Pollution Prevention Assessment - ABC City Power Plant

Pollution Prevention Assessment

                     ABC
               City Power Plant

                 Submitted Bv:
                   Ethan Joy

                 August 7,2000

                     Contact:
              Keith, Plant Engineer
               ABC, City Station
                City, NE 55555
                (555) 555-5555

  Department of Biological Systems Engineering
        University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Chapter 1
Introduction:
          The following pages describe the projects that I, Ethan Joy, have completed for
the Partners in Pollution Prevention (P3) internship in the summer of the year 2000. Here
I would like to present a brief description of what entailed my summer experience and
what projects were researched during the internship.
          When I was presented with an opportunity to join the P3 program, I had already
located and secured a summer internship with the ABC at City. Consequently, I was
unsure whether I would get the opportunity to be in the P3 program. However, after
communicating with both parties, it was agreed that I could work at ABC and still be able
to be in the P3 program. This fact limited some of the experiences that could have been
found in the small business portion of the program, but it allowed more people to be
accepted into the internship as I was being paid by ABC instead of the program. I still
believe I have benefited from the internship by the knowledge and information I have
gained.
          The projects that I performed at ABC were not exclusive to the ones that applied
to the P3 program. As a summer engineering intern, I was given a variety of tasks based
on my experience and field of study. Projects included coal fineness testing that
determined the efficiency of the grinding mills in the plant, analysis and modifications of
electrical systems located in various parts of the plant and coal handling system and       .
extensive computer use involving plant data and CAD drawings. Backlog projects were a
common task at the power plant. Some included the installation of fire protection devices
and the installation of a fire-escape ladder. Updates of facility and technical drawings
were a common activity as was the analysis of various processes in the chemistry lab and
sampling points. Thus, as one can see, the projects vary but the main focus is
engineering. ABC has provided a great experience of real world problems that apply
classroom    principles.
          The projects that I worked on for the P3 program were lighting modifications, exit
sign retrofits, and an establishment of a windbreak. These projects were chosen based on
the application to the pollution prevention goal, and what was approved by my
supervisor, the plant engineer. Each project was viewed as feasible and/or had a request

4

already in existence to research the project. The plan of action for each project was to
interview and discuss with appropriate personnel the project or problem and begin the
investigating from there. The main source of information was from engineers and craft
employees. They provided the best type of infomation, personal experience, which
proved very useful in my research. Vendors provided the next source of information.
The vendors were limited to ones that are currently being used because they have good
relations with their vendors and ABC can get better quotes because of it. Finally, the
information is gathered and compiled with conclusions being drawn from the data. This
is the general process of completion for each project I worked on at ABC.

                                                                                           4

5

                                        Chapter 2
Executive Summary:
        The ABC Station is a coal-fired power plant located on the Mighty River. The
maximum generation capacity is 670 MW while consuming around 6,000 to 8,000 tons
of coal daily. The overall appearance of the plant gives one the impression of a well-run,
properly managed facility. Many waste streams are produced in the plant, examples
range from the ash produced in the boiler to paper waste generated in the office. Each of
the waste streams provides a P2 opportunity along with some of the previous
implementation performed in the plant.
    T he maintenance shop put in an aqueous based parts cleaner. lt has been well
   received by reducing the solvent waste production in the plant.
    ABC has continued to change oil in old transformers from PCB's to less dangerous
    materials.
   Low sulfur coal is being burned in the plant from the Black Thunder mine in
    Wyoming.
    Recycling is used extensively in the office and storeroom. Paper is recycled along
   with cardboard in other ABC branches used in shipping materials.
    Printer toner cartridges are recycled and that avoids the disposal of possibly
   hazardous inks and dyes.
   ABC is changing from petroleum or synthetic solvents to natural; citric based
    solvents and Cleaners.
The P2 opportunities are also quite numerous as the list following illustrates.
    Reduce the amount of paper consumed in the office areas and start cardboard
   recycling in City. Cardboard is generated in large quantities in the purchasing
   department.
   Installing motion sensors in the office areas will reduce the electricity consumption
   due to work lighting.
   Another opportunity is to start to recycle the aerosol cans used in the shop by
   purchasing a special drum lid that will allow the employees to puncture and drain the
   cans thereby allowing them to be recycled or scraped.

6

    Most of the lighting in the plant is of the fluorescent type that is on 24 hours a day. 7
    days a week. Currently these bulbs are 34 watt T-12’s that are technically classified
    as hazardous waste. ABC has a current policy of shipping the worn out bulbs first to
    Omaha and then to Arizona to be recycled.
    Another lighting project is the type of lights used in required exit signs in the plant.
    About 40 exist and utilize incandescent bulbs that have short lifetimes and use high
    amounts of energy.
    The current fly ash landfill has experienced problems with considerable wind erosion
    and dust problems downwind. A proposal has been made to add a more extensive
    windbreak around the landfill area to reduce the particle pollution in the surrounding
    areas of the landfill.
    The most involved projects include finding alternate uses for fly ash and bottom ash
    that are waste products from the electricity generation process.
    The specific opportunity first analyzed in this report is the installation of alternate
fluorescent lighting products in the plant area. This will implement a bulb type that is not
classified as hazardous waste and provide substantial energy savings. The energy savings
are derived from a different type of ballast used to start the fluorescent light.’ A change to
an “Eco” fluorescent allows for conventional disposal in a landfill since the EPA does not
classify the bulb as a hazardous waste. The calculated savings are 2,100 MW-hrs to
2,700 MW-hrs per year with dollar savings of $20,000 to $27,000. Secondly, the exit
signs that exist on site are often burn out, requiring continual replacement and
maintenance. Each sign has currently two incandescent lights that illuminate the exit
sign. These may be replaced by a long lifetime LED that will reduce energy usage and
require little maintenance. The savings per year are estimated at $982.24, and the
payback period is 1.1 years. The final opportunity analyzed is the establishment of a
windbreak designed to control dust and wind erosion. The plant generates fly ash from
the burning of coal that is put in a landfill. The extension of the windbreak will reduce
the effective wind speed during times of increased potential for wind erosion. Windbreak
height and density are the two most important factors that determine the effectiveness of
a windbreak. The cost for the tree purchase and planting will total $23,000.

7

   Background:
       This summer I am working at the Omaha Public Power District at the City
Station. ABC is a coal fired power plant capable of producing around 670 MW at full
load and burning about 6,500 to 8,000 tons of coal per day. The power plant was built in
1979 and thus uses some old technology in some areas. It is located on the Missouri
River in southeast Nebraska. Since I worked at the plant last summer, I have extensive
knowledge of the terminology and mechanical and electrical systems within the plant.
This provides me with a considerable advantage when looking for possible P2 projects.
Knowing more facets of the systems and some of the operating procedures allows me to

       In the initial analysis of the station here in City, the overall appearance was quite
good. Everything is in order in terms of following regulations and following correct
procedures in materials handling. Many waste streams are generated here at the plant.
The most obvious is the fly ash that results from the burning of coal. Fly ash is collected
in the precipitators. The precipitators collect the ash that escapes the boiler and is in the
exit gas stream. They do an excellent job in reducing particulates that escape to the
atmosphere. The fly ash then is collected and put into a nearby landfill on site. The ash
itself is quite inert and low in sulfur content. The amount generated is about 2,000 tons
per day. The stack emissions are quite low, well within EPA regulations. Sulfur
emissions is very low and NOx (Nitrogen Oxides) are also low.
       Other waste streams generated are normal, non-hazardous wastes generated in the
cafeteria and by general human activities. Paper waste is already recycled in all areas of
the plant. A small amount (1-2 barrels) of waste oil is generated every year. This is kept
in a waste oil barrel and recycled. The solvents used in the machine shop are minimal
since they recently went to an aqueous based parts washer. Other cleaners and products
used in shop work are just used and discarded currently.
       Light bulbs are another common waste generated. Fluorescent lights are
frequently changed out since about 3,000 to 4,000 of them in the facility. The largest
waste stream is waste heat from the plant lost in the generation process. This is due to
inefficiencies that for the most part can’t be avoided.

8

General    Recommendations:
         ABC is committed to continued excellence, leadership, and stewardship in
protecting the environment. Environmental policy is a primary management
responsibility, as well as the responsibility of every employee.
         ABC’s objective is to reduce waste and achieve minimal adverse impact on the
air, water, and land through excellence in environmental control. Minimizing or
eliminating the generation of hazardous waste is a prime consideration in process design
and plant operations and is viewed by management as having a priority as high as safety,
yield, and loss prevention. Reuse and recycling of materials have been and will continue
to be given the first consideration prior to the classification and disposal of hazardous
waste.
Previous P2 Implementation:
   Recently the maintenance shop put in an aqueous based parts cleaner. It has been
   well received and has reduced the solvent waste production in the plant.
   ABC has continued to change oil in old transformers from PCB’s to less dangerous
   materials.
   Low sulfur coal is being burned in the plant from the Black Thunder mine in
   Wyoming.
   Recycling is used extensively in the office and storeroom. Paper is recycled along
   with cardboard in other ABC branches used in shipping materials.
   Printer toner cartridges are recycled and that avoids the disposal of possibly
   hazardous inks and dyes.
   ABC has made a commitment to changing from petroleum or synthetic solvents to
   natural, citric bases solvents and cleaners.
   Overall, the top priority is to reduce waste where it is economical or where it is “the
   right thing to do”, otherwise known as good public relations.

9

P2 Opportunities:
       Many opportunities have been identified in the plant. Many are more than what
can be done in a limited amount of time, but some are very feasible. The opportunities
vary from very easy to quite difficult and time intensive. Some of the easier ones are as
follows:
   Reduce the amount of paper consumed in the office areas and start cardboard
   recycling in City. Other parts of the district currently have a cardboard recycling
   system and the addition of a system in City would be very easy to do. Cardboard is
   generated in large quantities in the purchasing department. A good amount of benefit
   would result from a simple addition of this process.
   Installing motion sensors in the office areas will reduce the electricity consumption
   due to work lighting.
   Another opportunity is to start to recycle the aerosol cans used in the shop by
   purchasing a special drum lid that will allow the employees to puncture and drain the
   cans thereby allowing them to be recycled or scraped.
   Larger opportunities exist in the current type of lighting used in the plant. Most of
   the lighting is of the fluorescent type in the plant and they are on 24 hours a day, 7
   days a week. Currently these bulbs are 34 watt T- 12’s that are technically classified
   as hazardous waste. ABC has a current policy of shipping the worm out bulbs first to
   Omaha and then to Arizona to be recycled. An alternative to the current bulbs that
   aren’t hazardous would be a real improvement.
   Another lighting project is the type of lights used in required exit signs in the plant.
   About 40 exist and utilize incandescent bulbs that have short lifetimes and use high
   amounts of energy. Finding a suitable alternative would provide significant savings.
   Sodium vapor lamps provide large amounts of light at good efficiency of output.
   Mercury vapor and metal halide lamps are quite common in the plant. The policy of
   trying wherever possible to replace them with sodium lamps would provide energy
   savings and since the lifetime of sodium vapor lamps are longer than the other two,
   labor expenses would be saved by reducing the amount of replacements per year.
   The current fly ash landfill has experienced problems with considerable wind erosion
   and dust problems downwind. Fly ash is a fine, dust like material that is removed

10

   from the flue gas exiting the boiler. The ash is precipitated out of the flue gas by
   electrostatic precipitators right before exiting to the atmosphere through the
   smokestack. A proposal has been made to add a more extensive windbreak around
   the landfill area to reduce the particle pollution in the surrounding areas of the
   landfill. This opportunity is complicated by the location of transmission lines and the
   feasibility of getting trees to grow in the fly ash.
   The most involved projects include finding alternate uses for fly ash and bottom ash
   that are waste products from the electricity generation process. Finding a way to
   utilize the aggregate properties of the fly ash in products would be great solution for
   all involved. Bottom ash, the large, gravel sized aggregate left in the bottom of the
   boiler, can be a good base for roads or driveways. However, now there isn’t enough
   demand to keep up with the constant supply. Developing new markets or different
   ways to use the ash would be a great opportunity.
   In the operation of a steam turbine, large amounts of heat must be wasted due to the
   nature of how the steam generation system must operate. After steam is passed
   through the turbine it must be cooled back to a liquid state and pumped back into the
   system. The current cooling system is water taken from the Missouri River cools the
   steam and then is returned. When the fact that the plant is nearly 30% efficient and
   that 70% of the heat lost is almost entirely due to the cooling of the steam, is taken
   into account, one can observe a major opportunity for an alternate use of the waste
   heat.
       As you can see the opportunities at ABC are extensive and there are more than I
can do in one summer. The ones I will focus on are the smaller in scope and are quite
feasible. In addition, I am only investigating the opportunities that ABC has allowed
and/or opportunities that have a good possibility of implementation.
Implementation of Recommendations of Fluorescent Lighting:
       As you recall the current system of operation in the plant is that 34-watt T-12
bulbs are used in fluorescent fixtures. The EPA classifies these bulbs as a hazardous
waste because it does not pass the TCLP (toxicity characteristic leaching procedure). The
TCLP is a test designated by the EPA that simulates possible conditions in a landfill.
Water is passed through the material in question and the water that passes through the

11

material is analyzed for hazardous materials. ABC currently takes these bulbs to a
recycler in Arizona. The cost is about 19 cents per bulb recycled; this includes
transportation, labor, and service costs by the recycler. The proposal to improve the
current system is to change the T-12 bulbs to a more energy efficient T-8 bulb that is not
hazardous waste. The non-hazardous bulbs can be landfilled with no additional cost or
treatment. Another great benefit is that the T-8 bulbs described have a longer average life
of about 24,000 hours as opposed to the T-12’s life of 20.000 hours. This I believe is
going to be the major selling point of the new bulbs. In my discussions with the electrical
and maintenance personnel, they preferred a bulb that would just plainly last longer.
Changing out 3,000-4,000 fluorescent bulbs on a periodic basis is quite a hassle. They
view fluorescent bulbs in general as non-reliable and a waste of time. The current policy
is to replace the fluorescent bulbs with high pressure sodium when and where possible
because they favor the easy of upkeep and very long life when compared to the
fluorescent bulbs. The replacement with the sodium bulbs may be more desirable in the
long run due to lifetime, however the feasibility of doing that is quite low. The initial
cost and time required for installation of the sodium vapor lamps, makes large-scale
replacement unrealistic. Most fluorescent lights will have to be replaced every 2-2.5
years. If the new bulbs are used to replace the old T-12’s in about 3 years all the bulbs
will be more energy efficient, non-hazardous, and have a longer life.
       After researching and discussing the proposed system with Crescent Electric
Supply Co., they returned a price quote on a non-hazardous bulb that will cost ABC the
same as the current bulb that is purchased. This was surprising based on the information
that I had found previously which indicated a higher price for the “Eco” or non-hazardous
bulbs. The bulb is not a T-8 type but is a T-12; this I was told will help the tube lifetime
in the industrial application in which they are used. On the surface this change may not            .

look ideal when viewed from a viewpoint of wanting to save energy consumption also,
but as you will see that will come with another change. With the price quote for the new
bulb, the changeover is a very simple process. ABC only needs to change the stores’
item to reflect this type of bulb and whenever a fluorescent needs to be replaced, an Eco
can be put in the same fixture for the same price. This provides a great benefit, less
hazardous bulb, at the same price.

12

        Also in analyzing the possibility of reducing the amount of electricity consumed
by the lights in the plant, it was noted that a change in ballast type (the ballast is the
component that provides the starting mechanism for fluorescent lights) would provide
significant energy savings. Conventional magnetic ballasts have been the industry
standard for many years. Recently, an alternative to magnetic ballasts; electromagnetic
ballasts, have begun to be used extensively in industry. The electromagnetic ballast
enjoys significant energy use savings due to its design. When comparing a two-tube
fixture with each type of ballast and tube, one can see distinct advantages.

                                                                   $8.5 1 over Electronic

                                                                     can be landfilled

       As you can see the only potential barrier to the changeover to the new system is
the initial cost of the electronic ballast. However, after an analysis of the payback period
of the change, it becomes quite a viable option. If one calculates the payback for the use
of electronic ballasts in the entire plant, the payback is calculated to be about 3.75 years
with the savings due to reduced energy consumption alone. The savings estimate is
based on the average residential rate ABC charges its customers less the cost for the
production. The value used is $0.0584 per kW-Hr. This is a estimate that is on the low
side since during the summer average rates rise significantly, also industrial rates ABC
charges may rise higher than what has been estimated.
        In the final analysis, the total cost savings can be estimated on a high or low basis.
The high estimate based on 4,000 fluorescent bulbs, electronic ballasts, and 34-watt Eco
bulbs compared to 40-watt bulbs with magnetic ballasts. 'The low estimate is based on

the same specifications, except that the number of bulbs is 3,000. The total estimate is
$20,719,10 to $27,625.50 saved per year. As an added benefit. the Eco bulbs do not have
to be recycled as hazardous waste; thus recycling costs of $190 to $285 could be
eliminated. This estimate is based on about 1,000 to 1,500 replacements per year and a
recycling cost of $0.19 per bulb.
       The ultimate implementation is actually quite simple. Just changing the stores’
number for the bulbs and the ballasts will allow the gradual changeover to the improved
system. Since the average lifetime of the bulbs is a little over two years, the expected
time to complete changeover will be about 3 years due to lag time of replacement by
maintenance staff.
Implementation of Recommendations LED Exit Signs:
        Currently about 40 exit signs dot the doorways in ABC. These signs use
conventional incandescent light bulbs that run on 120-volt DC current. Each fixture has
two bulbs that run at about 25 watts each. The potential lifetime for these bulbs is quite
short, since they are all on continuously. The average life is nearly 750 hours for an
incandescent bulb. A great substitution is now available for the exit sign lighting source.
Light emitting diodes or LED’s have come to be the very best technology for exit signs.
LED’s use about 1-2.5 watts per sign, a whopping 24-22.5 watts of savings per bulb. The
best aspect of LED’s is their longevity. LED’s have a potential of 25+ years of life under
normal conditions. When I discussed the specifications of the LED exit signs with the
electrical and craft employees at ABC, they were very receptive to the installation of
LED’s. The signs now often burn out and must be changed a significant labor expense.
LED’s, on the other hand, with the extraordinary lifetime will outperform and save
money when compared to the current configuration.
        The current vendor for ABC is Crescent Electric Supply Co. The contact at
Crescent is Lowell Kliver. After discussing the current situation here at the plant, he
recommended an LED retrofit kit for the exit signs. This kit is made by Lithonia
Lighting and costs $13.50 per bulb of, which there is two per sign thus costing $27 per
sign not including labor costs. The following table summarizes the cost and
specifications of the LED retrofits.

14

Table 2: LED Specifications

Note: Energy cost based on ABC internal cost subtracted from average market value

       The economic analysis does not include the labor costs associated with the
replacement of the exit sign bulbs nor the time required to install the retrofit kit. The
benefits to the LED lights do not end with simple economics, since the lifetime is
considerably longer than the current system the exit signs will be lit when they may be
needed. Now because of the time constraints on the employees, often the bulbs in the
exit signs are not replaced when needed, so the exit signs are unlit and unsafe. The
change of the signs will provide increased safety, not to mention better compliance with
OSHA regulations.
Implementation of Recommendations of the Windbreak:
       The power plant at City is a coal fired plant. As a result of the burning of coal,
ash is an unavoidable by-product. Of the two types of ash mentioned before, fly ash is a
by-product that is landfilled in a disposal area west of the plant. The dry fly ash is a mix
of mainly silica, lime, alumina, sulfur trioxide compounds. The particle size varies from
2-50 microns when it is first applied to the ash pile. The fly ash is designated a type C fly
ash characterized by cementing properties along with a fine, silty consistency. All these
properties are conducive to problems with excessive wind erosion and blowing off the
ash landfill area. During dry spells, the ash can be seen blowing considerably on a breezy
to windy day. This poses problems to increased particles polluting the atmosphere and
fly ash landing in neighboring farm fields. The minimum wind velocity required for
picking up and transporting the fly ash produced at the plant is 10.8 mph. In southeast
Nebraska where the plant is located, the predominant wind direction in the summer is
south to southeast and also according to weather data this occurs nearly 37% of the time.

15

The area tends to be quite windy and the wind speed is estimated at or less then 19 mph
97 percent of the time. Thus, with a well-positioned and designed windbreak, the
problems associated with the blowing fly ash can be averted.
        The effectiveness of a given windbreak can be broken down into four factors.
The effective windbreak height is the first factor in measuring effectiveness. The
effective tree height is defined as the height of the tree less the elevation of the area to be
protected. Normally the trees are on the same elevation as the area, but in this situation,
the location of the trees will be 10-15 feet lower than the fly-ash landfill. This height

determines the amount of protection downwind from the windbreak. The above graphic
is very useful in visualizing the leeward effect of a windbreak.
        The next factor is tree density in the windbreak. Windbreak density is defined as
the ratio of the solid portion of the trees to the total area of the windbreak. Since the
wind passes through the open spaces in the trees, a denser windbreak (80-90%) will allow
less wind to pass through. This is the obvious goal of any windbreak, however too much
of a barrier actually reduces its value. A low-pressure zone will develop on the leeward
side of a given dense windbreak. This low pressure causes turbulence through the flow
of air to the low-pressure area from the wind stream that is forced over the barrier. This
turbulence reduces the gains of having the windbreak downwind at distances from 10 to
30 times the height of the trees. The optimum density is 60-80% for a few rows of trees
(2-4), whereas 40-60% is best for large multiple row windbreaks.
        Windbreak orientation will determine a large amount of the coverage area
protected from the wind. Windbreaks should be set perpendicular to the wind direction

16

to achieve the maximum amount of protection for a given area. The extension of the
windbreak beyond the edge of the desired area or a wraparound the edges must be
included to obtain the desired coverage. If this is not accomplished, wind tends to blow
around the windbreak, thereby reducing its effectiveness. The following graphic
illustrates the type of coverage areas of a typical windbreak design.

Figure 2: Areas of protection for two sample windbreak patterns. Note: Wind direction is from the
        top of the page.

        The last factor that is partially determined by the aspects discussed above is the
species of trees chosen. For the specified situation, the ground is set on the Missouri
River bottom. The soil is a silty loam with moist to wet conditions most of the time.
Lowland flooding occurs occasionally near the proposed windbreak area. The trees
chosen must be suitable for this location and still provide the windbreak effectiveness
desired. The search for the optimal tree type yielded many possible candidates.

Table 3: Tree Species Comparison

                                                                 the near-by intake fans

18

years the trees should be sufficiently rooted to be able to withstand weather extremes and
grow normally.
        The two species that have been chosen for the application at ABC is the
cottonwood and the Scotch pine. Each of these is well suited to the bottom ground and
has been designated good windbreak trees. The cottonwood selected will be a seedless
variety because of the problems mentioned in Table 3. The cottonwood is a fast growing
tree whose height reaches upwards of 80-90 feet. This will provide excellent coverage of
the ash pile that stretches about 1,300 feet north to south. At 90 feet tall the effective
coverage is about 17 times the height at either edge. allowing for a minimum of 20-30%
reduction in wind speed. The only limitation of the cottonwoods is wintertime
protection, but that is where the conifer proves its usefuless. The Scotch pine is a tree
that will not grow as fast as the cottonwood, nor prove to be as tall. The real benefit lies
in the extra density in the summer and the lone protection in the winter. This pine is also
well suited to moist soils where they are to be planted. The combination of these two
trees will allow the best coverage for the limited amount of space available at the landfill
site, which has been a limitation in the extent of the windbreak design. As you can see
below, interference with high-voltage transmission lines reduces the area in which trees
can be planted.

    Figure 3: OPPD Landfill Site Schematic

19

       The costs for the proposed project have been determined by a quote from Pine
Acres, a local nursery that has the tree types available. Both types of trees will be planted
with a tree spade, allowing the trees to be in the range of 10 feet tall when planted next
spring. The price for the cottonwoods is $49.95 ea. and the Scotch pine will cost $1 39.00
ea. The price is higher for these taller trees, however since it is the goal to have a more
effective windbreak in the shortest time frame possible; this is the best option. The total
cost estimate for planting the trees is $23,600. Since the length of the windbreak will be
about 1,880 feet and each species will be planted with a 15-foot spacing between trees,
there will be 125 needed for each tree. This total cost includes the handling and planting

       The time frame for the completion of the project begins with the site preparation
this fall. On the north side of the landfill, 25-30 feet of ash will have to be moved on the
pile in order to provide enough room for the two rows of trees. The south section is
already in good shape for the windbreak. Then the spring of 2001 , preferably in April or
May, the trees should be planted in there respective rows. The spacing shall be 15 feet
between trees for each row and 20 feet between rows. To provide the best protection,
each row should split the other with a 7.5- foot offset, that way the maximum coverage is
provided.
       Overall, the installation of the windbreak will provide a significant reduction in
wind velocity across the ash landfill site, thereby reducing the amount of fugitive dust
escaping the pile. Two rows of trees, one cottonwood and the other Scotch pine, will
provide excellent protection in all seasons as each are well suited to the soil and
environmental conditions of the site. The expected height of the windbreak is expected
to be at 40 feet at the ten-year mark. Bringing in large trees at the establishment and the
good growth rates contribute to the quick success of the windbreak. The price has been
quoted around $23,600 for the entire cost of the trees and planting.