Page images
PDF
EPUB

(6) Mechanical Engineering (86:58 August 1964): "Sulfur-Smoke Removal System."

(7) Combustion (November 1964, p. 57): Taken from article in Electrical Times, 1964, 146 (July 16), 94 "Removing Sulfur From Flue Gases."

(8) Air Pollution Handbook (1956, pp. 13–84): Megill, Holden, and Ackley.

(9) British Chemical Engineering (vol. 7, No. 11, November 1962, pp. 833836): "Recovery of Sulfur in Marketable Form From Flue asses,” E. Willis.

(10) Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association (vol. 10, 1960, pp. 121–125) : "Bench-Scale Investigation on Removing Sulfur Dioxide From Flue Gases,” D. Bienstock and J. H. Field.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

PIONEER SERVICE & ENGINEERING Co.,

Chicago, Ill., November 12, 1964.
Re Allen S. King generating plant, unit 1, project 2121-7569A (R/E 5577),

sulfur removal system.
Mr. D. F. McELROY,
Manager of Engineering, Northern States Power Co.,
15 South Fifth Street,
Minneapolis, Minn.
(Attention: Mr. N. R. Fitch).

DEAR MR. McELROY: As we told you in a recent telephone conversation, our first step in the investigation of the sulfur removal system from powerplant stack gases was to contact the group who developed the pilot plant for a sulfur removal system as described in the copy of Public Service magazine forwarded to us with your letter of October 15. Our first contact was with ResearchCottrell

, Inc., one of the participants in the pilot plant. Research, in addition to giving us an estimate of the dust- and mist-removal equipment also gave us the name of the contact at the headquarters of General Public l'tilities. This is the group which coordinates the research and development efforts on this sulfur removal system study.

We have discussed the status of the system study with Mr. Lambert of GPU. Mr. Lambert, incidentally, is an employee of Pennsylvania Electric Co. The pilot plant is located in Pennsylvania Electric's Shawville Station. The GPC group planned to build a prototype plant which would be scaled up from the pilot plant. This prototype to be installed on a 250-megawatt unit. This plan was abandoned because of the cost ($10 million estimated installation cost with little or no salvage value) and the requirement that most of the economizer surface would have to be removed from the boiler to give the 850° F. exit gas required; however, they are proceeding with a prototype which will be installed at the Portland Station of Metropolitan Edison Co. This will take a side stream of 125,000 pounds per hour of flue gas and they expected to be in operation in somewhere around a year.

There has been no attempt made to size or price hardware for anything larger than this 250-megawatt prototype unit and Mr. Lambert is of the opinion that there would be little interest in estimating a larger unit until the prototype is operating. This is because there have been some problems encountered in the pilot plant that must be worked out on the prototype; there have also been some problems on design of the larger components as well as selection of materials that can stand up in the atmosphere of the system. One of the problems has been leakage around the air heater which has resulted in an acid concentration that has attacked materials on the cold end of the

such as, the stainless steel used in the mist collectors and fans, which tended to disintegrate within a week's time. Another problein, and one which makes the operating cost high, is loss of the catalyst bed due to attrition from frequent handling in cleaning because the dust-removal system is not as effective as desired. The acid produced is not of a quality or concentration that can be marketed so it is recommended that a facility be installed to further concentrate the acid to a more salable concentration. The GPU group feel confident that all of these problems can be solved but, as stated above, can give us no information of a type that could be used for application to the Allen S King generating plant. From what we were able to get from Research, the dust collectors ahead of the catalyst would be at least twice the size of those which they are proposing for the Allen S King Generating Plant

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

system;

[ocr errors]

now. The mist collectors, some 23 in number, would add up to even more area than the dust collectors. Although, for the prototype plant, Monsanto, one of the other participants, will furnish one of their mist collectors but this too will take almost as much space as those required by Research. A "horseback" estimate for a 500 megawatt unit, according to Research, might range between $17 and $20 million.

In view of the reluctance to give us estimated sizes for components, we feel that further efforts directed toward a plant layout will not develop anything in value for future use. Our plan, unless you have other thoughts, is to follow closely this and the other methods of sulfur removal some of which are also approaching prototype stage and, when we find that someone is ready to talk about application of their equipment, we will resume our activity. Very truly yours,

V. H. SIMON,

Mechanical Engineer. Senator Nelson. We will open tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the hearing was adjourned until 9 a.m., Friday, December 11, 1964.)

ST. CROIX RIVER DISPUTE

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1964

U.S. SENATE,
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON AIR AND WATER POLLUTION
OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,

Stillwater, Minn. The Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution met, pursuant to adjournment, at 9 a.m., Hon. Gaylord Nelson presiding.

Senator NELSON. We will call these hearings to order.
Mr. Thuet, do you wish to open?
STATEMENT OF PAUL THUET, COUNSEL, SAVE THE ST. CROIX,

INC.
Mr. THUET. Yes.
Senator Nelson, Senator Metcalf, and staff, my name is Paul Thuet.
I am counsel for the Save the St. Croix Committee.

I would like to make the statement that I do serve also as State senator in the State of Minnesota.

I want to make it clear to the committee that I, in no way, am appearing for the State of Minnesota. I represent no agency. I am appearing here strictly as the attorney.

I have been counsel for the committee and corporation since it was instituted.

Many, many people wanted to testify here today. We felt, to conserve time, we would have a limited number. We have a list of our witnesses here. They will cover specific areas. We hope they will be short and we will be able to cover them within the time allotted. However, some governmental subdivisions from Wisconsin wish to be heard and I understand one is present here now. There would be two additional people who will come in approximately at noon and we would yield a portion of our time for them to be heard.

Mr. Arthur Olson of the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors is here at this time and I would like to call jon him. He is not connected in any way with our association. He wishes to make a free and independent statement on their position.

I would like to call on Mr. Arthur Olson. Senator Nelson. Will you state your name for the record and whom you represent? STATEMENT OF ARTHUR N. OLSON, HUDSON, WIS., ST. CROIX

COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Mr. Olson. My name is Arthur N. Olson, from Hudson, Wis. I am with the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors. I am also the

chairman of the air and water pollution committeee of the said county.

Over 25 miles of the St. Croix River borders St. Croix County. A lot of swimming, boating, fishing, and sailing start and stop on our shores. We swim all summer long, fish, and there is also ice fishing all winter long. St. Croix County recognizes the need for additional public access to the St. Croix River for recreational purposes.

Two years ago we established St. Croix Park. This park is about 5 miles south of Hudson, Wis., a wonderful area for swimming, a large expansive beach. We put in restroom facilities, black-top road, and parking. People from all over the United States have stopped there. Bus loads of children and adults come from the Twin Cities area for the purpose of swimming, boating, and just relaxing. The tourists themselves find many things in St. Croix Valley they wish to remember.

The county has built several wayside stops for public use. One of the most beautiful sights in St. Croix County is directly across the river from where we are now. At this point you will see a beautiful view of the valley itself and of the St. Croix River. We have established a historic monument there. We hope you gentlemen will get a chance to visit that place before you go back to Washington.

Our State forester has told us at the last county board session that there are two camping area facilities being established for tourists.

Dairying itself is our most important single source of income in St. Croix County. We are very proud of our production records. We have over 42,000 milk cows in St. Croix County, and over the age of 2 years we have over 48,000.

Our farms, there were over 38,000 acres of land in corn in the year 1962, 47,000 acres of oats, 4,200 acres of soybeans, 53,000 acres of alfalfa, and 17,000 acres of clover and timothy hay, a substance which is required for our dairies.

Of course, the most important thing we have in St. Croix County is our people. There are 30,000 of us. The residential growth in our valley itself and St. Croix County has been a healthy one. People are moving from the larger cities to the rural areas every day. One of our biggest drawings is the fact we have pure air and good water. They come and see it and they live and stay.

You very probably wondered why I am bringing up the facts on St. Croix County, which you probably can get from many of our books, but actually we suspect that our beautiful St. Croix River, the area surrounding, and these resources are being endangered. Forty-three percent of St. Croix County's population are under the age of 19 years. Gentlemen, that is 43 percent. We have to speak for them. Whatever decisions that are made on air and water pollution, these children have to be taken into account, their welfare has to be established. Eleven percent of our population is 65 years and over. We understand that these people are more susceptible to respiratory diseases through air pollution.

I would like to take the time just to read a resolution that our county board adopted at the November session.

Whereas NSP proposes to build a powerplant at the village of Bayport, Washington County, Minn.; and

Whereas evidence has been submitted tending to show that damage will be done to water life and plant life in the St. Croix River due to heated water coming out of said plant; and

Whereas evidence has further been submitted tending to show that the air will be polluted by the coal burned in said plant, which polluted air will be harmful to people, animals, and crops in St. Croix County, which polluted air will tend to drift into St. Croix County because of prevailing westerly and northwesterly winds : Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Governor of the State of Wisconsin, the State department of agriculture, public service commission, industrial commission, department of health, conservation department, and the president of Northern States Power Co. be respectfully requested to inquire into the proposed project and determine whether or not any damages may be inflicted on St. Croix County and propose measures to protect the river and the environs from such damage, if any.

(Signed) ARTHUR N. OLSON. STATE OF WISCONSIN, County of St. Croix, 88:

I, Lola M. Turnquist, county clerk in and for said county, do certify the above to be a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors on November 13, 1964.

(Signed) LOLA M. TURNQUIST. By county board action at the last session, because of the air pollution problems that might take place and the water pollution, they have established a water and air pollution committee to study the effect on St. Croix County and its people. As it stands now, we see no legal means of protecting this great resource, and before it is sold to anyone we should be consulted. To sell something that does not belong to you is wrong, legally and morally: Our people have appealed to us as county supervisors to do something.

I am here as a county supervisor to appeal to you gentlemen. We urge your committee to pass or find some legislation to protect our interest in a matter such as this.

At this time I would like to thank you gentlemen for your work in trying to protect our natural resources all over the country from undue exploitation.

Thank you very much.
Senator Nelson. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr. THUET. On behalf of Save the St. Croix, we would like to introduce our speaker who, in turn, will introduce the following speaker. This is Mr. Adrian Warren, who is chairman of Save the St. Croix, a resident of Houlton, Wis., and a St. Paul businessman.

Adrian.

STATEMENT OF ADRIAN L. WARREN, HOULTON, WIS., CHAIRMAN

OF SAVE THE ST. CROIX, INC. Mr. WARREN. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Adrian L. Warren, a resident of Houlton, Wis., just across the river on the bank of the beautiful St. Croix.

We are gratified that this committee has found time in its busy schedule to come to Minnesota to study a situation we feel is of vital concern not only to the people of Minnesota and Wisconsin, but one which embraces a principle important to the welfare of all Americans.

I am speaking today as chairman of Save the St. Croix, Inc., an organization of some 500 people supported by more than 10,000 petitioners in Minnesota and Wisconsin who have joined together in

40-957-65--8

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »