mike schimmelpfennig – january 15, 2015 an engineer’s perspective
TRANSCRIPT
THE EPA’S CLEAN POWER PLAN
Mike Schimmelpfennig – January 15, 2015
An Engineer’s Perspective
WHAT IS IT?• Currently it’s a proposed rule.• It is 645 pages.– 12 pages for contents and outline information– About 40% of the pages are justification for the rule.
• Justification is based on reduced human health issues (reduced heart attacks and asthma), better weather (reduction in hurricanes and other significant weather events) and more energy related jobs.
And, More…
• Final rule expected by 6/1/15. (p. 47)• Allows for individual and multi-state plans.• Each state must submit an initial plan by
6/30/16. (p.47)• Final state plans due by 6/30/17 or 6/30/18 if
multi-state. (p. 48)
Bottom Line Rule• The stated goal is a 30 percent reduction in CO2 emissions
from electric generating units by 2030 for the United States.• Each state has a different goal for CO2 reduction.• The EPA suggests a “building block” approach to achieve the
CO2 reductions to include demand side energy efficiency reductions, renewable energy and heat rate improvements.
• For Missouri, the interim goal is 1621 and a final goal of 1544 LBS of CO2 per MW-HR.
• For Illinois, the interim goal is 1366 and the final goal is 1271 LBS of CO2 per MW-HR.
• Interim goal by 2020 through 2029 and the final goal is due by 2030. (p. 346)
• Building Blocks:– 6% improvement in coal plant efficiency. Most
economic improvements have already been done.– Increase natural gas combined cycle (NGCC)
dispatch. Assumes a 70% capacity which is not a good economic choice.
– Increase RE generation from 1.3 million MWh to 2.8 million MWh by 2029 and continue to operate nuclear fleet at 90% capacity.
– Increase demand-side efficiency by 1.5% annually and a cumulative of 9.92% by 2030. This has never been done historically anywhere.
Bottom Line Rule
EPA Justification
• Reduced weather event savings by 2030 - $30 billion (“global social cost savings”)
• Health savings benefits by 2030 - $25 to $59 billion (“global social cost savings”) (p. 57)
• Cost of implementation by 2030 - $7.3 billion• Projects jobs growth in energy of 100,000+ per year.
(p. 60)Gina McCarthy: “So, by 2030, we are actually looking at electricity bills for families going down by 8 percent.” http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/epa-chief-defends-price-white-house-plan-cut-carbon-emissions/
Is this the end game for coal generation?
The agency is determining state goals for affected EGU (Electric Generating Unit) emission performance based on application of BSER (Best System of Emission Reduction) during specified time periods. This raises the question of whether affected EGU emission performance should only be maintained -- or instead should be further improved -- once the final goal is met in 2030. (p. 419)
Global Warming– Is it real? Politically, can there be any doubt?– Does the temperature data support claims?– Is it better to be warmer or colder?– If it’s bad, how does it get corrected?
Global Warming• Brisbane hits coldest temperature in 103 years http://
www.theaustralian.com.au/news/brisbane-hits-coldest-temperature-in-103-years/story-e6frg6n6-1226986116278?nk=9fe3cbf4f5bf37a6dc3f771dfd4654b8
• Coldest Antarctic June Ever Recorded http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/12/coldest-antarctic-june-ever-recorded/ • New York breaks record cold as temps hit 5 degrees, smashing 118-year mark set in 1896 http://
www.nydailynews.com/news/national/deep-freeze-midwest-prepares-50-article-1.1567597
NAMED HURRICANES BY YEAR
Global Warming
Global Warming
Rank YEAR AVERAGE
1 2012 61.2
2 1921 60.1
3 1991 59.2
4 1990 59.0
5 2011 58.7
6 1998 58.7
7 1938 58.7
8 1954 58.6
9 2006 58.5
10 1931 58.5
11 1953 58.5
12 2007 58.3
13 1900 58.3
14 1987 58.2
15 1946 58.1
TOP 15 WARMEST YEARS – ST. LOUIS, MO
Rank YEAR AVERAGE
1 1875 52.8
2 1978 53.2
3 1872 53.4
4 1873 53.7
5 1961 53.8
6 1917 54.0
7 1940 54.0
8 1976 54.1
9 1958 54.1
10 1979 54.1
11 1966 54.1
12 1963 54.3
13 1912 54.3
14 1951 54.4
15 1950 54.4
TOP 15 COLDEST YEARS – ST. LOUIS, MO
References: http://www.crh.noaa.gov/lsx/?n=cli_archive
Global Warming
• Global Warming 'Fabricated' by NASA and NOAA - http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
• Australian Bureau of Meteorology accused of Criminally Adjusted Global Warming - http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/25/Australian-Bureau-of-Meteorology-accused-of-Criminally-Adjusted-Global-Warming
• Extreme Weather is Linked to Global Warming, a New Study Suggests - http://www.universetoday.com/114076/extreme-weather-is-linked-to-global-warming-a-new-study-suggests/
• NASA Scientist Puzzled by Global Cooling - http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/science-us-climate-oceans/2014/10/06/id/598864/?Dkt_nbr=Newsmax&utm_source=Newsmax&utm_medium=widget&utm_content=5&utm_campaign=widgetphase2?ns_mail_uid=36752517&ns_mail_job=1589243_10072014&s=al&dkt_nbr=gtwfhh1a
• Irreversible Damage Seen From Climate Change in UN Leak - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-26/irreversible-damage-seen-from-climate-change-in-un-leak.html
• Extent of Antarctic sea ice reaches record levels - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-14/record-coverage-of-antarctic-sea-ice/5742668
• Top scientist resigns from post - admits Global Warming is a scam http://www.sott.net/article/277349-Top-scientist-resigns-from-post-admits-Global-Warming-is-a-scam
Global Warming
WHAT CAN YOU
BELIEVE?
WHAT ARE THE FACTS?• Coal burning produces about 2100 LBS of CO2 per
MW-HR. http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=74&t=11
• Natural gas burning produces about 1200 LBS of CO2 per MW-HR. http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=74&t=11
• 3.62% of all Green House Gases (GHGs) are CO2. http://
www.ncpa.org/pdfs/GlobalWarmingPrimer.pdf (see p. 6)
• 3.4% of all the earth’s CO2 is man-made. http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/GlobalWarmingPrimer.pdf (see p. 7)
• The USA produces 14.14% of all the man-made CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere. http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
• 32% of USA’s man-made CO2 is from the burning of fossil fuels for producing electricity. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/sources.html
• 3.62% X 3.4% is 0.123 percent. This is the percentage of man-made GHG CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere.
• 14.14% X 32% is 4.52 percent. This is the percentage of USA’s man-made CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere from electric generation.
• 4.52% X 30% is 1.36 percent which is the final 2030 reduction in the USA for man-made CO2 if this rule becomes reality.
• 1.36% X 3.4% is 0.046 percent which is the maximum reduction in world-wide man-made CO2.
• 0.046% X 3.62% is 0.0017 percent which is the maximum reduction in world-wide GHG CO2.
WHAT ARE THE BOTTOM-LINE FACTS?
What will electric generating corporations do if this rule is enacted?
• Burn natural gas? Natural gas price is currently about $4.25 / Mbtu, and coal is about $2.10 / Mbtu delivered.
• Complete CO2 capture projects on existing coal units? Estimated cost is $0.03 / KW-HR and a loss of 15 to 25 percent of the generating output. http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/David_and_Herzog.pdf
• Retire coal units and replace with wind and solar? Hidden costs are huge. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/renewable-energys-hidden-costs /
Ameren’s IRP
• Australia to repeal unpopular tax on carbon emissions http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/07/17/332251967/australia-repeals-an-unpopular-tax-on-carbon-emissions
• Coal Returns to German Utilities http://
www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-14/coal-rises-vampire-like-as-german-utilities-seek-survival.html
• Ontario bids farewell to coal http://
www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/editorials/Editorial+Ontario+bids+farewell+coal/9748912/story.html
• Ontario electricity consumers can expect their bills to jump almost 50 per cent in the next three years http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-electricity-rates-to-keep-rising-as-long-term-energy-plan-released-1.1569774
What has happened with other nations who have taken similar action?
CO2 CAPTURE & INDUSTRY LEADERS• Construction of World’s Largest Carbon
Capture Project Under Way – 240 MW, Estimated Cost $1 Billion http
://coalage.com/news/latest/3757-construction-of-world-s-largest-carbon-capture-project-under-way.html#.U8kuC4BdXSI#UF0983 http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2014/07/15/nrgs-1b-bet-to-show-how-carbon-capture-could-be-feasible-for-coal-power-plants/
• But we have a problem and it is NOT that the appropriate new technologies don't exist or haven't reached a competitive price point. The problem is us. We haven't figured out how to engage and motivate the end use energy customer - which basically is the entire American public and electorate - to pay attention, to take control of their individual energy destiny, to make energy decisions that are not only in their economic self-interest but critical, collectively, to the long run health of the planet that we all cherish and depend upon. David Crane, CEO, NRG http://www.nrg.com/news/executive-blog/post/build-the-clean-energy-movement-with-nrg
What does electricity cost?
What has happened with other nations who have taken similar action?
Note: Current Ontario, Canada electric rates are, OFF-PEAK 7.5¢/kWh, MID-PEAK 11.2¢/kWh, ON-PEAK 13.5¢/kWh http://www.ontarioenergyboard.ca/OEB/Consumers/Electricity/Electricity+Prices
25% RE25% Nuc
45% RE50% Oil28% Gas & Nuc
80% Nuc14% RE
35% Oil33% Gas & Nuc76% Oil40% Gas
32% Coal18% Nuc
40% Coal27% Gas 17% Nuc
72% Hyd11% Gas
48% Gas 20% Coal16% Nuc
68% Coal 17% Hyd
58% Hyd 20% Coal
64% Coal 22% Hyd
The Power Generation Industry is Changing
“The relationship between load growth and gross domestic product growth appears to have slowly eroded since the end of World War II”, said PJM Interconnection LLC Chief Economist Paul Sotkiewicz. “There could be a number of reasons for this erosion, including energy efficiency, declining median incomes and multiple families consolidating under one roof due to economic hardships”, he said. But “it's hard to discern what's actually going on.”
Responsible Questions
• Can a 0.0017% reduction in GHGs return any positive results for human health and weather events?
• How likely are electric rates to be decreased by burning more natural gas, CO2 capture or retiring existing coal units?
THE TIME TO TAKE ACTION IS NOW
• Comment on the EPA’s Clean Power Plan: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/how-comment-clean-power-plan-proposed-rule
• Write to Congress: Senate Contact Information: https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm House of Representative Contact Information: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
• Join and Participate in the ACC: http://www.americancoalcouncil.org/
