1 / 17

Massachusetts’ Power Plant Mercury Regulations

Massachusetts’ Power Plant Mercury Regulations. Sharon Weber Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. WESTAR Fall Business Meeting - September 22, 2005 - San Diego, CA. Mercury Policy Context. New England Governors/Eastern Canadian Premiers’ Regional Mercury Action Plan

lihua
Download Presentation

Massachusetts’ Power Plant Mercury 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’ Power Plant Mercury Regulations Sharon Weber Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection WESTAR Fall Business Meeting - September 22, 2005 - San Diego, CA

  2. Mercury Policy Context • New England Governors/Eastern Canadian Premiers’ Regional Mercury Action Plan • 50% reduction by 2003 • 75% reduction by 2010 • Virtual elimination of anthropogenic discharges of mercury is long term goal • MA Zero Mercury Strategy • 75% reduction by 2010 • Virtual elimination of anthropogenic discharges and use of mercury is long term goal

  3. MA Hg Emissions: Point Sources • Control efforts • 2000 regs. 3X more stringent vs. federal • 90-98% control • Source separation regs. • Control efforts: P2 • Health care • Products

  4. MA Hg Emissions: Area Sources

  5. Affected Facilities’ Contribution to Generation and Hg Emissions • The 4 facilities subject to the power plant mercury regulations represent 8% of 2003 New England megawatts of generating capacity • The 4 facilities emitted 17% of 2002 MA point source mercury emissions

  6. 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

  7. Mercury Standard Setting Process • Regulation 310 CMR 7.29: Emissions Standards for Power Plants: promulgated May 11, 2001 • http://www.mass.gov/dep/bwp/daqc/files/regs/7c.htm#29 • Mercury coal/emissions baseline testing: 2001-2002 • Stakeholder meetings: Aug/Sep/Oct 2002, Jan 2003 • Feasibility Report: December 2002 • http://www.mass.gov/dep/bwp/daqc/daqcpubs.htm#other • Proposed regulation: September 2003 • Final regulation: released May, effective June 4, 2004 • http://www.mass.gov/dep/bwp/daqc/daqcpubs.htm#regs

  8. Mercury Data Collection • Sampling for concentration of mercury and chlorine in each shipment of coal received at the 4 coal-fired facilities from May 2001-August 2002 • Sampling for concentration of speciated mercury at inlet (pre-ESP) and outlet (stack) of 8 coal-fired units (3 sets of tests in summer 2001, winter 2001-2002, and summer 2002)

  9. Brayton 1 Emissions Test Results250 MW, Bituminous Coal

  10. Average Baseline Mercury Results by Unit

  11. 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 Mercury is feasible

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

  13. Control Feasibility Report Technology Conclusions (2) • Mercury controls are technologically feasible • DOE field testing shows >90% mercury removal • MA Municipal Waste Combustors are removing 90% of mercury; some ≥ 95% removal • Extensive funding for research has resulted in mercury control technologies that have reached the field testing stage

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

  15. Final Mercury StandardEffective June 4, 2004 • Form of the standard • Output-based and % control efficiency options • Level of the standard • Phase 1: 85% or 0.0075 lb/GWh by 1/1/2008 • Phase 2: 95% or 0.0025 lb/GWh by 10/1/2012 • Demonstrating compliance with the standard • Every other quarter stack tests 10/06-1/1/2008 • CEMs required beginning 1/1/2008 • Averaging time of the standard • Rolling 12-month basis

  16. Media Transfer & Off-Site Mercury Reductions • Facility mercury caps include mercury emissions due to on-site re-burn of ash or off-site high temperature processing in Massachusetts (e.g., use of ash in cement kiln or asphalt batching plant) • Mercury standards must be met while including mercury emissions due to on-site re-burn of ash • Units shutting down can use early or off-site reductions to 2010. Facilities emitting less than 5 lb in 2001 can use early or off site reductions to phase 2.

  17. Expected Annual Reductions due to 2001 and 2004 Standards • Mercury: 85% (about 155 pounds) • SO2: 50-75% (about 56,000-84,000 tons) • NOx: 50% (about 15,000 tons) • CO2: 10% (about 1,954,000 tons, implemented on-site or off-site)

More Related