Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

ISSN: 0002-2470 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

A Systematic Procedure for Determining the Cost

of Controling Particulate Emissions From Industrial
Sources

Norman G. Edmisten & Francis L. Bunyard

To cite this article: Norman G. Edmisten & Francis L. Bunyard (1970) A Systematic Procedure for
Determining the Cost of Controling Particulate Emissions From Industrial Sources, Journal of the
Air Pollution Control Association, 20:7, 446-452, DOI: 10.1080/00022470.1970.10469423

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1970.10469423

Published online: 15 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 266

View related articles

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm16
 Norman G. Edmisten and Francis L. Bunyard
National Air Pollution Control Administration
The increasing concern about the air quality of our na-
tion has created a similar concern in the costs associated
with reducing emissions to desirable levels. The in-
formation available on such costs is not only scarce but
is further complicated by reporting inconsistency.
The purpose of this paper is to bridge this inadequacy
by presenting a methodology for assessing the cost of
controlling particulate emissions from industrial sources.
Basic equipment costs were collected and evaluated for
dry centrifugal and wet collectors, fabric niters, electro-
static precipitators, and afterburners. Manufacturers,
installers, users, and operators of air pollution control
equipment were contacted to obtain the necessary cost
data for the year 1968. A basic premise of the pro-
cedure developed is that the most meaningful approach
to the evaluation and comparison of air pollution con-
trol costs is based on the total cost of control annualized
over the expected economic life of the equipment.
Items such as capital charges and expenditures for
operation, maintenance, and collected waste disposal
are generally more significant in cost accounting than
the depreciated value of the initial investment. By
defining the size and efficiency of collection required;
the degree of difficulty in installing the equipment;
and knowledge of some of the characteristics of the
involved process, gas stream, and pollutant character-
istics, the cost of control can be estimated with the
assistance of cost factors and guidelines presented.
446
A new dimension of intensified interest and investigation was
added to the field of air pollution control with the passage of
The Air Quality Act of 1967. For the first time, comprehen-
sive economic investigations were to be undertaken to deter-
mine the cost of reducing air pollutant emissions and to
assess the related economic and welfare benefits to be derived
from various levels of required control effort. Accommo-
dating such comprehensive studies requires detailed informa-
tion on the cost incurred from the application of air pollution
control system alternatives.
This paper presents basic collection equipment costs and
estimating factors for assessing the total cost of control.
In addition, a procedure is outlined for calculating the total
cost of various devices for the collection of particulate matter
from industrial processes. Such information enables the
implementers of air quality-oriented control programs to
consider air pollution problems from an economic, as well as a
technical viewpoint, which will result in more effective con-
trol decisions. This concept of air quality-oriented control
programs provides an economically defensible and scientifi-
cally sound course of action for reducing the burden on our air
resources.
Messrs. Edmisten and Bunyard are associated with the
U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
National Air Pollution Control Administration, Division
of Economic Effects Research, 1033 Wade Ave., Raleigh,
N. C. 27605.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association
 The technology and art of applying devices for cleaning The costs developed in this paper are accurate to within
particulate laden gas is well denned, after years of research ±20% of specific equipment costs and to within ±50% of
and practical experience. Historically, most control efforts total capital investment. Such cost ranges take into account
have been directed toward nuisance abatement and visible cost differences caused by variations in: engineering design
plume reduction. The advent of air quality standards and among similar collector types, labor rates, taxes, freight,
increasingly stringent emission standards will require many construction codes, and gas stream characteristics.
users and operators of control devices to install more efficient Additional problems are encountered in estimating the
gas cleaning devices. Achievement of higher efficiencies cost of operating and maintaining control equipment. Rec-
within reasonable cost limits demands that attention be ords of comprehensive operating and maintenance costs are
directed toward integration of control equipment into the usually not available as they are considered impractical, too
industrial process and plant layout. Figure 1 illustrates this costly to maintain, and insignificant in terms of overall
concept in the selection of gas cleaning equipment for re- production costs. In the absence of such information, cost
moving particulate matter (dust, fume, mist, aerosol) from equations were developed on the basis of the assumption that
gas streams of industrial processes. control equipment is operated and maintained so that it
As shown in Figure 1, initial consideration in control equip- functions at its designed collection efficiency.
ment selection must be given to air quality and emission stan-
dards, from which collection efficiency may be ascertained. Source of Cost Data
Attention should be given not only to existing but also to The cost information presented in this paper is based on
anticipated control requirements. The overlapping of careful study of the literature, and survey of many suppliers,
collection efficiency ranges for various types of control installers, and operators of air pollution control equipment.
equipment, as shown in Table I, allows a certain amount of The cost information was reviewed by experts from the gas
flexibility in equipment selection. For example, to achieve cleaning equipment industry for reasonableness of data and
99% collection efficiency, a theoretical choice may be made methodology. In acquiring this cost information, care was
from among electrostatic precipitators, fabric niters, and wet exercised to assure completeness and consistency. The cost
collectors. data reflect 1968 prices.
Consideration should also be given to gas stream and par-
ticle characteristics. The most important factor here is the Categorization of Costs
gas volume, which determines the size of collection equip- The total cost of installing and operating air pollution con-
ment. Other characteristics may present problems or con- trol equipment is the function of three major definable cost
ditions that not only affect equipment selection, but also its categories: (1) capital investment, (2) operating and main-
operation, durability, and service. For example, the danger tenance costs, and (3) capital charges.
of a flash fire may preclude fabric niters altogether. In
another situation, a corrosive gas stream will shorten the
life of a wet collector unless the collector is constructed of
corrosion-resistant materials.
Further consideration in equipment selection, as shown in
Air quality and emissions
Figure 1, should be given to the accommodations. For standards
example, wet collectors require large amounts of water and
space for waste disposal. Electrostatic precipitators, be- [Determines collection efficiency
cause of their size, may require considerable space and
elaborate structural support.
Economics should also be considered in selection of control
equipment. The cost of control items listed in Figure 1
should be evaluated to select the most economic gas cleaning
system that is adaptable to the process and other require-
ments.
Ignition point ^
Estimating Control Costs m Volume ' Size distribution ."
E~ Temperature Abrasiveness ^ to
S c Moisture content Hygroscopic nature 73 ju
There are several procedures available for estimating the •{=•22 Corrosiveness Process Electrical properties "C "5
cost of an air pollution control system. The accuracy of the Eg Odor Grain loading <£ £
estimate depends on the amount of work done on problem ujsExplosiveness Density and shape -5 •
<-> Viscosity - Physical properties
assessments and system design, and the degree of component
accounting undertaken. Usually, the more laborious the Waste treatment Plant Water availability
Space restriction facility Heat recovery
procedure, the more accurate the estimate. Estimates pre- Product recovery .Fuel and energy availability
pared for competitive situations are developed through such • Power
procedures, and are usually considered to be of poor quality Engineering studies" Waste disposal
c Hardware Water 00 <f>
if they deviate by more than 5-8% from true costs. Besides £ Auxiliary equipment Cost of Materials ~ <n
being extremely time consuming, such detailed estimation is •SLand control Gas conditioning 2 S
a> Structures Labor g. g-
beyond the requirements of most air pollution control pro- _c Installation Taxes o <"
gram needs. For these reasons a simplified approach may Start-up . Insurance
be taken. Return on investment
Selected gas
The procedure presented in this paper is a compilation of cleaning system
cost aggregations derived from the most definable cost com-
ponent—the cost of "flange-to-flange" control hardware. Desired emission rate
Only those accounting items most directly associated with
control costs and definable for general application to all Figure 1. Criteria for selection of gas cleaning equipment.
industries are included in the cost aggregations. Costs of
such items as engineering studies, land, and site preparation,
which are extremely variable from one location to another,
were excluded from the procedures described.

July 1970 Volume 20, No. 7 447

 100

1000 - I I M i l l 1I II I i-

500

.2
5100
•>

o
50
tf
o
a>
.c

500 X
103 acfm
10
Cost of indicated efficiency may
vary + 20% of reported figure. 5
1 I I I I 1 1J ~ 1 I I I I I I I I
10 50 100 500 1000
Gas volume Ihrough collector, 10 3 acfm

Figure 2. Purchase cost of dry centrifugal collectors. Mll I

5 10 50 100 500 1000
3
Gas volume through collector, 10 acfm

Figure 3. Purchase cost of wet collectors.

Capital Investment
The "installed cost" quoted by a manufacturer of air pollu-
tion control equipment is usually based on an engineering
study of the actual emission source. The cost includes three Purchase cost varies with the size and collection efficiency
items: (1) control hardware costs, (2) auxiliary equipment for equivalent types of control devices. These costs are
costs, and (3) costs for field installation. Other costs in- reported for nominal high, medium, and low efficiencies.
curred in a control installation include engineering studies, As indicated in thefigures,the costs may vary from the plotted
land, site preparation, operating supply inventory, structured curve by ±20%. Reporting in this manner was necessary
modification, and start-ups. The variance of these cost items because of the wide range of process applications to which
is beyond the limits of general consideration. these curves relate. For example, electrostatic precipitators
designed to reduce emission to 0.05 gr/scf are considered
The purchase cost curves presented in Figure 2 through 6 high-efficiency electrostatic precipitators even though re-
illustrate the control hardware costs for dry centrifugal sulting collection efficiencies may range from 95% in one
collectors, wet collectors, electrostatic precipitators, fabric installation to 99.9% in another because of inlet grain loading
filters, and afterburners. These purchase costs are the differences.
amounts charged by manufacturers for equipment of standard
construction materials. Equipment fabricated with special Auxiliary equipment and installation, the remaining capital
materials (e.g., stainless steel 316 or ceramic coatings) to investment items, are aggregated with the purchase cost to
withstand high-temperature or corrosive gas streams will comprise the total installed cost. Total installed costs for
cost considerably more than reported in the figures. all generic types of control devices, expressed as a percentage
of purchase cost are presented in Table II. These installed
costs include a reasonable increment for the following items:
(1) erection, (2) insulation materials, (3) transportation of
Table I. Air pollution control equipment collection efficiencies. 1 ' 2 ' 3 equipment, (4) clarifiers and liquid treatment systems for
Typical efficiency ranges wet collectors, and (5) auxiliary equipment such as fans,
(on a total weight basis) normal ductwork, and motors. The low values listed in the
Equipment type (%) table are for minimal transportation and simple layout and
Electrostatic precipitatora 80-99.5+ installation of control devices. The high values are for
Fabric filters b 95-99.9 higher transportation cost and more difficult layout and in-
Mechanical collector 50-95 stallation. The extremely high values are for unusually
Wet collector 75-99+ complex installations, such as may be encountered with
Afterburner
Catalytic0 50-80 existing process situations. Ranges of installed costs for
Direct flame 95-99 electrostatic precipitators were calculated for each collection
a
Most electrostatic precipitators sold today are designed for 98-99.5%
efficiency cost curve in Figure 4 and are presented in Figure 7.
collection efficiency.
b
Table III lists the major cost categories and related con-
Fabric filter collection efficiency is normally greater than 99.5%.
c
Not normally applied in participate control; has limited use because ditions that establish the installed cost range for all categories
most particulate matter poisons or desensitizes the catalyst. of collection equipment.

448 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

 100 i i ii i_
i i i i \y y

1000 / / 500
TT 50-

500

10- y / o
rt
-y y _ioo

Purchase cos
i i \ i i\
i 100
5 5-

o
i i i i i i r
100 500
50 Gas volume 3through collector,
10 acfm
A- High temperature synthetics, woven and felt. -
Continuous automatically cleaned.
B - Medium temperature synthetics, woven and felt. —
Continuous automatically cleaned.
C-Woven natural fibers. Intermittently cleaned-single compartment.
10 50 100 500 1000
Cost of indicated efficiency may Gas volume through collector, 10 3 acfm
vary + 20% of reported figure.
10 JJ I I 1 I 1 I I I I I Cost for equipment of indicated construction may vary by + 20% of
10 50 100 500 1000 reported figure. ~
Gas volume through collector, 10 3 acfm
Figure 5. Purchase cost of fabric filters.
Figure 4. Purchase cost of high-voltage electrostatic precipitators.

Maintenance and Operation wear of the equipment. Formulas for calculating mainte-
nance costs are presented in Table IV.
The cost of operating and maintaining control equipment
depends on such factors as the quality and suitability of the Costs of electricity, fuel, and water are presented in Table
control equipment and the user's understanding and vigilance VI. Engineering data are also given in Table VI for opera-
in its operation. Management policies and attitudes also tional requirements of: (1) make-up water, (2) electricity
play a role in this area of cost. for electrostatic precipitators, (3) power for wet collectors,
and (4) pressure loss for all applicable control devices.
Maintenance and operating costs are difficult to assess, but
are frequently a significant portion of the overall annual Capital Charges
cost of controlling air pollutant emissions. Although com-
bined operating and maintenance costs may be as low as 15% The capital charges (interest, taxes, and insurance) vary
of the annualized total cost for dry centrifugal collectors and considerably depending on local tax structure, type of in-
electrostatic precipitators, they may be as high as 90% for a dustry, industry financial position and ability to borrow
high-efficiency wet collector. money, and the existing money market. The capital charge
The annual operating cost is the expenditure incurred in rate will range from 6 to 12% per year. For the purposes
operating a control device at its designed collection efficiency of presentation and ease of calculation a rate of 7% per year
for a period of one year. This cost depends on and accounts of the capital investment (total installed costs) was assumed.
for the following factors: (1) gas volume cleaned; (2) the
pressure drop across the system; (3) the total time the
device is operated; (4) the consumption and costs for elec-
tricity, fuel, and scrubbing liquor; and (5) the mechanical Table II. Installed cost expressed as a percentage of purchase
efficiencies of the fan and the pump. Table IV gives the cost for all generic types of control devices.
theoretical cost equations developed to reflect these factors. Cost range (%)
Maintenance cost is defined as the expenditure required to Extreme
sustain the operation of a control device at its designed Generic type Low Typical High high
efficiency. This is best accomplished with a scheduled main- Dry centrifugal 135 150 200 500
tenance program and proper replacement of defective and Wet scrubber
worn parts. The maintenance cost as indicated in Table V Low, mediuma energy 150 200 300 500
is assumed to be proportional to the gasflowrate of the device. High energy 200 300 500 600
Maintenance cost is an estimate based on present knowledge Electrostatic
precipitators 140 170 200 500
and understanding of control system applications. These Fabric filters 150 175 200 500
costs are expressed as average annual values computed over Afterburners 110 125 200 500
the useful life of the devices. Actually, maintenance costs, a
High-energy scrubbers usually require more expensive fans and
as in any mechanical device, will increase with the age and motors.

July 1970 Volume 20, No. 7 449

Table III. Conditions affecting purchase and installation costs.
Cost category Low to typical costs High to extreme high costs
Equipment transportation Minimum distance; simple loading and Extensive distance; complex procedure for loading and
unloading procedures unloading
Plant age Hardware designed into new plant as an Hardware installed into confines of old plant requiring
integral part of process structural or process modification or alteration
Available space Vacant area for location of control system Little vacant space; extensive steel support construction
and site preparation required
Instrumentation Little required Complex instrumentation required to assure reliability of
control or constant monitoring of gas stream
Guarantee on performance None required Guaranteed high collector efficiency to meet stringent
control requirements
Degree of assembly Control hardware shipped completely as- Control hardware to be assembled and erected in the field
sembled
Degree of engineering design Standard "package type" control system Control system requiring extensive integration with process,
insulation to correct temperature and moisture problem,
noise abatement
Utilities Electricity, water, waste disposal facilities Electrical and waste treatment facilities must be expanded;
readily available water supply must be developed or expanded
Collected waste material No special treatment facilities or handling Special treatment facilities and/or handling required
handling required
Labor Low wages in geographical area Overtime and/or high-wage geographical area
Auxiliary equipment Simple draft fan; minimal ductwork Extensive cooling equipment; ductwork; large motors
Corrosiveness Noncorrosive gas Acidic emissions requiring high alloy accessory equipment
using special handling and construction techniques

Table IV. Equations for calculating annual operation and Annualization of Costs
maintenance costs.
The capital investment for an air pollution control installa-
Operation costs tion can represent a sizable expenditure and have a significant
Main-
Electrical Liquor Fuel tenance impact on the economic position of an industrial firm. What
Control costs consumption costs costs is more important, however, is the recurring annual cost of
device (A) costs (B) (C) (D) control, which is the aggregation of all associated cost items.
Centrifugal o 0.7457 PHK
The annualized cost of control is computed by depreciating
collectors ~ 6356 E
the capital investment (total installed cost) over the expected
Wet collector S (0.7457) HKZ SWHL SM
or feasible life of the control equipment and adding the capital
Electrostatic charges (taxes, interest, and insurance). The recurring cost
precipitators S(JHK) SM of maintenance and operating expenditures are then added to
o 0.7457 PHK
the annualized capital cost figure to give the total annualized
SM cost of control.
Fabric filters " 6356 E
o 0.7457 PHK
The straight line method of depreciating capital invest-
SHF SM ment is a frequently used procedure because it has the sim-
Afterburners " 6356 E
plicity of a constant annual write-off. This procedure was
Note: annual cost (dollars) for operating and maintenance, G = used in the annualized cost calculation presented in this re-
(A) + (B) + (C) + (D) where:
port. The depreciation period varies considerably from
S = design capacity of the unit in actual cubic feet per minute industry to industry and is based on factors such as obsoles-
(acfm)
P = pressure drop in inches of water cence and useful life of the equipment. The standard In-
H = hours of operation annually
K = cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour
ternal Revenue Service guidelines4 for depreciation periods
E = fan efficiency expressed as decimal varies from 8 years for the aerospace and electronic indus-
M = maintenance cost per acfm in dollars per acfm tries to 28 years for the steam electric generating industry. A
F = tuel costs in dollars per actm per hour
W = make-up liquor rate in gallons per hour per acfm depreciation period of 15 years (6%% per year) can be con-
L = cost of liquor in dollars per gallon sidered typical for most control equipment installations.
Z = total power input required for a specified scrubbing efficiency in
horsepower per acfm
For ease of calculations a depreciation rate of 7% per year
J = kilowatts of electricity per acfm was used in this report.

450 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

Sample Calculations
The following procedure can be used to determine the
capital investment and annual cost of control for an average
application. A careful investigation of the industrial process
will determine the selection of applicable control devices, as
was discussed earlier. For purposes of illustration, the evalu-
ations of three collectors are presented in Table VII.
The calculations shown in Table VII are for a new plant
requiring high-efficiency collectors to comply with an emission
regulation. Control efficiency is required to be greater than
98 percent. The volume of gas handled is 100,000 actual
cubic feet per minute (acfm) for a temperature of 300°F;
no conditioning of gases is required. Only a minimum of
ductwork, valving, and hooding is required to fit the collector
onto the process. The step-by-step procedure is as follows:
1. Electrostatic precipitators, fabric filters, and high-energy
wet collectors have been assumed as applicable control
devices.
2. Determine purchase cost for high-efficiency electrostatic
precipitators, high-energy wet collectors, and fabric filter
of medium-temperature filter material from Figures 3, 4,
and 5.
3. Calculate low, typical, and high installed cost using the
installation factors from Table II. 100
4. Calculate low, typical, and high maintenance costs for Gas volume through collector, 103 acfm
8000 hr. Maintenance cost factors are presented in
Table V. Since maintenance costs may vary widely, low, Figure 6. Purchase cost of afterburners.
typical, and high costs are calculated.
5. Calculate operating expenses for high-efficiencies asso-
ciated with the individual collectors. Typical costs for
electricity and water are assumed. All such related values
for calculating operating expenses are taken from Table VI.
Since costs for electricity and for water are easily estab-
lished in any geographical area, single estimates can be
determined for operating expenses (Note Table VII).
6. Calculate the total annual control costs by adding the
annual depreciation costs and capital charges to operating 1000
and maintenance expenditures.
In the example presented here, an electrostatic precipitator
requires approximately twice as much capital outlay for 500
installation as either a fabric filter or a wet collector. How-
ever, the precipitator is a good choice economically on an
annual cost basis.
In another situation requiring cooling and conditioning of
hot gases, the wet collector would be a better choice. For

•K 100
Table V. Annual maintenance cost factors for all
generic types of control devices.
Cost ($/acfm) 50
Generic type Low Typical High 300 500
Gas volume,
Dry centrifugal 0.005 0.015 0.025 3
10 acfm
Wet collectors 0.02 0.04 0.06
Electrostatic
precipitators 0.01 0.02 0.03
Fabric filters 0.02 0.05 0.08a
Afterburners
Thermal 0.03b 0.06° 0.10° 10 J I I I I I I I J I I I I 1 I
Catalytic 0.07 0.20 0.35 10 50 100 500 1000
a
Exotic materials can result in higher maintenance. Gas volume through collector, 103 acfm
b
c
Metal liner with outside insulation.
Refractory lined. Figure 7. Installed cost of high-voltage electrostatic precipitators.

July 1970 Volume 20, No. 7 451

Table VI. Engineering and cost factors for determining example, in basic oxygen furnace installations, high-energy
operating cost. wet collectors with high power costs are competitive with
Cost of electricity, $/kwhra electrostatic precipitators and are sometimes cheaper than
Low Typical High the latter on an annual basis. In these installations, electro-
All devices 0.005 0.011 0.020 static precipitators and fabric filters must be large enough to
cope with the volume of gases generated by combustion of
Cost of liquor in 10~3 dollars per gallon carbon monoxide withdrawn from the furnace. In addition,
(assume H2O for make-up) precautionary gas conditioning has to be undertaken to pre-
Low Typical High vent explosions within the electrostatic precipitator or spark
Wet scrubber 0.10 0.25 0.50 carry-over into the fabric filter. These additional require-
ments of greater collector capacity and of gas conditioning
Hourly fuel costs for afterburners may make dry collectors more expensive than wet collectors.
Inlet Outlet
tern- tern- Summary
Device (source tern- perature perature Fuel costb
perature @ 380°F) (°F) (°F) AT°F ($/acfm-hr) Air quality control program officials should consider the
associated costs for various control strategies in their
Direct flame 380 1400 1020 0.00057 decision-making processes. The estimation of these costs
DF with heat exchanger 1000 1400 400 0.00023 in some simplified, logical manner has been the purpose
Catalytic afterburner 380 900 520 0.00028 of this presentation. Cost data have been illustrated for
CAB with heat exchanger 650 900 250 0.00014 basic control devices, and installed costs and annual control
costs have been estimated. In addition, due consideration
Watts of electricity per acfm based on efficiency for electrostatic has been given to the specific industrial process and its indi-
precipitators (10 ~3 kw/acfm) vidual engineering parameters, which affect the selection of the
Low Medium High ultimate control system.
0.19 0.26 0.40
Acknowledgments
Special data for wet collectors
Low Medium High
The authors wish to acknowledge the efforts and contribu-
efficiency efficiency efficiency tions of Ernst and Ernst, Washington, D. C, for the de-
Scrubbing (contact) power, velopment of background material under National Air
horsepower/acfmc 0.0013 0.0035 0.008 Pollution Control Administration Contract No. PH 86-68-37.
Make-up liquor rate, Credit is also given to the Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute
gal/acfm-hr 0.03 0.03 0.03 for its review and contribution of basic equipment cost data
Pressure losses through equipment (in. H2O)
and estimating procedures.
Low Typical High References
Dry centrifugal — 2-3 4 1. Wilson, E. L., Statement presented at hearings before the
Fabric filters 2-3 4-5 6-8 Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Committee
Afterburners 0.5 1.0 2 on Public Works, U. S. Senate, 90th Congress, First Session
Electrostatic — Considered on S. 780, Part 4. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
precipitators insignificant 0.5 ton, D. C , p. 2632, 1967.
Wet collectors 2. Danielson, John A. (ed.), Air Pollution Engineering Manual.
Fan losses 1 10 20-60 Public Health Service publication No. 999-AP-40. USDHEW,
Pump losses 1-3 1-5 1-10 PHS, National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati,
a Ohio, 1967.
h
Based on national average for large consumers. 3. Air Pollution Manual—Part II—Control Equipment. Ameri-
Includes the cost of heating an additional 50% excess air and as- can Industrial Hygiene Association, Detroit, Mich., 1968.
sumes no heat value content in the material or pollutant being con-
sumed. 4. Depreciation Guidelines and Rules, U. S. Treasury Dept.
e
Data do not include requirements for pumping water through system. Internal Revenue Service publication No. 456. U. S. Govern-
Such requirements may range from 0.0 to 0.5 horsepower per 1000 acfm. ment Printing Office, Washington, D. C , July 1962.

Table VII. Calculation of investment and annual costs for three collectors at 100,000 acfm and 8000 operating hours.

Electrostatic precipitator High-energy Medium temperature

(99.5% efficiency) wet collector fabric filter
Purchase cost $100,000 $27,000 $48,000
Installation charge 40% 70% 100% 100% 200% 400% 50% 75% 100%
Installation costs $ 40,000 $ 70,000 $100,000 $27,000 $54,000 $108,000 $24,000 $36,000 $48,000
Total installed costs $140,000 $170,000 $200,000 $54,000 $81,000 $135,000 $72,000 $84,000 $96,000
Depreciation (7%) $ 9,800 $ 11,900 $ 14,000 $ 3,780 $ 5,670 $ 9,450 $ 5,040 $ 5,880 $ 6,720
Capital charges (7%) 9,800 11,900 14,000 3,780 5,670 9,450 5,040 5,880 6,720
Annual capital costs $ 19,600 $ 23,800 $ 28,000 $ 7,560 $11,340 $ 18,900 $10,080 $11,760 $13,440
Maintenance $ 1,000 $ 2,000 $ 3,000 $ 2,000 $ 4,000 $ 6,000 $ 2,000 $ 5,000 $ 8,000
Electrical costs 3,520 3,520 3,520 52,500 52,500 52,500 7,740 7,740 7,740
Water — — — 6,000 6,000 6,000 —
Total operating and maintenance $ 4,520 $ 5,520 $ 6,520 $60,500 $62,500 $ 64,500 $ 9,740 $12,740 $15,740
Total annual cost $ 24,120 $ 29,320 $ 34,520 $68,060 $73,840 $ 83,400 $19,820 $24,500 $29,180

452 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association