Search This Blog

Thursday, August 25, 2011

EIA - Today in Energy

EIA - Today in Energy

EPA Regulations Could Cost America’s Largest Utility $18 Billion


EPA Regulations Could Cost America’s Largest Utility $18 Billion

Bloomberg reported Friday on the latest developments in the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory pushagainst the fossil fuel industry. Southern Co., the largest American utility owner in terms of market share, now says it will lose up to $18 billion as a result of new EPA regulations.
The planned regulations “are misguided in their content and timing,” Southern Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Thomas Fanning said today in a statement.
Southern, based in Atlanta, is among energy companies that say new rules from President Barack Obama’s EPA will force some coal-fired power plants to close, and may lead to higher energy costs. Electricity prices for Southern customers may increase an additional 10 percent to 20 percent during the next 10 years, according to the company.
The EPA regulations will “only impede the U.S. economic recovery, reduce our ability to create jobs and add to the economic burdens of our customers,” Fanning said.
Air, water and waste rules affecting coal-fueled electric utilities will require $13 billion to $18 billion in capital expenses through 2020, according to the company.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said the agency’s rules are needed to protect public health and the environment. EPA spokesmen didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on Southern’s projections.
The company said the EPA actions, including a proposal to cut mercury and other air toxics from power plants, will require installation of pollution controls on about 12,000 megawatts of coal-fired generation, or about 60 percent of the company’s fleet. The rules also will contribute to the shutdown of units with a total capacity of 4,000 megawatts.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Dominion’s North Anna Nuclear Plant Loses Power After Quake


Bloomberg

Dominion’s North Anna Nuclear Plant Loses Power After Quake

August 23, 2011, 8:17 PM EDT
By Julie Johnsson and Brian Wingfield
(Updates with comment from regulator on earthquake damage in third paragraph.)
Aug. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Dominion Resources Inc.’s North Anna nuclear power plant was operating on backup diesel generators after a 5.8-magnitude earthquake knocked out its offsite power.
North Anna’s twin nuclear reactors automatically shut down during the earthquake, whose epicenter was less than 15 miles (24 kilometers) from the plant, about 85 miles southwest of Washington, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
One of the plant’s four diesel generators, which are powering the reactors’ cooling systems during the blackout, stopped working as a result of a coolant leak, Roger Hanah, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said in an interview. Dominion Resources Inc. called a fifth standby generator into service to replace the broken unit, Ryan Frazier, a spokesman for Richmond-based Dominion, said in an e-mail.
“It’s not critical at this point,” Hanah said. “They are able to operate all safety systems off the generators they have.”
Workers at North Anna were trying to determine whether the generator was damaged during the earthquake or as the result of a mechanical failure, Hanah said.
North Anna, which generates 1,806 megawatts of power, enough to power 450,000 homes, is designed to withstand a 6.2 earthquake, William Hall, another Dominion spokesman, said in an interview. Following today’s earthquake, the station declared an “alert,” the second-lowest of four emergency classifications set by the nuclear oversight agency.
‘Conservative’ Restart
Hall said a damage inspection was still underway at 6 p.m. New York time. He said he did not know when the plant would restart.
“We will be conservative,” he said.
The earthquake was felt from Richmond, Virginia, to Toronto and as far west as Columbus, Ohio, and prompted power companies across the region to inspect pumps, motors and valves for damages. Twelve nuclear plants, including two as far west as Michigan, declared “unusual events,” the lowest of the four emergency designations set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Joey Ledford, a spokesman for the nuclear agency.
The incident provided a test of the U.S. nuclear industry’s earthquake preparedness at a time when regulators and industry operators are studying the lessons of the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-Ichi plants in March.
Response as Planned
“Based on all information we have thus far, the systems at every U.S. nuclear energy facility where the earthquake’s effects were felt responded as designed,” Tony Pietrangelo, senior vice president and chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington-based industry group, said in a statement today.
The earthquake shows why the industry shouldn’t wait to implement safety improvements to guard against such events, said Bob Alvarez, a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, a group that pushes for tighter regulation on nuclear power.
“We don’t need to wait for earthquakes to fix safety weaknesses that have been lingering for several years,” Alvarez, 64, said.
After four Exelon Corp. nuclear plants in Pennsylvania and New Jersey declared “unusual events,” operators were performing “walk-downs” to scout for damage from the seismic activity, Chicago-based Exelon said in a statement.
Local Outages
PJM Interconnection LLC, which manages the electric grid for all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia, said about 2,700 megawatts of power generation was lost in Virginia and another 500 megawatts were lost in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
“There were outages, but they are local outages,” said Ray Dotter, spokesman for PJM, based in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, in a telephone interview. “It wasn’t because the grid was unstable.”
U.S. nuclear plants are required to have batteries capable of powering a plant for four hours and diesel generators protected by a hardened structure. The power is necessary to keep nuclear fuel cool at the site, preventing a meltdown and a radioactive release.
Japan’s Fukushima reactors lost offsite power after a magnitude 9 earthquake struck in March. The tsunami that followed the quake wiped out its diesel generators, which weren’t secured, leading to a meltdown and the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl.
Cooling the Core
“The reactors need power to cool the operating cores and spent fuel,” Chris Gadomski, a nuclear analyst for Bloomberg New Energy Finance, said in an e-mail. “If we lose the backup diesel generators at North Anna, you can have a similar situation as Fukushima developing there. Virginia Power should try to restore offsite power as soon as possible.”
North Anna has a seven-day supply of diesel fuel on site and more can be brought in, Dominion’s Frazier said in an e- mail. The plants’ backup generators “can cool the reactor indefinitely,” said the nuclear agency’s Ledford.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspected North Anna earlier this year to evaluate whether it’s prepared to withstand disasters and blackouts as part of a survey conducted in Fukushima’s aftermath at all 104 nuclear plants in the U.S.
In a May 13 letter to David Heacock, president and chief nuclear officer of Dominion subisidary Virginia Electric and Power Co., the nuclear agency said its inspector hadn’t identified “any significant issues” with the station blackout diesel generator room and related equipment.
Seismic Design Lacking
However, the agency noted that a study by North Anna of the plant’s fire and flood protection structures had identified vulnerable areas that were “not seismically designed.”
“The licensee will evaluate the issues above in order to determine if additional mitigation strategies are required,” the letter stated.
When North Anna was built, some of these systems were not required to be designed to seismic standards, Hall said.
“We will do everything that needs to be done,” he said.
--With assistance from Mike Lee in Dallas, Zachary Mider in Chicago, Aaron Clark and Christine Buurma in New York, and Richard Heidorn in Washington. Editors: Susan Warren, Charles Siler
To contact the reporter on this story: Julie Johnsson in Chicago at jjohnsson@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Susan Warren at susanwarren@bloomberg.net

U.S. EPA's GHG regulations take effect in 2011, amidst growing legal challenges


U.S. EPA's GHG regulations take effect in 2011, amidst growing legal challenges

In April, Senators John Kerry, Joseph Lieberman and Lindsay Graham announced their intention to pass legislation pre-empting the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) regulation of greenhouse gases. 
However, since the recent abandonment of a Congress Energy Bill, the EPA’s regulations for stationary sources of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions and new standards for light-duty vehicles remain scheduled to take effect on January 2, 2011.
The vehicle rules will apply to new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles from model years 2012 to 2016, and will require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in model year 2016. Automakers may meet these standards through improvements in fuel economy or air conditioning systems.
The auto industry is not expected to mount significant challenges to these rules, as it is speculated that the terms of the regulation were negotiated when loans were committed to the auto industry from funds from The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
On the other hand, the EPA’s regulation for stationary sources has prompted various proposed Bills in Congress seeking to restrict the EPA’s ability to regulate GHGs, as well as court challenges, most notably a lawsuit mounted by Texas Governor Rick Perry in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The EPA’s stationary source regulation will operate under the Clean Air Act’s New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD“) and Title V Operating Permit (“Title V“) programs. Under these programs, industrial stationary source emitters who produce emissions above a set threshold are required to determine the Best Available Control Technologies (“BACT”) to limit their emissions. 
Prior to the EPA’s Endangerment Finding that determined that six established GHGs are “air pollutants” as defined by the Clean Air Act, the PSD and Title V programs applied only to criteria pollutants like lead, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. The emissions thresholds for criteria pollutants are 100 and 250 tonnes per year, depending on the pollutant. 
For GHGs, the EPA has “tailored” the thresholds to be 75,000 and 100,000 tonnes per year of CO2 equivalent, depending on whether the facility is a new construction application or an existing facility undergoing modifications. Additional conditions apply as the EPA’s regulation will be enacted in two phases: one phase starting in January 2 to June 30, 2011; and the next phase, from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013.
At the heart of Governor Perry’s challenge is that the EPA does not have the authority to “tailor” the emissions thresholds set by the Clean Air Act. Governor Perry has also stated that in January, Texas will not comply with the stationary source regulations. Nevertheless, the White House Office of Management and Budget is reviewing an EPA rule that would allow the agency to install federal implementation plans if States do not comply with the regulations.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

EIA reports a 3.9-percent increase in U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in 2010

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 18, 2011
EIA reports a 3.9-percent increase in U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in 2010


U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the consumption of fossil fuels were 5,638 million metric tons carbon dioxide (MMTCO2) in 2010, an increase of 3.9 percent from the 2009 level, according toEnergy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2010, an online analysis released today by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). This is the largest percentage increase in U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions since 1988. However emissions are still 6 percent below the 2005 level. Since 1990, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have grown at an average annual rate of 0.6 percent.


Among the factors that influenced the rise in emissions was an increase in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 3.0 percent. In addition, the energy intensity of the U.S. economy, measured as energy consumed per dollar of GDP (Energy/GDP), increased by 0.7 percent in 2010. There was also a slight increase in the carbon dioxide intensity of U.S. energy supply (CO2 per unit of energy) in 2010, which is in contrast to a drop of 2.4 percent in 2009. Consumption of coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, rose by 6 percent in 2010 after falling by 12 percent in 2009.


"The 3.9 percent increase in emissions in 2010 was primarily driven by the rebound from the economic downturn experienced in 2008 and 2009. The Reference case in our latest energy outlook projects significantly slower emissions growth over the next decade, averaging 0.2 percent per year," said Acting EIA Administrator Howard Gruenspecht.




Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Emanuel, aldermen send message to Chicago coal-fired power plants


Emanuel, aldermen send message to Chicago coal-fired power plants

July 28, 2011|By Hal Dardick | Clout Street
The company that owns two pollution-spewing coal-fired power plants targeted by environmental activists could be forced to talk clean-up with Mayor Rahm Emanuel after an ordinance was unveiled today that could halt their operations.

Although a nearly identical reform measure previously languished in committee, the new one is backed by about two-thirds of aldermen, including independents and some of the mayor’s closest allies.
Emanuel said he worked on the proposal with Ald. Joe Moore, 49th, a longtime supporter of the Clean Power Ordinance. But the mayor stopped short of endorsing its passage and instead issued a message to top officials at Midwest Generation, which owns the plants.

“We are paying a health care cost as a city because of” the plants, he said. “I want them as a company to be a responsible citizen to the people of the city of Chicago.

“I’m happy there are jobs there. I got that, but those jobs should not come at the expense of the public health cost to our children and to our taxpayers. And I’m planning on having that conversation with them.”The mayor previously has stated he wants Midwest Generation to either install equipment to dramatically reduce pollution or convert to natural gas.

The ordinance targets the Fisk plant in Pilsen and the Crawford plant in Little Village. It would force them to convert to natural gas, cut operating hours or shut down within four years.
It covers more types of pollution than an agreement Midwest Generation has with the state to clean up or shut down the plants by 2018. Even with the state agreement, the company signaled in its latest financial documents that it might delay installing pollution controls at Fisk, Crawford and four other coal plants “for the maximum time available.”

Executives at the plant testified at a council hearing earlier this year that the city ordinance would put 200 jobs at risk and jeopardize the stability of the city’s electric grid — contentions aldermen dispute.
Today, Midwest Generation officials said the ordinance is not needed because they already have started to comply with federal standards that will significantly cut pollution at their plants.
In addition to Moore, the other key backer of the ordinance is Ald. Daniel Solis, 25th, who earlier this year was forced into a runoff election by an opponent who backed the crackdown measure. Solis, who previously had said the matter was best left to the federal government, changed his stance.

Today, Solis said he believes the issue should be pushed by local government. “We should speak up,” he said. “Let’s pass an ordinance that will push the feds and the state.”

In another Solis-backed effort, the council today also approved an ordinance that could push both coal plants and the H. Kramer smelter operation in Pilsen to speed up compliance with federal standards for the release of harmful lead into the atmosphere.

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Greater Efficiency in Water Management Will Reduce Risk for Half of the Global Economy


Greater Efficiency in Water Management Will Reduce Risk for Half of the Global Economy
Posted on March 21, 2011 at 13:03 PM EDT
Study indicates need for sustainable water models at all levels of society
Half of world economy could be affected by water scarcity
CHICAGOMarch 21, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Unless more sustainable water resource management practices are adopted by companies and individuals, almost half of the global economy and more than half of the world's population will be exposed to severe water scarcity by 2050, according to research released today by Veolia Water.
New research modeling various levels of economic growth and water management efficiencies underscores the need for change in how society manages water resources and water productivity (economic output per drop). Analysis was conducted by Veolia Waterand the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), an international agricultural research center studying sustainable solutions to ending hunger and poverty. The study assessed water stress, measured as water use in excess of 40 percent of available resources, at river basin and country levels, to identify countries and regions where water scarcity will put economic development and food production at risk.
Released in advance of World Water Day, March 22, key findings include:
  • By 2050, current "business as usual" water management practices will put at risk approximately $63 trillion, or 45 percent of the projected 2050 global GDP (at 2000 prices), equivalent to 1.5 times the size of today's entire global economy. Moreover, 4.8 billion people (52 percent of the world population) will live in water-stressed areas by 2050.
  • If sustainable behaviors and practices are adopted, more than 1 billion people and approximately $17 trillion of GDP could escape exposure to risks and challenges from severe water scarcity. This $17 trillion figure reflects an amount larger than the entire GDP of the United States in 2010.
  • Implementation of sustainable water management practices would also reduce by 21 percent the number of children projected to suffer from malnourishment compared to a business-as-usual approach.

"With water resources being pushed to the limits of what is sustainable in both developed and developing countries, efficiency in water resource management is becoming one of the most critical factors in determining how countries, regions and cities can continue supporting growing population and economies," said Laurent Auguste, president and CEO of Veolia Water Americas. "Over the past several decades, more people have increasingly been thinking green. It's clear that we now need to also start thinking and acting blue. Water resources are directly connected not only to human health, food and the quality of the environment, but also to the sustainability and health of our economies. To adequately feed and support a growing population, our global economy needs to grow and that requires we become smarter in water management. We now have to find the way to grow blue."
Future dependent on "blue" approaches – not business as usual
To assess the impact of water on economic growth, IFPRI and Veolia Water analyzed what economic growth levels can be sustained at today's water management efficiency and to what extent gains in efficiency and water productivity (economic output per drop) can sustain higher levels of growth. Four scenarios were developed representing four different levels of water management efficiency. These four scenarios – BAU (Business as Usual), Low-Carbon, Grey, and Blue – were assessed against three levels of economic growth to examine in each case the impact of growth on water scarcity and food security.
The proportion of water withdrawal with respect to total renewable water resources was used to determine levels of water stress and scarcity. Water stress puts at risk businesses, agriculture and people who need stable and reliable water supplies.
Findings regarding the Blue model of water efficiency include:
  • Analysis by IFPRI indicated that the Blue model, when compared to BAU under a medium growth scenario, would help more than 1 billion people and $17 trillion of GDP avoid risk of unsustainable water supplies by 2050. The Blue model would also sustain high economic growth through 2050.
  • In addition to a reduction in child malnutrition levels, additional social, economic and health benefits would also result, and food prices would be significantly lower.

Analysis of the remaining models yielded the following key insights:
  • Absent any fundamental change in our management and behaviors, BAU practices would significantly impact investment decisions, increase investment needs and operational costs for agricultural and economic development, and affect the competitiveness of certain regions. Low-income countries will be especially impacted by water scarcity under a BAU approach.
  • Already, 39 percent of the world's grain production is at risk of non-sustainable water use. That number would increase to 49 percent by 2050 if BAU practices continue.
  • A Low-Carbon model remains close to BAU levels because low-carbon energy production requires more water production due to greater levels of biomass consumption and hydropower development.
  • A Grey Model – growth at all cost – does not enable high-growth levels to be sustained due to limits in water resource availability.
For ChinaIndia and many other rapidly-developing countries, water scarcity has already started to materially risk growth. Even many of the most advanced regions of the industrialized world such as California and Florida will have to increasingly cope with the effect of growing pressure on water resources and their effects on growth. For instance, the positive effects of water productivity for California means the state could avoid the negative effects of water stress and be able to support high-growth rates.
"Only by moving toward sustainable models and changing today's approach to water management and water productivity can we ensure a sustainable and prosperous future," stated Claudia Ringler, senior research fellow at IFPRI. "A sustainable, blue path generates less waste and results in less pollution, more reuse, and more effective management and use of water at all levels of society. That means individuals, cities, agriculture and industry all need to participate because of a common, vested interest."
The Blue model is centered on improving water productivity – producing more with less water. This includes greater public awareness; higher levels of water reuse by all users of water; improvements and evolution of water technology; water and wastewater infrastructure improvements; extension of services to rural and urban poor populations; and greater energy efficiency along with increased use of renewable energy.
Auguste said that current global water supply and demand pressures include a decline in renewable water resources intensified by growing urban, domestic and industrial water usage.
"Given the multi-faced nature of this challenge, along with the complexity and slow pace of water resource management, this issue must be taken seriously by everyone," Auguste said.
The study is available as a white paper on the Veolia Water North America web site at:http://www.veoliawaterna.com/sustainable/a-sustainable-economy.
The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) seeks sustainable solutions for ending hunger and poverty. IFPRI is one of 15 centers supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, an alliance of 64 governments, private foundations, and international and regional organizations.
Based in Chicago, Veolia Water North America is the leading provider of comprehensive water and wastewater partnership services to municipal and industrial customers, providing services to more than 14 million people in approximately 650 North American communities. The company is part of the Veolia Environment companies in North America, with 30,000 North American employees providing sustainable environmental solutions in water management, waste services, energy management, and passenger transportation.
Veolia Water, the water division of Veolia Environnement, is the world leader in water and wastewater services and technological solutions. Its parent company, Veolia Environnement (NYSE: VE$46 billion in 2010. Visit the company's Web sites atwww.veolianorthamerica.com and www.veoliawaterna.com.