環境資源報告成果查詢系統

109年度離島工業區揮發性有機物查核及有害空氣污染物調查計畫

中文摘要 本計畫主要的工作項目為專案列管本縣離島工業區揮發性有機物污染源管制及有害空氣污染物調查之業務。確實監督離島工業區揮發性有機物污染源之污染排放,並進行揮發性有機物污染源查核、檢測作業與後續追蹤管制作業,提昇離島工業區揮發性有機物、有害污染物查核管制及排放減量成效,以維護本縣空氣品質並減少對於民眾健康的衝擊。自決標日(109年01月31日)開始執行迄今,均依合約規定、原規劃之工作項目及執行方法,並於執行截止日前(109年12月31日)完成期末報告工作量,其主要成果摘要如下: (一) 列管石化製程排放管道及防制設備法規符合度查核共完成30製程,查核結果均符合規定;另針對列管石化製程排放管道共完成揮發性有機物(THC)稽查檢測30根次,其中進行台塑麥寮廠碳纖廠(M01製程)排放管道P005稽查檢測時,該廠防制設備吸收塔(A005)廢氣流量計故障,且未依規定完成故障報備程序,已提報環保局逕行告發。 (二) 離島工業區廢氣燃燒塔已完成43座法規符合度查核,並於廢氣燃燒塔達使用事件日時於導入廢氣處進行5件次採樣分析,其中塑化麥寮一廠輕油廠於109年3月23日至109年3月24日,因電力設施系統故障,使用燃燒塔AR02、AR04及AR05排放,燃燒塔AR02於3月23日晚上7點至3月24日早上2點皆超過燃燒塔使用計畫書核定46,000立方公尺/小時;針對燃燒塔操作熱值進行查核,於3月23日下午3點至3點15分熱值分別為49.96MJ/Nm3及44.06 MJ/Nm3,未符合燃燒塔使用計畫書之核定之熱值為40 MJ/Nm3≥ HT≥12 MJ/Nm3進行操作,已逕行告發。 (三) 查核廢氣燃燒塔緊急使用排放情形,塑化麥寮三廠輕油裂解二廠於109年6月5日因製程裂解爐管線修復後進行開車作業,廢氣排至燃燒塔處理。查核廢氣燃燒塔A001~A003使用情形,燃燒塔A001~A003蒸氣量與廢氣量之重量比介於3.04%至366%,不符合使用計畫書所核定第2項開車之條件說明規範,其蒸氣量與廢氣量因製程特性,最高比應不得超過200%,以逕行告發。 (四) 針對密閉集氣且經防制設備處理之固定頂及內浮頂進行法規符合度查核共208座,查核結果業者均依規定進行操作。 (五) 針對外浮頂式儲槽以快篩工具(GasFind IR及FID)進行二級密封偵測並進行法規符合度查核共10座,查核結果業者均依規定定期進行密封處檢查作業。 (六) 針對列管儲槽開槽清洗作業前油氣收集方法及排氣處理現場查核共完成11件次,查核結果業者均依規定進行操作。 (七) 儲槽設備元件洩漏稽查檢測作業共完成17座儲槽230點次,均未發現洩漏。 (八) 列管裝載場法規符合度查核共45座,長春石化麥寮廠製程M02裝載場L101法規查核,其防制設備洗滌塔(A109)依據業者提供之操作紀錄,其中109年3月12日、2月12日、2月10日、2月6日等4日,廢氣處理量大於操作許可證核定之操作範圍(55~320 kg/hr),已提報環保局進行告發;另裝載場設備元件稽查檢測作業共870個,均未發現洩漏。 (九) 廢水設施氣密測作業共完成26座檢測,檢測過程發現南亞海豐總廠(異壬醇廠)油水分離池現場編號T-3280-1抽測結果未保持氣密,現場測得最高淨檢值12,326.7 ppm(大於1,000 ppm),且發現未納入許可證管制,已依氣密檢測結果逕行告發;台化麥寮廠(純對苯二甲酸廠) 污泥處理設施編號T01-23抽測結果未保持氣密,現場測得最高淨檢值8,316.8 ppm(大於1,000 ppm),已依氣密檢測結果逕行告發;塑化麥寮三廠(輕油裂解二廠) 廢水收集系統現場編號V980,現場測得最高淨檢值31,611.6 ppm(大於1,000 ppm),且發現未納入許可證管制,已依廢水收集系統之液面不得與大氣接觸逕行告發。 (十) 針對冷卻水塔出入水端共檢測30座,其分析報告各廠皆符合法規標準5 mg/L。 (十一) 製程設備元件洩漏檢測共23,346個,其中大於洩漏定義值(1,000ppm)共36個,業者均依規定於24小時內完成修護並經承辦人員確認無誤;另台塑海豐廠丁醇廠1元件、南亞麥寮總廠異辛醇廠1元件、塑化麥二廠輕油裂解一廠1元件、長春石化麥寮廠1元件、塑化麥寮一廠西北碼槽處4個、塑化麥寮三廠輕油裂解三廠3個,共11元件大於洩漏管制值(10,000ppm),台化麥寮廠對苯二甲酸廠有2處元件旁管線破損及南亞麥寮總廠環氧樹脂廠有1處元件破損,已提報環保局逕行告發。 (十二) 針對原物料使用、污染源與防制設備操作紀錄及空污費申報紀錄等進行有害空氣污染物製程調查,共完成17個製程,其中發現廢氣燃燒塔、設備元件、裝載操作設施等污染源於空污費中13項個別物種排放量未進行申報,已將名單轉由空污費組進行追繳。
中文關鍵字 輕油廠、廢水廠、氣密量測、設備元件、燃燒塔(flare) 、苯(Benzene)、甲苯(Toluene)、二甲苯(Xylene)

基本資訊

專案計畫編號 YLEPB-109-022 經費年度 109 計畫經費 19200 千元
專案開始日期 2020/01/31 專案結束日期 2020/12/31 專案主持人 林清標
主辦單位 雲林縣環境保護局 承辦人 胡文愷 執行單位 台灣曼寧工程顧問股份有限公司

成果下載

類型 檔名 檔案大小 說明
期末報告 109-VOC查核期末_本文merge.pdf 18MB 計畫報告

The 2020 Project of VOC inspection in offshore industrial zones, Yunlin County

英文摘要 The main tasks of this project are to manage the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) pollution sources and the investigation of harmful air pollutants in the industrial zones of outlying islands, so as to monitor the emission of VOCs in the industrial zones of outlying islands and carry out the inspection, testing and follow-up control of VOC pollution sources, in order to improve the effectiveness of the inspection, control and emission reduction of VOCs and harmful pollutants in the industrial zones of outlying islands, so as to maintain the air quality of the County and reduce the impact on people's health. Since its implementation on the bid date (January 31, 2020), the project has been executed in accordance with the contract provisions, original planned work items and execution methods, and the final report was completed before the deadline (December 31, 2020), with the major achievements summarized below: (1) The compliance inspection of the emission pipeline and control equipment in blacklisted petrochemical processes was completed for a total of 30 processes, and the inspection results were all in line with the requirements. In addition, a total of 30 pipe times of volatile organic compound (THC) inspection were completed for the emission pipelines in blacklisted petrochemical processes. When the P005 inspection of the emission pipeline in the carbon fiber plant (M01 process) of Formosa Plastics Mailiao Plant was carried out, the exhaust gas flowmeter of the absorption tower (A005) of the control equipment in the plant was out of order and the failure reporting procedures were not completed. This non-compliance was reported to the Environmental Protection Bureau for disposal. (2) The compliance inspection of 43 exhaust gas combustion towers in the industrial zones of outlying islands was completed, and five samples were collected and analyzed at the places where the exhaust gas were introduced during the operation of the exhaust gas combustion towers. From March 23, 2020 to March 24, 2020, the light oil plant of Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao No. 1 plant used the combustion towers AR02, AR04 and AR05 for emission due to the failure of its power facilities system. The combustion tower AR02 was operated from 7 p.m. on March 23 to 2 a.m. on March 24, all exceeding 46,000 cubic meters per hour as approved in the combustion tower usage plan; the calorific value of the combustion tower was inspected, and from 3 p.m. to 3:15 p.m. on March 23, the calorific value was 49.96 MJ/Nm3 and 44.06 MJ/Nm3, which did not meet the approved calorific value of 40 MJ/Nm3≥ HT≥12 MJ/Nm3 of the combustion tower usage plan. This non-compliance was reported for disposal. (3) On the inspection of the emergency emission of exhaust gas combustion towers, the No. 2 light oil cracking plant of Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao No. 3 Plant resumed operation on June 5, 2020 after the repair of its process cracking furnace pipeline, and the exhaust gas was discharged to the combustion tower for treatment. After checking the use of exhaust gas combustion towers A001 ~ A003, the weight ratio of steam quantity to exhaust gas quantity of combustion towers A001 ~ A003 was between 3.04% and 366%, which does not meet the requirements of the second item in the approved usage plan on the start-up condition. The maximum ratio of steam quantity to exhaust gas quantity should not exceed 200% due to the process characteristics, and this non-compliance was reported for disposal. (4) A total of 208 fixed roofs and internal floating roofs with closed gas gathering and treated by control equipment were inspected for compliance with the regulations. The results showed that all manufacturers operated in accordance with the regulations. (5) A total of 10 external floating roof tanks were tested with Grade II seal detection by quick screening tools (Gasfind IR and FID), and inspections were carried out on regulatory compliance. The results showed that all the manufacturers regularly carried out the seal inspection according to the regulations. (6) Inspections were carried out for a total of 11 case times on the oil and gas collection method before the opening and cleaning of blacklisted storage tanks and exhaust gas treatment sites, and the results showed that all the manufacturers operated according to the regulations. (7) A total of 230 location times of leakage inspection on 17 storage tanks were completed, and no leakage was found. (8) A total of 45 blacklisted loading yards were inspected for regulatory compliance. On the regulatory compliance inspection of the M02 loading yard L101 of Changchun Petrochemical Mailiao Plant, according to the operating records of the control equipment scrubber (A2020) provided by the manufacturer, the exhaust gas treatment capacity on the four days of March 12, February 12, February 10 and February 6, 2020 exceeded the operating range (55~320 kg/hr) as approved in the operating permit, and the non-compliance was reported to the Environmental Protection Bureau for disposal. In addition, a total of 870 loading yard equipment components were inspected, and no leakage was found. (9) A total of 26 plants were inspected for the air tightness of wastewater facilities. During the inspection, it was found that the oil-water separation tank No. T-3280-1 of Nanya Haifeng General Plant (isononyl alcohol plant) did not maintain air tightness, and the highest net inspection value was 12,326.7 ppm (greater than 1,000 ppm); in addition, it was found not under the control of the permit, and this non-compliance was reported for disposal directly according to the air tightness inspection results. The sampling test results of sludge treatment facility No. T01-23 of Formosa Chemicals & Fiber Mailiao Plant (pure terephthalic acid plant) did not maintain air tightness, the highest net test value was 8,316.8 ppm (greater than 1,000 ppm), and the results of air tightness test were reported for disposal. The site numbered V980 of wastewater collection system at Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao No. 3 Plant (No. 2 light oil cracking plant) had the highest net inspection value is 31,611.6 ppm (greater than 1,000 ppm), and it was found not under the control of the permit. The non-compliance was reported for disposal directly according to the requirement that the liquid level of the wastewater collection system shall not contact the atmosphere. (10) A total of 30 cooling towers were inspected at the inlet and outlet, and the analysis report showed that all plants met the regulatory standard of 5 mg/L. (11) A total of 23,346 process equipment components were inspected for leakage, and 36 of them had leakages greater than the defined value (1,000ppm); the manufacturers have completed the repairs within 24 hours according to regulations and have been verified by the undertaker. In addition, a total of 11 components had leakages greater than the leakage control value (10,000ppm), including one at the butanol plant of Formosa Plastics Haifeng Plant, one at the isooctanol plant of Nanya Mailiao General Plant, one at the No. 1 light oil cracking plant of Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao No. 2 Plant, one at Changchun Petrochemical Mailiao Plant, four at the northwestern tank of Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao First Plant, and three at the No. 3 light oil cracking plant of Formosa Petrochemical Mailiao Third Plant. The pipelines beside two components at the terephthalic acid plant of Formosa Chemicals & Fiber Mailiao Plant were damaged, and one component was damaged in the epoxy resin plant of Nanya Mailiao Plant. The non-compliance was reported to the Environmental Protection Bureau for disposal. (12) 17 processes were investigated on the use of raw materials, operation records of pollution sources and control equipment, and declaration records of air pollution charges. It was found that no air pollution charges declaration was made for the emission of 13 individual items from pollution sources including exhaust gas combustion towers, equipment components and loading operation facilities, and the list was transferred to the air pollution charges group for recovery.
英文關鍵字 fixed roof tank、flare、Component