Remote Monitoring Necessary For Large Wind Farms

The wind turbine industry realized that if utility-scale wind power plants comprised of 200 turbines spread out over 4,000 acres of land, you're going to need some sort of technology that can monitor absolutely every aspect of operation of the turbine remotely.  Clearly the economics of having people climb 400 feet off the ground to do this kind of monitoring would never work.

Every original equipment manufacturer offers some sort of supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system with its turbine. The job of the SCADA is to continuously monitor the temperatures and production of a wind turbine and discover potential problems before they become large failures.

While sending workers to the top of a wind turbine may be the most
obvious solution to looking at a problem, it's rarely the
 safest or most efficient method. Photo courtesy of Alstom.

Unlike a fossil fuel-fired power plant, wind power projects do not typically have an on-site staff on a 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week basis. For wind power projects, the first line of defense may be on the site or hundreds of miles away.

Allowing the operator to see the performance of a part being monitored over a longer period of time allows the company to prioritize when maintenance is done on a particular turbine in order to avoid an alarm state that could shut the turbine down.  (Power Engineering, August 2013)

Global Warming Will Increase Wildfires by 2050

Wildfires have become a major issue as they blaze across acres of land, consuming trees, dry grass, houses and anything else in their path. Climate change may be worsening wildfires and by 2050 the wildfire season will be about three weeks longer, twice as smoky and will burn a wider area in western states.

The Center is promoting a Wildfire Mitigation Program (WMP) to mitigate the damage from wildfires.  The WMP will utilize young people to create firebreaks.  A firebreak or fuelbreak is a strip of plowed or cleared land made to check the spreak of a prairie or forest fire.  We intend to gather and stockpile the wood to provide fuel for small (10-megawatt) wood-chip-to-electricity power plants.  We are recommending firebreaks that are much wider than those pictured below.

Wildfires are triggered by two of influences--mainly human activity and lightning. Yet they're very difficult to predict since they can grow and spread according to a completely different range of influences that are heavily dependent on the weather. For example, wind levels from day to day can drastically impact how far a blaze spreads.

In order to actual predict these wildfires, the researchers looked to the past. They examined records of past weather conditions and wildfires in order to determine the main factors influencing the spread of the fire from region to region. They then created mathematical models that closely linked these variables with the observed wildfire outcomes for six "ecoregions" in the West.
 

After creating these models, the researchers then replaced historical observations with data based on the conclusions of the fourth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In the end, they found exactly how much area would be burned in each ecoregion in 2050. Some of the most startling findings were that the area burned in the month of August could increase by 65 percent in the Pacific Northwest and could nearly double in the Eastern Rocky Mountains/Great Plains region. It could also quadruple in the Rocky Mountains Forest reason. In addition, the probability of large fires could increase by factors of two or three.

The findings are published in the journal Atmospheric Environment.  (Science World Report, 8/30/2013)

Section 316(b) of The Clean Water Act

The EPA is moving forward on several new rules that would impose strict standards on water management at U.S. power plants. The agency's new rule governing water intake structures at existing power plants is a perfect example.

A juvenile striped bass impinging on water screen

 



Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act would affect roughly 670 power plants in the U.S. It would require plants that draw more than 2 million gallons a day and use 25 percent of that water for cooling to install the best technology available (BTA) to minimize the mortality of aquatic life. Losses occur when fish and other organisms become trapped (impinged) against water intake structures or sucked (entrained) into the cooling system and exposed to heat, pressure and machinery. The rule requires the best technology to mitigate what it describes as "adverse environmental impact" resulting from entrainment and impingement.

However, we still don't know what constitutes an "adverse environmental impact" because the rule, which was first introduced in 1972, does not provide a definition. The term has long been understood by the scientific community to refer to adverse changes in the abundance and productivity of fish and other aquatic life.  The problem is this: There is no scientific evidence that shows a reduction in entrainment and impingement would lead to measurable improvements in fish populations.

We recommend Wedgewire Screens as BTA

The 316(b) rule was first enacted in 1972 when Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (Clean Water Act). Since then, the rule has been suspended and rewritten several times in a long and drawn out legal battle between utilities and environmental groups. After 40 years, the EPA is expected to release the final rule in November.

Adverse impacts have been implicitly or explicitly defined as entrainment and impingement per se, irrespective of whether any adverse changes in populations can be demonstrated or predicted. The rarity of documentation of such impacts, after 40 years of operation of large power plants, some of which have been conducting extensive monitoring programs for several decades, provides substantial evidence that impacts related to entrainment and impingement are generally small. (Power Engineering, August 2013)

Power Engineering Magazine

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

I love Power Engineering magazine.  It is clearly the premier magazine for the most up to date and informative content on energy engineering in the world.  The articles by energy professionals serve as excellent educational tools.  The hard copy magazine sends me running to the online version so that I can share content with our readers.

If you want to drill down (pun intended) on issues from wind, solar, nuclear, natural gas, oil, coal and more, subscribe to Power Engineering magazine.  You will be kept up to date on the latest in technnology and policy.  In fact, they weave technology and policy together so you get a comprehensive understanding of exactly what is going on today in the various industries and before government agencies.

Below is a short description by the magazine itself:

Established in 1896, Power Engineering magazine is the comprehensive voice of the power generation industry that provides readers with the critical information needed to remain efficient and competitive in today's market.

For three years in a row, Power Engineering has been named the most read and useful magazine in the power industry.

Power Engineering Online provides up-to-the-minute energy news, stock quotes, five years of searchable editorial archives, power generation conference schedule and details, and an industry product and services guide.

Power Engineering is part of the PennWell energy group, the largest U.S. publisher of electric power industry books, directories, maps and conferences.  (Power Engineering)

The U.S. Relies on Foreign Uranium Enrichment Services to Fuel its Nuclear Power Plants

Owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power reactors buy uranium in various forms as well as enrichment services from other countries. U.S. nuclear plants purchased 58 million pounds of uranium in 2012 from both domestic and foreign suppliers; 83% of this total was of foreign origin. About 38% of the enriched uranium needed to fabricate fuel for U.S. reactors was supplied by foreign enrichers.

Owners and operators of commercial nuclear power reactors buy uranium in the form of uranium concentrate, uranium hexafluoride, and/or enriched uranium. If uranium is purchased after the enrichment process, the only step remaining is the fabrication into nuclear fuel. Historically, U.S. owners and operators have purchased most of their uranium from foreign countries. In 2012, 84% of foreign-supplied uranium came from Canada, Russia, Australia, Kazakhstan, and Namibia. The rest came from Uzbekistan, Niger, South Africa, Brazil, China, Malawi, and Ukraine.

Uranium purchased earlier in the nuclear fuel cycle, such as the purchase of uranium concentrate, must be converted to natural uranium hexafluoride and enriched before reactor fuel can be fabricated. The owners and operators of U.S. commercial nuclear power reactors pay for conversion, enrichment, and fabrication. During 2012, a total of 52 million pounds of uranium hexafluoride (UF₆) was delivered to enrichers in China, France, Germany, Netherlands, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States. Enrichers in the United States received 62% of the deliveries, and the remaining 38% went to foreign enrichers.

The nuclear fuel cycle is a multi-step process. Beginning with exploration and mining of uranium, it is then processed into uranium concentrate (U₃O₈, often called yellowcake). This concentrate is then converted into natural uranium hexafluoride (UF₆) gas, enriched, fabricated into nuclear fuel, and sent to reactors. These steps often take place at different facilities.  (DOE-EIA)

Will Warren Buffet Kill Keystone XL Pipeline?

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

Environmentalists might claim a win when President Obama rejects the Keystone XL pipeline, but it is more likely that Warren Buffet's purchase of a Canadian tar sands company and his lock on significant railroad assets will be responsible for the decision.  Canada also gave President Obama an out by announcing an eastern pipeline project. 

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway announced through a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that it bought $524 million worth of Suncor stock last quarter. Suncor is a Canadian oil company that derives most of its current oil production -- and future expansion plans -- from Alberta's oil sands.

Buffett bought Suncor to help ensure a steady supply of oil for his Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) railroad.  Oil currently accounts for about 4% of BNSF's freight. That's expected to double over the next several years.

Suncor owns huge tracts of oil sands resources from which oil production is projected to continue to grow.

Suncor doesn't have the same transportation issues as some other oil sands producers. It has locked up more than enough pipeline and rail capacity to move its current and planed production for several years. Plus, it owns several refineries, which help the firm avoid having to sell its crude for the depressed, mid-continent prices.

 

Oil producers and refiners are increasingly using rail in Texas and North Dakota, where there aren't enough pipelines to get the crude to markets that will command the highest price. More than 34 million barrels of crude were delivered to U.S. refineries by train in 2012, a fivefold increase compared with a year earlier, according to the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the U.S. Energy Department. The volume is expected to increase again in 2013.  U.S. railroads are already carrying more than 1 million barrels of crude oil a day. 

 

Buffet is banking on cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline to increase his share of oil-by-rail shipments.

The State Department said in its recent environmental impact statement that if a permit
for the Keystone XL pipeline is denied, oil producers would simply send their product to markets via railroads. The pipeline would carry oil from northern Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast. As a result, the State Department reasoned, blocking the pipeline would have no beneficial impact on greenhouse gas emissions because the oil sands would be developed anyway.

I initially thought that President Obama would direct the State Department to approve the Keystone XL pipeline because he would conclude that the oil would be shipped by rail anyway, probably further increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

In his climate change speech on Tuesday, President Obama said:

“Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would be in our nation’s interest,” Obama said. “And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution.”

“The net effects of climate impact will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project will go forward,” he added. “It is relevant.”

But now, with the Canadian eastern pipeline proposal and the Buffet 'influence,' I have to conclude that President Obama will reject the Keystone XL Pipeline because he will get the environementalist cred, hold harmless from the Canadians because of the eastern pipeline proposal and thanks from a future supporter, Warren Buffet.   (CNN Money, 8/15/2013,WSJ, 8/7/2013, Photo: Getty Images, Wash Post, 7/8/2013, Wash Post, 6/24/2013, Wash Post, 6/24/2013, FleetNewsDaily))

World Petroleum Use Sets Record High in 2012

The world's consumption of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, heating oil, and other petroleum products reached a record high of 88.9 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2012. Declining consumption in North America and Europe was more than outpaced by growth in Asia and other regions.  A previous article examined regional trends in petroleum consumption between 1980 and 2010; today's article extends that analysis through 2012.  (DOE-EIA)

DOE Announces Members of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board

The U.S. Department of Energy has announced the members of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB). The nineteen member board comprised of scientists, business executives, academics and former government officials will serve as an independent advisory committee to Energy Secretary Moniz.

The Board will include four standing subcommittees that provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary on the Department's four major mission areas: science; energy; nuclear security; and environmental stewardship. Ad-hoc task forces, comprised of SEAB members and outside experts, will be formed to advise in specific areas directed by the Secretary. The duties of the Board are solely advisory.

SEAB reports directly to the Secretary of Energy. It was chartered in 1990 to provide the Secretary with timely, balanced, external advice on issues concerning the Department. The board is expected to meet quarterly and at other times as needed.
John Deutch and Persis Drell will serve as the Co-Chairs of SEAB.

Below is the list of SEAB Members:

Frances Beinecke President, Natural Resources Defense Council
Rafael Bras Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology
Albert Carnesale Chancellor Emeritus and Professor, University of California, Los Angeles
John Deutch MIT Chemist and Former Under Secretary of Energy
Persis Drell Professor of Physics, Stanford University and Former Director, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
Shirley Ann Jackson President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Deborah Jin Physicist, National Institute of Standards and Technology and Professor Adjoint for Physics at the University of Colorado, Boulder
Paul Joskow President, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and MIT Professor of Economics, Emeritus
Steve Koonin Director, Center for Urban Science and Progress, New York University and Former Under Secretary for Science
Michael McQuade Senior Vice President for Science and Technology, United Technologies Corporation
Richard Meserve President, Carnegie Institution for Science and Former Chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Cherry Murray Dean, Harvard University School of Engineering and Applied Sciences
John Podesta Chair, Center for American Progress and Former White House Chief of Staff
Dan Reicher Executive Director, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance, Professor, Stanford University and Former Assistant Secretary for Energy
Carmichael Roberts General Partner, North Bridge Venture Partners
Martha Schlicher Renewables and Sustainability Technology Lead, Monsanto Company
Brent Scowcroft Retired U.S. Lieutenant General, Former National Security Advisor and President and Founder, Scowcroft Group
Ram Shenoy Chief Technology Officer, ConocoPhillips
Daniel Yergin Vice Chairman, IHS and Founder of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates

(DOE)

San Francisco Water & Electricity Threatened By Wildfire

Soot and Runoff Threaten Hetch Hetchy Drinking Water Supply

Governor Jerry Brown has extended a state of emergency to include San Francisco because the Rim Wildfire is threatening the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, which is a major source of electricity and water for the city. San Francisco gets 85 percent of its water from the Yosemite-area Hetch Hetchy reservoir.  The Rim Fire started in a remote canyon of the Stanislaus National Forest and has spread outh to Yosemite National Park.

Although the Rim Fire is more than 100 miles from the Bay Area, it still could threaten San Francisco's electric supply if it damages the power system originating in O'Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy reservoir. The weeklong blaze on the timbered slopes of the Western Sierra Nevada has spread to 196 square miles and was only 5 percent contained.



O'Shaughnessy Dam

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission has been forced to shut down two of its three hydroelectric power stations near Hetch Hetchy.

The 200-square-mile Rim Fire also threatensabout 5,500 residences, according to the U.S. Forest Service. The blaze has destroyed four homes and 12 outbuildings in several different areas. Approximately 3,000 firefighters, including inmate firefighters, were on the lines and one sustained a heat-related injury.  (San Jose Mercury News, 8/25/2013, Yahoo News, 8/24/2013, NPR, 8/24/2013)

Mississippi Energy Institute Wants Nuclear Waste Site In Mississippi

The Mississippi Energy Institute (MEI) is making a pitch to politicians and business leaders that Mississippi get into the used nuclear fuel storage business. 

Although the Center's first choice for such a national nuclear waste repository is Yucca Mountain, we could support the Mississippi proposal if Nevada continues to be successful in blocking the site development and if the site can be proven to be safe.

MEI has presented its plan to the state Senate Economic Development Committee and to business and political leaders in a closed meeting.  Proponents believe that since opponents appear to have shot down federal government plans to store the country’s nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, there’s an opportunity for Mississippi to bring billions of dollars and thousands of jobs. Because the federal government has moved so slowly in creating a centralized storage site, nuclear plants, such as Grand Gulf in Port Gibson, are storing their used nuclear fuel in above-ground casks on site.

Recalling the 1980s Richton salt dome plan, everybody came out against it, Democrat and Republican, including Congressman Trent Lott.

A white paper from the MEI says Mississippi has the opportunity to “structure a consent-based host agreement that delivers significant economic development, employment and security benefits.”  It says in the short term a storage area would see a $500 million site with almost 100 jobs and major highway and transportation upgrades to safely bring in the material.  Then, the report says, a storage area would see mid-term infrastructure and recycling investments of more than $15 billion and creation of more than 18,000 direct jobs during construction and 5,000 jobs for the next 50 years.

In the long term, the report says, “Mississippi’s unique geologic salt domes provide an opportunity for co-located repository facilities, making Mississippi most competitive with the ability to fully manage all materials in one area … estimates for long-term disposal costs are roughly $100 billion over the project life of 100 years.”

The Mississippi Energy Institute is a non-profit institution that seeks to advise and provide insight into energy-related economic development. The Institute’s primary objective is to diversify and improve Mississippi’s economic energy base.   (Clarion Ledger, 8/23/2013, MEI)

Warren Buffett Invests Half Billion Dollars In Oil Sands Producer Suncor

Warren Buffet

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway announced through a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that it bought $524 million worth of Suncor stock last quarter.  Suncor is a Canadian oil company that derives most of its current oil production -- and future expansion plans -- from Alberta's oil sands.

Buffett bought Suncor to help ensure a steady supply of oil for his Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) railroad to move. Oil currently accounts for about 4% of BNSF's freight.  That's expected to double over the next several years.

Suncor owns huge tracts of oil sands resources from which oil production is projected to continue to grow.

Suncor doesn't have the same transportation issues as some other oil sands producers. It has locked up more than enough pipeline and rail capacity to move its current and planed production for several years. Plus, it owns several refineries, which help the firm avoid having to sell its crude for the depressed, mid-continent prices. (CNN Money, 8/15/2013)

Stanislaus National Forest Fire Spreads To Yosemite National Park

The Rim Fire at Stanislaus National Forest has spread into Yosemite National Park in California on Friday.  Authorities urged more evacuations in nearby communities where thousands have already been forced out by flames marching through the timbered slopes of the western Sierra Nevada.

The Center has a Wildfire Mitigation Program to prevent these disasters.

The fire hit the park at the height of summer season and has closed some backcountry hiking but was not threatening the Yosemite Valley region, one of California’s most popular tourist destinations.

The week-long blaze has spread to more than 165 square miles and was only 2 percent contained. It continued to grow in several directions, although “most of the fire activity is pushing to the east right into Yosemite, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

The fire was threatening about 4,500 residences, according to the U.S. Forest Service. More than 2,000 firefighters were on the lines.  (AP, Wash Post, 8/23/2013)

The Rim Fire in Stanislaus National Forest Grows

The Rim Fire in the Stanislaus National Forest (east of Sacramento, California) is now 53,866 acres and continues into an eastward spread.  The Cherry Lake Campground was evacuated and an evacuation center has been opened at the Mother Lode Fairgrounds.

The Center has a Wildfire Mitigation Program to prevent these disasters.

DC-10 and military type aircraft are being used to try to contain the fires.  The fire continues to spread northwest burning past Butcher Knife Ridge and moving into Grapevine Creek; northeast up the Tuolumne River Drainage from the Gravel Range past Jones Point Lookout; and continues to spread southeast edge along Hwy 120 to the east.  (MyMotherLode, 8/22/2013)

Aubrey McClendon Starts Over in Fracking Business

Aubrey McClendon, one of America's best known wildcatters, is building a new oil and gas exploration company.  Mr. McClendon's new company, Oklahoma City-based American Energy Partners LP, struck a deal earlier this month to buy drilling leases on more than 22,500 acres in southeastern Ohio for $284.3 million from closely held EnerVest Ltd. and its publicly traded unit EV Energy Partners LP. Separately, American Energy has acquired some properties in Ohio from Royal Dutch Shell PLC.

Mr. McClendon was chief executive of Chesapeake Eenrgy Corporation before being ousted from the company he co-founded in 1989 by unhappy investors earlier this year. He has lined up about $1.2 billion in equity and debt financing for deals in Ohio, much of it coming from two energy-focused private-equity firms.

 

Mr. McClendon is close to completing an agreement to get more than $500 million from the Energy & Minerals Group, a Houston firm run by John Raymond, son of former Exxon Mobil Corp. Chief Executive Lee Raymond.  The financing from Energy & Minerals and First Reserve will be limited to activities in the Utica, according to a person familiar with the deals.

He expects to get another $200 million from private-equity group First Reserve, of Greenwich, Conn. Others will invest smaller sums, while Mr. McClendon will contribute some of his own money. The company has raised $400 million in debt. Mr. McClendon is close to completing an agreement to get more than $500 million from the Energy & Minerals Group.

Former Chesapeake CEO Aubrey McClendon

The moves mark Mr. McClendon's return to the Utica Shale, a dense layer of rock that many in the energy industry believe holds immense quantities of oil and natural gas.

Companies have drilled just over 500 Utica shale wells since 2011, according to Ohio records, but a lack of pipelines there has stalled production.

 

Chesapeake has by far the most extensive operations in the Utica, and Mr. McClendon continues to own a small stake in every well the company drills through a perquisite that survived his exit and which gives him access to company information about the wells.

Mr. McClendon built Chesapeake from a tiny Oklahoma City concern into the nation's second-largest producer of natural gas after Exxon Mobil, spending billions of dollars to lease drilling rights to shale fields from Texas to Pennsylvania.  But his spending outpaced earnings from operations, leaving Chesapeake with a cash shortfall last year as natural-gas prices tumbled to the lowest level in more than a decade. The company's swooning stock price, coupled with corporate governance controversies that included his personal stakes in all the company's wells, irked the company's biggest shareholders and hastened his departure.   (WSJ, 8/20/2013, Photo: AP)

Justice Department Investigating JP Morgan Chase on Energy Manipulation

The Justice Department is investigating whether J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. manipulated U.S. energy markets.  J.P. Morgan last month agreed to pay $410 million to settle allegations raised by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that the bank manipulated markets in California and the Midwest. J.P. Morgan, the nation's largest bank by assets, didn't admit to wrongdoing as part of the settlement.

 

The Justice Department decided to examine J.P. Morgan's energy practices in recent weeks as that settlement was being wrapped up.  U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara accused two former J.P. Morgan employees who worked alongside a former trader known as the "London whale" of hiding losses on runaway bets in 2012 that cost the bank more than $6 billion.  In the energy investigation, Mr. Bharara will examine some of the same issues at the center of the FERC case, these people said. It isn't known whether the investigation is civil or criminal. The U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York declined to comment.

The new inquiry from the Justice Department shows how J.P. Morgan's legal woes are mounting as regulators and government investigators work through a backlog of cases focused on banks' activities during the housing downturn and financial crisis.

The new look into J.P. Morgan's energy practices is the latest federal scrutiny of banks'

participation in the world of physical commodities assets. The Federal Reserve and some members of Congress are questioning whether banks should be profiting from their ownership of power plants and other assets.

 

J.P. Morgan plans to sell of its physical commodities assets, everything from metals warehouses to trading desks that buy and sell oil, gas, power and coal. The bank is planning to kick off the sale in early September and it hopes to sell the assets as one package but might have to sell them piecemeal.

FERC said in its settlement with J.P. Morgan that the bank engaged in a series of "manipulative bidding strategies" from September 2010 to November 2012. The regulator said J.P. Morgan devised ways to turn money-losing power plants into profitable assets, focusing in part on maximizing payments designed to compensate power providers when prices fall.

One alleged scheme took advantage of the fact that system operators try to avoid making power plants ramp up and down quickly. J.P. Morgan would submit a low bid to ensure the system operator would schedule its plant to produce power on a given day, the regulator alleged. Then it would bid $999 a megawatt-hour for the first two hours of the next day, even though market prices at the time were at about $12.
The California system operator's rules required it to pay J.P. Morgan the high prices because the plant was in "ramp-down" mode from the previous day, the regulator said. (WSJ, 8/19/2013)

EPA Proposes Reductions In Toxics at Power Plants

EPA Proposes to Reduce Toxic Pollutants Discharged into Waterways by Power Plants

In accordance with a consent decree and in line with requirements under the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a range of options on May 4, 2013, to help reduce dangerous pollutants, including mercury, arsenic, lead, and selenium that are released into America’s waterways by coal ash, air pollution control waste and other waste from steam electric power plants. Today’s proposal includes a variety of options for whether and how these different waste streams should be treated. EPA will take comment on all of these options, which it will use to help inform the most appropriate final standard.

Steam electric power plants currently account for more than half of all toxic pollutants discharged into streams, rivers and lakes from permitted industrial facilities in the United States. High exposure to these types of pollutants has been linked to neurological damage and cancer as well as damage to the circulatory system, kidneys and liver. Toxic heavy metals do not break down in the environment and can also contaminate sediment in waterways and impact aquatic life and wildlife, including large-scale die-offs of fish.

The proposal updates standards that have been in place since 1982, incorporating technology improvements in the steam electric power industry over the last three decades as required by the Clean Water Act. The proposed national standards are based on data collected from industry and provide flexibility in implementation through a phased-in approach and use of technologies already installed at a number of plants.

Under the proposed approach, new requirements for existing power plants would be phased in between 2017 and 2022, and would leverage flexibilities as necessary.

The four preferred options differ in the number of waste streams covered (such as fly ash handling systems, treatment of air pollution control waste and bottom ash), the size of the units controlled and the stringency of the treatment controls to be imposed. EPA estimates that the regulations would reduce pollutant discharges by 470 million to 2.62 billion pounds annually and reduce water use by 50 billion to 103 billion gallons per year.

EPA also announced its intention to align this Clean Water Act rule with a related rule for coal combustion residuals (CCRs, also known as “coal ash”) proposed in 2010 under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The two rules would apply to many of the same facilities and would work together to reduce pollution associated with coal ash and related wastes. EPA is seeking comment from industry and other stakeholders to ensure that both final rules are aligned to reduce pollution efficiently and minimize regulatory burdens.

There are approximately 1,200 steam electric power plants that generate electricity using nuclear fuel or fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas in the U.S. Approximately 500 of these power plants are coal fired units which are the primary source of the pollutants being addressed by the proposed regulation. Power plants that are smaller than 50 megawatts would not be impacted by these new standards, and the majority of coal-fired power plants would incur no costs under the proposed standards.

The public comment period on the proposed rule will be open for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The agency is under a consent decree to take final action by May 22, 2014. (EPA Press Release)

More information

Waterkeeper Alliance Report on Coal Plant Water Pollution

According to a new report by a coalition of environmental groups*, "CLOSING THE FLOODGATES: How The Coal Industry Is Poisoning Our Water and How We Can Stop It," claims that coal-fired power plants are the largest source of toxic water pollution in the United States based on toxicity, dumping billions of pounds of pollution into America’s rivers, lakes, and streams each year.

The waste from coal plants, also known as coal combustion waste, includes coal ash and sludge from pollution controls called "scrubbers" that contaminate ground and surface waters with toxic heavy metals and other pollutants. These pollutants, including lead and mercury, can be dangerous to humans and wreak havoc in  watersheds even in very small amounts.The toxic metals in this waste do not degrade over time and many bio-accumulate, increasing in concentration as they travel up the food chain, ultimately collecting in human bodies, and the bodies of children.

Existing national standards meant to control coal plant water pollution are thirty-one years old and fail to set any limits on many dangerous pollutants.  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to update these outdated standards, in order to curb discharges of arsenic, boron, cadmium, lead, mercury, selenium, and other heavy metals from coal plants.  Although the Clean Water Act requires the EPA and states to set pollution limits for power plants in the absence of federal standards, states have routinely allowed unlimited discharges of this dangerous pollution.

The report's review of 386 coal-fired power plants across the country demonstrates that

 the Clean Water Act has been almost universally ignored by power companies and permitting agencies.  The survey is based on the EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database and the Waterkeeper Alliance's review of discharge permits for coal-fired power plants.  For each plant, the Waterkeeper Alliance reviewed permit and monitoring requirements for arsenic, boron, cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium; the health of the receiving water; and the permit’s expiration date.

 

The analysis reveals that:  

 

Nearly 70 percent of the coal plants that discharge coal ash and scrubber wastewater are allowed to dump unlimited amounts of arsenic, boron, cadmium, mercury, and selenium into public waters, in violation of the Clean Water Act.

Only about 63 percent of these coal plants are required to monitor and report discharges of arsenic, boron, cadmium, mercury, and selenium.

Only about 17% of the permits for the 71 coal plants discharging into waters impaired for arsenic, boron, cadmium, lead, mercury, or selenium contained a limit for the pollutant responsible for degrading water quality.

Nearly half of the plants surveyed are discharging toxic pollution with an expired Clean Water Act permit.Fifty-three power plants are operating with permits that expired five or more years ago.

In short, according to the report, coal plants have used rivers, lakes, and streams as their own private waste dumps for decades.

The reports makes numerous additonal points about pollution from coal-fired power plants.  These dangerous discharges have serious consequences for communities that live near coal-fired power plants and their dumps across the United States.  Tens of thousands of miles of rivers are degraded by this pollution. The EPA has identified more than 250 individual instances where coal plants have harmed ground or surface waters. Because many coal power plants sit on recreational lakes and reservoirs, or upstream of drinking water supplies, those thousands of miles of poisoned waters have an impact on people across the country.

According to the report, coal water pollution raises cancer risks, makes fish unsafe to eat, and can inflict lasting brain damage on children. Americans do not need to live with these dangerous discharges.

Wastewater treatment technologies that drastically reduce, and even eliminate, discharges of toxic pollution are widely available, and are already in use at some power plants in the United States. According to the EPA, coal plants can eliminate coal ash wastewater entirely by moving to dry ash handling techniques. Scrubber discharges can also be treated with common sense technologies such as chemical precipitation, biological treatment, and vapor compression to reduce or eliminate millions of tons of toxic pollution. The EPA’s recent proposal to set long overdue standards contains multiple options, including strong standards that would require the elimination of the majority of coal plant water pollution using technologies that are available and cost-effective. (WaterkeeperAlliance)

* The Environmental Integrity Project, The Sierra Club, Clean Water Action, Earth Justice, Waterkeeper Alliance.

Energy Legislation Passes: 1st Since 2009

Congress passed the first significant energy legislation, except for some tax changes, since 2009, after the Senate approved two bills on August 1st.  The Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act (H.R. 267) and the Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act (H.R. 678) clear the way for faster licensing of hydroelectric projects.

The Senate unanimously approved two bills that had been passed by the House in February that streamline the procedure for licensing small hydroelectric projects.   The bills will now be sent to the President’s desk to be enacted into law.

The Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act, which was sponsored by Reps. Reps. Cathy McMorris-Rogers (R-Wash.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), focuses on administrative actions that can be taken to advance conventional hydropower resources. It unanimously passed the House earlier this year.

Similarly, the Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act, which was sponsored by Rep. Scott Tipton (R-Colo.) and Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Jim Risch (R-Idaho), passed the House earlier this year by a vote of 416-7.

Only 3 percent of the 80,000 dams in the United States are set up to generate electricity. That makes hydropower a significant source of untapped potential for generating cost-effective, carbon-free energy.  Capitalizing on the power potential of existing dams, pipes and conduits can generate more renewable energy and cut the nation's carbon footprint.  (NYT, 8/2/2013, Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee)

Oil Industry Wants Relief From Renewable Fuel Standard

The petroleum industry formally asked the Obama administration on Tuesday to lower the amount of corn-based ethanol refiners must blend into transportation fuel in 2014. In comments regarding a request for a waiver from the rule, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) stated they believe that failing to adjust the Renewable Fuel Standard’s blending targets could result in “severe harm to the U.S. economy” resulting in higher gasoline prices.

Created in 2005 by the Energy Policy Act and expanded two years later, the rule calls for blending 36 billion gallons of biofuel into traditional transportation fuel by 2022.

The “blend wall” refers to the point at which the oil industry says refiners would need to produce gasoline with higher ethanol concentrations than the market-standard 10 percent mix. In their formal waiver request, the groups asked the EPA to lower the Renewable Fuel Standard’s blending requirements to below 10 percent of gasoline to avoid the blend wall.

A waiver would eliminate 3.35 billion of the 18.15 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol called for in 2014, providing “short-term relief” according to API.

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency issued its annual renewable-fuels mandate, telling refineries how much ethanol they must blend into the nation's gas supply. This quota, which grows each year, is becoming a financial burden on the industry, forcing many refineries to buy federal ethanol "credits" to satisfy the rules. The skyrocketing price of those credits is adding hundreds of millions of dollars to refineries' annual costs.

In addition, the petroleum industry and automakers have warned fuel blends with a 15 percent ethanol concentration, known as E15, could damage car engines. They also say tankers and gas stations don’t have the infrastructure to support the fuel.

The biofuel industry has rejected those claims. It contends that E15 is safe, noting that the EPA has approved E15 for use in cars made in 2001 or later.

Biofuel groups oppose the waiver request, saying that it was designed to protect the profits of oil producers and refiners.

The EPA has so far rejected all previous Renewable Fuel Standard waiver requests, which have centered on the corn-based ethanol that dominates the biofuel market.
Last year, poultry and meat producers failed to secure a waiver when they argued the mandate was pushing corn prices upward and harming their businesses. And several state governors also unsuccessfully lobbied the EPA for relief on those grounds.
The waiver requests are just one example of how the mandate has come under fire in Washington, D.C.

Many lawmakers also say the intent of the law — to wean the U.S. off foreign fuels and drive down greenhouse gas emissions — can be accomplished with domestically produced natural gas and oil discovered since the rule was last updated. But biofuel groups contend next-generation biofuels are just starting to come online in commercial quantities. They say changing the mandate would threaten economic development in rural communities that have come to depend on the biofuel industry. (The Hill, 8/13/2013)

Court Rules NRC Must 'Approve or Deny' Yucca Mountain

Norris McDonald at Yucca Mountain in 2005

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday ruled that the Obama administration broke the law by delaying a decision on using the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada as a permanent nuclear waste dump.

In a 2-1 decision,  the court said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) violated a 1982 federal law by halting its consideration of the project. It ordered the NRC to deny or approve the Energy Department’s application to store nuclear waste at the site.

The Center supports Yucca Mountain.

Supperters of Yucca Mountain as the national repository for the nations nuclear waste have claimed that President Obama’s 2010 decision to pull the plug on the reviews ran afoul of a law that outlines Yucca as the nation's sole waste storage site.  Writing for the majority, Judge Brett Kavanaugh said that the

"policy disagreement with Congress's decision about nuclear waste storage is not a lawful ground for the for the Commission to decline to continue the congressionally mandated licensing process.  Federal agencies may not ignore statutory mandates simply because Congress has not yet appropriated all of the money necessary to complete a project,"

The Obama administration, including former NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, contended that the NRC didn’t have the funds to complete the Yucca review. The court ruled that the NRC's argument regarding funding was invalid, and said federal law mandates that the administration rule on Yucca.

The ruling could generate a challenge from the administration, which has endorsed the findings of an independent expert panel convened by Obama that said options other than Yucca should be explored for storing nuclear waste.  (The Hill, 8/13/2013)

Antero Resources To Pipe Water To Fracking Wells

Antero Resources Inc., plans to spend more than half a billion dollars on an 80 mile pipeline that will carry water from the Ohio River to fracking sites in West Virginia and Ohio.  Fracking, an oil-field technique driving the nation's current energy boom, involves injecting vast quantities of water into the earth, along with other materials, to break up rock formations and unlock trapped oil and gas.

Antero Resources wants to tap the Ohio River, above.

 

Hydraulic fracturing is a water-intensive business.

• Average amount of water used to hydraulically fractureasingle Marcellus Shale well: 4.2 million-5 million gallons
• 4.2 million gallons is enough water for a town of 42,000 people for one day
• Number of Marcellus Shale wells drilled in 2005-July 2013: 8,700*
• Percentage of freshwater used: 90%
• Percentage of water recovered from fracks and reused: 10%

Note: *Includes wells drilled and fracked through May 2013 in both Pennsylvania and West Virginia, but doesn't include every well. Some data are still being processed. Sources: Susquehanna River Basin Commission via Environmental Protection Agency; West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
 

Colorado-based Antero, which has announced plans to go public, had oil and gas revenues of about $265 million last year, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  The company says it is the most active driller in the Marcellus Shale, a gas-rich rock formation that stretches across Pennsylvania and into New York, Ohio and West Virginia. It is also pushing into Ohio's Utica Shale as well. The company uses a total of about six million gallons of water to frack each of its wells.

The proposed pipeline would slash the company's water costs by two-thirds, or about $600,000 per well. The trucks that now deliver most of that water are a "very, very large expense.

Tapping the Ohio would give the pipeline access to the region's most dependable source of water. Many of the rivers and streams that Antero now uses run low in the summer, prompting state officials to stop gas-industry withdrawals. A drought in Ohio last year curtailed water to fracking operations.

Ohio River & watershed

In a permit filed with the Army Corps of Engineers, which regulates water withdrawals from the Ohio River, Antero plans to build an intake pipe capable of sucking up 3,360 gallons of river water a minute—or about 4.8 million gallons a day.  Pumps would send the water through a 20-inch steel pipe eastward where it would be collected in several large pools before it was piped to drilling pads. The Army Corps has approved part of Antero's plan, and a decision on the remainder is pending.

A growing number of pipelines are supplying water to fracking wells—though few of them have been anywhere near as expensive. Antero filed for an initial public offering in June.

In 2011, Range Resources Corp.  built a 20-mile pipeline in the West Virginia panhandle to move water from the Ohio River.  In 2012, Aqua America Inc. built a 54-mile pipeline in northern Pennsylvania that serves several different energy companies.
The pipeline cost about $100 million.  It is estimated that the industry has spent nearly $1 billion altogether on water pipelines.  Exxon Mobil Corp.  has built three relatively short water pipelines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Based on the company's projected savings of $600,000 per well, Antero would need to frack 875 wells to break even; according to its filings, it plans to frack 135 wells in the Marcellus this year.

While the pipeline's construction costs are high, the project could pay off if there was a drought that sent other companies scrambling for water.  Access to reliable, affordable water can make or break the profitability of companies doing shale in a remote, water-scarce region.

Antero is an energy company backed by New York private-equity firms. The pipeline might not remain with the publicly traded Antero for long. According to its SEC filings, the company's top management and its private-equity backers, which include Warburg Pincus LLC, Yorktown Partners LLC and Trilantic Capital Partners, will be able to force the company to split off its gas and water pipelines into a separate company, called Antero Midstream. Antero would enter into a 20-year agreement with the new Antero Midstream to purchase water.

Shareholders of the newly public Antero would own the split-off company, but the private-equity backers and Antero management would retain management control and ultimately receive 50% of the cash distributions generated by the pipeline company.  (WSJ, 8/13/2013)

Duke Energy Cancels Plans For New Nuclear Plant

Duke Energy has dropped plans for a $24.7 billion nuclear reactor complex in Levy County, Florida, on which the company has already spent $1 billion, most of it collected from customers.  The company cited “regulatory uncertainty” after a change in Florida's rules that cast doubt on whether a utility can collect money from customers for construction work before a project is finished.  The project was started by Progress Energy in 2008, and was acquired by Duke when it merged with Progress Energy last year.  (NYT, 8/1/2013)
      

 

HyperLoop

Pods would be mounted on thin skis made out of inconel, a trusted alloy of SpaceX that can withstand high pressure and heat. Air gets pumped through little holes in the skis make an air cushion. The front of the pod would have a pair of air jet inlets—sort of like the Concorde. An electric turbo compressor would compress the air from the nose and route it to the skis and to the cabin. Magnets on the skis, plus an electromagnetic pulse, would give the pod its initial thrust; reboosting motors along the route would keep the pod moving. In theory, the pods would be propelled at high speeds just below the sound barrier, and the set-up would be powered by solar panels running along the top of the system.

Pods, with skis on the bottom zip through tunnels put under low pressure.  The pods will ride on air bearings. The pod produces air, and it’s pumped out of little holes on these skis.  You can move huge, heavy objects with very low friction, using air bearings. In the consumer sense, people would be familiar with air hockey tables, except in this case the air bearings are being generated by the pod itself, as opposed to the tube.

You don’t want the tube to be expensive. Because the tube is so long, you want the expensive stuff to be in the pod.

Some people believe it is impossible because it would require too much energy to get something through a tube at such high speeds and long distances.  Some are questioning the energy that would be required to move the air and the pod. But it is not the air that is moving the pod. The pod is accelerated to velocity by a linear accelerator, which is basically a rolled-out electric motor. The air in the pod is going maybe 200 to 300 miles an hour, and it is low-density. So some were thinking: ‘Oh, the air is sea-level density, and the air itself will be the thing that pushes the pod.’ But that is not the case.

You do want to have a continuously circulating loop of air so that you are not losing energy by letting the air slow down. But it is more efficient to have the pod go faster than the air. If you just try to pump air—particularly at sea-level pressure—through what is effectively a 700 mile loop, the energy required would be extremely high if you wanted that air to go fast because of friction against the side walls of the tube.

 

How would the linear accelerator work that gets the pods going?  It’s actually a linear electric motor. It’s a very basic thing. They have been around for a very long time. The air skis in the pod would have a thin row of magnets—you don’t need much. The linear motor would electromagnetically accelerate the pod. It would be just below where the skis are. It just creates an electromagnetic pulse that travels along the tube and pushes the pod to that initial velocity of 800 miles per hour.  About half a dozen re-boosts would be needed between San Francisco and L.A., but the linear induction motor size needed for re-boosts is much smaller than the initial one.

How would you slow down?  When you arrive at the destination, there would be another linear electric motor that absorbs your kinetic energy. As it slows you down, you put that energy back into a battery pack, which then provides the source energy for accelerating the next pod and for storing energy for overnight transport.

The solar panels would be laid on top of the tubes. You would store excess energy in battery packs at each station, so you could run 24-7.  (Bloomberg Business Week, 8/12/2013, Wash Post, 8/12/2013))

China To Become World’s Largest Oil Importer

EIA's August 2013 Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) forecasts that China's net oil imports will exceed those of the United States by October 2013 on a monthly basis and by 2014 on an annual basis, making China the largest importer of oil in the world.

The imminent emergence of China as the world's largest net oil importer has been driven by steady growth in Chinese demand, increased oil production in the United States, and a flat level of demand for oil in the U.S. market.

U.S. total annual oil production is expected to rise by 28% between 2011 and 2014 to nearly 13 million barrels per day, primarily from shale oil, tight oil, and Gulf of Mexico deepwater plays. In the meantime, Chinese production increases at a much lower rate (6% over this period) and is forecast to be just a third of U.S. production in 2014.

On the demand side, China's liquid fuels use is expected to grow by 13% between 2011 and 2014 to more than 11 million barrels per day while U.S. demand hovers close to 18.7 million barrels per day, well below the peak U.S. consumption level of 20.8 million barrels per day in 2005.

Looking beyond 2014, higher U.S. oil production and stagnant or declining U.S. oil consumption, coupled with China's projected strong oil demand growth and slow oil production growth, suggest that once China replaces the United States as the world's largest net oil importer, the gap between net oil imports in China and the United States will grow.

There are several different ways to measure oil import dependence. Discrepancies in the way dependence is assessed arise because oil is imported as crude oil but consumed as refined products, of which crude oil is the main but not only input.

Net oil imports reflect the broadest measure of liquid fuels and include the following elements in the volumes of oil liquids produced and used within national borders: crude oil, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, biofuels, other liquids, and refinery processing gain, which in the United States has been roughly 1 million barrels per day in recent years.

Another common (and narrower) measure of oil import dependence is the ratio of net imported crude oil to net crude oil inputs to refineries. The United States has emerged as a significant net exporter of petroleum products in recent years and a portion of U.S. crude oil imports is used to produce products not consumed domestically. The advent of China as the world's largest importer based on the narrower measure occurs on a different schedule than for the broader one, but the basic trends and drivers remain the same as for the broader measure. However, imports of crude oil alone do not automatically imply domestic dependence on foreign supplies.  (DOE-EIA)

San Jacinto Mountains Wildfire

The latest wildfire raging through a rugged Southern California San Jacinto Mountains range has already destroyed 26 homes and was threatening more than 500 other residences, forcing some 1,800 people to evacuate. More than 1,400 firefighters and nine helicopters battled the flames as they pushed eastward along the San Jacinto Mountains, a desert range 90 miles east of Los Angeles.  The blaze was heading toward the desert town of Cabazon and was estimated at nearly 22 square miles Thursday with 20 percent containment

Along with Cabazon, the evacuation orders covered two camping areas and the rural communities of Poppet Flats, Twin Pines, Edna Valley and Vista Grande.

A helicopter drops water over a wildfire

 on Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013, in Cabazon, Calif.

 (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

It was the second major wildfire in the San Jacinto Mountains this summer. A blaze that erupted in mid-July spread over 43 square miles on peaks above Palm Springs, burned seven homes and forced 6,000 people out of Idyllwild and neighboring towns.

The latest fire also burned in the footprint of the notorious Esperanza Fire, a 2006, wind-driven inferno that overran a U.S. Forest Service engine crew. All five crew members died. A man was convicted of setting the fire and sentenced to death.

After touring the area, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who lives in Riverside County, said 165,000 acres have burned in California this year and climate change is setting conditions for more disastrous blazes, while budget cuts are limiting resources to fight them. (MSN, 8/9/2013)