skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Clean coal technology and acid rain compliance: An examination of alternative incentive proposals

Abstract

The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 rely primarily on the use of market incentives to stimulate least-cost compliance choices by electric utilities. Because of the potential risks associated with selecting Clean Coal Technologies (CCTs) and the public-good nature of technology commercialization, electric utilities may be reluctant to adopt CCTs as part of their compliance strategies. This paper examines the nature of the risks and perceived impediments to adopting CCTs as a compliance option. It also discusses the incentives that regulatory policy makers could adopt to mitigate these barriers to CCT adoption. (VC)

Authors:
 [1];  [2]
  1. (Center for Regulatory Studies, Normal, IL (United States))
  2. (Argonne National Lab., IL (United States))
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE; USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
OSTI Identifier:
6078087
Report Number(s):
ANL/CP-74782; CONF-9104106-7
ON: DE92004126
DOE Contract Number:
W-31109-ENG-38
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: 53. annual American power conference, Chicago, IL (United States), 29 Apr - 1 May 1991
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; 01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT; US CLEAN AIR ACT; COMPLIANCE; ACID RAIN; ELECTRIC UTILITIES; MARKET; RISK ASSESSMENT; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER; US CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM; ATMOSPHERIC PRECIPITATIONS; LAWS; POLLUTION LAWS; PUBLIC UTILITIES; RAIN; 294001* - Energy Planning & Policy- Coal; 010900 - Coal, Lignite, & Peat- Environmental Aspects; 015000 - Coal, Lignite, & Peat- Economic, Industrial, & Business Aspects

Citation Formats

McDermott, K.A., and South, D.W.. Clean coal technology and acid rain compliance: An examination of alternative incentive proposals. United States: N. p., 1991. Web.
McDermott, K.A., & South, D.W.. Clean coal technology and acid rain compliance: An examination of alternative incentive proposals. United States.
McDermott, K.A., and South, D.W.. Tue . "Clean coal technology and acid rain compliance: An examination of alternative incentive proposals". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6078087.
@article{osti_6078087,
title = {Clean coal technology and acid rain compliance: An examination of alternative incentive proposals},
author = {McDermott, K.A. and South, D.W.},
abstractNote = {The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 rely primarily on the use of market incentives to stimulate least-cost compliance choices by electric utilities. Because of the potential risks associated with selecting Clean Coal Technologies (CCTs) and the public-good nature of technology commercialization, electric utilities may be reluctant to adopt CCTs as part of their compliance strategies. This paper examines the nature of the risks and perceived impediments to adopting CCTs as a compliance option. It also discusses the incentives that regulatory policy makers could adopt to mitigate these barriers to CCT adoption. (VC)},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 1991},
month = {Tue Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 1991}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 rely primarily on the use of market incentives to stimulate least-cost compliance choices by electric utilities. Because of the potential risks associated with selecting Clean Coal Technologies (CCTs) and the public-good nature of technology commercialization, electric utilities may be reluctant to adopt CCTs as part of their compliance strategies. This paper examines the nature of the risks and perceived impediments to adopting CCTs as a compliance option. It also discusses the incentives that regulatory policy makers could adopt to mitigate these barriers to CCT adoption. (VC)
  • Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 (P.L. 101--549) establishes the use of flexible emission compliance strategies for electric utilities to reduce the emissions of add precursors (SO[sub 2], NO[sub 2]). To control SO[sub 2] emissions, tradeable emission allowances will be used; NO[sub 2] emissions will be controlled by an emission standard, but a utility is permitted to average NO[sub 2] emissions systemwide to meet the standard. Both of these policies promote flexibility and cost savings for the utility while achieving the prescribed emission reduction goals of P.L. 101--549. The use of SO[sub 2] emission allowancesmore » has two notable benefits: A utility has the choice of a wide range of compliance methods allowing it to minimize compliance costs and second; the use of transferable emission allowances promote technological innovation with respect to emissions reduction/control. This report discusses the use of regulatory incentives towards the achievement of a Title IV goal of cost reduction of SO[sub 2] emissions.« less
  • Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 (P.L. 101--549) establishes the use of flexible emission compliance strategies for electric utilities to reduce the emissions of add precursors (SO{sub 2}, NO{sub 2}). To control SO{sub 2} emissions, tradeable emission allowances will be used; NO{sub 2} emissions will be controlled by an emission standard, but a utility is permitted to average NO{sub 2} emissions systemwide to meet the standard. Both of these policies promote flexibility and cost savings for the utility while achieving the prescribed emission reduction goals of P.L. 101--549. The use of SO{sub 2} emission allowancesmore » has two notable benefits: A utility has the choice of a wide range of compliance methods allowing it to minimize compliance costs and second; the use of transferable emission allowances promote technological innovation with respect to emissions reduction/control. This report discusses the use of regulatory incentives towards the achievement of a Title IV goal of cost reduction of SO{sub 2} emissions.« less
  • The Clean Coal Technology (CCT) Program was initiated by the US Department of Energy (DOE) in part as a response to the 1986 Joint Report of the US and Canadian Special Envoys on Acid Rain, with a particular focus on coal-burning electric power plants. The fist three solicitations of the CCT Program were aimed primarily at mitigating the potential impacts of acid rain. Subsequently, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 established emission reduction targets for SO{sub 2} and No{sub x}, which influenced the goals of the last two CCT Program. This paper provides an overview of the CCT Programmore » and reports the significant results, with emphasis on emissions reduction as well as their impact on ozone formation.« less
  • This study had as its primary focus the question of what SO/sub 2/ reductions could be obtained in the midwest by applying extensive physical coal cleaning to fuels being burned by major power plants. The issue of concern is strategies for achieving the level of SO/sub 2/ emission reductions (typically at least 50% from 1980 levels) proposed in acid rain legislation. The washabilities of the primary coals delivered to 20 plants in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio were examined in detail. Annual SO/sub 2/ emissions were calculated for each plant under 1980 operating conditions (capacity factor, heat rate, etc.) assuming 1980more » fuel use (a combination of coals) and assuming only the major coal source was used (both raw ROM and cleaned to 80% weight recovery). Cleaning coal could result in potential reductions for individual plants from 10 to 50%. In comparison to 1980 emissions, however, these reductions ranged from 4% to 52%. The results of this study show that several specific power plants could achieve a 50% reduction in annual SO/sub 2/ emissions by switching to complete reliance on the main coal source and physically cleaning that coal. Thus, coal cleaning may be a cost-effective SO/sub 2/ control strategy for individual plants, but its usefulness as a mandatory acid rain mitigation strategy is limited.« less