200 likes | 215 Views
Discussion on Good Neighbor SIPs, CAMx V6.10 modeling, 2018 emissions, IPM and ERTAC models, ozone design values, and SCR units. Insights on attainment tests and future projections.
E N D
Midwest Ozone Group Discussion on Good Neighbor SIP’s Rob Kaleel Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October 24, 2014
Overview • Background • Model: CAMx V6.10 • Modeling Period: June 17 to Sept 26 • Meteorology: EPA 2011 (version II) • Emissions: EPA 2011 & 2018 (version I) • Canada and Mexico emissions from 2008 NEI • EPA 2018: IPM, Tier 3 NPRM (not MOVES2014), State/Federal On-the-books • Scenarios • 2018 Attainment Test • IPM (CAIR) • ERTAC (version 2.2) - On-the-Books • Model Sensitivity - 0.10 lb/mmbtu “emissions cap” for EGU’s w/ SCR’s
Emission Trends and Projections VOC SO2 NOx 2002-2011 emissions from NEI; 2018 emissions from EPA Modeling Platform
Attributes of ERTAC and IPM • Starting point: Base Year CEM data by unit • Future year growth rate by region and fuel type • Future unit utilization based on historic (base year) activity • Future emission rate based on historic (base year) emission rate (absent new controls or new emission limits) • Starting point: Base Year CEM data by unit • Future year growth rate based on generation nationally; regional growth and fuel use based on cost model • Future unit utilization based on cost model • Future emission rate projected based on control type and fuel (actual and assumed) ERTAC IPM
2018 Modeled Ozone Design ValuesEPA (IPM) vs ERTAC 2.2 EPA (IPM) ERTAC
Edgewood, MD 75 ppb O3 threshold
Edgewood, MD 75 ppb O3 threshold IPM ERTAC2.2
Louisville, KY 75 ppb O3 threshold
Louisville, KY 75 ppb O3 threshold IPM ERTAC2.2
St. Louis, MO 75 ppb O3 threshold
St. Louis, MO 75 ppb O3 threshold IPM ERTAC2.2
SCR’s Exceeding 0.10 lb/mmbtu – ERTAC 2.2(2011 base projected to 2018)