Original Article

Application of AERMOD Gaussian plume air dispersion model for simulation of CO emission from Oil Refinery Stacks

Abstract

Air dispersion modeling is important tools to improve air quality. The primary objective of this research was focused on simulation of CO emission from stacks in Tehran oil refinery, which is main refinery complex in Iran. This study was performed by AERMOD to simulation the CO dispersion emitted from stacks in 2018 and 2019 .Modeling results shown that maximum concentration of CO values at 1hr and 8hr for two times hot and cold 109 μg/m3, 32 μg/m3, 360 μg/m3, 254 μg/m3 respectively. Simulated values of CO emissions were compared with those obtained area measurement campaign at 4 receptors. Maximum concentration of CO in cold times was more than hot times. This can be attributed to low air turbulence. Our analysis demonstrated that the AERMOD modeling system could be used in the air quality simulation in the near future for CO. Simulation output depict that were all centered in against mountain and  the middle of simulation area where the emission sources concentrated, and it is probably because the air pollutions were topography and source oriented. Finally, study results indicate that the simulated concentration of CO based on AERMOD, does not exceed concentration limit, set by the Iranian Ambient Air Quality Standard. It verified that co release from oil refinery stacks don't have any significant impact on nearby communities.

1. CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). Air quality trends and action plan for control of air pollution from seventeen studies. Ministry of Environment and Forest. NAAQMS/29/2006.
2. Sharma, A.R., Kharol, S.K., Badarinath, K.V.S., 2010. Influence of vehicular traffic on urban air quality – a case study of Hyderabad, India. Trans. Res. Part D: Trans.Environ. 15 (3), 154–159.
3. Goel, R., Guttikunda, S.K., Mohan, D., Tiwari, G., 2015. Benchmarking vehicle and passenger travel characteristics in Delhi for on-road emissions analysis. Travel Behav. Soc. 2 (2), 88–101.
4. Gulia, S., Nagendra, S.M.S., Khare, M., Khanna, I., 2015a. Urban air quality management – a review. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 6 (2), 286–304.
5. Gulia, S., Shrivastava, A., Nema, A.K., Khare, M., 2015b. Assessment of urban air quality around a heritage site using AERMOD: a case study of Amritsar city. India.Environ. Mod. Assess. 20 (6), 599–608.
6. Kirk-Othmer 2007. Chemical Technology and the Environment (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey. 1–10.
7. Lee C-Y, and Zhou P. 2015. Directional shadow price estimation of CO2, SO2 and NOx in the United
States coal power industry 1990–2010. Energy Econ 51:493–502. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2015.08.010
8. Nam K-M, Waugh CJ, Paltsev S, et al. 2013. Carbon co-benefits of tighter SO2 and NOx regulations in
China. Global Environ Change 23(6):1648–61. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.09.003
9. Gibson MD, Kundu S, and Satish M. 2013. Dispersion model evaluation of PM2.5, NOx and SO2 from
point and major line sources in Nova Scotia, Canada using AERMOD Gaussian plume air dispersion
model. Atmos Poll Res 4(2):157–67. doi:10.5094/APR.2013.016
10. Riga-Karandinos, A.N., Saitanis, C., 2005. Comparative assessment of ambient air quality in two typical Mediterranean coastal cities in Greece. Chemosphere59, 11251136.
11. Wagstrom, K.M., Pandis, S.N., 2011. Sourcereceptor relationships for fine particulate matter concentrations in the Eastern United States. AtmosphericEnvironment45, 347356.
12. Crowl D A, Louvar J F, 2002. Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals with Applications (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall PTR, U.S. 172.
13. Holmes N S, Morawska L, 2006. A review of dispersion modeling and its application to the dispersion of particles: An overview of different dispersion models available. Atmospheric Environment, 40(30): 5902–5928.
14. Zhang Y, Liu X H, Olsen K M, Wang W X, Do B A, Bridgers G M, 2010. Responses of future air quality to emission controls over North Carolina, Part II: Analyses of futureyear predictions and their policy implications. Atmospheric Environment, 44(23): 2767–2779.
15. Dutra JCC et al (2012) Simulação da dispersão de poluentes emitidos por uma usina termoelétrica de 532m nordeste brasileiro. In: VII Congresso Nacional de Engenharia Mecânica
16. Chen Z H, Cheng S Y, Li J B, Guo X R, Wang W H, Chen D S, 2008. Relationship between atmospheric pollution processes and synoptic pressure patterns in northern China. Atmospheric Environment, 42(24): 6078–6087.
17. Ganor E, Osetinsky I, Stupp A, Alpert P, 2010. Increasing trend of African dust, over 49 years, in the eastern Mediterranean. Journal of Geophysical research: atmospheres, 115(D7): D7201.
18. Wu S L, Mickley L J, Leibensperger E M, Jacob D J, Rind D, Streets D G, 2008. Effects of 2000–2050 global change on ozone air quality in the United States. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 113(D6): D6302.
19. Li L, Hao J M, Hu J N, 2005. Analysis and prediction of air quality influence from energy utilization in Beijing. China Environmental Science, 25(6): 746–750.
20. Khodakarami j, Ghobadi P,2016. Urban pollution and solar radiation impacts. Volume 57, May 2016, Pages 965-976
21. Kumar, A., Dixit, S., Varadarajan, C., Vijayan, A., & Masuraha, A. (2006). Evaluation of the AERMOD dispersion model as a function of atmospheric stability for an urban area. Environmental Progress, 25(2), 141–151.
22. Atash F (2007) The deterioration of urban environments in developing countries: mitigating the air pollution crisis in Tehran, Iran. Cities 24(6):399–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2007.04.001
23. Cpcb 2009 Guidelines for national ambient air quality monitoring, NAAQM, India Ministry of Environment and Forests MpcbgovWeb http://mpcbgovin/images/pdf/Ambient_Air_quality_ Monitoring_Guidlinespdf. Accessed 20 August 2017
24. Holnicki P, Nahorski Z (2015) Emission data uncertainty in urban air quality modeling -case study. Environ Model Assess 20(6):583– 597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-015-9445-7
25. Perry, S.G., Cimorelli, A.J., Paine, R.J., Brode, R.W., Weil, J.C., Venkatram, A., Wilson,R.B., Lee, R.F., Peters, W.D., 2005. AERMOD: a dispersion model for industrial source applications. Part II:model performance against 17 field study databases. Journal of Applied Meteorology 44, 694708.
26. Chang JC, and Hanna SR. 2004. Air quality model performance evaluation. Meteorol Atmos Phys 87(1–3);167–96
27. Lee H, Yoo J, Kang M, et al. 2014. Evaluation of concentrations and source contribution of PM10 and
SO2 emitted from industrial complexes in Ulsan, Korea: Interfacing of the WRF–CALPUFF modeling tools. Atmos Poll Res 5(4):664–76. doi:10.5094/APR.2014.076
28. USEPA (U.S. Environment Protection Agency), 2005. Federal Register, Part -III, 40 CFR Part 51, Revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions; Final Rule.
29. CERC (Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants, Ltd.), 2006. ADMS User Guide Manual. Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants Ltd. .
IssueVol 13 No 1 (2021) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
Published2021-03-03
Keywords
pollution AERMOD Monoxide carbon Point Source Dispersion Modeling

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Jamshidi Angas M, Jozi SA, Hejazi R, Rezaian S. Application of AERMOD Gaussian plume air dispersion model for simulation of CO emission from Oil Refinery Stacks. Int J Occup Hyg. 2021;13(1):xxx-xxx.