"Coal is base load generation king in the U.S."

August 10, 2010 - Tuesday morning's keynote session at COAL-GEN 2010 featured three informative speakers that opened up continued dialogue between the delegates across the exhibition floor. James Wood from the Department of Energy, Dr. Robert Wayland from the Environmental Protection Agency and Penn State Social Science Professor Frank Clemente all delivered insightful speeches on not only the current and future status of coal-fired generation, but energy as a whole.

As the U.S. population grows the need for electricity will continue to rise and coal is going to be in the mix of power generation. Prof. Clemente described during his presentation that by the year 2030 four billion people globally will get 40 percent of their electricity from coal-based generation. Just here in the U.S. coal represents almost 50 percent of the total power generation. But as the power providers continue to burn coal and companies look to build new coal-fired plants, there are regulations in place to cut down on emissions. EPA is working on several National Air Quality Standards that will reduce the amount of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter released. EPA has also proposed to strengthen the 8-hour primary ozone standard to a level within the range of 0.060-0.070 parts per million (ppm) to protect public health. And for companies operating coal-fired plants they may have to comply with the new standards being set forth by EPA.

EPA has created an Integrated Utility Strategy that has the vision of an electric power sector in a clean energy economy. All pieces of the larger puzzle are the newly proposed Transport Rule that covers 31 states and D.C., utility MACT (maximum achievable control technology), New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) along with regulations from the Office of Water and Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. But retrofitting plants to meet new standards is not cheap.

"It's sure true that if coal based generation is going to stay as base load in the U.S. the technologies that will need to be put in place for carbon capture and sequestration will have to be competitive in capital and operating costs," said Wood.

And Dr. Wayland stated that in order to avoid wasting investment and stranding assets the process has to be completed in a sequence and timely manner.

“There is new data coming in now to be used in the new MACT rule,” said Wayland.
And while companies will attempt to comply with new EPA standards in the future, Prof. Clemente insisted that coal is the answer for electricity generation in the U.S. Currently over 20 states get 45 percent of their power generation from what Prof. Clemente described as an energy secured, versatile fuel.

So what does the next 20 years look like for coal generation? No one can be so sure to say that they know exactly where the industry will stand but both Wood and Wayland stated that by the 2030 timeframe coal-fired plants should be in the mid-40 range for efficiency and be achieving zero emissions. When Power Engineering Chief Editor asked Wayland if zero emission is achievable, the answer was “by 2020 to 2030, yes it is.”

And while natural gas plants continue to come online in the U.S. along with renewables, "coal is base load generation king in the U.S,” said Wayland.

Bruce Mansfield Power Plant Tour

August 9, 2010 - To kick off COAL-GEN 2010, Monday morning I had the privilege of touring FirstEnergy's largest coal-fired power plant, the Bruce Mansfield station in Shippingport, Pa. The Bruce Mansfield plant is one of 7 fossil plants that FirstEnergy owns and operates and almost 40 COAL-GEN delegates took the 45 minute bus ride to attend the tour as well.

The three unit 2,460 MW station is situated along the Ohio River about 25 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. Unit 1, which was completed in 1976, generates 830 MW. Unit 2 came online a year later and also generates 830 MW. And 800 MW capacity Unit 3 came online in 1980. Upon arrival the generous hosts at FirstEnergy greeted us with a short introductory video and the tour was underway. Our tour guides, Jeff and Doug, gave us the full tour through the turbine room, the control room, past the pulverizers and boilers and even up to the roof of the plant. The entire tour was very informative but my personal favorite was getting out onto the roof of the plant. Although going up to the 17th floor was hotter than anything I have ever experienced, including humid Oklahoma summers, the view from the top was spectacular.

From the roof we could see the operation of the plant. As well as a never-ending view down the Ohio River. On the river sit coal unloading stations for barges that deliver about 3,000 tons of coal per hour. The birds'-eye-view also gave us the opportunity to see the huge coal yard. A large coal yard is needed because the Bruce Mansfield plant burns nearly 24,000 tons of coal per day and more than 7 million tons annually.

Looking down on the air quality control systems (AQCS) we had the opportunity to see the scrubbers and absorbers between the boilers and the 950-foot tall chimney for Units 1 and 2. Unit 3 is equipped with with a precipiatator/absorber system consisting of four electrostatic precipitators, four induced draft fans, five parallel absorber modules and a 600-foot tall stack. All three units use Selective Catalytic Reduction systems to eliminate about 90 percent of nitrogen oxides from the flue gases. And with the use of the AQCS the Bruce Mansfield station removes 92 percent of sulfur dioxide from boiler flue gas.

A lot of people tend to refer to power plants by the "huge, clouds of smoke" coming from enormous towers. Although those plumes are not smoke, the towers are large and are attached to a plant. And the Bruce Mansfield plant does use cooling towers. The plant uses about 70 million gallons of water per day from the Ohio River. Three 410-foot cooling towers reduce the temperature of about 310,000 gallons of water per minute by 27 degrees. Cooling towers are so synonymous with power plants that it was only appropriate to take the group picture standing underneath the large structures.

I can say the tour of the Bruce Mansfield plant was enjoyable for all participants, including myself. The 40 delegates from all over the globe were very enthusiastic about the operations of the plant and that made being the technical tour leader that much more enjoyable.

The U.S. nuclear renaissance coming to an end already?

August, 4 2010 - While the United States nuclear industry is continuing on its path to expand, there seems to be a roadblock for some companies. Cost. The capital cost for nuclear power plants is not cheap and this had led to some companies cutting back spending and even looking at canceling planned new nuclear development.

NRG Energy Inc. said it would cut spending on two new reactors planned at the South Texas Project from $7.5 million a month in July to $1.5 million a month. But NRG isn’t alone. Constellation Energy Group announced in late July it would cut spending on the planned Calvert Cliffs III reactor in Maryland. Both are waiting on a decision from the Department of Energy for a federal loan guarantee. Constellation has even stated it could completely shut down operations in Maryland by the end of the year if it hadn’t received a federal guarantee.

“This shows you the difficulty in this market and how important the loan program is to supporting the projects and getting them off the ground,” said Leslie Kass, Nuclear Energy Institute senior director of business policy and programs.

Since the DOE awarded Southern Co. an $8.3 billion loan guarantee in February for the Plant Vogtle project, NRG Energy, Constellation and Scana Corp. have been in competition for the remaining guarantee. DOE only has about $10 billion remaining of guaranteed money, enough for only one project.

“There is a challenge since they only have the funding for one project and it is very difficult to select just one when they are all so good,” said Kass. “And splitting it (the only current remaining loan guarantee) three ways does nobody any good.’

But Southern Co.’s loan was awarded almost six months ago. Why the holdup for the next announcement?

The DOE said that before a conditional commitment can be offered each project is thoroughly reviewed by the DOE’s Loan Program Office from a financial, environmental, legal and feasibility standpoint. While the DOE reviews each project, each company waits.

And those companies are waiting on the conditional commitment, not the money. But Kass thinks that a conditional commitment is enough to give them faith to go forward but “if they don’t have a clear path to financing, which is extremely difficult in a merchant market right now, they simply have to be prudent.”

And the DOE said their first priority is to minimize risk to taxpayers.

But being in a rate regulated market, Scana is different form NRG and Constellation. Scana can recover financing costs and return on equity as they go through the public service commission. The loan guarantee program improves cash flow and helps with ratings and its can give them another mechanism for support that is not available in the merchant markets.

“This is a good program for them because it can help save money for rate payers, but it is not as essential as it is for merchant plants,” said Kass.

Having already spent about $1 billion, Kass said Scana is going to continue to move forward with the already in progress construction as they wait on both DOE’s decision on the loan guarantee and NRC’s decision on a license.

As stated, NRG will continue to spend, but just not a much. If Constellation does not receive the loan guarantee, could this be the first company to put the brakes on the nuclear renaissance in the U.S.? Or will Congress increase funding levels for the loan guarantee program?

As the industry as a whole waits to see what happens next, DOE did tell me “we hope to make a nuclear loan announcement soon.”