Wet Dust Suppression: Difference between revisions

From Voices in the Dust
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
added notes from covering the train cars page
 
(30 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Loading and unloading coal out of the railcar, most commonly via bottom dump out the railcar base or via rollover wagon tipplers, displaces a lot of air and therefore kicks up a lot of [[Particulate matter and coal dust|coal dust]]. One proposed solution is to suppress the dust before the coal exiting the loading hoppers. This suppression (usually by water or chemical spray) would ideally occur within the railcar wagon to prevent the exit of the dust during the loading process.<ref>[https://nodust.com/application/rail-loading-unloading/ “Rail Loading & Unloading.” ''Dust Solutions Inc.'', 7 Aug. 2023, nodust.com/application/rail-loading-unloading/.]</ref>
Coal dust emissions in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point are primarily managed using wet suppression methods that consist of spraying water, or water with chemical additives, over coal storage piles, railcars, and/or transloading equipment using a system of sprinklers and water trucks. Water application is often adjusted based on terminal activity and ambient humidity conditions. According to a representative from [[Companies: railroads, terminals, and coal|Norfolk Southern]], most coal-carrying rail cars are sprayed with chemicals when they leave the coal mines, minimizing the dust emissions en route to terminals.<ref>Lawlor, Newport News, Coal Terminals Looking Into Wind Fence, ''Daily Press'', August 1, 2011.</ref>[[File:Dominion Terminal Water Application.jpg|alt=Dominion Terminal Water Application|thumb|While the sprinklers are not on at the moment of the photograph, large amounts of standing water are visible at the [[Companies: railroads, terminals, and coal|Dominion Terminal]].]]In general, dust suppressants should be durable, protective, easy (meaning they do not significantly impede transportation processes), cost-effective, and non-toxic. A variety of formulas are on the market, including oils, waste oils, oil emulsions, latex sealants, lignin derivatives, polyacrylamides and proprietary formations, each with their own drawbacks.


== Water Suppression ==
Measuring PM control efficiency is difficult if not impossible. Currently, there is no documentation that can independently verify the projected PM control efficiencies for most of these options.<ref>[[:File:S40789-025-00784-3.pdf|Han, F. et al. A review of water-based suppressants for coal dust suppression. September 24, 2024.]]</ref>
[[File:Dominion Terminal Water Application.jpg|alt=Dominion Terminal Water Application|thumb|While the sprinklers are not on at the moment of the photograph, large amounts of standing water are visible at the Dominion Terminal.]]
Coal dust emissions in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point are primarily managed using wet suppression methods that consist of spraying water, or water with chemical additives, over coal storage piles, railcars, and/or transloading equipment using a system of sprinklers. Water application is often adjusted based on terminal activity and ambient humidity conditions.


Water suppression is mentioned in the record as early as the 1920s, when the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Railroad Company installed a custom pipe system to spray water on coal-filled railcars where and when the cars were emptied through overturning.<ref>[https://voicesinthedust.org/File:Daily_Press_1927_11_23_Page_2.pdf Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers], ''Daily Press'', November 23, 1927.</ref> Following an air monitoring study in 1956 demonstrating coal was a major portion of airborne dust in Southeast Newport News and pressure from the Newport news City Council, C&O installed equipment to create a water fog over the coal piers to suppress dust.<ref>[https://voicesinthedust.org/File:Daily_Press_1956_12_12_Page_3.pdf C&O to Install Costly Equipment for Control of Air Pollution in NN], ''Daily Press'', December 12, 1956.</ref>
== Types of Surfactants ==
* Plain or mist water sprays
** Commonly installed at conveyor transfer points, rotary dumpers, hoppers, and stockpiles.
** Rely on fine water droplets (typically 10–200 µm) to adhere to dust and settle it out of the air
* Mist cannons or Dry Fog systems
** Ultrafine droplets (<10 µm) form an airborne “blanket” that agglomerates dust in enclosed areas like hoppers.
* Surfactant‑enhanced sprays
** Addition of surfactants reduces water surface tension to improve adhesion to fine, hydrophobic coal dust. This method enhances capture efficiency and conserves water compared to plain sprays
* Foam suppression: Foam mixes water, air, and a foaming agent to create a lasting layer that traps dust at high‑impact zones (e.g., conveyor ends, crushers) with minimal moisture addition


Today, the coal export terminals continue to rely on water suppression despite community calls for other forms of dust mitigation, particularly a [[Wind Fences, Domes, and Tree Barriers|wind fence or dome]] in Southeast Newport News or [[Covering the Train Cars and Dumpers|railcar coverings]] in Lambert's Point. The [[Companies: railroads, terminals, and coal|Kinder Morgan Bulk Terminals]] use a system of 44 sprinklers to spray water that suppresses dust emissions from the piles and transloading equipment.
* Products like Nbco DustBind, DustBind Plus, DustLock, HAUL‑EZE, and HAULAGE‑DC are polymer or salt-based additives applied via spray. They form a flexible crust over coal to prevent wind erosion and self-heating, especially during rail transport and stockpile storage


Water suppression is argued to be effective at fairly low cost,<ref>[[:File:RACM2.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 2)]], September 1980.</ref> and the terminals in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point have fought against other dust mitigation methods because of their associated costs.<ref>[[:File:Notes on email correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions.pdf|Email Correspondence with Richard Posner, President of Dust Solutions Inc.]], 2023.</ref> Despite decades of dust control using water suppression, nearby [[Interviews and oral histories|residents continue to report evidence]] that coal dust affects local air quality, outside and in their homes.
== Concerns ==
Some of the chemicals are environmentally toxic and present potential problems if spray run-off and spillage is allowed to fall onto ground unprotected by a collection pad.


== Chemical Coatings ==
Additionally, measuring the efficiency of these solutions is very difficult, and is still a developing process. 
Many private companies offer chemical sprays that coat the coal, usually within the train car, with a sealant that prevents fugitive dust emissions.  
 
== Wet Dust Suppression in Hampton Roads ==
 
=== History ===
Water suppression is mentioned in the record as early as the 1920s, when the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Railroad Company installed a custom pipe system to spray water on coal-filled railcars where and when the cars were emptied through overturning.<ref>[https://voicesinthedust.org/File:Daily_Press_1927_11_23_Page_2.pdf Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers], ''Daily Press'', November 23, 1927.</ref> Following an air monitoring study in 1956 demonstrating coal was a major portion of airborne dust in Southeast Newport News and pressure from the Newport News City Council, C&O installed equipment to create a water fog over the coal piers to suppress dust.<ref>[https://voicesinthedust.org/File:Daily_Press_1956_12_12_Page_3.pdf C&O to Install Costly Equipment for Control of Air Pollution in NN], ''Daily Press'', December 12, 1956.</ref>
 
Following community pressure on politicians and [https://voicesinthedust.org/Coal_dust_complaints complaints to Virginia Air Pollution Control Board] and additional research in the 1980s, water suppression infrastructure was expanded in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point, Norfolk.<ref name=":0">Vogelsong, [https://virginiamercury.com/2022/04/19/virginia-will-begin-monitoring-air-pollution-around-hampton-roads-coal-terminals/ 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.</ref> Some sources cite the [https://voicesinthedust.org/Virginia_Department_of_Environmental_Quality_(VA_DEQ) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ)] and claim new water suppression system at the terminals in Southeast Newport News reduced coal dust emissions by 80%.<ref>Seeking VA DEQ reference.</ref> However, this claim has not been substantiated.
 
=== Today ===
Despite decades of dust control using water suppression, nearby [https://voicesinthedust.org/Interviews_and_oral_histories residents continue to report] that coal dust negatively impacts local air quality, outside and in their homes, leaves dust films on outdoor and indoor surfaces, harms quality of life, and requires residents and property owners to bear high air filtration costs.<ref name=":0" /> That said, it is commonly held that [https://voicesinthedust.org/Particulate_matter_and_coal_dust coal dust] pollution in Southeast Newport News was worse before the water suppression sprinkler system was upgraded in the 1980s. Residents also describe seeing sprinklers that are frequently off. There are also reports from residents that the sprinklers are not turned on until winds are very fast.<ref name=":2">[./File:CPC_Minutes_5.2.18.pdf City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes], City of Newport News, May 2, 2018.</ref>
 
The [https://voicesinthedust.org/Companies:_railroads,_terminals,_and_coal Dominion Terminal] now used 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.<ref name=":1">Lawlor, [https://www.dailypress.com/2011/07/16/coal-dust-piles-an-issue-for-southeast-newport-news/ Coal dust, piles an issue for southeast Newport News], ''Daily Press'', July 16, 2011, Updated: August 18, 2019.</ref> The [https://voicesinthedust.org/Companies:_railroads,_terminals,_and_coal Kinder Morgan Bulk Terminals] use a system of 44 sprinklers to spray water that suppresses dust emissions from the piles and transloading equipment. In 2022, [https://voicesinthedust.org/Companies:_railroads,_terminals,_and_coal Kinder Morgan] spokesperson Amy Baek claimed the [https://voicesinthedust.org/Companies:_railroads,_terminals,_and_coal Kinder Bulk Morgan Terminals] used 20,000 gallons of water every hour to suppress dust emissions.<ref name=":0" />
 
Water suppression is argued to be effective at fairly low cost.<ref>[[:File:RACM2.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 2)], September 1980.]]</ref> 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 associated price tag,<ref>[./File:Notes_on_email_correspondence_between_Richard_Posner_of_Dust_Solutions.pdf Email Correspondence with Richard Posner, President of Dust Solutions Inc.], 2023.</ref><ref name=":2" /> even though [https://voicesinthedust.org/Wind_Fences,_Domes,_and_Tree_Barriers#Wind_Fences costs are small as a fraction of the terminals' annual revenue].<ref>Repair Lab, [./File:Wind_Fences_and_Domes_Report_Repair_Lab_2024_(corrected).pdf Coal Dust in Southeast Newport News Is a Nuisance and There Are Solutions (Corrected)], August 2024.</ref>


== Documents ==
== Documents ==


* [[:File:S40789-025-00784-3.pdf|Han, F. et al. A review of water-based suppressants for coal dust suppression. September 24, 2024.]]
* [[:File:Daily Press 1927 11 23 Page 2.pdf|Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers, ''Daily Press'', November 23, 1927]]
* [[:File:Daily Press 1927 11 23 Page 2.pdf|Railroads of Port Adopt Coal Sprinkle: Growing demand for Sprinkled Coal Said to Be Made by Trans-Shippers, ''Daily Press'', November 23, 1927]]
* [[:File:RACM1.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 1), September 1980]]
* [[:File:RACM1.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 1), September 1980]]
Line 21: Line 42:
* [[:File:RACM3.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 3), September 1980]]
* [[:File:RACM3.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 3), September 1980]]
* [[:File:RACM4.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 4), September 1980]]
* [[:File:RACM4.pdf|Ohio Office of Air Pollution Control, Reasonably Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources (Part 4), September 1980]]
* [[:File:CPC Minutes 5.2.18.pdf|City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, City of Newport News, May 2, 2018]]
* [[:File:Notes on email correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions.pdf|Email Correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions, Inc. and Repair Lab Team Member, 2023]]
* [[:File:Notes on email correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions.pdf|Email Correspondence between Richard Posner of Dust Solutions, Inc. and Repair Lab Team Member, 2023]]
* [[:File:Wind Fences and Domes Report Repair Lab 2024 (corrected).pdf|Repair Lab, Coal Dust in Southeast Newport News is a Nuisance and There Are Solution (Corrected), August 2024]]
* [[:File:Recommended practices for loading, unloading and transporting coal by rail .pdf|Wituschek E. et al. Coal Dust Control: Recommended practices for loading, unloading and transporting coal by rail. ''Regional Report No. 86-17.'' April 1986.]]


== References ==
== References ==

Latest revision as of 08:08, 18 July 2025

Coal dust emissions in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point are primarily managed using wet suppression methods that consist of spraying water, or water with chemical additives, over coal storage piles, railcars, and/or transloading equipment using a system of sprinklers and water trucks. Water application is often adjusted based on terminal activity and ambient humidity conditions. According to a representative from Norfolk Southern, most coal-carrying rail cars are sprayed with chemicals when they leave the coal mines, minimizing the dust emissions en route to terminals.[1]

Dominion Terminal Water Application
While the sprinklers are not on at the moment of the photograph, large amounts of standing water are visible at the Dominion Terminal.

In general, dust suppressants should be durable, protective, easy (meaning they do not significantly impede transportation processes), cost-effective, and non-toxic. A variety of formulas are on the market, including oils, waste oils, oil emulsions, latex sealants, lignin derivatives, polyacrylamides and proprietary formations, each with their own drawbacks.

Measuring PM control efficiency is difficult if not impossible. Currently, there is no documentation that can independently verify the projected PM control efficiencies for most of these options.[2]

Types of Surfactants

  • Plain or mist water sprays
    • Commonly installed at conveyor transfer points, rotary dumpers, hoppers, and stockpiles.
    • Rely on fine water droplets (typically 10–200 µm) to adhere to dust and settle it out of the air
  • Mist cannons or Dry Fog systems
    • Ultrafine droplets (<10 µm) form an airborne “blanket” that agglomerates dust in enclosed areas like hoppers.
  • Surfactant‑enhanced sprays
    • Addition of surfactants reduces water surface tension to improve adhesion to fine, hydrophobic coal dust. This method enhances capture efficiency and conserves water compared to plain sprays
  • Foam suppression: Foam mixes water, air, and a foaming agent to create a lasting layer that traps dust at high‑impact zones (e.g., conveyor ends, crushers) with minimal moisture addition
  • Products like Nbco DustBind, DustBind Plus, DustLock, HAUL‑EZE, and HAULAGE‑DC are polymer or salt-based additives applied via spray. They form a flexible crust over coal to prevent wind erosion and self-heating, especially during rail transport and stockpile storage

Concerns

Some of the chemicals are environmentally toxic and present potential problems if spray run-off and spillage is allowed to fall onto ground unprotected by a collection pad.

Additionally, measuring the efficiency of these solutions is very difficult, and is still a developing process.

Wet Dust Suppression in Hampton Roads

History

Water suppression is mentioned in the record as early as the 1920s, when the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Railroad Company installed a custom pipe system to spray water on coal-filled railcars where and when the cars were emptied through overturning.[3] Following an air monitoring study in 1956 demonstrating coal was a major portion of airborne dust in Southeast Newport News and pressure from the Newport News City Council, C&O installed equipment to create a water fog over the coal piers to suppress dust.[4]

Following community pressure on politicians and complaints to Virginia Air Pollution Control Board and additional research in the 1980s, water suppression infrastructure was expanded in Southeast Newport News and Lambert's Point, Norfolk.[5] Some sources cite the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) and claim new water suppression system at the terminals in Southeast Newport News reduced coal dust emissions by 80%.[6] However, this claim has not been substantiated.

Today

Despite decades of dust control using water suppression, nearby residents continue to report that coal dust negatively impacts local air quality, outside and in their homes, leaves dust films on outdoor and indoor surfaces, harms quality of life, and requires residents and property owners to bear high air filtration costs.[5] That said, it is commonly held that coal dust pollution in Southeast Newport News was worse before the water suppression sprinkler system was upgraded in the 1980s. Residents also describe seeing sprinklers that are frequently off. There are also reports from residents that the sprinklers are not turned on until winds are very fast.[7]

The Dominion Terminal now used 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 that suppresses 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 emissions.[5]

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 associated price tag,[10][7] even though costs are small as a fraction of the terminals' annual revenue.[11]

Documents

References

  1. ↑ Lawlor, Newport News, Coal Terminals Looking Into Wind Fence, Daily Press, August 1, 2011.
  2. ↑ Han, F. et al. A review of water-based suppressants for coal dust suppression. September 24, 2024.
  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. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 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.
  6. ↑ Seeking VA DEQ reference.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 [./File:CPC_Minutes_5.2.18.pdf 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. ↑ [./File:Notes_on_email_correspondence_between_Richard_Posner_of_Dust_Solutions.pdf Email Correspondence with Richard Posner, President of Dust Solutions Inc.], 2023.
  11. ↑ Repair Lab, [./File:Wind_Fences_and_Domes_Report_Repair_Lab_2024_(corrected).pdf Coal Dust in Southeast Newport News Is a Nuisance and There Are Solutions (Corrected)], August 2024.
Retrieved from "https://voicesinthedust.org/index.php?title=Wet_Dust_Suppression&oldid=1536"