1 / 10

Oil-fired Units

Oil-fired Units. March 5, 2002 Washington, D.C. Bill Maxwell EPA/ESD/CG. Where do we stand on oil?. Profile of the sector Status of the data What the data tell us Where to go from here. Limitations of the profile data. Data not as easy to identify as for coal units

hedva
Download Presentation

Oil-fired Units

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Oil-fired Units March 5, 2002 Washington, D.C. Bill Maxwell EPA/ESD/CG

  2. Where do we stand on oil? • Profile of the sector • Status of the data • What the data tell us • Where to go from here

  3. Limitations of the profile data • Data not as easy to identify as for coal units • More multiple fueled units • Not as much segregation as to what oil is burned

  4. Profile of the oil-fired sector • Used four data files • EPA E-GRID2000 Boiler and Generator files (data for 1999) • EPA Score00 files - Emissions scorecard data for 2000 • EIA Tables 8 and 20 (data for 1999) • Data posted on website as one file • Databases do not agree 100%

  5. Profile -- continued • Estimate on the order of 150 oil-fired units at 70 facilities • Estimated 137 facilities in Final Report to Congress • Has been a contraction of the sector • Located in 18 States and the District of Columbia • Size appears to range from ~270 - ~9,000 MMBtu/hr heat input

  6. Profile -- concluded • Controls • From Final Report to Congress, ~1/3 use ESP • No unit found with FGD system • Approximately 10-20% may use distillate oil • Dual-fuel capability • Difficult to determine as the listing of fuels is not consistent from file to file • Gas/oil firing significantly more prevalent than oil/coal firing

  7. Status of the data • Have tests from 13 units, all residual oil-fired • Inlet/outlet on 4 units • 3 ESP units • 1 pilot-scale FF • 1 SCR • With/without NOx control on 1 unit • Outlet only on 8 units • 20 tests total • 16 tests essentially uncontrolled • 4 tests with PM control for metals

  8. Assumptions going in • Nickel is HAP of greatest concern • CAA section 112(b)(1) lists “nickel compounds” -- not individual species • FF is not realistic control for oil-fired units • PM tends to be “sticky” • Fouls bags and presents safety hazard • Not suitable for MACT floor basis • Leaves ESP as only demonstrated control

  9. Finding the floor • More than 30 units in the sector so could use top-performing 12 percent of data • Top 12 percent would be top 2 units • Top 2 units are ESPs with reported PM efficiencies of 92 and 77 percent • Floor set based on performance of these units • Looking at individual runs will establish variability • Some uncontrolled units would be able to meet level established, depending on the metals content of the oil fired

  10. Where we go from here • Topics for further investigation • Availability of “low metal” oil • Impact on oil supply and quality of Phase II sulfur rules • Use of PM as surrogate for metals • Final floor numbers • Additional data made available in timely manner would be considered

More Related