Presented by: Eastern Research Group, Inc.
Post on 13-Jan-2016
37 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Transcript
Presented by:
Eastern Research Group, Inc.
May 11, 2005
Status Report to the Stationary Sources Joint Forum:
Task 1.A: 2002 WRAP Inventory Review
and
Task 1.C: Emissions Projections to 2018
2
Overview
Scope and Schedule for Task 1.AProgress to DateNext Steps
Scope and Schedule for Task 1.CProgress to DateNext Steps
3
Scope: Task 1.AImprove 2002 WRAP point and area
source inventories using all available data
Assess completeness of geographic, facility, source category, and pollutant coverage
Collect comprehensive control technology information
Provide data for other tasks—projections, control technology analyses
4
Progress: Task 1.A
Compiled point and area source master inventory databases2002 WRAP EDMS files
Posted for ERG by the EDMS DBAMost files date stamped May-December 2004
2002 NEI February 1, 2005 version
2002 CAMD data (NOx and SO2) for utilities1999 NEI1996 WRAP inventory
Used in the §309 TSD
5
Progress: Task 1.A (cont.)
Additional Activities:Common facility identifiers assignedControl device information compiled Contacted several state and local agencies
to resolve questions, obtain missing data files
Can “select” or “deselect” records at the pollutant level for any base year in gap filling process
6
Master Database Used to Verify/correct EPA’s assignment of
common facility identifiersCompare reported emissions values to
ID outliersGap fill and apply surrogate data
Facility names, locationsFacilities, source categories, pollutantsControl device codesControl device efficienciesStack parametersSCC and SIC/NAICS codes
7
Examples of Questions Resolved Mobile asphalt records with county code 777
CO: OK to delete records MT: Allocate as area sources using road construction as surrogate
Possible area source duplicated records Clark County, NV Washoe County, NV OR
Obtained Pinal County, AZ database and converted to NIF
Incorporated Clark County, NV point and area source resubmitted files
Corrected data transposed for a WA facility Corrected NM Intel emissions Still outstanding
MT CAMD – Local site ID mapping WY VOC estimates (two facilities)
8
Next Steps: Task 1.AContact state/local/tribal agencies for
point versus area source reporting cutoffsTo make sure gap filling of point sources is
conducted correctlyTo identify area source categories that should be
adjusted for point source reported data
Incorporate tribal databases Make adjustments for any possible double counting
Incorporate oil and gas databasesMake adjustments for any possible double counting
9
Point vs. Area Source Reporting
Verify thresholds identified for oil and gas sourcesAK, CO, MT, ND, NM, NV, OR, SD, UT, WY
ID – 100 tpy actual
Maricopa County, AZ – Varies by pollutant
10
Resolve any conflicts in EGU controlsQA stack parameters in point source inventory
U.S. EPA QA’d the parameters for the draft NEI Several agencies agreed with U.S. EPA defaults Others provided comments to U.S. EPA U.S. EPA’s stack parameter QA procedure resulted in the
application of many defaults For WRAP, the QA/QC range need not be as tight as U.S.
EPA’s
Assign BART flags in point source Emission Unit field
Prepare NIF files for upload into EDMS
Next Steps: Task 1.A (continued)
11
Other Possible Additional Activities Related to 2002 EI Review (Task 1.A)
Incorporate state/local/tribal revisions provided via EDMS since December 2004
Incorporate state/local/tribal revisions provided via NEI review process
Prepare NIF files and allow state/local/tribal agencies to review and comment
12
EDMS and NEI Revisions to DateState/local/tribal revisions provided via EDMS
Version 1.1 has corrections to area source records for Clark and Washoe Counties, NV
Others?
State/local/tribal revisions provided via NEI review process AZ Maricopa County CA- Cortina Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians- Area
sources CO- Area sources ID- Area and Point sources MT- Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation- Point sources NM Albuquerque- Area and Point sources OR- Area sources UT- Area and Point sources WA- Point sources
THANK YOU!
Any questions related
to Task 1.A?
14
Scope: Task 1.C (Projections)
A. Review previous projections, models
B. Update retirement rates for existing sources
C. Identify new (expected) sources, location, fuel
D. Develop projection variables
E. Write memo with findings from A-D
F. Identify/quantify impacts from laws/regulations not in full effect by 2002
EACs, agreements/enforcement actions, NEAPs, MACTs
Write memo
G. Other issues Handling CA projections
H. Develop baseline projections
Critical path = complete 2002 EI revision (Task 1.A)
I. Input to EDMS (June 1)J. Draft report (July 1)K. Final report (September 30)
15
Progress Since Last Update (February): Task 1.C
Work group calls on March 15, April 7, April 29 Regulatory research complete (potential post-2002 impacts from regulations, EACs,
agreements/ enforcements, NEAPs obtained on-line, MACTs) Follow-up questions and data requests being made to state/local agencies Results compiled in spreadsheet
Projections “roadmap” (2 drafts) developed Initial review of CAMD data as a basis to identify facilities with 2002 “atypical” operations Investigation of capacity factor Projections database format (draft) developed
16
Initial Results of Interviews with S/L Agencies (example)
Contact Facility NameState
Facility SICEmissions
(tpy)Type of Update Status/Comments
Next ERG Action
Tom BachmanRed Tail Energy (Richardton Plant)
None assigned 2869
spreadsheet gives permit limits New facility
New ethanol plant expected to operate in 2006.
MDU/Westmoreland Energy
None assigned 4911
ss gives permit limits New facility
New power plant expected to operate in 2009
Retired facility None
Tesoro (Mandan Refinery) 226 2911
Reductions: 3,500-4,000 tpy (SO2); 500 tpy (PM10) Consent decree
2002 emission reductions effective 12/1/04
Est. control factor
ArcherDanielsMidland (Walhalla) 251 2869
Reductions: VOC 100 tpy Consent decree
2002 emission reductions effective 3/31/03
Est. control factor
Alchem, Ltd. 261 2869Reductions: VOC 75 tpy Consent decree
2002 emission reductions effective 2/23/04
Est. control factor
Consent decree
Unnamed power plant: consent decree being negotiated; 2 units affected are both BART-eligible
None Rule/reg
NORTH DAKOTA
2018 Emissions
Oil and Gas Emissions
CA Emissions
2002 Point Sources
2002 Area Sources
All Others
RefineriesSmeltersEGUs
OtherRefineries SmeltersEGUs
All OthersPopulation-based
Livestock Sources
Energy-based
Other Population-based
Livestock Sources
Energy-based
CAMD/E-GRID
Industry Information EGAS
Agreements, Enforcements, New Rules, Regulations, NEAPs, EACs, etc.
DOE Pop. Proj.
USDA EGAS
Revised 2002 Point andArea Source Inventory
(excluding fire and windblown dust)
2002 Emissions
CA Emissions
CENRAP Emissions
Oil and Gas Emissions
2018 Baseline Emissions
Known Retired Point Sources
2018 Point Sources
Known New Point Sources
2002 Atypical to Typical Operation (Shutdowns, Repairs, High/Low Levels, etc.)
QA Checks:* Compare to SO2 Annex and plant-wide permit limits* Others TBD
Atypical Adjustment
Control Factors
Growth Factors
Road Map for Projection Task 1.C
18
Adjusting for “Atypical” OperationAtypical hours of operation resulting from
decreased production, unexpected/prolonged outages, etc.
Adjustments are needed to bring baseline emissions to typical rate as a basis for accurate projections
U.S. EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) data for EGUs 2002 hours of operation were calculated as a percentage of
8,760 hours for 1995 through 2004 Percentages were highlighted in quartiles (<25%, 25-50%,
50-75%, >75%) Limited value in examining annual trends
19
Adjusting for “Atypical” Operation (cont.)VISTAS analysis for modeling
inventory focused on development of hourly profiles for EGUs (Stella)Adjustments made in modeling files to
account for hourly operationsConversations underway with Stella to
devise WRAP methodIf typical, then replace annual emissions with
hourly emissions (CAMD CEM)If atypical, then adjust with monthly profiles
20
Investigating Capacity FactorPrevious WRAP projections methodology:
Electricity sector growth applied to existing EGUs After 85% capacity is achieved, new units are built Need to understand basis for 85% capacity factor, and
assess if change is warranted
U.S. EPA’s Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) Tracks large number of data fields 493 EGU records; capacity only for 157 records (1996-
2000) 86 (55%) operated between 50-85% capacity (1999) 12 (8%) operated >85% capacity (1999)
21
Investigating Capacity Factor (cont.)
Interviews with DOE/EIA and EPRI staffDOE/EIA staff (Martin) provided “fixed
reserve margins” for regionsEPRI staff (Miller, Booras) said 85% factor
sounded reasonable
Additional research may needed in order to reach agreement
22
Projections Database Objectives
Provides transparent methodology
Easily output to spreadsheets for S/L/T review
Easily updated and used for “what if” analyses
Comprehensive set of growth and control factors in one place
23
Spreadsheet LayoutNew
FacilityRetired
FlagAtypical
FlagAtypical Factor
Facility X 10,000 Y 2.000 20,000Facility Y 5,000 Y 0Facility Z 5,000 5,000Area Source V 30,000 30,000Area Source W 40,000 40,000
Facility/CategoryInventory
A
AdjustmentsInventory
B
Factor RefPermit Flag
Permit Limit
Annex Flag
Annex Factor
Facility X 1.100 EGAS 15,400 Y 13,000 1.000 13,000Facility Y 1.000 0 1.000 0Facility Z 1.200 Other 4,800 Y 4,000 Y 0.750 3,000Area Source V 1.300 EGAS 35,100 1.000 35,100Area Source W 1.400 DOE 47,600 1.000 47,600
Inventory DFacility/Category
Growth FactorInventory
C
Limits/QA Checks
A = 2002 Revised
B = Baseline Planning
C = Initial 2018
D = Final 2018
Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor RefsOverall Factor
Facility X Y 0.300 District 0.700Facility Y 1.000Facility Z Y 0.200 State 0.800Area Source V Y 0.100 State 0.900Area Source W Y 0.150 State 0.850
EACs
Facility/Category
Agreements/Enforcements Regulations NEAPsControl Factor
24
Next Steps: Task 1.CWork Plan Element F:
Complete interviews with agenciesCalculate emissions impacts based on priority
SCCsSubmit memo
Work Plan Elements A-E:Continue to review previous models, data Update retirement rates for existing sourcesDevelop projection variablesSubmit memo
25
Next Steps: Task 1.C (continued)
Calculate baseline projections for 2018 Receive comments, make changes Upload baseline projections to EDMS Draft and final reports
THANK YOU!
Any questions related
to Task 1.C?
top related