ML17024A193
| ML17024A193 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/2017 |
| From: | Entergy Operations |
| To: | Keegan E Division of License Renewal |
| Elaine Keegan, NRR/DLR, 415-8517 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17018A143 | List:
|
| References | |
| Download: ML17024A193 (20) | |
Text
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 1 of 20
Title:
Calculation to Support Section 7.1, Alternatives to Client: Entergy Louisiana, LLC (WF3) the Proposed Action, of the WF3 License Renewal Environmental Report Project: ENTGWF094 Item Cover Sheet Items Yes No 1 Does this calculation contain any open assumptions that require confirmation? (If YES, Identify the assumptions) X 2 Does this calculation serve as an Alternate Calculation? (If YES, Identify the design verified calculation.) Design Verified Calculation No. X 3 Does this calculation Supersede an existing Calculation? (If YES, identify the superseded calculation.) Superseded Calculation No. X Scope of Revision:
The client revised the existing Waterford 3 (WF3) nuclear power unit generating capacity to 1,188 MWe from 1,235 MWe. The WF3 generating capacity is the amount of power that the range of power alternatives analyzed in WF3s License Renewal Application Environmental Report must match.
Revision Impact on Results:
Revision of generating capacity needs, land requirements, air emission estimates, and waste estimates based on the revised WF3 generating capacity of 1,188 MWe.
Study Calculation Final Calculation X Safety-Related Non-Safety Related X (Print Name and Sign)
Originator: Mary N. Hoganson Date: 12/9/15 Design Verifier: Date: 12/09/2015 SURESH RAJA Approver: Date: 12/10/2015
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 2 of 20 CALCULATION REVISION STATUS REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION 0 09/032014 Original Issue 1 12/04/2014 Revised Issue 2 12/10/2015 Revised Issue PAGE REVISION STATUS PAGE NO. REVISION PAGE NO. REVISION 0 0 Various 1 Various 2 APPENDIX REVISION STATUS APPENDIX NO. PAGE NO. REVISION NO. APPENDIX NO. PAGE NO. REVISION NO.
NA
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 3 of 20 Calculation Design Verification Plan:
ENERCON used capacity and emissions factors and inputs as detailed in the WF3 License Renewal Application Environmental Report Section 7.0 that were prepared or adopted by federal agencies for approximate estimates of land use requirements, feedstock requirements, environmental emissions, and energy input demands. The calculations were used for relative comparison of alternatives. Calculation inputs were verified by checking the documented input with the source references and verifying that equations used were applicable based on references cited. The validity of references were checked for their intended use and all assumptions were evaluated and verified to be based on sound emissions calculation principles and practices. Calculation results were verified by checking all equations for each type of fuel source. The methodology, results and conclusions were also verified.
(Print Name and Sign for Approval - mark N/A if not required)
Approver: Date 12/10/2015 Calculation Design Verification Summary:
All assumptions and data sources were verified. Calculated values are correct.
Based On The Above Summary, The Calculation Is Determined To Be Acceptable.
(Print Name and Sign)
Design Verifier: Date: 12/09/2015 Suresh Raja Others: Date:
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 4 of 20 Item CHECKLIST ITEMS Yes No N/A 1 Design Inputs - Were the design inputs correctly selected, referenced (latest revision), consistent with the design basis and incorporated in the X calculation?
2 Assumptions - Were the assumptions reasonable and adequately described, justified and/or verified, and documented? X 3 Quality Assurance - Were the appropriate QA classification and requirements assigned to the calculation? X 4 Codes, Standard and Regulatory Requirements - Were the applicable codes, standards and regulatory requirements, including issue and X addenda, properly identified and their requirements satisfied?
5 Construction and Operating Experience - Have applicable construction and operating experience been considered? X 6 Interfaces - Have the design interface requirements been satisfied, including interactions with other calculations? X 7 Methods - Was the calculation methodology appropriate and properly applied to satisfy the calculation objective? X 8 Design Outputs - Was the conclusion of the calculation clearly stated, did it correspond directly with the objectives and are the results reasonable X compared to the inputs?
9 Radiation Exposure - Has the calculation properly considered radiation exposure to the public and plant personnel? X 10 Acceptance Criteria - Are the acceptance criteria incorporated in the calculation sufficient to allow verification that the design requirements have X been satisfactorily accomplished?
11 Computer Software - Is a computer program or software used, and if so, are the requirements of CSP 3.02 met? X COMMENTS:
(Print Name and Sign)
Design Verifier: Date: 12/09/2015 Suresh Raja Others: Date:
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 5 of 20 Table of Contents 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ............................................................................................................ 6 2.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... 6 2.1 Energy Inputs and Air Emissions for Natural Gas and Coal-Fired Alternatives .......................... 8 2.2 Annual Waste and Byproduct Estimates for Coal-Fired Alternate .............................................. 9
3.0 REFERENCES
........................................................................................................................... 9 4.0 ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................................................................... 10 5.0 DESIGN INPUTS ...................................................................................................................... 11 6.0 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 11 7.0 CALCULATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 11 7.1 Generating Capacity Estimates for Reasonable Alternatives to Replace WF3 Generating Capacity.................................................................................................................................... 11 7.2 Natural Gas Alternative Calculations ........................................................................................ 12 7.2.1 Land Use Requirements for Natural Gas Alternative .......................................................... 12 7.2.2 NGCC Annual Air Emissions ............................................................................................... 12 7.3 Coal-Fired Alternative Calculations .......................................................................................... 14 7.3.1 Land Use Requirements for Coal-Fired Alternative ............................................................. 14 7.3.2 SCPC Annual Air Emissions................................................................................................ 15 7.3.3 SCPC Annual Solid Waste .................................................................................................. 17 7.4 Calculations for Biomass Alternatives ...................................................................................... 18 7.4.1 Feedstock Estimates for Wood Waste Alternative .............................................................. 18 7.4.2 Feedstock Estimates for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Fired Alternative .......................... 19 7.4.3 Air Emission Estimates for Biomass Units Based on MSW-Fired Units Average Emissions ..
............................................................................................................................................ 19 7.5 Land Use Requirements for Concentrated Power Solar (CSP) and Photovoltaic (PV) Solar Facilities.................................................................................................................................... 20 8.0 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................... 20
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 6 of 20 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of the following analyses is to support assessments of Section 7.1, Alternatives of the WF3 License Renewal Application Environmental Report. Section 7.1 presents analysis of which of various electricity generating and non-generating options are reasonable for replacement of WF3s generating capacity, which is given as 1,188 MWe in Section 2.2.1.1 of the License Renewal Application Environmental Report and provides detailed discussions of the impacts of reasonable alternatives.
Estimates of generating capacity needed to replace WF3 for reasonable alternatives listed below a) Natural gas.
b) Coal with carbon capture sequestration.
c) New nuclear.
d) Combination of natural gas and biomass.
Land use requirements of solar generating facilities, natural gas discrete and combination alternatives, and coal-fired alternative.
Feedstock estimate for forest residues available in Louisiana in the area of WF3.
Feedstock estimate for municipal solid waste fired alternative.
Energy input estimates for natural gas-fired and coal-fired alternatives.
Annual air emissions for natural gas-fired, coal-fired alternatives, and municipal solid waste (MSW) burning biomass units of combination alternative.
Annual waste and byproduct estimates for coal-fired alternative.
2.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The results of the calculations are presented in the following tables. The calculation results were incorporated as appropriate into Section 7.1, Alternatives to the Proposed Action, of the WF3 License Renewal Environmental Report. The land use requirements for a solar replacement facility and feedstock estimates for a forest residue-fired and MSW- fired replacement facility were used to support that these facilities are unreasonable alternatives to replace WF3. Generating capacity calculations were used to determine the size of a plant that would be needed to replace the generating capacity of WF3. The emissions and waste estimates and land use requirements for the natural gas-fired and coal-fired alternatives were incorporated in Section 7.1 to describe their impacts and contrast them with those of the proposed action, continued operation of WF3. The emissions for a biomass component of the Combination Alternative were used to generally characterize the potential emissions from the biomass units in the absence of precise specifications of feedstock.
Estimates of Generating Capacity Needed for Reasonable Alternatives to Replace WF3 Natural Gas Coal w/CCS Nuclear Biomass DSM Capacity factors 0.87 0.85 0.9 0.83 Discrete alternative MWe 1,366 1,398 1,320 NA NA Combination alternative configuration 668 NA NA 200 441 Combination alternative MWe yield 581 NA NA 166 441 Notes: Capacity factors from EIA 2013a. CCS = carbon capture sequestration; DSM = demand side management.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 7 of 20 The Combination Alternative configuration was derived by (1) assigning the DSM value of 441 which was projected in an Entergy review of DSM programs (Entergy 2014) to bring the energy capacity needing to be filled by generation to 794 (1188-441 = 747), (2) selection of 4-50 MWe biomass units to provide generation from a renewable resource to provide approximately 20 to 25 percent of the generation capacity, (50-MWe sized biomass units were a component of the Combination Alternative devised by NRC for replacement of the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station in its license renewal EIS (NRC 2014), and (3) selection of a 668 MWe natural gas facility to make up the balance for the needed replacement energy capacity.
Land Use Requirements for Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) and Photovoltaic (PV) Solar Facilities CSP land use 1.5 acre/GWh/year 15,600 acres CSP land use 5.3 acre/GWh/year 55,200 acres PV land use 1.6 acre/GWh/year 16,700 acres PV land use 5.8 acre/GWh/year 60,400 acres Notes: Land use factors from NREL 2013.
Land Use Requirements for Natural Gas Alternative Discrete Alternative Combination Alternative Land for plant (acres) 59.1 28.9 Land for gas wells 4920 2400 (acres)
Notes: Land use factor for plant from NETL 2010a and for gas wells from NRC 1996.
Land Use Requirements for Coal-Fired Alternative Land for plant (acres) 115 1,350 to Land for mining (acres) 30,700 Notes: Land use factor for plant from NETL 2010b and for mining from NRC 1996 and NETL 2010b.
Feedstock Estimate for Forest Residues Available Per Parish Surrounding WF3 Forest residue energy content wet Btu/lb 5,140 Forest residue energy content dry Btu/lb 8,570 Dry metric tons (Tonnes) available per year per Louisiana parish 50,000 Tonnes to lb conversion factor 2,205 lbs 110,250,000 Btu/year from forest residue from one parish 9.44843E+11 Btu/hr 107,858,732.9 Watt to Btu/hr conversion factor 3.412142 MWe 31.61027087 Notes: Energy content factors from EPA 2007; dry tonnes available from NREL 2009.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 8 of 20 Feedstock Estimate for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Fired Alternative Average energy content of MSW (MWh per ton) 0.482122708 2012 MSW throughput (tons) 30,211,120 2012 MWh (net) 14,565,467 WF3 replacement energy (MWh/year) 10,400,000 Annual quantity (tons) of MSW needed for replacement 5,000,000 Notes: 2012 data from ERC 2014.
2.1 Energy Inputs and Air Emissions for Natural Gas and Coal-Fired Alternatives Air Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Alternative Combination Discrete Alternative Alternative Annual Emission Annual Amount Amount Gas consumption 94.0 Billion ft3 46.0 Billion ft3 Sulfur dioxidea 164 tons 79.9 tons Nitrogen oxidesb 625 tons 306 tons Carbon monoxide 1,440 tons 705 tons Particulate matter 317 tons 155 tons Nitrous oxide 144 tons 70.5 tons Volatile organic compounds 101 tons 49.4 tons Carbon dioxide 5.29 million tons 2.59 million tons
- a. Assumes sulfur content of 3.4%.
- b. Assumes 90 percent conversion in the Selective Catalytic Reduction equipment Air Emissions from Super-Critical Pulverized Coal Alternative Parameter Tons/year Annual coal consumption 7.84 million Sulfur oxides 2,670 Nitrogen oxides 1,410 Carbon monoxide 1,960 Filterable particulate matter 524 Particulates less than 10 microns in diameter 121 Carbon dioxide 13.7 million
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 9 of 20 Air Emission Estimates for Biomass Units Based on MSW-fired Units Average Emissions Biomass Units of Combination Alternative Plant Size (MWe) Annual (MWh) SO2 NOx CO2 Emission factors (lb/MWh) 200 1,752,000 1.2 6.7 1,016 Annual emission (tons) 1051.2 5,869.2 890,016 Notes: Emission factors for SO2 and NOx from EPA 2013; emission factors for CO2 from EPA 2014.
2.2 Annual Waste and Byproduct Estimates for Coal-Fired Alternate Solid Waste from Super-Critical Pulverized Coal Alternative Parameter Amount Annual SO2 generated subject to removal by scrubbers (excludes 61,000 tons per year the uncontrolled SOx emission)
Annual SO2 captured 58,000 tons per year Annual scrubber waste 158,000 tons per year Annual scrubber waste disposed based on 90 percent recycling 15,800 tons per year Annual ash generated 523,000 tons per year Annual ash disposed based on 50 percent recycling 262,000 tons per year Annual total waste disposed 277,000 tons per year Waste pile area (40-year period) assuming recycling 167 acres, 30 feet high
3.0 REFERENCES
EIA (U. S. Energy Information Administration). 2010. Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Plants 2009, DOE/EIA-0191(2010). December 2010. Retrieved from <http://www.eia.gov/electricity/cost_quality/> (accessed August 7, 2014).
EIA. 2013a. Levelized Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2013. January 2013.
Retrieved from <http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf> (accessed June 5, 2014).
EIA. 2013b. Electric Power Annual 2012. Retrieved from <http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/pdf/epa.pdf>
(accessed August 7, 2014).
EIA. 2014. Frequently Asked QuestionsHow much coal, natural gas, or petroleum is used to generate a kilowatt hour of electricity? Retrieved from <http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=667&t=2 (accessed August 7, 2014).
Entergy. 2014. EGSL and ELL 2012 DSM Potential Study Results, Prepared to Support Waterford 3 Relicensing Effort, Version 1.0. Produced by Planning Analysis Department of System Planning & Operations. July 11, 2014.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Factors Vol. 1. Stationary Point and Area Sources, Fifth Ed.
Chapter 1: External Combustion Sources, Section 1.1 Bituminous and Subbituminous Coal Combustion Supplement E, September 1998. Retrieved from <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/index.html> (accessed August 18, 2014).
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 10 of 20 EPA. 2000. AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors Vol. 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources. Fifth Ed., Chapter 3: Stationary Internal Combustion Sources, Section 3.1 Stationary Gas Turbines for Electricity Generation, April 2000. Retrieved from <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42> (accessed November 7, 2014).
EPA. 2007. Biomass Resources. In Biomass CHP Catalog, v.1.1, U.S. EPA Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
Partnership. Retrieved from <http://www.epa.gov/chp/documents/biomass_chp_catalog.pdf> (accessed July 10, 2014).
EPA. 2013. "Municipal Solid Waste, Electricity from Municipal Solid Waste." April 2013. Retrieved from
<http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/municipal-sw.html> (accessed September 3, 2013).
EPA. 2014. Air Emissions from MSW Combustion Facilities. January 2014. Retrieved from
<http://www.epa.gov/solidwaste/nonhaz/municipal/wte/airem.htm#1> (accessed August 12, 2014).
ERC (Energy Recovery Council). 2014. The 2014 ERC Directory of Waste-to-Energy Facilities. Retrieved from
<http://www.wte.org/userfiles/files/ERC_2014_Directory.pdf> (accessed July 11, 2014).
FHA (Federal Highway Administration). 2000. User Guidelines for Waste and Byproduct Materials in Pavement Construction, Coal Bottom Ash/Boiler Slag. Retrieved from
<http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/structures/97148/cbabs1.cfm> (accessed August 8, 2014).
NETL (National Energy Technology Laboratory). 2010a. Life Cycle Analysis: Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) Power Plant, DOE/NETL-403-110509. Retrieved from <http://netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/publications/details?pub=6c2fe989-d368-4bf5-8e5f-3bd85ff79f8f> (accessed August 26, 2014).
NETL. 2010b. Life Cycle Analysis: Supercritical Pulverized Coal (SCPC) Power Plant, DOE/NETL-403-110609.
Retrieved from <http://netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/publications/details?pub=0bd9660d-4e1f-401b-a4eb-1642cdba6fc8> (accessed August 26, 2014).
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1996. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. NUREG-1437. Vol. 1, Chapter 8. May 1996.
NRC. 2014. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 50, Regarding Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, NUREG-1437 Supplement 50. Washington, D.C. November 2014.
NREL (National Renewable Laboratory). 2009. Biomass Resources of the United StatesForest Residues.
Retrieved from <http://www.nrel.gov/gis/biomass.html> (accessed July 11, 2014).
NREL. 2013. "Land-Use Requirements for Solar Power Plants in the United States." Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-56290. June 2013.
4.0 ASSUMPTIONS The natural gas-fired alternative would be a natural gas-fired combined-cycle (NGCC) plant, consisting of multiple combustion turbines, heat recovery steam generator, and steam turbine generator assembled in appropriate power train configurations to produce a net electrical power virtually equivalent to the 1,188 net MWe generated by WF3.
Key inputs for the NGCC alternative are provided in Section 7.0.
The coal-fired alternative would a super-critical coal-fired generation (SCPC) plant, configured to produce net electrical power virtually equivalent to the 11,188 net MWe generated by WF3.
Key inputs for the SCPC alternative are provided in Section 7.0.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 11 of 20 The combination alternative involves the implementation of DSM programs for an annual reduction in demand and construction and operation of NGCC units and biomass units at the Waterford site.
The biomass units of the combination alternative would be capable of using a variety of biomass fuels such as wood waste, crop residues, energy crops, and MSW. The air emissions calculations are based on MWS emissions due to availability of average emissions from EPA publications.
5.0 DESIGN INPUTS See Section 4.0.
6.0 METHODOLOGY ENERCON used capacity and emissions factors and inputs as detailed in Section 7.0 that were prepared by or adopted by federal agencies for prepared approximate estimates of environmental emissions and energy input demands. The calculations are used for relative comparison of alternatives. The methodology for preparing the calculations is detailed within Section 7.0.
7.0 CALCULATIONS 7.1 Generating Capacity Estimates for Reasonable Alternatives to Replace WF3 Generating Capacity Formulas and Inputs A B C D E F G 1 WF3 net generating capacity 1,188 (MWe) 2 Natural Gas Coal w/CCS Nuclear Biomass DSM 3 Capacity factors (-) 0.87 0.85 0.9 0.83 4 Discrete alternative MWe =$D1/B3 =$D1/C3 =$D1/D3 NA NA 5 Combination alternative 722 NA NA 200 441 Total configuration 6 Combined alternative MWe
=B5*B3 NA NA =E5*E3 441 =B6+E6=F6 yield Notes: Capacity factors from EIA 2013a. CCS = carbon capture sequestration; DSM = demand side management.
Results Natural Gas Coal w/CCS Nuclear Biomass DSM Discrete alternative MWe 1,366 1,398 1,320 NA NA Combination alternative configuration 668 NA NA 200 441 (MWe)
Combination alternative MWe yield 581 NA NA 166 441
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 12 of 20 7.2 Natural Gas Alternative Calculations 7.2.1 Land Use Requirements for Natural Gas Alternative Formulas and Inputs A B C 1 Discrete alternative Combination alternative 2 Plant size (MWe) 1,366 668 3 Plant land need factor m2 per MWh 0.02 4 Gas wells land use factor acres/MW =3,600/1,000 5 Land for plant (acres) =(B2*24*365)*B3*.0002471 =(C2*24*365)*B3*.0002471 6 Land for gas wells (acres) =B2*B4 =C2*B4 Notes: Land use factor for plant land from NETL 2010a and for gas wells from NRC 1996; see Section 7.2.1 for calculation of plant size.
Results Discrete Alternative Combination Alternative Land for plant (acres) 59.1 28.9 Land for gas wells 4920 2400 (acres) 7.2.2 NGCC Annual Air Emissions Key inputs for NGCC air emissions Characteristic Basis Total size = 1,366 MWe for discrete alternative Calculated as replacement for WF3s generating capacity and 668 MWe for combination alternative of 1,188 based on 87% capacity factor (EIA 2013). (See Section 7.1 above)
Fuel type = natural gas Fuel heating average value = 1,023Btu/ft3 EIA 2014 Heat rate = 8,039 Btu/kWh EIA 2014 Capacity factor = 0.87% EIA 2013, Table 1 Air emission factors EPA 2000, Tables 3.1-1 and 3.1-2a Btu/kWh = British thermal unit per kilowatt hour CO2 = carbon dioxide Btu/ft3 = British thermal unit per cubic foot MMBtu = million British thermal unit MWe = megawatts, electric
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 13 of 20 Formulas, Emission Factors, Results Annual gas Plant size in MWe x Heat rate, 8,039 Btu/kWh x 1,000 x (1/ Fuel heating average value =
consumption (ft3) 1,023 Btu/ft3 ) x hours in a year Annual MMBtu = (annual gas consumption x fuel heating average value)/1,000,000 CO2 NOX CO PM SO2 VOC N2O Emission factor for Processed 110 0.13 0.03 0.0066 0.0034 .0.0021 0.003 Natural Gas (lbs/MMBtu)
Annual emissions
= (emission factor) x (annual MMBtu)/2000 (tons)
Notes:
CO2 = carbon dioxide; NOx = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; PM = total filterable particulates; SOx = oxides of sulfur; VOC = volatile organic carbon; NO2 - nitrous oxide.
Results Combination Discrete Alternative Alternative Annual Emission Annual Amount Amount Gas consumption 94.0 Billion ft3 46.0 Billion ft3 Sulfur dioxidea 164 tons 79.9 tons Nitrogen oxidesb 625 tons 306 tons Carbon monoxide 1,440 tons 705 tons Particulate matter 317 tons 155 tons Nitrous oxide 144 tons 70.5 tons Volatile organic compounds 101 tons 49.4 tons Carbon dioxide 5.29 million tons 2.59 million tons
- a. Assumes sulfur content of 3.4%.
- b. Assumes 90 percent conversion in the Selective Catalytic Reduction equipment
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 14 of 20 7.3 Coal-Fired Alternative Calculations 7.3.1 Land Use Requirements for Coal-Fired Alternative Formulas and Inputs A B 1 Plant size (Units) =1,398 2 Plant land need factor m2 per MWh =0.038 3 Mining land use factor = 0.0000192 m2 =22,000/1,000 per kg coal acres/MW 4 Land for plant (acres) =(B1*24*365)*B2*.0002471 5 Land for mining =annual coal =B1*B3 consumption kg (see Section 7.3.2) X 40 yrs X land use factor X conversion to acres Notes: Land use factors from NRC 1996 and NETL 2010b.
Conversion of tons to kg is tons X 907.18486 = kg.
Conversion of m2 to acres is m2 X .0002471 = acres.
Results Plant size (MWe) 1,398 Plant land need factor m2 per MWh 0.038 Mining and waste disposal land use factor acres/MW 22 Land for plant (acres) 115 1,350 to Land for mining and waste (acres) 30,700
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 15 of 20 7.3.2 SCPC Annual Air Emissions Key Inputs for the SCPC Air Emissions Calculations Characteristic Basis Total size = 1,398 MWe Calculated as replacement for WF3s generating capacity of 1,188 based on 85% capacity factor (EIA 2013). (See Section 7.1 above.)
Boiler type = pulverized coal, tangentially fired, Minimizes nitrogen oxide emissions dry-bottom, New Source Performance Standard (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3)
Fuel type = subbituminous (Powder River Basin) Typical for coal used in Louisiana and lignite (Louisiana) (EIA 2010, Table 15)
Approximately 78% = subbituminous (Powder River Basin) and 22% lignite (Louisiana)
Fuel heating average value = 8,201 Btu/lb Coal used in LA electricity generation (EIA 2010, Table 15)
Fuel ash content by weight = 6.69 percent Coal used in LA electricity generation (EIA 2010, Table 15)
Fuel sulfur content by weight = 0.39 percent Coal used in LA electricity generation (EIA 2010, Table 15)
Uncontrolled SOx emission = 35S lb/ton Typical for pulverized coal, tangentially fired, dry-bottom, Uncontrolled NOx emission = 7.2 lb/ton new source performance standard Uncontrolled CO emission = 0.5 lb/ton (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3)
Heat rate = 10,498 Btu/kWh Average operating heat rate for coal (EIA 2013b, Table 8.1)
Capacity factor = 0.85 EIA 2013a NOx control = low NOx burners, overfire air and Best available selective catalytic reduction (95 percent (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2) reduction)
Particulate Material, filterable (PMf) = 10A lb/ton Typical for pulverized coal, tangentially fired, dry-bottom of ash (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-4).
Particulate Material (less than 10 microns) PM10 A" represents factor based on fuel ash content by weight.
= 2.3A lb/ton of ash Particulate control = fabric filters (baghouse - Best available for minimizing particulate emissions 99.8 percent removal efficiency) (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-6)
SOx control = Wet scrubber - lime (95 percent Best available for minimizing SOx emissions removal efficiency) (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-1)
CO2 emission - average of bituminous and EIA 2013b, Table A.3 subbituminous coal = 212.7 lb/MMBtu Btu/kWh = British thermal unit per kilowatt hour MWe = megawatts, electric Btu/lb = British thermal unit per pound NOx = nitrogen oxides CO = carbon monoxide NSPS = New Source Performance Standard CO2 = carbon dioxide PMf = total filterable particulates lb = pound PM10 = particulates having diameter <10 microns MMBtu = million British thermal unit S = sulfur MW = megawatt SOx = oxides of sulfur
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 16 of 20 Formulas and Inputs A B 8 Average Btu content of coal used in LA 8,201 per BTU/lb (EIA 2010) sub-biuminous 9 Power plant heat rate Btu/kWh 10,498 (EIA 2013, Table 8.1) 10 Annual coal consumption (tons) =((((1453*B9*1,000)/B8)*24*365)/2,000) 11 SOx emissions (tons) =((B10*0.39*35)/2,000)*((100-95)/100) 12 NOx emissions (tons) =((B10*7.2*(1/2,000)*((100-95)/100)))
13 CO emissions (tons) =(B10*0.5)/2,000 14 CO2 emissions factor =((B10*212.7)/1,000,000)*8,201 (EIA 2013, Table A.3) (tons) 15 PM filterable (tons) =(B10*(6.69*10)/2,000)*((100-99.8)/100) 16 PM10 (tons) =(B10*(6.69*2.3)/2,000)*((100-99.8)/100)
Results Parameter Tons/year Annual coal consumption 7.84 million Sulfur oxides 2,670 Nitrogen oxides 1,410 Carbon monoxide 1,960 Filterable particulate matter 524 Particulates less than 10 microns in diameter 121 Carbon dioxide 13.7 million
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 17 of 20 7.3.3 SCPC Annual Solid Waste Formulas and Inputs A B C 18 Annual Generation Accounting for Recycling 19 SO2 generated Annual tons coal consumption X fuel NA sulfur content, 0.39% X (atomic weight of SO2, 64.1/atomic weight of Sulfur, 32.1) 20 SO2 removed by scrubbers =Annual SOx generation X sulfur NA removal efficiency, 95/100) 21 Ash generated =Annual tons coal consumption X fuel =Ash generated X 50%
ash content, 6.69% X particulate removal recycling efficiency, 99.8%
22 Lime consumption as scrubber =Annual SOx generation X (atomic NA media weight CaO, 56.1 / atomic weight of SO2, 64.1) 23 Calcium sulfate =Annual SOx generation X (atomic NA weight CaSO 2H O, 172 / atomic weight of SO2, 64.1) 24 Scrubber waste = Annual Calcium sulfate + scrubbing =Scrubber waste X 10%
media carryover calculated as Annual (90% recycling assumed) lime consumption X 100% - SOx removal efficiency, 95%)
25 Mass of waste disposed =Ash generated +Scrubber waste =Ash not recycled +
Scrubber waste not recycled 26 Total volume of scrubber waste Scrubber waste (tons/year) Time(years) 2000(lb/ton) =Scrubber waste ft3 X 10%
(ft3) (90% recycling assumed)
Density(lb / ft 3) 27 Total volume of ash (ft3) AshGen(tons/year) Time(years) 2000(lb/ton) =Ash generated ft3 X 50%
recycling DensityofAsh(lb / ft 3) 28 Total volume of solid waste (ft3) =volume of scrubber waste + volume of =volume of scrubber waste ash after recycling + volume of ash after recycling 29 Waste pile area (acres) = (total volume of solid waste in ft3 / = (total volume of solid 30 ft) X 0.00002296. waste after recycling in ft3 /
30 ft) X 0.00002296.
Notes:
Density of CaSO4*2H2O is 144.8 lb/ft3.
Density of ash is based on coal bottom ash, 100 lb/ft3 (FHA 2000).
Conversion of sq ft to acres is 0.00002296.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 18 of 20 Results Parameter Amount Annual SO2 generated 61,000tons per year Annual SO2 captured 58,000 tons per year Annual scrubber waste 158,000 tons per year Annual scrubber waste disposed based on 90 percent 15,800 tons per year recycling Annual ash generated 523,000 tons per year Annual ash disposed based on 50 percent recycling 262,000 tons per year Annual total waste disposed 277,000 tons per year Waste pile area (40-year period) assuming recycling 167 acres, 30 feet high 7.4 Calculations for Biomass Alternatives 7.4.1 Feedstock Estimates for Wood Waste Alternative Formulas and Inputs A B 1 Forest residue energy content wet Btu/lb 5,140 2 Forest residue energy content dry Btu/lb 8,570 3 Dry metric tons (tonnes) available per year per 50,000 Louisiana parish 4 Metric tons (Tonnes) to pound conversion factor 2,205 5 Pounds per year =B3*B4 6 Btu/year from forest residue from one parish =B5*B2 7 Btu/hr =B6/(24*365) 8 Watt to Btu/hr conversion factor 3.412142 9 MWe =(B7/B8)/1,000,000 Notes: Energy content factors from EPA 2007; dry metric tons (tonnes) available from NREL 2009.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 19 of 20 Results Forest residue energy content wet Btu/lb 5,140 Forest residue energy content dry Btu/lb 8,570 Dry metric tons (tonnes) available per year per 50,000 Louisiana parish Metric tons (Tonnes) to lb conversion factor 2,205 Pounds per year 110,250,000 Btu/year from forest residue from one parish 9.44843E+11 Btu/hour 107,858,732.9 Watt to Btu/hour conversion factor 3.412142 MWe 31.61027087 7.4.2 Feedstock Estimates for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Fired Alternative Formulas and Inputs A B 1 Average energy content of MSW (MWh/ton) =B3/B2 2 2012 MSW throughput (tons) 30,211,120 3 2012 MWh (net) 14,565,467 4 WF3 replacement energy (MWh/yr) =1188*24*365 5 Annual quantity (tons) of MSW needed for replacement =B4*B1 Notes: 2012 data from ERC 2014.
Results Average energy content of MSW (MWh/ton) 0.482122708 2012 MSW throughput (tons) 30211120 2012 MWh (net) 14565467 WF3 replacement energy (MWh/yr) 10406880 Annual quantity (tons) of MSW needed for replacement 5,020 7.4.3 Air Emission Estimates for Biomass Units Based on MSW-Fired Units Average Emissions Formulas and Inputs A B C D E 9 SO2 NOx CO2 10 Plant size (MWe) 200 11 Emission factors 1.2 6.7 1,016 (lb/MWh) 12 Annual MWh =B10*(24*365) 13 Annual emissions (tons) =(B12*C11)/2,000 =(D11*B12)/2,000 =(E11*B12)/2,000 Notes: Emission factors for SO2 and NOx from EPA 2013; emission factors for CO2 from EPA 2014.
CO2 = carbon dioxide; NOx = nitrogen oxides; SO2= sulfur dioxide.
CALC. NO. ENTGWF090-CALC-002 CALCULATION COVER SHEET REV. 2 PAGE NO. 20 of 20 Results Plant Size (MWe) Annual (MWh) SO2 NOx CO2 Emission factors (lb/MWh) 200 1,752,000 1.2 6.7 1,016 Annual emissions (tons) 1,051.2 5,869.2 890,016 7.5 Land Use Requirements for Concentrated Power Solar (CSP) and Photovoltaic (PV) Solar Facilities Formulas and Inputs A B 1 MW to GWh/year =B2*B3 2 Hours/year =24*365 3 MW to GW =1188/1,000 4 CSP land use 1.5 acre/GWh/year =B1*1.5 5 CSP land use 5.3 acre/GWh/year =B1*5.3 6 PV land use 1.6 acre/GWh/year =B1*1.6 7 PV land use 5.8 acre/GWh/year =B1*5.8 Notes: Land use factors from NREL 2013.
Results CSP land use 1.5 acre/GWh/year 15,600 acres CSP land use 5.3 acre/GWh/year 55,200 acres PV land use 1.6 acre/GWh/year 16,700 acres PV land use 5.8 acre/GWh/year 60,400 acres 8.0 APPENDICES None.