Transcript Informational Meeting Status of Glades Power Park Air Construction Permit Application April 24, 2007 Moore Haven, Florida State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection Division of Air.

Informational Meeting
Status of Glades Power Park
Air Construction Permit Application
April 24, 2007
Moore Haven, Florida
State of Florida
Department of Environmental Protection
Division of Air Resource Management
Bureau of Air Regulation
Overview
 Who we are, why we are here, what we
do, what we don’t do
 Overview of the power plant application
 Overview of the permitting process
 Questions and comments from the public
Who we are;
why we are here
 Florida Department of Environmental
Protection’s Division of Air Resource
Management
 We are here to provide information on this
proposed project, the permitting process
and answer questions you may have
What we do
 Evaluate applications for new sources of
air pollution to determine if Department
rules regarding air pollution would be met
– Determine Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) for the proposed facility
– Ensure any new source of air pollution would
not cause or contribute to a violation of air
quality standards
Important issues that are
outside of our authority:




Determining need for power or type of facility
Local zoning decisions
Comprehensive plans
Other state or federal permits (e.g. water, waste,
wetlands)
 Local ordinances
 Sewer hookups, building codes, noise
 We are not the Siting Office
Overview of the air
permitting process
 Application is required for a proposed facility that
will emit air pollution.
 This application is currently incomplete.
 Department must determine if the applicant has
provided reasonable assurance that the project
will not discharge, emit, or cause pollution in
contravention of Department air standards or
rules.
Overview of the air
permitting process





Department’s determination timeframe
About 60 days after completeness
Publication of notice in newspaper
14 day timeframe for filing legal challenges
30 day public comment period
– Request for public meeting
 Department takes final action
What is the project?
 FPL Glades Power Park
 A Pulverized Coal-fueled Power Plant
 Nominal Capacity of 1,960 megawatts
 Located Northwest of Moore Haven
 How Does a Power Plant Work?
coal.html
Combustion
Modifications
Air Pollution Control
Oxidation
Additive
Oxidation
Catalyst
FGD
Additive
Stack
SCR Oxidation
Fuel
Boiler
SCR
Air
Bottom
Ash










Flue Gas
NOx
Air Heater
ESP
or
FF
Fly Ash
Wet
FGD
FGD
Byproducts
Low NOX burners for Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
Good Combustion for Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Good Combustion - Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) for (NOX)
Lime Injection for Sulfur Trioxide (SO3)
Fabric Filter Baghouse for Particulate Matter (PM)
Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) for Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) - Sulfuric Acid Mist
Plus Activated Carbon Injection (ACI) for Mercury (Hg)
All For Control of Fine PM, Visibility, Ozone/Smog
Air Pollution Control Equipment
95% Hg
Removal
90% Hg
Removal
Lime Reagent
SO3
Wet FGD
(SO2)
Boiler
Combustion
Controls
Coal & Air
Fabric Filter
(PM)
Flue Gas
PM
NOX
VOC
SO2
CO
Hg
>2500 °F
SCR
(NOX)
Ammonia
Fan
ACI
(Hg)
Wet ESP
Fine PM
SAMist
Fly Ash
Gypsum
Fabric Filter
Stack
Key Emission Limits Pulverized Coal*
Plant Vintage
Rule
Controls
1977 Permits for PC Plant
2007 Proposed GPP Limits
New Source Performance Standard
Best Available Control Technology
Combustion Controls (CC), ESP
CC, SCR, ACI, Fabric, FGD, ESP
Units
Lb/MMBtu
Tons/Year
Lb/MMBtu
Tons/Year
SO2
1.20
108,000
0.04
3,050
NOX
0.70
63,000
0.05
3,830
PM (filterable)
0.10
11,800
0.013
1,285
CO
No Limit
No Limit
0.15
11,450
SAMist
No Limit
No Limit
0.004
305
VOC
No Limit
No Limit
0.0034
260
Fluorides
No Limit
No Limit
0.00023
18
~100x10-6 lb/MWH
~1,500 pounds
9.9x10-6 lb/MWH
180 pounds
Hg**
Opacity
20 Percent
20 Percent
* Assuming a new 1,960 megawatts (net) Pulverized Coal Plant. New Plant efficiency = 1.2 x Old Plant
** There were no Hg Standards in 1977 Permits. Actual Control was minimal.
Compliance
Monitoring
Hg-CEMS







Multi-pollutant Readout
Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS)
Hg-CEMS with Speciation to Determine Type of Hg
CEMS for NOX, CO and SO2
Continuous Opacity Monitoring System (COMS)
Posting of CEMS/COMS Data on Public Access Site
Stack Testing for SAMist, VOC, Fluorides, PM
PM Surrogate for PM smaller than 10 microns (PM10)
Ambient Air Quality Analysis
 Includes, but not limited to:
- Analysis of current air quality and an analysis of future
air quality if facility is built.
- In vicinity of the area and any National Parks, sensitive
areas within about 180 miles.
 Analysis must conclude that no National or State
Ambient Air Quality Standards will be violated as a result
of the proposed project.
Existing Air Quality
 The State of Florida is in attainment for all
criteria pollutants including SO2, Ozone, NOX,
PM/PM10 and CO.
 Existing air quality determined by monitors.
 Located to characterize:
- Background ambient air quality
- Air quality in populated areas
- Air quality at areas of greatest impact from
industrial activities.
Monitoring Network
 The State has an extensive monitoring network
which includes over 200 monitors, 34 counties.
 Exceeds number of monitors required by the
EPA
 Not all towns or communities have ambient
monitors; however, because ambient air quality
is monitored throughout the State and represent
air quality on urban, micro, middle,
neighborhood and regional scales, monitors
located in similar areas can be used to predict
ambient impacts.
What about
Cane Burning?
 Sugar Cane Burning produces Particulate Matter.
 PM Standards are based on 24-hour average, in
place to protect public health.
 Fields that burn in 15-20 minutes have minimal effect
on 24-hour average concentrations.
 The closest PM10 monitor is in Belle Glade.
 Belle Glade is in county with most burning and is in
compliance with Standards.
 PM monitor in Moore Haven (2003-04) met Air
Quality Standards as well.
How Will the Air I Breathe
Change if Glades Power
Plant is Constructed?
 Air Quality Computer Modeling is used to predict
Glades Power Park worst-case impacts for SO2,
NOx, PM/PM10 and CO.
 These results, or pollutant concentrations, are
compared to thresholds or levels for which either
more modeling is required and/or monitoring is
required upon construction.
 If more modeling is required, other stationary
sources of pollution are included in the model.
Modeling Results for
Plant Vicinity
 CO, 3-hour and Annual SO2,
Annual PM10 and NOx modeled
concentrations were low and did not
require additional modeling for the
vicinity of the proposed project.
 Additional modeling was required
for 24-hour SO2 and 24-hour PM10.
 Emissions from other sources were
then compared to the background
air quality and air quality standards.
To ensure SO2
background data is
most conservative –
all state monitors
were used for the
background.
Highest 24-hour
State-wide SO2
2004 – 30% below
2005 – 60% below
2006 - 30% below
Modeling Results - Plant Vicinity
Pollutant
Model
Results
Background
Total
Ambient
Air
Standard
Sulfur
Dioxide
24 hour
16.5
41
260
PM10
24 Hour
5.87
26
(Close Monitor)
166
(Highest 2006)
36
Moore Haven
38
Belle Glade
*All values in units of micrograms per cubic meter
183
42
44
150
National Parks, Sensitive Areas
 The National Park Service is currently reviewing
predicted worst-case impacts to the Everglades,
Chassahowitzka, Big Cypress and Biscayne.
 This includes a review of mercury, deposition and
visibility impacts.
 The National Park Service will determine whether
the Glades Power Park will have an adverse impact
on the Everglades and Chassahowitzka.
Monitoring
 If Glades Power Park is permitted:
– an ambient monitor within 1.5 miles from
stack will be required measuring Ozone,
PM/PM10, SO2, NO2 and Mercury;
– an ambient monitor in Moore Haven will be
required measuring Fine Particulate;
– continuous emissions monitoring at the stack
will be required measuring Mercury (including
all forms), Opacity, NOX, CO, SO2
Conclusion
 The application is still under review for
completeness and a final conclusion has
not been reached at this time.
 The Department continues to review the
application in accordance with its rules.