APPENDIX D

WASTE TREATMENT AND MINIMIZATION

FLARE SYSTEM DESIGN AND COSTING

*All correlations and assumptions for flare design are based on the book 'Flare
Gas Systems Pocket Handbook'.

From simulation results:

Molecular Weight, M = 50.29743
Density of gas,G = 1.888058 kg/m3 (0.1178676 lbm/ft3)

FLARE BURNER DESIGN

The flare exit velocity, V equals to 20% of sonic:
V

gKRT
M

Where
V
g

= Exit velocity (ft/s)

= Acceleration of gravity (32.17 lbmft/lbf.s2 )

(Eq D4-1)

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

K
R
T
M

=
=
=
=

D-2

Specific heat ratio Cp/Cv

Gas constant (1546 ft.lbf/R.mol))
Temperature (R)
Molecular weight

Assumptions:

K = 1.2 (Normal assumption)

T = 1300F

(32.17)(1.2)(1546)(960)
56.024
= 254 ft/s
The mass flow rate is given by:
Thus, V

W = 3600 G Ac V
Where Ac = Cross Section of flare burner tip
Assumptions:

Maximum load of flare = 800,000 lbm/hr

W
3600 GV
800000

(3600)(0.3207)(202.26)
= 3.43 ft2

Thus, Ac

Flare stack is cylindrical shape,

Ac = r2
Ac
r

3.43

= 1.04 ft
Thus Diameter of flare burner, D = 2.09 ft (25.06 or 0.64 m)

(Eq D4-2)

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D-3

FLARE STACK DESIGN

Figure D4-1: Flare Stack and Flame in Stagnant Surroundings

Assumptions:
1. Dstack = Dflame burner
2. Allowable intensity for personnel = 1500 Btu/hr.ft2
3. Allowable intensity for equipment = 3000 Btu/hr.ft2
4. Safe boundry q = 400 Btu/hr.ft2

Emissivity of the flame, f,

h
f 0.2 c
900

1
2

Where
f
hc

= Emissivity value
= Net heating value of gas (Btu/ft3)

For hydrocarbons, f = 0.3

(Eq D4-3)

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

f
Thus, hc

0.2

D-4

0.3

0.2
= 2025 Btu/ft3

Heat flow, Q
379

Q Whc

(Eq D4-4)

Where
Q

= Heat flow (Btu/hr)

379

56.024
= 1.071 x 1010 Btu/hr

Thus, Q (800000)(2025)

Radiation intensity, q
q

fQ
4 X 2

(Eq D4-5)

Where
X

= Distance from center of flame (ft)

Thus, X

fQ
4 q

(0.3)(1.071E 10)
4 (440)
= 880 ft (268.23 m)

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D-5

For maximum stack discharge, Mach number = 0.2

Figure D4-2: Superposition of typical flame characteristics on the locus curves

From figure D4-2,
L/D
Thus length of flame, L

=
=
=
=

118
118D
118(2.09)
246.43 ft (75.11m)

Figure D4-3: Plot of maximum radiation intensity vs. escape time, assuming 5
sec reaction time

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D-6

From figure D4-3, the maximum radiation intensity = 3300 Btu/hr.ft2

fQ
2

L
L

q
m

1
(0.3)(1.071E 10)
246.432
246.43
2
(3300)

= 181.12 ft (55.21 m)

1
Stack height, H
2

(Eq D5-5)

For safety reasons, height must be calculated assuming some reasonable escape time.
Assuming exit time, te = 15 s, from figure D4-3, qm = 2500 Btu/hr.ft2.

1
(0.3)(1.071E 10)
2
246.43
246.43
2
(2500)

= 219.43 ft (66.88m)

New stack height, H

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D-7

SAFE RADIAL DISTANCE CALCULATION FOR PERSONNEL AND

EQUIPMENT
Using Pasquill-Gifford Atmospheric Stability Class C (day),
Radiation intensity = Strong
Wind Speed, uw = 6 m/s (13.42 miles/hr or 19.68 ft/s)

Figure D4-4: Flare Stack and Flame in Wind-blown Surroundings

uw

u
By Trigonometric Law,
uw
u
19.68

202.26
= 0.0973
tan

uw

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

19.68

202.26

D-8

= 203.21 ft/s

sin

uw
z
19.68
203.21

= 0.0969

u
z
199.9

203.21
= 0.9953

cos

Distance of the point of maximum intensity, Xm

X m H H L
219.43 219.43 246.43
= 319.72 ft (97.45 m)
Xm H = 100.29 ft (30.57 m)

Thus, safe radial distance from flare, y

y X 2 H X m H cos 2

1
2

X m H sin

8802 219.43 100.29 0.99532

= 889.53 ft (271.13 m)

1
2

100.29 0.0969

CONDITION OF WASTE TREATMENT CALCULATION

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D-9

* All calculations and correlations for pressure and temperature are provided
by 'Flare Gas Systems Pocket Handbook' and Air Pollution Control-A design
Approch

Design Pressure
Assumption (Pressure drop)
P K.O. drum = 0.5 psig
P stack = 2 psig
No pressure drop in pipe
Pressure in knock-out drum
P = 1.5 bar - 0.0344737864 bar = 1.466 bar
The upstream pressure then,
P= 1.466 bar - 0.1378951456 bar = 1.328 bar

Design Temperature
Auto-ignition
Acetaldehyde = 347 F
Ethyl Acetate = 800 F
Ethanol = 685.4 F
Ross (1977) suggesting the design temperature must be set several hundred degrees
above the VOC autoignition temperature
T = 800F + 100 F = 900 F/ 482C

LOWER EXPLOSIVE LIMIT (LEL) CALCULATION

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 10

* All calculations and correlations for LEL are provided by the US EPA Air
Pollution Control Cost Manual January 2002, Chapter 2.

LELH2
LELnCH4
LELiCH4
LELiCH4=

=
=
=
=

LELmix

n
j 1

40000
19000
18000
18000

xj

ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
1

x LEL
n

i 1 i

Where
xi
= Volume fraction of combustible component, i
LELj = Lower explosive limit of combustible component, j (ppmv)
n
= Number of combustible components in mixture

From simulation results at stream 32,

xi = 10300 ppmv

LELmix

2800
100
2100
5300

(10300)(40000) (10300)(19000) (10300)(18000) (10300)(18000)

= 21177 ppmv

% LELmix

LELmix

(100%)

10300
(100%)
21177

= 48.64 %
Since % LELmix is above than 25%, dilution air is needed to satisfy fire
regulations.
FLARE COSTING

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 11

*All correlations and assumptions for flare costing are provided by The Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S Environmental Protection Agency.

Equipment Costs (1993)

Since the stack height H, is a little bit over 200 ft, Derrick Support is used. Thus
Equipment Costs, CF (US$):
CF (US$) = (76.4 + 2.72 D + 1.64 H)2
76.4 2.72 25.06 1.64 219.43

= US$ 254,442.00 (RM 966,879.60)

Costs for vent stream piping CP (US$),

CP (US$) = 127 D1.21 (Where 1 < D < 24)
127 25.061.21
= US$ 62260.20 (RM 23,788.75)

Flare system equipment costs EC (US$),

EC (US$) = CF + CP
= 254,442.00 + 62260.20
= US$ 260,702.20 (RM 990,668.36)

Equipment costs + installation (2001),

EC (US$) = EC(1990) x (CI2001/ CI1993)
= 260,702.20 x (476.66/359)
= US$ 346,145.70 (RM 1,315,353.70)

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

Figure D4-4: Derrick-Support Elevated Flare

D - 12

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 13

HEAT EXCHANGER DESIGN

Equipment Sizing
Heat exchanger type

1 shell and 2 tubes

Design type

Floating head

Heat exchanger orientation

Horizontal

Tube inlet direction

Horizontal

Number of parallel plate

Tube side stream feed

Heat duty

250128 W

Preliminary Calculation

Hot Stream Cold Stream

(Shell side) (Tube side)
o
Tin ( C)
270
32.217
Tout (oC)
240
260

T1: inlet temperature to shell

T2: outlet temperature from shell
t1: inlet temperature to tube
t2: outlet temperature from tube

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

T1 T2
t 2 t1

270 240
260 32.217

0.132

t 2 t1
T1 t1

260 32.217
270 32.217

0.958

From figure 12.19 (Chemical Engineering Vol. 6)

Ft

Tlm

Tm

0.650

T1 t 2 T2 t1
T t
ln 1 2
T2 t 1

270 260 240 32.217

270 260
ln
240 32.217

65.191 oC

FtTlm

0.650 x 65.191

42.374 oC

From Table 12.1, Chemical Engineering vol.6,

U

700 W/.m2 oC (Assumption)

D - 14

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

Povisional area, A

Q
UTm

250128
700 42.374

8.4327 m2

D - 15

Costing
Heat exchanger surface area ( sizing calculation),
A

8.4327 m2

From simulation, pressure inlet to X-2,

P

4.7089 kg/cm2

4.987 barg

From figure 5.36 (page 303), Ulrich, for Teflon tubing with carbon steel,
Material factor, Fm

From figure 5.37 (304),

Pressure factor, FP

1 (shell side and tube side heat exchangers)

From figure 5.38 (304),

At Fp x Fm

1x1

Bare module factor,

Fbm

3.4 (for conventional shell and tube, Teflon tubing

with CS)

From figure 5.36 (303),

Purchased equipment cost,
Cp

$ 8,200.00

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

Bare module cost Cbm =

Update Factor, UF

Cp x Fbm

8900.00 x 3.4

$ 27,880.00

Present cost index (2001)

Base cost index (1982)

476.66
315

1.513

Total cost for Heat Exchanger, X-2

Cbm x UF

27,880.00 x 1.513

$ 45,789.62

RM 160,315.13

D - 16

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 17

A-ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 1974 (ACT 127)

1. Requirement and approval of plans: section 20 (1)
a) Plans and specifications of the proposed work, building, erection or
alteration together with details of control equipment if any to be
installed.
b) A layout plan indicating the site of the proposed work, building,
erection or alteration, which will take place in relation to the
surrounding areas.
c) The details of trade, industry or process proposed to be carried on in
such premises.
d) Descriptions of waste constituents and characteristics.
2. Restriction on pollution of the atmosphere: Section 22(1) and (2), the plant is
a) Prohibited from, unless licensed, emitting or discharging any
environmentally hazardous substances, pollutants or wastes into the
atmosphere in contravention of the acceptable conditions specified
under section 21.
b) Prohibited from placing any matter in a place where it may be
released into the atmosphere.
c) Prohibited from causing the discharge of odors, which by virtue of
their nature, concentration, volume or extent are obnoxious or
offensive.
d) Prohibited from burning any wastes of the trade, process or industry.

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 18

e) Prohibited from using any fuel burning equipment not equipped with
any device or control equipment required to be fitted to such
equipment

3. Restriction on noise pollution: Section 23(1), the plant is

a) Prohibited from, unless licensed, emitting or causing or permitting to
be emitted any noise greater in volume, intensity or quality in
contravention of the acceptable conditions specified under section 21.
4. Restrictions on pollution of the soil: Section 24(1) and (2), the plant is
a) Prohibited from, unless licensed, polluting or causing or permitting to
be polluted any soil or surface of any land in contravention of the
acceptable conditions specified under section 21.
b) Prohibited from placing any matter whether liquid, solid or gaseous in
any place where it may gain access to any soil.
c) Prohibited from establishing on any land a refuse dump, garbage tip,
soil and rock disposal site, sludge disposal site, waste-injection well
or otherwise used land for the disposal of or a repository for solid or
liquid wastes so as to be obnoxious or offensive to human beings or
interfere with underground water or be detrimental to any beneficial
use of the soil or the surface of the land.
5. Restrictions on pollution of inland waters: Section 25(1) and (2), the plant is
a) Prohibited from, unless licensed, emitting, discharging or depositing
any environmentally hazardous substances, pollutants or wastes into
any inland waters in contravention of the acceptable conditions
specified by the government.

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 19

b) Prohibited from placing any wastes in or on waters or in a place where

it may gain access to any waters.
c) Prohibited from placing any waste in a position where it falls,
descends, drains, evaporates, is washed, is blown or percolates or is
likely to fall, descend, drain, evaporate or be washed, be blown or
percolated into any waters, or knowingly or through his negligence,
whether directly or indirectly, causes or permits any wastes to be
placed in such a position.
d) Prohibited from causing the temperature of the receiving waters to be
raised or lowered by more than the prescribed limits.
6. Prohibition of discharge of wastes into Malaysian waters: Section 29(1), the
plant is
a) Prohibited from, unless licensed, discharging environmentally
hazardous substances, pollutants or wastes into the Malaysian waters
in contravention of the acceptable conditions specified under section
21.
7. Under Section 31(1), the plant need to be:
a) Installed and operate any control equipment or additional control
equipment.
b) Repaired, altered or replaced with any equipment or control
equipment.
c) Erected or increased the height of any chimney.
d) Measured, take a sample of, analyzed, recorded and reported any
environmentally hazardous substances, pollutants, wastes, effluents,
or emissions containing pollutants.
e) Conducted a study on any environmental risk.
f) Installed, maintained and operated monitoring programmed at the
expense of the owner or occupier.

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 20

g) Adopted any measure to reduce, mitigate, disperse, remove, eliminate,

destroy or dispose of pollution, within such time and in such manner
as may be specified in the notice issued by the government.
8. Under Section 23, all the equipment or control equipment needs to be
maintained in a proper and efficient manner.

9. Prohibition against placing, deposit, etc. of scheduled wastes: Section 34B(1),

the plant is
a) Prohibited from placing, depositing or disposing of, or causing or
permitting to place, deposit or dispose of, except at prescribed
premises only, any scheduled wastes on land or into Malaysian
waters.
b) Prohibited from receiving or sending, or causing or permitting to be
received or sent any scheduled wastes in or out Malaysia.
c) Prohibited from transiting or causing or permitting the transit of
scheduled wastes, without any prior written approval of the
government.
10. Under Section 51(1) (Regulations), the plant is
a) Prohibited from discharging any matter, whether liquid, solid or
gaseous into the environment.
b) Prohibited from using any equipment, facility, vehicle, or ship capable
of causing pollution.
c) Need to be constructed or installed with any equipment to prevent or
minimize pollution.
d) Prohibited from discharge any environmentally hazardous substances
into the environment.
e) Measured, assessed, controlled, reduced or eliminate environmental
risk.

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 21

f) Hire persons qualified to maintain and operate any equipment or

control equipment.

B-SEWERAGE SERVICES ACT 1993 (ACT 508)

Industrial effluent, or noxious matter not to communicate with public sewer, etc;
the plant is:
a) Prohibited from discharging any industrial effluent, or allow to communicate
with any public sewer or public treatment works.
b) Prohibited from discharging any noxious, volatile or flammable substance or
any other matter likely to damage or impair the functioning of any public
sewer or public treatment works or to interfere with the free flow of its
contents or to affect prejudicially the treatment or disposal of its contents.

AIR QUALITY

The pollutants that affect the quality of air include suspended particulate
matter (SPM), airborne lead, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen,
hydrocarbon and ozone. From experience of other countries, the health risks (and
costs) and productivity loss from deterioration in air quality are known to be
substantial and take the form of respiratory illness and aggravation of lung and heart
disease.

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 22

1. Air Quality Monitoring

Collection of air data by the DOE was started in 1977 when a total of 9
Temporary stations were set up for short periods in Batu Caves quarry area and in the
vicinity of the APMC Cement Works in Rawang to measure suspended particulate
levels. Measurement was carried out with the use of 2 high volume samplers. The
experience obtained from these monitoring activities was put to good use in the
planning and implementation of a national air quality-monitoring programmer
(NAQMP) beginning from 1978 onwards.

The objectives of the national air quality-monitoring programmer include the

following:
a) To characterize existing environmental conditions.
b) To identify trends.
c) To evaluate compliance with the air quality standards or goals, to assess
the effectiveness of pollution control measures.
The major pollutant measured under the air quality monitoring programmed
Include particulates, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides,
hydrocarbons, ozone and airborne lead. Since then, the DOE has continued its
monitoring activities using conventional and semi-automatic equipment (HVS) for
the measurement of both total suspended particulates (TSP) and respirable
particulates (PM1O) through a network of 35 monitoring stations. Ambient lead level
is also monitored at sites close to the main roads with heavy traffic. Air quality
monitoring is also carried out using automated stations, which are linked, to the DOE
Headquarters via the newly set up telemetrized system. In the latest development in
DOEs monitoring activities, an agreement was signed between the Government of
Malaysia and Alam Sekitar Malaysia Sdn.Bhd. in April 1995 for the privatization of
air quality monitoring and environmental data collection and dissemination. Within a
period of 5 years, 50 new automated stations would be established in addition to the

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 23

use of conventional means.

2. Air Quality Standards - Recommended Malaysian Guidelines

Ambient Air Quality Standards have been set as a measure of air quality to
Ensure the levels of air pollutants are at safe levels. These standards which have been
identified for 8 major pollutant parameters, including total suspended particulates,
particulates less than 10 micron in size (PMIO), dust fall, lead, sulphur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, carbon dioxide and ozone. The standards given are guideline
standards for ambient air recommended for adoption in Malaysia for the protection
of human health and the environment. The standards are applicable for the whole
country and have not been modified or made specific for certain air quality zones or
regions.
Recommended Malaysian Air Quality Guidelines
(Ambient Standards at 25oC and 101.13 kPa)
Pollutant &

Averaging Time

Malaysian

Target Year For

Guidelines
ppm
g/m3

Compliance

0.1
0.06
30

200
120
35

1995

Carbon Monoxide

1 Hour
8 Hour
1 Hour

(AS 2695) (mg/m3)

8 Hour

10

Nitrogen Dioxide

1 Hour

0.17

320

1990

10 Minute
1 Hour

0.19
0.13

500
350

1990

Method
Ozone (AS 2524)

(AS 2447)
Sulfur Dioxide

1995

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 24

(AS 2523)
Particle TSP

24 Hour
24 Hour

(AS 2724.3)

1 Year

90

PM10 (AS 2724.6)

24 Hour
1 Year
3 Month

150
50
1.5

Lead (AS 2800)

0.04

105
260

1995
1995
1991

Recommended Malaysian Secondary Guidelines

Pollutant & Method

Dust fall

Averaging Time

1 Year

Malaysian

Target Year For

Guidelines

Compliance

(mg/m2/day)
133

1995

(AS 2724.1)

3. Air Quality Status

Although the air quality in the country generally is considered clean by
International or even national standards, there are however areas of concern. Urban
Areas and heavily industrialized areas are experiencing deterioration in their air
quality. As an example, the Klang Valley region and its vicinity in recent years are
experiencing worsening air quality as a result of rapid increase in the traffic density,
urban growth and industrial activities. This has been clearly indicated in the Air
Quality Management Study for Kiang Valley Region undertaken by a team of experts
from Japan and the DOE in 1992.
The study has shown high content of airborne dust in the Klang Valley
Region. The level of which although is still below the daily average allowable limit
of 260ug1m3 has at times exceeded the annual average acceptable limit of 90 ug/m3.
In terms of percentage, more than one-third of the particulate matter in the air comes
from the combustion of diesel oil of motor vehicles and boilers. Fuel combustion, if
not properly managed, can produce particulate matter in the form of smoke, as a
product of incomplete combustion. For solid fuels (coal and wood), emissions of

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 25

particulate matter is largely a consequence of the ash content of the fuel.

Oxides of nitrogen and carbon monoxide levels at monitoring stations close
to the congested streets of Kuala Lumpur are comparatively higher than at other
stations. The study identified motor vehicles and fuel combustion as being the
predominant sources of oxides of nitrogen and carbon monoxide. Other emissions,
which resulted from fuel combustion, are hydrocarbon particles and lead. Apart from
these primary air pollutants, a major source of concern about emissions from motor
vehicles is the formation of photochemical oxidants such as ozone, from reactions
involving hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight.
Sulphur dioxide presence in the air comes mainly from power stations,
manufacturing industries as well as diesel powered vehicles. Combustion of high
sulphur content fuel oil and coal produces emissions of sulphur oxides. Thermal
power stations and steam producing boilers commonly bum high sulphur fuel oil.
Coal combustion is another major source of sulphur oxides. However, even if the
sulphur content of the fuel is relatively low, the very large quantities burned can
cause excessive concentrations of sulphur dioxide. The levels of sulphur dioxide at
all monitoring stations recorded during the study however are still below the
Malaysian limit of acceptable level.

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

Air pollution control involve a variety of considerations, not only scientific

and technological, but also social, political, economical and administrative
considerations. To solve a pollution problem we need to know how to reduce the
incidence of that form of pollution, by using a method, which has costs no greater
than the resulting benefits, which is politically acceptable and which can be
effectively administered without intolerable economics and social advantages. The
costs and benefits of pollution control measures are often difficult to quantify. The
ringgit value of improvements to health and social amenities and of reductions in
damage to plants and materials cannot be estimated in the same way as the costs of

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 26

additional controls.

An integrated approach for air pollution control would require that air
pollution and meteorological factors to be carefully considered by land use planners.
Besides, buffer zones between industries and residential areas have to be provided.
Similarly, the planner should design a fairly good transport system especially in
urban areas because without proper planning, motor vehicles exhaust emissions may
cause photochemical smog problems.

In the light of these considerations, Malaysia is using an air pollution control

approach, which combines features from air quality management and best
practicable means. In the course of implementing air pollution control activities, the
Department of Environment continued to emphasize the preventive approach
supplemented with curative measures. Various strategies have been adopted and
found to be effective in air emissions control. Combinations of best practicable
means, (e.g. for control of odour and various gases), prohibitive standards (e.g. for
open burning), visible emission standard (e.g. smoke darkness) and numerical
standards (e.g. for noxious gases and particulates), air quality control zone concept
(e.g. Batu Caves and Tasek Industrial areas), buffer zone concept and pollutant
dispersion (e.g. chimney height stipulation) continued to be the main effective
instruments of control. The effectiveness of the enforcement activities is monitored
through the operation of ambient air quality monitoring programme, The air quality
data acquired are to be compared with the desired air quality goals which have been
adopted after incorporating considerations suitable to Malaysias needs. Control
programmes are readjusted according to the feedback received.

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LEGISLATION IN MALAYSIA

1. Control of Pollutant Emission

The Environmental Quality (Clean Air) Regulations 1978 is currently applied

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 27

mainly for regulating air emissions from industrial facilities and other point sources
of air emissions. The regulations, which came into force on 1 October 1978, specify
permissible limits for air emissions, which have to be complied with. The limits of
air emissions are applicable to any source or for specific sources or activities as
outlined below. All existing plants were required to comply with Standard A within
two years and Standard B within three years, while all new plants must comply with
Standard C, which is the most stringent. In the formulation of these standards, great
care has been exercised to ensure that they are technologically practicable and
economically viable so as to fall in line with the intent and purpose of the
Environmental Quality Act 1974.

Environmental Quality Act

Environmental Quality (Clean Air) Regulations 1978
Substances Emitted
Solid particles concentration in the
heating of metals
Solid particles concentration in other
operations
Metals and metallic Mercury
compounds
Cadmium
Lead
Antimony
Arsenic
Zinc
Copper
Dust
Asphalt Stationary plant
and
Concrete
Solid
Plant
Mobile Plant
Particles
Portland
Cement
Plant

Kiln

Clinker, Cooler
finish, grinding and
others
Asbestos and free silica
Substance Emitted

Standards (gm/Nm3)
A
B
0.3
0.25

C
0.2

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.02
0.025
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.15
0.15
0.5

0.01
0.015
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.1
0.1
0.4

0.01
0.015
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.1
0.1
0.3

0.7

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.4

0.2

0.1

0.4

0.2

0.12

Sources of Emission

Standards

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

Acid gases

Manufacture of sulphuric
acid

Sulphuric acid mist or

sulphur trioxide or both

Any source other than

combustion process and
plant for manufacture of
sulphuric acid as in (a)
above.

Chlorine gas

Any source

Hydrogen Chloride

Flourine, Hydroflouric
acid or inorganic fluorine
compound
Flourine, Hydroflouric
acid or inorganic fluorine
compound

Hydrogen sulphide

Oxides of Nitrogen

D - 28
Equivalent of :
Standard A: 7.5
Standard B: 6.0
Standard C: 3.5
Gram of sulphur
trioxide/Nm3 of effluent
gas.
Effluent gas free from
persistent mist
Equivalent of :
Standard A: 0.3
Standard B: 0.25
Standard C: 0.2
Gram of sulphur
trioxide/Nm3 of effluent
gas.
Effluent gas free from
persistent mist

Standard A: 0.3
Standard B: 0.25
Standard C: 0.2
Gram of Hydrogen
chloride/Nm3.
Any source
Standard A: 0.6
Standard B: 0.5
Standard C: 0.4
Gram of Hydrogen
chloride/Nm3
Manufacture of aluminium Equivalent of:
from alumina
Standard C: 0.02
Gram of Hydroflouric
acid/Nm3 of effluent gas
Any source other than
Equivalent of :
manufacture of aluminium Standard A: 0.15
from alumina as in (e)
Standard B: 0.125
above
Standard C: 0.10
Gram of Hydroflouric
acid/Nm3 of effluent gas
Any sources
Standard A: 6.25
Standard B: 5.00
Standard C: 5.00
Parts per million volume
for volume
Manufacture of Nitric Acid Equivalent of :
Standard A: 4.60
Standard B: 4.60
Standard C: 1.7 and
effluent gas substantially

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

Oxides of Nitrogen

D - 29

Any sources other than

combustion process and
manufacture of nitric acid

colorless gram of sulphur

trioxide /Nm3
Equivalent of :
Standard A: 3.0
Standard B: 2.5
Standard C: 2.0
Gram of sulphur
trioxide/Nm3

However, no compromise has been made on health grounds where the effects
are proven (e.g. asbestos and mercury) or where data are available to indicate the
existence of a condition not conducive to health (e.g. Batu Caves); under these
circumstances, more stringent standards have been prescribed. In addition, the
regulations also provide for the best practical means approach is to be adopted to
prevent the emission of noxious and offensive substances identified in the Third
Schedule of the regulations. The regulations also have provision to ensure proper
dispersion of pollutant through the control of chimney heights and installation of fuel
burning equipment such as boilers, kilns and furnaces and if necessary the imposition
of the type of fuel to be used.

Third Schedule
Noxious and Offensive Substances
(Regulation 32)
Substances
Muriatic acid
Sulphuric acid and sulphuric anhydride
Sulphurous acid and sulphurous
anhydride
Nitric acid and acid forming oxides of
nitrogen
Chlorine and its acid compounds
Bromine and its acid compounds
Iodine and its acid compounds
Flourine and its compounds
Arsenic and its compounds
Ammonia and its compounds

Cyanogens compounds
Pyridine
Bisulphide of carbon
Chloride of sulphur
Acetylene
Sulphuretted hydrogen
Volatile organic sulphur compounds
Fumes from benzene works
Fumes from cement works
Fumes from fish manure works

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 30

Fumes from pesticides formulating and

Fumes from asbestos product works
manufacturing works
Fumes from tar works
Fumes from paraffin oil works
Fumes containing copper, lead, antimony, Smoke, grit and dust
arsenic, mercury, zinc, aluminium, iron,
silicon, calcium, or their compounds
Fumes containing uranium, beryllium,
Carbon Monoxide
cadmium, selenium, sodium, potassium
or their compounds
Acetic anhydride and acetic acid
Aldehydes
In the absence of effective institutional control measure on the siting of
potentially polluting facilities near housing estates, the regulations also require such
industries to obtain prior approval for locating the facilities within 1 kilometer from
any housing estates as outlined in the First Schedule. Indiscriminate disposal of
industrial waste or refuse through open burning is prohibited. However, exceptions
are made for leaves and yard trimmings, fires set as part of good agricultural
practices and for fire-fighting purposes. The use of incinerators for waste disposal is
also controlled. A section of the regulations are also devoted to the prohibition of the
operation of an industry in the event of an undesirable occurrence of pollution of
such level as to threaten public health, safety and the quality of the environment, and
the Director-General has reason to believe that the industry is the source of such
occurrence.

In view of the seriousness of haze incident that has been shown clearly due to
open burning activities, the Environmental Quality Act, 1974 itself has been
amended in 1998 to prohibit any form of open burning activities and open burning is
strictly defined to mean any fire, combustion or smoldering that occurs in the open
air and which is not directed there through a chimney or stack, but does not include
any fire, combustion or smoldering that occurs for such activities as may be
prescribed by the Minister by order published in the Gazette. Both the owner and the
occupier of premises where open burning is taking place are liable.
Further, in line with the objective for an integrated approach in tackling the
air pollution problem in the country, the DOE had carried out a study to review the
air emission standards stipulated in the Environmental Quality (Clean Air)
Regulations 1978 with the view to ensure that source emissions are adequately

Appendix D Waste Treatment and Minimization

D - 31

controlled using best available techniques. This review is timely in view of the fact
that the regulations and standards specified have not been reviewed since its
enforcement in 1978. There is concern over the increasing number of sources of air
pollutants, both stationary and mobile, and the increasing load of air pollutants that
are being discharged into the environment. The frequent occurrence of haze, even in
the absence of transboundary pollutants, has heightened this concern and a review of
the present air emission standards is timely.
Reference
K.Banerjee, N.P.Cheremisinoff, P.N.Cheremisinoff, Plant Design Economics for
Chemical Engineers, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1980.
Cost information from Piedmont HUB, Inc, Raleigh, NC, August 1990.
Diana K. Stone, Susan K. Lynch, Richard F. Pandullo, Flares, Radian
Corporation, Research Triangle park, NC 27709
William M. Vatavuk, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S Environmental Protection Agency.