Wet Dust Suppression

From Voices in the Dust
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Why this Information Is Important: Coal dust pollution in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point is primarily mitigated by wetting coal with water sprinklers. Installation of the water sprinklers in the 1980s was a result of residents' activism. However, coal dust concerns today imply that the sprinklers are not on when they should be, that they are ineffective, or both. Understand why wet suppression measures often fails today and how to evaluate the current dust‑control practices and advocate for stronger, more reliable solutions.

Attention: Residents, activists and advocates, researchers, policymakers

See the highlights before jumping in.
Hide Highlights

Wet Dust Suppression in Hampton Roads

  • Newspaper clipping with a photograph of a woman hold a white rag with black residues
    Image: Mrs. Louise Bazemore shows coal dust she cleaned from the inside of her Ridley Circle home, January 27, 1985.[1]

Coal dust pollution in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point is primarily addressed using wet suppression methods that consist of spraying water, or water with chemical additives, over coal storage piles, railcars, and/or transloading equipment with a system of sprinklers and water trucks. Water application is adjusted based on terminal activity and weather conditions.

  • Newspaper clipping with a photograph of a woman hold a white rag with black residues
    Image: Mrs. Louise Bazemore shows coal dust she cleaned from the inside of her Ridley Circle home, January 27, 1985.[2]

1920s

Water suppression of coal dust emissions is mentioned in the record as early as the 1920s, when the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Railroad installed a custom pipe system to spray water on coal-filled railcars when the cars were emptied by overturning.[3]

1950s

Following pressure by the Garden-Shores Civic League, the City of Newport News hired a chemical engineering firm to measure the amount of coal in airborne particles. This study found that in one location in Southeast Newport News 45% of airborne dust was un-combusted coal. In response, the Newport News City Council compelled C&O to install equipment to create a water fog over the coal pier to suppress dust and led the Newport News City Council to pass an air pollution ordinance.[4]

1980s

Community activism and residents' complaints to Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board (APCB) led the APCB to conduct additional research on the factors that influenced coal dust emissions and develop a wet suppression approach that was more effective. This was driven by residents of the nearby Harbor Homes, Dickerson Courts, and Ridley Circle.

The APCB's research was published in the report: Control of Fugitive Emissions from Open Coal Storage in Newport News, Virginia. As part of this study, researchers developed a mathematical formula for the effective wind forces (Kt) on the terminals' coal piles using readily available meteorological measurements.

Kt=SP(TRH)(Pμ×1.68)

SP is the wind speed in miles per hour, T is air temperature in °F, RH is relative humidity (%), P is the air density in pounds (lbs) per cubic feet, and μ is the air viscosity in lbs per square feet hours. The constant of 1.68 is the value of P divided by μ at standard conditions of 70°F, RH of 60%, and P of 2116 lbs per square feet. The term T/RH reflects the tendency of the coal piles to emit particles when temperatures are high and/or RH is low.[5]

The 1987 study found a strong relationship between the daily summed Kt (ΣKt) and the amount of particles measured in the air. Because coal dust emissions are reduced on cloudy, rainy, foggy, and humid days, the APCD developed a weight (Fc) to be multiplied by Kt to include the effects of rain and fog on coal dust emissions. Fc is a value of 0 or 1, with heavy fog (visibility less than 4 miles) or rain (more than 0.3 inches) giving a value of Fc equal to zero, meaning Kt x Fc = 0.

To develop a standardized water sprinkler cycle for both Southeast Newport News terminals, the APCB tested the only recognized wind speed value of 12 miles per hour at which dust may become significant, which was reported in a 1984 study from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Air, Noise and Radiation, and the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. (Note, only a related report from 1985 could be found.) This value was used as a starting point to initiate a spray cycle, which would be repeated hourly as long as Kt remained above 12, with a one hour delay between cycles. It is not stated how long the sprinklers remained on per cycle. In a second experiment, if the hourly Kt reached or exceeded 28, hourly spray cycles would be employed as long as this condition existed. If Kt did not exceed 12 on a given day, the sprinklers were turned on at 11:00 am and 2:00 pm in an assurance cycle. In the case approaching extreme weather, the National Weather Service was to provide both terminals with warning information, with the terminals initiating water spraying hourly until Kt fell below 12.

The difference between the uncontrolled concentration of particles based on ΣKt divided by the number of cycles performed, was used to determine the percent reduction in coal dust emissions per cycle (%R/C) for a cycle applying 24,000 gallons of water.

%R/C=16×10−0.0010279Σ×Kt

The dust emissions reduction attained (ATT) was then equal to the reduction in coal dust emissions per cycle (%R/C) multiplied by the number of cycles (C).

ATT=(C)(%R/C)/100

Today

Despite decades of dust control using water suppression, nearby residents continue to report that coal dust negatively impacts local air quality, leaves dust films on outdoor and indoor surfaces, harms quality of life, and requires residents and property owners to bear high air filtration costs.[6]

That said, it is commonly held that coal dust pollution in Southeast Newport News was worse before the sprinkler system was upgraded in the late 1980s.

Residents describe seeing sprinklers that are frequently off and/or not turned on until winds are very fast.[7]

The Dominion Terminal Associates facility now uses 79 sprinklers, turned on about four times per day or more depending on the weather, as well as a water truck dispatched to locations not covered by the sprinklers.[8] The Kinder Morgan Bulk Terminals use a system of 44 sprinklers to spray water to suppress dust emissions from the piles and transloading equipment. In 2022, Kinder Morgan spokesperson Amy Baek claimed the Kinder Bulk Morgan Terminals used 20,000 gallons of water every hour to suppress dust.[6] A record has not been found as to when or if the terminals transitioned away from the spray cycles developed by the APCD in 1987.

Water suppression is argued to be effective at fairly low cost.[9] The terminals in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point have fought against other dust mitigation methods, not because they do not work, but because of their cost.[10][7] However, relative costs are a small fraction of the terminals' annual revenue.[11]

Water Quality

What happens to the large volumes of water sprayed on to the coal piles? At Dominion Terminal Associates, coal pile runoff and storm water drain into treatment ponds where coal settles out before being discharged into the lower James River. Inspections by staff at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) identify spills of oil and fuel from the equipment and vehicles that also migrated into the discharged water. The VA DEQ also notes that this region of water is impaired for aquatic life such as fish and submerged vegetation. This can degrade the odor and appearance of the shoreline thus impacting water recreation. There are many watertight/sealed surfaces within the terminals. If these surfaces are not kept clean, heavy rainfall can cause untreated runoff from surfaces to enter waterways or nearby neighborhoods.

Chemical Additives

In some instances, chemicals are added to water used for dust suppression. The chemicals include oils, waste oils, oil emulsions, surfactants (soaps), latex sealants, lignin derivatives, polyacrylamides, and proprietary chemicals. There are products like Nbco DustBind, DustBind Plus, DustLock, HAUL‑EZE, and HAULAGE‑DC that are polymer or salt-based chemicals added to water sprays. There is no documentation to independently verify whether adding these chemicals to water spays improves dust mitigation.[12]

It is unknown whether Dominion Terminal Associates, Kinder Morgan Bulk Terminals, or the Norfolk Southern Pier 6 Terminal uses chemical additives as part of water suppression. According to a representative from Norfolk Southern, most coal-carrying railcars are sprayed with chemicals when they leave the coal mines, minimizing the dust emissions en route to terminals.

Concerns around chemical additives are mainly that they may be toxic to people and the environment.

Resources and Materials: See for Yourself and Dig Deeper

Murry, Coal Dust Causes Concern (Continued from Page C1), Daily Press, January 27, 1985

Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing Demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers, Daily Press, November 23, 1927

C&O to Install Costly Equipment for Control of Air Pollution in NN, Daily Press, December 12, 1956

Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 1), Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, September 1980

Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 2), Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, September 1980

Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 3), Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, September 1980

Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 4), Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, September 1980

Stewart et al., Control of Fugitive Emissions from Open Coal Storage in Newport News, Virginia, Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board, 1987

Wituschek et al., Coal Dust Control: Recommended Practices for Loading, Unloading and Transporting Coal by Rail, Regional Report No. 86–17, April 1986

City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, City of Newport News, May 2, 2018

Email Correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions, Inc. and Repair Lab Team Member, 2023

Coal Dust in Southeast Newport News is a Nuisance and There Are Solution (Corrected), Repair Lab, August 2024

Han et al., A Review of Water-Based Suppressants for Coal Dust Suppression, International Journal of Coal Science & Technology, 12, 47, 2024

Visit Next

The Front Porch and Community Action

Have a question? Want to start a conversation or share an observation? Join the discussion: Front Porch

Do you have photographs or stories to add to this page? Add Your Voice

You can also email the Repair Lab at editor@voicesinthedust.org or call, text, or send a voice memo to (757) 317-0356. If you prefer, a Repair Lab team member can record your story in person or collect physical materials to digitize and then return them to you.

Make an Official Complaint

You can make an official complaint to the VA DEQ Tidewater Office through myDEQ portal or by calling (757) 518-2000.

You can also register a complaint with the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 3 Office ECHO tool, which allows video and photographic evidence to be uploaded as part of an observed violation.

Note, these websites might change. Voices in the Dust will try to keep this contact information up to date. However, if a link is broken, you can likely find the new page through a web search of the above information.

Sources

  1. ↑ Murry, Coal Dust Causes Concern (Continued from Page C1), Daily Press, January 27, 1985.
  2. ↑ Murry, Coal Dust Causes Concern (Continued from Page C1), Daily Press, January 27, 1985.
  3. ↑ Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing Demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers, Daily Press, November 23, 1927.
  4. ↑ C&O to Install Costly Equipment for Control of Air Pollution in NN, Daily Press, December 12, 1956.
  5. ↑ Stewart et al., Control of Fugitive Emissions from Open Coal Storage in Newport News, Virginia, Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board, 1987.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Vogelsong, Virginia Will Begin Monitoring Air Pollution around Hampton Roads Coal Terminals: Residents of Newport News’ East End Say There’s Been Too Many Studies and Too Little Action, Virginia Mercury, April 19, 2022.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, City of Newport News, May 2, 2018.
  8. ↑ Lawlor, Coal Dust, Piles an Issue for Southeast Newport News, Daily Press, July 16, 2011, Updated: August 18, 2019.
  9. ↑ Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 2), September 1980.
  10. ↑ Email Correspondence with Richard Posner, President of Dust Solutions Inc., 2023.
  11. ↑ Coal Dust in Southeast Newport News Is a Nuisance and There Are Solutions (Corrected), Repair Lab, August 2024.
  12. ↑ Han et al., A Review of Water-Based Suppressants for Coal Dust Suppression, International Journal of Coal Science & Technology, 12, 47, 2024.
Retrieved from "https://voicesinthedust.org/index.php?title=Wet_Dust_Suppression&oldid=10970"