Oil-fired Units

1
Oil-fired Units
March 5, 2002 Washington, D.C.

• Bill Maxwell
• EPA/ESD/CG

2
Where do we stand on oil?

• Profile of the sector
• Status of the data
• What the data tell us
• Where to go from here

3
Limitations of the profile data

• Data not as easy to identify as for coal units
• More multiple fueled units
• Not as much segregation as to what oil is burned

4
Profile of the oil-fired sector

• Used four data files
• EPA E-GRID2000 Boiler and Generator files (data
  for 1999)
• EPA Score00 files - Emissions scorecard data for
  2000
• EIA Tables 8 and 20 (data for 1999)
• Data posted on website as one file
• Databases do not agree 100

5
Profile -- continued

• Estimate on the order of 150 oil-fired units at
  70 facilities
• Estimated 137 facilities in Final Report to
  Congress
• Has been a contraction of the sector
• Located in 18 States and the District of Columbia
• Size appears to range from 270 - 9,000 MMBtu/hr
  heat input

6
Profile -- concluded

• Controls
• From Final Report to Congress, 1/3 use ESP
• No unit found with FGD system
• Approximately 10-20 may use distillate oil
• Dual-fuel capability
• Difficult to determine as the listing of fuels is
  not consistent from file to file
• Gas/oil firing significantly more prevalent than
  oil/coal firing

7
Status of the data

• Have tests from 13 units, all residual oil-fired
• Inlet/outlet on 4 units
• 3 ESP units
• 1 pilot-scale FF
• 1 SCR
• With/without NOx control on 1 unit
• Outlet only on 8 units
• 20 tests total
• 16 tests essentially uncontrolled
• 4 tests with PM control for metals

8
Assumptions going in

• Nickel is HAP of greatest concern
• CAA section 112(b)(1) lists nickel compounds --
  not individual species
• FF is not realistic control for oil-fired units
• PM tends to be sticky
• Fouls bags and presents safety hazard
• Not suitable for MACT floor basis
• Leaves ESP as only demonstrated control

9
Finding the floor

• More than 30 units in the sector so could use
  top-performing 12 percent of data
• Top 12 percent would be top 2 units
• Top 2 units are ESPs with reported PM
  efficiencies of 92 and 77 percent
• Floor set based on performance of these units
• Looking at individual runs will establish
  variability
• Some uncontrolled units would be able to meet
  level established, depending on the metals
  content of the oil fired

10
Where we go from here

• Topics for further investigation
• Availability of low metal oil
• Impact on oil supply and quality of Phase II
  sulfur rules
• Use of PM as surrogate for metals
• Final floor numbers
• Additional data made available in timely manner
  would be considered