Clean Power Plan - Final Rule Overview Mark Leath, PE Prepared for - Missouri Air Conservation Commission September 24, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EPA’S DRAFT GUIDELINES TO STATES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF STATE 111(d) PLANS MIDWESTERN POWER SECTOR COLLABORATIVE JUNE 17, 2014 FRANZ LITZ PROGRAM CONSULTANT.
Advertisements

EPA’s Clean Power Plan Proposed Rules for Reducing GHG Emissions from Power Plants Presentation to ACPAC June 16,
EDDIE TERRILL AIR QUALITY DIVISION DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AUGUST 21, 2014 EPA’s 111(d) Clean Power Plan Rule: A DEQ Perspective.
EPA Clean Power Plan. Emission Targets StateInterim Goal Final Goal 2030 AECI 2013 Net Rate Interim Reduction Final Reduction Missouri 1,6211,5441, %21.3%
Clean and Affordable Energy Future in Northwest U.S. Nancy Hirsh NW Energy Coalition October 1, 2014.
Update on EPA Activities MOPC July 15-16, Current Known Impacts –Retirements –De-ratings –Outage Impact Studies Proposed Clean Power Plan 2 Topics.
Proposed EPA Requirements for Existing Power Plants under FCAA 111(d) Erik Hendrickson Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced.
EPA Rulemakings to Set GHG Emission Standards for Power Plants National Hydropower Association Webinar Kyle Danish February 14, 2014.
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Indiana Energy Association September 11, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management.
EPA’s Clean Power Plan Rule:
CHEAPER AND CLEANER: Using the Clean Air Act to Sharply Reduce Carbon Pollution from Existing Power Plants, Delivering Health, Environmental and Economic.
1 Regulatory Concepts Related to the Control of NOx and SOx From Fossil- fired Electric Generating Units Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee Meeting.
Clean Power Plan EPA’s Clean Power Plan An overview of EPA’s proposed rules and the implications for the future Presented by: David Crews SVP - Power Supply.
Energy Efficiency in the Clean Power Plan Opportunities for Virginia Mary Shoemaker Research Assistant Spring 2015 VAEEC Meeting May 11, 2015.
Pennsylvania Draft Regulations for the Control of Mercury From Coal-fired Electric Generating Units Allegheny Section- AWMA Air Quality Issues Workshop.
Star Symposium 2013 The Changing Reality of Energy Development Jeffery LaFleur, Vice President Generation Assets APCO/KYPCO October 22, 2013.
CLEAN ENERGY TO PROMOTE CLEAN AIR & IMPROVE ELECTRICITY PRICE STABILITY Alden Hathaway, ERT Debra Jacobson, GWU Law School April 6, 2006.
OPTIONS FOR STATES IMPLEMENTING CARBON STANDARDS FOR POWER PLANTS ARKANSAS STAKEHOLDER MEETING MAY 28, 2014 FRANZ LITZ PROGRAM CONSULTANT.
EPA Energy Regulation Discussion Featuring If you experience any technical difficulties, please contact Anna Lemp at Clare Foran.
EPA’s Final Clean Power Plan: Overview Steve Burr AQD, SIP Section September 1, 2015.
EPA’s Proposed Clean Power Plan U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The Regulatory Assistance Project 50 State Street, Suite 3 Montpelier, VT Phone: web: Tracking Renewable Energy for.
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Indiana State Bar Association Utility Law Section September 4, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner IN Department.
EPA’s Proposed Federal Clean Power Plan Steve Burr AQD, SIP Section October 6, 2015.
CLEAN POWER PLAN. OVERVIEW The final rule released in August 2015: Sets first-ever limits on carbon pollution from power plants Sets achievable standards.
EPA’s Clean Power Plan: Compliance Options and Engagement Opportunities Vicki Arroyo, Executive Director Gabe Pacyniak, Mitigation Program Manager Lissa.
EPA’s Proposed Clean Power Plan House Committee on Natural Resources and Environment February 12, 2015 Tegan B. Treadaway Assistant Secretary Office of.
Electric Utility Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Initial Rule Development Workshop August 22, 2007 Department of Environmental Protection Division of.
California Energy Commission IEPR Lead Commissioner Workshop University of California, Irvine August 17,
Indiana Energy Conference EPA Clean Power Plan—111(d) November 13, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE, Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management.
Massachusetts Multi-pollutant Power Plant Regulations Sharon Weber Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection EPA Utility MACT Working Group.
CLEAN POWER PLAN PROPOSAL Reducing Carbon Pollution From Existing Power Plants Kerry Drake,Associate Director Air Division, US EPA, Region 9 California.
June 26, Background of Federal GHG Regulation Supreme Court determines greenhouse gases (GHGs) are “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act U.S.
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) CAIR Model Cap and Trade Rules: Unique Elements and Flexibilities Office of Air and Radiation March 2005.
Clean Power Plan Handbook For the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates | ©2015 Synapse Energy Economics Inc.
Overview of EPA’s Final Clean Air Act Section 111(d) Emissions Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Electric Generating Units Overview.
Clean Power Plan: Overview of Proposed Federal Plan and Model Rules Clean Power Plan: Overview of Proposed Federal Plan and Model Rules Air Quality Committee.
Clean Power Plan – Now What? OCTOBER 16, 2015 FALL PR-MR & MARKETING MEETING.
1 Consideration of Final Rulemaking Clean Air Interstate Rule Environmental Quality Board Meeting Harrisburg, PA December 18, 2007 Joyce E. Epps Director,
NTAA Webinar 10/15/2015. Summary 2 Climate change is a threat in the U.S. -- We are already feeling the dangerous and costly effects of a changing climate.
National Tribal Air Association Webinar October 15, 2015.
Clean Power Plan TENNESSEE MINING CONFERENCE AGENDA November 3, 2015 John Myers Director, Environmental Policy and Regulatory Affairs.
Clean Power Plan Compliance Pathways
EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Rules NOVEMBER 6, Overview Greater stringency overall: 32 percent vs. 30 percent reductions by 2030; setting the stage post-2030.
EPA Workshop for Environmental Justice Communities December, 2015.
©2010 Foley & Lardner LLP EPRC 5 EPI’s 5 th Annual Energy Policy Research Conference Will The Clean Power Plan Make It Through The Courts? September 11,
FINAL CLEAN POWER PLAN Before the Virginia Energy Efficiency Council Virginia Department of Environmental Quality November 12, 2015.
Proposed Federal Plan & Model Trading Rules Training for Tribal Communities Farmington, New Mexico | Tuba City, Arizona December 7 – 10, 2015.
CLEAN POWER PLAN: Opportunities for Energy Efficiency in Affordable Housing Todd Nedwick Housing and Energy Efficiency Policy Director National Housing.
Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) Training for Tribal Communities Farmington, New Mexico | Tuba City, Arizona December 7 – 10, 2015.
1 Special Information Session on USEPA’s Carbon Rules & Clean Air Act Section 111 North Carolina Division of Air Quality Special Information Session on.
EPA Workshop for Environmental Justice Communities December, 2015.
Impacts of Environmental Regulations in the ERCOT Region Dana Lazarus Planning Analyst, ERCOT January 26, 2016.
Clean Air Act Section 111 WESTAR Meeting Presented by Lisa Conner U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation November 6, 2013.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
111D OPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MISSOURI David Weiskopf Sustainable Energy Fellow Natural Resources Defense Council October 28 th.
Statewide Collaborative – EW Role of Energy Efficiency in Section 111(d) Compliance October 21, 2014.
Missouri Public Service Commission Workshop on EPA’s Clean Power Plan February 4, 2016 Andy Knott Sierra Club Beyond Coal Campaign
Kansas City Power & Light and KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations – Suggestions for Chapter 22 Revisions Missouri Public Service Commission Meeting Aug 31,
Clean Power Plan EW Tim Wilson Director of Energy Supply Services.
© 2015 Haynes and Boone, LLP Overview of the EPA Clean Power Plan Suzanne Beaudette Murray February 19, 2016 Tulane Environmental Law Summit.
Clean Power Plan Kyra Moore Director, Air Pollution Control Program Prepared for: Midwest Energy Policy Conference October 6, 2015.
 Final Plan published on October 23, 2015  Employs different method to develop state targets  Uses the proposal’s first three building blocks ◦ BB1.
The Clean Power Plan.  Standards of Performance for GHG Emissions from New, Modified, and Reconstructed Stationary Sources (111(b)).  Carbon Pollution.
Western State Targets and Key Issues Patrick Cummins, CNEE September 10, 2015.
Summary Climate change is a threat in the U.S. -- We are already feeling the dangerous and costly effects of a changing climate – affecting people’s.
Wind Industry Market and Policy Overview
Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP)
CAIR Replacement Rule and Regional Haze
Clean Air Act Section 111(d)
Presentation transcript:

Clean Power Plan - Final Rule Overview Mark Leath, PE Prepared for - Missouri Air Conservation Commission September 24, 2015

Presentation Overview Background –Federal regulations to control CO 2 from power plants Clean Power Plan Overview Clean Power Plan final vs. proposal Final Clean Power Plan goals for Missouri Compliance options and plan approaches Timeline 2

EPA Actions on August 3, 2015 EPA released two final rules and one proposed rule to control CO 2 emissions from power plants Two final rules –CO 2 emission standards for new power plants - 111(b) –CO 2 emission standards for existing power plants - 111(d) One proposed rule –Proposed Model rules for existing plants - 111(d) –Proposed Federal Plan for existing plants - 111(d) 3 AKA – Clean Power Plan

Clean Power Plan - Overview The Clean Power Plan sets CO 2 emissions performance rates for existing power plants that reflect the “best system of emission reduction” (BSER) EPA identified 3 “Building Blocks” as BSER and calculated nationally consistent performance rates for fossil fuel-fired electric steam generating units and another for natural gas combined cycle units EPA translated the performance rates into mass-based and rate-based state goals using each state’s unique mix of power plants in 2012 The rule establishes guidelines for states to develop plans that require existing power plants to achieve either the performance rates directly or one of the state goals 4

21 Affected Missouri Sources Identified in Final CPP Rule Plants highlighted in red have affected unit(s) with announced retirement and/or plans to switch to natural gas Plant Name Owner/Operator Labadie Ameren (Union Electric Company) Meramec Rush Island Sioux New Madrid Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. St Francis Energy Facility Thomas Hill Chamois Central Electric Power Cooperative and Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. Sikeston Power Station City of Carthage, Sikeston Bd. of Municipal Utilities, City of Fulton, and City of Columbia Columbia City of Columbia James River Power Station City of Springfield, MO John Twitty Energy Center Dogwood Energy Facility Dogwood Energy, LLC and North American Energy Services Asbury Empire District Electric Company State Line Combined Cycle Iatan Empire District Electric Company, KCP&L, KCP&L GMO, and Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility Commission Blue Valley Independence Power and Light Hawthorn KCP&L Montrose Lake Road KCP&L GMO Sibley 5

CPP Comparison: Final vs. Proposal Compliance timeframe: starts in 2022 (2020) Building Blocks and State Goals have changed –Consistent National Performance Rates Existing RE and Nuclear no longer compliance options Deadlines for state plans September 2016 with option for two-year extension September “Trading Ready” approaches Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) provides incentive for early action 6

Missouri’s Proposed vs. Final Rule Rate Comparison Step Proposed Rate (lbs CO 2 /MWh) Step Final Rate (lbs CO 2 /MWh) Starting rate 2012 statewide adjusted average emission rate 1,9632,008 Interim Period ,621 Interim step ,621 Interim step ,457 Interim step ,342 Average Interim Goal 1,490 Final 1,5441, %37% 17% 26%

Applied Regionally Eastern Region 4.3% Improvement Applied Regionally Phased in 75% of Net Summer Capacity No Nuclear Incremental RE only Based on Historical RE Penetration Levels No Demand-Side EE Building Blocks Used to Set the Standards 1. Coal Plants – Heat Rate Improvements 2. Redispatch to NGCC 3. Renewables & Nuclear 4. Demand-Side Energy Efficiency 8 * * * Demand-Side Energy Efficiency and New Nuclear are still allowable compliance options.

Consistent National Performance Standards EPA divided the country into three regional interconnects and applied the building blocks to each The resulting performance standards from the least stringent region were used as the nationwide performance standards Regional Interconnect Grids Nationwide Performance Standards EGU Type 2030 Rate (lbs CO 2 /MWh) Fossil Steam1,305 NGCC771 9

Note: All goals are listed in units of lbs CO 2 /MWh 10 Mid-U.S CPP Rate-Goals Final vs. (Proposal) ND 1,305 (1,783) SD 1,167 (741) MN 1,213 (873) WI 1,176 (1,203) IA 1,283 (1,301) NE 1,296 (1,479) KS 1,293 (1,499) OK 1,068 (895) MO 1,272 (1,544) IL 1,245 (1,271) AR 1,130 (910) LA 1,121 (883) TX 1,042 (791) Mid-U.S. Range (ND and TX) Proposed Rule Range: (791 – 1,783) Final Rule Range: (1,042 – 1,305)

Missouri’s Final Clean Power Plan Goals Timeframe Rate Based Goals Mass-Based Goals (without new units) Mass-Based Goals (with new units) CO 2 Rate (lbs/Net MWh) CO 2 Emissions (Short Tons) CO 2 Emissions (Short Tons) 2012 Actuals 2,00878,039,449 Interim Step ,62167,312,91567,587,294 Interim Step ,45761,158,27962,083,903 Interim Step ,34257,570,94258,445,482 Interim Average (2022 – 2029) 1,49062,569,43363,238,070 Final Goals (2030 and beyond) 1,27255,462,88456,052, % 37% 26% 28%

Available Compliance Options Three Building Blocks: –Improve efficiency at existing plants –Redispatch coal to existing NGCC –Increase renewable energy Other options: –Demand-side EE –New nuclear/upgrades to existing nuclear –Combined Heat & Power –Biomass –Natural gas co-firing/convert to natural gas –Transmission & distribution improvements –Energy storage improvements –Retire older/inefficient power plants –Trading 12

State Plan Approaches Choose form of the compliance goal –Rate-based: (lbs CO 2 /MWh) Performance rates, statewide rate-goal, or state-defined rates –Mass-based: (tons CO 2 ) Include or Exclude new units State measures option Different plan elements required depending on plan approach Interstate trading ability is affected by plan approach 13

Rate-Based Approach (overview)

Mass-Based Approach (overview) Traditional regulatory trading approach –Examples: Acid Rain, NO x Budget Program, CAIR, CSAPR State-wide annual budget of allowances (tons CO 2 ) –(Emissions are capped) Allowances are allocated to individual sources –Each allowance permits one ton of emissions –Allowances may be banked for future years or traded/sold among individual sources Plan must address emission leakage to new units

Fuel Mix Comparisons Fuel Mix 2030 Rate-based Fuel Mix * 2030 Mass-based Fuel Mix * * 2030 fuel mixes are estimates and could vary significantly based on compliance options selected.

Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) States award CEIP allowances/ERCs to eligible projects and EPA matches the award –Renewable Energy –Energy Efficiency in low-income communities To be eligible –Construction (RE) or implementation (EE) must begin after the State submits final plan –Generation (RE) or savings (EE) must occur in 2020 and/or 2021 (EM&V plan required) State participation is optional 17

Outreach and Coordination DNR plans to engage with numerous stakeholders throughout plan development –State Energy Office and Public Service Commission –Affected sources –ISOs/RTOs (Electricity Grid Operators) –EE/RE developers –Public engagement; particularly vulnerable communities General outreach, EE/RE education, CEIP opportunities 30-day public comment periods for both Initial and/or Final Plans 18

19 Clean Power Plan - Missouri Timeline * Tentative DateMilestone August 3 rd, 2015 Final Clean Power Plan Released by EPA July of 2016 Public Hearing for Initial Submittal/Extension Request August of 2016 Adoption for Initial Submittal/Extension Request September 6 th, 2016 Initial Submittal Deadline August of 2017 MACC Adoption of 2017 CPP Progress Report September 6 th, CPP Progress Report Submittal Deadline April of 2018 Public Hearing for Final Plan May of 2018 Adoption of Final Plan September 6 th, 2018 Final Plan Submittal Deadline January 1 st, 2022 Interim Compliance Period Begins January 1 st, 2030 Final Compliance Period Begins * This timeline is tentative and gives the maximum time allowed to meet a Final Plan submittal deadline of September 6 th, The actual schedule for plan development and adoption may be faster.

Division of Environmental Quality Director: Leanne Tippett Mosby Date: 9/24/15 Nothing in this document may be used to implement any enforcement action or levy any penalty unless promulgated by rule under chapter 536 or authorized by statute. 20