Recommendations for the Disposal of Chemical Agents and Munitions (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Comparisons of the Baseline System and Alternative Technologies
Comparisons of the Baseline System and Alternative Technologies
Pages 98-119
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 98... ...
A large number of potential alternatives were considered, which are presented later in the chapter, and have been taken directly from the report Altemative Technologies for the Destruction of Chemical Agents and Munitions (~Altemadves report, NBC, 1993a)
|
From page 99... ...
The section on metals, energetics, and dunnage disposal describes why the committee could not identify feasible alternatives to baseline system for disposal of metal parts, energetics, or dunnage. Consequently, the remainder of the chapter focuses largely on alternative technologies for agent destruction, as have virtually ah cans for alternative technologies.
|
From page 100... ...
Process readiness and time are also economic issues, in terms of research and development costs and extended storage costs, but these are of lesser concern than safety. Typical industrial development components are preliminary process design, bench scale testing, and pilot plant testing.
|
From page 101... ...
suitable for final disposal. TreaW compliance issues are the irreversibility of the agent destruction process and the schedule for completion of disposal operations.
|
From page 105... ...
, potassium persulfate (K2S2O~) , and other oxidizing agents such as hydrogen peroxide or chlorine oxide.
|
From page 106... ...
The committee has considered it for oxidation of the products of caustic neutralization or the products of wet air oxidation (see Appendix F for a more detailed discussion)
|
From page 107... ...
More detailed reviews of these two processes are prodded in AppendLx D gh-Temperahue, Low-Pressure Pyrite Several pyrolysis processes developed for other applications have been suggested for chemical agents.
|
From page 108... ...
The committee judged it as not offering a significant advantage over the baseline. Molten salt is a promising technology that can combine combustion with acid gas removal in one unit.
|
From page 109... ...
Alternative Processes Recommended for Further Research and Development Although no single process, including incineration, can do the entire job of agent destruction and waste treatment' several combinations of processes deserve further study as alternatives to the liquid incinerator and follow-up components of the baseline system. The four most promising alternatives to destroy liquid agent are based on neutralization as an initial step.
|
From page 110... ...
In contrast to wet air oxidation, however, supercr~tical water oxidation is not a proven commercial technology. The utility of an agent destruction system based on supercntical water oxidation depends on successful outcomes of current research programs.
|
From page 111... ...
Both are capable of oxidizing neat agent. Because both are high-pressure processes (1,000 2,000 psi for wet air oxidation; more than 3,200 psi for supercntical water oxidations, it is the committee ' s judgment that a neutral~zed-agent feed to either process is much preferred to the agents themselves as the process feed.
|
From page 112... ...
Wet air oxidation is the most developed of the three oxidation processes. However, although it is capable of breaking down the chemical agents, it produces intermediate products that are refractory and persist in the product stream.
|
From page 113... ...
· The carbon dioxide normally produced can be largely collected as additional salt (sodium carbonate) by excess caustic.
|
From page 114... ...
even Fisher - - ~ ~ solutions, is In an early experimental stage and would require research to treat agent-contam~nated solutions. Wet air oxidation and supercritical water oxidation are under consideration in that program and could destroy the energetics effectively if the materials are properly prepared for a slurry feed (see Appendix D regarding limitations of these technologies)
|
From page 115... ...
Many of the oblation and pyrolysis processes are capable of delousing metal parts to this condition, but they are not suited to metal parts feed, especially large metal parts such as ton containers. Low-pressure processes such as molten metal, plasma arc, and steam reforming could in principle handle intermittent feed, but they offer no improvement in safety or waste products over the baseline system.
|
From page 116... ...
The following options are available to improve the management of flue gas emissions from the baseline system: · capture and temporarily store the entire gas stream until chemical analyses confirm it is safe for release; · drastically reduce the volume of waste gas byus~ng electricalpower for process heat, using pure oxygen rather than air, condensing all water vapor, and capturing carbon dioxide on lime to produce solid calcium carbonate; and use charcoal scrubbing, as with ventilation air, to remove virtually all residual agent as well as other tonics such as diodes and other high molecular weight chlorinated compounds. Of these options, which are discussed in more detail In the Altematives report, only charcoal scrubbing is considered in detail here (and in Appendix C)
|
From page 117... ...
The combination of these two factors requires cooling of flue gas upstream of the bed to condense water, followed by some reheat to eliminate further condensation in the charcoal. Ding the stack gases in this way would also avoid formation of a visible plume.
|
From page 118... ...
r r DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES The potential alternative chemical agent destruction systems identified here have not yet undergone the range of scientific research and en~neenng development required to certify that they will indeed provide safe, effective, and efficient alternatives to incineration. Key component processes for each of these systems have not progressed past a scientific proof-of-pr~nciple stage for at least one, if not more, of the chemical agents to be destroyed.
|
From page 119... ...
It is significant that permitting for the JACADS and Tooele facilities has required three years each despite the Army's strong efforts to meet permitting requirements expeditiously. Given the increased risk of accidental or chronic exposure from storage imposed by delaying the stocl~ile destruction, it is important that the most promising of the identified potential alternative technologies be advarlced past scientific proof-of-pr~nc~ple as soon as possible.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.