ML14030A295
Text
Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Air Emissions and Solid Waste from Coal- and Gas-Fired Alternatives for Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Chapter 7 Energy Alternatives Rev 3 September 19, 2012 Prepared for: Exelon Corporation Prepared by: Chuck Conrad Tetra Tech, Inc.Aiken, South Carolina Braidwood Units I and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Approval Page Air Emissions and Solid Waste from Coal- and Gas-Fired Alternatives for Bralidwood Units I and 2 Rev 3 September 19, 2012 Author/Z)? -Reviewed M : Project Manager: Date:
Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Air Emissions and Solid Waste from Coal- and Gas-Fired Alternatives for Braidwood Units I and 2 This discussion supports the alternatives analysis in Chapter 7.0 of the Environmental Report.The process of burning fossil fuels (i.e., coal and natural gas) in power generation brings about emissions that pollute the atmosphere.
Among these, the principle emissions of concern are sulfur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM) and carbon dioxide (COA 2). If coal is the fuel source, mercury (Hg) emissions are also a concern.The coal combustion process also produces ash, and the flue gas desulfurization equipment produces a slurry of ash, unreacted limestone, and calcium sulfite (i.e. scrubber sludge). The management of these solid wastes would require additional facilities at the plant site.The analysis described below estimates air emissions and solid waste from the operation of hypothetical coal- and gas-fired electric generation units that could be built to provide the same net generating capacity as existing Braidwood Units 1 and 2. Braidwood has an approximate annual average net capacity of 2,360 MWe (Exelon Corporation, 2012c) but for purpose of this analysis, Exelon projects that Braidwood will increase its approximate annual net mean generation capacity by 34 MWe in the future to a total of 2,394 MWe.I. Problem Statement Provide input for evaluation of energy alternatives to the proposed action of the license renewal for the nuclear generating capacity at Braidwood Units 1 and 2. Specifically, calculate: " Controlled emissions of the following criteria pollutants:
sulfur oxides as sulfur dioxide (SO 2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), total suspended particulates (TSP)1, particulates smaller than ten microns (PM 1 0) and particulates smaller than 2.5 microns (PM 2 .).* Greenhouse gas [e.g. carbon dioxide (C0 2)] emissions.
- Controlled mercury (Hg) emissions from the coal-fired alternative.
- Solid waste (ash and scrubber sludge) that would be generated by the coal-fired alternative.
II. Analyzed Scenario For each of the fossil fuel-fired electric generation technologies, identify the appropriate electrical generation capability, fuel characteristics, firing configurations, and emissions control In 1971, the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for total suspended particulate (TSP) were established for particulate matter less than 50 microns in diameter.
On July 1, 1987 the particulate standard was revised from TSP to PM 1 o [52 FR 24634]. The PM 1 0 standard is federally enforceable and applicable nationwide.
The TSP standard is not federally enforceable, but is used by some states for industrial monitoring purposes.
Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package 0 devices. Fuel characteristics were based on fuel quality data originating from the region of interest (ROI) which was defined at the states surrounding Braidwood (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin).
Assumptions are based, in part, on electric power industry experience, and consist of the following:
Assumptions:
Generating Net Generation Units 2 Capacit Electricity Un I Consumed Technology Capacity' Factory Onsite 4 Coal-fired boiler 2,400 MWe Four 600 MWe (net) 0.85 6 percent Combined cycle Six 400 MWe (net) CC 0.87 4 percent gas turbine 2,400 MWe 1X1 units 0.87 4_percent 1 The net capacity of the combined cycle gas turbine is based on commercially available units (i.e. General Electric MS7001 H). For equivalency, the coal-fired boilers are assumed to have the same net capacity. (GE 2007)2 International Standards Organization (ISO) rating.3 While higher than typical modern fossil fuel-fired units this provides baseload generation capacity comparable to a typical nuclear plant.4 Based on industry experience.
Input Data: Generating2 Technology Fuel Type 1 Firing Configuration Control Devices2 SO 2 -wet scrubber-limestone NO,, -low NOx burner with overfire air Coal-Fired Pulverized, Ultra-supercritical, tangentially-and selective catalytic reduction Coired Sub-bituminous fired, dry-bottom, NSPS with low TSP, PM 1 0, and PM 2.5 -fabric filter Boiler Coal 3 NOx burner 4 (baghouse)
Hg -activated carbon injection CO and C0 2-none Combined Six GE H-class (MS7001H)
SO 2 -not applicable' Cycle Gas Natural Gas 3 combustion turbines in lx1 NOr and CO -selective catalytic Turbine combined cycle configuration each injection) with a heat recovery steam TSP and PM 1 0 -not applicable 5 generator and a steam turbine C0 2-none 1 2 3 4 5 Determination of the heat content and quality of each fuel is described under Calculation Methodology.
Best available control technology.
Fuel characteristics such as heating value, percent sulfur, and percent ash were determined via a weighted average over the fuel consumed in the ROI during the reference year.NSPS = New Source Performance Standards (40 CFR 60)Because of the purity of natural gas, combined-cycle gas units emit only trace amounts of SO 2 and particulate matter.0 2 Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Ill. Calculation Methodology Air Emissions:
Annual emission estimates for criteria pollutants are calculated using emission factors developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The emission factors are multiplied by the relevant "activity level" to determine annual emission estimates for criteria pollutants.
The basic emission estimation equation when using an emission factor is: E = A x EF x (1 -C)Where: E = emission estimate A = activity level, such as throughput EF = emission factor C = control efficiency (expressed in percent);
C equals zero if no control device is in place 2 The emissions calculations are performed using a series of Excel spreadsheets (Figures Ia through 4b). To facilitate description of the calculations, these spreadsheets are assigned names as shown below: Figure Label Spreadsheet Purpose Name Shows user-specified input and air emission Figure 1 a Coal estimates for the coal alternative Figure lb Gas Shows user-specified input and air emission estimates for the gas alternative Figure 2a Coal-calc Illustrates how the coal emissions are calculated Figure 2b Gas-calc Illustrates how the gas emissions are calculated r3 Calculates solid waste produced by combustion of coal Figure 4a Controls-Coal Provide databases of EPA emission factors, and other technical information used in the emission Figure 4b Controls-Gas cluain calculations EIA = Energy Information Administration EPA = Environmental Protection Agency Using the gas-fired technology as an example, in a work area that runs along the top of the Gas spreadsheet (cells A3:B8) in Figure lb the analyst specifies the plant name, client, plant capacity, region of interest, and reference year. The analyst then enters into the Input Table, the assumed number of units, unit size, heat rate, fuel characteristics, and capacity factor as indicated in Section II, Analyzed Scenario.2 Most emission factors are developed assuming no control devices are in place. Some emission factors, however, were derived from data obtained from facilities with a control device in place. When using these "controlled emission factors" the control efficiency is included in the emission factor.3 Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Going to the Controls-gas spreadsheet (Figure 4b), the analyst specifies the chosen firing configuration and control devices as indicated in Section II, Analyzed Scenario, by choosing the row number in the tables, which are directly below the selection cell. The selection enters the emission factors and control devices and control efficiencies into the Input Table. The annual fuel consumption and emissions are calculated and displayed in the Gas spreadsheet (cells A24:D35).
Emissions calculations for the coal-fired alternative are performed in the same manner.Solid Waste: The estimated amount of solid waste (e.g., ash and scrubber sludge) generated by the coal-fired alternative is calculated using a material balance based on annual fuel consumption.
The calculations assume complete combustion and operating life of 40 years3.An excel spreadsheet, SW-Coal (Figure 3) was used to perform the calculations.
This spreadsheet uses parameters (e.g., fuel use, sulfur content, ash content, and pollutant control efficiency) from the air emissions calculations.
The only inputs required are the amounts of ash and scrubber sludge recycled (cell 16 and 17, respectively).
Results are displayed on the right-hand side of the output table (cells K10:K58).IV. Verification and Validation This documentation assumes that the referenced EIA and EPA data input is valid. Verification, therefore, must demonstrate that the model is functionally equivalent to manual application of the emission factor methodology using the actual tables published in AP-42. Verification would consist of confirmation of the input and output files as defined in Section V. This would include confirmation of the following: " The tables in the model are equivalent to the corresponding tables and sections in the referenced publications." The input in the work area maps the correct data from the model tables into the work area.* The calculated emissions, which are also mapped into the work area, are correct and appear correctly in the summary tables and the calculation display tables (e.g. coal-alt)." Manual calculations from the calculation display tables equate to the listed values.V. Input and Output File Coal-Fired Boiler: 3 The total amount of solid waste generated during the 40 operating life of an electric generation plant is twice the amount that would be generated during the 20-year license renewal period. The total, however, is representative of the cumulative impact. a 4 Braidwood Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application Air Emissions and Solid Waste Calculation Package Figure 1 a is the work area for the sheet named Coal, and displays the user defined input (in bold), the source for other input is referenced, and corresponding output from the coal emissions work area in reverse video (white letters on black background).
The equations and the same output values for coal-fired boiler air emissions are displayed in Figure 2a. The formulas and output for the coal-fired boiler solid waste generation are provided in Figure 3.Lookup matrices and databases for control devices are shown in Figures 4a and 4b.Each input selects the state or row number for tables that are derived from EIA or EPA data.Section II, Analyzed Scenario, defines the appropriate selections and the information is displayed in Figure la.The Controls-Coal sheet (Figure 4a) input at A4 (cell value = "2") maps the user-selected SO, control technology (Wet scrubber-Limestone) and its control efficiency (95%) into cells B4:C4.The input at E4 (cell value = "8") places the user-selected NO, control technology (Low NO, burners with over-fire air and selective catalytic reduction) and its control efficiency (95%) into cells F4:G4. Similarly, input in cell 14 (cell value = "2") selects the user-selected TSP, PM 1 0 , and PM 2 5 control technology (Baghouse) and their control efficiencies (99.9%) into cells J4:M4. The assigned value for cell 04 (cell value = "13") maps the SO,, NO,, CO and CO 2 emission factors into cells Q4:T4 for the firing configuration shown in P4 (cell value = "PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, sub-bituminous, NSPS"). Similarly, less detailed firing configurations have associated emission factors for TSP, PM 1 0 , and PM 2.5. Input at U5 (cell value = "2") for the firing configuration placed in cell V5 (cell value = "PC-fired, dry bottom, tangentially-fired")
maps emission factors into cells W5:Y5 (cell values = "10A, 2.3A, and 0.6A").This is all the input required to calculate emissions listed in the problem statement.
The emissions in tons per year are shown in cells C42:C50 on the Coal worksheet (Figure la).Gas-Fired Combustion Turbine: Input and output for the gas alternative are similar to the input and output for the coal-fired alternative.
Figure lb is the work area for the sheet named Gas, and Figure 2b shows the formulas to calculate emissions.
Lookup matrices and databases are shown in Figure 4b.'On the Controls-gas sheet, input at cell A4 (cell value = "6") retrieves the NO, and CO emission factors for the selected control device (see B4:D4). C0 2 , SO 2 , filterable TSP, and condensable TSP are uncontrolled.
Their emission factors are listed cells C28:C35 in the worksheet Gas (Figure 1b).5 Figure la -Emissions for Coal Fired Alternative 0 I A I B I C I D Station: Braidwood Generation Station, Units 1 and 2 Plant License Expiration Date Client Replaces (MWe)Fuel: Referenced State Fuel Referenced Year Braidwood 2026 Exelon Nuclear 2,394 ROI: IL, IN, IA, MI, MO, WI 2010 (Year current operating license expires)Coal Fired Worksheet, Section 1.1 AP-42 Supplement E Inputs Fuel Type Boiler Technology Number of Units Plant Capacity-gross (MWe)Plant Capacity-net (MWe)Heat Rate (BTU/kWh)Heating Value (BTU/lb)Capacity Factor Percent Sulfur (%)Percent Ash (%)SO, Control Device SO, Control Efficiency
(%)NO, Control Device NO, Control Efficiency
(%)TSP Control Device TSP Control Efficiency
(%)PM 1 0 Control Device PM 1 0 Control Efficiency
(%)PM 2.5 Control Device PM 2 5 Control Efficiency
(%)Hg Control Device Hg Control Efficiency
(%)Firing Configuration to determine SOx, NOx, CO and CO 2 emission factors Value Sub-Bituminous, Pulverized Coal Ultra-Supercritical 4 638 600 8,937 8,730 0.85 0.27 4.93 Wet scrubber-Limestone 95 Low NOX burners with over-fire air and SCR 95 Baghouse 99.9 Baghouse 99.9 Baghouse 99.9 Activated carbon injection 90 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, sub-bituminous, NSPS Source Assumed Assumed Assumed: Provides 2,400 MWe -Braidwood net capacity of 2,394 MWe Assume 6% used onsite To match gas scenario for comparability S&L 2009, Table 2-2 EIA 2011d; typical for sub-bituminous coal used in ROI EIA 2011e EIA 201 ld; typical for sub-bituminous coal used in ROI EIA 201 ld; typical for sub-bituminous coal used in ROI EPA 1998, Table 1.1-1 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-1 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1 EPA 2010 ADA 2012 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-4 Source Energy Balance EIIP 2001, page 2.4-5, equation 2.4-4 Firing Configuration to determine TSP, PC-fired, dry bottom, tangentially.
PM 1 0 , and PM 2 5 emission factors fired Parameter Annual Coal Consumption (tons/yr)Hi.ann-_Annual Btu input (MMBTU/yr)
Value 9,730,777 169,901,877 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 52 54 55 Emissions SO, NOx CO CO 2 TSP PM 1 0 PM 2.0 Hg uncontrolled (lb/ton)35S = 9.45 7.2 0.5 4810 10A = 49.3 2.3A= 11.3 0.6A = 2.96 0.000016 controlled (tons/yr)2,299 1,752 2,433 23,402.520 239.9 55.17 14.39 0.14 Source EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-20 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-4 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-4 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-6 EPA 1998, Table 1.1-17' Hg emissions are pounds/MMBTU Bold = user defined inputs (e.g.White font = outputs (e.g.2,394 0 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm coal 9/1912012 Figure lb -Emissions for Gas Fired Alternative IA IB I C I .D Station: Braidwood Generation Station, Units I and 2 Plant License Expiration Date Client Replaces (MWe)Fuel: Region of Interest Fuel: Referenced Year Braidwood 2026 Exelon Nuclear 2,394 IL, IN, IA, MI, MO, WI 2010 (Year current license expires)Gas Turbines for Electrical Generation Worksheet, Section 3.1, AP-42 Supplement B Inputs Number of Units Plant Capacity-gross (MWe)Plant Capacity-net (MWe)Heat Rate (BTU/kWh)Heating Value (BTU/ft 3)Capacity Factor Percent Sulfur (%)SO, (lb/MMBTU)
NO, / CO control device Parameter Annual gas consumption (ft 3/yr)Annual Btu input (MMBTU/yr)
Emissions Value 6 417 400 5,690 1,011 0.87 0.0007 0.00066 Selective Catalytic Reduction (with water/steam injection)
Source Assumed; Provides 2,400 MWe -Braidwood net capacity of 2,394 MWe Assume 4% used onsite GE H-class (MS7001H) lx1 combined cycle unit (GE 2007)GE 2007 EIA 201 1d; typical for natural gas used in ROI EIA 201 le INGAA 2000, page 8 EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a Assumed Source Energy Balance EIIP 2001, pg 2.4-5, eq 2.4-4 (tonslyr)
Source EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a Value 107,198,042,714 108,411,570 (IlbMMBTU)
SO, 0.94S = 0.00066 NOx 0.0109 CO 0.00226 CO 2 110 Filterable TSP 0.0019 Filterable PM 2.5 a 0.0019 Condensable TSP 0.0047 Condensable PM 2 , a 0.0047 aAll particulate matter<1.0 micron (EPA 2000a, paqe 3.1-5)591 123 5,962,636 103 103 255 255 EPA 2000b, Table 3.1 Database EPA 2000b, Table 3.1 Database EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-2a Bold = user defined input (e.g. 2,394 White font = outouts (eo. *Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Gas 9/19/2012 Figure 2a -Calculation of Coal Fired Emissions A BI C IDI E IFI G IHI I JI K ILI M IN]OIPI Q IRI S T I U 1 Station: Braidwood Generation Station, Units 1 and 2 2 COAL 4 Parameter Calculation Result 6 7 Annual coal 4 Units x 638 MW 1,000 kW 8937 Btu lb ton 0.85 x (365 x 24) hr 9,730,777 tons of coal per year 8 consumption plant MW kWh 8730 Btu 2000 lb yr 9 10 11 35x0.27 lb ton (100-95) x 9730777 tons 2299 tons 502 per year 12 S2 ton 2000 lb 100 yr 13 14 15 NO 7.2 lb ton (100- 95) 9730777 tons 1,752 tons NOx per year 16 ton x 2000 lb -10 yr 17 18 19" 0.5 lb ton 9730777 tons = 2,433 tons CO per year 20 ton 200b x yr 21 22 23 CO. 4810 lb ton 9730777 tons 23,402,520 tons CO 2 per year 24 ton b yr 25 26 27 10x 4.93 1b ton (00 -99.9) x 9730777 tons-" TSP ton x 01 x 100 yr 239.9 tons TSP per year 29 30 31 PM10 2.3 x 4.93 lb ton (100 -99.9) 9730777 tons 55.17 tons PM 1 0 per year 32 ton 20001b x 100 yr 33 34 35 25 0.6 x 4.93 lb ton (100-99.9) 9730777 tons 14.39 tons PM 2 5 per year 36 ton b 100 -yr 37 38 39 0.000016 lb x 8730 Btu x MMBtu x 9730777 tons x (10-90) 0,14 tons Hg peryear 4 MMBtu lb 1E6 Btu yr 100 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3 xlsm roal-nnilc 9/19/2012
- 0 Figure 2b -Calculation of Gas Fired Emissions A IBI C IDIEIFIGIHIIIJIKILIMINIOIPI Q IRISITI U IVlWI x I Y 1 Station: Braidwood Generation Station, Units I and 2 2 GAS 4 Parameter Calculation Result 5 6. Annualgas 417 MW 5690 Btu 1,000 kW Wft 3 (365 x 24) hr ft 3 7 consumption 6 Units x Unit kWh MW 1011 Btu yr =8 9 Annual BTU 107,198,042,714 ft 3 1011 Btu MMBtu 10 input yr t X 106 Btu 108,411,570 MMBtu per year 11 12 13 so 0.94S = 0.00066 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 36 tons S02 per year 14 MMBtu 2000 lb yr 15 16 17 0.0109 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 591 tons NO, peryear 18 NOx MMBtu x 2000 lb x yr 19 20 21 0.00226 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 22 CO MMBtu A 2000 lb x yr 123 tons CO per year 23 24 25 110 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 5,962,636 tons CO 2 per year 26 CO 2 MMBtu 2000 lb x yr 27 28 29 0.0019 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 103 tons filterableTSP per year 30 Filterable TSP MMBtu 2000 lb yr =3T 32 33 Condensable 0.0047 lb ton 108,411,570 MMBtu 255 tons condensable TSP per year 34 TSP MMBtu x 000 x yr Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Gas-calc 9/19/2 012 Figure 3 -Calculation of Solid Waste from Coal Fired Alternative A 10 C IDI E IFI G I H I I I K I M I N 1 Station: Braidwood Generation Station, Units I and 2 2 Coal Solid Wastes 4 Basis: SO 2 Control Method: Wet scrubber-Limestone 5 Annual coal consumption
= 9,730,777 tons 6 Percent of ash recycled = 85 % Source: Exelon Corporation 2011 8 9Percent of scrubber sludge recycled 85 % Source: Exelon Corporation 2011 9 aaeter Calculation Re-suit SO 2 generated SO 2 removed Ash generated Ash recycled Waste ash Limestone consumption Calcium sulfite generated Scrubber sludge generated Scrubber sludge recycled Scrubber waste Total volume of scrubber waste Total volume of ash waste Total volume of solid waste Waste pile area Waste pile area (acre)Waste pile area (mil)0.27 64.065 9,730,777 tons coal 100 32.066 yr 95 100 x 52,491 =4.930 99.900 9,730,777 100 100-x yr 85 479248 tons of ash x 10 100 52,491 tons SO2 per year 49,867 tons SO 2 per year 479,248 tons ash per year 407,360 tons ash recycled per year 71,887 tons waste ash per year 479248 tons -407360 tons =Wet Scrubbing
-Limestone:
CaCO3 + H20 + S02 --> CaSO3 +C02 + H20 52,491 ton S02 100.087 ton CaCO3 yr 64.065 ton S02 49,867 ton S02 120.142 ton CaSO3 yr 64.065 ton S02 82,006 ton CaSO3 100-95 + 93516 ton CaSO3 yr 100 85 97,616 tons x =100 97,616 tons -82,974 tons =14,642 tons 2000 lb ft 3 yr ton 100 lb 71,887 tons x 20yr x 2000 lb ft 3 yr ton 100 lb 5,856,974 ft 3 + 28,754,856 ft 3 =34,611,830 ft 3 30 ft high ft 2 1,153,728 ft 2 X 4 0 43,560 acre 26 acre x mile 2 640 acre 82,006 tons CaCO3 per year 93,516 tons CaSO3 per year 97,616 tons scrubber sludge per year 82,974 tons scrubber sludge recycled per year 14,642 tons scrubber waste per year 5,856,974 ft 3 scrubber waste 28,754,856 ft 3 ash waste 34,611,830 ft 3 solid waste 1,153,728 ft 2 solid waste 26.49 acre solid waste 0.0414 mi 2 Solid waste 61 Notes: a. Calculations were performed using stoichometric ratios from the chemical equation shown above and molecular weights of the 62 compounds.
63 b. Calculations assume 100% combustion of coal.64 c. Limestone consumption is based on total S02 generated.
65 d. Calcium Sulfite generated is based on total S02 removed.66 e. Total sludge generated includes scrubbing media carryover in the waste.67 f. Density of Scrubber Sludge (Ib/ft 3): 100 Source: RMRC 2008 68 g. Density of Coal Bottom Ash (lb/ft 3): 100 Source: RMRC 2008 69 h. Plant life (year): 20 Source: Assumed 70 i. Waste pile height (ft): 30 Source: Assumed Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm SW-Coal 9/19/2012 Figure 4a -Emission Control Technologies for Coal-Fired Alternative A B C D 2 S02 Control SO 2 Control 3 Selection SO 2 Control Technology Efficiency 4 2 Wet scrubber-Limestone 95 5 6 7 Efficiency' 8 Number Technology
(%)9 1 Wet scrubber-Lime 95 10 2 Wet scrubber-Limestone 95 11 3 Wet scrubber-Sodium carbonate 98 12 4 Wet scrubber-Magnesium oxide/hydroxide 95 13 5 Wet scrubber-Dual alkali 96 14 6 Spray drying 90 15 7 Furnace injection 50 16 8 Duct injection 50 17 18 19 1 Source: EPA 1998, Table 1.1-1, page 1.1-13 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-coal 9/19/2012 Figure 4a -Emission Control Technologies for Coal-Fired Alternative E F G H 2 NOx Control NOx Control 3 Selection NOx Control Technique Efficiency 4 8 Low NOX burners with over-fire air and SCR 95 5 6 7 8 Number Technique Efficiency'
(%)9 1 Overfire air 30 10 2 Low NOx burners 55 11 3 Low NOx burners with overfire air 60 12 4 Reburn 60 13 5 Selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) 60 14 6 Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) 85 15 7 Low NOx burners with selective noncatalytic reduction 80 16 8 Low NOx burners with over-fire air and SCR 95 17 18 19 1 Source: EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2, page 1.1-14 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-coal 9/19/2012 o Figure 4a -Emission Control Technologies for Coal-Fired Alternative J K L M N 2 TSP and PM 1 o Control Particulate Matter Control TSP Control PM 1 0 Control PM 2.5 Control 3 Selection Technology Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency 4 2 Baghouse 99.9 99.9 99.9 5 6 7 TSP control PM 1 0 control PM 2.5 control 8 Number Technology efficiency 1 (%) efficiency 1 (%) efficiency'
(%)9 1 Electrostatic Precipitator 99 99 99 10 2 Baghouse 99.9 99.9 99.9 11 3 Wet Scrubber 99 99 99 12 4 Cyclone collector 95 78 78 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 Source: EPA 1998, §1.1.4.1, page 1.1-6 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-coal 9/19/2012 Figure 4a -Emission Control Technologies for Coal-Fired Alternative 0 P Q R S T 2-SON, NO., CO, CO 2 SO, NO, CO. CO 2 Firing Configuration Emission Emission Emission Emission 3 Selection Firing Configuration Factor Factor Factor Factor 4 13 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, sub-bituminous, NSPS 35S 7.2 0.5 4810 5 6 7 Emission Factors' (lb/ton)8 Number Firing Configration Sox NOx CO CO 2 9 1 PC, dry bottom, wall-fired, bituminous Pre-NSPS 38S 22 0.5 5510 10 2 PC, dry bottom, wall-fired, bituminous Pre-NSPS with low-Nox burner 38S 11 0.5 5510 11 3 PC, dry bottom wall-fired, sub-bituminous Pre-NSPS 35S 12 0.5 4810 12 4 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, bituminous, Pre-NSPS 38S 15 0.5 5510 13 5 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, bituminous, Pre-NSPS with low-NOx burner 38S 9.7 0.5 5510 14 6 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, sub-bituminous, Pre-NSPS 35S 8.4 0.5 4810 15 7 PC, wet bottom, wall-fired, bituminous, Pre-NSPS 38S 31 0.5 5510 16 8 PC, dry bottom, wall-fired, bituminous NSPS 38S 12 0.5 5510 17 9 PC, dry bottom, wall fired, sub-bituminous NSPS 35S 7.4 0.5 4810 18 10 PC, dry bottom, cell burner fired, bituminous 38S 31 0.5 5510 19 11 PC, dry bottom, cell burner fired, sub-bituminous 35S 14 0.5 4810 20 12 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, bituminous, NSPS 38S 10 0.5 5510 21 13 PC, dry bottom, tangentially fired, sub-bituminous, NSPS 35S 7.2 0.5 4810 22 14 PC, wet bottom, tangentially fired, bituminous, NSPS 38S 14 0.5 5510 23 15 PC, wet bottom, wall-fired sub-bituminous 35S 24 0.5 4810 24 16 Cyclone Furnace, bituminous 38S 33 0.5 5510 25 17 Cyclone Furnace, sub-bituminous 35S 17 0.5 4810 26 18 Spreader Stoker, bituminous 38S 11 5 5510 27 19 Spreader Stoker, sub-bituminous 35S 8.8 5 4810 28 20 Overfeed stoker 38S 7.5 6 4810 29 21 Underfeed stoker 31S 9.5 11 4810 30 22 Hand-fed units 31S 9.1 275 4810 39.6S/31 23 FBC, circulating bed (Ca/S)1 9 5 18 4810 39.6S/32 24 FBC, bubbling bed (Ca/S)1 9 15.2 18 4810 33 34 1 Source: EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 on page 1.1-16 and Table 1.1-20 on page 1.1-42 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-coal 9/19/2012 0 o Figure 4a -Emission Control Technologies for Coal-Fired Alternative U V W x Y z 2 Particulate Firing TSP PM 1 0 PM 2.5 Configuration Emission Emission Emission 3 Selection Firing Configuration Factor Factor Factor 4 2 PC-fired, dry bottom, tangentially-fired 10A 2.3A 0.6A 5 6 7 Emission Factors 1 (lb/ton)8 Number Firing Configuration TSP PM 1 0 PM 2.5 9 1 PC-fired, dry bottom, wall-fired 10A 2.3A 0.6A 10 2 PC-fired, dry bottom, tangentially-fired 10A 2.3A 0.6A 11 3 PC-fired, wet bottom 7A 2.6A 1.48A 12 4 Cyclone furnace 2A 0.26A 0.11A 13 5 Spreader stoker 66 13.2 4.6 14 6 Spreader stoker, with multiple cyclones, and reinjection 17 12 1.4 15 7 Spreader stoker, with multiple cyclones, no reinjection 12 7.8 3.2 16 8 Overfeed stoker 16 6 2.2 17 9 Overfeed stoker, with multiple cyclones 9 5 3.8 18 10 Underfeed stoker 15 6.2 3.8 19 11 Underfeed stoker, with multiple cyclones 11 6.2 -20 12 Hand-fed units 15 6.2 3.8 21 13 FBC, bubbling bed 17 12 1.4 22 14 FBC, circulating bed 17 12 1.4 23 24 25 Source: EPA 1998, Tables 1.1-4, 1.1-6, 1.1-7, 1.1-8, 1.1-9, 1.1-10, 26 and 1.1-11 on pages 1.1-21 through 1.1-31 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-coal 9/19/2012 Figure 4b -Emission Control Technologies for Gas-Fired Alternative A BC D E 2 Select # from Table NO. Emission CO Emission 3 3.1-1 or 3.1-2 NO, / CO Control (lb /MMBTU) (lb /MMBTU)Selective Catalytic Reduction (with water/steam 4 6 injection) 0.0109 0.00226 5 6 NOx CO 7 1 Uncontrolled 0.32 0.082 1 8 2 Water Injection 0.13 0.03 9 3 Steam injection 0.13 0.03 1 10 4 Lean-Premix 0.099 0.015 11 5 Selective Catalytic Reduction 0.0128 0.0168 2 12 6 Selective Catalytic Reduction (with water/steam injectiol 0.0109 0.00226 2 13 7 Steam/Water Injection with SCR & CO Catalyst 0.00899 0.06 2 14 15 16 17 1 Source: EPA 2000a, Table 3.1-1 18 2 Source: EPA 2000b, Section 3.1 database 19 Braidwood Emissions Calc Rev 3.xlsm Control-gas 9/19/2012 Fuel
References:
Braid-398 EIA 2011d Braid-384 INGAA 2000 Heat Rate
References:
Braid-383 GE 2007 Braid-386 S&L 2009 Emission Factor
References:
Braid-375 ADA 2012 Braid-377 EPA 1998 Braid-378 EPA 2000a Braid-374 EPA 2000b Braid-379 EPA 2010 Braid-376 EIIP 2001 Solid Waste
References:
EIA-923 (Schedule
- 2) -Monthly Utility and Nonutility Fuel Receipts and Fuel Quality Data -2010 (final data), Available at http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia423.html Interstate Natural Gas Association of America. 2000. "Implications of Reduced Gas Use on Emissions From Power Generation".
Available online at www.ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=282 (For sulfur content of natural gas.)"Gas Turbine and Combined Cycle Products." May, Available at http://www.gepower.com/prod-serv/products/index.html Sargent & Lundy. "New Coal-Fired Power Plant Performance and Cost Estimates." SL-009808. Available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/resource/docs/CoalPerform.pdf.
Activated Carbon Injection Systems, Available at http://www.adaes.com/mercury/acis/
Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Vol. 1, Stationary Point Sources and Area Sources. Section 1.1, "Bituminous and Subbituminous Coal Combustion." AP-42. September.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/.
Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Vol. 1, Stationary Point Sources and Area Sources. Section 3.1, "Stationary Gas Turbines." AP-42. April. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.
html.AP-42, Chapter 3, Section 3.1 Emission Factor Query database.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/chO3/related/cO3s01.
html.Controlling Power Plant Emissions:
Control Technology, Last updated Oct 2010, Available at http://www.epa.gov/hg/control_emissions/technology.
htm Emission Inventory Improvement Program Technical Report Series, Volume 2, Point Sources. Chapter 2, "Preferred and Alternative Methods for Estimating Air Emissions from Boilers." January.Recycled Materials Resource Center, User Guidelines for Byproducts and Secondary Use Materials in Pavement Construction, July, Available at http://www.rmrc.unh.edu/tools/uguidelines/index.asp Braid-475 RMRC 2008 Braid-380 Exelon Corporation "Maximizing the resources we use", Available at 2011 http://www.exeloncorp.com/environment/results/land.aspx Other
References:
Braid-366 Exelon 2012c Braid-476 EIA 2011e United States Securities and Exchange Commission, Form 10-K"Levelized Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2011" Available at http://205.254.135.24/oiaf/aeo/electricitygeneration.html