January 16, 2008

Opening Remarks

Howard Cohen

Chancellor Purdue University Calumet

Norman Peterson

Assistant to the Director Argonne National Laboratory

Multiple Efforts Contributing to BP Water Technology Decisions

Internal Review

BP and consultants with global refinery and other industry experience are evaluating and designing source control and water treatment options.

Expert Analysis

Expert consultants are conducting detailed analysis of ideas presented by others to determine if they may be applicable at Whiting . BP Whiting Refinery

PWI / Argonne Project

Scientific experts are studying emerging technologies and approaches to minimize discharges into Lake Michigan.

Petroleum Environmental Research Forum (PERF)

Industry group is researching and developing environmental technologies for the petroleum industry.

2 3

Emerging Technologies…

and Approaches to Minimize Discharges into Lake Michigan

Project Update

Community Briefing Purdue Calumet Water Institute/Argonne National Laboratory Project Team January 16, 2008 5

Outline

• Project Team • Overview • Current Treatment Technology • Objectives • Definitions • Approach • Sources • Screening Criteria • External Review • Status and Next Steps • Comparative Discharges Study 6

Project Team

Purdue University Calumet Water Institute Argonne National Laboratory •

George Nnanna

, Ph. D.

• Department of Mechanical Engineering • • • • • • •

Kathy Banks

, Ph. D.

• School of Civil Engineering

Young Choi

, Ph. D.

• Department of Biological Sciences

Izabela Jonnatta

, MSc.

• Environmental Science

Hal Pinnick

, Ph. D.

• Department of Chemistry & Physics

Kay Rowberg

, Ph. D.

• Department of Chemistry & Physics

Xiuling Wang

, Ph. D.

• Department of Mechanical Engineering

Chenn Zhou

, Ph. D.

• Department of Mechanical Engineering • • • • • • • • •

M. Cristina Negri

, Doctoral (Italy) • Soil Scientist/Environmental Engineer

Terrence Aylesworth

• Vulnerability Assessment Expert

Richard Doctor

• Section Leader, Hydrogen & Greenhouse Gas Engineering , P.E.

Deborah Elcock

• Policy Analyst , M.B.A.

John Gasper

• Strategic Area Manager, Environmental Policy Analysis & Planning , MSc.

Michael Kaminski

, Ph. D.

• Leader, Nanoscale Engineering Group

Yupo James Lin

, Ph. D.

• Research Area Leader, Membrane Separation & Chemical Engineering

Seth Snyder

, Ph. D.

• Section Leader, Process Engineering & Analysis

John Veil

, MSc.

• Manager, Water Policy Program 7

Overview

• Collaboration of Purdue Calumet Water Institute and Argonne National Laboratory • Develop a list of emerging technologies that may provide wastewater treatment options to BP’s Whiting Refinery expansion • Conduct a comparative analysis of overall discharges into Lake Michigan • Could have applications for other dischargers around the Great Lakes • Phase I: November 2007-June 2008 • Phase II: Through November 2009 8

Current Treatment Technology

Process water Surge Separator Equalization Dissolved Air Flotation Oily Biological Secondary Waste Treatment Activated Sludge Filters Treated Effluent

Lake Michigan

Objectives of the Study

• Screen Lakes: emerging technologies that could address wastewater treatment challenges along the Great • Ammonia • Total suspended solids • Metals (e.g. mercury) • Conduct a concerns.

comparative analysis of related discharge issues that may help policymakers better understand and address environmental 10

Definitions of Technology Categories

• Emerging • Embryonic : technologies in the development stage and/or tested at laboratory or bench scale • Innovative : technologies that have been… • tested at a full-scale demonstration site • available and implemented on a limited basis • Established : technologies that are proven and commercially viable 11

Technology Screening Approach

Collect Information Identify Technology Established Serve as Baseline Refer to BP Emerging (Embryonic or Innovative) Review Technology Summary Sheet Embryonic Determine Future Development Needs Prepare Technology Evaluation Matrix

Sources

• Data acquisition at BP • Information Collection • Published literature • “Gray” literature • Vendor-supplied information • Internet research • Consultants’ technical reports • Technical organizations • American Water Resources Association; Water Environment Federation; American Water Works Association; The WateReuse Association; World Water Council; U.N. Scientific, Educational and Cultural Organization Water Portal; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; etc.

• Industry • Comparison of U.S. refinery wastewater treatment plants’ technologies • Other 13

Initial Screening Criteria

Total Suspended Solids Heavy Metals Ammonia Technology screening criteria – Evaluate the principle of operation of the emerging technology Stage of development Stated performance Reliability Sustainability Cost Space requirements Implementation Secondary waste production Compare to expected performance Eliminate technically infeasible technology Characterize effectiveness of technically feasible technologies Prepare verification statements and report technologies Establish viable technology(ies ) Prepare evaluation summaries Validate best technology claims Discuss results and/or identify additional data needs

External Reviewers

Prepare Technology Evaluation Matrix Review matrix will be used to provide both qualitative and quantitative assessment of the screened technologies.

Panel of Technical Reviewers Government Academia Industry

Report

Status

• Acquired and analyzed data of the current wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) system • Established a process to maintain integrity of the project • Determined standard protocols of investigation, Quality Assurance (QA) methodologies and ranking criteria to ensure technical integrity and uniformity in evaluation • Identified some technologies for the screening process • Established screening criteria and a review matrix 16

Next Steps for Technology Screening

• Complete search for promising technologies • Inviting technology vendors • Collate all data in an initial screen • Convene technical review panel • Prepare final report • Continue public outreach and dissemination of information • Move to Phase II 17

Comparative Discharges Study

• Contact Regulators to obtain discharge data - Some information received, other pending • Search literature for non-point discharge sources (started) • Assemble database frame (started) • Enter and analyze data (started) • Geographic Information System-based report

Phase I – Lower Lake Michigan (June 2008) Phase II – Entire Lake Michigan (November 2009)