My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0813_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_0813_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/3/2011 11:55:31 AM
Creation date
10/3/2011 11:40:49 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
292
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mercury is being deposited from the air to the Minnesota surface at a rate of 12.7 <br /> ug/m2/year.3 In order to estimate increases in the deposition rate of mercury from the <br /> operation of a crematory, the following inputs are used: the resulting ambient <br /> concentration of mercury (from SCREEN3 modeling), the velocity of mercury deposition <br /> (from Pratt et.al 1996)4, and the amount of mercury that is in the form that will deposit <br /> (from attachment 1). <br /> This calculation is shown in attachment 5, and was done for two scenarios: if2190 <br /> cremations were conducted in a year (8760 hours per year/4 hours per cremation), and if <br /> 300 cremations per year were conducted. <br /> Mercury (Hg) deposition to McCarron Lake is estimated to increase three-fold assuming <br /> 2190 cremations were performed each year. If 300 cremations were to be conducted, the <br /> increased deposition is calculated to be 3 ug/m2/year, or an increase of about 23%. <br /> Because the proposed crematories are new air emission sources, increased mercury in the <br /> environment is expected. The estimates made here in the memorandum have been <br /> conducted using a conservative screening dispersion model; refined modeling would <br /> likely lower these estimates. <br /> Remedies to low mercury releases are not simple. Because few crematories in the United <br /> States use add-on air pollution control equipment, control of mercury at these facilities is <br /> undeveloped in the United States. For example, EPA's testing of a crematory that had a <br /> wet scrubber that was thought to be a well-controlled unit showed that it was ineffective <br /> at controlling pollution; particulate matter control was 0%, mercury emissions control <br /> was inconsistent (sometimes 0%, sometimes 50%). Mortuary Science staff at the MDH <br /> are adamant that society will not tolerate teeth removal. <br /> Impacts on underground water reservoirs <br /> v <br /> I am in the process of discussing with staff from St. Paul Region Water Services about <br /> citizens' concerns on the treated water in the reservoir northeast of Roselawn Cemetery. <br /> Citizens expressed their concern as the "respiration" of air through the reservoir as the <br /> water level rises and falls. <br /> Attachment 1: Emission Test Evaluation of a Crematory at Woodlawn Cemetery in the <br /> Bronx, NY. September 1999. <br /> Attachment 2: SCREEN3 Modeling Output: Crematory Run 4. <br /> Attachment 3: Estimated Potential to Emit of Pollutants from a Crematory <br /> Attachment 4: Estimated Ambient Air Concentrations from a Crematory <br /> Attachment 5: Calculation of Mercury Deposition Rate over McCarron Lake, Roseville <br /> 3 Swain et. al. Increasing rates of atmospheric mercury deposition in midcontinental North America. Science <br /> 257: 784-787. <br /> ¢Pratt et. al. 1996. Estimation of dry deposition of inorganics using filter pack data and inferred deposition <br /> veolcity. Environmental Science and Technology;30:2 168-2 177). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.