### P:\PACIFICORP\370414BART2\TECHNICAL_MEMORANDUM_DELIVERABLES\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 1 

# TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM



# Addendum to Wyodak 1 BART Report

PREPARED FOR: 

# Wyoming Division of Air Quality

PREPARED BY: 

# CH2M HILL

COPIES: 

# Bill Lawson/PacifiCorp

DATE: 

# March 26, 2008



# Introduction

In compliance with the Regional Haze Rule (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 51), the Wyoming Division of Air Quality (WDAQ) required PacifiCorp Energy to conduct a detailed Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) review to analyze the effects to visibility in nearby Class I areas from plant emissions, both for ba seline and for reasonable control technology scenarios. PacifiCorp submitte d these evaluations to WDAQ in January 2007. A revised report

was submitted in October 2007.

On January 3, 2008, PacifiCorp Energy personnel met with WDAQ staff to discuss the status of
the BART reviews. At that time, the state re quested that additional modeling scenarios for

several of the PacifiCo rp facilities be performed to aid in their BART review. Although Wyodak

was not one of the facilities that required re-modeling, this memorandum presents the economics analysis for two scenarios prev iously modeled, referred to as Scenario A and Scenario B and

described as follows:

• 

# Scenario A: PacifiCorp committed controls at permitted rates—low nitrogen oxide (NO

x 

# )
burners (LNBs) with over-fire air (OFA), dry flue gas desu lfurization (FGD), new fabric

filter

• 

# Scenario B: PacifiCorp committed controls and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) at permitted rates

The CALPUFF modeling system (v. 5.711a) was used for this analysis. All technical options and model triggers used in CALMET, CALPUFF, and CALPOST are consistent with those used for the previous BART analyses and described in the BART report submitted in October 2007.



# Stack Parameters, Emissions Information, and Capital Cost

Table 1 summarizes the control equipment for Scenarios A and B as well as the current equipment installed at the plant. The overall capital cost of installing these options is also shown.

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 2



# TABLE 1 

# Control Scenario Summary Wyodak Unit 1

Equipment Type Capital Cost

NO
x 

# SO 2 

# PM 10 

# Million dollars

Baseline Good Engineering Practices Dry FGD ESP —

Scenario A LNB with OFA Dry FGD Fabric Filter $93.9

Scenario B LNB with OFA and SCR Dry FGD Fabric Filter $252.7



# Emissions were modeled for the following pollutants:

• 

# Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

# )

• 

# NO

x



# • 

# Coarse particulate (PM 2.5 

# <diameter<PM 10 

# )

• 

# Fine particulate (diameter<PM 2.5 

# )

• 

# Sulfates

Table 2 shows stack parameters and emission rates that were used for the Wyodak BART modeling and analysis.

TABLE 2 

# Calpuff Model Inputs Wyodak Unit 1

BART Comparison (d)



# Model Input Data Baseline Scenario

A (e) 

# Scenario B (f)



# Hourly Heat Input (mmBtu/hour) 4,700 4,700 4,700

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 2,350 759 759

Nitrogen Oxide (NO

x 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 1,457 1,081 329

PM 10 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 141 70.5 70.5

Coarse Particulate (PM 2.5 

# <diameter< PM 10 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) (a) 

# 60.6 40.2 40.2

Fine Particulate (diameter<PM 2.5 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) (b) 

# 80.4 30.3 30.3

Sulfuric Acid (H 2 

# SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 5.6 5.6 9.4

Ammonium Sulfate [(NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# ] Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
— — 1.1

(NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
— — 1.9

H 2 

# SO 4 

# as Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) 5.5 5.5 9.2

(NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
— — 0.8

(NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
— — 1.6

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 3



# TABLE 2 

# Calpuff Model Inputs Wyodak Unit 1

BART Comparison (d)



# Model Input Data Baseline Scenario

A (e) 

# Scenario B (f)



# Total Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) (lb/hr) (c) 

# 5.5 5.5 11.6

Stack Conditions

Stack Height (meters) 122 122 122

Stack Exit Diameter (meters) 6.1 6.1 6.1

Stack Exit Temperature (Kelvin) 358 350 350

Stack Exit Velocity (meters per second) 23.5 23.5 23.5

NOTES:
(a) 

# Based on AP-42, Table 1.1-6, the coarse particulates are counted as a percentage of PM 10 

# . This equates to 43% ESP and 57% Baghouse. PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# refer to particulate matter less than 10 and 2.5 micrometers, respectively, in aerodynamic diameter.
(b) 

# Based on AP-42, Table 1.1-6, the fine parti culates are counted as a percentage of PM 10 

# . This equates to 57% ESP and 43% Baghouse.
(c) 

# Total Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) (lb/hr) = H 2 

# SO 4 

# as Sulfate (SO 4 

# ) Stack Emissions (lb/hr) + (NH 4 

# ) 2 

# SO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr) + (NH 4 

# )HSO 4 

# as SO 4 

# Stack Emissions (lb/hr)
(d) 

# SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , and PM rates are expressed in terms of permitted emission rates. Actual emissions will be less than the permitted rates.
(e) 

# PacifiCorp Committed Cont rols @ permitted rates : LNB with OFA, Dry FGD, New Fabric Filter

(f) 

# PacifiCorp Committed Controls and SCR @ permitted rates



# Economic Analysis

In completing this additional analysis to supplement the previous BART study, technology alternatives were investigated and potential reductions in NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and PM 10 

# emissions rates

were identified.

A comparison of Scenarios A and B on the basis of costs, design control efficiencies, and tons of pollutant removed is summarized in Tables 3 through 5. Capital costs were provided by PacifiCorp. The complete economic analyses for these two scenarios are provided as

Attachment 1.ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC4TABLE 3Scenario A Control CostWyodak Unit 1NOxControl SO2Control PM10Control Scenario ALNB with OFADry FGDFabric FilterControl CostTotal Installed Capital Costs (million dollars)$13.10$80.80—$93.90Annualized First-Year Capital Costs $1.25 $7.69 — $8.93First Year Fixed & Variable O&MCosts (million dollars) $0.06 $1.27 — $1.33Total First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$1.31 $8.95 — $10.26Power Consumption (MW)—0.15—0.15Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)—11.834—11.83Permitted Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) 0.230.160.015—Additional Tons of Pollutant Removedper Year over Baseline1,4826,272—8,032First Year Average Control Cost ($/Tonof Pollutant Removed)8811,428—1,277NOTE:(a)First year annualized costs include power consumption costs.ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC5TABLE 4Scenario B Control CostWyodak Unit 1NOxControl SO2Control PM10Control Scenario BLNB with OFA &SCRDry FGDFabric FilterControl CostTotal Installed Capital Costs (million dollars) $171.90 $80.80 — $252.70Annualized First-Year Capital Costs$16.35$7.69—$24.04First Year Fixed & Variable O&MCosts (million dollars)$2.56$1.27—$3.83Total First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$18.91 $8.95 — $27.86Power Consumption (MW)2.420.15—2.57Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)19.051.18—20.23Permitted Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu) 0.070.160.015—Additional Tons of Pollutant Removed perYear over Baseline4,4476,27227810,996First Year Average Control Cost ($/Tonof Pollutant Removed) 4,253 1,428 — 2,534NOTE:(a)First year annualized costs include power consumption costs.ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORTJMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC6TABLE 5Incremental Control Costs, Scenario B compared to Scenario AWyodak Unit 1NOxControl SO2Control PM10ControlTotalControl CostIncremental Installed Capital Costs (million dollars) $158.8 — — $158.8Incremental Annualized First-Year Capital Costs$15.11——$15.11Incremental First Year Fixed & VariableO&M Costs (million dollars)$2.50——$2.50Incremental First Year Annualized Costs (million dollars)(a)$17.60 — — $17.60Incremental Power Consumption (MW)2.42——2.42Incremental Annual Power Usage (Million kWh/Yr)19.05——19.05Incremental Improvement in Emission Rate (lb/mmBtu)0.23———Incremental Tons of Pollutant Removed2,964——2,964Incremental First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton of PollutantRemoved)5,939 — — 5,939NOTE:(a)Incremental first year annualized costs include power consumption costs.

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 7 

# Modeling Results and Least-Cost Envelope Analysis

CH2M HILL modeled Wyodak 1 for two post-cont rol scenarios. The re sults determine the change in deciview based on each alternative at the Class I areas specific to the project. The Class I areas potentially affected are Badla nds National Park and Wind Cave National Park

for this unit.

Modeled Scenarios

Current operations (baseline) a nd two alternative control scenar ios were modeled to cover the range of effectiveness for the combination of the individual NO

x 

# , SO 2 

# , and PM control technologies being evaluated. The mode led scenarios incl ude the following:

• 

# Baseline: Current operations with Good E ngineering Practices, Dry FGD, and ESP

• 

# Scenario A: LNB with OFA, Dry FGD, and Fabric Filter

• 

# Scenario B: Scenario A with SCR

Summary of Visibility Analysis

Tables 6 and 7 present a summary of the modeling period (2001–2003) results for each

scenario and Class I area.

TABLE 6 

# Costs and Visibility Modeling Results as Applicable to Badlands National Park Wyodak Unit 1

Scenario Controls Total First Year

Annualized Cost Highest Δ dV 98 th



# Percentile

Δ dV Maximum

Annual

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV

Baseline Current Operations with FGD

and ESP — 2.556 1.065 34

Scenario A Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls $10,260,225 1.319 0.554 14

Scenario B Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls and SCR $27,864,456 0.811 0.308 2

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 8 

# TABLE 7 

# Costs and Visibility Modeling Results as Applicable to Wind Cave National Park Wyodak Unit 1

Scenario Controls Total First Year

Annualized

Cost Highest Δ dV 98 th 

# Percentile

Δ dV Maximum

Annual

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV

Baseline Current Operations with FGD

and ESP — 3.296 1.353 41

Scenario A Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls $10,260,225 1.797 0.751 17

Scenario B Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls and SCR $27,864,456 1.065 0.389 6



# Results

Tables 8 and 9 present a summary of the cost s and modeling results for each scenario and

Class I area.

TABLE 8 

# Incremental Costs and Incremental Visibility Imp rovements Relative to Badlands National Park Wyodak Unit 1

Scenario Comparison Controls Incremental

Annualized

Cost (Million$) Reduction in

98 th



# Percentile

maximum dV Reduction in

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV Cost per dV

Reduction (Million$/dV

Reduced) Cost per Day

to Achieve a

Reduction in

the Days

above 0.5 dV (Million$/Day)

Scenario A Compared to

Baseline Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls $10.26 0.511 20 $20.08 $0.51

Scenario B Compared to

Baseline Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed

Controls and SCR $27.86 0.757 32 $36.81 $0.87

Scenario B Compared To

Scenario A Addition of SCR $17.60 0.246 12 $71.56 $1.47

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 9 

# TABLE 9 

# Incremental Costs and Incremental Visibility Improvements Relative to Wind Cave National Park Wyodak Unit 1

Scenario Comparison Controls Incremental

Annualized

Cost (Million$) Reduction in

98 th



# Percentile

maximum

dV Reduction in

Number of Days Above

0.5 dV Cost per dV

Reduction (Million$/dV

Reduced) Cost per Day

to Achieve a

Reduction in

the Days

above 0.5 dV (Million$/Day)

Scenario A Compared to

Baseline Scenario A: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls $10.26 0.602 24 $17.04 $0.43

Scenario B Compared to

Baseline Scenario B: PacifiCorp

Committed Controls

and SCR $27.86 0.964 35 $28.91 $0.80

Scenario B Compared To

Scenario A Addition of SCR $17.60 0.362 11 $48.63 $1.60



# Least-Cost Envelope Analysis

The least-cost envelope graphs for Badlands National Park are shown in Figures 1 and 2 and for Wind Cave National Park are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 10 

# FIGURE 1

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Wyodak Unit 1 - Badlands National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35



### Reduction in Days of Exceeding 0.5 dV (days)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)



# FIGURE 2

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Wyodak Unit 1 - Badlands National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80



### 98th Percentile Delta-Deciview Reduction (dV)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)

### ADDENDUM TO WYODAK 1 BART REPORT

JMS ES032008003SLC\BART_TMS_WYODAK_FINAL.DOC 11 

# FIGURE 3

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Wyodak Unit 1 - Wind Cave National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40



### Reduction in Days of Exceeding 0.5 dV (days)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)



# FIGURE 4

Least Cost Envelope
PacifiCorp Wyodak Unit 1 - Wind Cave National Park

Scenario B

Scenario A

Baseline

$0.0 $5.0 $10.0 $15.0 $20.0 $25.0 $30.0

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20



### 98th Percentile Delta-Deciview Reduction (dV)Total Annualized Cost (Mil $)

# ATTACHMENT 1 

# Complete Economic Analyses

for Scenarios A and BECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY - FIRST YEAR COSTSWyodakBoiler Design: Opposed Wall-Fired PCTYPE OF EMISSIONS CONTROLSNOxControl SO2ControlScenario A Scenario BTechnology Label BASE A B C D E F G A+F D+FCurrent OperationLow NOxBurners withOverfire AirRotating Overfire AirLow NOxBurners withOverfire Air and NonSelective CatalyticReductionLow NOxBurners withOverfire Air andSelective CatalyticReductionUpgraded Dry FGDUpgraded Dry FGD &Fabric FilterWet FGDLNB w/OFA, Dry FlueGas Desulfurizationand Fabric FilterBaghouseLNB w/OFA, SCR. DryFlue GasDesulfurization andFabric Filter BaghouseCAPITAL INVESTMENTTotal Installed Capital Costs ($) $0 $13,100,000 $15,252,149 $19,495,654 $171,900,000 $26,759,011 $80,800,000 $95,136,483 $93,900,000 $252,700,000FIRST YEAR DEBT SERVICE ($/Yr) $0 $1,246,174 $1,450,904 $1,854,579 $16,352,473 $2,545,526 $7,686,328 $9,050,127 $8,932,503 $24,038,801FIRST YEAR FIXED O&M Costs ($/Yr)Operating Labor ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $303,677 $0 $0Maintenance Material ($/Yr)$0 $24,000 $36,000 $93,000 $181,000 $21,900 $30,660 $328,496 $54,660 $211,660Maintenance Labor ($/Yr)$0 $36,000 $54,000 $139,500 $271,500 $14,600 $20,440 $218,998 $56,440 $291,940Administrative Labor ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0TOTAL FIRST YEAR FIXED O&M COST $0 $60,000 $90,000 $232,500 $452,500 $36,500 $51,099 $851,170 $111,099 $503,599FIRST YEAR VARIABLE O&M Costs ($/Yr)Makeup Water Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,388 $17,266 $47,193 $17,266 $17,266Reagent Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $87,549 $673,047 $320,193 $612,292 $632,710 $612,292 $1,285,339SCR Catalyst / FF Bag Costs ($/Yr) $0 $0 $0 $0 $480,000 $0 $186,992 $0 $186,992 $666,992Waste Disposal Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $167,958 $340,943 $460,766 $340,943 $340,943Electric Power Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $2,057,685 $132,057 $952,387 $44,939 $59,130 $689,850 $59,130 $1,011,517TOTAL FIRST YEAR VARIABLE O&M Costs ($/Yr) $0 $0 $2,057,685 $219,606 $2,105,434 $547,478 $1,216,623 $1,830,520 $1,216,623 $3,322,057SUMMARY OF FIRST YEAR COSTS ($/Yr)First Year Debt Service ($/Yr) $0 $1,246,174 $1,450,904 $1,854,579 $16,352,473 $2,545,526 $7,686,328 $9,050,127 $8,932,503 $24,038,801First Year Fixed O&M Costs ($/Yr) $0 $60,000 $90,000 $232,500 $452,500 $36,500 $51,099 $851,170 $111,099 $503,599First Year Variable O&M Costs($/Yr)$0 $0 $2,057,685 $219,606 $2,105,434 $547,478 $1,216,623 $1,830,520 $1,216,623 $3,322,057Total First Year Costs ($/Yr) $0 $1,306,174 $3,598,588 $2,306,685 $18,910,407 $3,129,504 $8,954,051 $11,731,816 $10,260,225 $27,864,457CONTROL COST COMPARISONSNOxTechnology ComparisonAdditional NOxRemoved From Base Case (Tons/Yr)0 1,482 2,038 2,409 4,447First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton NOxRemoved)$0 $881 $1,766 $958 $4,253Technology Case ComparisonA-BASE B-A C-A D-AIncremental NOxRemoved (Tons/Yr)0 1,482 556 926 2,964Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton NOxRemoved)$0 $881 $4,124 $1,080 $5,939SO2Technology Comparison69.0%80.0% 90.0% 95.0%Additional SO2Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)03,280 6,272 7,766First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton SO2Removed)$0$954 $1,428 $1,511Technology Case ComparisonE-BASE F-E G-FIncremental SO2Removed (Tons/Yr)03,280 2,992 1,494Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton SO2Removed)$0$954 $1,947 $1,859PM Technology Comparison0.0%327974.4% 776574.0%Additional PM Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)01 278 1First Year Average Control Cost ($/Ton PM Removed)$0$0 $32,219 $0Technology Case ComparisonE-BASE F-E G-FIncremental PM Removed (Tons/Yr)01 277 -277Incremental Control Cost ($/Ton PM Removed)$0$0 $0 $0SCENARIO A AND B COMPARISONSAdditional NOx, SO2, & PM Removed From Base Case (Tons/Yr)08,032 10,996First Year Average Control Cost Compared to Base Case ($/Ton Removed)$0$1,277 $2,534Incremental Tons Removed - Scenario B vs Scenario A (Tons/Yr)02,964Incremental Control Costs - Scenario B vs Scenario A ($/Ton Removed)$0$5,939JMS ES032008003SLC\First Yr Summary\Wyodak appendix.xlsPAGE 1 OF 1INPUT CALCULATIONSWyodakBoiler Design: Opposed Wall-Fired PCPARAMETERCurrentOperationNOxControl TechnologiesScenario A Scenario BControl TechnologiesNOxEmission Control SystemGood Practices LNB w/OFA ROFA LNB w/OFA & SNCR LNB w/OFA & SCRLNB w/OFA LNB w/OFA & SCRSO2Emission Control SystemDry FGDUpgraded Dry FGD Upgraded Dry FGD Wet FGD Upgraded Dry FGD Upgraded Dry FGDPM Emission Control System ESPFabric Filter Fabric Filter Fabric FilterGeneral Plant Design and Operating DataType of Unit PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PCAnnual Power Plant Capacity Factor 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%Annual Operation (Hours/Year) 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884 7,884Net Power Output (kW) 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000Net Plant Heat Rate (Btu/kW-Hr)12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087 12,087Boiler Heat Input, Measured by Fuel Input (MMBtu/Hr)4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049Annual Heat Input, Measured by Fuel Input (MMBtu/Year)31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459 31,923,459Boiler Heat Input, Measured by CEM (MMBtu/Hr)4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700 4,700Annual Heat Input, Measured by CEM (MMBtu/Year)37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800 37,054,800Plant Fuel SourceBoiler Fuel Source Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine ClovisPoint Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point Mine Clovis Point MineCoal Heating Value (Btu/Lb) 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050 8,050Coal Sulfur Content (wt.%) 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.650% 0.65% 0.65%Coal Ash Content (wt.%) 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46% 7.46%Coal Flow Rate (Lb/Hr) 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999 502,999Coal Consumed (Ton/Yr) 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824 1,982,824Nitrogen Oxide EmissionsNOxEmission Rate (Lb/MMBtu)0.31 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.070.23 0.07NOxEmission Rate (Lb/Hr)1,457 1,081 940 846 3291,081 329NOxEmission Rate (Lb Moles/Hr)48.55 36.02 31.32 28.19 10.9636.02 10.96NOxEmission Rate (Ton/Yr)5,743 4,261 3,705 3,335 1,2974,261 1,297Add'l NOxRemoved from Current Operations (Lb/Hr)0 376 517 611 1,128376 1,128Add'l NOxRemoved from Current Operations (Ton/Yr)0 1,482 2,038 2,409 4,4471,482 4,447Sulfur Dioxide EmissionsUncontrolled SO2(Lb/MMBtu)1.611.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61Uncontrolled SO2(Lb/Hr)7,5827,582 7,582 7,582 7,582 7,582Uncontrolled SO2(Lb Moles/Hr)118.36118.36 118.36 118.36 118.36 118.36Uncontrolled SO2(Tons/Yr)29,89029,890 29,890 29,890 29,890 29,890Controlled SO2Emission Rate (Lb/MMBtu)0.500.32 0.16 0.08 0.16 0.16SO2Removal Efficiency (%)69.0%80.0% 90.0% 95.0% 90.0% 90.0%Controlled SO2Emissions (Lb/Hr)2,3501,518 759 380 759 759Controlled SO2Emissions (Ton/Yr)9,2645,984 2,992 1,498 2,992 2,992SO2Removed (Lb/Hr)5,2326,064 6,823 7,202 6,823 6,823SO2Removed (Ton/Yr)20,62623,906 26,898 28,392 26,898 26,898Add'l SO2Removed from Current Operations (Lb/Hr)0832 1,591 1,970 1,591 1,591Add'l SO2Removed from Current Operations (Ton/Yr)03,280 6,272 7,766 6,272 6,272Particulate Matter EmissionsUncontrolled Fly Ash (Lb/Hr) 30,01930,019 30,019 30,019 30,019 30,019Uncontrolled Fly Ash (Lb/MMBtu) 6.3876.387 6.387 6.387 6.387 6.387Uncontrolled Fly Ash (Tons/Yr) 118,335118,335 118,335 118,335 118,335 118,335Controlled Fly Ash Emission Rate (Lb/MMBtu) 0.0300.030 0.015 0.030 0.015 0.015Controlled Fly Ash Removal Efficiency (%) 99.5%99.5% 99.8% 99.5% 99.8% 99.8%Controlled Fly Ash Emissions (Lb/Hr) 141141 71 141 71 71Controlled Fly Ash Emissions (Ton/Yr) 556556 278 556 278 278Fly Ash Removed (Lb/Hr) 29,87829,878 29,949 29,878 29,949 29,949Fly Ash Removed (Ton/Yr) 117,779117,779 118,057 117,779 118,057 118,057Add'l Ash Removed from Current Operation (Lb/Hr) 00 71 0 71 71Add'l Ash Removed from Current Operation (Ton/Yr) 00 278 0 278 278Economic FactorsInterest Rate (%) 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10%Discount Rate (%) 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10% 7.10%Plant Economic Life (Years) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20SO2Control TechnologiesJMS ES032008003SLC\Tech Calcs\Wyodak appendix.xlsPAGE 1 OF 2INPUT CALCULATIONSWyodakBoiler Design: Opposed Wall-Fired PCPARAMETERCurrentOperationNOxControl TechnologiesScenario A Scenario BControl TechnologiesNOxEmission Control SystemGood Practices LNB w/OFA ROFA LNB w/OFA & SNCR LNB w/OFA & SCRLNB w/OFA LNB w/OFA & SCRSO2Emission Control SystemDry FGDUpgraded Dry FGD Upgraded Dry FGD Wet FGD Upgraded Dry FGD Upgraded Dry FGDPM Emission Control System ESPFabric Filter Fabric Filter Fabric FilterSO2Control TechnologiesInstalled Capital CostsNOxEmission Control System ($2006)$13,100,000 $15,252,149 $19,495,654 $171,900,000$13,100,000 $171,900,000SO2Emission Control System ($2006)$26,759,011 $80,800,000 $95,136,483 $80,800,000 $80,800,000PM Emission Control System ($2006)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total Emission Control System Capital Costs ($2006) $13,100,000 $15,252,149 $19,495,654 $171,900,000 $26,759,011 $80,800,000 $95,136,483 $93,900,000 $252,700,000NOxEmission Control System ($/kW)$39 $46 $58 $513$39 $513SO2Emission Control System ($/kW)$80 $241 $284 $241 $241PM Emission Control System ($/kW)Total Emission Control Capital Costs ($/kW) $39 $46 $58 $513 $80 $241 $284 $280 $754Fixed Operating & Maintenance CostsOperating Labor ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $303,677 $0 $0Maintenance Material ($)$24,000 $36,000 $93,000 $181,000 $21,900 $30,660 $328,496 $54,660 $211,660Maintenance Labor ($)$36,000 $54,000 $139,500 $271,500 $14,600 $20,440 $218,998 $56,440 $291,940Administrative Labor ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Total 1st Fixed Year O&M Cost ($) $60,000 $90,000 $232,500 $452,500 $36,500 $51,099 $851,170 $111,099 $503,599Annual Fixed O&M Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Fixed O&M Cost ($/Yr) $71,130 $106,695 $275,629 $536,440 $43,270 $60,579 $1,009,065 $131,709 $597,019Variable Operating & Maintenance CostsWater CostMakeup Water Usage (gpm)0 0 0 0 25 30 82 30 30Unit Price ($/1000 gallons)$1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22 $1.22First Year Water Cost ($)$0 $0 $0 $0 $14,388 $17,266 $47,193 $17,266 $17,266Annual Water Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Water Costs ($/Yr)$0 $0 $0 $0 $17,057 $20,469 $55,948 $20,469 $20,469Reagent CostType of ReagentNone None UreaAnhydrous NH3Lime Lime Lime LimeLime & Anhydrous NH3Unit Cost ($/Ton)$0.00 $370.00 $400.00 $91.25 $91.25 $91.25Unit Cost ($/Lb)$0.000 $0.185 $0.200 $0.046 $0.046 $0.046Molar Stoichiometry0.00 0.45 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.02Reagent Purity (Wt.%)100% 100% 100% 90% 90% 100%Reagent Usage (Lb/Hr)60 427 890 1,702 1,759First Year Reagent Cost ($)$0 $87,549 $673,047 $320,193 $612,292 $632,710 $612,292 $1,285,339Annual Reagent Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Reagent Costs ($/Yr)$103,789 $797,899 $379,590 $725,874 $750,080 $725,874 $1,523,773SCR Catalyst / Fabric Filter Bag Replacement CostMaterial ReplacedSCR Catalyst Bags Bags Bags & SCR CatalystAnnual SCR Catalyst (m3) / No. FF Bags160 1,798SCR Catalyst ($/m3) / Bag Cost ($/ea.)$3,000 $104First Year SCR Catalyst / Bag Replacement Cost ($)$480,000 $186,992 $186,992 $666,992Annual SCR Catalyst / Bag Cost Escalation Rate (%)2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Catalyst/Fabric Fitler Bag Costs ($/Yr)$569,041 $221,680 $221,680 $790,721FGD Waste Disposal CostFGD Solid Waste Disposal Rate, Dry (Lb/Hr)1,751 3,555 4,804 3,555 3,555FGD Waste Disposal Unit Cost ($/Dry Ton)$24.33 $24.33 $24.33 $24.33 $24.33First Year FGD Waste Disposal Cost ($)$167,958 $340,943 $460,766 $340,943 $340,943Annual Waste Disposal Cost Esc. Rate (%)2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Waste Disposal Costs ($/Yr)$199,114 $404,189 $546,240 $404,189 $404,189Auxiliary Power CostAuxiliary Power Requirement (MW) 0.00 5.22 0.34 2.42 0.11 0.15 1.75 0.15 2.57Auxiliary Power Requirement (% of Plant Output) 0.00% 1.56% 0.10% 0.72% 0.03% 0.04% 0.52% 0.04% 0.77%Auxilliary Power Useage (MWh)0 41,154 2,641 19,048 899 1,183 13,797 1,183 20,230Unit Cost ($2006/MW-Hr)$50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00First Year Auxiliary Power Cost ($)$0 $2,057,685 $132,057 $952,387 $44,939 $59,130 $689,850 $59,130 $1,011,517Annual Power Cost Escalation Rate (%) 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%Levelized Auxilliary Power Costs ($/Yr) $0 $2,439,391 $156,554 $1,129,058 $53,275 $70,099 $817,819 $70,099 $1,199,157JMS ES032008003SLC\Tech Calcs\Wyodak appendix.xlsPAGE 2 OF 2