East Texas Electric Generating Facilities (EGFs) Stakeholder Meeting Summary



Similar documents
The Senate Committee on Natural Resources

Support for NCTCOG Comments on the DFW SIP Revision and Other Air Quality Updates

Phasing Out Coal Generation

December 2, Comments Regarding the East Texas Electric Generating Facility Rules (Rule Log No EN)

July 11, Rule Development Team Air Quality Planning Section Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Park 35 Circle Austin, TX 78753

Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Reducing Air Pollution Protecting Public Health

Spectra Energy Builds a Business

Honorable Mayor Bill Agan and members of the Richland Hills City Council. Ordinance Adopting Region Clean Fleet Vehicle Policy

Addition of general construction conditions applicable to the portable emergency turbine because they were omitted from the original Part 70 Permit.

Air Quality and Some Innovative Ways to Improve It. James W. Yarbrough U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Dallas, Texas

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Emissions Banking and Trading Programs. Office of Air Air Quality Division

Addition of general construction conditions applicable to the portable emergency turbine because they were omitted from the original Part 70 Permit.

Texas Natural Gas: Fuel for Growth. Michael J. Economides, PhD Professor, University of Houston and Philip E. Lewis, P.E.

Locking In the Benefits to Fuel Switching

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interoffice Memorandum

POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF A STRICTER OZONE STANDARD

Update on the Barnett Shale. Ed Ireland, Ph.D. Executive Director Barnett Shale Energy Education Council

Site Identification No.: AAO Application No.:

Assessment of the Full Cost of Electricity (FCe - ) A multi-disciplinary collaborative project across the campus of the University of Texas at Austin

tttt of eftr 1crz2 June 12,2014 Environmental Quality Board P.O. Box 8477 Harrisburg, PA

Colorado PUC E-Filings System

Bill Maxwell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS (C439-01)

NORTH TEXAS AIR QUALITY 101: OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

United States SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C FORM 8-K

Texas Wind: The New Oil. The earth is slowly, but surely, exhausting its resources. Fossil Fuels like coal and

To: Commissioners Date: September 1, 2006 Thru: Dan Eden, Deputy Director Office of Permitting, Remediation, and Registration

Air North Texas. North Texas Campus Sustainability Forum. July 31, Mindy Mize & Whitney Vandiver NCTCOG

FAC 7.1: Generators. EPA Impacts on Emergency Gensets for 2015 Installations

USA. Leader/Contributors: Jay Martin, Alpha Natural Resources (USA) Deck Slone, Arch Coal (USA)

IPM Model Updates to Cost and Performance for APC Technologies. SCR Cost Development Methodology. Final. March 2013

ProjectZero Lessons learned in overcoming barriers

IEPR Lead Commissioner Workshop Electricity Infrastructure Issues in California

llfl~ Regional Transportation Council

ACCELERATING GREEN ENERGY TOWARDS The Danish Energy Agreement of March 2012

Competitive Electricity Prices: An Update 1

Power Plant Operations and Maintenance. Maximize Your Plant s Bottom-Line Results

ENVIRONMENT. Putting Texas First 43

MAKING OHIO WORK FOR EVERYONE THE FITZGERALD PLAN FOR AN OHIO NEW ENERGY ECONOMY

3.0. IGCC DEPLOYMENT. Financing IGCC 3Party Covenant 48

Attachment I. Technical Support Document. Request for State Implementation Plan Revision to Remove Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Systems

SUBCHAPTER RR. STANDARD PROOF OF HEALTH INSURANCE FOR MEDICAL BENEFITS FOR INJURIES INCURRED AS A RESULT OF A MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT 28 TAC 21.

The Technology and Business of Power Andrew Valencia, P.E. Lower Colorado River Authority

Sixth Annual Stakeholders Briefing Hilton Atlanta Airport Hotel Atlanta, Georgia March 9 10, 2011

Renewable Energy Mandates Cost Texas Consumers. Bill Peacock Texas Public Policy Foundation

Transforming America s Energy Future. Kentucky. Energy Statistics. Developed by

Well Positioned for the Future

IMPACTS OF EPA S CARBON PROPOSAL ON COLORADO

Energy Projections Price and Policy Considerations. Dr. Randy Hudson Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Addressing Air Emissions from Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Production. Joe Osborne Lauren Burge Group Against Smog & Pollution Pittsburgh, PA

The Economic Impact of Dominion Capital Expenditure Projects

Multiple sources of energy will be available, giving the consumer choices. A Higher Percentage of Energy will come from renewable energy sources

Financing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy through the India Renewable Energy Development Agency

Board of Public Utilities Prepared Testimony of Darrell Dorsey September, 2010

Implications of Technology Availability and Cost on Clean Power Plan Compliance Costs. Scott Bloomberg Vice President

Opportunities for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in State Air Quality Planning

Benefits of and Challenges to Energy Access in the 21 st Century: Electricity

Imperial Oil Limited 237 Fourth Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3M9 imperialoil.ca

Creating and Retaining Sustainable Good Green Jobs

Bureau of Air Overview

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

CRS Report Summaries WORKING DRAFT

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interoffice Memorandum

United States Progress Report on Fossil Fuel Subsidies Part 1: Identification and Analysis of Fossil Fuel Provisions

GUIDANCE ON STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) CREDITS FOR EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM ELECTRIC-SECTOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY MEASURES

Energy [R]evolution vs. IEA World Energy Outlook scenario

Discussion of The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. September 13, 2011

*HB0380S03* H.B rd Sub. (Cherry) LEGISLATIVE GENERAL COUNSEL Approved for Filing: C.J. Dupont :25 PM

2010 NOV 30 P MQ. November 29,2010

Energy and Consumer Impacts of EPA s Clean Power Plan. Prepared for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity

An Economic Impact Analysis of Entergy Operations in Mississippi

Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2025: An Update of the 2020 Plan

FACT SHEET PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE

Module 7 Forms of energy generation

Air Quality Standard Permit for Electric Generating Units

CITIZENS TRANSIT ADVISORY GROUP (CTAG) Meeting Summary January 18, 2011 DISCUSSION SUMMARY

OIL AND GAS IMPACTS AND THE NEED FOR LOCAL REVENUE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE ON REVENUE

Anticipating Compliance Strategies and Forecasts for Satisfying Clean Power Plan Requirements

TESTIMONY ON THE NATURAL GAS SEVERANCE TAX PROPOSAL PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE APPRORIATIONS COMMITTEE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISCAL POLICY

Report to the Legislative Assembly

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH INFOR FOR CLOUDSUITE PUBLIC SECTOR SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AND SUPPORT

AIR QUALITY IN NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS

Expanding Renewable Energy Options for Companies Through Utility-Offered Renewable Energy Tariffs

2015 Second Quarter Results Conference Call July 29, Welcome to the 2015 Second Quarter Conference Call for Genesis Energy.

West Virginia Point Source Emissions Inventory Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

Massachusetts $ Savings and Job Gains from Energy Efficiency in Buildings & Transportation

A pound of coal supplies enough electricity to power ten 100-watt light bulbs for about an hour.

Statement of Paul Kempf, Director of Utilities, University Of Notre Dame

The National Gateway I-81 Corridor Coalition November 15, 2010

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Interoffice Memorandum

Why SWN Choose Natural Gas Vehicles? Natural Gas Summit Austin, TX. October 23 rd 2014 Eddie Murray. Texas Railroad Commission

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

North Central Texas Council of Governments

Electric Market National Overview

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Page 1 Chapter 101 General Air Quality Rules

Levelized Cost of New Electricity Generating Technologies

Carlos Fernández Alvarez. Senior Coal Analyst

ENERGY SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS AND ENERGY SAVINGS

Memo on Duke Energy and Costs of Coal Ash Cleanup

Sustainability and the Health of Your Communities

Transcription:

East Texas Electric Generating Facilities (EGFs) Stakeholder Meeting Summary TCEQ East Texas EGF rulemaking concept Friday November 18, 2005 1:30 PM to 4:00 PM TCEQ Campus, Building D, Room 191, Austin, Texas Moderators: Ashley Forbes, Karen Hill, and Ita Ufot I. Opening Remarks: Commissioner Ralph Marquez Commissioner Larry Soward David C. Schanbacher, P.E., Chief Engineer Candice Garrett, Director, Air Quality Planning and Implementation Division II. TCEQ Staff Presentations DFW SIP Information presented by Tom Lawshae Transport in DFW, East & Central Texas presented by Zhaohua Fang DFW Modeling Electric Generation Utility Sensitivity Tests presented by Pete Breitenbach Question and Answers: A stakeholder expressed concern regarding the real world application of the presented models and how the reduction of NO x from east Texas utilities would effect the ozone concentration in DFW. A stakeholder asked if future growth was assumed in the model o Staff replied that future growth is assumed in the model A stakeholder asked about the timeframe of the model o Staff replied that the model is for 2010. There was a discussion regarding associated costs and whether other measures were planned in the DFW area for the 8-hour ozone SIP. o This stakeholder meeting is to discuss one of eleven concepts currently being explored by the TCEQ. NCTCOG has other strategies under consideration posted on the organization s website (see http://www.dfwcleanair.com/sip/new_cont_strat.html). A stakeholder stated that he was prepared to supply the TCEQ with cost data. A stakeholder expressed concern with the monitoring locations. o Staff responded that three years ago TCEQ had a limited number of monitors, but more monitors have been installed and operated since then. 1

III. Open Discussion Several stakeholders representing several east Texas utilities made comments on the following issues: o The east Texas utilities provide 84% of Texas electricity and these utilities have already made reductions. o Claims that the agency cannot prove that further reductions from east Texas EGF s would significantly reduce ozone in DFW area. o The 1.1 parts per billion (ppb) that the model presents is a small fraction of the needed ozone reductions. o The rule would require that all units install SCR. SCR cannot work on lignite units and would be so costly on gas-fired units that they would shut down. The cost of installing SCR, converting from lignite, and replacing the gas units would be about $10 billion. The dollar/ton method of cost is inaccurate. There is not enough time to retrofit all the units with SCR by 2009. The lignite mining industry would be destroyed and the shut down of gas-units during retrofit would result in electricity shortages. The Agency should further evaluate the CAIR rules as an alternative. o The proposed rule would cause large price increases for electricity, adversely affecting low income and fixed income elderly population. o The rule effectively sets energy policy in the state. o The only way to get DFW in attainment is to reduce the contribution from mobile sources. Over 100 natural gas-fired units would have to be retired. The lignite mining industry would be shut down. Each SCR would cost between $100 and $150 million. The rule would narrow fuel diversity during a looming electricity crisis. Stakeholders from the lignite mining industry and the mining and reclamation industries made the following comments: o Support the comments made by EGF representatives. o TCEQ should look at $/ppb ozone not $/ton NO x. o TCEQ should do a technology feasibility study for lignite. o The economic impact of eliminating the lignite mining industry would be huge. o It is a $10 billion industry that employs 30,000 people o The rule would have large negative impact on property tax for schools. o Fuel diversity is critical to Texas well being. o The Perryman report/rp 49, which looked at east and northeast Texas, stated that lignite is a $1.356 billion industry and employs 7210 people, 2500 of which are in mining. 2

o In Rusk County, 48% of the people are in the lignite business. A stakeholder stated that the biofuels industry cannot meet the standards in the rulemaking concept. o The rulemaking concept would end fuel diversity. o SB 7 encouraged biofuels use. o The rulemaking concept would close his small company down. A stakeholder for a public interest group stated: o Any final decision will not be made lightly. o In 1999, the EGFs had the same concerns but were able to meet the regulations. o Without these controls, the state could lose federal highway funding. o The cost of healthcare far outweighs the cost of energy. o The cost is $825 million/year for respiratory illness in DFW alone. o Emissions from cars are already going down and will soon be as low as possible. o Oil and gas industry will have to make reductions. o Federally exempted sources like locomotives and airplanes should be looked at for further reductions. o The reductions from 1999 regulations will not be enough. o The 7 new proposed coal plants will add 40 tons per day (tpd) (TCEQ says 55 tpd) to east Texas. A stakeholder from a public interest group stated: o The agency does not make rash decisions and put a lot of thought into the rulemaking concept. o The estimated 1.1ppb reduction is worth looking at. o All sources in east Texas will have to make reductions. o Everyone must do their part. A Stakeholder from the utility industry stated: o Their company has spent over $700 million and has reduced NO x emissions by 75 to 90% in the HGB area. o One plant has achieved a 50% reduction from low NO x burners alone, but there is concern about the need for more, based on the rulemaking concept. o Utility NO x is not as effective as urban NO x in forming ozone. o The SCR on the HGB unit worked relatively well for 2 years, but is now having problems due to unexpected fly ash build-up. o SCR has cost the company between $300 and $400 million. o There is not enough time for all units to install SCR due to limits in skilled labor and materials. o The company exceeded its initial SCR cost estimate of $500 million by $200 million. 3

o The rulemaking concept would require excessive capital expenditure for little benefit and would result in companies deciding not to build new coal units. o The company is willing to work with the agency to find a workable solution. A stakeholder from the utility industry stated: o Their company has 12 units in east Texas - 4 units that would require SCR, and 8 gas-fired units would need to be retired. o Gas makes up 20% of the company s fuel used, but incurs 60% of the cost. o Customers in Louisiana and Arkansas would also bear cost of any Texas rules. A stakeholder from the coal industry presented the agency with copies of the Perryman report and the Governor s executive order and stated that the rulemaking concept requires an extensive economic analysis. A stakeholder from a public interest group: o Requested that comments be posted on the Agency website. o Stated that NO x has been reduced by 10 ppb over the last 10 years; o Stated the needed reductions (estimated to be 6 ppb) can be achieved over the next 3 years. A stakeholder from a utility company stated: o Their company converted from lignite to Powder River Basin (PRB) coal and spent $8 million on the conversion, with a 60% staff reduction. o The company also spent $12 million on low NO x burners. o Estimate that SCR would cost $53 million. o Stated that the TCEQ failed to discuss simple cycle gas turbines. o Stated the supply of PRB coal is less than the current demand. There are only 2 western railroad lines and they are expected to reduce their schedules. PRB usage is going to grow even without the rule and it is going to be very difficult to secure the necessary supply in the future. The mines and the railroads are not prepared for the growth in PRB demand. IV Closing Remarks Everyone was invited to join the SIP List-Serv for updates on this topic and other SIP related topics 4

Informal comments should be submitted to Karen Hill khill@tceq.state.tx.us or Ashley Forbes aforbes@tceq.state.tx.us by close of business, December 2, 2005. Staff will then prepare briefings for executive management and the commissioners on the topic. 5