EUEC Blog

courtesy of:

600 speakers and 1200 delegates have pre-registered to participate at the 15th Annual Energy, Utility & Environment Conference & Expo to be held January 30 to February 1, 2012, in Phoenix, Arizona.

Phoenix, Arizona (PRWEB) December 29, 2011

Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Air and Radiation, will be a keynote speaker at EUEC 2012, the USA’s largest energy, utility and environment conference to be held at the Phoenix Convention Center from January 30 through February 1, 2012. McCarthy will address the EPA’s new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), the first national standards to regulate power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollution issued on December 21, 2011.

“The EPA’s announcement on MATS directly impacts power plants and energy companies across the country. We’re proud to have Assistant Administrator McCarthy as one of our outstanding keynote speakers, along with senior representatives from DOE and Southern Company, to directly address how the utility industry plans to comply with these new regulations,” said Dr. Prabhu Dayal, EUEC Chairman. “After our plenary session, three tracks in our 12-track technical program will provide invaluable information for utilities with presentations by experts on the clean air rules, monitoring and control technologies and strategies for mercury and air toxics.”

The plenary keynote panel held on Monday, January 30, 2012, will feature:

• Christopher Smith, Deputy Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy
• Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Chris M. Hobson, Senior Vice President, Southern Company
• Bryan Hannegan, Vice President, Electric Power Research Institute
• Clay Bretches, Vice President, Anadarko
• Mark Brownstein, Chief Counsel, Environmental Defense Fund

EUEC provides one of the best technical programs in the industry, where 600 speakers make expert presentations in three days in 12 wide-ranging subject areas: clean air mercury rule; mercury and HAPS monitoring; mercury and air toxics control; energy and climate policy; wind, solar, and electric vehicles; carbon markets and carbon capture and storage; corporate greenhouse gas strategies; biofuels, biomass, and biogas; sustainability and reliability; energy efficiency and management; renewable energy; and operations and management.

Register online at http://www.euec.com for early bird discounts before January 15 or call (520) 615-3535. EUEC 2012 also offers free passes to participate in the networking receptions held in the 200-company exhibition hall between 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on January 30 and 31, 2012.

About EUEC
EUEC is an annual energy, utility and environment conference organized jointly by a team of directors from the US EPA, US DOE, EPRI, and EEI. EUEC 2012 is the 15th annual conference, making it the largest and longest running professional networking and educational event of its kind in the United States. At EUEC over 2,000 delegates including environmental business leaders, energy executives, NGOs and government policymakers converge to collaborate on the various issues facing energy generation, the future of utility and its impact on the environment.

I7.1 | Water Optimization – 30% Groundwater Use Reduction

Tabatha Pellerin, Senior Program Manager, AECOM

AECOM assisted the Entergy Lewis Creek gas/coal fired electric power plant with water conservation efforts prompted by a goal of 30% groundwater (GW) use reduction by 2016 mandated by the local GW authority. To complete this work, personnel interviews were conducted to investigate the GW losses and this information, along with engineering knowledge, was used to develop a detailed water balance. Water quality requirements for each process were established to identify areas where water was used inefficiently and where reuse opportunities existed. Then, AECOM designed equipment and procedural alterations for each instance of water loss at the plant. A retrofit options table of all of the plant’s water losses and associated costs, along with corresponding proposed solutions and associated capital and operations and maintenance costs was prepared. This data permitted the project team to develop a feasibility strategy for optimizing water use, in addition this information served to facilitate negotiations with the local water authorities. The options identified included a multitude of solenoid valves, liquid level detectors, programming, and equipment conversions to other water sources (as necessary). Through specific system alterations, options to meet the 30% GW reduction were identified along with many options for longer term water optimization.
f

I7.2 | Environmental and Greenhouse Gas Impacts of Water Conservation

Jeffrey Edstrom, Senior Water Resources Manager, Environmental Consulting & Technology

Water use has differing ranges of impacts on environmental resources based on source, use, wastewater discharge location, This presentation examines the environmental impacts resulting from water conservation and protection, including greenhouse gas reduction. It examines the broader environmental value of water conservation beyond water use reduction and how those benefits can be characterized, captured and potentially monetized. This includes identifying more direct and less direct environmental impacts on such parameters as water levels and flows, air quality and greenhouse gases, water quality, recreation, terrestrial habitat, groundwater recharge, wetlands, fisheries, and other aquatic habitat. The presentation, based on the findings of a project funded by the Great Lakes Protection Fund, also examines the potential for carbon and other greenhouse gas credits in a market system related to reduced electrical generation associated with pumping and treating water supplies and treating and discharging wastewater and sold as carbon credits on international greenhouse gas exchanges.
f

I7.3 | Pilot Project Update – Constructed Wetland Treatment Systems for FGD Blowdown Treatment

Chris Snider, Associate, Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company

Constructed wetland treatment systems use natural biological processes to reduce the concentrations of constituents in the wastewater and have demonstrated promise for the treatment of FGD wastewater. However, limited industry and academic research has been conducted and very few full scale applications have been undertaken. Constructed wetland treatment systems have been used effectively for the treatment of other industrial and municipal wastewaters but widespread use in the power generation sector has not yet developed due to lack of research and project experience. A major power producer has decided to undertake a constructed wetland treatment system pilot project to evaluate the technology. The constructed wetland, scheduled for completion in December 2010, will be approximately 2 acres in size and will treat approximately 10 percent of the plant FGD wastewater stream. The constructed wetland includes the beneficial use of both fly ash and bottom ash. A pilot project of this scale in an area of the country without a round-year growing season has yet to be undertaken in the U.S. This presentation will cover the design and construction of the pilot wetland treatment system.

f

I7.4 | California OTC Policy and New York BTA Policy Verses EPA Phase II/III BTA

Deborah Saxton, Client Program Manager, Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc.

Under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), EPA is planning to publish the draft combined Phase II and III Rule by February 1, 2011. This regulation will provide national performance standards for existing once through cooling (OTC) water intake structures (CWIS). It is anticipated that the draft EPA Phase II and III Rule will define Best Technology Available (BTA) as closed cycle cooling for sites located in sensitive habitats. The EPA definition for BTA for other habitats and for lower flow rates may be different. The State of New York will issue a new policy on BTA for CWIS with closed cycle cooling as BTA in mid to late October, 2010. The New York State policy is expected to regulate all OTC of 20 MGD or greater. Also, the State of California adopted a Policy on the Use of Coastal and Estuarine Waters for Power Plant Cooling (OTC Policy) and was approved on September 27, 2010. The policy establishes technology-based standards and applies to thermal power plants that withdraw cooling water from navigable waters. This paper compares the EPA, California and New York performance criteria and schedules for implementation.

.

I7.5 | Utilizing Reclaimed Wastewater at Power Generating Facilities

Douglas Brown, Vice President, CDM

Reclaimed wastewater can be used by electric generation facilities for cooling and process water in lieu of expensive or scare potable water supplies. When used a source of cooling water, softening or reducing the total dissolved solids (TDS) using reverse osmosis (RO) systems is often required to achieve cycles of concentration comparable to local water supplies. The TDS of wastewater increases 300-700 mg/L above the raw water TDS, and often results in reclaimed wastewater with greater than 1000 mg/L in arid areas. Examples of the use of reclaimed water at power generating facilities (east and west coast) are presented, and issues related to reliability, user agreements, backflow prevention, rates, rules and regulations are summarized including a method of calculating the rate structure for the reclaimed water. The regulatory and permitting implications of using reclaimed water at a generating facility are discussed. Finding acceptable disposal alternatives for the concentrated residual stream from the RO process often determines the cost effectiveness and feasibility of wastewater reclamation. This paper will describe the quality of reclaimed water available as a resource; concentrate management processes, and alternative high recovery systems that can support cooling tower operations with high quality reclaimed water.

.

I7.6 | Institutional Water Conservation Opportunities:  Keys to Energy and Cost Savings

Margie Brenner, Water Conservation Consultant, GreenerU, Inc.

With the world’s fresh water supply in unsustainable decline, the quest for improved water efficiency is gaining momentum across private and public sectors. This presentation was created to serve as a robust water conservation resource for sustainability and facility managers in higher education and beyond. Strategies discussed are low-flow toilets and fixtures, leak detection and reduction, building water metering, waterless urinals, laundry technology, rainwater harvesting, graywater reuse, weather-informed irrigation, and xeriscaping. Topics include analysis of effective water conservation case studies in the US; original survey insights on campus water efficiency implementation plans in the Northeast; the water-energy relationship; and strategic recommendations for water, energy and cost savings. By understanding lessons learned across the states, institutions can begin a flow a positive change towards a sustainable water future.

.

I8.1 | Oxigen Enrichment in Combustion of Toxic Waste Water

Bernhard Vosteen, President, Vosteen Consulting GmbH

Oxigen enrichment in combustion of toxic, salt-rich waste waters was developed in 2002 and has been commercially applied since then at two plants, heightening the waste water combustion capacity and lowering at the same time the need of high caloric fuel to support the so-called water combustion (mainly endothermal). The paper gives insight in the correlation between thermal NOx-formation and CO-formation, caused by incomplete combustion. Both NOx and CO formation can be suppressed – or at least minimized – by optimal operations temperature control – though direct measurements of the fire-box temperature is not possible.

.

I8.2 | Stormwater Recovery for Commercial & Industrial Reuse

Steven Gamelsky, President, GEA Engineering, P.C.

The recovery of stormwater from commercial and industrial properties represents a largely untapped, low cost, green sustainable resource. Stormwater recovery has broad application for the following facilities: ·HVAC Cooling water and cooling towers ·Industrial process water ·Boiler feedwater ·Powerplant Cooling and process water ·High purity water applications ·Irrigation and landscape water ·Potable water potential This paper presents: ·A methodology for evaluating sites for stormwater recovery ·Computerized modeling projections ·Water quality testing requirements ·Projections of recovered stormwater quality ·Stormwater treatment requirements, technologies, systems ·Collection and pumping techniques ·Estimated costs for construction ·Estimated O&M costs ·Case studies from facilities around the U.S. Evaluation of sites includes: ·Hydrologic watershed simulation modeling ·Collection of watershed data ·Projection of daily, monthly and annual stormwater recovery ·Use of stormwater captured from existing detention ponds ·New pond storage area and volume requirements ·Evaluation of alternative storage systems, chambers, basins ·Critical water quality parameters needed for testing ·Source water quality requirements ·Discharge permit issues Treatment needs and evaluation: ·Particle size and TSS ·Filtration requirements ·Water chemistry ·Chemical treatment ·Organics ·Microbiological parameters Presentation of case studies includes: ·Previous watershed simulation modeling based on the NRCS (Curve Number) methodology ·Illustration of recovery with graphs and charts ·Existing pond modifications needed ·Integration with Existing Stormwater Systems ·Drawings showing pumping and pipe lines ·Drawings showing treatment systems ·Costs of recovered stormwater ($/1000 gal.) lower than alternative sources Environmental/economic benefits of stormwater reuse: ·Reductions in energy use ·Reductions in chemical use ·Reductions in CO2 emissions ·Improvement of facility carbon footprint ·Reductions in water discharges to environment ·Savings in elimination of process chemicals and wastewaters (e.g., cooling tower blowdown)

.

I8.3 | Selenium in Water Emissions – How To Find Appropriate Treatment Options?

Greg Pulliam, Senior Client Services Manager, CH2M Hill

Selenium can be a challenging regulatory compliance issue in wastewater discharges from coal-fired electric utilities. Wastewater selenium concentrations have increased due to improved flue gas scrubbing technology, while concurrently regulatory limits have become more stringent. In this presentation, the key challenges facing coal-fired utilities and state of the practice approaches for addressing these challenges will be reviewed. Selenium management has been a water environment challenge since the mid 1980s, and the technologies for removing selenium are still developing to meet discharge criteria down to 5 parts per billion (ppb), or less. End of pipe treatment technologies are commercially available, but the technologies are not equally effective and must be considered on a case-by-case basis for each application. The available technologies for achieving the low selenium discharge concentrations that regulators are proposing or implementing will be reviewed and considerations in their selection and application will be addressed.

.

I8.4 | On-line Catalog of Alternative sources of Water for Coal Fired Power Plants

David Alleman, Senior Environmental Manager, ALL Consulting

In recent years, rising populations and regional droughts have caused coal-fired power plants to temporarily curtail or cease production due to a lack of available water for cooling. In addition, concerns about the availability of adequate supplies of cooling water have resulted in cancellation of plans to build much-needed new power plants. These issues, coupled with concern over the possible impacts of global climate change, have caused industry and community planners to seek alternate sources of water to supplement or replace existing supplies. The Department of Energy, through the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) is researching ways to reduce the water demands of coal-fired power plants. As part of the NETL Program, ALL Consulting is developing an internet-based Catalog of potential alternative sources of cooling water. The Catalog identifies alternative sources of water, such as mine discharge water, oil and gas produced water, saline aquifers, and publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), which could be used to supplement or replace existing surface water sources. This paper will provide an overview of the Catalog, and examine the benefits and challenges of using these alternative water sources for cooling water.

.

I8.5 | Field Evaluations of the Toxin TrapTM Technology for Removal of Heavy Metals in FGD Wastewater

Robert Jones, Managing Partner, Energy and Environmental Enterprises

A novel wastewater treatment technology has been developed for the removal of trace metals. The Toxin TrapTM technology utilizes partially-submerged, membrane-covered drums containing highly selective adsorbents. The adsorbents are designed to capture metallic trace elements such as arsenic, mercury, cadmium, and others. The drums are rotated to sustain a bi- directional flow, allowing the sorbents to remain separate from the suspended solids, avoiding plugging or fouling. The constant flow reversal is unique to the device and reduces clogging that has prevented coal power plants from using more common adsorbent filtration methods. The technology has been evaluated in field studies at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA) Paradise Fossil Plant. Field tests conducted with wastewater from TVA’s flue gas desulfurization (FGD) process showed promising results for reduction of mercury concentrations to less than ten parts per trillion and arsenic reductions to less than ten parts per billion.

F7.1 | DOE and NETL’s Carbon Capture R&D Program

Timothy Fout | Project Manager, US DOE/ NETL

With pending legislation or EPA action on greenhouse gas emissions, there is a concerted effort underway to find ways to meet possible future limits in a cost effective manner. The DOE, through its Existing Plants Program, is targeting existing pulverized coal (PC) power plants since they produce a sizeable portion of current CO2 emissions from all fossil-fuel-based sources, and that only about six gigawatts of the existing coal-fired electricity generating fleet is projected to retire by 2030. Current analysis indicates that state-of-the-art CO2 capture technologies are not cost-effective technologies for capturing CO2 from PC-based power plants. The technologies being researched through the Existing Plants program aim at achieving a 90% capture rate while achieving less than a 35% increase in the cost of electricity. This paper will give an update on the status of the program, its investigation of post combustion capture technologies (including membranes, sorbents and solvents), research into oxy-combustion systems, and development of advanced CO2 compression technologies.

.

F7.2 | A Solid Retrofit Approach for Capturing CO2: Pilot Testing and Equipment Update

Holly Krutka | Research Scientist, ADA Environmental Solutions

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) can be an important component of reducing worldwide CO2 emissions from stationary point sources, such as coal-fired power plants.  Aqueous amines and ammonia are being demonstrated for CO2 capture in a temperature swing cyclic process.  Solid sorbents can also be used in a similar process, but have the potential to drastically reduce the energy required to release the CO2 during material regeneration.  Through a DOE Cooperative Agreement with supplemental funding from EPRI and industry ADA Environmental Solutions is conducting a viability assessment of solid sorbents for post-combustion CO2 capture.  This evaluation has included screening of potential sorbents as well as process equipment.  Laboratory-scale sorbent screening results were used to identify the most promising sorbents.  These materials were produced in larger quantities and have been further evaluated at the 1 kW pilot scale.  In a parallel effort, a 500 MW concept design is being developed including initial cost estimates and a general arrangement.  An update on the progress of the project, focusing on the results of 1 kW pilot testing and the options for process equipment, will be discussed.

.

F7.3 | Carbon Capture Ready Feasibility Case Study for new build CCGT, UK

Richard Lowe | Associate Director, URS Corporation Ltd

EU Legislation now requires all new fossil fuel power plants (>300MWe) to demonstrate Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR) prior to being granted development consent. In the UK, CCR requirements are set out in new guidance, which requires demonstration that any new plant has space available to retrofit carbon capture technology and has an appropriate transport route to a final storage location. The application of this guidance to a specific new build 1,000 MWe CCGT case study is presented. A high level design layout for carbon capture plant based on current technologies has been developed, including innovative use of vertical train technology to optimise the footprint of the capture plant. Electrical and steam demand of the proposed capture plant are calculated and consideration is given to the benefits of stand-alone versus integrated steam and electrical supply to the capture plant. Two alternative transport routes are presented, together with an assessment of potential final storage locations. An economic appraisal of carbon capture and storage is also indicated, to meet CCR requirements. Finally, hazard risk modelling of potential accidental release scenarios of CO2 from the proposed transport pipeline pre- and post compression is shown, given the proximity of the proposed plant to sensitive receptors.

.

F7.4 | Impact of Coal Fired Power Plant Dynamics on Advanced Amine Carbon Capture

Naresh Handagama | Technology Manager/Principal Engineer, Alstom Power Inc.

ALSTOM Power and Dow Chemical jointly operate a pilot plant treating flue gas CO2 emissions in South Charleston, WV since September 2009. Bituminous coal-fired boiler flue-gas is treated with UCARSOL™ FGC-3000 amine solvent. The plant capacity is 5 CO2 tones/day with 90% CO2 capture efficiency. Flue gas is pre-treated by wet flue gas desulphurization (WFGD) and pre-cooler systems for temperature and water balance maintenance. A test program to mimic the power plant dynamics under transient conditions has been conducted. This provides information on synchronized operation of the carbon capture integrated power plant. Key control variables and the best possible manipulated variables are determined through dynamic simulation and demonstrated by experiment. Process systems expertise and control strategies are demonstrated through 6000+ hours of pilot plant operation. Operational philosophy developed through this unique combination of simulation and experiment is easily scalable to allow flexible operation of a large-scale carbon capture system.

.

F7.5 | MHI’s KM-CDR™ Post-Combustion CO2 Capture – Process Overview and Project Update

Steven Holton | Director of Business Development, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) currently provides the largest scale CO2 capture plants for commercial CO2 recovery from natural gas fired applications. The company is now focused on providing its KM-CDR™ post-combustion CO2 capture process for commercial scale solutions for coal fired applications. MHI are constructing a 500 Metric ton per day capture plant in collaboration with Southern Company at a commercially operating coal fired power plant in Alabama. The capture plant, which is funded mainly by the two parties, is scheduled to be operational during Q2 2011. EPRI will be conducting testing as an independent third Party. That project, along with scale-up to full commercial size and the recent energy saving enhancements to the KM-CDR™ CO2 capture process, are the focus of this paper.

.

F7.6 | Plant-specific GIS analysis of the CCS retrofit opportunity for the existing coal-fired fleet

Chris Nichols | Analyst, National Energy Techology Laboratory

To enable consideration of CO2 capture retrofit, NETL has performed a plant-specific geospatial analysis of the existing coal-fired fleet and estimated how much the capital cost and parasitic load for CO2 retrofit would vary from unit to unit. Site-specific characteristics such as base plant efficiency, whether or not the unit has a sulfur scrubber, the efficiency of the sulfur scrubber, how much water is available for the unit to use, and how much space is available for the CO2 capture and compression equipment were factored in to an estimate of CO2 capture cost at each generating unit.

I2.1 | Energy Management: Barriers to Implementation

Michael Walker | VP – Energy & Environmental Services, The EI Group, Inc.
There is a lot of talk about saving energy and improving sustainability. While everyone agrees that “we” should do more, many owners and property managers have concluded that their reasons for not implementing energy saving improvements are valid. Yet, many of these reasons can be boiled down into some common themes. This paper presents six reasons (some good, some not so good) energy improvement projects get derailed or don’t get any traction. In each case, strategies that may assist employee efforts to get energy savings projects back on track are presented.

I2.2 | Risk Management for Sustainable Projects

Timothy Corbett | President, SmartRisk
The interest along with the legal and regulatory requirements for sustainable design is gaining momentum dramatically in the industry today. With these changes comes increased risk and liability for design and building professionals and project owners. Sustainable design incorporates concepts using innovative products, energy efficient materials and new construction methods. This session will cover areas of concern, increased risk including industry claims that have occurred for sustainable projects. Sustainable risk based decision making along with risk management strategies will be discussed to help improve the successful outcome for sustainable projects.

I2.3 | New Options for Corporate Renewable Energy Programs

Peter Freed | Project Developer, TerraPass
For many companies, developing a renewable energy project means putting solar panels on the roof or buying RECs. More options are available for corporate renewable energy programs. TerraPass is working with corporations around the country to develop dedicated, off-site renewable energy projects. Such initiatives present unique opportunities for creating a long-term supply of fixed price, green power or gas. In this presentation, I will explore a variety of ways companies can identify and develop off-site renewable energy projects, how such arrangements can be structured, possible benefits to the companies and project owners and the challenges of such an approach.

I2.4 | Sustainability is Dead

Greg Scandrett | VP of Product Management, Enviance, Inc.
The basic idea of sustainability is to continue to act in the same way we always have and minimize the impact of our actions. This is the lazy route. This is the path devoid of innovation and real problem solving because it doesn’t require real change; it only requires us to do the best with what we have. Few businesses today would consider an investment in a sustainability project on par with an operational or R&D project, after all businesses make goods and services, sustainability is something we have to do. That is the main problem with the sustainability paradigm. In this presentation, Greg Scandrett, VP of Product Management will discuss with attendees why sustainability in the present form must change. Attendees will learn why it is counter productive to install sustainability initiatives that after the fact – after the product has been designed, after the business process has been created, after the raw materials have been procured, after the product has been manufactured. Sustainability decisions must be placed into the process and not managed ‘at the end of the pipe’. Greg will argue that sustainability must endure the same transformation process as quality did in the 20th century.

I2.5 | Building Information Modeling and Sustainability for Healthcare Design and Construction

Allan Chasey | Professor, Arizona State University
The US healthcare industry is a dynamically changing market, characterized by shortened design time, decreasing construction budgets, aggressive construction schedules and demanding requirements while maintaining sustainability goals. The increasing complexity of hospitals and the growing recognition of sustainability needs are major challenges for healthcare owners. To accomplish multifaceted healthcare construction with its shortened schedules, reduced cost, and sustainable objectives, a collaborative, Integrated Project Design (IPD) team approach and Building Information Modeling (BIM) are needed. The use of sustainability guidelines and BIM are critical in achieving the comprehensive approach necessary for constructing highly technical healthcare facilities. The case study of the Phoenix Children’s Hospital’s (PCH) new 750,000 SF healthcare and administration facilities will provide insights into the process of integrating sustainability and BIM. Specifically, this presentation will: 1) Identify the Green Guide for Healthcare (GGHC) credits earmarked as attainable. 2) Analyze the BIM usage through the Construction Manager/General Contractor process. 3) Identify how BIM tools were used within the construction cycle to promote the PCH sustainability mission. 4) Provide suggestions to improve the use of BIM for future sustainable healthcare projects. The complexity and integrated approach highlights how BIM can be used to support sustainability efforts for future healthcare projects.

I2.6 | Collaboration-Based Management of Petroleum Pipeline Rights of way in Nigeria

Unite Ekwo | Phd Resercher, Newcastle University
The paper starts with a conceptual exploration of the challenges in the management of Petroleum Pipeline Rights of Way within the context of public infrastructure maintenance. Upon this, it developed a holistic understanding of the concept and global challenges of petroleum pipeline rights of way management. It argues the need for Collaboration-Based Management of the Rights of Way of Petroleum Pipeline, in particular, to involve the communities traversed by the pipelines as a stakeholder to enhance social, economic and environmental sustainability in a balanced manner in their interaction with the other stakeholders, viz; the government and the multi-national oil companies. By applying the framework, the route taken by the pipeline in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja is demarcated; and further analysis found that there is widespread encroachment on it by residential developments and other land uses. By analysing this and other data from secondary sources, it was found that the pipeline has not improved the economic situation of the people in the communities it traversed. On the contrary, it has transformed the otherwise tranquil communities into disorderliness, attracted violent crime and caused a plethora of environment problems, exposing the people to challenges which are unimaginable if the pipeline project were not executed.

C1.1 | Halogens and Sulfur in Coals and their Influence on Co-benefit Mercury Capture

Bernhard Vosteen | President, Vosteen Consulting Gmbh

Not only the range of the coal mercury content itself, but also the range of the native halogen and sulfur contents in coal are of great influence on co-benefit mercury capture, wet and dry. The specific role of different halogens is discussed with respect to many low chlorine coals worldwide, demonstrating that pre-combustion bromide addition to enhance mercury oxidation and co-benefit mercury capture will be needed not only in USA, but also in other countries (e.g. South Africa, China). The large scatter of coal sulfur contents is discussed, with respect to mercury reduction caused by sulfite and to mercury contamination of gypsum. Technologies are presented, how to prevent mercury reemissions and mercury contamination of by-products.

C1.2 | MHI Mercury Removal System with NH4Cl Injection

Shintaro Honjo | Lead Research Engineer, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc.

MHI has developed and demonstrated an effective Mercury Removal System that is integrated with the SCR and FGD. This technology uses the injection of ammonium chloride (NH4Cl) into the ductwork, upstream of the SCR catalyst and provides NOx control and improved oxidation of elemental mercury. The downstream wet limestone FGD effectively removes the SO2 and the oxidized mercury with MHI ORP (Oxidation-Reduction-Potential) control technology. The results of several tests and a demonstration program have shown this halogen (NH4Cl) can result in much lower operating costs compared with Activated Carbon Injection (ACI). This technology also provides a benefit for the replacement of hazardous anhydrous ammonia injection and substitutes safer ammonium chloride injection. MHI has successfully completed collaborative testing and pilot-scale demonstrations of this Mercury Removal System with the Southern Company at the “Mercury Research Center” in Plant Crist, Pensacola, FL. With success of the demonstration, Southern Company and MHI will conduct full-scale demonstration testing for the NH4Cl injection and ORP control technologies at Alabama Power’s Plant Miller Unit 1 in early 2011. This report presents the demonstration results, including the vaporization, sublimation performance and effective emission control, and the future demonstration test plan.

C1.3 | Optimization of activated carbon addition and comparison of activated carbons in recent fullscale trial

Rob Nebergall | Business Manager, Norit Americas Inc.
Norit Americas Inc. is performing a full-scale field test at a coal fired power plant in the state of Illinois during the third quarter of 2010. The test program was developed in order to assist the plant in meeting the pending 2015 state mercury regulations in a cost effective and reliable manner. On January 1st, 2015, the State of Illinois requires a ninety percent reduction from coal base mercury or an output based emission standard of 0.008 lb of mercury per GW-hr on a plant-by-plant basis. Norit Americas Inc. will test several novel sorbents and compare the mercury removal efficiencies to that of DARCO® Hg-LH, The field test will last approximately eight weeks. EPA Method 30B will be used to determine the coal-to-stack mercury removal as well as the mercury stack emissions in lbs of mercury per GW-hr for each sorbent tested. In addition an economic analysis will be provided.

C1.4 | Evaluation of Sorbent-Based Strategies for Mercury Control at a Subbituminous Coal-Fired Plant

John Pavlish | Senior Research Advisor, Energy & Environmental Research Center of University of North Dakota
The Energy & Environmental Research Center has been investigating and developing sorbent-based strategies for mercury and trace metal control for well over a decade. At a midsized (400 MW) subbituminous power plant, two sorbent-based strategies were evaluated for mercury control, with some emphasis on evaluating balance-of-plant impacts. Testing included baseline measurement plus parametric and extended tests with sorbent-based strategies—commercial carbons and a suite of proprietary sorbents that were coupled with sorbent enhancement additives (SEAs). For comparison, noncarbon sorbents were also included with the SEAs. Trace metal data were captured by coal analysis, continuous mercury monitors, and sorbent traps. In addition, possible halogen impacts were evaluated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Method 26A. Electrostatic precipitator ash was analyzed to provide data on halogens, mercury, and loss-on-ignition changes as a result of using the technologies. Project results will be presented.

C1.5 | Behavior of various alloys in a steam boiler at the Ramat Hovav facility, using fuel oil spiked with bromide and chloride

Mira Freiberg | Head of Research, Israel Chemicals Ltd- Industrial Products
Inorganic Bromides such as NaBr, CaBr2, KBr, MgBr2 have advantages over chlorides for removal of mercury from flue gas produced in coal fired power plants. Bromine and bromine compounds are applied via different technologies to coal or flue gas for mercury control. This study evaluates the corrosion effects of adding bromides to coal fed to the boilers. It was designed to simulate the effect of addition of the bromides on the behavior of various alloys in the combustion atmosphere. Experiments were run in a steam boiler system at the Ramat Hovav plant, using fuel oil. The tests were carried out with chlorides, bromides and mixtures thereof. The results indicate similar behavior of the alloys in the different environments. The corrosion rate in all cases was at a safe level of less than 0.1 mm/year.

C1.6 |  Low Cost Multi-Pollutant Control Solutions

Tony Silva | Principal Engineer, Babcock & Wilcox

While dry sorbent injection (DSI) is not a new concept, it has taken on a new life in anticipation of regulations more stringent than CAIR. Field demonstrations have been ongoing in order to develop design and performance guidelines and comparative reagent economics for trona and hydrated lime. The impacts of a baghouse and/or ESP on reagent performance will also be discussed. The test results will not only address acid gas control but also the overall impact on multi-pollutants (including mercury) control. In addition, performance variables attributable to multi-pollutant control will be discussed.

Renewable & Clean Energy Solutions to Secure Energy Independence from Foreign Oil.

FOREIGN OIL: As imports grow and world prices rise, the amount of money we send to foreign nations every year is soaring. At current oil prices, we will send $700 billion dollars out of the country this year alone — that’s four times the annual cost of the Iraq war. Projected over the next 10 years, the cost will be $10 trillion — it will be the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind. America uses a lot of oil. Every day, 85 million barrels of oil are produced around the world. And 21 million of those are used here in the United States. That’s 25% of the world’s oil demand used by 4% of the world’s population.

SOLUTION: It’s compressed natural gas (CNG). Natural gas and bio-fuels are the only domestic energy sources used for transportation. Saves About 40% On Fuel. Natural gas costs about 40% less than gasoline. In places like Utah, prices are less than $1 a gallon. Compressed natural gas (CNG) is the cleanest transportation fuel available today. According to the California Energy Commission, critical greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas are 23% lower than diesel and 30% lower than gasoline. Natural gas (CNG) vehicles are available NOW and combine top performance with low emissions.

According to NGV America, there are more than 7 million NGVs in use worldwide, but only 150,000 of those are in the United States. The EPA estimates that vehicles on the road account for 60% of carbon monoxide pollution and around one-third of hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions in the United States. As federal and state emissions laws become more stringent, many requirements will be unattainable with conventionally fueled vehicles. Since CNG is significantly cleaner than petroleum, CNG-fueled vehicles are increasingly popular. (The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach recently announced that 16,800 old diesel trucks will be replaced, and half of the new vehicles will run on alternatives such as natural gas. Source: Pickens Plan

Energy Security, including transportation strategies, will be featured as a separate track at EUEC 2012. Chesapeake Energy, Navistar, GM and EPRI are collaborating with EUEC to exhibit CNG vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and shale gas development. This month’s blog features relevant presentations from EUEC 2011.

D3.1 | Index of US Energy Security Risk

Stephen Eule | VP, Climate & Technology , Institute For 21St Century Energy

Energy security has occupied the minds of policymakers since the Arab oil embargo on the early 1970s. This concern, however, has not been matched with metrics that allow for a quantifiable, dispassionate, and comprehensive assessment of the risks to our Nation’s energy security. This shortcoming is what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for 21st Century Energy seeks to address by introducing a first-of-a-kind annual Index of U.S. Energy Security Risk. The Index, which covers the years 1970 to 2030, incorporates 37 different measures of energy security risk, covering a wide range of energy supplies, energy end-uses, operations, and environmental emissions. Besides providing an historical look at U.S. energy security, the Index can be used to explain whether our energy security is trending better or worse, to assess the potential impact of new policies on U.S. energy security, and to measure the aspects of energy security that have had, or are likely to have, the greatest impact on energy security risks. By developing a transparent and objective means for measuring the once elusive concept of energy security, the Energy Institute is working to ensure that energy security considerations are more directly incorporated into the policy debates moving forward.

D3.3 | Prism 2.0: Preliminary Insights from EPRI’s Regional Model

Bryan Hannegan | Vice President, Environment And Renewables , Electric Power Research Institute

Using a new regional economic model developed by EPRI, I will discuss the challenges faced by the electric power industry as it seeks to incorporate greater amounts of variable renewable energy into its future generation mix. I will also provide an updated assessment of the potential near-term and long-term response of the industry to an aggressive climate policy, and reiterate the value of investment in a “Full Portfolio” of low-carbon electricity technologies.

J8.4 | Implications of Cyber Attacks on the Critical Infrastructure

Donald Cox | Project Manager , Raytheon

The success enjoyed by modern society is built on a foundation of 16 major infrastructure sectors. For example, transportation, telecommunication, banking, electric power, water/wastewater, and agriculture are seven that combine to provide developed countries with the highest standard of living in the history of mankind. These infrastructure sectors are highly interdependent and reliable. Disruption of any one of these sectors threatens the quality of life we enjoy. Computerized industrial control systems are a contributing factor that has made industrial productivity possible and have hitherto been considered immune to cyber attack. Last year, the STUXNET cyber worm was exposed as the first cyber weapon to directly target industrial control systems. The emergence of this threat brought attention to the existing vulnerabilities of our industrial infrastructure resulting in government and industry leaders to question the reliability of the utilities that historically have been highly dependable. STUXNET surprised experts with its high level of sophistication; well beyond that of other cyber threats to date. This paper will briefly discuss Stuxnet and the implications of cyber threats focused specifically on industrial control systems and the processes they control. We also evaluate the possible impacts to reliability and sustainability of our critical industrial infrastructure.

L5.3 | Why Coal Plant Retirements & Fuel Switching Conversions to Natural Gas Matters to Utilities and Our Customers

Alex Hofmann | Sr. Energy and Environmental Services Engineer , American Public Power Association

Public power utilities, owned and operated by municipal governments in 49 states are operating in extraordinary times with lower industrial and commercial load (electricity demand) and pressures by the consumer to keep rates low. Public power communities are under pressure to “keep the lights on” and remain highly reliable while also transforming the current generation to lower carbon footprint and reduced conventional pollutants (SO2, NOx and mercury). This talk will discuss why premature retirements of power plants and fuel switching to gas matters to residential and industrial consumers. The talk will address costs, reliablity, infrastructure and debt remaining on power plants that might retire prematurely. The talk will also address recent events that have made the permitting of natural gas storage and natural gas pipeline more difficult. The talk will also take into account any recent studies by NERC, FERC, DOE or other relevant agencies.

L5.2 | Implications of Greater Reliance on Natural Gas for Electricity Generation

Catherine Elder | Senior Associate , Aspen Environmental Group

The study identifies issues that arise if electric utilities turn to natural gas to replace their existing baseload coal-fired generation, either to address carbon emissions or due to other pending regulations. It evaluates natural gas demand under a variety of resource portfolio scenarios, and demonstrates how much gas would be required to replace all existing coal-fired generation with gas. It tempers the favorable supply picture presented by natural gas producers, and reviews how much new natural gas transmission and storage infrastructure might be added across a variety of scenarios, including if all coal-fired generation were replaced with gas. In general, the potential demand, supply and infrastructure needed are unprecedented relative to maxima experienced by the industry to date. As much as 70 Bcf per day of new pipeline capacity might be needed, compared to the 45 Bcf per day added since 1990. In addition, not all natural gas pipelines have storage located along them and the ability to add storage is limited by geology. Between the necessary infrastructure to deliver gas, build new power plants, train staff, Aspen estimates a cost in the range of $750 billion, excluding higher commodity costs, debt service on existing plants, and local capacity constraints.

E2.4   Introducing eStar: The All-Electric Commercial Vehicle from Navistar

Mark Aubry | Vice President, Sales, Navistar, Inc.

Come learn about the eStar, the all-electric commercial vehicle from Navistar. It’s what business needs and Mother Earth deserves. A pure electric commercial truck with zero tailpipe emissions. Purpose-built to evolve with your business. Narrow and nimble for city streets and alleys. And quiet as a whisper.

P3 | The Emergence of Shale Gas in U.S Gigsaw

Mitchell Baer | Director. Oil and Gas Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy

This paper surveys U.S. energy use during the past 30 years and present projections of energy use into the future.  Energy resource information will include the traditional energy resources, coal, nuclear, oil, gas, and renewable (principally hydropower), and the projected future role of the expanding set of alternative/renewable energy resources, including solar, wind.  The advent and expansion of the natural gas production from the shale gas formations will be explored.

L3.1  | Chemical Security: Sustainable Utilities through a Secure Power Grid

Jeff Simmerman |  Lieutenant Commander USCG (ret), ERM

On Christmas Day
2009, a young radicalized Detroit-bound passenger on a Northwest (NW) Flight 253 attempted to become a bomber aboard that flight with a liquid explosive.
This liquid explosive, undetectable by current airport security measures, was
potentially powerful and deadly. Only the would-be-bomber’s inexperience in
the manner of use of the explosive kept the NW Flight from ending in a
disaster. The key ingredient in this liquid explosive was Pentaerythritol
tetranitrate or PETN, a product used by the utility power sector and frequently
found in large electrical transformers. The Utility power sector uses many such
chemicals like PETN, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Chlorine, that could be used as a
precursor to a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) by criminal or terrorist
elements. The intent of this paper is to educate listeners to the challenges in
protecting these WMD precursor chemicals from being misappropriated for
malicious purposes. Additionally there are common countermeasures that a plant
Environmental Health and Safety Supervisor could utilize to: • Help mitigate
the hazards that these chemicals may pose and • Help secure these chemicals
for the beneficial use of a secure power grid. This presentation will include:
1) Terrorist and criminal chemical WMD incidents. 2) A brief introduction to
DHS regulations. 3) Chemical security measures. 4) How a bench-mark safety
measures enhances the security and safety of a power production facility.

L3.2  | Water Management: The Next Corporate Challenge in Compliance

Doug Hatler |  Vice President of Alliances, Enviance, Inc.

With the drastic consequences of the oil spill in the Gulf, the EPA’s recent emphasis on
enforcement of the Clean Water Act, and the mounting scientific evidence
pointing to water scarcity, water – and more specifically, the management of
water – is top of mind for state and federal regulators, communities at large,
and EHS professionals. A mounting concern in the corporate environment,
managing water resources encompasses everything from water supply, quality and
recycling to regulatory compliance management to sustainability and corporate
social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. In short, water is a major component
of both sustainability and operating a business effectively and efficiently. In
this presentation, Doug Hatler, environmental management lecturer, industry
expert and Vice President of Alliances at Enviance, Inc., will explore water
resource management, including regulatory compliance management and CSR
initiatives, and the role of data management technology. He will also address
how organizations can better prepare for and report on regulatory compliance
mandates and how companies can manage water resource risks strategically while
reducing exposure in today’s new water-constrained environment.

L3.3  | Emerging Best Practice Ensures EHS and Sustainability Systems Achieve Business Objectives

Carrie Tuosto |  Client Services Director, EHS & Sustainability Solutions, IHS

Technology experts agree that nearly half of enterprise software implementations fail to
achieve the desired objective of streamlining and simplifying EHS compliance
and sustainability management. Typically, system implementation failure can be
attributed to the lack of a proactive implementation plan or a flawed change
management strategy. Successful implementation of information management
systems supporting EHS and sustainability management programs requires
extensive knowledge of technology, the environment in which the system will be
deployed, and the business requirements it will support. Constructing a
detailed implementation plan and corresponding business case prior to
developing an RFP—is critical to the success of any enterprise software
implementation. A proactive pre-implementation plan includes: • Business goals,
desired outcomes, processes and resources that aligns them with applicable
standards and regulations; • Existing technology that will be leveraged to
complete the solution; • Resources that will be required for software
implementation; and • Process and personnel changes that will be required to
monitor and manage the information. This presentation will offer industry best
practices for conducting effective pre-implementation planning, which has
helped hundreds of businesses, including those in the electric generation
sector, execute successful system implementations.

L3.4  | Now that your wind farm is finally up and running…how strong is your EHS  compliance program?

Brian Koziczkowski |  Senior Project Manager, ERM

For many, the monumental effort of getting a wind energy project sited, permitted and constructed overshadows the equally important task of instituting an effective environmental health and safety (EHS) program for the operating facility. Wind energy facilities pose a unique set of EHS compliance challenges when compared to large stationary sources such as chemical manufacturing plants, petroleum
refineries and traditional power plants. This paper will review the key
elements of a wind energy facility EHS program, including, but not limited to
worker safety issues relating to the maintenance of wind turbine nacelles and
towers; control of hazardous energy; electrical safety; hot work; hazard
communication; emergency action plans; personal protective equipment (PPE);
bloodborne pathogens; powered industrial trucks; walking and working surfaces;
hoists and slings; spill prevention, control, and countermeasure plans (SPCC);
hazardous chemical inventories; waste management; and stormwater management.
Additionally, the paper will discuss how to properly audit these EHS program
elements and review personnel training requirements. Programmatic approaches to
implementing “fit for purpose” EHS programs will be presented relative to the
maturation of the renewable power industry; the focus on shifting to long-term
operational goals; and the need to achieve high reliability factors.
Co-authors: Brian Koziczkowski, ERM (presenter) Industry representative,
pending confirmation Peter Anderson, ERM

L3.5  | The Big Squeeze – Using Technology to enable EHS Compliance Assurance while reducing Cost and minimizing Risk

Jim Braselman |  VP, Safetec

Like most business people, EHS professionals are facing the Big Squeeze of meeting increased regulatory requirements with reduced resources. In particular, the rapid rate of EHS regulatory change is forcing companies to do a lot more with a lot less when it comes to credibly managing compliance assurance. Knowing
what regulations apply to your business operations, what changes have occurred,
and how these changes affect your task burden and compliance activities is
something that cannot be managed “manually” anymore. There are dozens of
technology providers that deliver “task management” solutions or regulatory
content search engines intended to help achieve credible compliance assurance.
Unfortunately, real-world results are mixed. This presentation explores: – the
true cost and complexity of configuring “compliance assurance” software solutions
- the most common functional gaps and shortcomings of these solutions, and -
the 3 key technology enablers needed to assure performance improvement and cost
reduction The presentation will highlight real-world examples of how 3
companies focused on crucial technology enablers to drive out the cost and risk
of meeting their overall EHS Compliance obligations.

L3.6  | Integrating  ESC and IHS EMIS Tools For Automated Air Emissions Data Transfer

Cindy Whitaker |  Senior Environmental Specialist, Duke Energy

Duke Energy will discuss our effort, benefit and project experience in implementing a fleet-wide EMIS program. Its integration to the CEM Data Acquisition Systems for air data collection will be of particular interest, as the IT infrastructure and all vendor products continue to change at a rapid pace. Air monitoring requirements also
continue to expand beyond the original scope, to include Greenhouse Gas
reporting and future monitoring indicated by the Utility Boiler MACT. The
smooth integration of the regulatory and business reporting requirements has
been a boon to Duke Energy, but the pitfalls and risks should also be borne in
mind. Duke will share lessons learned and goals achieved by this project.

G 6.1 | Requirements and Developments in Environmental and Carbon Reporting and Disclosure

John Fillo | Senior Engineer, Sentech, Inc.

Climate change and carbon risk management are complex environmental and societal issues, as well as fundamental business issues. Increased reporting and disclosure of environmental and carbon exposures and liabilities, risks and opportunities are driven by federal, regional, and state/provincial requirements in the U.S. and abroad. These obligations are evolving from participation in voluntary initiatives to legislative- and regulatory-driven mandatory action. While reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is only one component of these requirements, statutory financial disclosure requirements for publicly held companies extend these reporting obligations to address operations, business risks, legal and supply chain issues, as well as disclosures in financial statements. This presentation will provide an overview of and insight into the complexity of these requirements. It will summarize various mandatory and voluntary emissions reporting programs/requirements; outline statutory, industry and voluntary environmental and carbon disclosure requirements; address some of the complexities of carbon risk management that go beyond simply reporting a GHG inventory; and provide real-world examples of how selected entities approach conformance with these requirements. As the statutory requirements around GHG reporting, reductions, and overall carbon management expand and mature, so will the complexity of public reporting and disclosure.

G6.2 | An Inefficient and Costly Patchwork Quilt of GHG Reporting

Christina Schwerdtfeger | President, Coto Consulting, Inc.

This case study discusses the differences and similarities in mandatory greenhouse gas reporting programs between California, EPA and Executive Order 13514. The data collection and management challenges are substantial with very little consistency between reporting programs and tools.  The three-fold reporting burden on individual facilities is substantial but does not provide benefits which are commensurate with the level of effort. Using real data, this case study shows why a single regulatory and reporting framework makes sense.

G 6.3 | GHG Reporting Rule Requirements for Power Generating Units

Stephen Norfleet | Project Manager, RMB Consulting & Research, Inc.

Late in 2009, EPA promulgated the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Rule. The GHG reporting requires reporting of annual emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorochemicals (PFCs), and other fluorinated gases and affects over 30,000 individual facilities across some 40 source categories. The rule places additional monitoring and reporting requirements on sources and is likely to produce data that will influence potential GHG reduction policy decisions and could establish potential precedents for future CO2/GHG reporting requirements. The broadly reaching regulation will affect virtually all US generating units. With little time to prepare, sources were required to start monitoring in 2010 and will shortly need to submit the first electronic report by March 31, 2011 even though EPA has yet to release the final format. Complicating the issue, if a facility includes a GHG Reporting Rule affected source (boiler, turbine, etc.), then all combustion sources at the facility become affected (i.e., there is no “de minimis” exemption in the rule) including otherwise trivial overlooked sources (e.g., gas-fired hot water heaters or stoves) at the plant. The presentation will include: • Monitoring requirements and calculation procedures for combustion sources • Use of CEMS, fuel monitoring/analysis and/or options for using “company records” • Proposed requirements for electric transmission and distribution equipment (Subpart SS) • QA/QC requirements/equipment calibration and accuracy requirements •Reporting requirements (final reporting format expected in December 2010)

G 6.4 | The GHG Tailoring Rule Double-Take

Jamie Wilson | Senior Consultant, Trinity Consultants

The fanfare around EPA’s greenhouse gas (GHG) Tailoring Rule continues to focus primarily on the thresholds at which GHG emissions trigger the federal New Source Review (NSR) and Title V programs in 2011 and beyond. In addition, we have all heard of the subsequent EPA action focused on federal implementation of the rule in jurisdictions that were not poised to implement it to meet EPA’s timeframe. But look again! With regards to triggering the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program, if your facility (especially a new facility!) triggers PSD for GHGs, the implications are significant, and this does not simply involve the uncertainty surrounding GHG BACT! This presentation will focus on the lesser-explored consequences of the Tailoring Rule on PSD permitting for both new facilities and modifications, as well as explore some interesting opportunities on how to navigate away from potential pitfalls and permitting traps.

G6.5 | NSR and GHG Emissions – A Regulatory Status Report

Dave Jordan | Air Program Director, ERM

The GHG Tailoring Rule is expected to have substantial impacts on the utility industry. This paper provides a brief overview of the rule and a report on the various challenges to its implementation including both FIP and SIP status updates.

G 6.6 | Electric Utility Small Project PSD Cautions post GHG Tailoring Rule

Brian Burdorf | Director, Trinity Consultants

Following U.S. EPA’s promulgation of the Tailoring Rule, electric utilities have to exercise increased sensitivity to the fact that the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) significance threshold for GHGs may be the most stringent PSD triggering threshold for certain projects. This presentation will discuss how seemingly minor upgrades (including projects affecting non-emissions generating equipment like steam turbines, heat transfer elements, cooling water systems, etc.) can encounter PSD permitting challenges. Based on several project examples, a comparison of the PSD threshold for GHGs with traditional criteria pollutant thresholds will be provided to identify if GHGs represent the triggering pollutant or not. A discussion of demand growth exclusion obligations for 5 to 10 years following a project will be provided for situations where projects do not trigger PSD based on the exclusion of emissions associated with product demand growth. The presentation content will draw upon recent project applicability analyses performed for electric utility generation facilities, court case precedents, and federal requirements.

C 6.1  | The Utility MACT Rule: An Industry Perspective

Michael  Rossler |  Manager, Environmental Programs, EEI

EPA is proceeding with the Utility MACT rulemaking for coal- and oil-based EGUs. The rule is to be proposed by March 16 and finalized November 16. This rule will be unprecedented in its scope and range across a large sector of the US economy. What will the MACT look like? What did the ICR data reveal? Can the industry comply with the rule in three years, like the Clean Air Act mandates? Ultimately it will be one or two non-mercury HAPs that will determine the emission control fate of the coal- and oil-based power plant fleet. Meanwhile, some groups and the international community have other plans

C 6.2  | Combustion MACT Standards Update

Carrie Yonley | Vice President, Schreiber, Yonley & Associates

EPA has now issued the first MACT standards for major combustion processes under the current EPA Administration, in addition to new proposed rules. The latest rules include significantly more stringent standards, incorporate startup/shutdown/malfunction emission standards, new CEMs/CMSs and significantly more challenges than previous NESHAP rules. In addition, other 2010 proposed rules include a different regulatory approach for combustion facilities using non-hazardous waste as an alternative fuel in the process. This presentation addresses the MACT approach finalized in the Portland Cement NESHAP (40 CFR 63, Subpart LLL), in addition to the relation to the proposed (final by January 2011) CISWI and Boiler rules. The purpose will be to explore these rules in order to draw potential implications and parallels for similar regulation of the electric power generation industry.

C 6.3  | HAP Insights from the Utility ICR Database

Sid Nelson Jr. | Director New Business Development, Albemarle Corporation

The U.S. EPA is to soon set the utility hazardous air pollutant (HAP) standards at the average performance limitations of the best performing 12% of boilers.  To determine these MACT emission limits, an Information Collection Request was issued requiring HAP emission measurements at about 350 utility boilers, costing an EPA-estimated $75 million.  Measurements included mercury and other heavy metals, HCl, PM, dioxins and other organic HAPs and possible surrogates.  This presentation will take a preliminary peek at the resulting database for a variety of HAPs.  Initial findings will be presented and interesting relationships will be described.

C6.4  | Projection of Final EPA Utility MACT Requirements…

Karl Wilber | General Manager, Tekran Instruments Corporation

…and Presentation of a Challenge for Design and Implementation of a Complete Emissions Monitoring Solution” EPA is finalizing their Information Collection Request (ICS), which will lead to finalization of the Utility Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) guidelines for Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS) from coal-fired power plants. Projections from regulatory authorities and knowledgable consultants suggest that the Utility MACT rules will closely follow paths of the ICI and PC MACT regulations. This paper will provide updates on the specifics of the Utility MACT provisions, with focus on new CEMS requirements. Examples of reporting requirements for criteria pollutants and HAPS will be provided. The paper will also show the performance and experiences with real-time CEMS for Hg, HCI, THC and PM. Data from Coal-fired Electric Generating Units and Cement processes will be presented. Recent supplemental laboratory and research information on low-level accuracies of CEMS will be summarized. Traceability requirements for HgCEMS will be highlighted with the EPA/NIST. Analogous data on PM CEMS are anticipated. The use of low-level CEM system for performance monitoring and optimization of pollutant-specific abatement systems will be included. Economic considerations and examples of the latter will be included as well.

C 6.5  | Energy Efficiency as a Regulatory Requirement

Kristine Baranski | Project Engineer, Cardinal Engineering, Inc.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed energy assessments as requirements in rulemakings such as 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJ, or Boiler MACT, as well as 40 CFR 60 Subparts CCCC and DDDD, or New Source Performance Standards for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (CISWI). EPA is also expected to issue technical guidance including energy efficiency as an approach to Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for greenhouse gases as related to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting under the recently finalized Tailoring Rule. The Boiler MACT and CISWI regulations as well as the EPA technical guidance on greenhouse gas BACT are all anticipated to be finalized during 2010. This session will focus on energy efficiency from a regulatory standpoint. Requirements for facility-wide energy assessments for compliance with the Boiler MACT and CISWI rules will be addressed, including the assessment scope and the necessary technical qualifications for auditors. Additionally, an overview of greenhouse gas BACT guidance and relevant BACT determinations will be presented. Finally, any recent EPA rulemakings including energy efficiency requirements will be discussed.

C 7.1  | Strategies and Costs of Compliance with the Engine NESHAPS

William Stark | Senior Consultant, R. W. Beck, A Science Applications International Corporation Company

In 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized new National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) applicable to existing reciprocating engines. In most cases, the new rule will require emission controls be added to engines used in peaking service. The presentation will include a summary of rule requirements as applicable to engines in peaking service and will present strategies for compliance, including evaluation of engines, initial emissions testing, and evaluation of emission reduction requirements and control technology alternatives. Estimates of capital, operating, and maintenance costs expected to be incurred in order to achieve and maintain compliance will also be presented. The presentation will be largely based on work performed for several municipal agencies in conjunction with their individual members.