p. 1 

# OAR Box 1781 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 13)11-1- 5 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/29/2008 10:46:18 AM Sheet 13 of 142P. 2

^!L! % UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y OFFIC E O F RESEARC H AN D DEVELOPMEN T AI R AN D ENERG

Y ENGINEERIN G RESEARC H LABORATOR Y RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK , NORT H CAROLIN A 2771 1 

### DATE : Augus t

31 , 199 3 SUBJECT : Comment s o

n Chapte r 4 , "Opportunitie s T o Reduc e Methan e Emission s fro

mLandfills " fro

mRepor t to Congres s - Opportunitie s T o Reduc e Methane Emission s i n Th e Unite dStates " FROM : Susa

n A . Thornelo e (M

D 63) ^ Globa l Warming Contro l Branch Globa l Emission s & Contro l Divisio n TO : Sta

n Durkee (

H 8105 ) Office o f Scienc e Plannin g & Regulator y Evaluatio n A s yo u requested , I hav e reviewe dth e draf t repor t tha t i s i n RedBorder Review . I hav e anumbe

r o f concern s about

th e landfill chapter . M

y main concer n i s tha t it give s the impressio n tha

t utilizatio n i s relativel y eas y whe n thi s i s not the case . Ther

e ar e anumbe r o f barrier s (or

disincentives ) tha

t ar e occurring . I thin

k thi s need s t

o b e mor e emphasize di

n th e report . Hopefull

y by identifying thes e barriers , Congres s ca n initiate step s tha

t wil l lea dto developin g policie s tha

t will help t

o minimiz e som

e o f the existin g barriers . Provide dbelo w i s alis t

o f ou r comments . Als o attache di s apaper o n th e benefit s an

dbarrier s associate dwit

h landfill ga s utilization . I thin k th e informatio n provide di

n thi s pape

r woul db e o

f help i n OAIAP' s revisio n o

f thi s chapter . Als o attache di s amark-u p o f som e o f the page s fro

mth e draf t chapter . D o not hesitate callin g m

e a t (919 ) 541-270 9 i

f I ca n b e o f furthe r assistance . 1 . Give n the uncertaint

y associate dwit

h the estimat

e o f methan e emissions , thre e significan t figures i s not

accurate . 2 . Ther e i s adiscrepanc y between th e OR D estimat e an dth e OALA

P estimate o

f methan e emission s fro

mlandfill s in th e U.S . Th e OR D estimate i s 9 t

o 1 9 Tg/yr a s compare dt

o OAIAP' s estimate which i s 8 t o 1 2 Tg/yr . W

e ar e behin din gettin g ou r final estimat

e publishe ddue t

o m y illnes s but

i t shoul db e publishe d thi s fall . W

e hav e include dthe estimate i n the OPP E Repor t t o Congres s o

n Internationa

l Methane Emissions .P. 3



### 3 . Ther e are severa

l statement s tha

t spea k in generalitie s about

methane recover

y tha t ar e no t factual . For

example , pag e 4- 2 state s tha t i t i s technically feasibl e to recover 85 % o f LFemissions , i t

i s profitabl e t

o recove r onl y abou t 50-60 % o

f landfill methan e emission s a t a n electricit y pric e o f $0.0 5 pe r kWh . Mos t

o f th e industr y doe s not

clai mprofitabilit

y unles s they ca

n obtain $0.0 6 - 0.0 8 per

kWh . Als o there ar

e anumbe r o f factor s tha

t ca n affec t the projec t

in additio n t

o economics . Although projec t economic s ar

e important , othe

r factor s ca n ultimately decide aproject' s fate . Fo r instance , State s ar

e viewing thes e project s a s a n emissio n sourc e a s oppose dt o apollutio n preventio n source . Consequently , project s ar

e not bein g permitte do

r develope ds o tha

t Ne w Sourc e Review or other applicabl e regulation s are no t triggered . Jus t las t wee k I receive dacall fro

mWast e Managemen

t about alarg e projec t

tha t the y ha dpropose di

n the Stat e o f Illinois . The

y ha dhope dt o instal l 2 ga s turbines . Th e Stat

e denie dthe permit

du e t o concer n fo r NOx emissions . Apparently the Stat

e didnot allo w offsets t

o b e considered . Thi s projec t wa s marginally economica

l bu t wit h the ai r permit bein g denied , it

i s not bein g developed . I a mals o awar

e o f othe r project s tha

t ar e constraine db

y either NOx o r C O emissio n limit s an

dconsequently ar

e not utilizin g all o

f th e ga s tha

t i s bein g generated . Ther

e ar e als o project s constraine dby powe r contract s andar

e no t utilizin g all o

f the ga s bein g generated . Thes e factor s ar e inhibitin g landfill ga s t o energ y projects . Th e Ai r an dEnergy Engineerin g Research Laborator y in associatio n wit

h the Soli dWast

e Associatio n o

f Nort h Americ ai s collectin g informatio n about

the differen

t project s i n the U.S . s o tha

t w e hav e abetter understandin g o

f thes e project s includin g the barrier s affecting landfill ga s utilization . The point tha t we woul dlik

e t o mak e i s tha t ther e ar e othe r factor s a s important o r mor e important

tha n economic s tha

t affec t the viabilit

y o f thes e projects . We ar e workin g wit

h OAQP S t

o see tha t thes e kind s o

f project s ge

t considere da s pollutio n preventio n project s s o tha t State s will hopefull

y mor e favorably conside r thes e project s sinc e they do resul t i n anumbe r o f benefit s includin g reductio n o

f methane , VOC , toxic s an

dconservatio n o

f ou r globa l fossil fue

l resources . 4 . TTTher e are severa

l statement s i n thi s chapte

r tha t w e fee l are overly simplisti c a s t o landfill ga s utilization . Suc h a s "Th e profitabilit

y o f recoverin g andusin g LF G depend s upon the amoun t o f ga s produce dan

dit s value. " The informatio n in th e EP A repor t tha t i s reference di

n thi s chapte

r (Landfill Ga s Energ y Utilization : Technolog y Option s an dCas e Studies , Jun e 1992 ) wa s collecte dt oP. 4

hel p illustrat e th e differen t factor s affectin g landfil l ga s utilization . Th e 199 2 repor t identifie s th e differen t

factor s suc h a s th e trac e constituent s i n th e ga s tha t determin e clean-u p requirements , moistur e conten t o f th e ga s an dit s characteristic s that

determin e typ e o f

pipin g an dwel l material s t o b e use d(som e site s hav e gon e to stainles s stee l whic h greatl y impact s th e cos t o f th e installation) , dilutio n o f

ga s an dperformanc e effects , an dloa dfactor . Ther e ar e als o no n technica l issue s includin g th e permittin g requirements , applicabl e emissio n restrictions , powe r

contrac t restrictions , an dliabilit y requirements . A projec t i n Virgini ashu t

dow n du e t o problem s wit h moistur e an dga s clean u p difficulties . A projec t

i n Marylan dha da

n engin e seiz e after

onl y 50 0 hour s o f operation . Thi s impacte dth e economics . W e can provid e othe r example s i f

yo u wouldlike . 5 . W e woul dlik e t o se e ho w th e valu e o n pag e 4- 5 i s derive dwhic h i s th e valu e o f recoverin g landfil l methan e emissions . 6 . W e appreciat e tha t

page s 4- 7 an d4- 8 giv e a n overvie w o f

fou r o f th e si x site s feature di n th e cas e studies . However , i t wa s ou r intent t o sho w th e rea l lif

e difficultie s associate dwit h landfil l ga s t o energ y projects . Thes e ar e considere d successfu l project s bu t

i t ha s no t bee n eas y a s th e cas e studie s illustrate . I thin k thi s kin do f

informatio n i s importan t t o includ e t o th e Repor t t o Congres s s o tha t the y hav e abette r

understandin g o f

th e barrier s both technica l an dnontechnical . 7 . W e thin k

th e barrie r

sectio n need s t o b e expande dt o cove r som e o f th e idea s offere dabove . Th e powe r contract s t o resul t

i n constraint s a s du e t o emissio n limit s for NO x an dCO . Althoug h fuel cell s coul dmee t thes e emissio n limits , the y ar e roughl y twic e th e pric e o f technolog y i n us e today . Consequently , someho w w e nee dt o adop t som e sor t o f syste mtha t

woul dallo w for

offset s o r consideration o f

thes e factors . Typicall y project s ar e buil t base do n th e lowes t BI D an dther e i s no t

an y kin do f

consideration o f

thes e othe r

factor s suc h a s highe r energ y efficiency . 8 . I t i s no t clear ho w profitability i s define dfor Exhibi t 4-7 . A s w e trie dt o poin t ou t abov e ther e ar e factor s othe r than jus t th e buybac k

rat e tha t affec t th e economic s o f

aproject . 9 . Th e GA A yearboo k

i s frequentl y cited . Pleas e b e awar e tha t ther e ar e man y problem s wit

h thi s database . Consequently , SWAN A i n conjunctio n with EPA' s AEER L ar e workin g t o develo p adatabas e that wil l provid e mor e reliabl e informatio n for

th e U.S . landfil l ga s industry . Th e first versio n o f

thi s databas e wa s publishe di n referenc e 1992d .P. 5



### 10 . Thi s chapter

seem s ver

y long . Som

e o f the informatio n seem s repetitious . For example , the informatio n presente do n pag e 4- 8 an

d4- 9 o n barrier s i s repeate do n page s 4-4 7 an

d4-48 . We als o foun

dothe r informatio n i s repeate din th e chapter

tha t coul db e consolidate dhelpin g to shorten th e chapter . 3 Attachment s cc : Denni s Doll , OAQPS Denni s Drehmel , AEER

L Bo b Hangebrauck , AEER

L Bill Lamason , OAQP S Mik e Maxwell , AEER

L Blai r Martin , AEER

L Fran k Princiotta , AEER

L Lowel l Smith , OEPE

RCHAPTE R 4 OPPORTUNITIE S T O REDUC E METHAN E EMISSION S FRO M LANDFILLS P. 6

Landfil l Methan e Emission s Reduction s Sh»r » o f U S Ef i I « s i on * Q»au e t > on s 1 6

- m 1 2 £• e 6 2 O ^JB- a ,11,6 . • B B

•• 5 . 2 ' I g ? ,

6 6

L o wMIg r 199 0 LO wt H I g n 200 0 ,,13., ^

-a-a ,

« i ! 6 . D Pi - o- r i to o t « B«OuC t I Ori f R*»rr> o t n I r-n p E m i s s i on s LO W M I 5) f SO-I O

/ 

## g- H 201 0 Landfil l Methan e Emission s (Tg )

Yea rBaselin e Emission s a Emission s wit h Technicall y Feasibl e Reductions' 5 Emission s wit h Profitabl e Reduction s 8.1-11. 8 8.8-12. 7 9.5-13. 4 1.5-2. 1 1.6-2. 2 5.2-6.6 c (2.6-5.6) d (8.8-10.6) 6

•» c 4.2-6.0 1 ' (1.8-4.8) d (9.5-11.3) e a Source : USEP A (1993 ) Baselin e emission s reflec t methan e recover y o f 1. 5 T g pe r yaa r throughou t th e perio d examined . b Technicall y feasibl e emission s reductio n estimate d a t 8 5 percen t o

f emission s i n th e absenc e of an y recover y projects . c Rang e o

f estimate s base d o n a n electricity sale s pric e o f $0.0 5 per

kWh . d Rang e o

f estimate s base d o n a n electricity sale s pric e o f S O 0 6 pe r kWh . •Rang e o

f estimate s base d o n a n electricity sale s pric e o f $0.0 4 pe r kWh . 4. 1 SUMMARY Landfill s ar

e th e larges t anthropogeni c sourc e of methan e emission s i n th e Unite d States . I n 199 0 landfill s emitte d a n estimate d 8. 1 t o 11. 8 Tg t o th e atmospher e (USEP A 1993) . Thes e emission s represen t a substantia l amoun t o f energy an d ar

e equivalen t t

o abou t 5,00 0 to 7,50 0 M

W of electri c generatin g capacity . I n th e absenc e o f effort s t o reduc e

. . emissions , landfil l methan e emission s ar e expected t o gro

wt o betwee n 9. 5 to 13. 4 T g pe r Revie wDraf t •Jul y 199 3 •D o No t Cit e o r Quot e Pag e 4- 1P. 7 produce s electricity . Th e advantage s o f stea m turbine s ar e hig h electri c generatin g efficienc y an d relativel ylo w ai rpollutan t emissions . Th e disadvantag e of stea m turbine s i s tha t the y requir e a n extremel ylarg e quantityof ga s t o operat e an d s o ar e suitabl e onl yfo ra handfu l o t th e ver ylarges t landfills . Othe rUtilization

Options Sale as a Medium-BTU

Fuel. I f th e landfil l i s locate d nea rsuitabl e industria l facilitie s th e ga s ca n b e transporte d vi a pipelin e an d sol d as a "medium-BTU " fuel. 3 A n idea l medium BT U ga s custome rwoul d b e locate d nea rth e landfil l an d woul d have a nearl ycontinuou s deman d fo rgaseou s fuel . Landfil l ga s customers ma yus e th e ga s t o fue l a cogeneratio n system , t o fir e boiler s o rchillers , o rt o provid e spac e heating . Fuel Cells. A fue l cel l convert s th e chemica l energ yo f th e methan e directl yint o usabl e energ yas electricityan d heat . Th e advantage s o f fue l cell s include : hig h energ y efficiency ; lo w by-produc t emissions ; limite d nois e production ; minima l labo rrequirements ; an d modularity . Th e disadvantag e o f fuel s cell s i s thei rhig h cost . However , th e cos t o f fue l cell s i s expecte d t o decreas e enoug h t o b e competitiv e wit h othe rmethod s o f generatin g electricity . Fue l cell s hol d grea t promis e a s a futur e optio n fo rusin g landfil l gas . Production

of Liquid Fuels and Industrial

Chemicals. Recen t development s i n alternativ e fuel s have le d t o th e improvemen t of a proces s tha t convert s landfil l ga s int o diesel , naphtha , an d hig h grad e industria l waxes . Th e advantag e o f producin g thes e product s i s tha t th e economi c benefit s d o no t depen d o n th e loca l electri c powe rsyste m o r o n proximityt o a suitabl e industria l customer . Th e disadvantag e of producin g thes e product s I s hig h cos t tha t make s the m no t competitiv e wit h conventiona l liqui d fuels . Flaring. Flarin g i s th e simples t wa yt o eliminat e landfil l gas . Th e advantag e of flarin g i s tha t th e cos t i s smal l compare d t o energ yrecover ysystems . Th e disadvantag e i s tha t flaring produce s n o incom e fo rth e landfill . 4.1. 4 Curren t Recover yan d Utilizatio n Project s There ar e abou t 10 0 landfil l ga s recover yan d utilizatio n project s operatin g i n th e U.S . (GAA-499T) . Th e followin g ar e a fe w example s o

f successfu l projects . ^U^fJbt. , Hit Reciprocating

Engine • Marina, CA. Th e Marin a project bega n operatio n i n Decembe r 198 3 an d i s on e o

f th e oldes t landfil l ga s recover yan d utilizatio n project s i n th e Unite d State s Th e landfil l opene d i n 196 6 an d contain s abou t fou rmillio n ton s of waste . Th e recover y syste m consist s of 1 2 vertica l well s an d seve n horizonta l trenches . Abou t 900,00 0 cubi c fee t o f ga s ar e collecte d pe rday . Th e ga s powers a Waukesh a 12-cylinde rI C engine s tha t turn s tw o generato rset s tha t togethe rproduc e 1. 2 MW o f powe r(USEP A 1992c ; USEP

A 1992d) . Combustion

Turbine • San Diego, CA. Th e Sycamore Canyo n Landfil l i s locate d nea r Sa n Diego , California . Th e landfil l opene d i n 196 2 an d ha s nearl ynin e millio n ton s of wast e i n place . Th e collectio n syste m consist s of 5 0 vertica l well s tha t collect abou t 1,200,00 0 cubi c

3 A mediu m BT U fue l ha s a n energ y conten t betwee n 40 0 t o 60 0 BTU/ft 3 . B y contras t a hig h BT U fue l suc h a s natura l ga s ha s a n energ y conten t o f abou t 1,00 0 BTU/tt 3 Revie wDraf t •Jul y 199 3 - D o No t Cit e o r Quot e Pag e 4- 7P. 8 USEP A (Unrte d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency ) 1991b . EP A Docke t Numbe rA-B8-0 9 Documen t Numbe rll-B-45 , Memorandu m fro m Kathlee n Hogan , Chief , Methan e Program s t o Alic e Chow , Offic e o f Ai rQualityPlannin g an d Standards , "Analysi s o f Profit s an d Cos t fro m Regulatin g Municipa l Soli d Wast e Landfills, " Marc h 28,1991 . USEP A (Unite d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency ) 1992a . "Characterizatio n of Municipa l Soli d Wast e I n th e Unrte d States : 199 2 Update. " EP A Offic e of Soli d Wast e an d Emergenc

yResponse , Washington , D.C . EPA/530-R-019 , Jul y1992 . USEP A (Unrte d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency ) 1992b . "Developmen t o f a n Empirica l Mode l o f Methan e Emission s fro m Landfills. " Ai ran d Energ yEngineerin g Researc h Laboratory , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C EP A 600/R-92-037 , Marc h 1992 . 'USEP A (Unrte d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency ) 1992c . "Landfil l Gas Energ y Utilization : Technolog yOption s an d Cas e Studies, " prepare d b yth e Ai ran d Energ y Engineerin g Researc h Laboratory , U S EPA , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 27711 , EPA600/R-92-116 . Jun e 1992 . USEP A (Unite d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Agency ) 1992d . "Landfil l Ga s Recovery/Utilizatio n - Option s an d Economics " prepare d byth e Globa l Emission s an d Contro l Division , Ai ran d Energ yEngineerin g Researc h Laboratory , U S EPA , Researc h Triangl e Park , N C 27711 , Marc h 5,1992 . USEP A (Unrte d State s Environmenta l Protectio n Adency ) 1993 . "Anthropogeni c Methan e Emission s i n th e Unite d State s - Repor t tbjcongress, " prepare d b yGloba l Chang e Division , Office o

f Ai ran d Radiation , U S EPA , Washington , DC . Williams , R.A. an d E . Larson . 1989 . "Expanding/Role s fo rGa s Turbine s i n Powe r Generation, " i n Electricity : Efficien t End-Us e an d New Generatio n Technologies , an d Thei rPlannin g Implications , Lun d Unive/sity Press . Sweden . 1989 . 6- . r.1 ^

ir^- (jLr^iT^xx jL-fr^rx. &Cr>S-+^? C-^J-

ISW-lr?



### ^yA^tX^SMJ> D^U ^V ^ ,5~*-TMI Revie wDraf t - Jur y 199 3 - D o Not Cit e o r Quote Pag e 4 5 0P. 9

Landfil l Ga s Recovery/Utilizatio n Option s an d Economic s Susa n A . Thornelo e (MD-63 ) (Jloba l Emission s an d Contro l Divisio n Ai ran d Energ j Engineerin g Researc h Laborator y U . S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y Researc h Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

Presente d at : Th e Sixteent h Annua l Conferenc e b vth e Institut e of

Ga s Technolog y o n Energ yfro m Biomas s an d Waste s

Orlando , Florid a

Marc h 5 , 199 2P.1 0

Landfil l Ga s Utilizatio n - Options , Benefits , an d Barrier s

Susa n A . Thornelo e (MD-63 ) Global Emission s and Contro l Divisio n Ai rand Energy Engineerin g Research Laborator y U . S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agency Research Triangl e Park , Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

Presente d at : Th e Secon d Unite d State s Conferenc e on Municipal Soli d Waste Managemen t

at Hyat tRegency Crystal Cit

y Arlington , V

A

Jun e 3 - 5 , 199 2P.1 1 

# &EP A Unite d Stele s

Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y 

# Researc h an d Developmen t EPA-600/R-92-11 6 Jun e 199 2

LANDFIL L GA S ENERG Y UTILIZATION : TECHNOLOG Y OPTION S AN D CAS E STUDIE S 

# Prepare d fo r Offic e o f

Ai ran d Radiatio n an d Offic e of

Policy , Plannin g an d Evaluatio n 

# Prepare d b y Ai r an d Energ y Engineerin g Researc h Laborator y Researc h Triangl e Par k N C 2771 1

*»JJ I am