Internal Data Search by Company/Division Name
Based on a Federal Court decision the US EPA has agreed to propose the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units. This NESHAP is to be proposed by March 16, 2011 and promulgated by November 16th, 2011. This NESHAP, and the associated requirements for MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology), are expected to be very similar in form to the Industrial Boiler MACT. The MACT floor, based on EPA regulations, cannot be less stringent than the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12% of existing sources for subcategories with 30 or more sources, or the best-performing 5 sources for subcategories with fewer than 30 sources. Accordingly at least 90% of the Utility industry will be affected by the emission standards promulgated under this MACT. The MACT requirements will require upgrades and modifications to existing emissions control equipment and the installation of new control systems to limit emissions of mercury, the other criteria metals, acid gases such as HCl, and organics. This presentation will address the potential impacts on existing Utility Assets and discuss the implications and limitations of existing control technology to control the air pollutants addressed by this NESHAP.
Revision Date: 5/11/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Air Quality, MACT, USA
The electrical generating community is aware of the U.S. EPA-proposed first-time nationwide regulations for handling and disposal of coal ash residuals (CCRs) including fly ash, bottom ash, and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) byproducts. Option one (Subtitle C) makes CCRs subject to hazardous waste requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Option two (Subtitle D) establishes stringent requirements under non-hazardous classification similar to municipal solid waste rules, also under RCRA. The industry is buzzing with speculation regarding the form of the final rule, timing, litigation and how to influence change. The critical question is “what is this going to cost?” Timely budget planning, decisions, and actions are necessary to prepare for minimum requirements common to both options, with sufficient flexibility to adapt should the more stringent classification be approved. In addition to new dry disposal requirements, existing wet ash and FGD handling systems may be phased out entirely, requiring conversion of equipment, addition of dewatering systems, and closure of ash ponds. Some states already have similar disposal requirements; others have no such regulations. Using the combined resources of detailed cost analysis for specific sites, adjustments from municipal and hazardous waste regulations and costs, trade and association summaries, existing regulations, local economic conditions, computer models, and 30 years of disposal records for other wastes help to develop high confidence level cost estimates. This paper presents an up-to-the moment rule status summary, key points of the CCR proposal and discusses optional engineering solutions available for compliance along with associated costs using the Total Cost Accounting approach. Potential impacts on beneficial uses (recycling) of CCRs are difficult to predict but must be factored into the financial decision making process.
Revision Date: 5/12/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Wastewater Treatment System, Wastewater, USA
Flyash Pond and Wastewater Treatment - Part I - Hot Topic Hour May 3, 2012
Status of proposed federal and state regulations and what will need to be done to comply with the regulations and systems and technology for eliminating wet ash handling and slurry storage in ponds. Reduction of wastewater volume as well as treat wastewater generated.
Revision Date: 5/3/2012
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, John Ward, Inc., Infilco Degremont, FLSmidth, Flyash Separation System, Wastewater Treatment System, Flyash, Regulation, Flyash Pond, Wastewater Treatment
Certifying an HCl Cems is Complex
Sargent & Lundy LLC (S&L) investigated the status of PM and HCl emissions monitors in the U.S. This included reviewing the technologies and the variety and availability of monitors. This paper presents the results of the study as well as a review of the monitoring requirements under the Utility MATS and the applicability of available monitors to meet these requirements. Also reviewed are the factors that a utility should consider in choosing to monitor particulates either with periodic stack sampling, a PM CEMS or with a PM CPMS (continuous parameter monitoring system) and the complexities in certifying an HCl CEMS with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) current Performance Specifications (PS).
Revision Date: 1/31/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 221118 - Other Electric Power , Sargent & Lundy, HCl
Utility MACT - Likely Impact Webinar - Hot Topic Hour September 9, 2010
Issues discussed relating to the impact of the Utility MACT on power plant operators; the current status of the MACT rule making; the worst case scenario of emissions limits and required controls under the MACT; the key issues to be considered when developing a strategy to achieve compliance with the MACT; control technologies and equipment that can be utilized to achieve the expected emissions limits imposed by the MACT, and various other strategies that an operator could adopt.
Revision Date: 9/9/2010
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, CEFCO Global Clean Energy, AECOM, Schreiber Yonley & Associates, Edison Electric Institute, MACT
Kenneth J. Snell, Environmental Consultant at Sargent & Lundy LLC Environmental Services Division, believes that EPA will divide sources into categories by fuel type as well as combustor type. He anticipated regulations could include (in descending order of likelihood). Mercury Acid gases (HCl and HF) Dioxins/furans Non-mercury trace metals Non-dioxin organic HAPs
Revision Date: 9/9/2010
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, MACT
Biography of Kenneth Snell - Sargent & Lundy - Hot Topic Hour September 9, 2010
BIO: Mr. Snell is an environmental specialist with more than 25 years experience in environmental permitting, compliance and control. He has degrees in environmental studies, chemical engineering, and law. Mr. Snell has prepared numerous environmental regulatory assessments and environmental permit applications for power plant projects, cement kilns, and hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities. His responsibilities also include reviewing existing and proposed power plant projects for compliance with the environmental regulations and regulatory compliance strategies.
Revision Date: 9/9/2010
Tags: Sargent & Lundy
Filter Media Selection for Dry FGD and Particulate Control - Hot Topic Hour August 11, 2011
The importance of filter media selection for dry FGD and Particulate Control was discussed.
Revision Date: 8/11/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Midwest Energy Emissions Corp, W. L. Gore, Hamon Research-Cottrell, Filter Media, Pulse Jet
Zachary Arndt emphasized that recent US EPA policies will require more baghouse installations on utility boilers in order to be in compliance with Utility MACT, Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and BART (Best Available Retrofit Technology) or Regional Haze Rule. Arndt provided an approach to selecting the appropriate baghouse fabric filter bags when high temperatures, oxygen concentrations and chemical agents are present in the inlet gas flow. He stressed the importance of understanding design conditions before the fabric media is chosen. Fabric filter bag concerns he mentioned were chemical degradation due to acid attack and thermal degradation due to elevated temperature and oxygen levels.
Revision Date: 8/11/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Filter Media
Doug discussed how the proposed U.S. EPA coal combustion residuals regulations will impact the power plant and the bottom line.
Revision Date: 5/3/2012
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Flyash Pond, Regulation, Wastewater Treatment
Revision Date: 9/26/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Mercury, NOx, SO2, Research & Development, MATS, Coal
Multi Pollutant Control Webinar - Hot Topic Hour - Part 1, September 26, 2013
Revision Date: 9/26/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Energy & Environmental Research Center, Sargent & Lundy, Sorbent Trap, MATS, Coal, HCl, Cadmium, Selenium, Mercury, NOx, SO2, Research & Development
Douglas anticipates a final rule to classify CCRs under Subtitle D, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), similar to Municipal Waste.
Revision Date: 10/3/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Flyash Pond, Bottom Ash, CCR, Regulation, Ash Handling
Coal Ash and CCR Issues and Standards Webinar - Hot Topic Hour October 3, 2013
Revision Date: 10/3/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, GSE Environmental, Sargent & Lundy, NAES Corp., Clyde Bergemann, Conveying, Dry Ash Conveyor, Geosynthetic Lining, Flyash Pond, Bottom Ash, CCR, Regulation, Chemical Fixation, Ash Handling
This case study describes a sky vent solution for a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) which addresses noise and vibration concerns at a combined cycle power plant in Texas. The solution incorporated a whisper Trim III noise attenuating flow cage along with a downstream diffuser.
Revision Date: 9/8/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Emerson Process Management, Sargent & Lundy, Heat Recovery Steam Generator, Control Valve, Valve, Noise, Vibration, USA
This study by Sargent & Lundy provides methods to determine costs of DSI for acid gas removal. The sorbent requirement is a function of particle size, particulate control device, and other factors. 2016 cost factors are utilized. Based on commercial testing, removal efficiencies with DSI are limited by the particulate capture device employed. Trona, when captured in an ESP, typically removes 40 to 50% of SO2 without an increase in particulate emissions, whereas hydrated lime may remove an even lower percentage of SO2. A baghouse used with sodium-based sorbents generally achieves a higher SO2 removal efficiency (70 to 90%) than that of an ESP. DSI technology, however, should not be applied to fuels with sulfur content greater than 2 lb SO2/MMBtu.
Revision Date: 2/25/2019
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Sargent & Lundy, Dry Sorbent Injection
L&T and Sargent & Lundy have Joint Venture
Larsen & Toubro is a major Indian-based valve supplier. It is also involved in many of the processes that use valves. This gives it an edge in many industries but especially so in power.
Revision Date: 6/18/2019
Tags: Valves 阀, Larsen & Toubro, Sargent & Lundy, Valves, Consulting Services, Engineering Services, India