1
Ammonia synthesis - <1 - <1 - - 12
Urea synthesis and
granulation
- <1 505 - - - 1364
Power Island 6 350 56 368 - <1 <1
Air separation - - - - - - -
Estimated emissions will be used as input for air dispersion modelling, as described in Section 7.
2.3.1 Coal Milling and Drying (CMD)
The coal is expected to have an average moisture content of 24.5% as received. During wet months a
slightly higher moisture content is allowed, to be offset with a reduced ash content.
The coal is dried to a residual moisture content of 7% 1%. This is done with low temperature drying
technology (< 200C) to avoid volatilization of coal hydrocarbon components, as such carbon loss, but
also emissions. Typically at > 350C, some organic components are pyrolised from the coal (boiling
point of light organics). This has been estimated at 30 tpa.
Of the two approaches available, the current basis assumes use of combustion of fuel gas for direct
heating during coal milling as the drying agent (low pressure steam can also be used with indirect
heating). Coal milling will use technology as per leading German coal milling companies such as
Polysius or Loesche. The milling is expected to be done in four trains with a spare train on standby,
shared between the units.
Desulphurised fuel gas will be used, with a specification of max 50 ppm sulphur components. The fuel
gas will be a mixture of mainly carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Combusted gas has a low residual
oxygen content (mainly nitrogen, some carbon monoxide and moisture). This provides an inert
environment to minimize spontaneous coal combustion, the risk of occurrence of such increasing with
lower moisture content.
17 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Low oxides of nitrogen emissions are attributed to combustion at lower temperatures (< 250C (peak)).
The moisture is thus vented at the top of the CMD section hoppers. Two mills are combined to a vent,
resulting in two vents overall.
Calculation of emissions has been made using the estimated moisture content with an estimate of fuel
gas required to evaporate the moisture in the coal (and heat the coal). This flow rate assumes a
combination of water vapour with combusted syngas and a modest excess of air.
2.3.2 Acid Gas Recovery Unit (AGRU)
Most of the excess carbon dioxide from the process is vented at the AGRU vent. In the gas clean up the
carbon monoxide is shifted to hydrogen using steam. Following cooling, the syngas feed to AGRU
consists of mainly hydrogen and carbon dioxide, inert nitrogen and argon and traces of unreacted carbon
monoxide and hydrogen sulphide. The carbon dioxide and sulphur impurities (acid gas) are removed
from the syngas with a solvent, which is subsequently regenerated (recovered) leaving a concentrated
stream of carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide.
An important design feature is the choice of AGRU technology. Conventionally Rectisol is used in
combination with a liquid nitrogen wash (LIN). This is the case for coal based plant such as Sasol, South
Africa and all modern Chinese coal based ammonia plants. Rectisol uses a chilled methanol solvent,
which results in traces of methanol vapour in the excess carbon dioxide vent of the process.
The Collie Urea Plant will use a combination of ADIP
1
(Shell
2
) with Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA)
(UOP LCC
3
). ADIP involves an iso-propanol solvent and ambient extraction temperature and eliminates
use of methanol. PSA uses adsorption beds to remove trace contaminants from the ammonia plant feed
gas, which are recovered for use as a fuel gas (combusted).
The hydrogen sulphide is processed in the sulphur recovery plant. This is Shell Paques technology,
which is a biosulphur process.In this process, a gas stream containing hydrogen sulphide contacts an
aqueous carbon dioxide solution containing Thiobacillus bacteria in an absorber. The soda absorbs the
hydrogen sulphide and is transferred to an aerated atmospheric tank where the bacteria biologically
converts the hydrogen sulphide to elemental sulphur. This process is ideally suited to environmentally
sensitive areas where venting or incineration are not desirable options. Treated outlet gas can readily
meet a less than 100 ppm hydrogen sulphide specification (typical requirement for biogas). This is
followed by a guard bed which reduces the sulphur to max 10 ppm.
The proposed plant would have three beds for roughly up to 20 tonnes of sulphur per day. The biological
sulphur slurry produced may be used for agricultural purposes or purified to a high quality (99%+)
sulphur cake.
Around 40% of the AGRU carbon dioxide is used for urea manufacture, with the balance vented to
atmosphere. This stream is then ~99% carbon dioxide with traces of carbon monoxide, nitrogen and
max 10 ppm hydrogen sulphide.
The carbon dioxide stripped syngas is further purified to remove remaining impurities with a Pressure
Swing Adsorption (PSA) unit. This unit selectively traps non hydrogen species in the syngas in an
1
The ADIP process is a regenerable amine process for the removal of H2S and CO2 from natural gas (Shell trademark)
2
www.shellglobalsolutions.com
3
www.uop.com
18 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
adsorbant, which is periodically regenerated to a fuel gas stream. This results in a pure hydrogen stream
which is mixed with nitrogen for ammonia synthesis. The fuel gas stream can either be used for drying
or duct firing to superheat steam in the HRSG. This combustion results in a small amount of sulphur
dioxide in the vent from traces of combusted hydrogen sulphide which has been allocated in the
respective units.
The carbon dioxide stream is estimated from the syngas composition and quantity, with assumptions to
the required fuel gas for power and coal drying. Based on preliminary Licensor data, this results in a net
vent of some 2.4 Mtpa of carbon dioxide
,
together with max 10 ppmv hydrogen sulphide.
It is noted that the fuel gas stream has a selective desulphurization step to remove sulphur from the fuel
gas stream. The extracted hydrogen sulphide is combined with the process gas hydrogen sulphide and
carbon dioxide.
2.3.3 Urea Synthesis and Granulation Trains 1 and 2
Two identical urea granulation trains will be provided, with technology from Stamicarbon (Netherlands).
This technology involves spraying a film of urea slurry through a nozzle to produce a film spray that with
air hardens and forms visually spherical granules. Oversize granules are crushed and undersize urea
particles are re-dissolved in water and reworked. A small amount (0.3 kg/t) of formaldehyde (resin) is
added to give strength to the granules to minimize dust during transport and application.
In the past few years Stamicarbon has become the leading licensor in the world for new granulation
units. The technology has common origins with the UFT
4
technology which accounts for most of the
remaining global granulator sales.
Stamicarbon differs from UFT technology in that the spray nozzle is a film rather than a mist. This
reduces the dust formation in the process and results in less rework.
While most ammonia and carbon dioxide have reacted to urea and the urea product concentrated and
stripped to recover unreacted ammonia and carbon dioxide, there are still traces of ammonia. These are
entrained in the air flow. The air is filtered to reduce urea particle dust emissions (1 micron). The air is
then vented at the urea granulator stack. This approach is applied to virtually all modern granulation
plants around the world.
The expected granulator emissions are specified as 130 mg/m
3
ammonia in air and up to 50 mg/m
3
urea
particles (Stamicarbon design basis). This corresponds to ~19.7 g/s of ammonia per Granulator. To this
is added the contribution from the urea synthesis purge of 0.15 g/t urea, resulting in an overall 22 g/s
ammonia emission. Similarly the urea particle emission is estimated to be ~9 g/s per Granulator.
From commercial experience the ammonia and urea emissions are expected to be somewhat less.
The assumption has been made that 25% of the urea particles are PM
2.5
. It is noted that these are not
particulates in the sense of a product of incomplete high temperature combustion. Urea is a fertilizer and
the released particles may contribute to some degree of stimulated localized plant growth.
4
With the acquisition of the exclusive licence rights for the fluid bed urea granulation technology from Yara Fertilizer Technology,
Uhde Fertilizer Technology (UFT) has taken over the full rights for this granulation technology. This technology has been applied
in more than 50 plants.
19 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
2.3.4 Flare Main and Ammonia Flare
The purpose of a flare is to combust purge gas from the process and be available to effectively combust
unreacted process gas either during start-up or shutdown, particularly an emergency shutdown, i.e., the
process gas inventory is vented to the flare, during upset conditions. The flare has a pilot burner to
ensure that on demand the gas in the flare is ignited with pilot gas to ensure good combustion before
release to atmosphere.
With combustion, most fuels are converted to combustion products:
CO + O
2
CO
2
H
2
+ O
2
H
2
O
2NH
3
+ 1 O
2
N
2
+ 3 H
2
O
H
2
S + 1O
2
H
2
O + SO
2
During normal operating conditions the flare will be on pilot mode (supplied by a plant independent liquid
petroleum gas fuel source).
The main duties are considered Gasifier start-up and shutdowns. These take place over several hours,
and start at reduced load, which impacts the peak emission load. The peak is thus more pronounced
than the normal operation peaks. A conservative view is that all syngas is flared for the 4-hour period for
a startup. Operationally after the first two hours it may be feasible to supply some of the gas to the
Power Island.
An estimate of the peak period:
Start-up - 1 gasifier - 21 per year x 4 hours = 84 hours per annum (average flow rate at turndown is
75%, equivalent to 112 hours);
Shutdown 1 gasifier 21 per year x 1 hour = 21 hours per annum;
Total estimated release of 133 hours per annum.
The excess air is an assumption relating to the flare burner design to approximate the flare tip conditions
to allow a plume to be modelled. The first gasifier on-line is envisaged to have the longest start-up
period. Following stable operation of the first gasifier, it would be easier to bring the second gasifier on
line, given access to syngas and steam then exists.
2.3.5 Power Island
The power for the plant is generated with a combined cycle gas turbine. This means a gas turbine of a
scale / configuration similar to existing natural gas fired units in south-west WA (Worsley, Kemerton or
Kwinana). The combined cycle means addition of a HRSG and steam turbine, which increases the
power plant thermal efficiency from ~33% to ~50% (GE and Siemens Technology vendor data sheets).
The estimated power requirement is 140-150 MW this is after excess process steam has been applied
to drive various process compressors, such as ammonia and carbon dioxide. This implies that the gas
turbine output is ~95 MW.
Perdaman will use desulphurised and scrubbed syngas as the fuel gas during normal operation. Syngas
is derived from the gasifier and consist of mainly carbon monoxide and hydrogen. The sulphur content
has been specified to be max. 50 ppm (all species). This differs greatly from all the existing power plants
20 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
near Collie which have no sulphur reduction technology and all the sulphur content of the coal is
converted and released as sulphur dioxide.
The condensing steam turbine does mean that a third of the power is generated without emissions
barring water vapour. The gas turbine emissions are considerably less than a coal fired boiler, with the
allowable oxides of nitrogen limited to 35 ppm as per EPA Guidance Statement 15 (EPA 2000).
2.3.6 Mitigation Measures
Various design features have been incorporated to minimize atmospheric emissions and safely process
coal to syngas to urea, including:
The coal is dried to reduce moisture and increase process efficiency.
Gasification is not combustion (using limited oxygen converts coal to syngas) and a pressurized
closed system allows containment of various contaminants. Scale assists with the ability to
economically capture small contaminants in large streams.
Slagging gasification melts the ash (>1500C) which eliminates polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and retains most heavy metals unlike fly ash which is >1150C. The slag is non leaching.
Nearly all sulphur in the coal is recovered as a saleable product, not emitted as sulphur dioxide.
Gasification allows sulphur removal from a concentrated syngas which is not contaminated with
excess air.
Waste heat is extensively recovered in the process improving efficiency and reducing coal energy
input, thereby reducing emissions.
A combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) is used for internal power generation, which has a higher
efficiency and low oxides of nitrogen emissions compared to pulverized coal boilers. The syngas fuel
will be desulphurised.
Ammonia is produced and used internally and combusted (to water and nitrogen) during process
upsets at a flare.
Urea granulation has been selected which results in substantially less dust and stronger particles for
transport than traditional prilling technology.
2.3.7 Volatile Organic Compound and Heavy Metal Emissions
Due to the PCF application of slagging gasification technology and other processing technologies
relating to gas treatment and recovery of impurities, the expected air emissions of typical contaminants
relating to emission from pulverised coal boiler power plants are reduced.
Table 2 indicates the expected PCF emissions for lower level contaminants.
21 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 2 Estimated emissions of volatile organic compounds and heavy metals from Collie
Urea Plant
Description Emission Comments
Total volatile organic compounds < 15 tonnes/yr Mainly from Coal Milling and Drying vapour vent
(based on Shell Buggenum, Netherlands
estimates). There is minimal process use of
methanol.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons < 3.0 kg/yr Based on low temperature drying and milling
process.
Arsenic < 3.0 kg/yr
Cadmium < 1.5 kg/yr
Chromium < 0.3 kg/yr
Lead < 3.0 kg/yr
Nickel < 0.5 kg/yr
Based on 1 mg/Nm
3
particles to gas treatment
following candle filtration and wet scrubbing in
gasification
5
.
Mercury < 6.0 kg/yr Activated carbon filtration on process gas, 35%
captured in slag (as per Shell).
Fluoride < 10 kg/yr Fluorides from coal report to water effluent as salt.
Aromatics and Volatile Organic Compounds
The Gasification process converts coal to syngas above the melting point of the ash (> 1500 C). At this
temperature all organic compounds are converted to synthesis gas (viz. carbon monoxide, hydrogen and
carbon dioxide). Even methane is reduced to very low levels - < 15 ppm (estimated by the Technology
vendor).
This means that there will be no complex aromatics from gasification. The synthesis gas is selectively
converted to ammonia (the only chemical option for hydrogen and nitrogen) and urea involves ammonia
and carbon dioxide, neither of which results in aromatic compounds.
The coal milling and drying uses a low drying temperature to limit potential for pyrolysis products from
coal (e.g. at Buggenum, Netherlands moisture from coal drying with gas is vented directly to atmosphere
at the top of the milling section, complying with Dutch standards). The process will not add aromatics.
The moist Collie coal is dried to ca. 5% moisture during the milling stage. This combines enhanced heat
transfer from the combusted products of the heating fuel gas with small particle size of milled coal. This
allows an inert atmosphere (which prevents spontaneous combustion of the coal) as well as low
temperature (typical vent outlet 110C). These conditions result in minimal generation and minimal loss
of volatile components in the coal.
5
Assumption is that all particles in scrubbed syngas are released - in practice most will to captured on the Shift and or COS
hydrolysis catalyst beds.
22 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Shell has estimated a VOC load of 12-14 tpa from CMD. A check with Loesche (a leading CMD vendor)
indicates that a lower VOC number may be feasible, depending on design conditions. Other VOC
contributions are estimated for reagents used for cooling water and steam.
Traces of methanol are anticipated from the application of the UF85 (unreacted methanol from
formaldehyde). If 0.5% of methanol is residual in UF85 (sourced from Dynea, local manufacturer), this is
estimated to be maximum of 5 kg/h.
Heavy Metals
The coal ash typically contains trace quantities of various heavy metals. With existing pulverised boiler
power stations, most of these metals are retained in the fly ash. However some fly ash is emitted as
particulates in the stack and this includes some of the heavy metals.
The Shell gasification is a pressurised co-current up-flow slagging gasifier design. This means the coal
is added near the bottom together with limited oxygen to result in incomplete oxidation of the coal to
mainly CO and hydrogen. No gas is released from the process without additional processing to remove
potentially harmful contaminants. This uses a six opposed burner design with induced swirl. The gasifier
operates above the ash melting point, which is over 1500C. At this temperature all complex
hydrocarbons are reduced to syngas, with evidence that methane is < 100 ppm.
The molten ash droplets are guided to the gasifier cooling screen, where they coalesce and drip down to
the slag quench bath below the gasifier. This results in a inert glassy slag, that effectively traps heavy
metals and other ash components. US and Dutch authorities have classified gasifier slag as a non toxic
product, demonstrating very low leaching properties.
Smaller droplets move upwards in the gasifier and at the exit a cool syngas recycle (200C) quenches
the temperature to 900C. This coalesces the slag particles. This temperature is also below the melting
point of nearly all metals, including sodium chloride (salt). Following heat recovery, the small slag
particles are filtered followed by a scrubber. This ensures that nearly all remaining particles are removed
from syngas (better than 1 mg/Nm
3
). As noted above this has been used as assumption for potential
emission of metals to air although in practice the syngas passes through further catalytic beds before
portions may be released to atmosphere. In the Shift reaction the catalyst also catalyses the conversion
of metal carbonyls to metal sulphides, which are trapped on the catalyst.
Fluorides present from the coal ash report as salts to either effluent treatment or slag. Chloride in the
coal also largely report to the water treatment section.
This highlights how Gasification results in considerably lower heavy metal emissions to air compared to
the traditional open pulverised coal combustion boiler system.
The total mercury in the coal feed is in the order of 90-100 kg/yr. Shell estimates about a third of the
mercury is captured in the slag. Most of the balance of mercury is in the syngas and is trapped with an
activate dcarbon mercury guard bed in the AGR unit. A small portion of mercury is released to
atmosphere from a portion of the fuel gas to the gas turbine.
An indicative reduction of criteria pollutants and heavy metals for Gasification compared with typical
modern coal fired power stations in the Collie airshed (Figure 4) shows that the Collie Urea Plant
approach results in tangible reductions for nearly all emissions.
23 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Figure 4 Indicative reduction of criteria pollutants and heavy metals for Gasification compared
with modern coal fired power stations in the Collie Airshed
2.4 Emission Sources Collie Airshed Context
Emissions from the Collie Urea Plant were compared against the emissions from the existing, approved
(under construction) and proposed facilities within the Collie airshed. Table 3 presents the annual
emissions from each facility, with a chart presenting the emissions contribution from each source. Table
3 shows that the Coal Urea Plant contributes less than one percent to airshed emissions of sulphur
dioxide, one percent to oxides of nitrogen emissions, two percent to emissions of particulates as PM
10
and five percent to emissions of carbon monoxide.
Table 3 Contribution of emission sources within the Collie airshed
Sulphur dioxide Emissions (tpa)
Collie Urea Plant 106
Muja A+B 16,966
Muja C+D 49,133
Collie A 16,241
Worsley 12,173
Bluewaters I+II 14,507
Bluewaters III+IV 4,352
Muja A+B
15%
Muja C+D
43%
Collie A
14%
Worsley
11%
BW I+II
13%
BW III+IV
4%
Urea Plant
0%
24 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Nitrogen oxides Emissions (tpa)
Muja A+B 16,146
Muja C+D 25,166
Collie A 4,983
Worsley 5,424
Muja A+B
24%
Muja C+D
37%
Collie A
8%
Worsley
8%
BW I+II
11%
BW III+IV
11%
Urea Plant
1%
Carbon monoxide Emissions (tpa)
Collie Urea Plant 1,130
Muja A+B 360
Muja C+D 1,034
Collie A 3,974
Worsley 546
Muja A+B
2%
Collie A
19%
Worsley
3%
BW I+II
33%
BW III+IV
33%
Muja C+D
5%
Urea Plant
5%
25 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Particulates as PM
10
Emissions (tpa)
Muja A+B 33,933
Muja C+D 870
Collie A 192
Worsley 114
Bluewaters I+II 593
Bluewaters III+IV 593
Muja A+B
91%
Collie A
1%
Worsley
0%
BW I+II
2%
BW III+IV
2%
Muja C+D
2%
Urea Plant
2%
2.5 Emission Sources Export Facility
Ship loading facilities will be provided at Bunbury Port by PCF. This facility will consist of a large storage
shed (300m x 70m x 27m), train unloading and ship loading facilities. The storage shed will be fully
enclosed, climate controlled and under negative pressure to ensure urea is not effected by moisture.
All conveyers will be fully enclosed. Urea dust should not be emitted in any quantity during ship loading
as best available ship loading technology will be used, incorporating telescopic chutes with baffles. Dust
will be collected and filtered through reverse pulse baghouses at the ship loading conveyor transfer
points.
Small amounts of dust (urea) may be produced during handling, although this will be minimal as the urea
is granulated and therefore produces less dust during handling, when compared to traditional prilled
products.
Dust (urea) generated during unloading from trains will be contained within the storage facility. Any dust
or other particulates that is lost to the environment will be attributed to a fault or breakdown of equipment.
As such, appropriate management frameworks will be introduced for maintenance of equipment,
identification of equipment failure and control measures to minimise urea particulate dust emissions
during such equipment failure.
26 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
3. Ambient Air Quality Criteria
Air quality impacts are assessed by comparing monitoring results or model predictions with appropriate
ambient air criteria. The criteria referred to in this assessment include:
National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (NEPC 1998);
Kwinana Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) Standards; and
Victorian Environmental Protection Authority (Vic EPA) Design Criteria (Vic EPA 2001).
3.1 Air NEPM
The National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (Air NEPM) was developed to
provide benchmark standards for ambient air quality to ensure all Australians have protection from the
potential health effects of air pollution (NEPC 1998). Air NEPM standards have been developed for CO,
NO
2
, photochemical oxidants (as ozone (O
3
)), SO
2
, lead and particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than 10 micrometers (PM
10
). In addition, an advisory reporting standard has been
established for particulates as PM
2.5
, where the goal was to gather sufficient data to facilitate a review
(NEPC 2003).
The pollutants of interest for this assessment were CO, NO
2
, O
3
, SO
2
, PM
10
and PM
2.5
. The relevant Air
NEPM standards are provided in Table 4.
The draft State Environmental (Ambient Air) Policy 2009 (Ambient Air SEP) gives effect to the Air NEPM
standards and goals by establishing such standards as environmental quality criteria. The Ambient Air
SEP states Environmental quality criteria should acts as a trigger for investigation and management
action when they are not met (Government of WA 2009).
Environmental quality criteria are applied across the whole State except where an EPP exists, within the
boundary of an industrial premise; within industrial buffer areas, within the boundary of a road or where
there are no sensitive receptors (Government of WA 2009).
The Air NEPM standards and goals, for criteria pollutants, are therefore the most appropriate for this
assessment. Assessment of compliance with Air NEPM standards has been made at the maximum
predicted value.
27 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 4 National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure standards
Pollutant Averaging period Maximum concentration
6
Carbon monoxide 8-hours 11,254 g/m
3
1-hour 247 g/m
3
Nitrogen dioxide
Annual 62 g/m
3
1-hour 214 g/m
3
Photochemical oxidants (as ozone)
4-hour 172 g/m
3
1-hour 572 g/m
3
24-hours 229 g/m
3
Sulphur dioxide
Annual 57 g/m
3
Particulates as PM10 24-hours 50 g/m
3
Particulates as PM2.5 24-hours 25 g/m
3
3.2 Kwinana Environmental Protection Policy
The Kwinana Environmental Protection (Kwinana) (Atmospheric Wastes) Policy 1999 (Kwinana EPP)
establishes ambient air quality standards and limits for SO
2
and total suspended particulates (TSP). A
standard is defined as the concentration of an atmospheric waste which it is desirable not to exceed,
and a limit is the concentration that should not be exceeded (EPA 2009).
The Kwinana EPP establishes an 1-hour SO
2
standard of 350 g/m
3
for Area C (rural and residentially
zoned land). Achievement of the standard is determined by comparison with the 99.9
th
percentile, which
is the value below which 99.9% of hourly averages fall. In a full year of hourly averaged figures, this
would be the 9
th
highest value (EPA 2009).
DEC have advised an appropriate criteria for assessment of impacts from SO
2
in the Collie airshed is the
Area C standard determined in the Kwinana EPP (DEC 2009). As such, GHD has adopted this criteria
for the PCF assessment.
3.3 Victorian Environment Protection Authority
The Victorian Environment Protection Authority Design Criteria established under the State Environment
Protection Policy (Air Quality Management) (SEPP-AQM) were used during this assessment where Air
NEPM standards were not available. SEPP-AQM design criteria are taken at the 99.9 percentile
concentration using an averaging time of one hour or less, which corresponds to the 9
th
highest hourly
concentration (Vic EPA 2001). The relevant SEPP-AQM design criteria are provided in Table 5.
6
Concentrations of gaseous pollutants have been converted from the Air NEPM standard expressed as ppm at 0C and 1
atmosphere
28 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 5 State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management) design criteria
Pollutant Averaging period 99.9%ile concentration
7
Ammonia 3-minute 600 g/m
3
Hydrogen sulphide 3-minute 470 g/m
3
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 3-minute 0.73 g/m
3
Benzene 3-minute 53 g/m
3
Cumene 3-minute 39 g/m
3
Cyclohexane 3-minute 35,000 g/m
3
Ethyl benzene 3-minute 14,500 g/m
3
Formaldehyde 3-minute 40 g/m
3
n-Hexane 3-minute 5,900 g/m
3
Toluene 3-minute 650 g/m
3
Xylene 3-minute 350 g/m
3
Arsenic 3-minute 0.17 g/m
3
Cadmium 3-minute 0.033 g/m
3
Chromium VI 3-minute 0.17 g/m
3
Lead 1-hour 3.0 g/m
3
Nickel 3-minute 0.33 g/m
3
Mercury 3-minute 0.33 g/m
3
3.4 Air Pollution Species Assessed
The following air pollutant species were identified as relevant for this assessment, based on previous air
quality assessments for power stations in the Collie region (CSIRO 2004, SKM 2005 and ENVIRON
2009) and predicted emissions from the Collie Urea Plant.
Criteria Pollutants
Carbon monoxide Photochemical oxidants (as ozone)
Nitrogen dioxide Particulate matter as PM
10
Sulphur dioxide Particulate matter as PM
2.5
Other Pollutants
PM
10
(as urea) Hydrogen sulphide
Ammonia Formaldehyde
Benzene n-Hexane
Cumene Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
7
Gas volumes expressed at 25C and 1 atmosphere
29 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Cyclohexane Toluene
Ethyl benzene Xylene
Arsenic Lead
Cadmium Nickel
Chromium Mercury
30 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
4. Existing Conditions Shotts Industrial Park
This section provides a summary of the existing environmental aspects relevant to this air quality
assessment, including topography, land use, meteorology, ambient air quality and sensitive receptors, for
the Shotts Industrial Park site.
4.1 Topography and Land Use
The Collie Urea Plant will be constructed on land at the Shotts Industrial Park. The Shotts Industrial Park
is located approximately 15 km east of Collie and has a total area of 250 ha, with the Plant to utilise 120
ha of the available area located at the western end of the Industrial Park. The Shotts site is situated
within the Collie Basin and more specifically at the former Shotts townsite. The Collie Basin forms a
northwesterly trending valley in the Darling Plateau and is surrounded by Archaean granitic rocks of the
Yilgarn Craton (DoW 2007). The basin is bilobate in shape and is filled with Permian and Recent
sedimentary deposits. The area is also characterised by bedrock outcrops and a dissected topography
(DoF 2007).
The area consists of a combination of gently undulating lateritic uplands and broad shallow sandy valley
floors. The soils of the broad shallow sandy valley floors are described as fawn to strong brown sands,
fine to medium and poorly to moderately sorted, whilst a small granite outcrop occurs on the southern
edge of the area (GHD 2008).
Land use in the area includes farming and forestry, with industrial use predominately open cut coal
mining and power generation. The Shotts site is located adjacent to the Ewington coal mine. Muja coal
mine and Premier mine are located within 10 km of the Shotts site.
The Shotts site is within 5 km of the existing Collie power station and Bluewaters power station at the
Coolangatta Industrial Estate . The Muja power station is located approximately 9 km to the south east.
4.2 Meteorology
The Shotts Industrial Park site is proximate to Collie and general meteorology and climate data from
Collie would be most nearly representative for the plant site. The following discussion is based on
Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Climate Statistics for Australian Locations obtained for the Collie automatic
weather station (AWS)
8
(ID: 009628, located at 33.36 S, 116.15 E) (BoM 2009a).
4.2.1 Temperature
Table 6 shows long term mean maximum and minimum temperatures observed at the Collie AWS. This
shows that Collie experiences relatively warm to hot summers and cool winters, with a mean annual
maximum temperature of 22.5 C and a mean annual minimum temperature of 8.4 C. The highest
temperatures are observed in January and the lowest in July. Collie averages 62.9 days above 30 C,
19.9 days above 35 C, 1.8 days above 40 C, 28.0 days below 2 C and 8.4 days below 0 C.
8
Collie East AWS (ID: 009994, located at 33.36 N, 116.17 E) opened December 2002 to replace Collie AWS. Long term climate
statistics have been derived from data collected from the Collie AWS.
31 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
4.2.2 Rainfall
Table 6 shows the spread of monthly rainfall at Collie AWS. This table shows that Collie experiences a
dry summer and a relatively wet winter. Collie has an annual mean rainfall of 937.3 mm. Collie
averages 140.5 rain days with 90.1 days of greater than 1 mm rainfall, 28.8 days greater than 10 mm
rainfall and 8.1 days of greater than 25 mm rainfall.
Table 6 Mean monthly temperatures, rainfall, wind speeds and number of cloudy days recorded
at Collie AWS
Spring Summer Autumn Winter
Season
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Max. temperature
(C)
18.1 20.7 24.8 28.3 30.5 30.1 27.3 23.1 18.9 16.3 15.5 16.3
Min. temperature
(C)
5.8 7.4 9.7 11.7 13.2 13.1 11.5 8.7 6.3 5.0 4.2 4.5
Rainfall
(mm)
99.7 65.4 32.1 16.0 14.8 14.2 23.7 48.4 126.2 180.5 180.7 140.4
9:00 am wind speed
(km/hr)
7.4 8.3 9.3 8.3 9.6 9.2 8.0 5.2 4.4 5.0 4.8 5.0
3:00 pm wind speed
(km/hr)
11.8 11.7 12.2 10.0 11.5 10.6 10.2 9.2 9.2 11.1 12.6 11.9
Cloudy days
12.1 11.8 10.6 6.1 5.7 5.4 7.2 11.9 14.7 14.8 15.2 13.1
4.2.3 Wind
Table 6 shows the 9:00 am and 3:00 pm wind speeds at Collie AWS. Typical temperate conditions for
wind over south-west Australia can be seen in the climate data at the Collie AWS. Spring is the windiest
season while autumn is the calmest.
Wind roses (based on 9:00 am and 3:00 pm observations) indicate prevailing south easterly winds on
spring and summer mornings and north west to westerly winds during the afternoon. During winter and
autumn, west to south westerly winds due to the passage of cold fronts are observed. Wind speeds
average between 4.4 and 9.6 km/hr in the morning (900 am) and between 9.2 to 12.6 km/hr in the
afternoon (3:00 pm).
4.2.4 Cloudiness
Table 6 shows the mean number of cloudy days, indicating winter having the highest number of cloudy
days and summer the least. There is a lack of significant geographical features in the area that would
affect cloudiness. A common measured parameter that is a proxy for cloudiness is the mean daily solar
exposure in mega joules per square metre (MJ/m
2
). The annual mean daily solar exposure at Collie
AWS is 18.2 MJ/m
2
.
32 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
4.2.5 Frost and Fog
Frost and fog conditions most often occur during light wind conditions and the colder months. The
number of days recording a minimum temperature below 2 C gives an indication of frost occurrence.
Collie experiences an average of 28.0 frost prone days per year, the peak occurrence being during
August (7.6 days). Bunbury, which is heavily influenced by the coastal waters, has just 0.4 frost prone
days.
Fog formation requires still conditions with temperatures cool enough to condense atmospheric water
vapour. Fog would occur, in preference to frost under these conditions, when the dew point of the
atmosphere is above zero. This results in autumn being the season most likely to experience fogs with a
lesser occurrence during winter (due to lower dew points). Fog can persist well into the day as the fog
itself moderates the usual diurnal temperature rise.
4.3 Meteorological Modelling
The simulation of emissions from the Collie Urea Plant requires the use of a meteorological data set
containing hourly data spanning a year. Ideally, much of these data would be obtained from on-site
observations. Such observations are, however, not available for the Plant site.
Where site representative data are not available, the alternative is to synthesise meteorological data for
the site using diagnostic or prognostic 3D meteorological modelling.
TAPM (The Air Pollution Model) was used to simulate the climate over the Plant site. TAPM was used to
produce representative hourly surface meteorological data at the Plant site for assessment purposes and
at the location of a the Collie East AWS
9
site for comparison and model validation purposes.
4.3.1 TAPM Meteorological Model
TAPM (v4) was developed at Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisations (CSIRO)
Division of Atmospheric Research and is a PC based prognostic modelling system consisting of coupled
prognostic meteorological and air pollution dispersion model components. It is suitable for use with
complex geographic sites and/or for situations when the available site representative meteorological data
are not adequate.
The prognostic meteorological model predicts the meteorological conditions across the model domain
based on synoptic scale meteorology, local topography and land surface characteristics (i.e. soil type
and vegetation cover). The CSIROs global dataset of synoptic meteorological data was used as input
into TAPM, along with terrain elevation and land surface characterisation data for the Collie region, to
generate a site specific meteorological dataset. The synoptic meteorological data were derived from
LAPS (Limited Area Prediction System) analysis data used by BoM for weather forecasting. The model
then provides the link between the synoptic large scale flows and local climatology, such as downslope
drainage flows (katabatic winds), sea breeze influences and regional/local scale wind channeling around
terrain features (Hurley 2005).
The synoptic meteorological data used in the modelling has been obtained from the CSIRO for the year
2001.
9
The BoM Collie East and Verve Collie AWS are located on the same site
33 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Configuration
TAPM was initially configured with a nested model grid coverage designed to capture:
Broad scale synoptic flows;
Regional and local wind channeling around terrain features;
Regional to local scale sea breezes and katabatic (down-slope night-time drainage) flows; and
The influence of local land use.
Nested grids were then configured with the surface characteristics, such as terrain elevation; surface
roughness/vegetation type; soil type and monthly varying deep soil moisture content. The synoptic
analysis for 1 January to 31 December 2001 was used within the model.
The 2001 dataset of hourly varying meteorological data representative of the Collie Urea Plant site
location was synthesised using TAPM. Specific model settings were as follows:
4 nested meteorological grids with grid spacing of 30,000m, 10,000m, 3,000m and 1,000m;
40 x 40 grid points in the east west and north south direction respectively;
Grids centred at 3323 N, 11615.5 E at a local grid centre of 431,156 E, 6,306,105 N (MGA 94);
Topography generated from the AUSLIG 9-second (250m resolution) terrain elevation datasets
provided with the model;
Characterised vegetation and land use was determined from the datasets provided with the model;
Soil type information was derived from the US geological datasets provided with the model;
Deep soil moisture (as per CSIRO 2004, SKM 2005 and ENVIRON 2009) with 0.1 m
3
/m
3
(volume of
water per volume of soil) assigned for January to April, 0.2 for May to August, 0.15 for September
and October and 0.1 for November and December;
25 vertical levels; and
Surface vegetation and precipitation processes included, (snow processes and non-hydrostatic
processes were excluded).
After the model was run, hourly varying surface winds, temperatures and measures of atmospheric
stability were extracted at the location of the Plant site (Shotts) and the Collie East AWS site (Collie).
The latter was to allow for validation against observed data.
4.3.2 Site Representative Meteorology
Site representative meteorological data is essential to conduct dispersion modelling of emissions to air
and to determine the general wind climate at the site. The directional dependence of stable or neutral
atmospheric conditions is also useful to define directions of good and poor dispersion at the site.
Meteorological data has been extracted from the TAPM output for the period 1 January to 31 December
2001 and is discussed below.
Wind Climate
Figure 5 shows the annual and seasonal wind rose for the TAPM synthesised (predicted) meteorological
data at Shotts and several features can be seen namely:
34 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Wind speed is mid range with an annual average wind speed of 3.48 m/s, with spring (3.71 m/s) and
summer (4.23 m/s) being the windiest seasons and winter (2.83 m/s) the calmest;
South easterly quadrant (east south east to south south east) winds during spring, increasing in
strength and frequency during summer, regularly exceeding 6-7 m/s;
Decreased strength and frequency of south easterly quadrant winds and increasing north east
quadrant (north north east to east north east) winds during autumn; and
Increased frequency of north east to north west winds during winter.
Directions of Good and Poor Dispersion
The directions of good and poor dispersion for surface based releases (i.e. construction dust) can be
determined from the stability rose for the stability categories E and F (slightly and moderately stable
under the Pasquil Gifford System).
Figure 6 shows the annual and seasonal stability classes for E and F stable winds and it is clear that the
highest incidence is confined to east south east and south east directions. The incidence of stable flows
in these directions is approximately 11% and 12% respectively.
This directional incidence of stable poor dispersion winds is confined to east south east and south east
directions. The closest sensitive receptors (Stockton Pool caretakers residence and camping areas) are
located to the south west of the site and are therefore not downwind of the Plant site in poor dispersion
directions. Sensitive receptors located downwind of the Plant site are sufficient distance to not be
impacted by low level sources.
Directions of poor dispersion are specific to surface based release. This is not the case from the upper
level releases from the Collie Urea Plant - poor dispersion condition for such stack sources would be
moderate winds with neutral to slightly unstable atmospheric conditions (i.e. winds to limit plume rise but
not overly dilute the plume in the horizontal). These are categorised by stability classes C and D. As
shown in Figure 6, these are fairly predominant in the area, being most common from the east south east
to south east.
Spring
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Summer
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Annual
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Wind speed (m/s) Average wind speeds Calms
>= 10.0
8.0 - 10.0
6.0 - 8.0
4.0 - 6.0
2.0 - 4.0
0.1 - 2.0
Annual:
Spring:
Summer:
Autumn:
Winter:
3.48 m/s
3.71 m/s
4.23 m/s
3.15 m/s
2.83 m/s
0.0%
Autumn
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Winter
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Figure 5 Annual and seasonal wind roses for TAPM synthesised meteorological data at Shotts (2001)
Spring
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Summer
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Annual
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Stability class Average wind speeds Calms
F
E
D
C
B
A
Annual:
Spring:
Summer:
Autumn:
Winter:
3.48 m/s
3.71 m/s
4.23 m/s
3.15 m/s
2.83 m/s
0.0%
Autumn
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Winter
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Figure 6 Annual and seasonal stability classes for TAPM synthesised meteorological data at Shotts (2001)
37 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
4.3.3 Model Validation
The distribution of wind speeds and directions as predicted by TAPM can be validated against a local
observed source of meteorology if available. In this regard, the observed winds at the Collie East AWS
were available for validation.
For the purpose of comparison, Figure 7 shows the TAPM predicted wind distribution for the period of 1
January to 31 December 2001 at the Collie East AWS site, Figure 8 shows the Collie East AWS
observed wind distribution for 1 January to 31 December 2003 and Figure 9 shows the Collie East AWS
observed wind distribution for 1 January to 31 December 2004. Figures 7 and 8 show that the observed
wind distributions have a higher proportion of calm recordings, 26.8% and 30.9%, respectively. This is
likely due to the stall speed of the anemometer used at the AWS.
Comparison of the annual wind roses shown in the three figures show that TAPM predictions generally
represent the observed meteorology, with the following noted:
South-west sector winds are least likely to occur in all three sets of data;
TAPM has predicted the high incidence of winds in the south easterly direction; and
TAPM predicts slightly higher average wind speed (2.68 m/s) than the observed data (2.27 m/s and
2.16 m/s respectively).
Comparison of the seasonal wind roses show at Figures 6, 7 and 8 show TAPM predictions generally
represent the observed meteorology for all seasons. In view of the foregoing it is considered that the
TAPM predictions are representative of the meteorology of the Collie East site.
Spring
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Summer
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Annual
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Wind speed (m/s) Average wind speed Calms
>= 10.0
8.0 - 10.0
6.0 - 8.0
4.0 - 6.0
2.0 - 4.0
0.1 - 2.0
Annual:
Spring:
Summer:
Autumn:
Winter:
2.68 m/s
2.85 m/s
3.26 m/s
2.42 m/s
2.18 m/s
0.0%
Autumn
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Winter
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Figure 7 Annual and seasonal wind roses for TAPM synthesised meteorological data at Collie East AWS (2001)
Spring
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Summer
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Annual
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Stability class Average wind speed Calms
>= 10.0
8.0 - 10.0
6.0 - 8.0
4.0 - 6.0
2.0 - 4.0
0.1 - 2.0
Annual:
Spring:
Summer:
Autumn:
Winter:
2.27 m/s
2.56 m/s
2.83 m/s
1.91 m/s
1.81 m/s
26.8%
20.1%
12.5%
33.3%
40.7%
Autumn
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Winter
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Figure 8 Annual and seasonal wind roses for BoM observed meteorological data at Collie East AWS (2003)
Spring
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Summer
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
7%
14%
21%
28%
35%
Annual
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Stability class Average wind speed Calms
>= 10.0
8.0 - 10.0
6.0 - 8.0
4.0 - 6.0
2.0 - 4.0
0.1 - 2.0
Annual:
Spring:
Summer:
Autumn:
Winter:
2.16 m/s
2.31 m/s
2.79 m/s
1.71 m/s
1.84 m/s
30.9%
29.0%
11.7%
40.9%
41.8%
Autumn
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Winter
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST EAST
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Figure 9 Annual and seasonal wind roses for BoM observed meteorological data at Collie East AWS (2004)
41 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
4.4 Background Air Quality
Ambient air quality is not currently monitored at the site for the Collie Urea Plant. Industries established
in the local area include power generation, coal mining and agriculture (grazing and dairy). In order to
determine the significance of potential air quality impacts from the Collie Urea Plant, baseline ambient air
quality data was required.
As reported in SKM 2005, monitoring of ambient air quality has historically been conducted in the Collie
region by Verve Energy Pty Ltd (Verve) (formerly Western Power Corporation) and Worsley Alumina Pty
Ltd (Worsley). Verve has operated three continuous SO
2
ambient monitoring stations as follows:
Long term monitoring at Shotts (from March 1995 to November 2003);
Long term monitoring at Collie from March 1995 to present),
Short-term monitoring located at Cardiff (from March 1995 to November 1996), at Jacksons Farm
(from December 1996 to November 1998) and at Bluewaters Farm (from November 1998 to
November 2003).
Verve has also monitored PM
10
from 1998 to present at Collie and from 2000 to 2003 at Bluewaters.
More recently, since February 2003, the Collie station has included monitoring of PM
2.5
. Verve currently
monitor SO
2
, PM
10
and PM
2.5
at their Collie monitoring station. The BoM Collie East AWS is also located
at the Verve Collie monitoring station.
Worsley monitors NO
2
and SO
2
at its Site T monitoring station, located approximately 13 km from the
refinery site.
4.4.1 Sulphur Dioxide and Nitrogen Dioxide
Table 7 shows a summary of available sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide monitoring data for the
period March 1995 to December 2002 (SKM 2005).
Table 7 Summary of available sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide monitoring data
Monitoring station Max.1-hour conc. (g/m
3
)
(% Air NEPM)
Max. 24-hour conc. (g/m
3
)
(% Air NEPM)
Max. annual conc. (g/m
3
)
(% Air NEPM)
Sulphur dioxide
Collie 211 (37%) 58 (25%) 6.3 (11%)
Shotts 364 (64%) 110 (48%) 4.3 (7.5%)
Cardiff 161 (28%) 30 (13%) 6.3 (11%)
Jacksons Farm 178 (31%) 23 (10%) 2.9 (5.1%)
Bluewaters 252 (44%) 56 (25%) 4.6 (8.1%)
Site J 65 (11%) 14 (6.1%) 3.4 (5.9%)
Site T 177 (31%) 29 (13%) 2.7 (4.7%)
Nitrogen dioxide
Site J 31 (13%) 8.0 (NA) 2.3 (3.7%)
Site T 58 (23%) 16 (NA) 4.2 (6.8%)
42 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
DEC 2008 examined SO
2
concentrations for the period 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2006 from the
Roche Park (Verve Collie / BoM Collie East AWS) monitoring station. Findings are summarised in Table
8.
Table 8 Summary of available sulphur dioxide monitoring data
Year Max. 1-hour conc. (g/m
3
)
(% Air NEPM)
Max. 24-hour conc. (g/m
3
)
(% Air NEPM)
2002 126 (22%) 17 (7.4%)
2003 152 (27%) 21 (9.2%)
2004 143 (25%) 23 (10%)
2005 157 (27%) 22 (9.6%)
2006 132 (23%) 24 (11%)
Table 7 and Table 8 show:
1-hour SO
2
concentrations at most 64% Air NEPM standard;
24-hour SO
2
Annual SO
2
1-hour NO
2
concentrations at most 23% Air NEPM standard; and
Annual NO
2
concentrations at most 6.8% Air NEPM standard.
4.4.2 Ozone
Ozone is not monitored in the Collie region. As reported in SKM 2005, ambient ozone concentrations
are measured by Alcoa World Alumina Australia (Alcoa) near their Wagerup Refinery, situated
approximately 38 km north west of the Worsley alumina refinery. Alcoas monitors are considered to be
situated at an ideal distance to pick up maximum impacts of ozone formation from emissions from
sources in the Collie airshed.
SKM 2005 reported, based on monitoring data obtained from Alcoa, there are no obvious impacts on
ozone concentrations at Wagerup from Collie emission sources, with potential maximum 1-hour ozone
concentrations of around 44 ppb (94 g/m
3
) for winds from the Collie direction.
4.4.3 Particulates PM
10
and PM
2.5
Verve monitoring data indicate that the number of exceedances of the PM
10
standard range from zero to
five per year at Collie and from zero to one per year at Bluewaters. Around one exceedance per year is
considered to be due to bushfire smoke (either controlled or uncontrolled fires), which have resulted in
the maximum 24-hour values that have been recorded. The PM
10
levels are considered higher in Collie
than Bluewaters due to smoke from wood heaters during the winter months. Table 9 summarises
particulate monitoring data provided by Verve (SKM 2005).
43 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 9 Summary of available particulate monitoring data
Concentration Collie PM10 Collie PM2.5 Bluewaters PM10
Max. 24-hour concentration (g/m
3
) 125 106 73
90
th
percentile 24-hour concentration (g/m
3
) 26.2 15.9 23.6
70
th
percentile 24-hour concentration (g/m
3
) 19.7 10.9 16.0
4.5 Sensitive Receptors
A number of sensitive receptors were identified in the Collie region. Sensitive receptors for the Collie
airshed have been classified as follows (in order of significance):
1. Built up town area receptors located on extents or town centre;
2. Single rural residence or a cluster of rural residences existing privately owned;
3. Potential rural residence - private rural lots on which construction of a dwelling is permitted;
4. Isolated rural residences (located on Government land); and
5. Recreational/temporary dwellings/camping.
Upon visiting the site and reviewing aerial photographs of the Collie area, a total of 80 sensitive receptors
have been identified, as listed in Table 10 and shown on Figure 10. Whilst the majority of these
receptors are unlikely to experience any impact during the construction or operation of the Collie Urea
Plant (due to the separation distance), they have been included in this assessment for the purpose of
completeness.
44 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 10 Sensitive receptors
Location (MGA 94)
Receptor name
Easting (m) Northing (m)
Classification and Description
31 421933 6310483 Built up town area Collie (northern extent)
33 425080 6309476 Built up town area Collie (north-eastern extent)
34 422017 6308957 Built up town area Collie (town centre)
35 424340 6308636 Built up town area Collie (eastern extent)
71 426186 6300949 Built up town area Collie Burn
80 429517 6293957 Built up town area - Cardiff
1 421420 6316897 Cluster of rural residences
3 419372 6316207 Single rural residence
45 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Location (MGA 94)
Receptor name
36 434726 6307836 Potential rural residence
46 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Location (MGA 94)
Receptor name
44 427848 6305891
Single rural residence Government land Stockton Pool
Caretaker Cottage
43 428623 6305947 Recreational Stockton Pool
70 429899 6301057 Recreational Collie Motorplex
CREATED BY CHECKED APPROVED
HORIZONTAL DATUM: PROJECTION:
THIS DOCUMENT IS AND SHALL REMAIN
THE PROPERTYOF GHD PTY LTD
THIS DOCUMENT MAY ONLY BE USED
FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT
WAS COMMISSIONED
AND IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE TERMS OF
ENGAGEMENT FOR THE COMMISSION
COPYRIGHT
HEIGHT DATUM: METADATA RECORDED:
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 10
PERDAMAN CHEMICALS AND FERTILISERS
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Sensitive Receptors - Collie Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
43
70
44
36
39
41
45
48
54
63
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
32
37
38
40
42
46 47
49
50
51
52
53
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
68 69
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
31
33
34
35
71
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
Recreational facility / temporary dwelling / camping
Isolated rural residence - located on Government land
Potential rural residence - private rural lots on which a dwelling is permitted
Single rural residence or cluster of rural residences - existing privately owned
Built up town area - receptors located on extents or town centre
48 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
5. Existing Conditions - Bunbury Port
This section provides a summary of the existing environmental aspects relevant to this air quality
assessment, including topography, land use, meteorology, ambient air quality and sensitive receptors, for
the Bunbury Port site.
5.1 Topography and Land Use
Bunbury Port is located close to City of Bunbury centre. The Port is long established and very active with
cargo movement for 2007/08 exceeding 13,659 million tonnes, mostly consisting of the export of
alumina, woodchips and spodumene
10
and the importing of caustic soda (BPA 2008). There are well
established and utilised road and rail connections into the Port.
Export facilities consisting of a storage shed, conveyor and ship loader will be constructed at Berth 5.
Berth 5 is a General Purpose or Multipurpose Berth that is owned and operated by BPA. There are
hoppers at Berth 5 available for the discharge of bulk commodities and mineral sands such as zircon are
currently loaded.
PCF intends to install a multi-user ship loader that will have a nominal loading capacity of 2,500 tonnes
per hour and to construct a urea storage shed at Berth 5 with a storage capacity of up to 100,000 tonnes.
PCF intends to rail urea twice daily, 350 days per year, offloading at Berth 5 (GHD 2009a).
5.2 Meteorology
The Bunbury Port site is proximate to Bunbury and general meteorology and climate data from Bunbury
would be most nearly representative for the Port. The below discussion is based on BoM Climate
Statistics for Australian Locations obtained for the Bunbury Post Office (PO) AWS
11
(ID: 009514, located
at 33.33 S, 115.63 E) (BoM 2009b).
5.2.1 Temperature
Table 11 shows the long term mean maximum and minimum temperatures observed at the Bunbury PO
AWS. This shows that Bunbury experiences a relatively warm summer and mild winter, with a mean
annual maximum temperature of 21.8 C and a mean annual minimum temperature of 11.6 C. The
highest temperatures are observed in February and the lowest in July and August. Bunbury averages
30.3 days above 30 C, 3.7 days above 35 C, 0.1 days above 40 C, 0.4 days below 2 C and zero days
below 0 C.
5.2.2 Rainfall
Table 11 shows the spread of monthly rainfall at Bunbury PO AWS. This table shows that Bunbury
experiences a dry summer and a relatively wet winter. Bunbury has an annual mean rainfall of 870.7
mm. Bunbury averages 119.4 rain days with 68.8 days of greater than 1 mm rainfall, 19.9 days greater
than 10 mm rainfall and 4.4 days of greater than 25 mm rainfall.
10
Spodumene is a lithium aluminosilicate mineral, Li2O.Al2O3.4SiO2. Theoretical maximum Li2O content is 8% for pure spodumene.
11
Bunbury AWS (ID: 009965, located at 33.36 N, 115.64 E) opened November 1995 to replace Bunbury PO AWS. Long term
climate statistics have been derived from data collected from the Bunbury PO AWS.
49 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 11 Mean monthly temperatures, rainfall, wind speeds and number of cloudy days
recorded at Bunbury PO AWS
Spring Summer Autumn Winter
Season
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Max. temperature
(C)
18.1 19.9 22.9 25.6 27.6 27.8 25.9 22.8 19.8 17.7 16.8 17.1
Min. temperature
(C)
9.2 10.3 12.2 13.9 15.2 15.4 14.3 12.2 10.4 9.2 8.4 8.4
Rainfall
(mm)
80.4 54.1 26.2 13.7 11.1 11.8 21.9 46.4 128.1 182.9 170.6 123.6
9:00 am wind speed
(km/hr)
12.0 13.2 13.2 12.3 13.4 14.6 13.5 11.7 11.7 14.3 13.5 13.0
3:00 pm wind speed
(km/hr)
14.9 15.5 15.4 14.7 15.3 14.8 14.1 14.6 14.6 16.6 16.7 16.2
Cloudy days
10.1 7.8 7.9 4.7 3.3 3.6 5.6 10.1 11.2 12.4 12.6 11.5
5.2.3 Wind
Table 11 shows the 9:00 am and 3:00 pm wind speeds at Bunbury PO AWS. Due to the coastal nature
of Bunbury, observed wind speeds are higher than the inland site at Collie. Annual average winter wind
speed (15.1 km/h) is slightly higher than summer (14.2 km/h), spring (14.0 km/h) and autumn (13.4
km/hr).
Wind roses (based on 9:00 am and 3:00 pm observations) indicate prevailing south easterly to easterly
winds on spring and summer mornings and south westerly to westerly winds during the afternoon.
Morning winds in autumn are predominantly south easterly, tending north westerly during winter.
Afternoon winds are predominantly south westerly in autumn and north westerly in winter. Wind speeds
average between 11.7 and 14.6 km/hr in the morning (900 am) and between 14.1 to 16.7 km/hr in the
afternoon (3:00 pm).
5.2.4 Cloudiness
Table 11 shows the mean number of cloudy days, indicating winter having the highest number of cloudy
days and summer the least. A common measured parameter that is a proxy for cloudiness is the mean
daily solar exposure in mega joules per square metre (MJ/m
2
). The annual mean daily solar exposure at
Bunbury PO AWS is 18.7 MJ/m
2
.
5.2.5 Frost and Fog
Frost and fog conditions most often occur during light wind conditions and the colder months. The
number of days recording a minimum temperature below 2 C gives an indication of frost occurrence.
Bunbury, which is heavily influenced by the coastal waters, has just 0.4 frost prone days.
Fog formation requires still conditions with temperatures cool enough to condense atmospheric water
vapour. Fog would occur, in preference to frost under these conditions, when the dew point of the
50 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
atmosphere is above zero. This results in autumn being the season most likely to experience fogs with a
lesser occurrence during winter (due to lower dew points). Fog can persist well into the day as the fog
itself moderates the usual diurnal temperature rise.
5.3 Background Air Quality
BPA maintains a real time ambient dust monitoring system. Tapered element oscillating microbalance
(TEOM) dust monitors deployed around the Port indicate that the Port does not contribute significantly to
dust levels surrounding the Port. During 2007/2008, no port related exceedances of the Air NEPM 24-
hour PM
10
standard of 50 ug/m
3
were recorded (BPA 2008).
An additional TEOM dust monitor was installed and commissioned in late 2007 at the Stirling Street site
to measure TSP. This dust monitor collects and measures 50 micron dusts which are considered to be
courser nuisance dusts that are visible to the human eye as fallout on surfaces. While there is no Air
NEPM standard for TSP, BPA use the 24-hour TSP concentration of 90 ug/m
3
as its desirable not to be
exceeded level which is commonly used in Western Australia for industrial and mining operations. To
date this level has not been exceeded (BPA 2008).
Air dispersion modelling completed for the draft Bunbury Port Inner Harbour Structure Plan indicated that
predicted worst case 24-hour PM10 concentrations are lower than the Air NEPM standard at surrounding
communities. A number of simulations were run regarding the type and size of operations that could
operate in the expanded Inner Harbour to predict how much dust might result. The modelling study
indicated that future operations expand dust contours in a northerly and easterly direction, however, the
Port land and public open space to the north and east of the proposed dust sources provides a buffer to
residential areas of Pelican Point and Vittoria Heights (BPA 2007).
The modelling indicated that managing sources of dust was important to controlling dust levels beyond
the buffer zone. Future operations that have the potential to emit dust should be located and managed
to ensure there are no impacts on neighbouring residential areas. Port operations with potential to
generate dust should be located in an effort to maximise the distance from sensitive receptors such as
residential areas (BPA 2007).
51 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
6. Construction Assessment Shotts and Bunbury Port
This section outlines assessment of air emissions likely to result from the construction stage for both the
Collie Urea Plant at the Shotts Industrial Park and the export facility at Bunbury Port.
6.1 Emission Sources
Potential air quality impacts during construction of the Collie Urea Plant and export facility at Bunbury
Port will be emissions from heavy vehicle exhausts and dust generation from heavy equipment during
earthworks and erosion from disturbed soil surfaces.
6.1.1 Construction Dust
The impacts of dust emissions fall under two distinct categories, being health and amenity.
Potential health impacts are attributable to the concentration of respirable particles in ambient air.
Respirable particles of dust have an aerodynamic equivalent diameter of 10 microns or less (PM
10
).
These fine fractions of dust would have maximum impact under light winds and stable atmospheric
conditions. These conditions most frequently occur overnight and very early in the morning, and
therefore, become more significant only if construction operations extend outside typical operating hours,
which would be during daylight periods.
The presence of larger suspended dust particles, greater than 35 micron, is likely to affect amenity by
way of reducing visibility (whilst in the air column) and by soiling of materials via dust deposition.
Amenity impacts are most marked in high wind conditions, when larger particles may be displaced and
transported a significant distance before being deposited and so soiling surfaces. Mitigation of amenity
related dust impacts would in turn act to reduce health impacts due to dust emissions.
The extent to which these emissions may impact on the surrounding sensitive land uses would depend
upon a number of site-specific factors.
Dust emissions will arise during construction of the Collie Urea Plant and the export facilities at Bunbury
Port. The following construction activities involve the movement and placement of soil, rock etc. and can
be the source of dust emissions:
Mechanical disturbance: dust emissions resulting from the operation of construction equipment and
vehicles; and
Wind erosion: dust emissions from exposed and disturbed soil surfaces under high wind speeds
during construction.
Extensive inventories (US EPA 2001; NPI 2001) for PM
10
and TSP emissions from earth moving
machinery are commonly used to characterise the source dust emission rates from activities on-site
during the construction phase. At this stage, the reference design has not specified the schedule of
operations and the exact type and number of dozers, scrapers, trucks and other earthmoving equipment,
so that it is not possible to characterise these sources.
Based on the isolated nature of the Collie Urea Plant site and surrounding land uses, dust emissions are
not considered to represent a significant source of emissions. As the extent of earthworks at the export
facility will be relatively minor, dust emissions at this site are not considered to be significant.
52 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
For the construction phase of the Plant and export facility, a framework which includes a comprehensive
range of mitigation measures for the management of dust emissions will be developed as a part of
construction dust management measures.
6.1.2 Heavy Machinery and Plant
Emissions from heavy vehicles would consist of products of combustion, including NO
2
, SO
2
, PM
10
and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
At this stage, the reference design will not be specifying the schedule of operations and the exact type
and number of dozers, scrapers, trucks and other earthmoving equipment, so that it is not possible to
characterise these sources.
Vehicle emissions will arise from diesel powered equipment used during construction. Emissions from
heavy equipment will be minimised by ensuring all vehicles on-site are well maintained and operated in
an efficient manner. Construction equipment will be fuelled using biodiesel or a biodiesel blend, where
available locally in the Collie region.
Emissions from vehicles on-site are not considered to represent a significant source of emissions.
6.2 Management Framework
As previously described, the reference design would not be specifying the schedule of operations and
the exact type and number of dozers, scrapers, trucks and other earthmoving equipment, so that it is not
possible to characterise construction dust sources. A management framework has been developed and
would be applied to ensure dust emissions do not impact on sensitive receptor locations.
Dust emissions would be controlled by application of a dust management process, defined as part of the
site environmental management plan. The dust management process would provide real-time
monitoring of fine particulate emissions during construction, with agreed trigger points at which mitigation
measures must be initiated.
Using this approach, a staged dust management plan for dust mitigation and management measures
would be influenced by the proximity of sensitive receptors. In essence, the dust management measures
would detail actions for typical and high level dust control and would specify at which locations each set
of actions should be followed.
Typical Dust Management and Mitigation Measures
Typical dust management measures are based on the principles found in the Environmental Guidelines
for Major Construction Sites (Vic EPA 1996). From the identification of potential dust emission sources,
appropriate dust management and mitigation measures for a typical level of control would include:
All construction and maintenance equipment/vehicles to be operated and maintained to
manufacturers specifications in order to minimise exhaust emissions;
Defined haul routes to be used wherever it is necessary for vehicles to traverse unsealed surfaces or
unformed roads;
Vehicular speeds would be limited to 15 km/h on areas of unconsolidated or unsealed soil associated
with the project;
Prompt mitigation of visible dust emissions, which may involve a combination of:
53 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Stabilisation of surface silt content through application of localised water sprays, or the use of
appropriate chemical dust suppressants (suitable for access roads which are traversed less
frequently);
Control of mechanically induced dust emissions (from clearing, scraping, excavation, loading,
dumping filling and levelling activities) by application of water sprays;
Awareness of operational areas more frequently exposed to higher winds and the predominant
wind directions in these areas at various times of the year. Temporary wind barriers may be
employed where necessary;
Review of daily weather updates from BoM, or a private meteorology service provider, to give
warning of likely strong winds to assist with daily management of wind blown dust from
unconsolidated soil surfaces and material stockpiles;
All haulage vehicles are to have their loads covered while transporting material to the work area;
and
Areas of disturbed soil are to be re-vegetated as soon as practicable.
High Level Dust Management and Mitigation Measures
It is proposed to develop a proactive and reactive dust management regime that makes use of real-time
particulate monitoring to achieve a high level of control. This regime may employ one or two real-time
aerosol monitors, with PM
10
size selective inlets.
These real-time monitors can be configured to provide a warning (via an audible or visible signal or as a
communication link) of short-term elevations in concentrations of respirable dust. This is to enable
immediate dust suppression and remediation steps to be initiated. It is recommended that reactive
mitigation measures include:
Application of additional water sprays;
Reducing the intensity of operations, including speed limits to 10 km/h, or even zero if required; and
Restricting the extent of construction operations until suitable meteorological conditions prevail.
The threshold particulate concentration for alarm/warning activation could be based on an interpretation
of SEPP-AQM intervention levels for respirable dust. The 24-hour Intervention Level is 60 g/m
3
but this
could be used as the short-term trigger level.
Table 12 lists the typical array of dust control measures that would need to be evaluated and detailed in
the dust management process.
54 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 12 Recommended requirements for control of dust emissions
Dust Source Specific Requirements
An adequate supply of water would be available at all times.
Water use for dust suppression shall not create contaminated run-off that could enter
surface water bodies.
Water would not be sprayed at the site access point where mud could be transported onto
the surrounding public roads.
All construction trucks would be kept to designated routes on site.
General
Loads would be wet-down when there is potential for unacceptable dust to be generated
from the material being transported.
Administrative
vehicles
Speed restrictions would be utilised to minimise the generation of dust. As a general rule
speeds should be restricted to less than 25 km/h on site.
All site exits and entrance points for trucks would be paved.
Sealed entry and exit roads would be swept as required to control the accumulation of dust.
The tailgates of all trucks leaving the premises would be securely fixed to prevent loss of
materials.
Vehicles leaving and
entering the site
Where sediment or mud is deposited on a public road, the sediment or mud would be
cleaned up immediately.
Stockpiles Sprinklers and water cannons are to be maintained and operational to apply water to the
faces where necessary.
The sprinkler shall operate out of working hours as required.
Dust suppressants to be used to seal surfaces where practicable.
The Site Manager would monitor the condition of the stockpiles.
During periods of the year with higher evaporation rates (October to April), the Site Manager
is to obtain daily weather updates from BoM or a private meteorology service provider to
provide adequate warning of likely strong wind forecasts to assist with daily management of
wind blown dust.
Where high winds are predicted, the Site Manager shall implement proactive dust
suppression measures such as extra dust suppression of stockpiles and haul routes.
Contingencies in
event of dust
generation
When dust generation is noted (either through an alert from monitoring data, or noting visible
dust on and/or off site) proactive suppression measures are to be implemented. These
include:
Increased use of water and dust suppressants;
Reduction of speed on haul roads; and
Halt work in the area generating the dust until effective dust control measures can be
applied.
Dust Monitoring Program
Table 13 presents the requirements for the dust monitoring program. Through the use of real-time data,
the program is designed to facilitate an adaptive management approach. The operator may amend this
program as required following review of the programs effectiveness in assessing performance against
compliance benchmarks.
55 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 13 Recommended dust monitoring program requirements
Program Specific Requirements
Inspection
Program
The Site Manager would undertake a daily visual inspection of dust suppression.
Real-time aerosol dust monitoring station
The site would utilise at least one real-time aerosol dust monitoring station to allow for an
adaptive dust management strategy.
Dust deposition gauges
The site would also utilise several dust deposition gauges as required on the site boundaries to
provide an assessment of compliance to the 4 g/m
2
/month nuisance dust deposition criterion.
Dust deposition gauges would be sampled on a monthly basis.
Locations
The monitoring station would be located as required, dependent on prevailing winds, to assess
potential dust impacts on residences.
Dust Monitoring Units
The aerosol monitor would be fitted with:
A 10 micron size selective inlet matched to the inlet flow rate;
A heating coil around the inlet air tube so as to reduce the humidity in the inlet air stream;
On-site anemometer recording wind speed and direction. It can be used to provide real-time
indication to the site office on mean and gust wind speed.
Standards for siting, installation and operation:
The aerosol monitoring station and dust deposition gauges would conform to AS2922 1987
Ambient Air - Guide for the Siting of Sampling Units.
The aerosol monitoring station would conform to the relevant components of AS/NZ 3580.12.1
2001 Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Ambient Air Method 12.1: Determination of Light
Scattering - Integrating Nephelometer Method and AS2923:1987 Ambient Air Guide for the
Measurement of Horizontal Wind for Air Quality Applications.
The dust deposition gauges would conform with AS3580.10.1: 1991 Methods for Sampling and
Analysis of Ambient Air Determination of Particulates Deposited Matter Gravimetric
Method.
The anemometer station conforms to AS2923:1987 Guide for Measurement of Horizontal
Wind for Air Quality Applications.
The monitoring station would be secure from vandalism and tampering at all times.
Monitoring equipment would be maintained and calibrated on a regular basis.
Alert level
The unit would be configured to record 10-minute averages of PM10. An alert level would be
determined, an indicative level being 100 g/m
3
over a 10-minute average.
Real time dust
monitoring
program
The monitoring station would be linked to a computer in the site office. Site staff would be
instructed to regularly check dust levels measured by the station via the computer.
Contingency
Program
Where the alert level is triggered, a contingency program is to be enacted immediately and
consequent actions logged. The program shall include:
Immediate inspection of the site for signs of dust;
Proactive suppression measures such as use of water carts and water canons; and
Cessation of earth moving/levelling operations.
56 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Program Specific Requirements
All exceedances shall be recorded using the site environmental incident report.
The dust monitoring station would be configured to allow for examination of historical records
to demonstrate compliance with the criteria.
A minimum of two dust deposition gauges would be installed, in accordance with AS3580.10.1
1991. These would be located on the site boundary between the works area and the location
of sensitive receptors.
Samples would be taken from each gauge at monthly intervals for gravimetric analysis in
accordance with AS3580.10.1.
Annual averaged results of the deposition rates from each gauge would be provided to DEC to
demonstrate compliance.
Dust Deposition
Monitoring
Program
Dust deposition monitoring may be discontinued after 12 months of monitoring, subject to clear
compliance with the criterion.
57 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7. Operational Assessment Shotts
This section outlines assessment of air emissions likely to result from operation of the Collie Urea Plant
at the Shotts Industrial Park. The assessment includes quantification of emission sources, air dispersion
modelling and assessment against relevant air quality criteria, for existing, approved (under construction)
and proposed emission sources and emissions from the Plant.
7.1 Emissions Sources
The emissions sources considered in this assessment include existing, approved and proposed sources
in the Collie airshed and the emissions associated with the Collie Urea Plant.
7.1.1 Existing Sources
The Collie airshed has several major sources of air emissions associated with coal mining, electricity
generation and alumina refining. These operations include:
Muja power station;
Collie power station;
Worsley alumina refinery; and
Open cut coal mines in the area.
Muja Power Station
Muja Power Station, located approximately 22 km to the east of Collie, is the largest coal fired power
station in the region with a total electrical generation capacity of 1,094 Megawatts (MW). It is the oldest
site in operation, with Stage A commissioned in 1966 (120 MW), Stage B (120 MW) in 1969, Stage C
(400 MW) in 1982 and Stage D (400 MW) in 1985. Stage D has been uprated by 54 MW to 454 MW
(Verve 2009a).
Stages A and B were decommissioned in April 2007, reducing total electrical generation capacity to 854
MW. Closure of Stages A and B decreased particulate emissions into the Collie airshed as stages A and
B have relatively short stacks with no particulate emission control. This lead to a general improvement in
air quality in the region. The coal-fired boilers on Stages C and D have their own ash precipitator which
allows the ash suspended in the exhaust gases to be collected and removed (Verve 2009a).
Stage B was recommissioned in July 2008 in response to the Varanus Island gas explosion. It was shut
down again in April 2009. In May 2009, Verve signed an Memorandum of Understanding to set up a joint
venture to refurbish, upgrade and recommission Stages A and B. The joint venture will have Muja
Stages A and B operating in time for the 2012 summer (Verve 2009b).
This assessment includes emissions from Muja Stages A, B, C and D. As PCF is not aware of the
emissions reductions provided by the refurbished Stages A and B, PCF have used the emission rates for
when Muja A and B were operating previously and not a reduced emission rate.
Collie Power Station
Collie Power Station is a coal-fired power station situated 10 km north of Collie. Collie Stage A with a
generating capacity of 300 MW was commissioned in 1998. As the newest operating plant in the region,
58 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Collie A is representative of technology for newer coal fired power stations in the Collie airshed (Verve
2009c).
The proposed Stage B was to be located on the current Collie Power Station site and was the same
capacity as the existing Stage A plant (300 MW). The development of Stage B did not proceed.
Therefore, this assessment only includes emissions from Stage A.
Worsley Alumina Refinery
The Worsley alumina refinery, located approximately 13 km to the north west of Collie, produces
approximately 3.25 Mt of alumina per year. Construction of a mine site and refinery began in 1980 and
the first alumina was produced in April 1984 (BHPB 2009a).
This assessment includes emissions from the Worsley alumina refinery.
7.1.2 Approved and Proposed Sources
This assessment has considered the following projects/expansions which have been approved and/or
are under construction and are undertaking approvals:
Bluewaters power station; and
Expansion of Worsley alumina refinery.
Bluewaters Power Station
Bluewaters power station (Stages I and II) are currently being constructed at the Coolangatta Industrial
Estate, located 4.5 kilometres north east of Collie. Stage I and II are both 208 MW coal fired generating
units, for a potential total of 416 MW. The proposed Bluewaters power station (Stages III and IV) will
consist of an additional two 208 MW coal fired generating units and will be constructed adjacent to
Stages I and II (Griffin 2009).
As part of the Bluewaters power station expansion (Stages III and IV), it is proposed to install two new
150m tall stacks. The Bluewaters III 150m stack will be designed to accept flue gases from Bluewaters II
and the Bluewaters IV stack will be designed to accept flue gases from Bluewaters I. Approval of
Bluewaters I and II was on the basis that the flue gases would be discharged via two 100m tall stacks
(ENVIRON 2009).
This assessment has included emissions from the Bluewaters Stages I, II (under construction), III and IV
(as proposed).
Worsley Alumina Refinery Expansion
Worsleys Efficiency and Growth Expansion Project will increase the Worsley alumina refinerys annual
alumina production capacity from 3.5 to 4.6 Mt. The expansion, which was announced in May 2008,
consists of a project to upgrade the capacity of the refinery and construct a multi-fuel cogeneration power
plant. The cogeneration plant will use the steam and power it produces in the refining process. The
construction project is scheduled for completion at the end of 2010 with commissioning scheduled for
2011 (BHPB 2009b).
This assessment includes emissions from the Worsley expansion project.
59 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.1.3 Emission Rates Used for Dispersion Modelling
The source characteristics and emission rate information used for dispersion modelling to describe the
existing, approved (under construction) and proposed sources in the Collie airshed included in the
cumulative impact assessment, are provided in Table 15 and Table 16.
Non-industrial emissions, such as those resulting from domestic wood heating and bushfires have not
been included in the modelling as the duration, frequency and magnitude of these emissions are difficult
to quantify.
The source emission rates used in this assessment are based upon the previous cumulative air
dispersion modelling assessments completed by CSIRO 2004, SKM 2005 and ENVIRON 2009.
Table 14 Source characteristics and emission rates for existing sources
Muja A Muja B Muja C Muja D Collie A Worsley PS
Status of source Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing
MGA94 Easting (m) 435,785 435,734 435,636 435,525 431,227 413,242
MGA94 Northing (m) 6,298,979 6,299,001 6,299,074 6,299,109 6,310,439 6,322,257
Stack height (m) 98 98 151 151 170 76
Stack tip diameter (m) 3.94 3.94 5.91 5.91 5.23 4.00
Exit velocity (m/s) 19.0 19.0 20.4 19.0 24.4 23.7
Exit temperature (C) 200 200 133 133 152 130
Emission rate (g/s)
Sulphur dioxide 269 269 779 779 515 315
Oxides of nitrogen 256 256 399 399 158 110
Nitrogen dioxide
12
25.6 25.6 39.9 39.9 15.8 11.0
Particulate matter as PM10 538 538 13.8 13.8 6.1 2.9
Particulate matter as PM2.5 140 140 5.9 5.9 2.6 1.6
Carbon monoxide 5.7 5.7 16.4 16.4 126 11
Ammonia 0.0064 0.0064 0.0183 0.0183 0.0119 0.0079
12
This assessment has aassumed 10% NOx emitted as NO2 at the point of discharge.
Table 15 Source characteristics and emission rates for approved (under construction) and proposed sources
Worsley BE Bluewaters I
13
Bluewaters II
14
Bluewaters III
15
Bluewaters IV
16
Status of source Approved Approved Approved Proposed Proposed
MGA94 Easting (m) 413,290 428,126 428,202 428,195 428,119
MGA94 Northing (m) 6,322,270 6,311,651 6,311,609 6,311,595 6,311,6371
Stack height (m) 105 100 100 150 150
Stack tip diameter (m) 2.50 4.00 4.00 5.66 5.66
Exit velocity (m/s) 24.5 24.0 24.0 25.5 25.5
Exit temperature (C) 130 131 131 131 131
Emission rate (g/s)
Sulphur dioxide 71 230 230 69 69
Oxides of nitrogen 62 112 112 112 112
Nitrogen dioxide
17
6.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2
Particulate matter as PM10 0.7 9.4 9.4 9.4 9.4
Particulate matter as PM2.5 0.4 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Carbon monoxide 6.3 112 112 112 112
Ammonia 0.0041 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085
13
Bluewaters I stack located at 428,119m E and 6,311,637m N, 150m stack height, 5.66m stack tip diameter, 25.5 m/s exit velocity and 131C exit temperature, when assessed with
Bluewaters IV
14
Bluewaters II stack located at 428,195m E and 6,311,595m N, 150m stack height, 5.66m stack tip diameter, 25.5 m/s exit velocity and 131C exit temperature, when assessed with
Bluewaters III
15
Assumes discharge with Bluewaters II
16
Assumes discharge with Bluewaters I
17
This assessment has aassumed 10% NOx emitted as NO2 at the point of discharge
62 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.1.4 Collie Urea Plant
The source characteristics and emission rate information used in the air dispersion modelling to describe
the emissions from the Collie Urea Plant are based on information provided by PCF, as described in
Section 2.3, assuming continuous full load operation, as follows:
Full (design) production of 6,200 tpd urea for 330 days per annum (full time-equivalent) operation;
Design philosophy is to substantially desulphurise all syngas (including fuel gas) to minimise
contribution of SO
2
to existing Collie airshed;
Electrical power for the plant is generated by a combined cycle gas turbine to minimise emissions,
with NO
2
managed to meet criteria specified in EPA Guidance Statement 15; and
Urea and granulator as per standard specification for international plants.
Source characteristics and emission rates for Collie Urea Plant sources under normal (steady state)
operations are summarised in Table 16.
Start-Up/Shut Down/Upset Conditions
As outlined in Section 2.3.4, during start-up, shut down or an emergency shutdown, raw syngas (gas
section of plant) is depressurised via the flare. This combusts the fuel components to mainly carbon
dioxide and water vapour. As such ammonia becomes nitrogen and water with entrained sulphur
compounds.
During normal operating conditions the flare will be on pilot mode (supplied by a plant independent liquid
petroleum gas fuel source).
As previously outlined, an estimate of the peak period of flare operation is as follows:
Total estimated release of 133 hours per annum:
Start-up - 1 Gasifier - 21 per year x 4 hours = 84 hours per annum (average flow rate at
turndown is 75%, equivalent to 112 hours); and
Shutdown 1 Gasifier 21 per year x 1 hour = 21 hours per annum.
Table 16 provides the emission rates for pollutants during flaring conditions.
Table 16 Source characteristics and emission rates for Collie Urea Plant sources
UREA1 UREA2 GT STACK CMD1 CMD2 AGR FLARE
18
MGA94 Easting (m) 430,000 429,910 429,780 430,090 430,150 430,040 429,810
MGA94 Northing (m) 6,306,700 6,306,690 6,306,490 6,306,260 6,306,260 6,306,480 6,306,160
Stack height (m) 50 50 35 60 60 30 70
Stack tip diameter (m) 3.50 3.50 3.60 2.00 2.00 1.8 2.00
Exit velocity (m/s) 18.6 18.6 20.0 15.2 15.2 14.8 18.0
Exit temperature (C) 40 40 105 120 120 30 200
Emission rate (g/s)
Sulphur dioxide - - 0.190 0.793 0.793 - 89.7
Oxides of nitrogen - - 11.1 0.079 0.079 0.032 8.68
Nitrogen dioxide
19
- - 1.11 0.008 0.008 0.003 0.868
Particulate matter as PM10 8.01 8.01 1.78 - - - -
Particulate matter as PM2.5 2.40 2.40 0.533 - - - -
Carbon monoxide - - 11.7 2.63 2.63 15.7 295.1
Ammonia 21.6 21.6 0.032 0.016 0.016 0.032 2.89
Hydrogen sulphide - - - - - 0.634 -
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons - - - 0.000048 0.000048 - -
Total volatile organic compounds - - - 0.238 0.238 - -
18
Emissions not continuous, flare to operate for approximately 133 hours per year (start up/shut down/upset case)
19
This assessment has aassumed 10% NOx emitted as NO2 at the point of discharge.
UREA1 UREA2 GT STACK CMD1 CMD2 AGR FLARE
20
Heavy metals
Arsenic - - 0.000095 - - - -
Cadmium - - 0.000048 - - - -
Chromium VI - - 0.000010 - - - -
Lead - - 0.000095 - - - -
Nickel - - 0.000016 - - - -
Mercury - - 0.00019 - - - -
20
Emissions not continuous, flare to operate for approximately 133 hours per year (start up/shut down/upset case)
65 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.1.5 Modelled Scenarios
Assessment of air quality impacts from the Collie Urea Plant has been considered in the context of power
stations and other industrial facilities already operating within the Collie airshed, approved sources which
are under construction and proposed sources which are undertaking approvals.
Sulphur Dioxide
Previous studies have identified sulphur dioxide as the main pollutant of concern for the Collie airshed.
In line with the requirements for assessment specified in the DEC Air Quality Modelling Guidance Notes
(DEC 2006), sulphur dioxide impacts arising from the Collie Urea Plant in isolation and cumulatively with
other airshed sources have been assessed, as outlined below and summarised in Table 17.
In order to assess the incremental impact of each existing or proposed facility on the Collie airshed, the
following additional scenarios were include in this assessment:
Scenario 4: Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources , excluding Bluewaters III
and IV; and
Scenario 5: Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources , excluding Muja A and
B.
An additional scenario has been provided to allow comparison with the base case operating scenario
from the assessment of Bluewaters I and II, at the request of DEC:
Scenario 6: Existing and approved sources in the Collie airshed (excluding Muja A and B).
Table 17 Scenarios modelled
Scenario Muja A+B Muja C+D Collie A
Worsley
21 BW I+II BW III+IV
Urea
Plant
Urea
Plant
Upset
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
The assessment included an additional scenario to consider the likely impacts of the Collie Urea Plant
operating under start up/shut down/upset conditions (Scenario 7 in Table 17).
21
Worsley includes Worsley power station (existing) and Worsley boiler extension (approved)
66 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Other Criteria Pollutants
The air quality impacts arising from emissions of CO, NO
2
, O
3
and particulates as PM
10
and PM
2.5
have
been assessed for Scenarios 1, 2 and 3, to demonstrate compliance with the relevant air quality
standards. For pollutants where compliance with relevant air quality standards cannot be shown at all
sensitive receptors, examination of the incremental impacts of each existing or proposed facility on the
Collie airshed has been completed.
Other Pollutants
Other pollutants emitted from the Collie Urea Plant and included in this assessment include ammonia,
hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals. Impacts arising for these pollutants
have only been assessed for Scenario 2 (Collie Urea Plant in isolation).
AUSPLUME (v6) plume dispersion model was used to predict ground level concentrations for
comparison against the SEPP-AQM design criteria, listed in Table 5. AUSPLUME was chosen in
preference to TAPM as:
The urea plant is the only local source of ammonia and hydrogen sulphide and as such airshed
modelling using TAPM is not required;
AUSPLUME modelling allows use of a higher resolution grid (50m compared to 500m for TAPM),
Impacts from ammonia and hydrogen sulphide are assessed against the SEPP-AQM criteria on a 3-
minute averaging period, due to their toxicity (ammonia) and odourous nature (hydrogen sulphide);
Highest concentrations will likely occur in proximity to the Collie Urea Plant and AUSPLUME
modelling on a higher resolution grid (50m) will provide predicted ground level concentrations in
proximity to the Plant.
7.2 Airshed Modelling
Airshed modelling of emissions from the Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved (under construction)
and approved sources was conducted using TAPM (v4.0.3) TAPM was developed by the CSIRO and
consists of coupled prognostic meteorological and air pollution dispersion model components. The
prognostic meteorological model was used to predict the meteorological conditions across the model
domain, as described in Section 4.3.
The stored meteorological fields, in conjunction with the source emissions inventory information (Section
7.1), were used with the dispersion model component of TAPM to predict the ground level concentrations
for each hour of the year at specified grid points across the model domain. Of significance for this study,
the dispersion model can characterise:
The simulation of curved, recirculating or stagnating transport of emissions to air within the stored
hourly averaged spatially complex flow fields;
Pollutant transport over spatially varying surface types, such as trees, residential areas, barren land
or water surfaces, that induce varying levels of mechanical and convective mixing and dilution in the
vertical;
The retention of plume history, where the position of the airborne emissions are remembered from
one hour to the next;
Emission transport during calm winds events, including build-up and fumigation;
67 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Cumulative impacts for many sources within a spatially varying flow field;
Photochemical conversion of oxides of nitrogen to nitrogen dioxide, which is assessed as an airshed
pollutant; and
Post-processing procedures to produce the required statistics of predicted pollutant impact for
comparison with the various airshed goals and design criteria (GHD 2006).
With these capabilities, the TAPM model represents the most up to date technology for undertaking
airshed assessments. TAPM was therefore selected for this assessment, consistent with recent
modelling conducted for assessment of other major projects in the Collie airshed. The use of TAPM for
this assessment was endorsed by DEC.
7.2.1 TAPM Model Configuration
TAPM (v4.0.3) was used to predict the ground level concentrations across the modeled domain resulting
from the Collie Urea Plant emissions considered in isolation and cumulatively with other existing and
approved industrial emission sources in the Collie region.
Specific model settings were as follows:
Grids centred at 3323 N, 11615.5 E at a local grid centre of 431,156 E, 6,306,105 N (MGA 94);
Four nested pollution grids of 15,000m (Grid 1), 5,000m (Grid 2), 1,500m (Grid 3) and 500m (Grid 4);
51 x 51 grid points in the east west and north south direction respectively;
Dispersion modelling of airborne particulate matter (APM), fine particulate matter (FPM), nitrogen
dioxide, ozone, sulphur dioxide with chemistry and deposition;
Tracer dispersion modelling of carbon monoxide, ammonia and hydrogen sulphide;
Constant emission rates for all sources (i.e. 24 hours per day, 7 days per week operation);
Eulerian dispersion for Worsley power station and Worsley boiler extension sources and Lagrangian
dispersion up to 900 seconds for Muja, Collie and Bluewaters power station sources and Collie Urea
Plant sources (DEC 2009);
NO/NOx ratio of 0.9 to represent 10% NOx present as NO
2
;
Emission rate of R
smog
of zero assumed for all sources, as all sources are low contributors of VOCs;
Buoyancy enhancement factor of 1.8 for Muja A and B and 2.0 for Muja C and D (as per CSIRO
2004, SKM 2005 and ENVIRON 2009);
Varying FPM/APM ratio for each source based on emission rate information provided at Section 7.1;
and
Source emissions characteristics and emission rates as per Section 7.1.
Further information on the options selected and the model configuration is provided in the sample TAPM
output files presented in Appendix B.
In order to maintain consistency with previous studies conducted in the Collie airshed, background
concentrations adopted for this study are taken from previous studies (CSIRO 2004, SKM 2005 and
ENVIRON 2009) as follows:
68 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Generally conservative background (approximately 70
th
percentile) value of PM
10
and PM
2.5
values of
20.0 and 11.0 g/m
3
;
Background value of ozone taken as 22.3 ppb (47.7 g/m
3
);
Background smog reactivity (R
smog
) value of 0.2; and
Background concentration of zero for all other constituents.
7.3 Collie Urea Plant Modelling
An assessment of emissions of ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic compounds, heavy metals
and PM
10
(as urea) from the Collie Urea Plant was made using the AUSPLUME (v6) dispersion model.
The modelled results were compared against relevant Air NEPM and SEPP-AQM criteria.
AUSPLUME is a steady-state Gaussian plume model that can be used to predict off-site pollutant
concentrations for a wide variety of sources, which include (apart from vent stacks) area, line and volume
initial geometries with arbitrary orientation. It is highly flexible and has a range of options, which allow
the user to adapt the model to suit particular applications and make best use of available source and
meteorological data (Vic EPA 2000).
7.3.1 AUSPLUME Model Configuration
Key components of the AUSPLUME model configuration are summarised below:
Ground level concentrations were predicted over a 5 km square Cartesian receptor grid, centred over
the Collie Urea Plant site with a grid resolution of 50m;
Averaging periods specific to the assessment criteria were selected;
A dataset of a year of hourly meteorological data representative of the Plant site was synthesised
using TAPM. Details of this modelling are given in Section 4.3.
Source characteristics and emission rates provided in Table 16 were used;
Consistent with the TAPM airshed modelling, the following background concentrations have been
adopted:
Generally conservative background (approximately 70
th
percentile) value of PM
10
and PM
2.5
values of 20.0 and 11.0 g/m
3
; and
Background concentration of zero for all other constituents.
The influence of terrain on the dispersion of the stack plumes over the area of interest was
considered significant. Terrain elevations at each receptor were determined from 0.50m contour
data of the region;
Building wake effects were included, with characteristic building dimensions provided for the Plant.
The Building Profile Input Program (BPIP) module within AUSPLUME was used to generate the
characteristic dimensions for each 10-degree wind-directional arc. For wind directions where the
potential for building wake influences was considered significant by AUSPLUME, the PRIME building
wake algorithm was used to provide a conservative estimate of ground level concentrations;
Irwins Rural wind profile exponents were used;
Default vertical temperature gradients were assumed;
69 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Plume rise was computed as a function of distance downwind;
Horizontal dispersion and vertical dispersion was parameterised according to equations for the
Pasquill-Gifford (sources <100m high) and Briggs rural curves; and
An aerodynamic roughness height of 0.3m was used to represent the area of interest.
Further information on the options selected and the model configuration is provided in the sample
AUSPLUME output files presented in Appendix C.
7.4 Modelling Results
This section reports the results of airshed modelling of the cumulative impacts of pollutants emitted from
the Collie Urea Plant and other Collie airshed sources (existing, under construction and proposed). The
airshed assessment has considered six criteria pollutants (SO
2
, NO
2
, O
3
, PM
10
, PM
2.5
and CO). The
predicted ground level concentrations are from the inner most (500m) grid for all pollutants assessed.
This section also reports the results of modelling of ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic
compounds, heavy metals and PM
10
(as urea) for the Collie Urea Plant in isolation.
7.4.1 Performance of TAPM in Modelling Collie Airshed Sources
The performance of TAPM in modelling tall stacks in the Collie region is subject to a review by DEC.
This review, although not published to date, has confirmed that there is a tendency for TAPM to over-
predict concentrations, across all percentiles (DEC 2009). Such over-prediction means that the results of
this study and the predicted concentrations reported are conservative in nature.
Noting the concerns with TAPM over-predicting, TAPM is considered the most suitable tool for assessing
cumulative emissions in the Collie airshed (DEC 2009).
7.4.2 Performance Against Air Quality Criteria
Table 18 summarises compliance with relevant air quality criteria, both at the sensitive receptor with the
highest predicted concentration and across the modelled domain, for each of the three scenarios, as
follows:
From Table 18, the following is observed:
Air NEPM standards across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
, 1-hour
NO
2
, 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
; and
Kwinana EPP standard across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
.
Scenario 2, no exceedances are predicted for across the model domain.
70 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Emissions of PM
10
heavy metals; and
10
There are no exceedances of the SEPP-AQM criteria for ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, PAHs,
VOCs (benzene, cumene, cyclohexane, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde, n-Hexane, toluene and
xylene) and heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel and mercury) predicted; and
receptors for SO
2
, PM
10
and PM
2.5
(Stages A and B).
Sulphur dioxide:
SO
2
2
annual and 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2.
2
3
.
2
and
2.
2
3
.
averaging period.
71 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
2
3
.
10
and PM
2.5
:
annual PM
10
2.5
.
10
and annual PM
2.5
3
, respectively.
10
and annual PM
2.5
3,
respectively.
10
and annual PM
2.5
3
, respectively.
Table 18 Summary of compliance with criteria
Predicted maximum concentration (g/m
3
)
Pollutant
Averaging
period
22 Criteria Basis
At sensitive
receptor
% of criteria Compliance
Across model
domain
Scenario 1 Existing, approved and proposed sources
1-hour 572 Air NEPM
1128.2 197% 2,934.9 513%
24-hour 229 Air NEPM
162.8 71% 211.4 92%
Annual 57 Air NEPM
9.0 16% 12.0 21%
Sulphur dioxide
1-hour 350 Kwinana EPP
538.1 154% 655.2 187%
1-hour 247 Air NEPM
260.4 105% 321.3 130%
Nitrogen dioxide
Annual 62 Air NEPM
4.6 7% 11.8 19%
1-hour 214 Air NEPM
78.5 37% 99.2 46%
Ozone
4-hour 172 Air NEPM
69.1 40% 86.4 50%
PM10 24-hour 50 Air NEPM
149.1 298% 182.9 366%
PM2.5 24-hour 25 Air NEPM
42.6 171% 51.2 205%
Carbon monoxide 8-hour 11,254 Air NEPM
114.4 1% 221.6 2%
22
Assessed at maximum, except 1-hour SO2 Kwinana EPP, assessed at 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest)
3
)
Pollutant
Averaging
period
23
Criteria
g/m
3
)
Basis
At sensitive
receptor
Across model
domain
Scenario 2 Collie Urea Plant
1-hour 572 Air NEPM 17.8 3% 30.2 5%
24-hour 229 Air NEPM 6.1 3% 14.0 6%
Annual 57 Air NEPM 0.2 0% 0.9 2%
Sulphur dioxide
1-hour 350 Kwinana EPP 11.9 3% 25.1 7%
1-hour 247 Air NEPM 25.1 10% 28.0 11%
Nitrogen dioxide
Annual 62 Air NEPM 0.4 1% 2.8 5%
1-hour 214 Air NEPM 50.4 24% 51.3 24%
Ozone
4-hour 172 Air NEPM 47.8 28% 48.6 28%
PM10 24-hour 50 Air NEPM 35.3 71% 45.9 92%
PM2.5 24-hour 25 Air NEPM 19.7 79% 21.6 86%
Carbon monoxide 8-hour 11,254 Air NEPM 101.7 1% 355.3 3%
PM10 (as urea) 24-hour 50 Air NEPM 4.4
3
8.8% 13 26%
Ammonia 3-minute 600 SEPP-AQM 57 9.5% 143 24%
Hydrogen
sulphide
3-minute 470 SEPP-AQM 4.3 0.9% 33 7.0%
23
th
percentile (9
th
highest).
3
)
Pollutant
Averaging
period
24
Criteria
g/m
3
)
Basis
At sensitive
receptor
Across model
domain
Polycyclic
aromatic
hydrocarbons
3-minute 0.73 SEPP-AQM 0.00017 0.02% 0.00022 0.03%
Benzene 3-minute 53 SEPP-AQM 1.7
3.2% 10.2
19%
Cumene 3-minute 39 SEPP-AQM 1.7
4.4% 10.2
26%
Cyclohexane 3-minute 35,000 SEPP-AQM 1.7
0.005% 10.2
0.03%
Ethyl benzene 3-minute 14,500 SEPP-AQM 1.7
0.01% 10.2
0.07%
Formaldehyde 3-minute 40 SEPP-AQM 1.7
4.3% 10.2
26%
n-Hexane 3-minute 5,900 SEPP-AQM 1.7
0.03% 10.2
0.17%
Toluene 3-minute 650 SEPP-AQM 1.7
0.26% 10.2
1.6%
Xylene 3-minute 350 SEPP-AQM 1.7
0.49% 10.2
2.9%
Arsenic 3-minute 0.17 SEPP-AQM 0.00010 0.06% 0.00021 0.13%
Cadmium 3-minute 0.033 SEPP-AQM 0.00005 0.15% 0.00011 0.32%
Chromium 3-minute 0.17 SEPP-AQM 0.00001 0.01% 0.00002 0.01%
Lead 1-hour 3.0 SEPP-AQM 0.00012 0.004% 0.00024 0.01%
Nickel 3-minute 0.33 SEPP-AQM 0.00002 0.005% 0.00004 0.01%
Mercury 3-minute 0.33 SEPP-AQM 0.00019 0.06% 0.00043 0.13%
24
th
percentile (9
th
highest).
3
)
Pollutant
Averaging
period
25 Criteria Basis
At sensitive
receptor
Across model
domain
Scenario 3 Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved and proposed sources
1-hour 572 Air NEPM 1165.3 204% 2826.4 494%
24-hour 229 Air NEPM 158.4 69% 212.1 93%
Annual 57 Air NEPM 8.9 16% 11.7 21%
Sulphur dioxide
1-hour 350 Kwinana EPP 551.6 158% 649.8 186%
1-hour 247 Air NEPM 248.0 100% 311.6 126%
Nitrogen dioxide
Annual 62 Air NEPM 4.7 8% 12.3 20%
1-hour 214 Air NEPM 81.1 38% 101.5 47%
Ozone
4-hour 172 Air NEPM 69.1 40% 89.1 52%
PM10 24-hour 50 Air NEPM 144.6 289% 180.3 361%
PM2.5 24-hour 25 Air NEPM 41.5 166% 50.5 202%
Carbon monoxide 8-hour 11,254 Air NEPM 116.9 1% 358.9 3%
25
th
percentile (9
th
highest)
76 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.4.3 Criteria Pollutants
Predicted concentrations are presented below for each criteria pollutant assessed at sensitive receptors
where an exceedance of one or more relevant criterion are predicted. Results for all three scenarios for
all pollutants at all sensitive receptors are presented in Appendix A.
Sulphur Dioxide
Previous studies (CSIRO 2004, SKM 2005 and ENVIRON 2009) have identified sulphur dioxide as the
main pollutant of concern for the Collie airshed.
As previously mentioned, DEC has requested consideration of an additional scenario (Scenario 6) for
sulphur dioxide emissions, consisting of all existing and approved sources (Muja power station, Stages C
and D, Collie power station, Stage A, Worsley power station and Expansion and Bluewaters power
station, Stages I and II).
As such, this section presents comparison of the results from Scenarios 1 to 3 and 6 against both the Air
NEPM and Kwinana EPP standards.
Table 19 presents the predicted maximum 1-hour, 24-hour and annual SO
2
concentrations and predicted
99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) concentrations at sensitive receptor locations predicted to exceed one or
more criteria across the model domain, for Scenario 3. Table 19 provides the percentage of the relevant
criterion the concentration represents, with values higher than the relevant criterion (i.e. 100% or greater)
shaded gray. Exceedances of the Air NEPM 1-hour SO
2
standard (572 g/m
3
) and Kwinana EPP
standard (350 g/m
3
) are predicted at a number of sensitive receptors. The 24-hour (229 g/m
3
) and
annual (57 g/m
3
) Air NEPM standards are not predicted to be exceeded at sensitive receptors or within
the model domain.
Figure 11, Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14 illustrate the predicted maximum 1-hour SO
2
concentrations for the model domain for each of the four scenarios. Predicted concentrations are
represented by light blue contours with the Air NEPM 1-hour SO
2
standard of 572 g/m
3
shown as red
contours. Yellow crosses represent sensitive receptors, as provided in Table 10 (Section 4.5) and
orange crosses emission sources. Areas inside red contours represent areas where the Air NEPM
standard is predicted to be exceeded.
Figure 11 illustrates the predicted maximum 1-hour SO
2
concentrations for the model domain for
Scenario 1, existing, approved and proposed sources. Figure 11 shows there are predicted to be
significant exceedances of the Air NEPM standard across the model domain and at many sensitive
receptors, in the vicinity of the Bluewaters, Collie and Muja power stations.
2
concentrations for Scenario 2, the Collie Urea
Plant in isolation. Figure 12 shows there are no areas across the model domain predicted to exceed the
Air NEPM standard.
2
Scenario 3, the Collie Urea Plant and all existing, approved and proposed sources. Figure 13 shows
only very small changes in the contours when compared to Figure 11.
2
Scenario 6, the existing and approved sources, excluding Muja A and B. Figure 14 shows there are
predicted to be significant exceedances of the Air NEPM standard across the model domain and at many
77 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
sensitive receptors, in the vicinity of the Bluewaters, Collie and Muja power stations. The number of
sensitive receptors with exceedances is less than for Scenario 1 and 3, although exceedances are
predicted at the extents of Collie township (#33 and #35).
Table 19 shows the highest maximum 1-hour SO
2
concentration predicted at a residential receptor is
1,165 g/m
3
(204% of the Air NEPM standard) at the Cardiff town site (#80), as shown on Figure 13.
Figure 15, Figure 16, Figure 17 and Figure 18 illustrate the predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 1-hour
SO
2
concentrations for the model domain for each of the four scenarios. Predicted concentrations are
represented by light blue contours with the Kwinana EPP 1-hour SO
2
standard of 350 g/m
3
represented
by green contours. Areas inside the green contours represent areas where the Kwinana EPP standard is
predicted to be exceeded.
Figure 15 illustrates the predicted 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
Scenario 1. Figure 15 shows there are predicted to be significant exceedances of the Kwinana EPP
standard across the airshed and at several sensitive receptors.
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
concentrations for Scenario 2. Figure 16 shows
there are no areas across the airshed predicted to exceed the Kwinana EPP standard.
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
Scenario 3. Figure 17 shows very small changes in the contours when compared to Figure 15.
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
Scenario 6. Figure 18 shows there are predicted to be exceedances of the Kwinana EPP standard
across the airshed and at several sensitive receptors north and east of Muja power station.
Table 19 shows the highest 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
552 g/m
3
(158% of the Kwinana EPP standard) at a cluster of rural residences (#74), as shown on
Figure 17.
78 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 19 Predicted SO
2
concentrations at sensitive receptors (Scenario 3)
1-hr maximum
(Air NEPM)
24-hr maximum
(Air NEPM)
Annual maximum
(Air NEPM)
1-hr 99.9%ile
(Kwinana EPP)
Sensitive
receptor
g/m
3
% g/m
3
% g/m
3
% g/m
3
%
Maximum across
model domain 2,826.4 494% 212.1 93% 11.7 21% 649.8 186%
3 596.9 104% 72.6 32% 6.4 11% 213.7 61%
9 657.8 115% 78.5 34% 6.7 12% 243.1 69%
13 600.8 105% 82.9 36% 6.6 12% 255.8 73%
16 591.5 103% 110.8 48% 8.2 14% 329.0 94%
21 583.0 102% 61.9 27% 6.2 11% 198.8 57%
26 594.2 104% 51.3 22% 6.1 11% 194.0 55%
36 604.3 106% 78.9 34% 6.3 11% 398.2 114%
37 468.1 82% 69.9 31% 6.1 11% 354.1 101%
39 715.3 125% 83.9 37% 6.3 11% 389.3 111%
41 755.9 132% 90.2 39% 6.2 11% 376.7 108%
42 518.6 91% 81.7 36% 6.4 11% 409.2 117%
45 802.9 140% 101.6 44% 6.6 12% 448.8 128%
46 508.6 89% 96.1 42% 6.5 11% 421.4 120%
47 597.5 104% 87.3 38% 5.2 9% 254.1 73%
48 812.7 142% 96.9 42% 6.8 12% 470.4 134%
50 645.6 113% 94.1 41% 5.3 9% 270.8 77%
51 583.4 102% 97.9 43% 7.0 12% 446.3 128%
53 595.6 104% 78.2 34% 5.3 9% 318.7 91%
56 574.4 100% 87.4 38% 7.3 13% 304.1 87%
57 728.4 127% 107.9 47% 6.0 11% 285.0 81%
58 596.6 104% 95.6 42% 5.3 9% 264.0 75%
60 500.7 88% 69.7 30% 4.7 8% 356.2 102%
63 725.3 127% 118.9 52% 8.9 16% 532.7 152%
64 571.5 100% 78.1 34% 5.0 9% 404.0 115%
68 618.5 108% 108.7 47% 5.8 10% 434.5 124%
70 1,079.5 189% 158.4 69% 8.5 15% 376.2 107%
74 823.6 144% 106.5 46% 5.5 10% 551.6 158%
75 594.1 104% 96.0 42% 5.1 9% 356.4 102%
77 559.4 98% 104.0 45% 4.9 9% 402.6 115%
78 661.9 116% 70.7 31% 4.0 7% 368.9 105%
80 1,165.3 204% 96.2 42% 3.6 6% 321.3 92%
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 11
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 1-hour SO2 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
Existing, Approved and Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Air NEPM criteria = 572 ug/m3
Predicted maximum 1-hour SO2 concentration (ug/m3)
182 ug/m3
2,934 ug/m3
Concentrations Within Model Domain
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 12
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Air NEPM criteria =572 ug/m3
Predicted maximum1-hour SO2 concentration (ug/m3)
0.5 ug/m3
30 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 13
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Col li e Urea Plant and Existi ng, Approved and
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
191 ug/m3
2,826 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 14
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 6:
Existi ng and Approved Sources (Excl uding Muj a A and B)
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
140 ug/m3
2,660 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muj a PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 15
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted 9th Highest 1-hour SO2 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Kwinana EPP criteria = 350 ug/m3
Predicted 9th highest 1-hour SO2 concentration (ug/m3)
121 ug/m3
655 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 16
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Kwinana EPP criteria =350 ug/m3
0.4 ug/m3
25 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 17
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
122 ug/m3
650 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 18
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 6:
Existi ng and Approved Sources (Excl uding Muj a A and B)
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
96 ug/m3
460 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muj a PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
87 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Incremental Contribution
When cumulative emissions to the Collie airshed are modelled, there are a number of exceedances of
the Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP standards predicted across the model domain and at several sensitive
receptors, as outlined in Table 19.
In order to consider the significance of each existing or proposed facility to such exceedances, the
incremental contribution of the Collie Urea Plant, Bluewaters power station, Stages III and IV; and Muja
power station, Stages A and B, have been examined. These facilites have been considered as Muja A
and B are likely to be decommissioned and Bluewaters III and IV and the Collie Urea Plant are proposed
(seeking approvals).
Table 20 outlines the predicted contribution from the Collie Urea Plant, Bluewatwers III and IV and Muja
A and B, at each sensitive receptor where an exceedance of one or more criteria are predicted (as per
Table 19). The facility with the highest contribution at each sensitive receptor is shaded gray.
Table 20 shows several receptors where negative contributions are predicted, that is, there is predicted
to be a reduction in pollutant concentrations. Such reduction may be real or maybe artificial due to
spatial and temporal variation in predicted concentrations between different modelled scenarios. Such
variation is reduced as the averaging period is increased, such that predicted annual concentrations
have very little spatial and temporal variation for a simulation of one year duration.
Table 20 shows negative concentrations predicted for Bluewaters III and IV for annual SO
2
concentrations. These are likely to be real reductions as there should be very little spatial or temporal
variation with an annual average for a simulation of one year duration. This predicted decrease is
supported by the increase in stack height for Bluwaters I and II stacks as part of the Bluewaters III and IV
proposal. Bluewaters III and IV will include installation of two new 150m tall stacks, as outlined in
Section 7.1.2. The two new 150m tall stacks will be designed to accept flue gases from the existing
Bluewaters I and II. Increasing the stack height (from 100m to 150m) will lead to decreased
concentrations within the model domain due to increased dispersion of emissions from Bluewaters I and
II.
Table 20 shows that when comparing the contribution of the three facilities, Muja A and B was predicted
as the main contributor at all but two sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
, all but two sensitive receptors
for 24-hour SO
2
and the main contributor at all receptors for annual and 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2
.
2
and two
sensitive receptors for 24-hour SO
2
. As outlined above, Bluewaters III and IV results in reduced
concentrations across all sensitive receptors for annual SO
2
. Collie Urea Plant was not predicted as the
main contributor at any sensitive receptor for any averaging period.
88 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Figure 19, Figure 20 and Figure 21 illustrate the predicted annual incremental contribution from the Collie
Urea Plant, Bluewaters III and IV and Muja A and B, respectively. Yellow crosses represent sensitive
receptors. Orange crosses represent emission sources within the model domain.
Figure 19 shows the Collie Urea Plant is predicted to contribute a maximum of 1.0 g/m
3
to the annual
SO
2
concentrations in the model domain, in the area surrounding the Plant, represented by a small
number of light blue contours.
Figure 20 shows Bluewaters III and IV is predicted to contribute a maximum of -3.5 g/m
3
to the annual
SO
2
concentrations in the model domain, that is, annual SO
2
concentrations are predicted to decrease by
3.5 g/m
3
with the inclusion of Bluewaters III and IV, for reasons outlined above.
Figure 21 shows Muja A and B is predicted to contribute a maximum of 4.3 g/m
3
to the annual SO
2
concentrations in the model domain, with the highest contribution in the area surrounding Muja power
station.
Figure 19, Figure 20 and Figure 21 show that the largest contributor to annual SO
2
concentrations
predicted across the model domain is from Muja Stages A and B, development of Bluewaters Stages III
and IV is predicted to reduce emissions, as outlined above and the Collie Urea Plant is predicted to
contribute very little to concentrations across the model domain.
Table 20 Predicted incremental SO
2
concentrations at sensitive receptors
1-hour maximum 24-hour maximum Annual 1-hour 9
th
highest
Receptor
# CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA
3 -59.9 -46.9 79.9 -4.4 8.0 3.5 -0.1 -0.8 0.7 13.3 5.3 9.0
9 -17.9 11.5 75.2 -2.9 7.9 3.7 -0.1 -1.1 0.7 13.8 3.0 4.5
13 -36.6 -24.5 69.5 -4.5 -0.2 2.9 -0.1 -0.8 0.7 -4.0 12.2 21.7
16 -0.9 36.6 34.8 -0.2 8.5 13.2 -0.1 -1.1 0.7 -17.1 -29.5 22.3
21 -2.3 76.1 71.9 -4.0 -14.2 1.9 -0.1 -0.7 0.8 -0.9 -26.2 15.3
26 22.5 109.4 161.1 -2.1 -8.2 0.7 0.0 -0.3 1.0 -7.5 -23.9 24.3
36 -27.9 10.3 155.4 -3.0 -11.7 21.6 0.0 -0.3 1.3 5.9 7.6 114.5
37 -20.3 -9.2 44.0 -4.3 0.5 14.8 0.0 -0.2 1.3 -26.7 2.0 71.3
39 -61.0 -8.7 177.5 -0.8 -5.4 24.2 -0.1 -0.3 1.3 -10.1 -12.5 90.9
41 -45.6 3.2 190.7 -1.5 -10.8 26.0 0.0 -0.3 1.4 -7.0 -10.8 93.5
42 -4.2 -19.1 68.6 -2.4 3.3 23.6 0.0 -0.2 1.5 -21.0 -7.3 103.2
45 -35.5 9.0 204.8 -2.1 -12.8 29.2 0.0 -0.4 1.5 1.6 2.5 158.2
46 -25.6 -24.8 72.7 -6.2 2.8 27.5 0.0 -0.2 1.6 -7.2 9.4 129.3
47 11.6 4.7 121.2 -1.6 0.1 22.9 0.0 -0.1 1.2 -1.5 4.1 53.9
48 -15.0 14.0 198.5 -0.5 -4.3 27.8 -0.1 -0.4 1.6 -45.5 -5.4 119.2
50 9.6 6.3 135.0 -1.9 0.0 25.0 0.0 -0.2 1.3 13.1 20.3 43.0
51 -38.8 3.2 158.6 -1.7 5.3 26.0 0.0 -0.3 1.8 -14.4 -19.5 131.6
1-hour maximum 24-hour maximum Annual 1-hour 9
th
highest
Receptor
# CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA
53 -31.1 29.2 154.8 -2.0 -1.2 24.9 0.0 -0.3 1.1 -5.3 -5.6 66.6
56 42.4 5.9 83.4 -19.8 -16.6 23.2 -0.1 -0.3 1.9 -14.3 -15.0 54.4
57 19.2 9.3 154.1 -0.5 0.0 29.5 -0.1 -0.3 1.6 9.9 19.7 58.8
58 -35.5 -3.9 157.7 -2.0 -1.4 28.3 -0.1 -0.3 1.3 33.5 27.3 84.5
60 2.2 3.0 82.3 -4.0 -2.5 17.7 0.0 -0.2 1.0 -13.9 -18.2 102.8
63 -17.7 -9.3 239.4 -3.2 -4.5 38.2 -0.1 -0.3 2.5 -5.5 -2.0 161.5
64 17.9 -8.4 92.1 -5.2 -3.6 18.8 0.0 -0.3 1.1 -11.2 2.9 122.6
68 -4.0 15.1 137.9 -1.8 0.3 33.9 0.0 -0.3 1.5 0.1 -3.3 122.1
70 -42.3 -6.3 293.9 -4.5 -3.6 59.3 -0.2 -0.5 2.7 -26.9 -10.8 97.1
74 -23.4 -31.1 238.4 -3.0 -3.3 28.0 0.0 -0.2 1.4 39.2 -9.0 204.3
75 1.6 30.8 200.4 -5.9 -2.2 33.8 -0.1 -0.4 1.4 -3.1 -16.4 105.1
77 -15.0 0.1 181.9 0.2 0.0 36.5 0.0 -0.2 1.2 -4.1 4.3 119.2
78 -40.2 31.1 117.6 -0.9 3.9 13.5 0.0 -0.2 1.0 -2.0 1.1 89.4
80 37.1 6.1 456.3 12.6 11.8 40.3 0.1 -0.3 1.0 8.5 12.5 112.1
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 19
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum Annual SO2 Concentrations
Contribution from Collie Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum annual SO2 concentration (ug/m3)
-0.3 ug/m3
1.0 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 20
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Contribution from Bluewaters III and IV
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
-3.5 ug/m3
0 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 21
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Contribution from Muja A and B
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
0.5 ug/m3
4.3 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
94 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Nitrogen Dioxide
The predicted maximum 1-hour NO
2
concentration across the model domain is 312 g/m
3
(126% of the
Air NEPM standard). One exceedance of the Air NEPM 1-hour NO
2
standard (247 g/m
3
) is predicted at
a sensitive receptor. The annual Air NEPM standard (62 g/m
3
) is not predicted to be exceeded within
the model domain.
Figure 22, Figure 23 and Figure 24 illustrate the predicted maximum 1-hour NO
2
concentrations for the
model domain for each of the three scenarios. The predicted concentrations are represented by light
blue contours with the NEPM 1-hour NO
2
standard of 247 g/m
3
is represented by red contours. Yellow
crosses represent sensitive receptors and orange crosses emission sources. Areas inside red contours
represent areas where the Air NEPM standard is predicted to be exceeded.
Figure 22 illustrates the predicted maximum 1-hour NO
2
Scenario 1. Figure 22 shows there are predicted to be some exceedances of the Air NEPM standard
across the model domain and a sensitive receptor north-west of Muja power station.
2
concentrations for Scenario 2. Figure 23 shows
there are no areas across the model domain predicted to exceed the Air NEPM standard.
2
Scenario 3. Figure 24 shows only very small changes in the contours when compared to Figure 22.
The highest maximum 1-hour NO
2
concentration predicted at a receptor is 248 g/m
3
(100% of the Air
NEPM standard) at the Collie Motorplex (#70), which is a non residential receptor, as shown on Figure
24. No exceedances are predicted at residential receptors.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 22
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 1-hour NO2 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 1-hour NO2 concentration (ug/m3)
53 ug/m3
321 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 23
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum1-hour NO2 concentration (ug/m3)
2 ug/m3
28 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 24
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum1-hour NO2 concentration (ug/m3)
53 ug/m3
312 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
98 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Ozone
The predicted maximum 1-hour and 4-hour O
3
concentrations across the model domain are 102 g/m
3
(48% of the Air NEPM standard) and 89 g/m
3
(52% of the Air NEPM standard), respectively. No
exceedance of the Air NEPM 1-hour or 4-hour O
3
standards (214 and 172 g/m
3
) are predicted within the
model domain.
Figure 25 and Figure 28, Figure 26 and Figure 29 and Figure 27 and Figure 30 illustrate the predicted
maximum 1-hour and 4-hour O
3
concentrations for the model domain for Scenarios 1, 2 and 3,
respectively. Predicted concentrations are represented by light blue contours, yellow crosses represent
sensitive receptors and orange crosses emission sources.
Figure 25, Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28, Figure 29 and Figure 30 show there are no areas across the
model domain predicted to exceed the Air NEPM standards.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 25
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 1-hour O3 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 1-hour O3 concentration (ug/m3)
62 ug/m3
99 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 26
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum1-hour O3 concentration (ug/m3)
46 ug/m3
51 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 27
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
62 ug/m3
102 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 28
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 4-hour O3 concentration (ug/m3)
54 ug/m3
86 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 29
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
45 ug/m3
49 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 30
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
54 ug/m3
89 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
105 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Carbon Monoxide
The predicted maximum 8-hour CO concentration across the model domain is 359 g/m
3
(3% of the Air
NEPM standard). No exceedance of the Air NEPM 8-hour CO standard (11,254 g/m
3
) is predicted
within the model domain.
Figure 31, Figure 32 and Figure 33 illustrate the predicted maximum 8-hour CO concentrations for the
model domain for Scenarios 1, 2 and 3. Predicted concentrations are represented by light blue contours,
yellow crosses represent sensitive receptors and orange crosses emission sources.
Figure 31, Figure 32 and Figure 33 show there are no areas across the model domain predicted to
exceed the Air NEPM standard.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 31
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 8-hour CO Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Air NEPM criteria = 11,254 ug/m3
Predicted maximum 8-hour CO concentration (ug/m3)
16 ug/m3
222 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 32
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Air NEPM criteria =11,254 ug/m3
Predicted maximum8-hour CO concentration (ug/m3)
5 ug/m3
355 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 33
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Air NEPM criteria =11,254 ug/m3
Predicted maximum8-hour CO concentration (ug/m3)
18 ug/m3
359 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
109 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Particulates as PM
10
and PM
2.5
Table 21 presents the predicted maximum 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
concentrations at sensitive
receptor locations predicted to exceed one or more criteria across the model domain. Table 21 provides
the percentage of the relevant criterion the concentration represents, with values higher than the relevant
criterion (i.e. 100% or greater) shaded gray. Exceedances of the Air NEPM 24-hour PM
10
standard (50
g/m
3
) and 24-hour PM
2.5
standard (25 g/m
3
) are predicted at a number of sensitive receptors.
Figure 34, Figure 35, Figure 36, Figure 37, Figure 38 and Figure 39 illustrate the predicted maximum 24-
hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
concentrations for the model domain for each of the three scenarios.
Predicted concentrations are represented by light blue contours with the Air NEPM 24-hour PM
10
standard of 50 g/m
3
and 24-hour PM
2.5
standard of 25 g/m
3
are represented by red contours. Yellow
crosses represent sensitive receptors and orange crosses emission sources. Areas inside red contours
represent areas where the Air NEPM standard is predicted to be exceeded.
Figure 34 and Figure 37 show there are predicted to be significant exceedances of the Air NEPM
standards across the model domain and at many sensitive receptors.
Figure 35 and Figure 38 show no exceedances of the Air NEPM 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
standards across the model domain.
Figure 36 and Figure 39 show only very small changes in the contours when compared to Figure 34 and
Figure 37.
Table 21 shows the highest maximum 24-hour PM
10
99 g/m
3
(198% of the Air NEPM standard) at a cluster of residences (#67), as shown on Figure 36.
Higher 24-hour PM
10
concentrations are predicted at the Collie Motorplex (#70), a non residential
receptor.
Table 21 shows the highest maximum 24-hour PM
2.5
32 g/m
3
(128% of the Air NEPM standard) at a cluster of residences (#67), as shown on Figure 39.
Higher 24-hour PM
2.5
concentrations are predicted at the Collie Motorplex (#70), a non residential
receptor.
110 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 21 Predicted PM
10
and PM
2.5
concentrations at sensitive receptors (Scenario 3)
24-hr maximum PM10
(Air NEPM)
24-hr maximum PM2.5
(Air NEPM)
Sensitive receptor
g/m
3
% g/m
3
%
Maximum across model domain 180.3 361% 50.5 202%
2 59.7 119% 23.2 93%
7 59.4 119% 23.0 92%
15 63.1 126% 24.1 96%
18 55.8 112% 22.2 89%
20 58.1 116% 22.8 91%
23 54.1 108% 19.2 77%
29 52.6 105% 20.7 83%
32 50.6 101% 19.4 77%
35 53.1 106% 19.0 76%
36 58.3 117% 20.8 83%
37 53.3 107% 19.1 76%
38 57.8 116% 19.2 77%
39 67.1 134% 23.2 93%
41 68.7 137% 23.6 95%
42 58.6 117% 20.5 82%
43 61.3 123% 20.5 82%
44 62.6 125% 20.1 80%
45 74.5 149% 25.3 101%
46 73.8 148% 23.4 93%
47 59.6 119% 19.8 79%
48 79.1 158% 26.4 106%
49 67.3 135% 23.5 94%
50 65.3 131% 21.0 84%
51 77.1 154% 23.1 92%
52 57.2 114% 20.1 80%
53 65.9 132% 23.0 92%
54 91.3 183% 26.5 106%
55 60.3 121% 20.8 83%
56 91.4 183% 25.8 103%
57 79.5 159% 24.2 97%
58 82.6 165% 24.3 97%
59 57.6 115% 20.7 83%
111 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
24-hr maximum PM10
(Air NEPM)
24-hr maximum PM2.5
(Air NEPM)
Sensitive receptor
g/m
3
% g/m
3
%
60 54.5 109% 20.6 82%
61 78.7 157% 26.6 106%
62 72.6 145% 25.0 100%
63 98.3 197% 30.5 122%
64 61.6 123% 22.4 89%
65 59.3 119% 21.5 86%
66 60.4 121% 21.8 87%
67 98.9 198% 31.8 127%
68 84.6 169% 29.5 118%
69 70.0 140% 24.2 97%
70 144.6 289% 41.5 166%
71 71.7 143% 24.7 99%
72 78.3 157% 26.0 104%
73 53.2 106% 18.7 75%
74 72.5 145% 24.1 96%
75 84.4 169% 25.5 102%
76 50.2 100% 19.4 78%
77 86.7 173% 26.5 106%
78 57.0 114% 22.2 89%
79 52.2 104% 20.2 81%
80 95.9 192% 27.9 112%
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 34
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 24-hour PM10 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration (ug/m3)
34 ug/m3
183 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 35
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum24-hour PM10 concentration (ug/m3)
29 ug/m3
46 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 36
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum24-hour PM10 concentration (ug/m3)
34 ug/m3
180 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 37
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Concentrations
Scenario 1:
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 24-hour PM2.5 concentration (ug/m3)
18 ug/m3
51 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 38
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Concentrati ons
Scenario 2:
Colli e Urea Plant
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum24-hour PM2.5 concentration (ug/m3)
17 ug/m3
22 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 39
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 24-hour PM2.5 Concentrati ons
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum24-hour PM2.5 concentration (ug/m3)
17 ug/m3
51 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
118 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Incremental Contribution
When cumulative emissions to the Collie airshed are modelled, there are a number of exceedances of
the 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
Air NEPM standards predicted across the model domain and at
many sensitive receptors, as outlined in Table 21.
In order to consider the significance of each existing or proposed facility to such exceedances, the
incremental contribution of the Collie Urea Plant, Bluewaters power station, Stages III and IV; and Muja
power station, Stages A and B, have been examined, as previously completed for sulphur dioxide.
Table 22 outlines the predicted contribution from the Collie Urea Plant, Bluewatwers III and IV and Muja
A and B, at each sensitive receptor where an exceedance of one or more criteria are predicted (as per
Table 21). The facility with the highest contribution at each sensitive receptor is shaded gray.
Table 22 shows several receptors where negative contributions are predicted, that is, there is predicted
to be a reduction in pollutant concentrations. Such reduction may be real or maybe artificial due to
spatial and temporal variation in predicted concentrations between different modelled scenarios. Such
variation is reduced as the averaging period is increased, such that predicted annual concentrations
have very little spatial and temporal variation for a simulation of one year duration.
Table 22 shows that when comparing the contribution of the three facilities, Muja A and B was predicted
as the main contributor at all sensitive receptors for 24-hour and annual PM
10
and 24-hour and annual
PM
2.5
. Bluewaters and the Collie Urea Plant were not predicted as the main contributor at any sensitive
Figure 40, Figure 41 and Figure 42 illustrate the predicted annual incremental contribution from the Collie
Urea Plant, Bluewaters III and IV and Muja A and B, respectively. Yellow crosses represent sensitive
receptors, as provided in Table 10 (Section 4.5). Orange crosses represent emission sources within the
model domain.
3
to annual PM
10
concentrations in the model domain, in the area surrounding the Plant, represented by a small number of
light blue contours.
Figure 41 shows Bluewaters III and IV is predicted to contribute a maximum of 0.1 g/m
3
to annual PM
10
concentrations in the model domain, represented by a small number of light blue contours.
3
to annual PM
10
station.
Figure 40, Figure 41 and Figure 42 demonstrate that the largest contributor to annual PM
10
concentrations predicted across the model domain is from Muja Stages A and B. Development of
Bluewaters Stages III and IV and the Collie Urea Plant are predicted to contribute very little to
concentrations across the model domain.
Figure 43, Figure 44 and Figure 45 show the predicted annual PM
2.5
incremental contribution from the
Collie Urea Plant, Bluewaters III and IV and Muja A and B, respectively.
3
to annual PM
2.5
concentrations in the model domain, in the area surrounding the Plant, represented by a small number of
light blue contours.
119 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Figure 44 shows Bluewaters III and IV is predicted to contribute a maximum of 0.1 g/m
3
to annual PM
2.5
concentrations in the model domain.
3
to annual PM
2.5
station.
Figure 43, Figure 44 and Figure 45 show that the largest contributor to annual PM
2.5
concentrations
predicted across the model domain is from Muja Stages A and B. Development of Bluewaters Stages III
and IV and the Collie Urea Plant are predicted to contribute very little to concentrations across the model
domain.
120 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Table 22 Predicted incremental concentrations at sensitive receptors
24-hour maximum PM10 24-hour maximum PM2.5
Receptor #
CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA
2 -0.9 1.8 29.1 -0.4 0.5 5.3
7 1.0 1.0 28.4 0.2 0.3 4.9
15 0.2 1.8 32.1 -0.1 0.5 5.9
18 -1.5 1.1 24.9 -0.5 0.3 4.1
20 -1.3 1.4 27.0 -0.5 0.4 4.6
23 -1.1 0.3 23.3 -0.4 0.2 1.2
29 2.0 -0.7 20.5 0.4 -0.1 2.0
32 -1.5 -1.4 17.3 -0.2 0.0 0.1
35 -0.7 -0.7 20.6 -0.1 0.1 0.1
36 -2.4 -7.4 26.0 -0.8 -1.9 1.9
37 -1.1 0.1 21.3 -0.4 -0.2 0.2
38 2.6 4.0 25.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
39 -2.6 -3.6 34.8 -0.7 -0.8 4.3
41 -2.6 -7.3 36.5 -0.7 -1.7 4.8
42 -3.5 -0.3 26.4 0.1 0.3 1.6
43 -0.1 1.8 29.1 1.1 1.7 1.8
44 -0.9 -0.3 30.1 0.9 1.1 1.2
45 -2.8 -8.6 42.3 -0.8 -2.1 6.6
46 -2.4 0.6 41.7 -0.6 0.1 4.6
47 -0.3 0.6 26.2 -0.1 0.1 0.5
48 -2.3 -4.0 46.9 -0.6 -0.9 7.6
49 -4.7 -0.4 35.3 -1.4 0.0 4.7
50 1.1 1.6 31.9 -0.1 0.2 1.6
51 -1.2 3.4 44.9 -0.3 0.8 4.3
52 -0.5 -0.3 23.7 -0.6 0.4 0.7
53 -1.0 -0.5 33.8 -0.4 -0.1 4.2
54 -15.4 -15.2 57.9 -4.4 -4.3 7.3
55 -0.8 -1.7 26.8 -0.6 0.1 1.4
56 -7.1 -5.6 58.0 -1.7 -1.3 6.4
121 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
24-hour maximum PM10 24-hour maximum PM2.5
Receptor #
CUP BW MUJA CUP BW MUJA
57 3.9 1.5 46.1 0.8 0.3 4.8
58 2.8 -0.2 49.4 1.0 0.2 5.0
59 0.1 -0.7 25.4 -0.2 -0.3 2.0
60 -1.1 -0.3 22.3 -0.3 -0.1 1.8
61 2.5 -0.9 45.7 0.6 -0.3 7.5
62 4.0 1.5 39.5 1.0 0.4 5.9
63 -4.7 -4.5 61.0 -1.3 -1.1 10.1
64 -1.2 -1.0 28.3 -0.4 -0.2 3.4
65 1.9 0.9 26.7 0.5 0.2 2.7
66 0.5 0.8 27.8 0.1 0.2 2.8
67 1.4 -1.2 66.1 0.3 -0.3 12.8
68 -2.1 -0.3 49.9 -0.6 -0.1 9.9
69 -1.6 -1.9 37.5 -0.4 -0.5 5.4
70 -4.5 -1.3 111.7 -1.1 -0.3 22.4
71 -0.2 -1.8 39.3 -0.1 -0.5 5.9
72 -4.1 -2.3 46.0 -1.1 -0.6 7.2
73 -0.8 -1.1 21.0 -0.1 -0.3 0.1
74 -6.8 -1.1 39.1 -2.1 -0.1 4.8
75 -1.7 -1.6 52.2 -0.8 -1.0 6.8
76 -0.9 -1.1 18.3 0.5 0.4 0.3
77 -2.3 -0.5 53.6 -0.8 -0.2 7.3
78 2.7 -0.2 23.3 -0.7 -0.3 2.8
79 -1.3 -0.4 21.1 -0.3 -0.2 2.2
80 14.2 8.7 65.0 2.0 1.7 10.0
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 40
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum Annual PM10 Concentrations
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum annual PM10 concentration (ug/m3)
-0.2 ug/m3
2.4 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 41
COLLIE UREA PLANT
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
-0.3 ug/m3
0.1 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 42
COLLIE UREA PLANT
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
1.0 ug/m3
8.3 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 43
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum Annual PM2.5 Concentrations
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum annual PM2.5 concentration (ug/m3)
-0.1 ug/m3
0.7 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bluewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 44
COLLIE UREA PLANT
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
-0.1 ug/m3
0.1 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 45
COLLIE UREA PLANT
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
0.3 ug/m3
2.2 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Collie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
128 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Deposition of Nitrogen Dioxide
Nitrogen (as nitrogen dioxide) may be deposited on the surrounding areas by wet or dry deposition.
Figure 46 illustrates the predicted deposition of nitrogen dioxide across the model domain for emissions
from Scenario 3 (Collie Urea Plant and all existing, approved and proposed sources). Figure 46 shows
that the predicted maximum nitrogen dioxide deposition within the model domain is 12.6 kg/ha/year. This
equates to 3.7 kg/ha/yr of deposited nitrogen.
There are no scheduled criteria for deposited nitrogen in WA. A review in Denmark of the current state
modelling of nitrogen deposition on a local scale cites a UN expert workshop on critical loads for nitrogen
(Hertel et al. 2006 and UN ECE 2002). A critical load is here defined as the maximum load of
atmospheric nitrogen deposition that an ecosystem can tolerate and still keep the same status. Below
this critical load no harmful effects on an ecosystem are expected. This critical load is cited as being in
the range of 10 to 20 kg/ha/year total deposited nitrogen.
The predicted maximum total nitrogen deposition of 3.7 kg/ha/year is compliant with the cited critical
loading.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 46
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Nitrogen Dioxi de Deposi tion (kg/ha/yr)
Scenario 3:
Proposed Sources
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/TAPM 10.7.2009
CG CG J F
0 2000 4000
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted nitrogen dioxide deposition (kg/ha/yr)
1.1 kg/ha/yr
12.6 kg/ha/yr
Deposition Within Model Domain
Predicted Minimum
Predi cted Maxi mum
420000 422000 424000 426000 428000 430000 432000 434000 436000 438000 440000 442000
6294000
6296000
6298000
6300000
6302000
6304000
6306000
6308000
6310000
6312000
6314000
6316000
6318000
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13 14
15
16
17
18
19 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 64
65
66
67
68 69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Muja PS
Coll ie PS
Bl uewaters PS
Urea Plant
130 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
7.4.4 Other Pollutants
AUSPLUME was used to predict ground level concentrations of PM
10
(as urea), ammonia (NH
3
),
hydrogen sulphide (H
2
S), heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (benzene, cumene,
cyclohexane, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde, n-hexane, toluene and xylenes) from the Collie Urea Plant in
isolation. AUSPLUME was used to predict ground level concentrations across a 5 km square Cartesian
grid, centred on the Plant location. Within this model domain, there are three sensitive receptors: #43-
Stockton Pool (recreational), #44-Stockton Pool Caretakers Cottage and #54-potential rural residence,
as shown on Figure 47.
Predicted concentrations of NH
3
and H
2
S were assessed against the design criteria specified in the
SEPP-AQM (Table 5). The SEPP-AQM criteria for NH
3
and H
2
S are both assessed at the 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) at a 3-minute averaging period, to reflect the toxic (NH
3
) and odourous (H
2
S)
nature of the pollutants.
Predicted concentrations of PM
10
(as urea) were assessed against 24-hour PM
10
Air NEPM standard. An
assessment was made of the contribution of deposited urea to total deposited nitrogen.
Ammonia
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 3-minute NH
3
concentration across the model domain is 143
g/m
3
(24% of the SEPP-AQM design criteria). No exceedance of the SEPP-AQM design criteria (600
g/m
3
) is predicted within the model domain. The highest concentration predicted at a sensitive receptor
is 47 g/m
3
at #43Stockton Pool, well below the SEPP-AQM criteria and the odour threshold (11,700
g/m
3
).
th
highest 3-minute NH
3
concentrations across the model domain for
emissions from the Collie Urea Plant in isolation. Predicted concentrations are represented by light blue
contours, yellow crosses represent sensitive receptors and orange crosses emission sources.
Figure 47 shows there are no areas across the model domain predicted to exceed the SEPP-AQM
criteria.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 47
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted 9th Highest 3-minute NH3 Concentrations
Scenario 2:
Collie Urea Plant
0 500 1000
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/AUSPLUME 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
SEPP-AQM criteria = 600 ug/m3
Predicted 9th highest 3-minute NH3 concentration (ug/m3)
0.2 ug/m3
98 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
427500 428000 428500 429000 429500 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000
6304500
6305000
6305500
6306000
6306500
6307000
6307500
6308000
6308500
54
44
43
UREA1+2
GT
CMD1+2
AGR
132 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Hydrogen Sulphide
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 3-minute H
2
S concentration across the model domain is 33
g/m
3
(7.0% of the SEPP-AQM design criteria). No exceedance of the SEPP-AQM design criteria (470
g/m
3
) is predicted within the model domain. The highest concentration predicted at a sensitive receptor
is 3.4 g/m
3
at #43-Stockton Pool, well below the SEPP-AQM criteria.
th
highest 3-minute H
2
S concentrations across the model domain for
criteria.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 48
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted 9th Highest 3-minute H2S Concentrations
Scenario 2:
Collie Urea Plant
0 500 1000
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/AUSPLUME 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
SEPP-AQM criteria = 470 ug/m3
Predicted 9th highest 3-minute H2S concentration (ug/m3)
0 ug/m3
14 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
427500 428000 428500 429000 429500 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000
6304500
6305000
6305500
6306000
6306500
6307000
6307500
6308000
6308500
54
44
43
UREA1+2
GT
CMD1+2
AGR
134 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
PM
10
(as Urea)
The predicted maximum 24-hour PM
10
(as urea) concentration across the model domain is 13 g/m
3
(26% of the Air NEPM standard). No exceedance of the Air NEPM standard (50 g/m
3
) is predicted
within the model domain. The highest concentration predicted at a sensitive receptor is 4.2 g/m
3
at
#43-Stockton Pool.
Figure 49 illustrates the predicted maximum PM
10
(as urea) concentrations across the model domain for
Figure 49 shows there are no areas across the model domain predicted to exceed the Air NEPM
standard.
Urea dust may be deposited on the surrounding areas by wet or dry deposition. Figure 50 illustrates the
predicted deposition of urea across the model domain for emissions from the Collie Urea Plant in
isolation. Figure 50 shows that the predicted maximum urea deposition within the model domain is 11.6
kg/ha/year.
A study was undertaken by Dampier Nitrogen which found that urea deposition of 2.0 kg/ha/year was
considerably less than the nitrogen pollution from sites such as large cities or industrial zones where
adverse effects on native vegetation have been recorded. Natural nitrogen deposition has been
measured near Darwin of 1.4 kg/ha/year and may fluctuate within a 30% range. However no data exists
regarding the effects on vegetation of nitrogen deposition at this level (EPA 2002).
There are no scheduled criteria for deposited urea (nitrogen) in WA. Urea has a nitrogen content of
46.7% by weight. As such, the predicted maximum urea deposition of 11.6 kg/ha/year equates to 5.4
kg/ha/year total deposited nitrogen.
A review in Denmark of the current state modelling of nitrogen deposition on a local scale cites a UN
expert workshop on critical loads for nitrogen (Hertel et al. 2006 and UN ECE 2002). A critical load is
here defined as the maximum load of atmospheric nitrogen deposition that an ecosystem can tolerate
and still keep the same status. Below this critical load no harmful effects on an ecosystem are expected.
This critical load is cited as being in the range of 10 to 20 kg/ha/year total deposited nitrogen.
Deposition of nitrogen (from nitrogen dioxide) was reported as 3.7 kg/ha/yr (Section 7.4.4). The
predicted maximum total nitrogen deposition due to urea and nitrogen dioxide deposition is 9.1 kg/ha/yr,
comfortably compliant with the cited critical loading.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 49
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Maximum 24-hour PM10 (as Urea) Concentrations
Scenario 2:
Collie Urea Plant
0 500 1000
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/AUSPLUME 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted maximum 24-hour PM10 (as urea) concentration (ug/m3)
0 ug/m3
13 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
427500 428000 428500 429000 429500 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000
6304500
6305000
6305500
6306000
6306500
6307000
6307500
6308000
6308500
54
44
43
UREA1+2
GT
CMD1+2
AGR
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 50
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted Urea Deposition (kg/ha/yr)
Scenario 2:
Collie Urea Plant
0 500 1000
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/AUSPLUME 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted urea deposition (kg/ha/yr)
0 kg/ha/year
11.6 kg/ha/year
Deposition Within Model Domain
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
427500 428000 428500 429000 429500 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000
6304500
6305000
6305500
6306000
6306500
6307000
6307500
6308000
6308500
54
44
43
UREA1+2
GT
CMD1+2
AGR
137 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 3-minute PAH concentration across the model domain is
0.00022 g/m
3
(0.03% of the SEPP-AQM design criteria). No exceedance of the SEPP-AQM design
criteria (0.73 g/m
3
) is predicted within the model domain. The highest concentration predicted at a
sensitive receptor is 0.00011 g/m
3
at #43-Stockton Pool, well below the SEPP-AQM criteria.
Volatile Organic Compounds
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 3-minute VOC concentration across the model domain is
10.2 g/m
3
. Table 23 outlines compliance with SEPP-AQM design criteria for each constituent VOC
species likely to be present in total VOC emissions. As PCF does not have an emission profile for the
emission of VOCs, the conservative assumption has been made that each VOC species is present as
total VOC, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance.
Table 23 Compliance with SEPP-AQM for VOC species
Predicted 9
th
highest concentration (g/m
3
)
Species
Criteria
g/m
3
)
At
sensitive
receptor
% of
Criteria
Compliance
Across
model
domain
% of
Criteria
Compliance
Benzene 53 1.7 3.2%

10.2 19%

Cumene 39 1.7 4.4%

10.2 26%

Cyclohexane 35,000 1.7 0.005%

10.2 0.03%

Ethyl benzene 14,500 1.7 0.01%

10.2 0.07%

Formaldehyde 40 1.7 4.3%

10.2 26%

n-Hexane 5,900 1.7 0.03%

10.2 0.17%

Toluene 650 1.7 0.26%

10.2 1.6%

Xylenes 350 1.7 0.49%

10.2 2.9%

Table 23 shows that compliance is demonstrated with the SEPP-AQM criteria for all VOC species
considered.
th
highest 3-minute VOC concentrations across the model domain for
criteria.
WAS COMMISSIONED
COPYRIGHT
DATE FILE LOCATION:
REVISION DRAWING NO
SCALE
LEGEND
FIGURE 51
COLLIE UREA PLANT
Predicted 9th Highest 3-minute VOC Concentrations
Scenario 2:
Collie Urea Plant
0 500 1000
0
G:/61/23685/06/Tech/AUSPLUME 10.7.2009
CG CG JF
Emission Source
Sensitive Receptor
Predicted 9th highest 3-minute VOC concentration (ug/m3)
0.8 ug/m3
10.1 ug/m3
Predicted Minimum
Predicted Maximum
427500 428000 428500 429000 429500 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000
6304500
6305000
6305500
6306000
6306500
6307000
6307500
6308000
6308500
54
44
43
UREA1+2
GT
CMD1+2
AGR
139 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Heavy Metals
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 1-hour lead concentration across the model domain is
0.00024 g/m
3
(0.01% of the SEPP-AQM design criteria). No exceedance of the SEPP-AQM design
criteria (3.0 g/m
3
) is predicted within the model domain.
The predicted 99.9
th
percentile (9
th
highest) 3-minute concentration for heavy metals are shown in Table
24. Table 24 shows that compliance is demonstrated with the SEPP-AQM criteria for all heavy metals.
Table 24 Compliance with SEPP-AQM for heavy metals
Predicted 9
th
highest concentration (g/m
3
)
Species
Criteria
g/m
3
)
At
sensitive
receptor
% of
Criteria
Compliance
Across
model
domain
% of
Criteria
Compliance
Lead 3.0 0.00012 0.004%

0.00024
0.01%
Arsenic 0.17 0.00010 0.06%

0.00021
0.13%
Cadmium 0.033 0.00005 0.15%

0.00011
0.32%
Chromium 0.17 0.00001 0.01%

0.00002
0.01%
Nickel 0.33 0.00002 0.005%

0.00004
0.01%
Mercury 0.33 0.00019 0.06%

0.00043
0.13%
7.4.5 Start-Up/Shut Down/Upset Conditions
An assessment of the impact of start-up/shut down/upset conditions for the Collie Urea Plant on
predicted concentrations was conducted.
As outlined in Section 2.3.4, during start-up, shut down or an emergency shutdown, raw syngas is
depressurised via the flare. This combusts the fuel components to mainly carbon dioxide and water
vapour. As such ammonia becomes nitrogen and water with entrained sulphur compounds.
During normal operating conditions the flare will operate on pilot mode (supplied by a plant independent
liquid petroleum gas fuel source).
As previously outlined, an estimate of the peak period of flare operation is as follows:
Total estimated release of 133 hours per year:
Start-up - 1 Gasifier - 21 per year x 4 hours = 84 hours per year (average flow rate at turndown
is 75%, equivalent to 112 hours); and
Shutdown 1 Gasifier 21 per year x 1 hour = 21 hours per year.
Table 16 shows the emission rates for the pollutants during flaring conditions. As flaring results in
intermittent emission which may occur at anytime, assessment of the predicted maximum concentration
across the model domain has been made assuming worse case meteorological conditions by modelling
the emissions as constant emissions. This provides the worse case concentration predicted at any time
across the model domain.
140 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
The probability of worse case meteorological conditions occurring at the time the flaring occurs is based
on the duration of the flaring, estimated at 133 hours per year, out of 8,760 hours in the year (or flaring
occurs 1.5% of the year).
Table 25 outlines the predicted maximum concentration across the model domain for each assessed
pollutant as a result of flaring.
Table 25 Predicted worse case maximum concentration under flaring (g/m
3
) (percent relevant
criteria)
Pollutant 3-minute
26
1-hour
27
8-hour
2
24-hour
2
Annual
2
Sulphur dioxide - 264 (46%) - 69 (30%) 4.5 (7.9%)
Nitrogen dioxide - 13 (5.3%) - - 0.26 (0.42%)
Carbon monoxide - - 387 (3.4%) - -
Ammonia 5.2 (0.9%) - - - -
Table 25 shows the predicted concentrations from operation of the flare for worse case conditions
comfortably comply with relevant criteria.
26
SEPP-AQM criteria assessed at predicted 9
th
highest concentration
27
Air NEPM standard assessed at maximum predicted concentration
141 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
8. Recommended Monitoring
The EPA may require that in-stack monitoring be conducted post-commissioning. In this instance, PCF
recommends to the EPA that any monitoring apply to the significant emission species only, as
determined from the modelling assessment.
A continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) would be installed to measure air flow characteristics
and in-stack emission concentrations, as a minimum, of SO
2
and NO
2
.
Stacks could be designed to incorporate emission sampling ports with consideration to AS 4323.1 such
that emission testing can be conducted as per any EPA requirements.
142 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
9. Conclusions
An air quality assessment has been completed for emissions to air resulting from construction and
operation of the Collie Urea Plant and the export facilities at Bunbury Port. The assessment includes
quantification of emission sources, air dispersion modelling and assessment against relevant air quality
criteria, for existing, approved (under construction) and proposed emission sources and emissions from
the Plant.
The major emission sources assessed and the results of the assessment are provided as follows:
Emissions from vehicles on-site during construction are not considered to represent a significant
source of emissions. Emissions from heavy equipment will be minimised by ensuring all vehicles on-
site are well maintained and operated in an efficient manner. Construction equipment will be fuelled
using biodiesel or a biodiesel blend, where available locally.
A framework for management of dust emissions during construction of the Collie Urea Plant and
export facilities at Bunbury Port has been developed and would be applied as part of construction
dust management measures.
Emissions from the Collie Urea Plant and existing, approved (under construction) and proposed
sources in the Collie region were assessed using the TAPM air dispersion model for airshed impacts,
using the following Scenarios:
Scenario 1: Existing (Muja - Stages A, B, C and D, Collie and Worsley power stations), approved
(under construction) (Worsley Boiler Extension and Bluewaters power station - Stages I and II)
and proposed (Bluewaters power station - Stages III and IV) sources in the Collie airshed;
The airshed modelling, inclusive of adopted ambient background levels, shows for:
o Air NEPM standards across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour SO
2
,
1-hour NO
2
, 24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
; and
o Kwinana EPP standard across the model domain and at sensitive receptors for 1-hour
SO
2.
Scenario 2, no exceedances are predicted across the model domain.
Emissions of PM
10
heavy metals; and
10
143 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
There are no exceedances of the SEPP-AQM criteria for ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, PAHs
and VOCs (benzene, cumene, cyclohexane, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde, n-Hexane, toluene
and xylene) and heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel and mercury) predicted;
and
receptors for SO
2
, PM
10
and PM
2.5
(Stages A and B).
Annual concentrations have been used to examine incremental contribution from each facility as there
will be less spatial and temporal variation with annual averages compared to shorter averaging periods.
Sulphur dioxide:
SO
2
2
annual and 9
th
highest 1-hour SO
2.
2
3
.
2
and
2
.
2
3
.
averaging period.
2
3
.
10
and PM
2.5
:
annual PM
10
2.5
.
144 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
10
and annual PM
2.5
3
, respectively.
10
and annual PM
2.5
3,
respectively.
10
and annual PM
2.5
3
, respectively.
Overall, results of the cumulative modelling assessment show:
There are significant exceedances of the Air NEPM standards predicted at sensitive receptors within
the Collie airshed for 1-hour SO
2,
24-hour PM
10
and 24-hour PM
2.5
;
There are significant exceedances of the Kwinana EPP standard predicted at sensitive receptors
within the Collie airshed for 1-hour SO
2,
;
In each case, emissions from Muja A and B are the main contributor to concentrations predicted and
Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP exceedances;
Bluewaters III and IV and the Collie Urea Plant contribute very little to predicted concentrations and
Air NEPM and Kwinana EPP exceedances at sensitive receptors in the Collie airshed;
Collie Urea Plant is a source of ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, volatile organic compounds, heavy
metals and urea in the Collie airshed, with predicted concentrations compliant with relevant criteria;
and
Collie Urea Plant is predicted to increased deposition of nitrogen in the form of urea and nitrogen
dioxide, with total deposited nitrogen complying with relevant criteria.
This report provides an air quality assessment for the Collie Urea Project as described and should be
read based on the limitations presented in Section 10.
145 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
10. Limitations
This report presents the results of an investigation and analysis to determine the air quality impacts from
the Collie Urea Project and was produced specifically for the purposes of this commission. GHD accepts
no responsibility for other use of the data.
No warranties, expressed or implied, are offered to any third parties and no liability will be accepted for
use of this report by any third party. The advice tendered in this report is based on information obtained
from desktop studies and dispersion modelling.
GHD accepts no responsibility for the third party information used within this assessment provided by
PCF and for regional emission sources obtained from previous air quality assessments. GHD are unable
to and have not independently verified such data. GHD accepts no responsibility for the integrity of the
software coding of the approved regulatory dispersion models (TAPM and AUSPLUME) used.
The work conducted by GHD for PCF under this commission has been to the standard that would
normally be expected of professional environmental consulting firm practising in this field in the State of
Western Australia. However, although strenuous effort has been made to identify and assess all
significant issues required by this brief we cannot guarantee that other issues outside of the scope of
work undertaken by GHD do not remain.
An understanding of the site conditions depends on the integration of many pieces of information, some
regional, some site specific, some structure specific and some experienced based. Hence this report
should not be altered, amended or abbreviated, issued in part or issued in any way incomplete without
prior checking and approval by GHD. GHD accepts no responsibility for any circumstances that arise
from the issue of the report that has been modified other than by GHD.
146 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
References
BoM (Bureau of Meteorology). 2009a. Climate Statistics for Australian Locations Collie (ID: 009628).
Accessed via www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_009628_All.shtml.
BoM. 2009b. Climate Statistics for Australian Locations Bunbury Post Office (ID: 009514). Accessed
via www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_009514_All.shtml.
BPA (Bunbury Port Authority). 2008. Bunbury Port Authority - Annual Report 2008, August 2008.
BPA. 2007. Bunbury Port Inner Harbour Structure Plan (draft), December 2007.
BHPB (BHP Billiton). 2009a. About Worsley. Accessed via
www.bhp.com.au/bb/ourBusinesses/aluminium/worsleyAlumina/aboutWorsley.jsp.
BHPB. 2009b. Expansion Project. Accessed via
www.bhp.com.au/bb/ourBusinesses/aluminium/worsleyAlumina/expansionProject.jsp.
CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation). 2004. A Modelling Assessment
of the Air Quality Impact in the Collie Region of 1 x 200 and 2 x 200 MW Power Stations at Bluewaters,
November 2004.
DEC (Department of Environment and Conservation). 2009. Personal Communication with Ken Rayner,
Air Quality Management Branch, 7 May 2009.
DEC. 2008. Air Quality Monitoring for Sulphur Dioxide in Collie, 2002-2006 Technical Report, October
2008.
DEC. 2007. 2006 Western Australia Air Monitoring Report Technical Report AQM 2, July 2007.
DEC. 2006. Air Quality Modelling Guidance Notes, March 2006.
DoF (Department of Fisheries). 2007. Aquaculture Groundwater Resource Atlas Western Darling
Range. Accessed via
www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/pub/AquaGroundWater/swagWestern_darling_range.php?00.
DoW (Department of Water). (2007) The Upper Collie Catchment. Accessed via
www.portal.water.wa.gov.au/portal/page/portal/PlanningWaterFuture/AllocationPlanning/UpperCollie.
ENVIRON. 2009. Bluewaters Expansion (Units III & IV) Air Dispersion Modelling Study and Screening
Health Risk Assessment, March 2009.
EPA (Environmental Protection Authority). 2009. Options for the Review of the Environmental Protection
(Kwinana)(Atmospheric Wastes) Policy 1999 Discussion Paper, June 2009.
EPA. 2002. Ammonia-Urea Plant, Burrup Peninsula Dampier Nitrogen Pty Ltd Report and
Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority, September 2002.
EPA. 2000. Guidance Statement for Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Gas Turbines No. 15, May
2000.
Griffin (Griffin Energy Pty Ltd). 2009. Bluewaters Power Station Expansion. Accessed via
www.griffinenergy.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=76.
147 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Hertel O, Skjoth CA, Lofstrom P, Geels C, Frohn, LM, Ellermann T and Madsen PV. 2006. Modelling
Nitrogen Deposition on a Local Scale - A Review of the Current State of the Art. Environmental
Chemistry, 2006, 3, 317 - 337.
Hurley P. 2005. The Air Pollution Model Version 3 User Manual - CSIRO Atmospheric Research
Internal Paper No. 31, April 2005.
Hurley P, Physick W, Luhar A and Edwards M. 2005. The Air Pollution Model (TAPM) Version 3 Part 2:
Summary of Some Verification Studies, CSIRO.
GHD. 2009a. Perdaman Chemicals and Fertilisers Collie Coal to Urea Plant - Environmental Scoping
Document, May 2009.
GHD. 2009b. Perdaman Industries Project Description Document Collie Coal to Urea Plant, March
2009.
GHD. 2008. Report for Collie Shotts Industrial Park - Spring Flora and Fauna and Wetland Assessment,
March 2008.
GHD. 2006. Gunns Limited Proposed Pulp Mill Bell Bay Impact on Air Quality, June 2006.
Government of WA. 2009. State Environmental (Ambient Air) Policy 2009 - Draft Policy for Public and
Stakeholder Comment, June 2009.
NPI (National Pollutant Inventory). 2001. Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining Version
2.3, December 2001.
NEPC (National Environment Protection Council). 2003. Variation to the National Environment Protection
(Ambient Air Quality) Measure, June 2003.
NEPC. 1998. National Environment Protection Measure for Ambient Air Quality, June 1998.
SKM (Sinclair Knight Merz). 2005. Collie Power Station Expansion Air Quality Modelling and Screening
Air Quality Health Risk Assessment, January 2005.
UN ECE. 2002. Empirical Critical Loads for Nitrogen - Expert Workshop, Berne, 11-13 Nov 2002.
Environmental Documentation No. 164 (Eds B. Acherman, R. Bobbink) 2003 (Swiss Agency for the
Environment, Forests and Landscape).
US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. AP-42: Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors Fifth Edition.
Verve (Verve Energy Pty Ltd). 2009a. Muja. Accessed via
www.verveenergy.com.au/mainContent/powerStations/muja.html.
Verve. 2009b. Muja Power Station Joint Venture. Accessed via
www.verveenergy.com.au/subContent/mediaReleases/mediaReleasesArticles/Muja_AB_joint_venture.ht
ml.
Verve. 2009c. Collie. Accessed via www.verveenergy.com.au/mainContent/powerStations/Collie.html.
Vic EPA (Victorian Environmental Protection Authority). 2000. Ausplume Gaussian Plume Dispersion
Model Technical User Manual, November 2000.
Vic EPA. 2001. State Environment Protection Policy (Air Quality Management), Victorian Government
Gazette, December 2001.
148 61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Vic EPA. 1996. Best Practice Environmental Management - Environmental Guidelines for Major
Construction Sites, February 1996.
61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Appendix A
TAPM Predicted Concentrations
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
TAPM Predicted Concentrations Scenario 1: Existing, Approved and Proposed Sources (ug/m
3
)
Receptor # Easting (m) Northing (m) SO2 1hr SO2 24hr SO2 Annual SO2 1hr 9th NO2 1hr NO2 Annual O3 1hr O3 4hr PM10 24hr PM2.5 24hr CO 8hr
2934.9 211.4 12.0 655.2 321.3 11.8 99.2 86.4 182.9 51.2 221.6
1 421,420 6,316,897 429.3 60.7 6.6 227.0 90.4 2.9 72.9 68.1 45.0 19.4 61.8
2 432,062 6,316,495 506.8 56.5 5.5 246.8 122.9 2.4 74.3 65.2 60.6 23.5 59.3
3 419,372 6,316,207 656.9 77.0 6.5 200.4 113.9 2.9 72.5 68.5 38.1 18.9 98.5
4 434,942 6,316,182 340.0 44.9 4.8 226.8 103.8 2.3 73.4 64.2 47.3 18.6 53.7
5 425,112 6,316,164 565.3 97.7 6.8 313.2 100.6 2.9 73.9 67.4 41.4 18.5 87.2
6 426,017 6,315,960 518.1 87.2 6.8 312.9 97.9 2.9 74.1 67.2 42.4 18.6 66.8
7 431,004 6,315,798 409.8 51.0 6.1 261.7 91.0 2.7 74.4 65.6 58.4 22.8 64.6
8 427,205 6,315,727 416.4 67.7 6.8 263.2 91.5 3.0 74.3 66.9 40.3 18.4 80.5
9 420,791 6,315,643 675.7 81.4 6.8 229.3 112.5 3.0 73.3 68.3 40.2 18.9 112.9
10 427,392 6,315,263 432.0 70.1 7.1 289.5 95.1 3.2 74.4 66.8 39.9 18.4 81.3
11 427,857 6,315,102 429.0 65.2 7.1 276.1 90.9 3.3 74.5 66.7 37.1 18.4 88.3
12 424,251 6,315,079 566.1 87.9 8.1 274.0 93.6 3.4 74.3 67.6 42.9 18.7 88.1
13 420,731 6,315,040 637.4 87.4 6.7 259.7 109.5 3.0 73.7 68.4 39.3 18.9 104.4
14 433,660 6,315,038 317.8 44.3 5.4 239.7 92.6 2.5 70.9 63.6 39.4 18.1 56.0
15 432,002 6,314,930 457.7 50.0 6.3 259.4 108.8 2.8 72.8 64.7 62.9 24.1 73.6
16 425,692 6,314,810 592.5 111.0 8.3 346.2 121.3 3.4 74.3 67.1 43.0 18.6 114.4
17 434,547 6,314,752 327.0 49.6 5.1 231.4 103.9 2.4 68.4 61.9 45.3 18.0 43.8
18 432,812 6,314,586 502.7 69.7 6.0 260.2 124.3 2.7 69.4 63.2 57.3 22.7 68.3
19 424,654 6,314,158 512.7 77.6 9.0 275.7 88.4 3.7 74.6 67.5 43.3 18.8 113.4
20 432,809 6,314,124 514.9 69.5 6.1 268.6 124.4 2.8 68.2 61.0 59.4 23.3 55.4
21 420,405 6,313,395 585.3 65.9 6.3 199.7 106.2 2.8 74.3 68.7 38.2 18.8 84.3
22 420,166 6,312,366 554.5 48.1 5.9 171.4 114.5 2.7 74.5 68.9 46.2 19.0 62.8
23 440,062 6,312,083 378.6 78.2 4.5 226.3 87.9 2.4 73.2 57.6 55.2 19.7 38.8
24 422,870 6,311,681 482.6 54.5 6.6 218.5 91.7 3.0 75.1 68.3 39.7 18.7 63.9
25 424,211 6,311,574 417.6 53.3 7.2 240.5 100.4 3.2 75.1 68.0 41.8 18.8 63.2
26 421,793 6,311,502 571.7 53.4 6.1 201.5 114.7 2.8 75.0 68.6 45.8 18.9 60.3
27 420,450 6,311,382 513.1 50.1 5.8 169.7 113.2 2.6 74.8 68.9 46.3 19.2 54.4
28 419,136 6,311,219 337.8 46.2 5.5 162.4 85.0 2.4 74.4 69.1 43.6 19.4 42.9
29 426,776 6,310,814 517.0 60.0 7.0 264.0 109.5 3.2 75.0 67.4 50.6 20.3 61.3
30 425,995 6,310,785 432.1 55.5 7.1 243.7 105.9 3.1 75.0 67.6 49.6 20.7 68.3
31 421,933 6,310,483 558.2 52.6 5.8 175.7 118.8 2.7 75.0 68.7 49.1 19.1 52.2
32 420,092 6,309,713 357.7 52.9 5.5 178.5 85.6 2.4 74.7 69.0 52.1 19.5 41.2
33 425,080 6,309,476 417.4 51.2 6.2 218.3 89.8 3.0 74.9 68.0 44.6 18.7 65.5
34 422,017 6,308,957 410.0 54.2 5.8 183.6 96.6 2.6 74.7 68.6 48.2 19.5 63.5
35 424,340 6,308,636 516.4 57.4 6.1 220.6 106.7 2.9 74.7 68.1 53.8 19.1 90.7
36 434,726 6,307,836 632.2 81.8 6.3 392.3 127.7 2.9 74.2 62.1 60.7 21.6 52.9
37 436,871 6,307,563 488.4 74.2 6.1 380.8 111.9 3.0 73.7 60.0 54.4 19.5 47.2
38 424,941 6,307,495 490.7 60.7 6.0 215.8 103.1 2.9 74.4 67.7 55.2 19.3 111.7
39 435,348 6,307,244 776.3 84.7 6.3 399.3 116.6 2.9 74.0 62.3 69.7 23.9 49.6
40 420,284 6,307,156 328.0 54.1 5.0 192.8 83.6 2.2 74.0 68.3 47.8 19.7 31.4
41 435,124 6,306,890 801.6 91.7 6.2 383.7 113.8 2.9 73.9 62.9 71.3 24.4 44.3
42 436,554 6,306,732 522.9 84.1 6.4 430.2 117.9 3.1 73.5 61.7 62.1 20.4 45.7
43 428,623 6,305,947 370.2 72.3 6.1 275.5 103.4 3.2 74.2 66.7 61.4 19.4 69.4
44 427,848 6,305,891 549.2 75.1 6.3 247.6 101.2 3.2 74.2 66.8 63.4 19.2 95.2
45 435,108 6,305,793 838.3 103.7 6.6 447.2 125.3 3.2 73.3 63.7 77.3 26.1 24.7
46 436,895 6,305,603 534.2 102.3 6.5 428.6 116.5 3.3 72.8 62.5 76.1 24.0 37.4
47 421,581 6,305,584 585.9 88.8 5.3 255.7 142.1 2.3 73.6 67.5 59.9 20.0 85.1
48 435,442 6,305,515 827.8 97.4 6.9 515.9 134.3 3.4 73.4 63.6 81.4 27.0 24.3
49 437,831 6,305,098 623.6 87.1 5.7 349.3 130.6 3.1 70.7 62.1 72.1 24.9 36.5
50 422,728 6,305,018 635.9 96.0 5.4 257.7 154.1 2.4 73.6 67.2 64.1 21.1 60.5
51 436,690 6,304,860 622.2 99.6 7.0 460.7 121.9 3.5 72.3 63.0 78.3 23.4 24.1
52 424,845 6,304,765 493.2 80.5 6.2 241.5 122.1 2.8 73.9 67.0 57.6 20.7 31.9
53 438,252 6,304,532 626.7 80.2 5.3 323.9 129.2 2.9 70.8 61.9 66.9 23.3 31.2
54 428,253 6,304,432 458.0 106.5 7.6 318.8 105.2 3.6 73.9 66.4 106.7 30.9 73.3
55 425,709 6,304,407 509.8 83.0 6.5 270.4 125.3 3.0 73.9 66.8 61.1 21.4 35.6
56 427,129 6,304,076 531.9 107.2 7.4 318.5 121.1 3.4 73.9 66.5 98.4 27.5 66.7
57 425,054 6,303,960 709.2 108.4 6.1 275.1 171.5 2.7 73.8 66.7 75.6 23.4 34.5
58 423,130 6,303,836 632.2 97.7 5.3 230.4 166.1 2.3 73.4 66.7 79.8 23.3 30.6
59 438,934 6,303,531 525.9 77.4 4.8 357.8 117.7 2.6 70.2 57.7 57.5 20.9 23.4
60 439,468 6,303,451 498.5 73.7 4.7 370.1 111.7 2.4 66.0 56.1 55.6 20.9 25.5
61 422,550 6,303,110 381.6 56.7 4.7 239.7 103.5 2.0 73.1 66.3 76.2 26.0 31.1
62 421,178 6,302,887 335.3 45.2 4.2 189.3 68.2 1.8 72.6 66.2 68.6 24.0 28.3
63 433,315 6,302,831 743.0 122.1 9.0 538.1 169.8 4.6 78.5 64.6 103.0 31.7 33.7
64 438,768 6,302,829 553.6 83.3 5.0 415.2 117.2 2.7 69.8 56.1 62.8 22.8 23.5
65 422,773 6,301,828 298.6 45.8 4.1 196.2 67.8 1.8 73.0 65.8 57.4 21.1 37.3
66 421,178 6,301,724 246.3 38.3 3.9 181.0 58.3 1.6 72.4 65.7 59.9 21.7 30.8
67 426,539 6,301,575 604.3 80.6 5.8 291.6 157.8 2.6 73.0 65.3 97.4 31.5 33.1
68 440,002 6,301,411 622.6 110.5 5.8 434.3 117.7 3.1 74.1 55.3 86.8 30.1 24.6
69 425,486 6,301,381 420.5 70.7 4.9 267.9 91.1 2.1 73.1 65.3 71.6 24.6 38.6
70 429,899 6,301,057 1121.7 162.8 8.7 403.1 260.4 4.0 71.9 64.5 149.1 42.6 48.8
71 426,186 6,300,949 469.1 74.9 5.1 273.8 86.8 2.2 72.8 65.0 72.0 24.8 25.3
72 427,364 6,300,472 487.6 88.4 5.7 311.9 98.9 2.4 72.2 64.5 82.4 27.1 37.1
73 423,584 6,299,980 441.8 70.7 3.9 235.4 94.4 1.6 72.5 64.7 54.0 18.9 38.9
74 440,689 6,299,145 847.1 109.5 5.4 512.4 126.7 3.2 74.9 67.7 79.2 26.2 23.8
75 428,589 6,298,886 592.5 101.9 5.1 359.5 121.6 2.2 71.1 63.4 86.1 26.3 31.5
76 420,211 6,298,519 254.8 50.5 3.1 197.2 61.0 1.3 71.7 64.8 51.2 18.9 25.8
77 441,615 6,297,588 574.3 103.7 4.8 406.7 134.1 2.5 68.8 55.8 89.0 27.3 19.8
78 440,345 6,296,035 702.1 71.6 4.0 370.9 107.6 2.4 68.6 59.3 54.3 22.8 23.3
79 427,599 6,295,494 373.6 55.1 2.8 240.5 97.4 1.3 70.3 62.0 53.5 20.5 25.2
80 429,517 6,293,957 1128.2 83.6 3.6 312.8 123.1 1.5 69.2 61.5 81.7 25.9 20.4
Maximum across model domain
TAPM Predicted Concentrations Scenario 2: Collie Urea Pl ant (ug/m
3
)
30.2 14.0 0.9 25.1 28.0 2.8 51.3 48.6 45.9 21.6 355.3
1 421,420 6,316,897 1.3 0.2 0.0 1.0 6.7 0.1 48.5 45.7 31.1 18.1 14.5
2 432,062 6,316,495 1.9 0.3 0.0 1.4 8.7 0.1 48.6 47.1 29.9 17.5 23.7
3 419,372 6,316,207 1.4 0.5 0.0 0.9 6.3 0.1 48.7 45.8 31.9 18.4 21.6
4 434,942 6,316,182 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.6 3.8 0.0 48.6 47.3 29.4 17.2 12.2
5 425,112 6,316,164 1.8 0.4 0.0 1.4 7.5 0.1 48.2 45.7 30.5 17.7 19.3
6 426,017 6,315,960 1.8 0.3 0.0 1.2 7.1 0.1 48.1 45.8 30.5 17.8 23.9
7 431,004 6,315,798 3.8 0.6 0.0 1.7 8.4 0.1 48.6 46.6 29.9 17.4 36.5
8 427,205 6,315,727 2.3 0.4 0.0 1.5 8.0 0.1 48.0 45.9 30.5 17.8 22.5
9 420,791 6,315,643 1.9 0.5 0.0 1.0 8.3 0.1 48.7 45.8 31.8 18.4 21.1
10 427,392 6,315,263 2.3 0.5 0.0 1.5 8.2 0.1 48.1 45.9 30.6 17.8 24.1
11 427,857 6,315,102 2.6 0.6 0.0 1.6 9.7 0.1 48.0 45.9 30.6 17.8 26.6
12 424,251 6,315,079 1.7 0.6 0.0 1.4 8.0 0.1 48.7 45.7 30.9 18.0 20.5
13 420,731 6,315,040 1.9 0.5 0.0 1.0 7.4 0.1 48.8 45.8 31.8 18.4 24.0
14 433,660 6,315,038 1.2 0.2 0.0 0.8 6.3 0.1 48.7 47.0 29.8 17.4 16.7
15 432,002 6,314,930 1.8 0.4 0.0 1.4 10.6 0.1 48.6 46.7 29.9 17.4 19.0
16 425,692 6,314,810 2.0 0.5 0.0 1.6 8.1 0.1 48.5 45.8 30.5 17.9 19.5
17 434,547 6,314,752 1.3 0.2 0.0 0.7 4.4 0.0 48.7 47.0 29.7 17.3 13.8
18 432,812 6,314,586 1.7 0.4 0.0 1.1 6.3 0.1 48.7 46.7 29.9 17.4 18.1
19 424,654 6,314,158 1.8 0.6 0.0 1.5 9.4 0.1 48.8 45.7 31.0 18.1 21.6
20 432,809 6,314,124 1.7 0.4 0.0 1.1 6.6 0.1 48.6 46.6 29.9 17.4 20.0
21 420,405 6,313,395 1.2 0.3 0.0 0.9 4.8 0.1 48.6 45.9 32.2 18.6 15.5
22 420,166 6,312,366 1.4 0.3 0.0 1.1 5.6 0.1 48.4 45.9 32.6 18.9 20.9
23 440,062 6,312,083 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.7 5.3 0.0 49.6 47.8 29.7 17.4 13.0
24 422,870 6,311,681 1.7 0.5 0.0 1.2 6.2 0.2 48.6 46.0 31.8 18.4 27.6
25 424,211 6,311,574 2.1 0.7 0.0 1.6 9.3 0.2 48.8 46.0 31.3 18.2 35.8
26 421,793 6,311,502 1.7 0.4 0.0 1.3 6.1 0.2 48.4 45.9 32.3 18.7 24.9
27 420,450 6,311,382 1.5 0.3 0.0 1.2 5.9 0.1 48.6 45.9 32.8 19.1 15.3
28 419,136 6,311,219 1.4 0.3 0.0 1.1 5.8 0.1 48.9 45.9 33.2 19.3 12.9
29 426,776 6,310,814 3.2 0.8 0.0 2.3 10.4 0.2 48.9 45.8 30.9 18.1 36.5
30 425,995 6,310,785 3.1 0.8 0.1 2.3 10.7 0.2 48.8 45.8 31.0 18.1 43.0
31 421,933 6,310,483 1.8 0.4 0.0 1.4 7.7 0.2 48.6 46.0 32.7 19.0 16.6
32 420,092 6,309,713 1.7 0.4 0.0 1.3 6.7 0.1 48.9 45.9 33.6 19.5 15.9
33 425,080 6,309,476 3.1 1.1 0.1 2.7 9.7 0.3 48.4 46.1 31.9 18.6 35.6
34 422,017 6,308,957 2.5 0.6 0.0 1.9 9.0 0.1 48.8 46.1 33.2 19.4 23.2
35 424,340 6,308,636 3.3 0.9 0.1 2.7 11.0 0.2 48.4 46.2 32.6 19.0 32.3
36 434,726 6,307,836 3.4 0.8 0.0 2.3 9.2 0.1 49.7 46.9 31.0 18.1 27.3
37 436,871 6,307,563 2.4 0.5 0.0 1.7 8.6 0.1 50.1 47.3 30.4 17.9 21.6
38 424,941 6,307,495 6.0 1.4 0.1 4.3 12.3 0.2 48.5 46.2 32.9 19.2 34.3
39 435,348 6,307,244 4.1 0.8 0.0 2.4 10.4 0.1 49.9 46.9 31.2 18.2 32.5
40 420,284 6,307,156 1.9 0.4 0.0 1.5 5.8 0.1 48.2 46.3 34.0 19.7 13.9
41 435,124 6,306,890 4.4 0.9 0.0 2.7 12.5 0.1 49.9 46.7 31.5 18.3 39.7
42 436,554 6,306,732 2.7 0.6 0.0 2.1 9.3 0.1 50.2 46.9 31.2 18.2 33.1
43 428,623 6,305,947 17.8 6.1 0.2 11.7 25.1 0.4 48.8 45.8 32.2 18.8 101.7
44 427,848 6,305,891 16.8 4.5 0.1 11.9 22.9 0.3 48.8 46.0 32.6 18.9 83.6
45 435,108 6,305,793 3.3 0.8 0.0 2.5 23.5 0.1 50.0 46.5 31.9 18.4 35.5
46 436,895 6,305,603 1.8 0.6 0.0 1.4 17.9 0.1 50.4 46.6 31.5 18.3 25.2
47 421,581 6,305,584 2.7 0.6 0.0 2.2 5.7 0.1 47.8 46.2 33.9 19.6 20.8
48 435,442 6,305,515 2.8 0.8 0.0 2.1 22.1 0.1 50.1 46.5 31.8 18.4 29.7
49 437,831 6,305,098 1.4 0.5 0.0 1.2 16.3 0.1 50.4 46.7 31.3 18.2 18.4
50 422,728 6,305,018 4.3 0.7 0.0 2.7 7.5 0.1 47.9 46.2 33.8 19.6 30.9
51 436,690 6,304,860 1.9 0.5 0.0 1.4 10.7 0.1 50.3 46.6 31.7 18.3 24.7
52 424,845 6,304,765 4.7 0.8 0.0 2.7 7.9 0.1 48.4 46.4 33.8 19.6 36.1
53 438,252 6,304,532 1.3 0.4 0.0 1.0 9.3 0.1 50.4 46.7 31.3 18.2 19.6
54 428,253 6,304,432 4.3 0.9 0.0 3.0 23.6 0.2 49.1 46.4 33.4 19.2 73.6
55 425,709 6,304,407 3.1 0.5 0.0 1.8 8.6 0.1 48.6 46.4 33.7 19.6 27.6
56 427,129 6,304,076 3.3 0.5 0.0 2.1 16.9 0.1 48.9 46.4 33.6 19.5 35.9
57 425,054 6,303,960 2.4 0.2 0.0 1.4 7.2 0.1 48.3 46.4 33.8 19.6 21.0
58 423,130 6,303,836 1.5 0.2 0.0 1.1 6.0 0.0 47.9 46.2 33.6 19.5 17.6
59 438,934 6,303,531 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.8 6.0 0.1 50.0 46.7 32.2 18.5 15.7
60 439,468 6,303,451 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.8 5.2 0.0 49.9 46.7 32.0 18.4 14.3
61 422,550 6,303,110 1.2 0.2 0.0 0.9 5.6 0.0 47.8 46.0 33.4 19.3 16.1
62 421,178 6,302,887 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.8 4.9 0.0 47.5 45.8 33.2 19.2 12.8
63 433,315 6,302,831 3.3 0.6 0.0 2.4 14.1 0.1 48.8 45.9 35.3 19.3 33.1
64 438,768 6,302,829 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.7 7.7 0.1 49.7 46.8 33.0 18.8 16.0
65 422,773 6,301,828 1.4 0.3 0.0 1.0 6.7 0.0 47.5 45.8 32.7 18.9 19.1
66 421,178 6,301,724 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.9 6.1 0.0 47.1 45.7 32.6 19.1 14.6
67 426,539 6,301,575 2.6 0.6 0.0 1.8 15.6 0.1 48.1 46.1 33.2 19.2 24.7
68 440,002 6,301,411 1.1 0.2 0.0 0.6 6.0 0.1 49.7 46.7 33.1 18.7 11.4
69 425,486 6,301,381 1.9 0.3 0.0 1.3 6.7 0.1 47.5 46.1 32.9 19.1 23.2
70 429,899 6,301,057 3.8 1.1 0.0 2.9 13.0 0.1 48.4 45.7 33.2 19.3 45.7
71 426,186 6,300,949 2.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 10.3 0.1 47.6 46.1 32.7 19.0 20.8
72 427,364 6,300,472 2.4 0.7 0.0 1.6 10.3 0.1 47.7 46.0 32.6 18.9 26.3
73 423,584 6,299,980 1.5 0.2 0.0 1.1 6.8 0.0 46.7 45.7 32.0 18.5 14.4
74 440,689 6,299,145 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.6 6.9 0.0 49.8 46.6 32.4 18.6 7.0
75 428,589 6,298,886 2.4 0.6 0.0 1.8 7.7 0.1 46.8 45.8 31.9 18.5 30.5
76 420,211 6,298,519 1.3 0.2 0.0 1.0 7.0 0.0 46.7 45.8 31.8 18.8 12.8
77 441,615 6,297,588 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.5 3.6 0.0 49.9 46.5 31.5 18.3 6.4
78 440,345 6,296,035 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.6 4.8 0.0 49.1 46.6 32.2 18.6 10.7
79 427,599 6,295,494 1.7 0.6 0.0 1.2 7.8 0.0 46.7 45.7 30.7 17.8 24.8
80 429,517 6,293,957 1.8 0.3 0.0 1.2 11.4 0.0 46.8 45.5 30.4 17.6 17.4
Maximumacross model domain
TAPM Predicted Concentrations Scenario 3: Collie Urea Pl ant and Exi sti ng, Approved and Proposed Sources (ug/m
3
)
2,826.4 212.1 11.7 649.8 311.6 12.3 101.5 89.1 180.3 50.5 358.9
1 421,420 6,316,897 430.0 60.7 6.6 234.6 86.7 3.0 72.9 67.9 46.2 19.7 61.9
2 432,062 6,316,495 513.6 57.7 5.5 240.3 118.5 2.5 74.2 64.9 59.7 23.2 59.5
3 419,372 6,316,207 596.9 72.6 6.4 213.7 103.8 3.0 72.4 68.3 38.0 18.5 99.2
4 434,942 6,316,182 339.3 42.7 4.7 227.3 105.0 2.3 73.2 63.9 49.3 19.0 55.1
5 425,112 6,316,164 551.3 96.0 6.7 291.2 100.8 2.9 73.9 67.2 46.5 18.3 89.2
6 426,017 6,315,960 501.8 86.3 6.7 301.6 96.2 2.9 74.1 67.0 46.2 18.4 68.1
7 431,004 6,315,798 408.5 48.2 6.0 252.6 89.9 2.8 74.3 65.4 59.4 23.0 64.7
8 427,205 6,315,727 398.6 67.5 6.7 257.4 90.9 3.1 74.3 66.8 39.8 18.0 82.3
9 420,791 6,315,643 657.8 78.5 6.7 243.1 107.4 3.1 73.3 68.2 40.4 18.6 113.6
10 427,392 6,315,263 411.6 70.0 7.0 275.4 95.2 3.2 74.4 66.7 39.8 18.0 82.2
11 427,857 6,315,102 413.0 64.9 7.0 264.9 91.0 3.3 74.4 66.5 37.7 18.0 88.9
12 424,251 6,315,079 551.8 87.5 8.0 276.0 90.4 3.5 74.3 67.5 49.8 18.2 89.8
13 420,731 6,315,040 600.8 82.9 6.6 255.8 104.1 3.0 73.7 68.3 39.4 18.5 105.1
14 433,660 6,315,038 354.6 44.9 5.4 246.2 92.0 2.5 70.7 63.4 40.9 17.7 56.2
15 432,002 6,314,930 450.7 51.2 6.2 254.2 107.0 2.8 72.6 64.5 63.1 24.1 73.8
16 425,692 6,314,810 591.5 110.8 8.2 329.0 119.5 3.4 74.3 67.0 47.5 18.2 116.9
17 434,547 6,314,752 332.0 47.4 5.1 238.7 105.1 2.5 68.8 61.8 48.3 17.7 45.6
18 432,812 6,314,586 491.9 70.9 5.9 269.2 118.8 2.7 69.1 63.0 55.8 22.2 68.3
19 424,654 6,314,158 505.7 78.3 8.9 289.9 85.8 3.8 74.6 67.3 48.5 18.8 113.4
20 432,809 6,314,124 552.0 70.9 6.0 272.3 119.5 2.8 68.0 60.9 58.1 22.8 55.8
21 420,405 6,313,395 583.0 61.9 6.2 198.8 108.6 2.9 74.3 68.6 38.1 18.6 84.6
22 420,166 6,312,366 559.5 46.7 5.9 161.2 114.6 2.8 74.6 68.8 45.9 18.9 61.9
23 440,062 6,312,083 380.4 76.9 4.4 219.9 84.6 2.4 72.5 57.7 54.1 19.2 37.0
24 422,870 6,311,681 530.4 52.8 6.5 209.6 98.5 3.1 74.7 68.1 39.9 18.4 63.7
25 424,211 6,311,574 420.7 53.2 7.2 239.1 100.5 3.3 74.5 67.7 43.2 18.4 61.9
26 421,793 6,311,502 594.2 51.3 6.1 194.0 117.7 2.9 74.8 68.5 45.5 18.7 60.3
27 420,450 6,311,382 504.2 48.2 5.8 167.7 110.1 2.7 74.7 68.8 45.6 19.0 53.7
28 419,136 6,311,219 331.7 45.6 5.5 160.3 80.1 2.5 74.5 69.1 43.5 19.3 43.0
29 426,776 6,310,814 482.1 57.9 7.0 255.2 107.1 3.3 74.2 66.9 52.6 20.7 61.3
30 425,995 6,310,785 401.8 54.3 7.0 245.3 104.0 3.2 74.3 67.2 49.9 20.7 68.1
31 421,933 6,310,483 561.4 51.1 5.8 174.4 118.1 2.8 74.6 68.4 48.2 19.0 51.3
32 420,092 6,309,713 366.6 51.8 5.4 174.3 84.5 2.5 74.5 68.9 50.6 19.4 39.5
33 425,080 6,309,476 478.9 49.3 6.2 208.4 91.9 3.2 74.2 67.6 44.3 18.5 63.8
34 422,017 6,308,957 407.6 53.6 5.7 183.5 95.0 2.7 74.2 68.4 48.9 19.4 60.9
35 424,340 6,308,636 560.2 55.8 6.1 212.1 113.5 3.1 74.0 67.8 53.1 19.0 90.7
36 434,726 6,307,836 604.3 78.9 6.3 398.2 117.9 3.0 74.4 61.0 58.3 20.8 52.8
37 436,871 6,307,563 468.1 69.9 6.1 354.1 106.3 3.0 74.1 59.0 53.3 19.1 47.1
38 424,941 6,307,495 545.0 58.3 6.0 218.7 109.9 3.0 73.8 67.5 57.8 19.2 112.1
39 435,348 6,307,244 715.3 83.9 6.3 389.3 117.3 3.0 74.3 61.3 67.1 23.2 49.6
40 420,284 6,307,156 317.1 54.1 4.9 194.9 87.7 2.3 73.5 68.2 47.2 19.5 31.5
41 435,124 6,306,890 755.9 90.2 6.2 376.7 121.3 3.0 74.2 62.1 68.7 23.6 46.3
42 436,554 6,306,732 518.6 81.7 6.4 409.2 121.3 3.1 74.0 60.9 58.6 20.5 45.7
43 428,623 6,305,947 374.9 70.3 6.3 270.7 101.2 3.5 73.9 66.6 61.3 20.5 103.2
44 427,848 6,305,891 529.5 72.0 6.3 251.9 98.5 3.4 73.9 66.8 62.6 20.1 102.5
45 435,108 6,305,793 802.9 101.6 6.6 448.8 130.1 3.3 73.9 63.3 74.5 25.3 35.2
46 436,895 6,305,603 508.6 96.1 6.5 421.4 113.3 3.3 73.5 62.0 73.8 23.4 37.6
47 421,581 6,305,584 597.5 87.3 5.2 254.1 142.5 2.3 73.0 67.5 59.6 19.8 85.3
48 435,442 6,305,515 812.7 96.9 6.8 470.4 131.2 3.5 73.9 63.2 79.1 26.4 29.4
49 437,831 6,305,098 536.9 79.9 5.6 322.6 117.2 3.1 73.4 61.7 67.3 23.5 36.7
50 422,728 6,305,018 645.6 94.1 5.3 270.8 153.2 2.4 73.0 67.2 65.3 21.0 61.3
51 436,690 6,304,860 583.4 97.9 7.0 446.3 116.1 3.6 73.0 62.7 77.1 23.1 24.9
52 424,845 6,304,765 525.4 81.8 6.1 253.7 131.4 2.9 73.5 67.0 57.2 20.1 35.8
53 438,252 6,304,532 595.6 78.2 5.3 318.7 123.9 3.0 74.1 61.6 65.9 23.0 31.5
54 428,253 6,304,432 491.3 99.4 7.5 315.0 111.1 3.8 73.7 66.5 91.3 26.5 81.8
55 425,709 6,304,407 561.5 82.9 6.5 268.8 138.4 3.1 73.6 66.9 60.3 20.8 35.0
56 427,129 6,304,076 574.4 87.4 7.3 304.1 129.9 3.5 73.7 66.6 91.4 25.8 66.8
57 425,054 6,303,960 728.4 107.9 6.0 285.0 172.0 2.8 73.4 66.8 79.5 24.2 34.3
58 423,130 6,303,836 596.6 95.6 5.3 264.0 155.4 2.3 72.9 66.8 82.6 24.3 30.6
59 438,934 6,303,531 546.3 72.3 4.8 343.6 123.6 2.6 71.5 58.0 57.6 20.7 23.9
60 439,468 6,303,451 500.7 69.7 4.7 356.2 117.8 2.4 65.9 56.4 54.5 20.6 25.9
61 422,550 6,303,110 372.1 53.7 4.6 237.1 96.7 2.0 72.6 66.5 78.7 26.6 31.3
62 421,178 6,302,887 328.1 46.6 4.2 189.9 68.3 1.8 72.1 66.3 72.6 25.0 32.4
63 433,315 6,302,831 725.3 118.9 8.9 532.7 166.8 4.7 81.1 64.8 98.3 30.5 35.5
64 438,768 6,302,829 571.5 78.1 5.0 404.0 119.2 2.7 70.8 56.1 61.6 22.4 23.7
65 422,773 6,301,828 288.3 43.9 4.1 200.0 71.1 1.8 72.6 66.0 59.3 21.5 36.9
66 421,178 6,301,724 235.9 38.0 3.9 177.5 61.5 1.7 72.0 65.8 60.4 21.8 31.2
67 426,539 6,301,575 561.6 75.8 5.7 271.0 145.0 2.6 73.0 65.6 98.9 31.8 36.1
68 440,002 6,301,411 618.5 108.7 5.8 434.5 118.5 3.1 72.8 55.4 84.6 29.5 24.7
69 425,486 6,301,381 400.2 67.2 4.9 259.1 88.6 2.2 72.9 65.6 70.0 24.2 38.6
70 429,899 6,301,057 1,079.5 158.4 8.5 376.2 248.0 4.0 72.8 65.0 144.6 41.5 55.7
71 426,186 6,300,949 450.0 71.9 5.1 271.7 85.0 2.3 72.8 65.3 71.7 24.7 33.2
72 427,364 6,300,472 484.0 84.1 5.7 303.0 95.2 2.5 72.7 64.9 78.3 26.0 41.0
73 423,584 6,299,980 446.2 66.8 3.9 230.8 90.0 1.6 72.3 65.0 53.2 18.7 38.9
74 440,689 6,299,145 823.6 106.5 5.5 551.6 122.4 3.3 73.8 67.9 72.5 24.1 23.5
75 428,589 6,298,886 594.1 96.0 5.1 356.4 121.7 2.2 72.0 63.9 84.4 25.5 35.2
76 420,211 6,298,519 257.5 48.4 3.1 189.0 60.3 1.4 71.5 64.9 50.2 19.4 26.7
77 441,615 6,297,588 559.4 104.0 4.9 402.6 129.3 2.6 69.5 55.8 86.7 26.5 20.3
78 440,345 6,296,035 661.9 70.7 4.0 368.9 104.6 2.4 69.3 59.0 57.0 22.2 24.5
79 427,599 6,295,494 367.8 53.4 2.7 236.8 94.1 1.3 71.2 62.5 52.2 20.2 27.6
80 429,517 6,293,957 1,165.3 96.2 3.6 321.3 133.7 1.5 70.1 61.9 95.9 27.9 23.1
Maximumacross model domain
61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Appendix B
Sample TAPM Files and Outputs
TAPM S1. l i s
TAPM Li st Fi l e - Scenar i o 1
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
| THE AI R POLLUTI ON MODEL ( TAPM V4. 0. 3) . |
| Copyr i ght ( C) CSI RO Aust r al i a. |
| Al l Ri ght s Reser ved. |
| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RUN I NFORMATI ON:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NUMBER OF GRI DS= 4
GRI D CENTRE ( l ongi t ude, l at i t ude) =( 116. 2583 , - 33. 38334 )
GRI D CENTRE ( cx, cy) =( 431156 , 6306105 ) ( m)
GRI D DI MENSI ONS ( nx, ny, nz) =( 40 , 40 , 25 )
NUMBER OF VERTI CAL LEVELS OUTPUT = 20
DATES ( START, END) =( 20010101 , 20010331 )
DATE FROM WHI CH OUTPUT BEGI NS = 20010101
LOCAL HOUR I S GMT+ 7. 800000
TI MESTEP SCALI NG FACTOR = 1. 000000
VARY SYNOPTI C WI TH 3- D SPACE AND TI ME
V4 LAND SURFACE SCHEME
EXCLUDE NON- HYDROSTATI C EFFECTS
I NCLUDE PROGNOSTI C RAI N EQUATI ON
EXCLUDE PROGNOSTI C SNOWEQUATI ON
TKE- EPS TURBULENCE ( PROGNOSTI C TKE + EPS, EDMF)
POLLUTI ON : CHEMI STRY ( APM, NOX, NO2, O3, SO2, FPM)
EXCLUDE POLLUTANT VARI ANCE EQUATI ON
EXCLUDE 3- D POLLUTI ON OUTPUT ( *. C3D)
POLLUTANT GRI D DI MENSI ONS ( nxf , nyf ) =( 51 , 51 )
BACKGROUND APM = 20. 00000 ( ug/ m3)
BACKGROUND NOX&NO2= 0. 0000000E+00 ( ppb)
BACKGROUND O3 = 22. 30000 ( ppb)
BACKGROUND Rsmog = 0. 2000000 ( ppb)
BACKGROUND SO2 = 0. 0000000E+00 ( ppb)
BACKGROUND FPM = 11. 00000 ( ug/ m3)
pH of l i qui d wat er = 4. 500000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
START GRI D 1 t 300a
GRI D SPACI NG ( del x, del y) =( 30000 , 30000 ) ( m)
POLLUTANT GRI D SPACI NG ( del xf , del yf ) =( 15000 , 15000 ) ( m)
NO MET. DATA ASSI MI LATI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO CONCENTRATI ON BACKGROUND FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO BUI LDI NG FI LE AVAI LABLE
NUMBER OF pse SOURCES= 11
NO l se EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO ase EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO gse EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO bse EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO whe EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO vpx EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO vdx EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO vl x EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
NO vpv EMI SSI ON FI LE AVAI LABLE
I NI TI ALI SE
LARGE TI MESTEP = 300. 0000
METEOROLOGI CAL ADVECTI ON TI MESTEP = 150. 0000 ( s)
POLLUTI ON ADVECTI ON TI MESTEP = 300. 0000 ( s)
pse KEY :
i s = Sour ce Number
l s = Sour ce Swi t ch ( - 1=Of f , 0=EGM, 1=EGM+LPM)
xs, ys = Sour ce Posi t i on ( m)
hs = Sour ce Hei ght ( m)
r s = Sour ce Radi us ( m)
es = Buoyancy Enhancement Fact or
f s_no = Fr act i on of NOX Emi t t ed as NO
f s_f pm= Fr act i on of APM Emi t t ed as FPM
I NI T_pse
Page 1
TAPM S1. l i s
i s, l s, xs, ys, hs, r s, es, f s_no, f s_f pm
1, 1, 435785. , 6298979. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
2, 1, 435734. , 6299001. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
3, 1, 435636. , 6299074. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
4, 1, 435525. , 6299109. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
5, 1, 431227. , 6310439. , 170. 00, 2. 62, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
6, 0, 413242. , 6322257. , 76. 00, 2. 00, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 55,
7, 0, 413290. , 6322270. , 105. 00, 1. 25, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 57,
8, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
9, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
10, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
11, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
LAGRANGI AN ( LPM) MODE I S OFF FOR THI S GRI D
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I NI TI ALI SE
pse KEY :
I NI T_pse
1, 1, 435785. , 6298979. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
2, 1, 435734. , 6299001. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
3, 1, 435636. , 6299074. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
4, 1, 435525. , 6299109. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
5, 1, 431227. , 6310439. , 170. 00, 2. 62, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
6, 0, 413242. , 6322257. , 76. 00, 2. 00, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 55,
7, 0, 413290. , 6322270. , 105. 00, 1. 25, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 57,
8, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
9, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
10, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
11, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page 2
TAPM S1. l i s
I NI TI ALI SE
pse KEY :
I NI T_pse
1, 1, 435785. , 6298979. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
2, 1, 435734. , 6299001. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
3, 1, 435636. , 6299074. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
4, 1, 435525. , 6299109. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
5, 1, 431227. , 6310439. , 170. 00, 2. 62, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
6, 0, 413242. , 6322257. , 76. 00, 2. 00, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 55,
7, 0, 413290. , 6322270. , 105. 00, 1. 25, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 57,
8, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
9, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
10, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
11, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I NI TI ALI SE
pse KEY :
I NI T_pse
1, 1, 435785. , 6298979. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
2, 1, 435734. , 6299001. , 98. 00, 1. 97, 1. 80, 0. 90, 0. 26,
3, 1, 435636. , 6299074. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
4, 1, 435525. , 6299109. , 151. 00, 2. 96, 2. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
5, 1, 431227. , 6310439. , 170. 00, 2. 62, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 43,
Page 3
TAPM S1. l i s
6, 0, 413242. , 6322257. , 76. 00, 2. 00, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 55,
Not e: sour ce 6 i s of f t he pol l ut i on gr i d
7, 0, 413290. , 6322270. , 105. 00, 1. 25, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 57,
Not e: sour ce 7 i s of f t he pol l ut i on gr i d
8, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
9, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
10, 1, 428195. , 6311595. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
11, 1, 428119. , 6311637. , 150. 00, 2. 83, 1. 00, 0. 90, 0. 59,
LAGRANGI AN ( LPM) MODE I S ON FOR THI S GRI D
END GRI D
t 010a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page 4
61/23685/06/87117
Collie Urea Project
Appendix C
Sample AUSPLUME Files and Outputs
NH3. t xt
___________________________
Col l i e Ur ea Pl ant - NH3
___________________________
Concent r at i on or deposi t i on Concent r at i on
Emi ssi on r at e uni t s gr ams/ second
Concent r at i on uni t s mi cr ogr am/ m3
Uni t s conver si on f act or 1. 00E+06
Const ant backgr ound concent r at i on 0. 00E+00
Ter r ai n ef f ect s Egan met hod
Smoot h st abi l i t y cl ass changes? No
Ot her st abi l i t y cl ass adj ust ment s ( " ur ban modes" ) None
I gnor e bui l di ng wake ef f ect s? No
Decay coef f i ci ent ( unl ess over r i dden by met . f i l e) 0. 000
Anemomet er hei ght 10 m
Roughness hei ght at t he wi nd vane si t e 0. 300 m
Use t he convect i ve PDF al gor i t hm? No
DI SPERSI ON CURVES
Hor i zont al di sper si on cur ves f or sour ces <100mhi gh Pasqui l l - Gi f f or d
Ver t i cal di sper si on cur ves f or sour ces <100mhi gh Pasqui l l - Gi f f or d
Hor i zont al di sper si on cur ves f or sour ces >100mhi gh Br i ggs Rur al
Ver t i cal di sper si on cur ves f or sour ces >100mhi gh Br i ggs Rur al
Enhance hor i zont al pl ume spr eads f or buoyancy? Yes
Enhance ver t i cal pl ume spr eads f or buoyancy? Yes
Adj ust hor i zont al P- G f or mul ae f or r oughness hei ght ? Yes
Adj ust ver t i cal P- G f or mul ae f or r oughness hei ght ? Yes
Roughness hei ght 0. 400m
Adj ust ment f or wi nd di r ect i onal shear None
PLUME RI SE OPTI ONS
Gr adual pl ume r i se? Yes
St ack- t i p downwash i ncl uded? Yes
Bui l di ng downwash al gor i t hm: PRI ME met hod.
Ent r ai nment coef f . f or neut r al & st abl e l apse r at es 0. 60, 0. 60
Par t i al penet r at i on of el evat ed i nver si ons? No
Di sr egar d t emp. gr adi ent s i n t he hour l y met . f i l e? No
and i n t he absence of boundar y- l ayer pot ent i al t emper at ur e gr adi ent s
gi ven by t he hour l y met . f i l e, a val ue f r omt he f ol l owi ng t abl e
( i n K/ m) i s used:
Wi nd Speed St abi l i t y Cl ass
Cat egor y A B C D E F
________________________________________________________
1 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
2 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
3 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
4 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
5 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
6 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 020 0. 035
WI ND SPEED CATEGORI ES
Boundar i es bet ween cat egor i es ( i n m/ s) ar e: 1. 54, 3. 09, 5. 14, 8. 23, 10. 80
WI ND PROFI LE EXPONENTS: " I r wi n Rur al " val ues ( unl ess over r i dden by met . f i l e)
AVERAGI NG TI ME: 3 mi nut es.
_____________________________________________________________________________
1 ___________________________
SOURCE CHARACTERI STI CS
Page 1
NH3. t xt
___________________________
STACK SOURCE: UREA1
X( m) Y( m) Gr ound El ev. St ack Hei ght Di amet er Temper at ur e Speed
430000 6306700 223m 50m 3. 50m 40C 18. 6m/ s
______ Ef f ect i ve bui l di ng di mensi ons ( i n met r es) ______
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
Ef f ect i ve bui l di ng wi dt h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Ef f ect i ve bui l di ng hei ght 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Al ong- f l ow bui l di ng l engt h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Al ong- f l ow di st ance f r omst ack 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Acr oss- f l ow di st ance f r omst ack 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
( Const ant ) emi ssi on r at e = 2. 16E+01 gr ams/ second
No gr avi t at i onal set t l i ng or scavengi ng.
STACK SOURCE: UREA2
429910 6306690 222m 50m 3. 50m 40C 18. 6m/ s
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Page 2
NH3. t xt
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
( Const ant ) emi ssi on r at e = 2. 16E+01 gr ams/ second
STACK SOURCE: GT
429780 6306490 222m 35m 3. 60m 105C 20. 0m/ s
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
Page 3
NH3. t xt
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
( Const ant ) emi ssi on r at e = 3. 20E- 02 gr ams/ second
STACK SOURCE: CMD1
430090 6306260 220m 60m 2. 00m 120C 15. 2m/ s
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
STACK SOURCE: CMD2
430150 6306260 222m 60m 2. 00m 120C 15. 2m/ s
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
Page 4
NH3. t xt
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
STACK SOURCE: AGR
430040 6306480 225m 30m 1. 80m 30C 14. 8m/ s
Fl ow di r ect i on 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100 110 120
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
220 230 240
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Page 5
NH3. t xt
0 0 0
0 0 0
Fl ow di r ect i on 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330
340 350 360
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
_____________________________________________________________________________
1 ___________________________
RECEPTOR LOCATI ONS
___________________________
The Car t esi an r ecept or gr i d has t he f ol l owi ng x- val ues ( or east i ngs) :
427495. m 427545. m 427595. m 427645. m 427695. m 427745. m 427795. m
427845. m 427895. m 427945. m 427995. m 428045. m 428095. m 428145. m
428195. m 428245. m 428295. m 428345. m 428395. m 428445. m 428495. m
428545. m 428595. m 428645. m 428695. m 428745. m 428795. m 428845. m
428895. m 428945. m 428995. m 429045. m 429095. m 429145. m 429195. m
429245. m 429295. m 429345. m 429395. m 429445. m 429495. m 429545. m
429595. m 429645. m 429695. m 429745. m 429795. m 429845. m 429895. m
429945. m 429995. m 430045. m 430095. m 430145. m 430195. m 430245. m
430295. m 430345. m 430395. m 430445. m 430495. m 430545. m 430595. m
430645. m 430695. m 430745. m 430795. m 430845. m 430895. m 430945. m
430995. m 431045. m 431095. m 431145. m 431195. m 431245. m 431295. m
431345. m 431395. m 431445. m 431495. m 431545. m 431595. m 431645. m
431695. m 431745. m 431795. m 431845. m 431895. m 431945. m 431995. m
432045. m 432095. m 432145. m 432195. m 432245. m 432295. m 432345. m
432395. m 432445. m
and t hese y- val ues ( or nor t hi ngs) :
6304035. m6304085. m6304135. m6304185. m6304235. m6304285. m6304335. m
6304385. m6304435. m6304485. m6304535. m6304585. m6304635. m6304685. m
6304735. m6304785. m6304835. m6304885. m6304935. m6304985. m6305035. m
6305085. m6305135. m6305185. m6305235. m6305285. m6305335. m6305385. m
6305435. m6305485. m6305535. m6305585. m6305635. m6305685. m6305735. m
6305785. m6305835. m6305885. m6305935. m6305985. m6306035. m6306085. m
6306135. m6306185. m6306235. m6306285. m6306335. m6306385. m6306435. m
6306485. m6306535. m6306585. m6306635. m6306685. m6306735. m6306785. m
6306835. m6306885. m6306935. m6306985. m6307035. m6307085. m6307135. m
6307185. m6307235. m6307285. m6307335. m6307385. m6307435. m6307485. m
6307535. m6307585. m6307635. m6307685. m6307735. m6307785. m6307835. m
6307885. m6307935. m6307985. m6308035. m6308085. m6308135. m6308185. m
6308235. m6308285. m6308335. m6308385. m6308435. m6308485. m6308535. m
6308585. m6308635. m6308685. m6308735. m6308785. m6308835. m6308885. m
6308935. m6308985. m
DI SCRETE RECEPTOR LOCATI ONS ( i n met r es)
No. X Y ELEVN HEI GHT No. X Y ELEVN HEI GHT
1 428623 6305947 200. 0 0. 0 3 428253 6304432 193. 0 0. 0
Page 6
NH3. t xt
2 427848 6305891 208. 0 0. 0
_____________________________________________________________________________
METEOROLOGI CAL DATA : SHOTTS AUSPLUME METFI LE
___________________________________________________________________________
At t he di scr et e r ecept or s:
1: 5. 72E+01 @Hr 10, 25/ 09/ 01 3: 4. 14E+01 @Hr 09, 12/ 08/ 01
2: 5. 48E+01 @Hr 10, 09/ 04/ 01
_____________________________________________________________________________
1 Peak val ues f or t he 100 wor st cases ( i n mi cr ogr am/ m3)
Aver agi ng t i me = 3 mi nut es
Rank Val ue Ti me Recor ded Coor di nat es
hour , dat e ( * denot es pol ar )
1 2. 29E+03 20, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 429145, 6308485, 0. 0)
2 5. 51E+02 19, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 431395, 6306985, 0. 0)
3 1. 50E+02 13, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 430195, 6306435, 0. 0)
4 1. 48E+02 14, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429445, 6306435, 0. 0)
5 1. 45E+02 12, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430245, 6306985, 0. 0)
6 1. 44E+02 13, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430295, 6306935, 0. 0)
7 1. 44E+02 13, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429595, 6306985, 0. 0)
8 1. 43E+02 13, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 429645, 6307035, 0. 0)
9 1. 43E+02 14, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 429695, 6307135, 0. 0)
10 1. 43E+02 12, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 429595, 6306935, 0. 0)
11 1. 42E+02 15, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 430045, 6307285, 0. 0)
12 1. 37E+02 14, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429845, 6307035, 0. 0)
13 1. 35E+02 14, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 430345, 6306435, 0. 0)
14 1. 33E+02 19, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429745, 6308685, 0. 0)
15 1. 33E+02 16, 05/ 03/ 01 ( 429445, 6306435, 0. 0)
16 1. 32E+02 15, 05/ 03/ 01 ( 429545, 6306435, 0. 0)
17 1. 32E+02 11, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430245, 6306385, 0. 0)
18 1. 32E+02 14, 05/ 03/ 01 ( 429595, 6306385, 0. 0)
19 1. 32E+02 12, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430345, 6306435, 0. 0)
20 1. 30E+02 12, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429595, 6306385, 0. 0)
21 1. 29E+02 13, 05/ 03/ 01 ( 429595, 6306385, 0. 0)
22 1. 28E+02 13, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430545, 6306485, 0. 0)
23 1. 27E+02 15, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 430545, 6306435, 0. 0)
24 1. 26E+02 16, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 430545, 6306535, 0. 0)
25 1. 26E+02 14, 04/ 03/ 01 ( 429545, 6306635, 0. 0)
26 1. 26E+02 13, 04/ 03/ 01 ( 429545, 6306585, 0. 0)
27 1. 26E+02 13, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429445, 6306235, 0. 0)
28 1. 25E+02 14, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430495, 6306885, 0. 0)
29 1. 25E+02 12, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 429995, 6306135, 0. 0)
30 1. 24E+02 15, 04/ 03/ 01 ( 429545, 6306685, 0. 0)
31 1. 24E+02 15, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430445, 6306835, 0. 0)
32 1. 17E+02 09, 16/ 12/ 01 ( 429895, 6305685, 0. 0)
33 1. 17E+02 17, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 430545, 6307285, 0. 0)
34 1. 17E+02 14, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430545, 6306635, 0. 0)
35 1. 14E+02 15, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429845, 6307235, 0. 0)
36 1. 14E+02 14, 17/ 01/ 01 ( 429895, 6307235, 0. 0)
37 1. 13E+02 16, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430645, 6307085, 0. 0)
38 1. 12E+02 16, 04/ 03/ 01 ( 429345, 6306685, 0. 0)
39 1. 12E+02 15, 17/ 01/ 01 ( 430045, 6307185, 0. 0)
40 1. 12E+02 17, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430645, 6307035, 0. 0)
41 1. 11E+02 14, 08/ 01/ 01 ( 430045, 6307185, 0. 0)
42 1. 10E+02 16, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429295, 6307235, 0. 0)
43 1. 10E+02 17, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429845, 6307535, 0. 0)
44 1. 10E+02 16, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430645, 6306885, 0. 0)
45 1. 10E+02 15, 16/ 01/ 01 ( 430645, 6306785, 0. 0)
46 1. 10E+02 16, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 430195, 6306035, 0. 0)
Page 7
NH3. t xt
47 1. 10E+02 16, 16/ 02/ 01 ( 429495, 6306285, 0. 0)
48 1. 09E+02 16, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429795, 6307535, 0. 0)
49 1. 09E+02 15, 16/ 02/ 01 ( 429545, 6306285, 0. 0)
50 1. 08E+02 11, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430295, 6307085, 0. 0)
51 1. 07E+02 14, 30/ 01/ 01 ( 429695, 6306235, 0. 0)
52 1. 07E+02 17, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 431445, 6306485, 0. 0)
53 1. 07E+02 16, 06/ 01/ 01 ( 430695, 6307435, 0. 0)
54 1. 06E+02 14, 16/ 02/ 01 ( 429545, 6306285, 0. 0)
55 1. 06E+02 17, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 429195, 6307535, 0. 0)
56 1. 06E+02 17, 07/ 01/ 01 ( 430495, 6307335, 0. 0)
57 1. 06E+02 12, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429495, 6306635, 0. 0)
58 1. 05E+02 18, 18/ 01/ 01 ( 431445, 6306635, 0. 0)
59 1. 05E+02 15, 30/ 01/ 01 ( 429745, 6306185, 0. 0)
60 1. 04E+02 15, 08/ 01/ 01 ( 430045, 6307135, 0. 0)
61 1. 04E+02 16, 17/ 01/ 01 ( 430095, 6307485, 0. 0)
62 1. 04E+02 15, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 430095, 6306085, 0. 0)
63 1. 04E+02 13, 30/ 01/ 01 ( 429645, 6306235, 0. 0)
64 1. 03E+02 12, 30/ 01/ 01 ( 429595, 6306285, 0. 0)
65 1. 01E+02 12, 16/ 12/ 01 ( 430345, 6306735, 0. 0)
66 1. 01E+02 16, 30/ 01/ 01 ( 429745, 6305985, 0. 0)
67 1. 01E+02 10, 12/ 04/ 01 ( 429795, 6305485, 0. 0)
68 1. 01E+02 17, 17/ 01/ 01 ( 429995, 6307435, 0. 0)
69 1. 01E+02 14, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 430095, 6306035, 0. 0)
70 1. 00E+02 11, 05/ 01/ 01 ( 429595, 6306585, 0. 0)
71 9. 97E+01 13, 05/ 02/ 01 ( 430195, 6306185, 0. 0)
72 9. 94E+01 13, 08/ 01/ 01 ( 429995, 6307085, 0. 0)
73 9. 93E+01 11, 21/ 01/ 01 ( 430395, 6307285, 0. 0)
74 9. 87E+01 12, 08/ 01/ 01 ( 429795, 6307135, 0. 0)
75 9. 87E+01 18, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 432445, 6305785, 0. 0)
76 9. 85E+01 18, 04/ 03/ 01 ( 428195, 6307185, 0. 0)
77 9. 80E+01 13, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 429995, 6306085, 0. 0)
78 9. 77E+01 12, 06/ 03/ 01 ( 429845, 6306085, 0. 0)
79 9. 74E+01 17, 05/ 02/ 01 ( 430995, 6306135, 0. 0)
80 9. 61E+01 15, 02/ 03/ 01 ( 428795, 6307085, 0. 0)
81 9. 58E+01 09, 17/ 03/ 01 ( 428395, 6306935, 0. 0)
82 9. 56E+01 12, 14/ 11/ 01 ( 430245, 6306335, 0. 0)
83 9. 54E+01 14, 28/ 02/ 01 ( 430595, 6306335, 0. 0)
84 9. 48E+01 08, 03/ 01/ 01 ( 430945, 6306235, 0. 0)
85 9. 44E+01 14, 15/ 12/ 01 ( 429595, 6307085, 0. 0)
86 9. 41E+01 12, 05/ 02/ 01 ( 429995, 6306135, 0. 0)
87 9. 39E+01 16, 08/ 01/ 01 ( 430045, 6307435, 0. 0)
88 9. 33E+01 15, 26/ 12/ 01 ( 429395, 6306735, 0. 0)
89 9. 30E+01 15, 22/ 02/ 01 ( 429445, 6307135, 0. 0)
90 9. 25E+01 16, 05/ 02/ 01 ( 430895, 6306085, 0. 0)
91 9. 25E+01 11, 17/ 05/ 01 ( 429345, 6305535, 0. 0)
92 9. 24E+01 13, 26/ 12/ 01 ( 429595, 6306585, 0. 0)
93 9. 23E+01 16, 04/ 04/ 01 ( 430845, 6306285, 0. 0)
94 9. 22E+01 15, 04/ 04/ 01 ( 430645, 6306135, 0. 0)
95 9. 20E+01 12, 21/ 01/ 01 ( 430195, 6307035, 0. 0)
96 9. 18E+01 10, 04/ 04/ 01 ( 429595, 6305335, 0. 0)
97 9. 18E+01 13, 14/ 11/ 01 ( 430545, 6306235, 0. 0)
98 9. 18E+01 14, 26/ 12/ 01 ( 429495, 6306635, 0. 0)
99 9. 11E+01 08, 31/ 01/ 01 ( 430745, 6305635, 0. 0)
100 9. 10E+01 13, 19/ 02/ 01 ( 430195, 6306235, 0. 0)
Page 8

Collie Urea Project Air Quality Report Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Collie Urea Project Air Quality Report Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perdaman Chemicals and

You might also like