1 / 20

Massachusetts Multi-pollutant Power Plant Regulations

This document explores the background, major provisions, and implementation of Massachusetts' multi-pollutant power plant regulations. It discusses the standards for emissions of pollutants such as mercury, SO2, NOx, and CO2, as well as the feasibility and economic considerations for implementing control technologies. The schedule for the standard-setting process and major issues for the proposed standard are also addressed.

kaitlyn
Download Presentation

Massachusetts Multi-pollutant Power Plant Regulations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Massachusetts Multi-pollutant Power Plant Regulations Sharon Weber Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection EPA Utility MACT Working Group – March 4, 2003 –Washington DC

  2. Background of regulation 310 CMR 7.29: Emissions Standards for Power Plants • http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/daqc/files/regs/7c.htm#29 • Mercury coal and emissions testing results • Mercury control feasibility report • Mercury standard-setting process

  3. Environmental Concerns • Acid Deposition • Climate Change • Mercury • Nitrification, Eutrophication • Ozone • PM 2.5 • Regional Haze • Visibility

  4. Capacity Context

  5. Major Provisions Effective May 11, 2001 • Standards • Output-Based Emission Rates - SO2, NOx, CO2 • Annual caps for CO2 (tons) and Hg (lbs) • Hg data collection for cap and 2003 proposed standard • Hg control feasibility report by December 2002 • Compliance schedules • Dates depend on compliance approach • standard path - 10/04 and 10/06 • repowering path - 10/06 and 10/08 • Hg cap effective at first compliance date • Proposed compliance date for Hg standard will be October 1, 2006

  6. SO2 and NOx Standards • SO2 and NOx • 2 phase SO2 requirement • 6.0 lb/MWh at first compliance date • 3.0 lb/MWh at second compliance date • 1.5 lb/MWh for NOx at first compliance date • Compliance measured as a 12 month rolling average and monthly average at 2nd date

  7. CO2 Standards • CO2 • Annual facility cap based on three years of data at first compliance date • Annual facility rate of 1800 lb CO2/MWh at second compliance date • Compliance measured as a calendar 12 month average

  8. Implementation • Compliance Flexibility • Two Compliance Options - standard and repowering • Averaging within facility • Early reduction credit for SO2 • Use of SO2 Allowances • Off-site Reductions for CO2 • Greenhouse gas banking and trading regulation in development

  9. Hg Data Collection • Sampling for concentration of mercury and chlorine in each shipment of coal received at the 4 coal-fired facilities from May 2001-May 2002 • Sampling for concentration of speciated mercury at inlet (pre-ESP) and outlet (stack) of 8 coal-fired units (3 sets of tests over one year)

  10. Coal Mercury Data

  11. Coal Chlorine Data

  12. Hg Emissions Data • Sampling for concentration of mercury at inlet (pre-ESP) and outlet (stack) of 8 coal-fired units • Round 1: summer 2001 • Round 2: winter 2001-2002 • Round 3: summer 2002

  13. Brayton 1 Emissions Test Results250 MW, Bituminous Coal

  14. Average Baseline Mercury Results by Unit

  15. Mercury Control Feasibility Report – December 2002 • “Evaluation of the Technological and Economic Feasibility of Controlling and Eliminating Mercury Emissions from the Combustion of Solid Fossil Fuel” • 85-90+% removal of flue gas Hg is feasible • http://www.state.ma.us/dep/bwp/daqc/ daqcpubs.htm#other

  16. Control Feasibility Report Technology Conclusions (1) • Hg controls are technologically feasible • Some existing US units are achieving up to 98% Hg removal • Some MA units are already removing close to 90% of Hg • Controls to meet MA SO2 and NOx standards are expected to achieve Hg reduction co-benefits

  17. Control Feasibility Report Technology Conclusions (2) • Hg controls are technologically feasible • DOE field testing shows >90% Hg removal • MA Municipal Waste Combustors are removing 90% of Hg • Extensive funding for research has resulted in Hg control technologies that have reached the field testing stage

  18. Control Feasibility Report Economic Conclusions • Hg controls are economically feasible • Sorbent-based Hg controls costs are similar to historically accepted NOx control costs (mills/kMWh) • Multi-pollutant regs (like MA’s) improve cost-effectiveness

  19. Schedule for standard setting process • Three stakeholder meetings: Aug/Sep/Oct 2002 • Release of Feasibility Report: December 2002 • Stakeholder feedback on Feasibility Report and input on regulation issues: January 2003 • “Rule review” meeting to discuss working draft regulation: Spring 2003 • Release of proposed regulation for public comment & hearing: June 2003 (as per 7.29 regulation)

  20. Major Issues for Proposed Standard • Form of the standard • Units of the standard • Level of the standard • Averaging time of the standard • Demonstrating compliance with the standard • Waste issues • Unit and facility specific issues

More Related