Cost-Effective Strategies and Emerging Federal and State Regulations for Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants

Transcription

1 Cost-Effective Strategies and Emerging Federal and State Regulations for Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants Praveen Amar, Ph.D., P.E. Director, Science and Policy Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Western Regional Air Partnership Board Meeting December 14-15, 2005 Palm Springs, California

2 Overview What does NESCAUM do? Public health and environmental impacts of mercury: monetized benefits of mercury reductions from coal-fired electricity generating units (EGUs) Control technologies and strategies for EGUs Federal and state regulations for EGUs

3 Who we are Our Members include: Connecticut Massachusetts Maine New Hampshire New Jersey New York Rhode Island Vermont

4 Economic Valuation of Human Health Benefits of Controlling Mercury Emissions from U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants February 2005 Report Work undertaken by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Dr. James Hammitt and Glenn Rice, and by NESCAUM, Dr. Praveen Amar

5 Overview of NESCAUM Report The report covers diverse areas of policyrelevant research including: Mercury emissions (including changes from coal plants), atmospheric transport and fate, modeling of Hg deposition Relationship between Hg deposition and methylmercury levels in fish, current and future exposures in humans to mercury in fish Dose response functions, and finally, monetization of benefits

6 What did this Report Monetize? Monetized two end points: IQ of children born to mothers with high blood-hg levels Myocardial infarction and premature mortality among adults

7 8 Regions Other Marine

8 Catfish Scallops Sardines Clams Average Methylmercury Concentrations for "Top 24" Types of Fish Consumed in the U.S. Commercial Seafood Market Halibut Sable fish Rockfish Tuna-canned Crabs-Dungeness Pollock Crabs-Snow Crabs-Blue Lobster-Spiney Cod Flatfish Crabs-King Perch-Ocean Shrimp Salmon Oysters Crawfish Swordfish Shark Lobster-American Fish Type Methylmercury Concentration (ppm)

9 For "Top 24" Types of Fish in U.S. Commercial Seafood Market, the Percentage of Methylmercury Contributed by Fish Type 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Tuna-canned Pollock Shrimp Cod Halibut Swordfish Salmon Catfish Lobster-American Crabs-Blue Flatfish Rockfish Shark Crabs-Snow Oysters Lobster-Spiney Scallops Clams Crabs-Dungeness Sable fish Sardines Perch-Ocean Crabs-King Crawfish Percent of Total Methylmercury in U.S. Market Fish Type Estimate based on the product of per capita fish consumption rates and mean methylmercury concentrations of each type of fish (Carrington and Bolger, 2002)

10 Spectrum of Health Effect Certainty Persistent IQ deficits from fetal exposures above MeHg RfD Persistent IQ deficits in all children from fetal MeHg exposures Cardiovascular effects and premature mortality in male consumers of non -fatty freshwater fish with high MeHg levels Decreasing Certainty Increasing Benefit Cardiovascular effects and premature mortality in male fish consumers Cardiovascular effects and premature mortality in all fish consumers Scenario 1 $75M $194M $48M $1.5B $3.3B (26 TPY) Scenario 2 $119M $288M $86M $2.3B $4.9B (18 TPY) Spectrum of Certainty of Causal Association of Health Effect with Mercury Exposure with Estimated Benefit Overlay In Millions ($M) and Billions ($B) of Dollars (2000$)

11 Value of Monetized Benefits for about 70 percent control Annual benefits: 200 to 300 million dollars for IQ gain Annual benefits: 3 to 5 billion dollars for avoided fatal and non fatal heart attacks among adults

12 Coal-Fired Power Plants There are about 530 power plants with 305 gigawatts of capacity. The capacity consists of about 1,300 units, 1,150 of which are >25 megawatt. Coal plants generate the vast majority of power sector emissions: 100% of Hg 95% of SO2 90% of NOX

13 Regulatory Drivers Environmental Regulation and Technology Innovation (NESCAUM s September 2000 Report) State Rules (strong drivers) NJ, CT, MA, NH(?), WI and others Consent Decrees We Energies, Xcel, PSNM, Dynegy EPA s Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR): weak drivers for mercury 2010 Phase I cap of 38 TPY (about 20 percent reduction) 2018 Phase II cap of 15 TPY (70% reduction; not achieved till 2025 and beyond because of trading) States have leeway to adopt EPA s CAMR or propose a more-stringent approach

14

15 Control Technologies and Strategies: Coal-Fired EGUs: Feasibility and Costs

16 Native or Baseline Mercury Capture Mercury emissions vary with: Coal type and mercury content Trace species present in coal/flue gas Form of mercury in the flue gas Unburned carbon (Loss on Ignition, LOI) Unit configuration Control devices (FF, SCR, FGD, SDA) and operating temperatures

17 Native Hg Capture with Existing Control Equipment( 1999 ICR Data) Controls Bituminous PM Only CS-ESP 46% HS-ESP 12% FF 83% PM Scrubber 14% Dry FGD SDA + ESP SDA + FF 98% Wet FGD CS-ESP+Wet FGD 81% HS-ESP+Wet FGD 55% FF+Wet FGD 96% Subbituminous 16% 13% 72% 0% 38% 25% 35% 33%

18 Power Plant Mercury Control Options

19 Full-Scale Tests of Sorbent Injection Completed: Site Coal Equipment 1. Gaston 1 month Low-S Bit FF 2. Pleasant Prairie PRB C-ESP 3. Brayton Point Low-S Bit C-ESP 4. Abbott High-S Bit C-ESP/FGD 5. Salem Harbor Low-S SA Bit C-ESP 6. Stanton 10 ND Lignite SDA/FF 7. Laskin ND Lignite Wet P Scrbr 8. Coal Creek ND Lignite C-ESP 9. Gaston 1 year Low-S Bit FF 10. Holcomb PRB SDA/FF 11. Stanton 10 ND Lignite SDA/FF 12. Yates 1 Low-S Bit ESP 13. Yates 2 Low-S Bit ESP/FGD 14. Leland Olds ND Lignite C-ESP 15. Meramec PRB C-ESP 16. Brayton Point Low-S Bit C-ESP (Source: ADA-ES)

20 Full-Scale Tests of Sorbent Injection Scheduled: Site Coal Equipment 1-6 Commercial Tests Low-S Bit ESP 7. Laramie River PRB SDA/ESP 8. Conesville High-S Bit ESP/FGD 9. DTE Monroe PRB/Bit ESP 10. Antelope Valley ND Lignite SDA/FF 11. Stanton 1 ND Lignite C-ESP 12. Council Bluffs 2 PRB H-ESP 13. Louisa PRB H-ESP 14. Independence PRB C-ESP 15. Gavin High-S Bit C-ESP FGD 16. Presque Isle PRB HS-ESP TOXECO (Source: ADA-ES)

21

22 Limited Hg Capture by ACI on Western Coals in Earlier Tests Mercury Removal (%) Sorbent Injection Rate (lb/mmacf) ESP Low S Bit ESP PRB

23 Enhancing Mercury Removal for Western Coals Cl, Br, F, I Sorbent Injection Cl, Br, F, I ESP or FF Hg CEM Cl, Br, F, I Ash and Sorbent

24 Enhancing Mercury Removal on Units with only an ESP Burning PRB Coal Hg Removal Efficiency (%) Ameren Meramec KNX + DARCO Hg DARCO Hg-LH DARCO Hg Injection Concentration (lb/mmacf)

25 Improved Mercury Capture with Coal Blending: Holcomb Hg Removal (%) Percent Western Bituminous Coal

26 Sorbent Cost Comparison SDA + FF PRB, DARCO Hg-LH ESP PRB, DARCO Hg-LH ESP PRB/Bit, DARCO Hg ESP Bit, DARCO Hg % Hg Removal ESP, HS Bit, DARCO Hg Holcomb: ~ $1950/lb Hg removed Meramec: ~ $6200/lb Hg removed Sorbent Costs (mills/kwh)

27 A Comparative Estimate of Hg Control Costs with ACI (mills/kwh) Control Type Annual Levelized Cost Activated Carbon Injection for Hg 0.2 to 0.8 mills/kwh FGD for SO2 3 to 5 mills/kwh SCR for NOx control 1 to 2 mills/kwh

28 Regulatory Landscape: State and Federal Mercury Regulations, Rules, Legislation

29 Mercury Policy Context in the Northeast New England Governors/Eastern Canadian Premiers Regional Mercury Action Plan (1998) 50% reduction by % reduction by 2010 Virtual elimination of anthropogenic discharges of mercury is long-term goal

30 Examples of State Actions State Connecticut Massachusetts Wisconsin New Jersey North Carolina New Hampshire New England Governors & Eastern Canadian Premiers Program 90% control by 2008 (state law) 85% reduction in Hg emissions by 2008 and 95% by 2012 (state rule) 40% reduction in Hg emissions by 2010 and 75% by 2015 (approved plan) 90% reduction or 3 mg/mwhr by 2008; 5-yr extension with multipollutant controls for SO2, NOx, and PM 55% reduction in Hg emissions by 2013 expected; recommendations for additional reductions (NC Clean Smokestacks Act) 58% reduction in Hg emissions (cap of 50 lbs/year) 1 year after federal compliance dates; 80% reduction (cap of 24 lbs/year) 4 years later (departmental recommendations to legislature) 50% reduction in Hg by 2003; 75% reduction by 2010; virtual elimination of anthropogenic discharges long term (Mercury Action Plan)

31 States Taking Action (continued) State and local agencies setting mercury limits for new construction (sorbent injection): Wisconsin permitting a facility using sub bituminous coal 83% reduction Iowa issued a permit for facility using sub bituminous coal limit equivalent to 83% reduction

32 Smart Regulatory Drivers Components Long-term averaging (annual) Dual limit: less stringent of: Removal efficiency or Emission limit (output based, lb of Hg/MWhr) Flexibility in achieving mercury removal Averaging of units at a site Enhances cost effectiveness

33 The STAPPA/ALAPCO MODEL RULE How States Can Provide Better Protection from Mercury Effects on Health and Welfare

34 Goals of Model Rule Policy Objectives: Protect public health and welfare Reduce Coal-Fired EGU emissions Hg to <7 tons/year Provide flexibility to reduce cost Spur rapid technological development

35 Goals of Model Rule Improve on EPA proposal Treat EGU Hg as a HAP Expeditious application of Maximum Achievable Control Technology Substantial reductions in Hg emissions in 2008; 90-95% reductions in 2012 No emission trading

36 Architecture of the Model Rule Applicable to Coal-Fired EGUs Addresses only Hg Two Options All new EGUs must achieve 90-95% capture; or Outlet standard of lb/gwh

37 Existing EGUs - Option I Phase 1 - end per cent capture; or Outlet standard lb/gwh Emissions averaging allowed among owned or operated EGUs w/in state

38 Existing EGUs - Option I Phase 2 - End % capture; or Outlet standard lb/gwh Compliance on plant basis

39 Existing EGUs - Option II Phase 1 end % capture; or Outlet standard lb/gwh May postpone 50% EGUs 4 years if agree to: Meet multi-pollutant standards 2012 Prevent Hg emission increases in interim

40 Existing EGUs Option II Phase 2 end 2012, meet multipollutant standards: SO2: 95% reduction or lb/mmbtu NOx: lb/mmbtu PM: lb/mmbtu Hg: 90-95% capture; or Outlet standard of lb/gwh

41 How Can a State Adopt the Model Rule? EPA rule not national MACT standard under section 112 of CAA EPA rule under section 111(d) of CAA SIP-like process required Cap and trade regime optional Emissions must meet EPA cap for State Model Rule reductions will exceed what EPA requires

42 Some Final Observations Many states in the U.S. are moving at a faster and a more certain pace than the CAMR, based on the assumption that environmental regulation drives technology innovation and implementation Hg Control technologies are now commercially available; new technologies are rapidly emerging; 90% and higher control is feasible Cost effectiveness of Hg control is quite comparable to, and more attractive than, the cost effectiveness of SO2 and NOx controls from power plants (Hg:SO2:NOx: 0.2 to 0.8 mills/kwhr: 3-5 mills/kwhr: 1-2 mills/kwhr)