POWER October 2011 - 65

POWER VIEWS
What also has to be taken into consideration
when determining how much time
it will take to install the necessary controls
is that utilities schedule power plant maintenance-including
retrofits and installation
of environmental controls-during the
spring and fall months. This is because peak
demand on their system generally occurs
during the summer and winter months, and
electric utilities must have enough generation
facilities online to meet the maximum
demand on their systems. As a result, the
majority of utilities will not be able to work
year-round to install control technologies to
reduce mercury and HAPs.
What was the EPA's response to
your suggestions?
Shea: The EPA has suggested a willingness
to consider extensions on a unit-by-unit basis.
But the number of generating units needing
additional time likely will be sufficiently
large that a case-by-case review of individual
requests for extensions actually could delay
overall compliance.
Given these realities, we plan to ask the
president to issue an executive order using
the CAA " exemption authority " for power
plant owners or operators who are unable
to comply with the Utility MACT requirements
within four years (the standard threeyear
compliance period plus the EPA's
optional one-year extension). We will ask
the president, or any designated agency or
department, to grant these extensions in
the instances where a utility is making a
diligent, good-faith effort to comply but
the control technology is unavailable, or
in those instances where the appropriate
national, state, or regional grid operator,
North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
or state regulators certify that an extension
of time is necessary to address reliability
and economic impact issues.
What other steps to reduce
mercury and HAP emissions are
utility plant owners taking?
Shea: It is important to emphasize that although
we are asking for greater flexibility
in implementing the new MACT rule, electric
utilities are not opposed to reducing their
emissions of mercury and HAPs. In fact,
electric utilities have made significant strides
over the last two decades in reducing the industry's
overall emissions.
Coal-based power plants-which still
generate nearly half of the nation's electricity-emit
about 70% less sulfur dioxide
(SO2
) and nitrogen oxides (NOx
)
emissions today than they did in 1990. And
in the eastern United States, we have cut
ozone-related summer NOx
emissions by
CIRCLE 37 ON READER SERVICE CARD
October 2011 | POWER
www.powermag.com
65
80% during the same period. What is truly
remarkable, however, is that while these
emissions reductions were taking place,
electricity demand grew 38%. Other regulations
being proposed by the EPA also
will lead to SO2
, NOx, mercury, and other
emissions being reduced by 80% to 90% in
most eastern states compared to 1990.
In addition, companies also are investing
in advanced generating technologies
to reduce emissions even further. And we
have begun exploring methods for capturing
and storing carbon emissions.
The EPA's Utility MACT is as complex
as it is far-reaching. With greater flexibility
in complying with it, we believe that
the new MACT rule will achieve its objectives,
while working to lower compliance
costs, increase system reliability, and preserve
valuable economic resources. ■
-Dr. Robert Peltier, PE, POWER's editor-inchief,
conducted and edited this interview.
http://www.powermag.com
POWER October 2011

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of POWER October 2011
