A 1.1 Electric Sector Technology Transition and Emissions
A1.1 Electric Sector Technology Transition and Emissions
John Kinsman – Edison Electric Institute
This presentation will overview the many factors influencing the transitioning electric power sector, including clean air issues at the federal and state level (environmental policies and regulations, legislation and judicial decisions), evolving power generation sources and technology advances, fuels issues, energy efficiency, electrification, permitting, and more.
A 1.2 A Look at the Biden EPA’s Source Specific Determinations: Trends
A1.2 A Look at the Biden EPA's Source Specific Determinations: Trends
Eric Hiser – Jordan Hiser & Joy, P.L.C.
While EPA’s large rulemakings such as the Clean Power Plan/Affordable Clean Energy and Interstate Transport FIP get much attention, EPA’s New Source Review (NSR) program plays an important role in determining what changes and modifications a facility can make and what the pollution control or enforcement consequences may be of various decisions. This presentation will review recent EPA NSR source-specific determinations in both the permitting and enforcement areas to evaluate trends under the Biden Administration to assist participants in understanding the evolving risks during a period of profound transition in the U.S. energy economy.
A 1.3 The Role For Natural Gas Utilities In A Clean Energy Future
A1.3 The Role For Natural Gas Utilities In A Clean Energy Future
Sapna Gheewala – AGA
The presentation will address a pathway forward for natural gas, which maximizes environmental benefits and supports renewable resources to realize emissions reductions in a low carbon future. Energy efficiency, RNG, and Hydrogen are featured tools to leverage our existing infrastructure into the future of net-zero emissions.
A 1.4 Lessons Learned From Major Projects – Solutions for Today | Options for Tomorrow
A1.4 Lessons Learned from Major Projects Solutions for Today | Options for Tomorrow
MAJOR TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS AT NETL: PAST & FUTURE
Thomas A. Sarkus
Science & Technology Strategic Plans & Programs, National Energy Technology
Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy
The U.S. DOE and NETL has co-funded more than 80 major fossil energy and carbon management
demonstration projects since 1980s. The presentation will include Carbon Capture & Storage and
future funding opportunities for major demonstrations and other large-scale projects relevant to
DOE’s fossil energy and carbon management priorities, for example those stemming from the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, will be summarized.
A 1.5 Framing to classify issues and manage conflict
A1.5 Framing to clarify issues and manage conflict
Greg Demmitt – Safety Management Group
Transmission construction often deals with conflict, e.g., with customers or regulatory agencies. Bolman and Deal, in Reframing Organizations, introduced four frames to help identify the root sources of contact, as well as to narrow the focus of discussion in resolving conflict. This presentation will describe how to identify these frames and also give techniques for reframing discussions to move toward mutually acceptable solutions.
What are the four frames of organizational structure?
Which frame is most prevalent in conflict? Which is encountered the least?
How do I reframe in a way that encourages communication without manipulating the response?
The presentation will review the changes and advances that EPA and others have made during the last few years. It will address ozone and PM2.5 modeling, ambient air policy , changes to the models and more.
A 2.2 Managing Permitting Risks in Carbon Capture and Sequestration Projects
A2.2 Managing Permitting Risks in Carbon Capture and Sequestration Projects
Matthew Dobbins – Vinson & Elkins
Despite promulgating rules for carbon capture and sequestration facilities in 2010, only a handful of states have obtained primacy from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to issue Class VI permit’s under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act’s Underground Injection Control Program. EPA as the permitting authority raises a number of permitting risks, from delays to additional opportunities for third parties to challenge permits. EPA as the permitting authority also the potential to trigger additional federal environmental reviews that otherwise would not be required if the state agency issued the permit. Moreover, even with several states (e.g., Wyoming, North Dakota) obtaining primacy, the differing approaches taken by these states raise potential permitting risks and project constraints. This presentation will navigate the various federal and state permitting issues that can arise when developing CCS facilities, and identify opportunities to decrease regulatory risks and spur project development.
A 2.4 CCUS Site Selection: Local Siting Conditions and Project Financials
A2.4 Considerations for CCUS Site Selection: Local Siting Conditions and Impacts on Project Financials
Charles Hostetler – SCS Engineers
A number of generalized tools and concepts exist to assess the capacity for carbon dioxide storage on a regional scale. An issue for assessing carbon dioxide storage capacity for local point-source emitters is gathering enough data from readily available sources to determine the potential for carbon sequestration on a local scale, particularly in geologic settings that are not thought of as traditional; e.g., depleted oil fields or coal beds. In this talk we examine some methods for assessing carbon sequestration capacity at local scales and in non-traditional terrains, and consider the impacts of characterization uncertainty on project financials.
A 2.5 Utility Adaptation in a Post-mitigation Environment
A2.5 Utility Level Adaptation in a Post-mitigation Environment
Jesse Frederick – WZI
The answer to the policy question “adaptation vs. mitigation” is complex and best framed by the challenges and outcomes associated with each policy action. The move to a federally driven ACE-based framework reflects a return from market driven tools and impact mitigation to the long history of command and control to balance societal needs and cost-effective adaptation at the utility level. This presentation provides: an overview of the issues of mitigation and adaptation, a historic perspective of the evolution of policy in the context of the trend in policy migration from adaptative measures to the aggressive focus on mitigation of utility-related impacts, selected historic policy-level adaptation measures used to meet previous challenges that were managed and a discussion of the emerging challenges and the application of the historic suite of measures. Lastly, this presentation considers the unique issue of sustainability of California’s management of utility-scale measures framed against the federal change in intent, particularly in the context of California industrial rate base erosion.
New Source Review (NSR) is one of the most contentious Clean Air Act program and has been subject of several recent developments. These developments include administration changes that affected or will affect program elements and court challenges. In addition, there are efforts at State level to address program implementation. NSR permitting (which includes nonattainment major NSR permitting, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting, and minor NSR permitting) continues to be affected by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policy and court decisions regarding implementation of the programs, and other issues. With the new administration, several major NSR policy shifts are likely to come into the picture. I plan to discuss major developments in NSR, point out ways that facility operations could be affected by these developments, indicate what lay ahead, and identify issues that remain unsettled.
A 3.2 Environmental Permitting and Siting for Utility-Scale Renewables
A3.3 Environmental Permitting and Siting Considerations for Utility-Scale Renewable Development
Amanda Miller – Olsson
While a number of factors contribute to successful development of a renewable project, few factors are as critical as having a proven and effective strategy for site selection. This presentation will demonstrate how a successful strategy for project siting can strengthen the financial position of the project while avoiding or limiting resistance to the project. The presentation will explain how to identify and understand key project parameters, avoid environmental constraints, and mitigate risk through project visualization and stakeholder communication. The presentation will also address the importance of identifying state and local permit requirements and understanding local stakeholder considerations. Finally, the presentation will demonstrate the importance of using a cross-functional team of environmental scientists; geotechnical structural, transmission and distribution and civil engineers; land acquisition experts; construction managers; and community outreach professionals. Lessons learned from successful project execution will also be shared.
A 3.3 Testing and Monitoring Plans for CO2 Storage Projects: MSW and CCR
A3.4 Developing Testing and Monitoring Plans for CO2 Storage Projects: Lessons Learned from MSW and CCR
Kacey Garber – SCS Engineers
To protect underground sources of drinking water, it is essential to develop effective testing and monitoring plans for carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. The regulatory framework and practice for CCS are similar to Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and Coal Combustion Residual (CCR) disposal sites; however, the risk and related cost implications of monitoring network errors in CCS projects are significantly higher. In this talk, we discuss key considerations for developing testing and monitoring plans for CCS projects based on our understanding of MSW and CCR regulatory frameworks and in the context of lessons learned from those mature monitoring programs.
A 3.4 Embracing Digital Transformation for Proactive Environmental Compliance
A3.4 Embracing Digital Transformation for Proactive Environmental Compliance
The journey to Proactive Environmental Compliance maturity is often riddled by uncertainty, but it doesn’t have to be. After this session with Encamp’s CEO and Co-founder, Luke Jacobs, to enterprises and leading EHS teams participating in the event will gain actionable insights on how to transform their environmental compliance programs with digital technology and expert support:
Building a strong foundation for compliance data
Maintaining continuous data collection
Automating regulatory updates and notifications
Automating compliance reporting
Building a unified data-system across all their compliance program areas
A 3.5 Streamlining the CAA – How it can Help the New Administration
A3.5 Streamlining the CAA - How it can Help the New Administration with its Regulatory Agenda
William Smalling – The Law Offices of William Smalling
• President Joe Biden on Jan. 21 directed agencies to examine dozens of Trump-era rules, including carbon emissions, clean air rollbacks, and Clean Air Act rules on science and costs.
• Any bold standards Biden has in mind to stem emissions from industry through the Clean Air Act will almost certainly get challenged in court.
• The cycle of rulemakings followed by years-long lawsuits is a signal that the Clean Air Act needs to be amended to give the President more direct authority.
• President Biden may have to choose between innovative actions or traditional “nuts and bolts” regulation under the statute in order to avoid defeat in a conservative Supreme Court skeptical of broad EPA powers.
• Likely a lot harder to do more flexible, ambitious and innovative programs under these older laws because a conservative SCOTUS may be predisposed to overrule such programs.
• This proposal advances an alternate solution of simplification and modernization of the CAA.
• The current CAA is a virtual field of landmines set to disrupt new, more flexible, ambitious and innovative programs.
• The complexity of the 1970, 1977 and 1990 versions of the CAA make challenge of new control programs easy.
The current watch list of air issues on Biden’s agenda are:
• Power Plant Carbon Rules
• Clean Air Act Analysis
• ‘Once In, Always In’
• National Ambient Air Quality Standards
1. Will the “New” CAA reduce the amount of pollution controlled?
Answer: No. Emission reductions have averaged nationwide about 1.5% per year since the 1970 CAA. Additionally, GHGs emission controls are being added to the “New” CAA.
2. Will the “New” CAA reduce red tape?
3. Will the “New” CAA reduce jobs in the “Environmental” Professions.
Answer: Possibly, but job growth in other professions will more than offset any Environmental Profession reductions.