environmental and permitting issues for a new coal unit
DESCRIPTION
Environmental and Permitting Issues For a New Coal Unit. Presented to APPA New Coal Unit Symposium San Antonio February 17, 2005. CPS Coal Units Are Not Grandfathered. JK Spruce Plant (one unit, 595 MW burning Powder River Basin Coal) was granted construction and PSD permit in September 1987 - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Environmental and Permitting IssuesFor a New Coal Unit
Presented to APPA New Coal Unit SymposiumSan Antonio February 17, 2005
CPS Coal Units Are Not Grandfathered
• JK Spruce Plant (one unit, 595 MW burning Powder River Basin Coal) was granted construction and PSD permit in September 1987– Subject to top-down BACT Review– Subject to Subpart Da of the NSPS
Subpart Da Requires 2003 Actuals
SO2 1.2 Lb/MMBTU/70% 0.15 Lb/MMBTU
NOx 0.5 Lb/MMBTU 0.17 Lb/MMBTU
PM 0.03 Lb/MMBTU 0.02 Lb/MMBTU
2002 NOx Rate (lb/mmBtu)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1 41
81
121
161
201
241
281
321
361
401
441
481
521
561
601
641
681
721
761
801
841
881
921
961
1001
1041
NO
x E
mis
sio
ns R
ate
- L
b/M
MB
TU
U.S. Coal Unit Performance Data
CPS Coal Units Ranking JK Spruce - 1,004 JT Deely 1 - 1,005 JT Deely 2 - 1,006
There were 1,072 reporting coal units in the 2002 EPA Database.
Source: EPA EDR data
U.S. Average NOx Rate = 0.41 lb/MMBTU
Figure 9
2002 SO2 Rate (lb/mmbtu)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
1 41 81 121
161
201
241
281
321
361
401
441
481
521
561
601
641
681
721
761
801
841
881
921
961
1001
1041
SO
2 E
mis
sio
ns
Rat
e -
Lb
/MM
BT
U
CPS Coal Units Ranking JK Spruce - 1,003 JT Deely 1 - 695 JT Deely 2 - 694{
U.S. Coal Unit Performance Data
There were 1,072 reporting coal units in the 2002 EPA database.
Source: EPA EDR data
U.S. Average SO2 Rate = 0.98 lb/MMBTU
Figure 10
Source: EPA EDR data
Combined SO2 & NOx Rate
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
1 55 109 163 217 271 325 379 433 487 541 595 649 703 757 811 865 919 973 1027
Co
mb
ined
Em
issi
on
Rat
e S
O2
+ N
Ox
- L
b/M
MB
TU
CPS Coal Units Ranking JK Spruce - 1,054 JT Deely 1 - 854 JT Deely 2 - 853{
There were 1,072 reporting coal units in the 2002 EPA database.
U.S. Coal Unit Performance DataFigure 11
25 Best Coal Units in the US - 2002Based upon Combined SO2 + NOx Emission Rates
Laram
ie R
iver
Reid G
ardner
Sam S
eym
our
Northsi
de 2A
Centra
lia
Holcom
b
J K S
pruce
1
Navaj
o
Rawhid
e Ener
gy Sta
tion
Navaj
o
Navaj
o
Clove
r
Musc
atin
e
Clove
r
Cope Sta
tion
Bonanza
Altavi
sta
Power S
tatio
n
Altavi
sta
Power S
tatio
n
Stanto
n Ener
gy 2
W A
Par
ish 8
Neil S
impso
n II 1
Hawth
orn 5
A
Mt.
Carm
el C
ogen
Shiras
3
Polk 1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5Aggregate Emissions Rate for SO2 + NOX - Lb/MMBTU
Lowest Emitting 25 units out of 1,072 Nationwide in 2002
Figure 12
J.K. Spruce
NOx Emissions Rates From Coal Plants - 2002100 Largest Generating Utilities in the U.S.
NRDC et. al. 2002 Benchmarking - April 2004
As
so
cia
ted
Ele
ctr
ic C
oo
p
A
lco
a
T
EC
O E
ne
rgy
El
Pa
so
El e
ctr
i c C
o.
Aq
uil
a
N
iSo
urc
e
In
tern
ati
on
al
Pa
pe
r
C
og
en
trix
Do
mi n
ion
Ve
ctr
en
Ne
bra
sk
a P
ub
lic
Po
we
r D
istr
ict
Te
nn
es
se
e V
all
ey
Au
tho
rity
Re
lia
nt
Re
so
urc
es
DP
L
P
NM
Re
so
urc
es
Ala
ba
ma
Ele
ctr
ic C
oo
p
P
inn
ac
le W
es
t C
ap
ita
l
P
SE
G
M
ira
nt
Fir
stE
ne
rgy
Se
mi n
ole
Ele
ct r
ic C
oo
p
W
PS
Re
so
urc
es
Big
Riv
ers
Ele
ctr
ic
S
ou
th C
aro
lin
a P
ub
lic
Se
r vic
es
We
st a
r E
ne
rgy
All
ian
t E
ne
rgy
Av
ist a
Pu
ge
t E
ne
rgy
Wis
co
ns
in E
ne
r gy
En
ron
Gre
at
Pla
i ns
En
erg
y
J
ac
ks
on
vi l
le E
l ec
tri c
Au
tho
rity
Pe
pc
o H
ol d
ing
s
U
niS
ou
rce
En
er g
y
A
me
r ic
an
Ele
ct r
ic P
ow
er
Cin
er g
y
C
LE
CO
Ho
os
ier
En
erg
y
In
term
ou
nta
in P
ow
er
Ag
en
cy
Sa
lt R
ive
r P
roj e
ct
All
eg
he
ny
En
er g
y
M
idA
me
ric
an
En
erg
y
S
co
ttis
hP
ow
er
Sie
rra
Pa
cif
ic R
es
ou
rce
s
A
LL
ET
E
C
on
ste
lla
t io
n E
ne
rgy
Gro
up
Ed
iso
n I
nt e
rna
t io
na
l
B
as
in E
lec
tric
Po
we
r C
oo
p
P
rog
r es
s E
ne
rgy
So
uth
ern
Co
mp
an
y
X
ce
l
ID
AC
OR
P
D
TE
En
erg
y
F
PL
Gro
up
Lo
s A
ng
ele
s C
ity
SC
AN
A
U
S B
ure
au
of
Re
cla
ma
tio
n
D
uk
e E
ne
r gy
AE
S
O
ma
ha
Pu
bli
c P
ow
er
Dis
t ric
t
T
ri-S
tate
Ge
n &
Tra
ns
mis
sio
n A
ss
n
E
nte
r gy
OG
E E
ne
r gy
CM
S E
ne
rgy
E.O
N
E
xe
lon
Ark
an
sa
s E
lec
t ric
Co
op
Au
sti
n C
ity
Dy
ne
gy
Lo
we
r C
ol o
rad
o R
ive
r A
ut h
ori
t y
P
PL
Tra
ns
Alt
a
E
as
t K
en
tuc
ky
Po
we
r C
oo
p
M
un
icip
al
Ele
ct r
ic A
uth
or i
ty
O
gle
t ho
rpe
Po
we
r
P
G&
E
G
rea
t R
ive
r E
ne
rgy
Am
er e
n
S
an
An
ton
i o P
ub
lic
Se
rvic
e B
oa
rd
C
en
terP
oin
t E
ne
rgy
Se
mp
ra E
ne
rgy
TX
U
B
riti
sh
En
erg
y
C
alp
i ne
Do
w C
he
mic
al
El
Pa
so
Co
rp.
En
erg
y N
ort
hw
es
t
E
xx
on
Mo
bil
Ha
wa
iia
n E
lec
t ric
In
du
str
ies
Inte
rna
tio
na
l P
ow
er
Ke
yS
pa
n
N
ort
h C
aro
lin
a M
un
icip
al
Po
we
r
P
an
da
En
erg
y
P
ow
er
Au
t ho
rity
of
Ne
w Y
ork
PU
D N
o 1
of
Ch
ela
n C
ou
nt y
PU
D N
o 2
of
Gr a
nt
Co
un
ty
S
ea
ttle
Cit
y
S
tate
St
Ba
nk
Tru
st
Co
Te
na
sk
a
U
S C
orp
s o
f E
ng
ine
ers
CP
S F
ut u
re
0
2
4
6
8NOx Emission Rates from Coal Plants - Lb/MWH
U.S. Coal Plant Average 4.34 Lb/MWH
CPS
CPSFuture
Note: 16 of the 100 largest generating companies do not have any coal fired generation
SO2 Emissions Rates From Coal Plants - 2002100 Largest Generating Utilities in the U.S.
NRDC et. al. 2002 Benchmarking - April 2004
Alc
oa
Re
lian
t R
es
ou
r ce
s
T
XU
Mir
an
t
C
ine
rgy
Alle
gh
en
y E
ne
r gy
Ve
ctr
en
Co
ns
tella
tio
n E
ne
rgy
Gro
up
Pe
pc
o H
old
i ng
s
E
as
t K
en
tuc
ky
Po
we
r C
oo
p
P
PL
DP
L
P
rog
res
s E
ne
r gy
So
uth
ern
Co
mp
an
y
F
irs
t En
er g
y
D
uk
e E
ne
rgy
Big
Riv
er s
Ele
ctr
i c
S
CA
NA
Am
eri
ca
n E
l ec
t ric
Po
we
r
P
SE
G
T
en
ne
ss
ee
Va
l ley
Au
tho
rity
WP
S R
es
ou
rce
s
D
TE
En
er g
y
E
xe
lon
AE
S
M
un
ici p
al
El e
ctr
ic A
uth
ori
ty
O
gle
tho
rpe
Po
we
r
C
MS
En
erg
y
E
.ON
Wis
co
ns
i n E
ne
rgy
Do
min
i on
Am
ere
n
A
llia
nt
En
erg
y
A
lab
am
a E
lec
tric
Co
op
TE
CO
En
erg
y
E
dis
on
In
ter n
ati
on
al
Xc
el
So
uth
Ca
rol in
a P
ub
l ic S
erv
ice
s
A
qu
i la
B
as
in E
lec
tric
Po
we
r C
oo
p
H
oo
sie
r E
ne
rgy
Gre
at
Riv
er
En
erg
y
W
es
tar
En
erg
y
C
LE
CO
PG
&E
Mid
Am
eri
ca
n E
ne
rgy
Dy
ne
gy
Ne
bra
sk
a P
ub
l ic P
ow
er
Dis
t ric
t
O
ma
ha
Pu
blic
Po
we
r D
ist r
ict
En
terg
y
A
us
t in
Cit
y
C
en
ter P
oin
t E
ne
r gy
FP
L G
rou
p
A
rka
ns
as
El e
ctr
ic C
oo
p
N
iSo
ur c
e
G
rea
t P
lain
s E
ne
rgy
AL
LE
TE
OG
E E
ne
rgy
Lo
we
r C
olo
r ad
o R
ive
r A
ut h
ori
ty
S
an
An
ton
io P
ub
l ic S
erv
ice
Bo
ard
Se
min
ole
El e
ct r
ic C
oo
p
E
l P
as
o E
lec
tric
Co
.
J
ac
ks
on
vill
e E
lec
tric
Au
tho
r ity
En
ron
Un
iSo
urc
e E
ne
rgy
Pin
na
cle
We
st
Ca
pit
al
Sc
ott
ish
Po
we
r
A
ss
oc
i ate
d E
lec
tric
Co
op
Tr a
ns
Alt
a
S
alt
Ri v
er
Pro
j ec
t
S
em
pr a
En
erg
y
C
og
en
trix
PN
M R
es
ou
rce
s
ID
AC
OR
P
L
os
An
ge
les
Cit
y
S
ier r
a P
ac
ific
Re
so
urc
es
Inte
rna
tio
na
l P
ap
er
Av
ista
Pu
ge
t E
ne
rgy
Tr i
-Sta
te G
en
& T
ran
sm
iss
ion
As
sn
Inte
rmo
un
tain
Po
we
r A
ge
nc
y
U
S B
ure
au
of
Re
cla
ma
tio
n
B
riti
sh
En
er g
y
C
alp
ine
Do
w C
he
mic
al
El
Pa
so
Co
r p.
En
erg
y N
ort
hw
es
t
E
xx
on
Mo
bi l
Ha
wa
ii an
Ele
ct r
ic I
nd
us
trie
s
In
tern
ati
on
al
Po
we
r
K
ey
Sp
an
No
rth
Ca
r oli n
a M
un
icip
al
Po
we
r
P
an
da
En
er g
y
P
ow
er
Au
tho
rit y
of
Ne
w Y
ork
PU
D N
o 1
of
Ch
ela
n C
ou
nty
PU
D N
o 2
of
Gra
nt
Co
un
t y
S
ea
ttle
Cit
y
S
tat e
St
Ba
nk
Tru
st
Co
Te
na
sk
a
U
S C
orp
s o
f E
ng
i ne
ers
CP
S F
utu
re
0
5
10
15
20
25SO2 Emission Rates from Coal Plants - Lb/MWH
CPS
U.S. Coal Plant Average 10.48 Lb/MWH
CPSFuture
Note: 16 of the 100 largest generating companies do not have any coal fired generation
Combined Emissions Rates From Coal Plants - 2002100 Largest Generating Utilities in the U.S.
NRDC et. al. 2002 Benchmarking - April 2004
Alc
oa
Re
lian
t R
es
ou
rce
sM
ira
nt
Cin
erg
yV
ec
tre
nT
XU
Alle
gh
en
y E
ne
rgy
Co
ns
tell a
tio
n E
ne
rgy
Gr o
up
Pe
pc
o H
old
ing
sD
PL
Fir
stE
ne
rgy
Ea
st
Ke
ntu
ck
y P
ow
er
Co
op
Pro
gre
ss
En
erg
yS
ou
the
rn C
om
pa
ny
PP
LB
ig R
ive
rs E
lec
tric
PS
EG
Te
nn
es
se
e V
alle
y A
uth
ori
tyA
me
ric
an
Ele
ctr
ic P
ow
er
Du
ke
En
erg
yT
EC
O E
ne
rgy
SC
AN
A
WP
S R
es
ou
rce
sD
om
inio
nD
TE
En
erg
yA
qu
ilaE
xe
lon
Wis
co
ns
in E
ne
rgy
AE
SA
lab
am
a E
lec
tric
Co
op
Alli
an
t E
ne
rgy
CM
S E
ne
rgy
So
uth
Ca
rolin
a P
ub
lic S
erv
ice
sE
.ON
Ed
iso
n I
nte
rna
tio
na
lX
ce
lO
gle
tho
r pe
Po
we
rM
un
icip
al
Ele
ctr
ic A
uth
ori
tyB
as
in E
l ec
tric
Po
we
r C
oo
pN
eb
ras
ka
Pu
blic
Po
we
r D
istr
ict
We
sta
r E
ne
rgy
NiS
ou
rce
Ho
os
ier
En
erg
yA
ss
oc
iate
d E
lec
tric
Co
op
Am
ere
nC
LE
CO
El
Pa
so
Ele
ct r
ic C
o.
Mid
Am
er i
ca
n E
ne
rgy
Gre
at
Pl a
ins
En
erg
yG
rea
t R
i ve
r E
ne
rgy
Om
ah
a P
ub
lic P
ow
er
Dis
tric
tD
yn
eg
yP
G&
ES
em
ino
le E
lec
tric
Co
op
AL
LE
TE
FP
L G
rou
pE
nte
rgy
Pin
na
cle
We
st
Ca
pit
al
Ja
ck
so
nv
ille
Ele
ctr
ic A
uth
ori
tyA
us
tin
Cit
yE
nro
nU
niS
ou
rce
En
erg
yC
og
en
tri x
Ark
an
sa
s E
lec
tric
Co
op
OG
E E
ne
rgy
Sc
ott
ish
Po
we
rL
ow
er
Co
lora
do
Riv
er
Au
tho
rit y
Sa
lt R
ive
r P
roje
ct
Int e
rna
tio
na
l P
ap
er
PN
M R
es
ou
rce
sC
en
terP
oin
t E
ne
rgy
Sa
n A
nto
nio
Pu
blic
Se
rvic
e B
oa
rdT
ran
sA
lta
ID
AC
OR
PA
vis
taP
ug
et
En
erg
yL
os
An
ge
les
Cit
yS
ierr
a P
ac
ific
Re
so
urc
es
Tri
- Sta
te G
en
& T
ran
sm
i ss
ion
As
sn
Se
mp
ra E
ne
rgy
Int e
rmo
un
tain
Po
we
r A
ge
nc
yU
S B
ure
au
of
Re
cl a
ma
tio
nU
S C
orp
s o
f E
ng
ine
ers
Ca
lpin
eP
ow
er
Au
tho
rity
of
Ne
w Y
ork
Ke
yS
pa
nIn
t ern
ati
on
al
Po
we
rT
en
as
ka
Bri
tis
h E
ne
rgy
En
erg
y N
ort
hw
es
tP
UD
No
2 o
f G
ran
t C
ou
nty
PU
D N
o 1
of
Ch
ela
n C
ou
nty
Do
w C
he
mic
al
Pa
nd
a E
ne
rgy
Sta
te S
t B
an
k T
rus
t C
oE
xx
on
Mo
bil
No
rth
Ca
rolin
a M
un
icip
al
Po
we
rS
ea
ttle
Cit
yH
aw
aiia
n E
lec
tric
In
du
st r
ies
El
Pa
so
Co
rp.
CP
S F
ut u
re
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35Combined SO2 + NOx Emission Rates from Coal Plants - Lb/MWH
U.S. Coal Plant Average 14.83 Lb/MWH
CPS
CPSFuture
Note: 16 of the 100 largest generating companies do not have any coal fired generation
CPS Seeks Public Input
• Established Southeast Quadrant Community Advisory Group (SEQCAG) in October 2002.
• SEQCAG issued report and list of issues in April 2003, continues to meet on a quarterly basis.
• CPS Board of Trustees endorsed management’s commitments to SEQCAG, added more requirements and approved going forward with project in June, 2003.
CPS’ Key Environmental Commitments to the Community
• Use BACT on new unit at a minimum • Enhance coal yard environmental controls• Reduce existing emissions so there will be no net increase in aggregate
emissions as a result of new unit going on-line• 10% renewables commitment by 2015• Increase spending on conservation programs• Enhanced air quality monitoring program around plant• Community environmental health awareness program• New Unit will be brought under Ch. 117 NOx cap• Additional emissions reductions from existing units so there will be a
substantial net decrease in aggregate emissions after new unit goes on-line
CPS Plans to Add a New Coal Unit
• Type : Pulverized Coal, Hybrid Pressure (2520 psi, 1050 oF, 1050 oF)
• Location: Calaveras Lake• Fuel: Powder River Basin Coal• Size: 750 MW• Heat Rate: 9,800 BTU/KWH• Proposed Permit Levels (annual averages)
– SO2 - 0.06 Lb/MMBTU (wet limestone scrubber)– NOx - 0.05 Lb/MMBTU (SCR)– PM - 0.022 Lb/MMBTU (fabric filter) (collectibles + condensables)
Environmental Enhancements at Existing CPS Coal Units
Item Date Cost
System NOx Reductions 1999 - 2004 $55 million
Enhanced Monitoring Program
2003 - 2009 $3 million
Coal Yard Dust Controls 2003 - 2004 $4.0 million
Gas Startup at JTD 2006 - 2007 $5.5 million
Baghouse Retrofit at JTD 2006 - 2007 $90 million
Additional Coal NOx Controls
2005 - 2007 $15 million
Enhance Existing Scrubber 2008 - 2009 $10 million
Scrubber Retrofits at JTD 2012 - 2013 $150 million
Total Cost - $333 million
Green – completed Orange – In Progress Red - Budgeted
CPS Air Emissions from CoalPast, Present and Future
Past Present Future 0
10
20
30
40
50
60Air Emissions -Thousand Tons per Year
Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Particulate Matter
69% Reduction in Emissions!
1997 - 1450 MW
2003 - 1450 MW
2012 - 2200 MW
52% Increasein Power
Calaveras Lake PlantsActual and Projected Emissions
Perm
its19
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
0920
1020
1120
1220
13
0
20
40
60
80
100
120Thousand Tons per Year
SO2
NOx
PM
Actuals Projected(Based upon highest historical heat inputs)
New UnitOn-line 2009
25 Best Coal Units in the US - 2002Based upon Combined SO2 + NOx Emission Rates
Laram
ie R
iver
Reid G
ardner
Sam S
eym
our
Northsi
de 2A
Centra
lia
Holcom
b
J K S
pruce
1
Navaj
o
Rawhid
e Ener
gy Sta
tion
Navaj
o
Navaj
o
Clove
r
Musc
atin
e
Clove
r
Cope Sta
tion
Bonanza
Altavi
sta
Power S
tatio
n
Altavi
sta
Power S
tatio
n
Stanto
n Ener
gy 2
W A
Par
ish 8
Neil S
impso
n II 1
Hawth
orn 5
A
Mt.
Carm
el C
ogen
Shiras
3
Polk 1
JT D
eely
JK S
pruce
New U
nit0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5Aggregate Emissions Rate for SO2 + NOX - Lb/MMBTU
{
After Upgrades
Lowest Emitting 25 units out of 1,072 Nationwide in 2002
San Antonio Air Quality 1979-2001The Six Criteria Pollutants as a Percent of the Standard
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%Pollutant Concentration as a Percentage of the EPA Standard
SO2 NO2 Lead CO PM10 1 Hr Ozone 8 Hr Ozone PM 2.5
8-Hr Ozone
1-Hr Ozone
8-Hr Carbon Monoxide Annual PM-10
Annual NO2
24 Hr SO2Annual Lead
Annual PM-2.5
CPS Plans to Add a New Coal Unit
• Type : Pulverized Coal, Hybrid Pressure (2520 psi, 1050 oF, 1050 oF)
• Location: Calaveras Lake• Fuel: Powder River Basin Coal• Size: 750 MW• Heat Rate: 9,800 BTU/KWH• Proposed Permit Levels (annual averages)
– SO2 - 0.06 Lb/MMBTU (wet limestone scrubber)– NOx - 0.05 Lb/MMBTU (SCR)– PM - 0.022 Lb/MMBTU (fabric filter) (collectibles + condensables)
The problem:
• Dry windy days
What we built:
