Biomass Wars

***
Here are two well-done web sites with opposite views on the benefits of using biomass for heat and power.

Partnership for Policy Integrity (OFPI)

National Alliance of Forestry Owners
___

Tailoring Rule Guidance, November 2010

GHG PSD and Title V Guidance

Regarding biogenic emissions sources, EPA indicates that it's still unsure of how to account for them and plans to issue further guidance next year. It's interesting how they think May of 2011 is "well before the start of the second phase of PSD implementation pursuant to the Tailoring Rule"; heck, that could give someone one or two whole months to respond! Here's a relevant section from the document:

“…numerous stakeholders requested that EPA exclude, either partially or wholly, emissions of GHG from bioenergy and other biogenic sources for the purposes of the BACT analysis and the PSD program based on the view that the biomass used to produce bioenergy feedstocks can also be a carbon sink and therefore management of that biomass can play a role in reducing GHGs. EPA plans to provide further guidance on the [sic] how to consider the unique GHG attributes of biomass as fuel.

“Even before EPA takes further action, however, permitting authorities may consider, when carrying out their BACT analyses for GHG, the environmental, energy and economic benefits that may accrue from the use of certain types of biomass and other biogenic sources (e.g., biogas from landfills) for energy generation, consistent with existing air quality standards. In particular, a variety of federal and state policies have recognized that some types of biomass can be part of a national strategy to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and to reduce emissions of GHGs. Federal and state policies, along with a number of state and regional efforts, are currently under way to foster the expansion of renewable resources and promote biomass as a way of addressing climate change and enhancing forest-management. EPA believes that it is appropriate for permitting authorities to account for both existing federal and state policies and their underlying objectives in evaluating the environmental, energy and economic benefits of biomass fuel. Based on these considerations, permitting authorities might determine that, with respect to the biomass component of a facility’s fuel stream, certain types of biomass by themselves are BACT for GHGs. To assist permitting authorities further in considering these factors, as well as to provide a measure of national consistency and certainty, EPA intends to issue guidance in January 2011 that will provide a suggested framework for undertaking an analysis of the environmental, energy and economic benefits of biomass in Step 4 of the top-down BACT process, that, as a result, may enable permitting authorities to simplify and streamline BACT determinations with respect to certain types of biomass.

“… Finally, EPA also plans to determine by May 2011, well before the start of the second phase of PSD implementation pursuant to the Tailoring Rule, whether the issuance of a supplemental rule is appropriate to address whether the Clean Air Act would allow the Agency and permitting authorities or permitted sources, when determining the applicability of PSD permitting requirements to sources of biogenic emissions, to quantify carbon emissions from bioenergy or biogenic sources by applying separate accounting rules for different types of feedstocks that reflect the net impact of their carbon emissions.” pages 9 & 10

Regarding BACT:
Refers to technical “white papers” that provide industry-sector-specific GHG BACT guidance, but it doesn’t say where to find these documents. (page 21)

The guidance explicitly requires consideration of alternate processes that may have better energy efficiency. They offer an example of comparing a supercritical and subcritical coal fired boiler (page 22). The guidance presents a detailed analysis of this issue starting on page 27.
***

GHG Reporting, Subpart W, Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems

Final rule published 11/8/10; published in Federal Register 11/30.
Final Rule

Here's an overview article published March 2011 in the Air Pollution Consultant on-line magazine (available through Cyber Regs). (Added 6/14/11, KMM)


All the Part 98 subparts are collected here:
GHG Reporting Rule Web Site

Here's the text relating monitoring and QA/QC requirements (§98.234):

The GHG emissions data for petroleum and natural gas emissions sources must be quality assured as applicable as specified in this section. Offshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities shall adhere to the monitoring and QA/QC requirements as set forth in 30 CFR 250.

(a) You must use any of the methods described as follows in this paragraph to conduct leak detection(s) of equipment leaks and through-valve leakage from all source types listed in §98.233(k), (o), (p) and (q) that occur during a calendar year, except as provided in paragraph (a)(4) of this section [which requires optical imaging for inaccessible areas as defined].

(1) Optical gas imaging instrument. Use an optical gas imaging instrument for equipment leak detection in accordance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, §60.18(i)(1) and (2) of the Alternative work practice for monitoring equipment leaks [This is italicised in the original. It would seem to refer to some document, but word searching this rule yielded no other occurrence.]. Any emissions detected by the optical gas imaging instrument is a leak unless screened with Method 21 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7) monitoring, in which case 10,000 ppm or greater is designated a leak. In addition, you must operate the optical gas imaging instrument to image the source types required by this subpart in accordance with the instrument manufacturer’s operating parameters.

(2) Method 21. Use the equipment leak detection methods in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, Method 21. If using Method 21 monitoring, if an instrument reading of 10,000 ppm or greater is measured, a leak is detected. Inaccessible emissions sources, as defined in 40 CFR part 60, are not exempt from this subpart. Owners or operators must use alternative leak detection devices as described in paragraph(a)(1) of this section to monitor inaccessible equipment leaks or vented emissions.

(3) Infrared laser beam illuminated instrument. Use an infrared laser beam illuminated instrument for equipment leak detection. Any emissions detected by the infrared laser beam illuminated instrument is a leak unless screened with Method 21 monitoring, in which case 10,000 ppm or greater is designated a leak. In addition, you must operate the infrared laser beam illuminated instrument to detect the source types required by this subpart in accordance with the instrument manufacturer’s operating parameters.

(4) Optical gas imaging instrument. An optical gas imaging instrument must be used for all source types that are inaccessible and cannot be monitored without elevating the monitoring personnel more than 2 meters above a support surface.

(5) Acoustic leak detection device. Use the acoustic leak detection device to detect through-valve leakage. When using the acoustic leak detection device to quantify the through-valve leakage, you must use the instrument manufacturer’s calculation methods to quantify the through-valve leak. When using the acoustic leak detection device, if a leak of 3.1 scf per hour or greater is calculated, a leak is detected. In addition, you must operate the acoustic leak detection device to monitor the source valves required by this subpart in accordance with the instrument manufacturer’s operating parameters.

Comments:

• Is acoustic leak detection (5) limited to only a subset of required monitoring? Appears that way.
• It looks like (4) is an extension of (1) and indicates that, in some cases, using a camera is the only option.

***

GHG Tailoring Rule

The rule (via the preamble only) will allow Step 1 "anyway" sources to commence construction after January 2, 2011 without considering GHG emissions as long as their permit was issued before that date. But Step 2 sources (those who become major after July 1, 2011 due solely to GHG emissions) must "begin actual construction" before 7/1/11. If they have a final permit but don't begin actual construction--which does not include the consideration of having entered into binding contracts--they will have to reopen the permit to include consideration of GHGs. See 75 FR 31527. A discussion of reasoning behind this begins on 75 FR 31593.

The rule establishes a "subject to regulation" definition for GHGs that contains the 100K and 75K tpy thresholds for CO2e. Once these thresholds are surpassed, then the source must determine major source/modification status based on the mass emissions of combined GHGs relative to the standard 100/250 tpy thresholds. In this case, the source may not be major if it has low CO2 emissions and moderate emissions of a high GWP pollutant such as N2O (because each GHG is added based on its mass only, without multiplying by its GWP).

This "subject to regulation" approach somehow facilitates adoption by SIP-approved states such that the rule becomes effective in all states at the same time.

It appears that, in Step 2, a major modification must 1) result in a net CO2e increase greater than 75k tpy and 2) occur at a facility with a CO2e PTE of >100k tpy. CONFIRM

Senate Climate Bill Introduced Amid Considerable Fanfare, and an Uncertain Future

Good summary and analysis of the new Senate cap & trade bill...

Senate Climate Bill article (Marten Law)

GHG Tailoring Rule

Highlights:

Jan 2, 1011 to June 30, 2011:
Only sources that are major due to emissions of a non-GHG pollutant would be subject to PSD and Title V if their CO2e PTE is 75,000 tpy or more.

July 1, 2011 and on:
Sources would not have to be major for a non-GHG in order to be major due to GHG emissions. The major source threshold for PSD and Title V will be 100,000 tpy CO2e. The major modification threshold for PSD will be 75,000 tpy CO2e.

By July 1, 2012:
EPA will complete rulemaking to address smaller sources of GHGs.

The rule does not provide any BACT guidance, but EPA recognizes the need and is working on it. They plan to issue technical guidance and tools by June 2010 and policy guidance by the end of 2010.

Fact sheet link

Final rule link

GHG Reporting Nuts and Bolts - Article

Helpful article with some detailed guidelines and suggestions regarding GHG reporting:

GHG Reporting Article

GHG Reporting - Subpart W, brief summary

"EPA has changed the proposal in three ways. First, the rules add two new reporting segments within the sector—onshore petroleum and natural gas production and natural gas distribution facilities. Second, the rule seeks to reduce the burden on the regulated community by taking a new approach to emissions monitoring in the sector. EPA’s previous proposal relied heavily on comprehensive leak detection and direct measurements for capturing emissions data. Because emissions sources in this sector are relatively diffuse, i.e., thousands of miles of pipelines and valves, EPA recognized that direct emissions monitoring would impose a significant cost on the industry. As a result, EPA’s current proposal allows most facilities to measure emissions through engineering estimates, emission modeling software, and emission factors.[4] Third, EPA seeks to alleviate confusion caused by the previous proposal by providing separate definitions for “vented” and “fugitive” emissions instead of collectively defining both sources as “fugitive.”

"EPA’s proposal requires facilities that emit greater than 25,000 metric tons or more per year of CO2 equivalent to report their GHG emissions. Due to the diffuse nature of the storage facilities, wells, and associated pipelines in the industry sector, the proposal contains three different “facility” definitions for three different industry segments, all of which differ from the definition provided in the 2009 GHG Reporting Rule. For example, a facility in the onshore petroleum and natural gas production segment is defined to include all petroleum or natural gas equipment associated with production wells that are under common ownership or control and within one hydrocarbon basin.[5] Therefore, unlike the 2009 GHG Reporting Rule, an onshore production “facility” need not be connected or even located on adjacent properties; rather, the total fugitive and vented emissions from an unconnected network of wells, pipelines, and processing facilities would count towards the 25,000 metric ton reporting limit. Unique facility definitions are also provided for the offshore petroleum and natural gas production and natural gas distribution industry segments."

EPA Releases Additional Proposed Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting Rules for Three Industry Sectors Marten Law

Proposed GHG reporting for petroleum and natural gas production - Subpart W

March 22, 2010 "(P)roposed rule for the mandatory reporting of vented and fugitive methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from petroleum and natural gas industry facilities emitting 25,000 metric tons or more of carbon dioxide equivalent per year."

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Regulatory Initiatives Climate Change U.S. EPA

Letters regarding EPA regulation of GHGs -- MPA and others

Here are some letters regarding EPA regulation of GHG emissions:

MPA letters to Baucus --
http://companyweb/General%20Documents/Docs%20for%20posting/GHG%20letters/MPA%20letter%20to%20Baucus%202-10.pdf

http://companyweb/General%20Documents/Docs%20for%20posting/GHG%20letters/MPA%20letter%20to%20Baucus%203-10.pdf

MPA letter to Attny Gen Bullock --
http://companyweb/General%20Documents/Docs%20for%20posting/GHG%20letters/Intervention%20Endangerment-Bullock%20final.pdf

Letter to EPA Adminstrator Jackson from group of senators including Baucus --
http://companyweb/General%20Documents/Docs%20for%20posting/GHG%20letters/Rockefeller%20Letter%20-%202-10.pdf

Response from Jackson to Baucus --
http://companyweb/General%20Documents/Docs%20for%20posting/GHG%20letters/Jackson%20Response%20Letter%20-%202-10.pdf

EPA Raises Initial Threshold for Greenhouse-Gas Regulation - WSJ.com

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will set an emissions threshold of at least 75,000 tons a year—and possibly more than 100,000 tons a year—for power plants and other industrial projects for the initial stage of stationary-source greenhouse-gas regulations between 2011 to 2012, the head of the agency said Wednesday [3/3/2010].

EPA Raises Initial Threshold for Greenhouse-Gas Regulation - WSJ.com

Minnesota MPCA GHG guidelines

Climate Change web page
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/climatechange/

Environmental review web page
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/programs/envr_p.html

General Guidance for Carbon Footprint Development in Environmental Review
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/p-ear1-07.pdf

Completion of a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Evaluation
7/16/2008 policy memo
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/greenhousegas-memo0708.pdf

EPA GHG Endangerement and Cause & Contribute Findings

Final findings on 12/7/2009.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html