15-i ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PR OPOSED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

15.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 15.2 AIR EMISSIONS ANALYSIS ............................................................................................1 15.2.1 Air Emissions Descriptions ......................................................................................1 15.2.1.1 Sulfur Dioxide ................................................................................................... 2 15.2.1.2 Nitrogen Oxides ................................................................................................ 2 15.2.1.3 Mercury ............................................................................................................. 3 15.2.1.4 Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ) ...................................................................................... 3 15.2.1.5 Particulate Matter

.............................................................................................. 4

6 7 7 8 9 15.2.2 Air Quality Regulation .............................................................................................5 15.2.3 Global Climate Change ............................................................................................6 15.2.3.1 Impacts of Climate Change on the Environment

.............................................. 15.2.3.2 Causes of Climate Change

................................................................................ 15.2.3.3 Stabilization of CO 2 Concentrations

................................................................. 15.2.3.4 The Beneficial Impact of the Rule on CO 2 Emissions

...................................... 15.2.3.5 The Incremental Impact of the Rule on Climate Change

................................. 15.2.4 Analytical Methods for Air Emissions ....................................................................9 15.2.5 Effects on Power Plant Emissions .........................................................................10 15.2.6 Effects on Upstream Fuel-Cycle Emissions ..........................................................14 15.3 WETLAND, ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ..............................................................................................15 15.4 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS ........................................................................................15 15.5 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS ......................................................................15 15.6 NOISE AND AESTHETICS .............................................................................................16 15.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ...........................................................1615-1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PR OPOSED ENERGY CONSERVATION
STANDARDS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS

15.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes potential environmental effects that may result from energy conservation standards for small electric motors. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s proposed energy conservation standards are not site-speci fic and would apply to all 50 states and U.S. territories. Therefore, none of the proposed standards would impact land uses, cause any direct disturbance to the land, or directly affect biological resources in any one area.

All of the trial standard levels (TSLs) are expected to reduce energy consumption in comparison to the baseline efficiency levels. These changes in the demand for electricity are the primary drivers in analyzing environmental effects. Estimates of source energy savings can be found in the utility impact analysis in chapter 13 of this technical support document (TSD).

The primary impact of the TSLs is in air quality resulting from changes in power plant operations and capacity additions. Therefore, much of this chapter describes the air quality analysis, and the latter part describes potential impacts to other environmental resources.

15.2 AIR EMISSIONS ANALYSIS
The primary focus of the environmental analysis is the impact on air quality of energy conservation standards for small electric motors. The outcomes of the environmental analysis are driven by changes in power plant types and quantities of electricity generated under each of the alternatives. Changes in generation are described in the utility impact analysis in TSD chapter 13.

15.2.1 Air Emissions Descriptions

For each of the TSLs, DOE calculated total power-sector emissions based on output from NEMS-BT model (see chapter 13 for description of the model). This analysis considers three pollutants: sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), and mercury (Hg). An air pollutant is any substance in the air that ca n cause harm to humans or the environment. Pollutants may be natural or man-made (i.e., anth ropogenic) and may take the fo rm of solid particles (i.e., particulates or particulate ma tter), liquid droplets, or gases a . This analysis also considers carbon dioxide (CO 2 ).

a More information on air pollution characteristics and regul ations is available on the U.S. Environment Protection Agent (EPA)’s website at www.epa.gov.15-2 15.2.1.1 Sulfur Dioxide

Sulfur dioxide, or SO 2 , belongs to the family of sulfur oxide gases (SOx). These gases dissolve easily in water. Sulfur is prevalent in al l raw materials, including crude oil, coal, and ore that contains common metals like alum inum, copper, zinc, lead, and iron. SO x gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil, is burned, and when gasoline is extracted from oil, or metals are extracted from ore. SO2 disso lves in water vapor to form acid, and interacts with other gases and particles in the air to form sulfates and other products that can be harmful to people and their environment. 1

DOE has preliminarily determined that SO 2 emissions from affected Electric Generating Units (EGUs) are subject to nationwide and regi onal emissions cap and trading programs that create uncertainty about standard’s impact on SO 2 emissions. Title IV of the Clean Air Act sets an annual emissions cap on SO 2 for all affected EGUs. SO 2 emissions from 28 eastern States and the District of Columbia (D.C.) are also li mited under the Clean Air In terstate Rule (CAIR, published in the Federal Register on May 12, 2005. 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005), which creates an allowance-based trading program that will gr adually replace the Titl e IV program in those States and D.C.. (The recent legal history surr ounding CAIR is discussed below.) The attainment of the emissions caps is flexible among EGUs and is enforced through the use of emissions allowances and tradable permits. The standard could lead EGUs to trade allowances and increase SO 2 emissions that offset some or all SO 2 emissions reductions attributable to the standard. DOE is not certain that there will be reduced overall SO 2 emissions from the standards. The NEMS-BT modeling system th at DOE plans to use to forecast emissions reductions currently indicates that no physical re ductions in power sector emissions would occur for SO 2,. However, remaining uncertainty prevents DOE from estimating SO 2 reductions from the standards at this time.

Even though DOE is not certain that there will be reduced overall emissions from the standard, there may be an economic benefit from reduced demand for SO 2 emission allowances. Electricity savings decrease the generation of SO 2 emissions from power production, which can lessen the need to purchase SO 2 emissions allowance credits, and thereby decrease the costs of complying with regulatory caps on emissions.

15.2.1.2 Nitrogen Oxides
Nitrogen oxides , or NO x , are the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases, all of which contain nitrogen and oxygen in varyi ng amounts. Many of the nitrogen oxides are colorless and odorless. However, one common pollutant, nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), along with particles in the air can often be seen as a reddish-brown layer over many urban areas. NO 2 is the specific form of NO x reported in this document. NO x is one of the main ingredients involved in the formation of ground-level ozone, which can tr igger serious respiratory problems. It can contribute to the formation of acid rain, and can impair visibility in areas such as national parks. NO x also contributes to the fo rmation of fine particles that can impair human health. 215-3 Nitrogen oxides form when fossil fuel is bur ned at high temperatures, as in a combustion process. The primary manmade sources of NO x are motor vehicles, electr ic utilities, and other industrial, commercial, and residentia l sources that burn fossil fuels. NO x can also be formed naturally. Electric ut ilities account for a bout 22 percent of NO x emissions in the United States.

15.2.1.3 Mercury
Coal-fired power plants emit mercury (Hg) found in coal during the burning process. While coal-fired power plants ar e the largest remaining source of human-generated Hg emissions in the United States, they contri bute very little to th e global Hg pool or to contamination of U.S. waters. U.S. coal-fired power plants emit Hg in three different forms: oxidized Hg (likely to deposit within the United States); elemental H g, which can travel thousands of miles before depositing to land and water; a nd Hg that is in particulate form. Atmospheric Hg is then deposited on land, lakes, rivers, and estuaries th rough rain, snow, and dry deposition. Once there, it can transform into methylmercury and accumula te in fish tissue through bioaccumulation.

Americans are exposed to methylmercury pr imarily by eating contaminated fish. Because the developing fetus is the most sensitive to the toxic effects of methylmercury, women of childbearing age are regarded as the population of greatest concern. Children exposed to methylmercury before birth may be at increased risk of poor performa nce on neurobehavioral tasks, such as those measuring attention, fine motor function, language skills, visual-spatial abilities, and verbal memory.

15.2.1.4 Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 )
Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is not a criteria pollutant (see belo w), but it is of interest because of its classification as a gree nhouse gas (GHG). GHGs trap the sun’ s radiation inside the Earth’s atmosphere and either occur na turally in the atmosphere or result from human activities. Naturally occurring GHGs include water vapor, CO 2 , methane (CH 4 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), and ozone (O 3 ). Human activities, however, add to the leve ls of most of these naturally occurring gases. For example, CO 2 is emitted to the atmosphere when solid waste, fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), wood, and wood products are bur ned. In 2007, over 90 percent of anthropogenic (i.e., human-made) CO 2 emissions resulted from burning fossil fuels. 3

Concentrations of CO 2 in the atmosphere are naturally regulated by numerous processes, collectively known as the “carbon cycle.” The move ment of carbon between the atmosphere and the land and oceans is dominated by natural proce sses, such as plant photosynthesis. While these natural processes can absorb some of the anthropogenic CO 2 emissions produced each year, billions of metric tons are a dded to the atmosphere annually. In the United States, in 2007, CO 2 emissions from electricity generation accounted for 39 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions. 315-4 15.2.1.5 Particulate Matter
Particulate matter (PM) also known as pa rticle pollution, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Pa rticle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates an d sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles.

PM impacts are of concern due to human e xposures that can impact health. Particle pollution - especially fine particles - contains microscopic solids or liqui d droplets that are so small that they can get deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Numerous scientific studies have linked particle polluti on exposure to a variety of problems, including: increased respiratory symptoms, such as irrita tion of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing, for example; decreased lung function; aggravated asthma; de velopment of chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfat al heart attacks; and premature death in people with heart or lung disease.

Power plant emissions can have either direct or indirect impacts on PM. A portion of the pollutants emitted by a power plant are in the form of particulates as they leave the smoke stack. These are direct PM emissions. Meanwhile other pollutants such as SO 2 and NO x interact with other elements in the atmosphere to produce PM at some distance from the power plant.

In general, the relative impacts of direct PM emissions reduction compared to other pollutants on PM exposures are much more difficu lt to estimate than other emissions reductions. This is due to the complex interactions betw een PM, other power plan t emissions, meteorology and atmospheric chemistry that impact human e xposure to particulates. Human exposure to PM usually occurs at a significant distance from th e power plants that are emitting particulates and particulate precursors. When power plant emi ssions travel this distance they undergo highly complex atmospheric chemical reactions a nd the proportion of impacts and exposures attributable to different emissions can vary dramatically for different emissions sources and types of particulate precursors. Thes e variations in emissions impact s depend on the distance to the source, land use and land cover, and the local and regional meteorology responsible for pollutant transport, deposition and atmospheric chemistry.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled and summarized technical studies regarding PM source apportionment. In this compilation of studies, sources are classified into seven categories: (1) Secondary sulfate/coal, (2) Secondary organic matter/mobile sources, (3) Nitrate dominated sour ces, (4) Biomass burning, (5) Industrial, (6) Crustal and salt (7) Other. In these studies, the PM exposures attributed to coal power plants are not disaggregated between direct particulate emissions and SO 2 emissions from these power plants. This is because both SO 2 and direct PM emissions aggregate and interact with water droplets and emissions from other sources to create final particulates that ar e a complex mixture of different constituents. Both the SO 2 and direct PM are emitted from th e power plant at the same time and if the final aerosol particle contains both su lfur compounds and other PM components it is not possible to attribute that aerosol particle to one source or the other. Therefore, DOE is not15-5 e

stered currently able to perform modeling that can make reliable estimates of the impact of direct PM emissions on air quality at this time.

15.2.2 Air Quality Regulation

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 list 188 toxic air pollutants that EPA is required to control. 1 EPA has set national air quali ty standards for six common pollutants (also referred to as “criteria” pollutants), two of which are SO 2 and NO x . Also, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 gave EPA the authority to cont rol acidification and to require operators of electric power plants to reduce emissions of SO 2 and NO x . Title IV of the 1990 amendments established a capand-trade program for SO 2 intended to help control acid rain. 1 This cap-and-trade program serves as a model for more recent programs with similar features.

In 2005, EPA issued the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) under sections 110 and 111 of the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Parts 51, 96, and 97). 4 b CAIR will permanently cap emissions of SO 2 and NOx in eastern States of the United States. CAIR achieves large reductions of SO 2 and/or NOx emissions across 28 eastern States and the District of Columbia. States must achiev the required emission reductions using one of two compliance options: 1) meet an emission budget for each regulated state by requiring power plants to partic ipate in an EPA-admini interstate cap-and-trade system th at caps emissions in two stages, or 2) meet an individual state emissions budget through measures of th e state’s choosing. Phase 1 caps for NO x are to be in place in 2009. Phase 1 caps for SO 2 are to be in place in 2010. The Phase 2 caps for both NO x and SO 2 are due in 2015.

Also in 2005, EPA issued the final rule en titled “Standards of Performance for New and Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Steam Ge nerating Units,” under sections 110 and 111 of the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Parts 60, 63, 72, and 75) 5 . This rule, called the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), was closely related to the CAIR and established standards of performance for Hg emissions from new and existing coal-fired elec tric utility steam gene rating units. The CAMR regulated Hg emissions from coal-fired power plants.

On February 8, 2008, the U.S. Court of App eals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued its decision in State of New Jersey, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency

, c in which the Court, among other actions, vacated the CAMR referenced above.

On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals fo r the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued its decision in North Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency

, which vacated the CAIR issued by the U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency on March 10, 2005. d

b See http://www.epa.gov/cleanairinterstaterule/.

c No. 05-1097, 2008 WL 341338, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 8, 2008).

d North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008) See http://www.epa.gov/cl eanairinterstaterule/.15-6 CAIR was the vehicle for capping NOx emissions

. e On December 23, 2008, the D.C. Circuit decided to allow CAIR to remain in effect until it is replaced by a rule consistent with the court’s earlier opinion. North Carolina v. EPA , 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (remand of vacatur). f

15.2.3 Global Climate Change
Climate change has evolved into a matter of gl obal concern because it is expected to have widespread, adverse effects on natural resour ces and systems. A growing body of evidence points to anthropogenic sources of gree nhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), as major contributors to climate change. Because this Rule, if finalized, will likely decrease CO 2 emission rates from the fossil fuel sector in the United St ates, the Department here examines the impacts and causes of climate change and then the potential impact of the Rule on CO 2 emissions and global warming.

15.2.3.1 Impacts of Climate Change on the Environment
Climate is usually defined as the average we ather, over a period ranging from months to many years. Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate, which is identifiable through changes in the mean and/or the variabil ity of its properties (e.g., temperature or precipitation) over an extended peri od, typically decades or longer. 7

The World Meteorological Organization a nd United Nations E nvironment Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Pa nel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide an objective source of information about climate change. According to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC Report), published in 2007, climate cha nge is consistent with observed changes to the world’s natural systems; the IPCC expects these changes to continue. 7

Changes that are consistent with warming include warming of the world’s oceans to a depth of 3000 meters; global average sea level rise at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year from 1961 to 2003; loss of annual average Arctic sea ice at a rate of 2.7 percent per decade, changes in wind patterns that affect extra-tropical storm tracks and temperature patterns, increases in intense precipitation in some parts of the world, as well as increased drought a nd more frequent heat waves in many locations worldwide, and numerous ecological changes. 6

Looking forward, the IPCC describes contin ued global warming of about 0.2 °C per decade for the next two decades under a wide range of emission scenarios for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), other greenhouse gases (GHG)s, and aerosols. After that period, the ra te of increase is less certain. The IPCC Report describes increases in average global temperat ures of about 1.1 °C to 6.4 °C at the end of the centu ry relative to today. These increases vary depending on the model and emissions scenarios. 6

e See id. at 903.

f State of North Carolina, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008).15-7 The IPCC Report describes incremental impacts associated with the rise in temperature. At ranges of incremental increases to the global average temperature, IPCC reports, with either high or very high confidence, that there is likely to be an increas ing degree of impacts such as coral reef bleaching, loss of wild life habitat, loss to specific ecosystems, and negative yield impacts for major cereal crops in the tropics, but al so projects that there likely will be some beneficial impacts on crop yiel ds in temperate regions.

15.2.3.2 Causes of Climate Change
The IPCC Report states that the world has warmed by about 0.74 °C in the last 100 years. The IPCC Report finds that most of the temperat ure increase since the mi d-20th century is very likely due to the increase in anth ropogenic concentrations of CO 2 and other long-lived greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxid e in the atmosphere, rather than from natural

causes.

Increasing the CO 2 concentration partially blocks the earth’s re-radiation of captured solar energy in the infrared band, inhibits the radiant cooling of the earth, and ther eby alters the energy balance of the planet, which gradually increases its average temperature. The IPCC Report estimates that currently, CO 2 makes up about 77 percent of the total CO 2 -equivalent g global warming potential in GHGs emitted from hu man activities, with th e vast majority (74 percent) of the CO 2 attributable to fossil fuel use. 7 For the future, the IPCC Report describes a wide range of GHG emissions scenarios, but under each scenario CO 2 would continue to comprise above 70 percent of the total global warming potential. 7

15.2.3.3 Stabilization of CO 2 Concentrations
Unlike many traditional air pollutants, CO 2 mixes thoroughly in the entire atmosphere and is long-lived. Th e residence time of CO 2 in the atmosphere is long compared to the emission processes. Therefore, the global cumulative emissions of CO 2 over long periods determine CO 2 concentrations because it takes hundreds of y ears for natural processes to remove the CO 2
. Globally, 49 billion metric tons of CO 2 –equivalent of anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gases are emitted every year. Of this annual total, fossil fuels c ontribute about 29 billion metric tons of CO 2
. 8 h

Researchers have focused on considering atmospheric CO 2 concentrations that likely will result in some level of globa l climate stabilization, and the emission rates associated with achieving the “stabilizing” concentrations by part icular dates. They associate these stabilized

g GHGs differ in their warming influence (radiative forci ng) on a global climate syst em due to their different radiative properties and lifetimes in the atmosphere. Thes e warming influences may be expressed through a common metric based on the radiative forcing of CO 2 , i.e., CO 2 -equivalent. CO 2 equivalent emission is the amount of CO 2 emission that would cause the same- time integrated radiative forcing, over a given time horizon, as an emitted amount of other long- lived GHG or mixture of GHGs.

h Other non-fossil fuel contributors include CO 2 emissions from deforest ation and decay from agriculture biomass; agricultural and industrial emissions of methane; and emissions of nitrous oxide and fluorocarbons.15-8 CO 2 concentrations with temperature increases that plateau in a defined range. For example, at the low end, the IPCC Report scenarios target CO 2 stabilized concentrations range between 350 ppm and 400 ppm (essentially today’s value)—because of climate inertia, concentrations in this low end range would still result in temperatures projected to increase 2.0 °C to 2.4 °C above preindustrial levels i (about 1.3 °C to 1.7 °C above today’s levels). To achieve concentrations between 350 ppm to 400 ppm, the IPCC scenarios pr esent that there would have to be a rapid downward trend in total annual gl obal emissions of greenhouse gase s to levels that are 50 to 85 percent below today’s annual emission rates by no later than 2050. Since it is assumed that there would continue to be growth in global populations and substantial increases in economic production, the scenarios identify required re ductions in greenhouse gas emissions intensity (emissions per unit of output) of more than 90 pe rcent. However, even at these rates, the scenarios describe some warming and some climate change is projected due to already accumulated CO 2 and GHGs in the atmosphere. 9

15.2.3.4 The Beneficial Impact of the Rule on CO 2 Emissions
If finalized, it is anticipated thatthe Rule will reduce energy-related CO 2 emissions, particularly those associated w ith energy consumption in buildings . In the United States, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports in its 2009 Annual Energy Outlook ( AEO2009 ) 11 that U.S. annual energy-related emissions of CO 2 in 2006 were about 6.0 billion metric tons, of which 2.3 billion tons were attr ibuted to the electricity consumption (including related energy–using products such as small el ectric motors). Most of the greenhouse gas emissions attributed to commercial and industr ial electricity are emitted from fossil fuel-fired power plants that generate the electr icity used in these sectors. In the AEO2009 Reference Case, EIA projected that a nnual energy-related CO 2 emissions would grow from 5.7 billion metric tons in 2010 to 6.2 billion metric tons in 2030, an increase of 8 percent (see AEO2009 ), while electricity-related emissions would grow to from 2.3 billion metric tons to 2.6 billion metric tons, an increase of 13 percent.

The estimated cumulative CO 2 emission reductions from a small electric motors efficiency standard (shown as a range of altern ative TSLs) during the 30-year forecast period are indicated in Table EA.2.1. Estimated CO 2 emission reductions in Table EA.2.1 come from electricity generation (i.e., pow er plants). The estimated CO 2 emission reductions from electricity generation are calculated us ing the NEMS-BT model.

i IPCC Working Group 3 Table TS 215-9 Table 15.2.1 Impact of Small Electric Motors Efficiency Standards on Cumulative Electricity-Related Emissions of CO 2 between 2010 and 2045 (Million Metric Tons of CO 2 ) Trial Standard Levels TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 TSL 7 TSL 8 Polyphase Motors* -2.2 -5.2 -9.7 -11.1 -18.6 -20.5 -23.8 N/A Capacitor Start Motors* -57.9 -73.8 -83.6 -84.6 -85.3 -105.8 -106.2 -122.6 Total* -60.1 -79.0 -92.3 -95.7 -103.9 -126.3 -130.0 N/A Percent of Total Cumulative Power Sector Emissions from 2010 to 2045 compared with the AEO 2009 Reference Case -0.08% -0.10% -0.12% -0.12% -0.13% -0.16% -0.16% N/A

* All results in million metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons ; negative values refer to a reduction compared with the Base Case.

15.2.3.5 The Incremental Impact of the Rule on Climate Change
It is difficult to correlate specific emissi on rates with atmospheri c concentrations of CO 2 and specific atmospheric concentrations with future temperatures because the IPCC Report describes a clear lag in the climate syst em between any given concentration of CO 2 (even if maintained for long periods) and the subsequent average worldwide and regional temperature, precipitation, and extreme weat her regimes. For example, a major determinant of climate response is “equilibrium climate sensitivity”, a measure of the climate system response to sustained radioactive forcing. It is defined as the global average surface warming following a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations. The IPCC Report describes its estimated, numeric value as about 3 °C, but the likely range of that value is 2 °C to 4.5 °C, with cloud feedbacks the largest source of uncertainty. Further, as illustrated above , the IPCC Report scenarios for stabilization rates are presented in terms of a range of concentrations, which then correlates to a range of temperature changes. Thus, climate sensitivity is a key uncertainty for CO 2 mitigation scenarios that aim to meet sp ecific temperature levels.

Because of how complex global climate systems ar e, it is difficult to know to what extent and when particular CO 2 emissions rates will impact glob al warming. However, as Table 15.2.1 indicates, the proposed rule is expected to reduce CO 2 emissions from the electricity-generation
sector.

15.2.4 Analytical Methods for Air Emissions
NEMS-BT incorporates capabilit ies to assess compliance with SO 2 restrictions specified in the Clean Air Act and its amendments. Cl ean Air Act provisions include New Source Performance Standards, and Re vised New Source Performance St andards. The version of NEMS-BT in 2008 included provisions for the CAIR , which imposes stricter restrictions on SO 2 and NO X for some states, and the CAMR, which impos ed a national Hg constraint. As discussed15-10 earlier is section EA.2.2, on December 23, 2008, the D.C. Circuit decided to allow CAIR to remain in effect until it is replaced by a ru le consistent with the court’s earlier opinion. Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency , 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (remand of vacatur). But actions taken on February 8, 2008 by the U.S. Cour t of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued in its decision in State of New Jersey, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency , remain in effect vacating the CAMR . Thus, the version of NEMS-BT in 2009 used in this analysis does not include provisions for the CAMR.

Coal-fired electric generation is the single largest source of electricity in the United States. Because the mix of coals used signifi cantly affects the emissions produced, the model includes a detailed representation of coal suppl y. The model considers the rank of the coal as well as the sulfur contents of the fuel used when determining optimal dispatch.

Within the NEMS-BT model, pl anning options for achieving em issions restrictions in the Clean Air Act Amendments include installing pollution control equipment on existing power plants and building new power plants with lo w emission rates. These methods for reducing emission are compared to dispatching options such as fuel switching and allowance trading. Environmental regulations also a ffect capacity expansion decisions . For instance, new plants are not allocated SO 2 emissions allowances according to the Clean Air Act Amendments. Consequently, the decision to build a particular capacity type must consider the cost (if any) of obtaining sufficient allowances. This could involv e purchasing allowances or over complying at an existing unit.

DOE’s analysis assumed the presence of nationwide emission caps on SO 2 and caps on NOx emissions in the 28 States covered by the CAIR. In the presence of these caps, the NEMSBT modeling system that DOE used to forecas t emissions reduction indi cated that no physical reductions in power sector emissions would occur for SO 2 , but that the standards could put slight downward pressure on the prices of emissions allowances in cap-and-trade markets.

In contrast to the modeling forecasts of NEMS-BT that SO 2 emissions reductions will remain at the cap, during the years 2007 and 2008, SO 2 emissions have been below the trading
cap. 11 The difference between the emissions levels that NEMS-BT forecasts and those that EPA forecasts is an indicator of the uncertainties as sociated with long range energy sector forecasts. Because of such uncertainties, DOE is unable to estimate the economic and physical benefit from SO 2 emissions reductions at this time.

As noted in chapter 13, NEMS-BT model fo recasts end in year 2030. Emissions impacts beyond 2030 were extrapolated for this rulemaking in Table EA.2.3 through EA.2.4.

15.2.5 Effects on Power Plant Emissions
Table EA.2.2 shows AEO2009 reference case powe r plant emissions in selected years. The Reference Case emissions are the emissions shown by the NEMS-BT m odel to result if none of the TSLs are promulgated (the base case).15-11 Table 15.2.2 Power Sector Emissions Forecast from AEO2009 Reference Case
NEMS-BT Results*
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
CO 2 (Million metric tons/year)** 2,39 7 2,343 2,381 2,466 2,535 2,636
NO X (Million metric tons/year) † 3.30 2.07 1.87 1.88 1.88 1.91 Hg (metric tons/year) † 51.5 43.8 29.5 28.9 29.3 28.7 * All results in metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons and negative values refer to a reduction compared with the Base Case ** Comparable to Table A17 of AEO2009 : Electric Generators
† Comparable to Table A8 of AEO2009 : Emissions

Table 15.2.3 through Table 15.2.4 show the esti mated changes in power plant emissions in selected years for all the TSLs. Changes in NO x and Hg emissions from power plants calculated by NEMS-BT are shown in these tables. Changes in CO 2 emissions from all sources are also shown in these tables.

Compared to the anticipated reference cas e emissions impacts forecast shown in Table 15.2.2, changes in emission levels shown in Table 15.2.3 though 15.2.4 are extremely small.Table 15.2.3 Power Sector Emissions Impact Foreca sts for Polyphase Small Electric Motors NEMS-BT Results Difference from AEO 2009 Reference Case Extrapolation Cumulative
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2010-2045 Standard Level 1 CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.02 0.03 -0.04 -0.09 -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -2.3 NOx (kt/a) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0016 Hg (t/a) -0.0001 -0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0123

Standard Level 2 CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.04 0.07 -0.10 -0.22 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -5.2 NOx (kt/a) 0.0000 0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0037 Hg (t/a) -0.0003 -0.0004 -0.0007 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0282

Standard Level 3 CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.07 0.13 -0.19 -0.40 -0.44 -0.44 -0.44 -0.44 -9.7 NOx (kt/a) 0.0001 0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0003 -0.0069 Hg (t/a) -0.0005 -0.0008 -0.0014 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0529

Standard Level 4 CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.08 0.15 -0.21 -0.46 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -11.1 NOx (kt/a) 0.0001 0.0001 -0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0004 -0.0080 Hg (t/a) -0.0005 -0.0009 -0.0016 -0.0017 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0606

Standard Level 5
CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.13 0.25 -0.36 -0.77 -0.84 -0.84 -0.84 -0.84 -18.6 NOx (kt/a) 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0133 Hg (t/a) -0.0009 -0.0016 -0.0027 -0.0029 -0.0030 -0.0030 -0.0030 -0.0030 -0.1016

Standard Level 6
CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.14 0.27 -0.39 -0.85 -0.92 -0.92 -0.92 -0.92 -20.5 NOx (kt/a) 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0006 -0.0007 -0.0007 -0.0007 -0.0007 -0.0147 Hg (t/a) -0.0010 -0.0018 -0.0030 -0.0032 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.1118

Standard Level 7
CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.16 0.31 -0.46 -0.99 -1.08 -1.08 -1.08 -1.08 -23.8 NOx (kt/a) 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0003 -0.0007 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0008 -0.0171 Hg (t/a) -0.0012 -0.0020 -0.0034 -0.0037 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.1300

15-12Table 15.2.4 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecast s for Capacitor Start Small Electric Motors
NEMS-BT Difference from AEO 2009 Reference Case Extrapolation Cumulative
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2010-2045 Standard Level 1

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.42 0.68 -1.48 -2.33 -2.50 -2.50 -2.50 -2.50 -57.9 NOx (kt/a) 0.0004 0.0005 -0.0011 -0.0017 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0018 -0.0416 Hg (t/a) -0.0022 -0.0053 -0.0073 -0.0124 -0.0058 -0.0058 -0.0058 -0.0058 -0.2428

Standard Level 2

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.53 0.86 -1.88 -2.96 -3.18 -3.18 -3.18 -3.18 -73.8 NOx (kt/a) 0.0005 0.0007 -0.0014 -0.0022 -0.0023 -0.0023 -0.0023 -0.0023 -0.0530 Hg (t/a) -0.0027 -0.0067 -0.0093 -0.0158 -0.0073 -0.0073 -0.0073 -0.0073 -0.3090

Standard Level 3

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.60 0.98 -2.13 -3.35 -3.60 -3.60 -3.60 -3.60 -83.6 NOx (kt/a) 0.0005 0.0008 -0.0016 -0.0025 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0600 Hg (t/a) -0.0031 -0.0076 -0.0105 -0.0179 -0.0083 -0.0083 -0.0083 -0.0083 -0.3497

Standard Level 4

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.60 0.97 -2.13 -3.38 -3.65 -3.65 -3.65 -3.65 -84.6 NOx (kt/a) 0.0005 0.0008 -0.0016 -0.0025 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0026 -0.0608 Hg (t/a) -0.0031 -0.0075 -0.0105 -0.0180 -0.0084 -0.0084 -0.0084 -0.0084 -0.3529

Standard Level 5

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.60 0.98 -2.14 -3.40 -3.68 -3.68 -3.68 -3.68 -85.3 NOx (kt/a) 0.0005 0.0008 -0.0016 -0.0025 -0.0027 -0.0027 -0.0027 -0.0027 -0.0612 Hg (t/a) -0.0031 -0.0075 -0.0106 -0.0182 -0.0085 -0.0085 -0.0085 -0.0085 -0.3551

Standard Level 6

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.76 1.24 -2.70 -4.25 -4.56 -4.56 -4.56 -4.56 -105.8 NOx (kt/a) 0.0007 0.0010 -0.0021 -0.0031 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0760 Hg (t/a) -0.0039 -0.0096 -0.0133 -0.0227 -0.0105 -0.0105 -0.0105 -0.0105 -0.4427

Standard Level 7

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.74 1.22 -2.67 -4.24 -4.58 -4.58 -4.58 -4.58 -106.2 NOx (kt/a) 0.0007 0.0010 -0.0020 -0.0031 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0033 -0.0763 Hg (t/a) -0.0038 -0.0094 -0.0132 -0.0226 -0.0106 -0.0106 -0.0106 -0.0106 -0.4427

Standard Level 8

CO 2 (Mt/a) 0.77 1.25 -2.85 -4.76 -5.30 -5.32 -5.32 -5.32 -122.6 NOx (kt/a) 0.0007 0.0010 -0.0022 -0.0035 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.0038 -0.0882 Hg (t/a) -0.0039 -0.0097 -0.0141 -0.0254 -0.0122 -0.0123 -0.0123 -0.0123 -0.4988

15-1315-14 15.2.6 Effects on Upstream Fuel-Cycle Emissions
Upstream fuel-cycle emissions refer to th e emissions associated with the amount of energy used in the upstream production and downs tream consumption of electricity, including energy used at the power plant. Upstream proce sses include the mining of coal or extraction of natural gas, physical preparatory and cleaning processes, and transportation to the power plant. The NEMS-BT does a thorough accounting of emissions at the power plant due to downstream energy consumption, but does not account for upstream emissions (i.e., emissions from energy losses during coal and natural gas production). Thus, this analysis re ports only power plant emissions.

However, previous DOE environmental assessment documents have developed qualitative estimates of affects on upstream fu el-cycle emissions. These emissions factors provide the reader with a sense of the possible magnitude of upstream effects. These upstream emissions would be in addition to emissions from direct combustion. Relative to the entire fuel cycle, estimates based on the work of Dr. Mark DeLuchi, and reported in earlier DOE environmental assessment documents, find that an amount approximately equal to eight percent, by mass, of emissions (including SO 2 ) from coal production are due to mining, preparation that includes cleaning the coal, and transporta tion from the mine to the power plant. 10 Transportation emissions include emissions from the fuel used by the mode of transportati on that moves the coal from the mine to the power plant. In addition, based on Dr. DeLuchi’s work, DOE estimated that approximately an amount equal to 14 percent of emissions from natural gas production result from upstream processes.

Emission factor estimates and corresponding percentages of contributions of upstream emissions from coal and natural gas production, re lative to power plant emissions, are shown in Table EA.2.5 for CO 2 and NO x . The percentages provide a mean s to estimate upstream emission savings based on changes in emissions from power plants. The percentage effects presented in Table EA.2.5 provide a qualitative approach to viewing effects on fuel cycle emissions. The previous section indicates s light overall reductions in CO 2 and NO x . Thus, very small reductions in upstream emissions of air pollutant could be expected. This approach does not address Hg emissions.

Table 15.2.5 Estimated Upstream Emissions of Air Pollutants as a Percentage of Direct Power Plant Combustion Emissions

Pollutant Percent of Coal Combustion Emissions Percent of Natural Gas Combustion Emissions
CO 2 2.7 11.9
NO x 5.8 4015-15 15.3 WETLAND, ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES

Because small electric motors are not wate r-consuming products, more efficient motors would not reduce the amount of water discharged into the waste stream. As a result, small electric motor energy conservation standards do no t have the effect of improving the quality of wetlands, nor threatened or endange red species that reside in thes e wetlands. This action is also not expected to impact cultural resources su ch as historical or archaeological sites.

15.4 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS
DOE's analysis has shown that the increase in the first cost of pur chasing more efficient small electric motors at the proposed standard le vels is largely offset by a reduction in the lifecycle cost (LCC) of owning a more efficient pro duct for the average consumer. In other words, the consumer will pay less operati ng costs over the life of the produc t even through the first cost increases. The complete analysis and its conclu sions are presented in chapter 8 of the TSD.

The primary purchasers of small electric motors are commercial and industrial businesses. Subgroups of space-constrained moto r owners will primarily be affected by the standard through impacts on initial cost which DOE estimates can be very large when more efficient motors have difficulty satisfying space constraints. DOE estimates that such costs should be distributed throughout the economy an d should not affect any particular socioeconomic group more than others. Therefore, DOE concludes that the proposed action would have no significant socioeconom ic impact. For a complete discussion on the consumer and national impacts of the proposed standard, s ee chapters 8 and 10 of the TSD respectively.

15.5 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS
According to Executive Order 12898 of Febr uary 11, 1994, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minorit y Populations and Low-Income Populations,” DOE is required to examine the effect of more stringent energy -efficiency standards on (1 ) small businesses that either manufacture or use small electric motors, (2) manufacturers of ni che products related to small electric motors, and (3) small busine sses operated by disadvantaged or minority populations.

DOE identified small businesses as a subgroup that possibly could be disproportionately affected by small electric motors energy cons ervation standards. As described in the Manufacturer Subgroup Analysis, Chapter 12 of the TSD, DOE found that there was no disproportionately high and advers e human health or environmental effects on small businesses that would result from the proposed energy cons ervation standards. DOE believes that above conclusion also applies to minority populations.15-16 15.6 NOISE AND AESTHETICS
Improvements in efficiency of small electric motors are expected to result from changes in the choice of components and other design feat ures. These changes are described in chapter 5 of this TSD. These design changes are not expe cted to change noise levels in comparison to products in today’s market. DOE considered no ise and aesthetics when evaluating different engineering design options and f ound that products that meet the proposed standard can maintain the same noise levels as products currently in the market. Products that are currently manufactured in the existing market that would meet the proposed standards are no louder than less efficient products. Changes to the design to improve the efficien cy levels are not anticipated to affect the product aesthetics.

15.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Table 15.7.1 through Table 15.7.2 summarize anti cipated environmental impacts for each of the TSLs across all product types. Air qual ity impacts were modeled for each of the TSLs. The summary table shows cumulativ e changes in emissions for CO 2 , NO x , and Hg from 2015 to 2045 for small electric motors. Cumulative CO 2 , NO x , and Hg emissions show a decrease compared to the reference case.

Upstream fuel cycle emission of CO 2 and NO x are described but not quantified in section 15.2.6. The text describes potential re ductions in fuel cycle emissions as percentage of decreases in power plant emissions. This qualitative approa ch suggests that upstrea m fuel cycle emissions would decrease and provides a sense for the ma gnitude of effects; how ever DOE does not report actual estimates of the effects.

No impacts are anticipated in the area of environmental ju stice, wetlands, endangered and threatened species, and cultural reso urces; or noise and aesthetics.15-17 Table 15.7.1 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary, Polyphase Small Electric Motors TSL Environmental Effects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Cumulative Emissions Reductions ** CO 2 , Mt 2.2 5.2 9.7 11.1 18.6 20.5 23.8 NO x , kt 0.002 0.004 0.007 0.008 0.013 0.015 0.017 Hg, t 0.012 0.028 0.053 0.061 0.102 0.112 0.130 Fuel-Cycle (Upstream) Emissions †† †† †† †† †† †† †† Wetlands, Endangered and Threatened Species; Cultural Resources -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Socioeconomic Impacts– Weighted Mean LCC Savings ‡ -- -- -- -- -- -- --

All Motors $0 $9 $21 $19 ($38) ($85) ($818) Space-Constrained Motors $0 $9 $21 $19 ($150) ($151) ($2,937) Environmental Justice -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Noise and Aesthetics -- -- -- -- -- -- --
* The reference case values reflect total cumulative em issions and life cycle cost s in the absence of an energy conservation standard.

** Cumulative total is from 2010–2045 for standard implemented in 2015. †† DOE does not report actual estimates of the effect s of standards on upstream emissions, but section EA.2.6 provides a sense for the possible magnitude of effects. ‡ Values refer to life-cycle cost sa vings over the equipment lifetime.15-18 Table 15.7.2 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary, CapacitorStart Small Electric Motors TSL Environmental Effects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cumulative Emissions Reductions ** CO 2 , Mt 57.0 57.9 73.8 84.6 85.3 105.8 106.2 122.6 NO x , kt 0.042 0.053 0.060 0.061 0.061 0.076 0.076 0.088 Hg, t 0.243 0.309 0.350 0.353 0.355 0.443 0.443 0.499 Fuel-Cycle (Upstream) Emissions †† †† †† †† †† †† †† Wetlands, Endangered and Threatened Species; Cultural Resources -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Socioeconomic Impacts– Weighted Mean LCC Savings ‡ -- -- -- -- -- -- --

All Motors: CSIR CSCR $55 $23 $55 $28 $54 $28 $21 $10 $21 $28 ($346) ($846) ($346) $28 ($346) ($47) Space-Constrained Motors: CSIR CSCR $49 $8 $49 $11 $54 $11 ($48) $7 ($48) $11 ($1,891) ($2,937) ($1,891) $11 ($1,891) ($157) Environmental Justice -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Noise and Aesthetics -- -- -- -- -- -- --
* The reference case values reflect total cumulative emissions and life cycle costs in the absence of an energy conservation standard.

** Cumulative total is from 2010–2045 for standard implemented in 2015. †† DOE does not report actual estimates of the effects of standards on upstream emissions, but section EA.2.6 provides a sense for the possible magnitude of effects. ‡ Values refer to life-cycle cost savings over the equipment lifetime.15-19 REFERENCES

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, How Sulfur Dioxide Affects the Way We Live (Updated June 29st, 2009) <http ://www.epa.gov/oar/urbanair/so2/>

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nitrogen Oxides Health and Environmental Impacts of NOx (Posted July 31st, 2009) < http:// www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides/ >

3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009 U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report

, 2009. < http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/e missions/usinventoryreport.html >

4. U.S. Federal Register, Rule To Reduce Interstate Transpor t of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call, Final Rule, May 12, 2005, 2005.

5. U.S. Federal Register, Standards of Perf ormance for New and Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Steam Gene rating Units, Final Rule, May 18, 2005, 2005. Report No. 70 FR 28606.

6. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Cha nge, IPCC WGI Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, 2007. Geneva. < http://ipccwg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/WG1AR4_SPM_PlenaryApproved.pdf >

7. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, Climate Change 2007 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability . < http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov >

8. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, IPCC Special Report on Land Use, LandUse Change And Forestry , 2000.

< http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_ sr/?src=/Climate/ipcc/land_use/index.htm >

9. Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Climate Change 2007: Working Group III Report "Mitigation of Climate Change" , 2007.

< http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmen t-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-ts.pdf >

10. DeLuchi, M. A., Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from the Use of Transportation Fuels and Electricity, Volume 2: Appendixes A-S, November, 1993. Argonne National Laboratory. Argonne, IL. Repor t No. ANL/ESD/TM-22-Vol.2.

11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions, Compliance, and Market Data | Acid Rain Program Program 2008 Progress Reports | Progress Reports | Clean Air Markets, 2009. < http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/progress/ARP_1.html>15-20 12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Existing Studies on Source Apportionment for PM 2.5 , Emissions, Monitoring, and An alysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, August 22, 2003, 2003. <http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/specialstudies/compsareports.pdf>