Does CCS Meet BACT Requirements under the DQA?

Editor’s Note: Given that DOE expects CCS to raise the wholesale price of electricity by 70-80%, regulatory authorities may want to consult with consumers about what winning the “race” would mean to their economic future– or lack thereof.

From: BusinessGreen Plus

From: Jones Day

Article by Jennifer M. Hayes

Pursuant to new source performance standards proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) on January 8, any new fossil fuel-fired power plants commencing construction after that date will be required to meet new carbon emissions standards. The agency proposed one set of standards for gas-fired units and second pair of alternative standards for coal-fired units. Most new combined cycle gas-fired units already meet the proposed standard. By contrast, neither recently built nor recently proposed coal-fired units can meet the EPA’s proposed standard without using carbon capture and sequestration (“CCS”), a technology that some electric utilities are likely to assert has not yet been deployed cost-effectively on a commercial basis.

From: NewsTalk 650 CKOM

From: The Press and Journal (Inverness)

BY RYAN CRIGHTON BUSINESS EDITOR

That would be equivalent to the annual exhaust fumes of 1.1million cars.

An environmental group said the papers revealed “some potentially major problems” but it was “reassured” that all but the worst-case scenarios could be dealt with.

A CCS project at Peterhead aims to capture carbon dioxide at the town’s power station then pump it into a depleted gas field.

But, last year, academics at Bristol University said using offshore oil and gas reservoirs “could have the potential to trigger earthquakes” and “reactivate faults and fractures”.

From: cnsnews.com

From: Environmental Leader

Southern Co. has voiced opposition to a federal proposal to require new coal-fired power plants to capture their carbon emissions.

The company is building the nation’s only commercial carbon capture power plant.

At a public hearing at the EPA headquarters in Washington, industry representatives said the agency went too far in its proposed limits on carbon-dioxide emissions from new power plants, Businessweek reports.

The technology isn’t commercially available and doesn’t have the rules in place to govern its use, they said.

Read Complete Article

 Editor’s  Note:  The CRE letter requesting that EPA conduct a structured peer review as mandated by the Data Quality Act is in  this letter to EPA on peer review ff

 CRE is reflecting upon on the strong opposition to its very straight forward proposal that EPA conduct a structured peer review  of the CCS  technology as mandated by the Data Quality Act. In our view we simply asked EPA to follow the law.  Why then the strong negative reaction to the CRE proposal?

From: Phys.org

by Geoff Vivian

Researchers’ early attempts to find a Perth Basin site to sequester carbon have detected a suitable porous aquifer, but they are yet to find a non-porous cap rock to contain it.

Curtin University geologist Hugo Olierook says saline water aquifers, in porous stone, are considered suitable for carbon capture and storage (CCS) if they have a layer of impermeable cap rock above.

He has been analysing the results of the Geological Survey of Western Australia’s core and wire line drilling at the “Harvey 1” well near Harvey in WA’s South West.