U.S. EPA s s Clean Air Gasification Initiative

Transcription

1 U.S. EPA s s Clean Air Gasification Initiative Presentation at the Platts IGCC Symposium June 2, 2005 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, N.C.

2 Power Generation Is a Major Source of Emissions 1999 Mercury 2000 Sulfur Dioxide 2000 Nitrogen Oxides Utilities (22%) Utilities (63%) Utilities (40%) Fuel Combustionelectric utilities Other stationary combustion * Industrial Processing Transportation Miscellaneous * Other stationary combustion includes residential and commercial sources.

3 Areas Designated Nonattainment for Ozone and PM 2.5 Standards April ozone nonattainment areas with 474 counties Nonattainment areas for 8-hour ozone pollution only Nonattainment areas for fine particle pollution only Nonattainment areas for both 8-hour ozone and fine particle pollution 39 PM 2.5 nonattainment areas with 208 counties

4 Anthropogenic Air Emissions of Mercury: Distribution by Region in 1990 and 2000 Africa 9% South America 3% North America 14% 1990 Europe 33% Asia 38% Australia 3% South America 4% North America 9% 2000 Africa 18% Asia 52% Europe 11% Australia 6% Total: 1,881 metric tons/yr Total: 2,269 metric tons/yr Asia and Africa account for >70% of global emissions and show steady, significant increases due to industrialization. Source: Based on Pacyna, J., Munthe J., Presentation at Workshop on Mercury, Brussels, March 29-30, 2004

5 There Have Been Two Ways to Address Transported Emissions from Power Plants The President s s Clear Skies legislation is the preferred approach to achieving multi-pollutant emission reductions: Multipollution caps apply to entire country. Legislation can provide more certainty, coordination, and less complexity. c Use of existing Clean Air Act authority to address interstate transport of pollution and Hg: Until legislation passes, our attainment deadlines and other problems related to power plant emissions demand we act now. Settlement conditions set up Hg actions. Clean Air Interstate (CAIR) and Mercury (CAMR) Rules will provide e very significant air quality attainment, health, and environmental improvements in a cost-effective manner.

6 Ozone and Particle Pollution: CAIR, Together with Other Clean Air Programs, Will Bring Cleaner Air to Areas in the East Ozone and Fine Particle Nonattainment Areas (April 2005) Projected Nonattainment Areas in 2015 after Reductions from CAIR and Existing Clean Air Act Programs 104 ozone nonattainment areas (408counties) 36 PM 2.5 nonattainment areas with 195 counties 5 ozone nonattainment areas 14 PM 2.5 nonattainment areas Nonattainment areas for 8-hour ozone pollution only Nonattainment areas for fine particle pollution only Nonattainment areas for both 8-hour ozone and fine particle pollution Projections concerning future levels of air pollution in specific geographic locations were estimated using the best scientific models available. They are estimations, however, and should be characterized as such in any description. Actual results may vary significantly if any of the factors that influence air quality differ from the assumed values used in the projections shown here.

7 CAIR and CAMR Implementation Timeline CAIR CSP Early Emission Reduction Period (annual CAIR NOx program) (07 and 08) Phase I: CAIR NOx Programs (ozone-season and annual) (09) Early Reductions for CAIR NOx ozone-season program and CAIR SO2 program begin immediately because NOx SIP Call and title IV allowances can be banked into CAIR CAIR Rule signed States develop SIPs (18 months) SIPs Due (Sep 06) NOx Monitoring and Reporting Required (08) SO2 Monitoring and Reporting Required (09) Phase I: CAIR SO2 Program (10) Phase II: CAIR NOx and SO2 Programs Begin (15) CAMR Rule signed SPs Due (Sep 06) Hg Monitoring and Reporting Required (10) Phase I: Hg Program (10) Phase II: Hg Program (18) States develop SPs (18 months) CAMR Note: Dotted lines indicate a range of time.

8 Environmental Technology Initiative Key leaders at the Agency understand that innovative technology has been and will continue to be a key element in meeting our environmental needs in a economical, cost-effective manner Upper management has challenged the Agency staff to figure out ways to facilitate and incentivize the development and deployment of such technologies Created the Environmental Technology Council (ETC) Solicited topics for consideration Agency-wide 47 possible technologies and environmental problems in need of technology solutions were identified 14 projects were selected as priorities for the Agency, based on Agency-wide voting across all EPA offices and Regions.

9 Two Gasification Projects Selected Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Generating electricity from the gasification of coal and other fossil fuel byproducts Office of Air and Radiation is lead office on development and deployment of IGCC technology Waste-to to-energy Utilization of biomass, petroleum residuals, petroleum coke, secondary materials Office of Research and Development in conjunction with the Office of Solid Waste are the leads on the waste-to to- energy effort OAR, ORD and OSWER are working together as a cross- Agency team to promote these technologies for deployment

10 Future of Electricity Generation in the U.S. U.S. has a well- known, readily available supply of coal 250+ years of coal reserves Limited natural gas availability Need to utilize coal reserves more efficiently Incorporate renewables (e.g., biomass) into our fuel diversity mix

11 Coal The New Frontier The world needs to make electricity from coal in an environmentally and economically sustainable way IGCC has fundamental advantages from both environmental and efficiency perspectives relative to conventional coal-fired power generation technologies Inherently lower emissions of NO X, SO 2 and Hg Requires less fresh water special issue in the drier, water-limited Western regions of the U.S. Considerably more commercially useful byproducts (and thus, less waste materials) High potential for reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by allowing for carbon capture and sequestration at costs significantly below conventional PC generation costs CINERGY s Wabash River Facility

12 Gasification Offers Clean Alternative 2 Estimated New Plant Emissions Performance Proposed Da SO 2 limit 1.5 lb/mwh Proposed Da PM limit* 1 Proposed Da NOx limit 0.5 ~80% 95%+ ~0 ~0 ~0 NOx SO 2 PM Hg NOx SO 2 PM Hg NOx SO 2 PM Hg SCPC IGCC NGCC * - Taking comment on the adoption of PM-CEMS; other alternative is lb/mmbtu limit

13 EPA s s Role in Deployment The Environmental Technology Initiative s s purpose is to Achieve improved, real-world environmental results through the design, development and deployment of innovative technologies Identify short- and long-term priority environmental problems with attainable technological solutions Coordinate efforts within EPA and other Federal agencies to identify and implement such technological advancements and solutions; and, Create partnerships with other Federal agencies, State governments, Tribal governments, non-profit groups and industry to incentivize technology enhancements and deployment ETC has a very broad mandate, with excellent goals just very limited in terms of financial resources and staffing commitments

14 EPA Actions to Date Regulatory Issues Biggest issue for IGCC facilities is currently New Source Review (NSR) Brownfields redevelopment sites Conversion of older PC plants Conversion of natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants Headquarters and Regional offices want to work with companies interested in developing IGCC technology in the near future Identify novel issues/concerns Resolve novel issues/concerns quickly EPA is committed to working with State permitting authorities States are the primary permitting authority under NSR often can be more stringent than Federal regulations Agency is attempting to be upfront and let States know where we stand on IGCC permitting issues Anticipate this may help expedite and streamline the NSR permitting ing process considerably

15 Potential Regulatory Hurdles Should Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) be required as best achievable control technology (BACT) for IGCC? TECO s s Polk Power Station, Tampa, Florida Florida DEP ultimately decided in conjunction with Region IV that SCR was not required as BACT a position supported by Headquarters BACT is a case-by by-case determination One Size Doesn t t Fit All Circumstances at a new plant may not be the same as what drove our decision at Polk Power Station Regardless, SCR as BACT is a decision that merits our attention and resolution sooner as opposed to later

16 Potential Regulatory Incentives Recently proposed New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Subpart Da IGCC Units constructed on/after February 9, 2005 would be subject to the same emission limits as a coal-fired boiler Given current IGCC technology, this should not pose any regulatory burden on new, planned IGCC facilities Duct burners moved into KKKK Recently promulgated Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) Created separate source category for IGCC units Hg emission limit of 20 x 10-6 lb/mwh Comparable to a bituminous PC- fired power generation system

17 Future Plans and Needs To incentivize the commercial deployment of IGCC technology EPA needs to better understand the environmental footprint of these facilities relative to conventional power generation technologies EPA is working on models to assess the economic viability of IGCC plants under different conditions Working closely with DOE on these economic and environmental efforts Biggest barrier today is the cost of IGCC technology EPA is working in conjunction with DOE to evaluate various proposals to address this economic barrier Three Party Covenant Production Tax Credits Investment Tax Credits Direct Loan

18 For more information contact: Bob Wayland Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Research Triangle Park, NC (919)