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

Title: DOE/EA-1493: Environmental Assessment for Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project (August 2004)

Abstract

DOE has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), DOE/EA-1493, titled ''Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project'', to analyze the potential environmental consequences of providing cost-shared funding support for the design, construction, and demonstration of an integrated multipollutant control system at AES's Greenidge Station in Dresden, New York. The system, expected to control emissions of NO{sub x}, SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HF, HCl, and Hg, would be installed on the existing, coal-fired, 107-MW Unit 4 at Greenidge. The results of the analyses provided in the EA are summarized in this Finding of No Significant Impact. The proposed action is for DOE to provide about $14.5 million for this project, while CONSOL Energy Inc. and its project partners would be responsible for the remaining $21 million. The proposed project will result in technical, environmental, and financial data from the design, operation and construction of the multi-pollutant control system. This 4.5-year, commercial-scale demonstration project would allow utilities, particularly those with units less than 300-MW in capacity, to make decisions regarding the integrated multi-pollutant control system as a viable commercial option. Based on the analyses in the EA, DOE has concluded that the Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project would result in minimal and insignificant consequences to the humanmore » environment. Thus, DOE considers that the proposed action, providing cost-shared funding for the project, is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, 42 United States Code 4321, et seq. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR Part 1021.322, DOE has concluded that preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not required, and DOE is issuing this FONSI.« less

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
National Energy Technology Lab., Pittsburgh, PA, and Morgantown, WV (US)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42) (US)
OSTI Identifier:
837648
Report Number(s):
DOE/EA-1493
TRN: US200506%%316
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Resource Relation:
Other Information: PBD: 10 Aug 2004
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; CAPACITY; CONSTRUCTION; CONTROL SYSTEMS; DESIGN; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS; FINANCIAL DATA; US NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT; NETL; EA; GREENIDGE MULTI-POLLUTANT; FONSI; CONSOL ENERGY; DRESDEN, NEW YORK

Citation Formats

N /A. DOE/EA-1493: Environmental Assessment for Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project (August 2004). United States: N. p., 2004. Web. doi:10.2172/837648.
Copy to clipboard
N /A. DOE/EA-1493: Environmental Assessment for Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project (August 2004). United States. doi:10.2172/837648.
Copy to clipboard
N /A. Tue . "DOE/EA-1493: Environmental Assessment for Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project (August 2004)". United States. doi:10.2172/837648. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/837648.
Copy to clipboard
@article{osti_837648,
title = {DOE/EA-1493: Environmental Assessment for Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project (August 2004)},
author = {N /A},
abstractNote = {DOE has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), DOE/EA-1493, titled ''Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project'', to analyze the potential environmental consequences of providing cost-shared funding support for the design, construction, and demonstration of an integrated multipollutant control system at AES's Greenidge Station in Dresden, New York. The system, expected to control emissions of NO{sub x}, SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HF, HCl, and Hg, would be installed on the existing, coal-fired, 107-MW Unit 4 at Greenidge. The results of the analyses provided in the EA are summarized in this Finding of No Significant Impact. The proposed action is for DOE to provide about $14.5 million for this project, while CONSOL Energy Inc. and its project partners would be responsible for the remaining $21 million. The proposed project will result in technical, environmental, and financial data from the design, operation and construction of the multi-pollutant control system. This 4.5-year, commercial-scale demonstration project would allow utilities, particularly those with units less than 300-MW in capacity, to make decisions regarding the integrated multi-pollutant control system as a viable commercial option. Based on the analyses in the EA, DOE has concluded that the Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project would result in minimal and insignificant consequences to the human environment. Thus, DOE considers that the proposed action, providing cost-shared funding for the project, is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, 42 United States Code 4321, et seq. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR Part 1021.322, DOE has concluded that preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not required, and DOE is issuing this FONSI.},
doi = {10.2172/837648},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Aug 10 00:00:00 EDT 2004},
month = {Tue Aug 10 00:00:00 EDT 2004}
}
Copy to clipboard
Technical Report:
View Technical Report
DOI:  10.2172/837648
Save / Share:
Export Metadata
Save to My Library
You must Sign In or Create an Account in order to save documents to your library.

  • ;
    On March 28-30 and May 1-4, 2007, CONSOL Energy Inc. Research & Development (CONSOL R&D) performed flue gas sampling at AES Greenidge to verify the performance of the multi-pollutant control system recently installed by Babcock Power Environmental Inc. (BPEI) on the 107-MW Unit 4 (Boiler 6). The multi-pollutant control system includes combustion modifications and a hybrid selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)/in-duct selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system to reduce NO{sub x} emissions, followed by a Turbosorp{reg_sign} circulating fluidized bed dry scrubber system and baghouse to reduce emissions of SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HCl, HF, and particulate matter. Mercury removal is provided viamore » the co-benefits afforded by the in-duct SCR, dry scrubber, and baghouse and by injection of activated carbon upstream of the scrubber, as required. The testing in March and May demonstrated that the multi-pollutant control system attained its performance targets for NO{sub x} emissions, SO{sub 2} removal efficiency, acid gas (SO{sub 3}, HCl, and HF) removal efficiency, and mercury removal efficiency. However, the ammonia slip measured between the SCR outlet and air heater inlet was consistently greater than the guarantee of 2 ppmvd {at} 3% O{sub 2}. As a result, additional testing was performed on May 30-June 1 and on June 20-21, 2007, in conjunction with tuning of the hybrid NO{sub x} control system by BPEI, in an effort to achieve the performance target for ammonia slip. This additional testing occurred after the installation of a large particle ash (LPA) screen and removal system just above the SCR reactor and a fresh SCR catalyst layer in mid-May. This report describes the results of the additional tests. During the May 30-June 1 sampling period, CONSOL R&D and Clean Air Engineering (CAE) each measured flue gas ammonia concentrations at the air heater inlet, downstream of the in-duct SCR reactor. In addition, CONSOL R&D measured flue gas ammonia concentrations at the economizer outlet, upstream of the SCR reactor, and CAE measured flue gas NO{sub x} and CO concentrations at the sampling grids located at the inlet and outlet of the SCR reactor. During the June 20-21 sampling period, CONSOL R&D measured flue gas ammonia concentrations at the air heater inlet. All ammonia measurements were performed using a modified version of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Conditional Test Method (CTM) 027. The NO{sub x} and CO measurements were performed using U.S. EPA Methods 7E and 10, respectively.« less

  • The Greenidge Multi-Pollutant Control Project was conducted as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's Power Plant Improvement Initiative to demonstrate an innovative combination of air pollution control technologies that can cost-effectively reduce emissions of SO{sub 2}, NO{sub x}, Hg, acid gases (SO{sub 3}, HCl, and HF), and particulate matter from smaller coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs). There are about 400 units in the United States with capacities of 50-300 MW that currently are not equipped with selective catalytic reduction (SCR), flue gas desulfurization (FGD), or mercury control systems. Many of these units, which collectively represent more than 55 GWmore » of installed capacity, are difficult to retrofit for deep emission reductions because of space constraints and unfavorable economies of scale, making them increasingly vulnerable to retirement or fuel switching in the face of progressively more stringent environmental regulations. The Greenidge Project sought to confirm the commercial readiness of an emissions control system that is specifically designed to meet the environmental compliance requirements of these smaller coal-fired EGUs by offering a combination of deep emission reductions, low capital costs, small space requirements, applicability to high-sulfur coals, mechanical simplicity, and operational flexibility. The multi-pollutant control system includes a NO{sub x}OUT CASCADE{reg_sign} hybrid selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)/in-duct SCR system for NO{sub x} control and a Turbosorp{reg_sign} circulating fluidized bed dry scrubbing system (with a new baghouse) for SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HCl, HF, and particulate matter control. Mercury removal is provided as a co-benefit of the in-duct SCR, dry scrubber, and baghouse, and by injection of activated carbon upstream of the scrubber, if required. The multi-pollutant control system was installed and tested on the 107-MW{sub e}, 1953-vintage AES Greenidge Unit 4 by a team including CONSOL Energy Inc. as prime contractor, AES Greenidge LLC as host site owner, and Babcock Power Environmental Inc. as engineering, procurement, and construction contractor. About 44% of the funding for the project was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, through its National Energy Technology Laboratory, and the remaining 56% was provided by AES Greenidge. Project goals included reducing high-load NO{sub x} emissions to {le} 0.10 lb/mmBtu; reducing SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HCl, and HF emissions by at least 95%; and reducing Hg emissions by at least 90% while the unit fired 2-4% sulfur eastern U.S. bituminous coal and co-fired up to 10% biomass. This report details the final results from the project. The multi-pollutant control system was constructed in 2006, with a total plant cost of $349/kW and a footprint of 0.4 acre - both substantially less than would have been required to retrofit AES Greenidge Unit 4 with a conventional SCR and wet scrubber. Start-up of the multi-pollutant control system was completed in March 2007, and the performance of the system was then evaluated over an approximately 18-month period of commercial operation. Guarantee tests conducted in March-June 2007 demonstrated attainment of all of the emission reduction goals listed above. Additional tests completed throughout the performance evaluation period showed 96% SO{sub 2} removal, 98% mercury removal (with no activated carbon injection), 95% SO{sub 3} removal, and 97% HCl removal during longer-term operation. Greater than 95% SO{sub 2} removal efficiency was observed even when the unit fired high-sulfur coals containing up to 4.8 lb SO{sub 2}/mmBtu. Particulate matter emissions were reduced by more than 98% relative to the emission rate observed prior to installation of the technology. The performance of the hybrid SNCR/SCR system was affected by problems with large particle ash, ammonia slip, and nonideal combustion characteristics, and high-load NO{sub x} emissions averaged 0.14 lb/mmBtu during long-term operation. Nevertheless, the system has reduced the unit's overall NO{sub x} emissions by 52% on a lb/mmBtu basis. The commercial viability of the multi-pollutant control system was demonstrated at AES Greenidge Unit 4. The system, which remains in service after the conclusion of the project, has enabled the unit to satisfy its permit requirements while continuing to operate profitably. As a result of the success at AES Greenidge Unit 4, three additional deployments of the Turbosorp{reg_sign} technology had been announced by the end of the project.« less

  • The digital full text of this report is divided into two parts. This part of the report contains five and a half of the twelve appendices of the report.

  • No abstract prepared.

  • ;
    CONSOL Energy Inc. Research & Development (CONSOL R&D) performed flue gas sampling at AES Greenidge to verify the performance of the multi-pollutant control system recently installed by Babcock Power Environmental Inc. (BPEI) on the 107-megawatt (MW) Unit 4 (Boiler 6). The multi-pollutant control system includes combustion modifications and a hybrid selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)/induct selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system to reduce NO{sub x} emissions, followed by a Turbosorp{reg_sign} circulating fluidized bed dry scrubber system and baghouse to reduce emissions of SO{sub 2}, SO{sub 3}, HCl, HF, and particulate matter. Mercury removal is provided via the co-benefits afforded by the in-ductmore » SCR, dry scrubber, and baghouse and by injection of activated carbon upstream of the scrubber, as required. Testing was conducted through ports located at the inlet and outlet of the SCR reactor to evaluate the performance of the hybrid NO{sub x} control system, as well as through ports located at the air heater outlet and baghouse outlet or stack to determine pollutant removal efficiencies across the Turbosorp{reg_sign} scrubber and baghouse. Data from the unit's stack continuous emission monitor (CEM) were also used for determining attainment of the performance targets for NO{sub x} emissions and SO{sub 2} removal efficiency.« less