GRE

PUG

FRED

EXPA

MOU

Prepared 

Puget S

10885 N

Bellevu

Submitted

Washin

P.O. Bo

Olymp

Northw

1600 So

Mount

October 2

URS Corpo

111 SW Co

Portland, O

(503) 222-7

Project No

EENHO

GET SO

DONIA

ANSIO

UNT V

for: 

Sound En

NE 4th St

ue, Wash

d to: 

ngton Sta

ox 47600

pia, Wash

west Clea

outh Sec

t Vernon,

2011 

oration 

olumbia, Suite 

Oregon 97201 

7200 ♦ Fax (50

. 33762289

OUSE 

OUND 

A GEN

ON PR

VERNO

nergy 

treet 

hington 9

ate Depa

0

hington 9

an Air Ag

ond Stre

, Washin

1500 

03) 222-4292 

GAS B

ENER

NERA

ROJEC

ON, W

98009-97

artment o

98504-76

gency 

eet 

ngton 982

BACT 

RGY 

TING 

CT

WASHIN

734

of Ecolog

600 

273-5202

ANAL

STAT

NGTO

gy 

2

LYSIS

TION

ON

S
TABLE 

1.0 In

2.0 P

 2

 

 2

 2

3.0 E

 3

4.0 P

 4

5.0 G

 5

 5

 

 

 5

 

 

 

 

 

 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 5

 TABLES

T

T

T

 

T

 

T

T

T

 

 OF CONT

ntroduction ..

roject Descr

.1 Projec

2.1.1 

.2 Descr

.3 PSD A

mission Info

.1 Estim

SD Applicab

.1 PSD A

GHG BACT An

.1 Introd

.2 BACT

5.2.1 

5.2.2 

.3 BACT

5.3.1 

5.3.2 

5.3.3 

5.3.4 

5.3.5 

.4 BACT

5.4.1 

5.4.2 

5.4.3 

5.4.4 

5.4.5 

.5 BACT

Table 3-1 

Table 3-2 

Table 5-1 

Table 5-2 

Table 5-3 

Table 5-4 

Table 5-5 

TENTS 

.....................

iption ...........

ct Location .

Land Use 

ription of the

Applicability

ormation .......

mated Emissio

bility Analysis

Applicability

nalysis .........

duction ........

T Assessmen

EPA RBL

California 

T for Gas Tu

Step 1: Av

Step 2: Eli

Steps 3: R

Step 4: Ev

Step 5: Se

T for Switch

Step 1: Av

Eliminate 

Rank Rem

Evaluate M

Results ....

Select the 

T for Emerge

Estimated 

Estimated 

Large-scal

Institute in

Other Post

CCS Instit

Efficiency

Without C

Efficiency

With 90%

Increment

Turbine O

.....................

.....................

....................

....................

e Proposed S

y ..................

.....................

ons for Appl

s ...................

y Review .....

.....................

....................

nt Methodolo

C.................

BACT Dete

urbines .........

vailable Con

iminate Tech

Rank Remain

valuate Most

lect the BAC

hyard Breake

vailable Con

Technically

maining Cont

Most Effectiv

....................

BACT ........

ency Genera

Annual Em

Annual GH

le Integrated

n Execution 

t-Combustio

tute – Propo

y and CO2e E

CCS.............

y and CO2e E

 CCS.........

al Emission 

Options .........

i

......................

......................

....................

....................

Source Modi

....................

......................

licability An

......................

....................

......................

....................

ogy .............

....................

erminations .

....................

ntrol Technol

hnically Infe

ning Control 

t Effective C

CT ...............

ers ................

ntrol Technol

y Infeasible O

trol Options .

ve Controls 

....................

....................

ators ............

issions for th

HG Emission

d CCS Projec

and Operatio

on CCS Proje

sed or with O

Emissions fro

...............

Emissions fro

..................

Reduction C

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

....................

ification .......

....................

.....................

nalyses .........

.....................

....................

.....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

logies ..........

easible Optio

Options ......

Controls and 

....................

....................

logies ..........

Options ........

....................

and Docume

....................

....................

....................

he Potential 

s by Pollutan

cts Listed by

on Stages ....

ects not List

Operational 

om Availabl

...............

om Availabl

..................

Cost Analysi

....................

Fredonia GHG

.....................

.....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

.....................

....................

.....................

....................

.....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

ons ..............

....................

Document R

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

ent 

....................

....................

....................

Turbine Op

nt ................

y the Global 

....................

ted by the Gl

Experience .

le Turbine O

..................

le Turbine O

...............

is for Five 

....................

G BACT 2011.10.

......................

......................

....................

....................

....................

....................

......................

....................

......................

....................

......................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

Results ........

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

ptions ...........

....................

CCS 

....................

lobal 

....................

Options 

................

Options 

..................

...................

31.docx 

.... 1-1 

.... 2-1

... 2-1 

... 2-1 

... 2-1 

... 2-2 

.... 3-1 

... 3-1 

.... 4-1 

... 4-1 

.... 5-1 

... 5-1

... 5-1

... 5-2 

... 5-2 

... 5-2

... 5-3 

... 5-5 

. 5-11 

. 5-13 

. 5-15 

. 5-16 

. 5-16 

. 5-18 

. 5-18 

. 5-18 

. 5-18 

. 5-18 

... 3-2 

... 3-3 

... 5-7 

... 5-9 

5-12 

.5-13

5- 17 
TABLE 

FIGURES

 F

ATTACHM

A

 OF CONT

S

igure 2-1 

MENTS 

Attachment A

TENTS 

General Lo

Explanatio

cation Map

n – Cost of

ii

p ..................

f CO2 Avoide

....................

ed ................

Fredonia GHG

....................

....................

G BACT 2011.10.

....................

....................

31.docx 

.. 2-3 

. A-1
TABLE 

List of Ac

BAAQM

BACT 

bhp 

bkW 

CARB 

CEC 

CCCT 

CCS 

CFR 

CH4

CI 

CO2

CO2e 

DC 

DCS 

DOE 

EOR 

EPA 

EPS 

FGS 

FP&L

FR 

GE 

GHG 

GWP 

HHV 

HRSG 

kV 

kW 

LAER 

lb 

MSL 

MW 

MW-hr 

N2O 

NAAQS 

NETL 

NOx

NSPS 

NSR 

 OF CONT

cronyms 

MD Bay 

best 

brake

brake

Calif

Calif

comb

carbo

code

meth

comp

carbo

carbo

direc

distri

Unite

enha

Unite

emis

Fred

Florid

Fede

Gene

green

globa

highe

heat 

kilov

kilow

lowe

poun

mean

mega

mega

nitro

Natio

Natio

nitro

new 

new 

TENTS 

Area Air Qu

available co

e-horsepowe

e-kilowatt 

fornia Air Re

fornia Energ

bined cycle c

on capture an

e of federal re

hane 

pression igni

on dioxide 

on dioxide e

ct current 

ibuted contro

ed States De

anced oil reco

ed States En

sion perform

onia Genera

da Power and

eral Register

eral Electric 

nhouse gas 

al warming p

er heating va

recovery ste

volt 

watt 

est achievabl

nd

n sea level 

awatt 

awatt-hour 

ous oxide 

onal Ambien

onal Energy 

ogen oxides 

source perfo

source revie

uality Manag

ontrol techno

er

esources Bo

gy Commissi

combustion 

nd sequestra

egulation 

ition 

equivalents 

ol system 

epartment of

overy 

nvironmental

mance standa

ating Station

d Light

potential 

alue 

eam generato

le emission r

nt Air Qualit

Technology

ormance stan

ew 

iii

gement Distr

ology 

ard

ion 

turbine 

ation 

f Energy 

l Protection 

ard

or

rate 

ty Standard

y Laboratory

ndard

rict 

Agency 

y

Fredonia GHG BACT 2011.10.31.docx 
TABLE 

NWCAA

OAQPS 

PHPP 

PSD 

PSE 

RBLC 

SCAQM

SCR 

SF6

SJVAPC

tpy 

ULSD 

VAC 

VDC 

WAC 

 OF CONT

A North

EPA

Palm

preve

Puge

RAC

D South

selec

sulfu

CD San J

tons 

ultra

volta

volta

Wash

TENTS 

hwest Clean

A Office of A

mdale Hybrid

ention of sig

et Sound Ene

CT/BACT/LA

h Coast Air 

ctive catalyti

ur hexafluori

Joaquin Vall

per year

-low sulfur d

age alternatin

age direct cu

hington Adm

n Air Agency

Air Quality P

d Power Proj

gnificant dete

ergy 

AER Clearin

Quality Man

ic reduction

ide 

ley Air Pollu

distillate 

ng current 

urrent 

ministrative C

iv

y

lanning and 

ject 

erioration 

nghouse 

nagement Di

ution Contro

Code 

Standards 

istrict 

l District 

Fredonia GHG BACT 2011.10.31.docx 
SECTIO

This stan

(GHGs) 

provided

(PSD) P

February

analysis 

Applicati

emission

Applicati

The follo

emission

analysis f

ON ONE

nd-alone Be

was prepare

d in support 

ermit Appli

y 2011, and 

previously 

ion. Those 

n summaries 

ion are up to

owing sectio

ns (Section 3

for GHGs (S

E

est Available

ed at the req

of Puget S

ication for t

revised July

provided in

Application

in Section 

o date for all 

ons describe

3.0), assess 

Section 5.0).

e Control T

quest of the W

Sound Energ

the Fredonia

y and Octob

n Sections 5

n sections a

3.2 and det

PSD polluta

e the Projec

PSD applica

1-1

Technology 

Washington

gy’s (PSE)

a Generating

ber 2011). T

5.3.4 throug

are now ob

tailed emissi

ants includin

ct (Section 2

ability (Sect

(BACT) an

n Departmen

Prevention 

g Station E

This docume

gh 5.3.4.5 a

solete and 

ion calculati

ng GHGs. 

2.0), summa

tion 4.0), an

Fredonia GHG

nalysis for g

nt of Ecology

of Significa

Expansion Pr

ent replaces 

and 5.4 of 

will not be

ions in Atta

arize the Pr

nd provide a

Introduc

G BACT 2011.10.

greenhouse 

y (Ecology)

ant Deterior

roject (subm

the GHG B

the PSD P

e updated. 

achment A o

oject’s estim

a detailed B

ction

31.docx 

gases 

. It is 

ration 

mitted 

BACT 

Permit 

GHG 

of the 

mated 

BACT 
SECTIO

2.1 P

The Fred

Vernon, 

south of 

Padilla B

site, whic

elevation

known se

2.1.1 L

The regi

municipa

Bayview

lumber c

2.2 D

As stated

provide a

available

relatively

changes i

will cont

The prop

to the ex

simple cy

• O

• O

• O

• T

The PSD

made on 

procurem

thermody

turbines a

The prim

oil (ULS

anticipate

than 336 

and 5 (BA

In additio

generator

event po

ON TWO

PROJECT L

donia Gener

Skagit Coun

the west end

Bay. The pro

ch is approx

n of the faci

ensitive rece

and Use 

ion surroun

al and indu

w Airport and

onversion fa

DESCRIPTIO

d in the Proje

additional po

e fuels. The

y quickly to

in method o

inue to respo

posed Projec

isting FGS. 

ycle turbine 

One General 

One GE 7FA

One Siemens

Two 100 MW

D Permit Ap

the basis of

ment efforts

ynamic and 

analyzed for

mary fuel for 

SD) will be

es that oper

hours per y

ACT) of the

on to the tur

r (Caterpilla

ower could 

O

LOCATION 

rating Statio

nty, Washing

d of the Skag

oposed Proje

ximately 40 a

ility is appr

eptors nearby

ding the PS

strial facilit

d the Paccar

acilities to th

ON OF THE

ect’s PSD Pe

ower generat

e Expansion

o meet sudd

f operation w

ond to shortct involves th

The Project

options: 

Electric (GE

.04 frame tu

 SGT6-5000

W GE LMS1

pplication ad

f a commerci

s, possibly 

environmen

r the PSD Pe

the new gas

e needed/use

ation of the

year. The bac

 PSD Permit

rbine(s), the 

ar C18, or eq

not be bac

on (FGS) fa

gton (see Fig

git Regional

ct is not exp

acres. The te

oximately 5

y to the facil

SE site is p

ties in the i

r Technical 

he south. 

E PROPOSE

ermit Applic

tion capacity

n Project m

en changes 

will occur to

-term system

he addition o

t base design

E) 7FA.05 fr

urbine, appro

0F4 frame tu

00 aeroderiv

ddresses eac

ial and techn

after air 

ntal perform

ermit Applic

s turbine unit

ed rarely w

 new combu

ck-up fuel u

t Application

Project incl

quivalent) to

ck fed from

2-1

acility is loc

gure 2-1). Th

 Bayview A

pected to inc

errain surrou

50 feet abov

lity. 

primarily in

immediate v

Center, both

ED SOURC

cation, the p

y to help me

must be capa

in system p

o the exiting 

m capacity re

of one or two

n will consis

rame turbine

oximately 18

urbine, appro

vative turbin

ch of these 

nical evaluat

permits ar

mance will m

cation. 

t(s) will be n

when natural

ustion turbin

use is describ

n. 

ludes one no

o supply the 

m either the

cated at 13

he site is on

Airport, appro

crease the cu

unding the fa

ve mean sea

ndustrial an

vicinity, inc

h north of th

CE MODIFIC

purpose of th

eet future PS

able of star

power dema

Fredonia G

equirements 

o simple cyc

st of one of t

e, approxima

81 MW; 

oximately 19

nes, totaling a

options. Fin

tion by PSE 

re issued. 

meet or exc

natural gas. B

l gas is not

ne unit(s) on

bed further i

ominal 600 k

new units’ c

e site's 230

Proje

Fredonia GHG

085 Ball R

n south side 

oximately 2.

urrent footpri

facility is ess

a level (MSL

nd agricultur

cluding the 

he PSE facil

CATION 

he proposed 

SE system ne

rting up and

ands. No ph

Generating St

as they curr

cle electric g

the followin

ately 207 me

97 MW; or 

approximate

nal turbine 

after further

The select

ceed the per

Back-up ultr

t reasonably

n ULSD wil

in Sections 1

kilowatt (kW

critical elect

0 kilovolt (

ect Descrip

G BACT 2011.10.

Road near M

of Ovenell R

.5 miles inla

int acreage o

sentially flat

L). There ar

ral, with se

Skagit Reg

lity, and mu

Project will 

eeds using lo

d shutting d

hysical chang

tation units. 

rently do. 

generating u

ng high-effic

egawatts (MW

ely 200 MW

selection wi

r engineering

ted equipm

rformance o

ra-low-sulfu

y available. 

ll occur no 

1.1 (Introduc

W) diesel sta

trical loads i

(kV) or 115

ption

31.docx 

Mount 

Road, 

and of 

of the 

t. The 

re no 

everal 

gional 

ultiple 

be to 

ocally 

down 

ge or 

They 

unit(s) 

iency 

W); 

W. 

ill be 

g and 

ment’s 

of the 

ur fuel 

PSE 

more 

ction) 

andby 

in the 

5 kV 
SECTIO

transmiss

battery b

through 

needing 

Control S

pump. In

and 120 

VDC bat

quickly 

electrical

transmiss

batteries.

1 hour p

hours, fo

The Proj

with sulf

these eig

breakers 

might be

10 break

emission

SFMT-40

Conceptu

through 2

in this GH

2.3 P

The exis

modifica

regulator

emission

ON TWO

sion systems

bank to supp

an inverter 

Essential Po

System (DC

n the event o

VAC Essen

ttery bank. H

since they 

lly driven l

sion system 

. Testing and

er week, or 

r a total of u

ject’s propo

fur hexafluo

ght breakers

installed to

e emitted fro

kers are inclu

ns. Although 

0E or 200-S

ual plot plan

2-4 and Atta

HG BACT A

PSD APPLIC

sting facility

ation to the 

ry applicabil

ns provided b

O

s. The turbin

ply a critica

or directly 

ower from o

CS), protecti

of a transmi

tial Power B

However, th

have large,

lubricating 

failure, an e

d maintenan

52 hours pe

up to 275 hou

sed new 23

ride (SF6), a

s accommod

o replace som

om switchya

uded in the 

specific mo

FMT-63F br

ns for each

achment C-2

Analysis. 

CABILITY 

y is a PSD

existing so

lity are prov

below in Sec

ne(s) would b

al 120 VAC

from a 125

one or both 

ve relays an

ission system

Buses could 

he turbine un

heavy com

pumps. To 

emergency g

nce operation

er year. It is

urs of emerg

0 kV switch

a gaseous d

dating the n

me existing

ard breakers 

Project’s P

odels have n

reakers (or s

h of the fou

 in the PSD 

D major sou

ource, thereb

vided in Se

ction 3.1 of t

2-2

be supplied 

C (voltage al

5 VDC Esse

of these sou

nd a direct c

m failure an

be kept ene

nits have the

mponents, su

prevent d

generator is 

ns for the em

s estimated t

gency genera

hyard will i

ielectric com

new equipm

 units. A sm

as a result o

PSD Permit 

ot been iden

similar) will 

ur gas turbin

Permit App

urce. The pr

by triggerin

ction 4 of t

his documen

with a 125 V

lternating cu

ential Power

urces would

current (DC

nd blackout o

ergized for a 

e potential to

uch as roto

amage to t

needed to p

mergency gen

that emerge

ator operatio

include eigh

mmonly use

ment, there w

mall amoun

of unavoidab

Application

ntified, PSE 

be used. 

ne options a

lication. The

roposed Pro

ng this PSD

the PSD Pe

nt. 

Proje

Fredonia GHG

VDC (voltag

urrent) Esse

r Bus. Exam

d be the faci

C) driven em

of the facilit

a period of ti

o expend the

or bearings, 

these comp

provide pow

nerator are e

ency use wil

on annually. 

ht new circu

ed in breaker

will also be

nt of the GH

ble leakage.

n due to thei

expects that

are provided

ese figures a

oject is con

D process. D

ermit Applic

ect Descrip

G BACT 2011.10.

ge direct cur

ential Power

mples of de

ility's Distrib

mergency lub

ty, the 125 

ime from the

e battery's p

that need 

onents duri

er to back u

expected to o

ll not exceed

uit breakers 

rs. In additi

e two other 

HG pollutan

 Therefore, 

ir potential 

t Mitsubishi

d in Figure

are not dupli

nsidered a m

Details rega

cation, and 

ption

31.docx 

rrent) 

r Bus 

evices 

buted 

be oil 

VDC 

e 125 

power 

large 

ing a 

up the 

occur 

d 223 

filled 

on to 

new 

t SF6

these 

GHG 

i 200-

s 2-2 

icated 

major 

arding 

GHG 
SECTIO

Figure 2-

N TWO

1 – General Location Map

2-3

Proje

Fredonia GHG

ct Descrip

 BACT 2011.10.

tion

31.docx 

 
SECTIO

3.1 E

This exis

existing o

Potential

worst-cas

requirem

7FA.04, 

Maximum

hours pe

firing on 

this wors

is include

emission

A worstalso inclu

estimates

GHG com

and SF6.

calculate

emission

Applicati

The Proj

SF6). Cir

fugitive 

based on

SF6 in ea

not yet b

been ass

Attachme

analyses,

conversio

CO2e em

Further d

Applicati

ON THR

ESTIMATED

sting Fredon

operations at

l annual emi

se operating

ments. Maxim

and Siemen

m annual op

r year (for 

distillate is 

st-case maxi

ed in the ann

ns on natural 

-case maxim

uded in the 

s for the four

mpounds fro

 The total c

d using the 

n spreadshee

ion and are n

ect’s circuit

rcuit breaker

emissions. T

n estimates fr

ach circuit br

been chosen 

sumed for t

ent A-13 of

, applying th

on is also sh

mission totals

details regar

ion. 

REE

D EMISSION

nia Generati

t the FGS ex

issions for th

g scenarios 

mum annua

ns SGT6-50

perating hour

each of the 

included in 

mum of 336

nual emissio

gas. 

mum number

annual emis

r turbine opt

om the Proje

carbon dioxi

Global Wa

ets are inclu

not duplicate

t breakers w

rs do not em

The rate of 

rom PSE for

reaker is bas

for this Pro

the emissio

f the PSD Pe

he 100-year

hown in At

s shown in in

rding PSD 

NS FOR AP

ing Station 

xceed 75,000

he new gas 

estimated 

al operating 

00F4) are e

rs for the GE

two units). 

the annual e

6 hours (con

on estimates

r of start-ups

ssion estimat

tions. Table 

ect: carbon d

ide equivale

arming Poten

uded in Att

ed in this doc

will have the

mit SF6 norm

leakage is 

r previous eq

sed on equip

oject, the eq

n calculatio

ermit Applic

r SF6 GWP 

ttachment A

n Attachmen

applicability

3-1

PPLICABILI

(FGS) is a 

0 tons per ye

turbine unit

by PSE, an

hours for 

expected to 

E LMS100’s

A maximum

emission esti

nsecutive or n

only if pollu

s and shutdo

tes. Table 3-

3-2 provides

dioxide (CO

ents (CO2e)

ntial (GWP)

tachment A

cument. 

 potential to

mally, but do 

conservative

quipment wh

pment specif

quipment opt

ons. Emissio

cation. The 

of 23,900 t

A-13, and the

nt A-1 of the 

y are addres

ITY ANALY

major sourc

ear (tpy). 

ts and auxili

nd were ge

the Frame 

be approxim

s are expect

m of 336 ho

imates. On a

nonconsecut

utant emissio

owns on bot

-1 summariz

s a breakdow

O2), methane

for each eq

) for each in

A of the Pro

o emit a ver

have the po

ely assumed

hich showed

fications. Be

tion with the

on calculati

breaker emi

to convert S

e breaker em

PSD Permit

ssed in Sect

Emissio

Fredonia GHG

YSES 

ce of GHG.

iary equipm

enerated fro

turbines (G

mately 2400

ted to be app

ours (equiva

a pollutant-b

tive) firing o

ons on ULSD

th natural ga

zes potential

wn of the po

e (CH4), nitro

quipment un

ndividual po

oject’s revi

ry small amo

otential for m

d to be 0.5 

d lower rates

ecause speci

e highest vo

ion details 

issions are u

SF6 emission

missions are

t Application

tion 4.1 of 

on Informa

G BACT 2011.10.

 Emissions 

ment are base

om forecast 

GE 7FA.05

0 hours per 

proximately 

alent to 14 

y-pollutant b

on backup U

D are higher

as and ULSD

l annual emi

otential indiv

ous oxide (N

nit is also sh

ollutant. Det

sed PSD P

ount of GHG

minor leakag

percent per

s. The quant

fic breakers 

olume of SF

are provide

used in the 

ns to CO2e.

e included i

n. 

the PSD P

ation

31.docx 

from 

ed on 

load 

, GE 

year. 

3200 

days) 

basis, 

ULSD 

r than 

D are 

ission 

vidual 

N2O), 

hown, 

tailed 

ermit 

G (as 

ge, or 

r year

ity of 

have 

F6 has 

ed in 

GHG 

This 

in the 

Permit 
SECTIO

Pollut

NO

CO

SO

TSP

PM

PM2

VOC

H2SO

Pb

CO2

 (1)40 CFR 5

Notes: 

• Em

eq

At

• SO

10

• Si

40

• Va

• G

Fo

em

es

ON THR

Est

tant

Ox

O

O2

P

10

2.5

C

O4

b

2e 3

1.166(b)(48)(v)(b

missions estimat

quipment vendor

ttachment A of th

O2 and particulat

00 standard cubi

ignificant Emissio

0 CFR 51.166(b)

alues shown in it

as turbine CO2e 

or reasons cited

missions; emissi

stimates. 

REE

imated Annu

E

GE 

7FA.05

32 

58 

7 

43 

43 

43 

6 

16 

0.0200 

311,631 

b). 

tes are inclusive 

r data (as provide

he Project’s PSD

te emissions are 

c foot (scf) [gr/10

on Rate (SER) p

)(48)(v)(b). 

talic exceed the S

emissions in thi

d in Section 5.3

ions of other GH

T

ual Emission

Expected Incr

GE 

7FA.04

31 

39 

6 

43 

43 

43 

5 

14 

0.0194 

274,752 

of the turbine(s)

ed by Black & Ve

D Permit Applicat

based on histori

00 scf] reported a

per 40 CFR 52.21

SER. 

s table are base

3.1 of this GHG

HGs (including 

3-2

Table 3-1 

ns for the Pot

reased Emis

(tpy)

Siemen

SGT6

5000F

38

160

6 

32

32

32

20

17

0.0194

302,02

, one emergency

eatch and PSE) a

ion for details). 

ic annual averag

at the Williams N

1(b)(23)(i) and W

ed on CO2 emiss

G BACT Analysi

N20, CH4, and S

tential Turbi

ssions 

ns 

6- 

F4

GE L

(2 U

3

3

4

4

4

4 0.0

23 327

y generator and s

and operating sc

ge sulfur content 

Northwest Pipelin

WAC 173-400-030

sion estimates in

is, CO2 is the p

SF6) are in the 

Emissio

Fredonia GHG

ne Options

LMS100 (P

Units)

37 

31

8

45 

45 

45 

8 

17 

0193 

7,826 

switchyard break

cenarios provided

in natural gas of

ne Sumas compr

0. The PSD Thre

 PSD Permit Ap

predominant con

noise level (les

on Informa

G BACT 2011.10.

Significant

Emission Ra

PSD Thresho

(tpy) 

40 

100 

40 

25 

15 

10 

40 

7 

0.6 

75,000 

kers, and are bas

d by PSE (see 

f 2.25 grains (gr)

ressor station. 

eshold for CO2e i

pplication Attachm

ntributor to tota

ss than 0.01%) 

ation

31.docx 

t

ate 

old) 

sed on 

) per 

is from 

ment A. 

al CO2e 

of CO2 
SECTIO

Source 

Turbine O

Siemens 

GE LM

Emergenc

Circuit Bre

Notes: 

• Em

th

Pe

• Em

ON THR

Option: 

GE 7FA.0

GE 7FA.0

SGT6-5000F

MS100 (2 Units

cy Generator 

eakers 

missions of indiv

e turbine(s), one

ermit Application

 CO2: 1 

 CH4: 21 

 N2O: 310 

 SF6: 23,900 

mission calculati

REE

Estimat

CO2

05 309,36

04 272,73

F4 299,76

s) 325,31

128.2

-- 

vidual GHG com

e emergency ge

n Attachment A. C

ons are provided

T

ted Annual G

2 C

64 0.0

33 0.0

66 0.0

12 0.0

28 0.0

pounds (CO2, C

enerator and sw

CO2e emissions 

d in Attachment A

3-3

Table 3-2 

GHG Emissio

CH4

04057 

03560 

04039 

04556 

00702 

-- 

CH4, and N2O) an

itchyard breaker

are calculated us

A of the Project’s

ons by Pollut

tpy 

N2O 

6.506 

5.710 

6.477 

7.306 

-- 

-- 

nd the summatio

rs, and are base

sing the following

s PSD Permit Ap

Emissio

Fredonia GHG

tant

SF6

-- 

-- 

-- 

-- 

-- 

0.00503 

on CO2e emissio

ed on more deta

g GWP’s for eac

pplication. 

on Informa

G BACT 2011.10.

CO2

311,3

274,5

301,7

327,5

128.4

120.1

ons in this table 

ailed estimates 

ch GHG compoun

ation

31.docx 

2e 

382 

503 

775 

577 

43 

10 

include 

in PSD 

nd: 
SECTIO

4.1 P

Ecology 

divided 

Northwe

defer to 

Environm

some PSD

The exist

The PSD

new unit

case for t

Project’s

PSD rule

equipmen

demonstr

pollutant

ON FOU

PSD APPLIC

is the stateinto multipl

st Clean Air

Ecology fo

mental Prote

D pollutants

ting facility 

D NSR proce

s’ potential 

the proposed

 GHG emiss

es require a 

nt and proce

rates that th

ts is addresse

UR

CABILITY R

level govern

le air pollu

r Agency’s (

for major so

ection Agen

s including G

is a PSD ma

ss is require

to emit exce

d Project, as 

sions. 

BACT analy

edures. Secti

he Project w

ed in Section

REVIEW 

ning body fo

ution control

(NWCAA) a

ource attain

ncy (EPA) c

GHGs. 

ajor source w

ed for GHG’s

eeds 75,000 

shown abov

ysis to ensur

ion 5 of this

will meet BA

n 5 of the PS

4-1

or air quality

l agencies. 

authority. Th

nment perm

currently ove

with potentia

s from new e

tpy CO2e (4

ve in Table 3

re the use o

s document p

ACT require

SD Permit Ap

PS

y in Washin

The Projec

he regional a

mitting issue

ersees New 

al GHG emi

emission un

40 CFR 51.1

3-1. As a res

f the most e

presents a th

ements for G

Application. 

SD Applica

Fredonia GHG

gton. In add

ct site is lo

air pollution

s, such as 

Source Rev

issions excee

nits at major 

166(b)(48)(v

sult, BACT i

effective air 

horough BA

GHG. BAC

ability Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

dition, the st

cated within

n control age

PSD. The 

views (NSR

eding 75,000

sources whe

v)(b)). This i

is required fo

pollution co

ACT analysis

T for other 

lysis

31.docx 

tate is 

n the 

encies 

U.S. 

R) for 

0 tpy. 

en the 

is the 

or the 

ontrol 

s, and 

PSD 
SECTIO

5.1 IN

40 CFR 

each pol

energy, e

BACT re

standards

As stated

●

●

●

5.2 B

In a De

Radiation

This topReview W

Step 

the sp

Step 

Step 

hierar

Step 

Step 

econo

If the app

4 is not 

NWCAA

determin

ONFIVE

NTRODUCT

51.21(j) def

llutant.” BA

environment

equirements 

s. There are 

d in Section 2

Simple cy

considere

o One G

o One G

o One S

o Two G

A 600 kW

(approxim

Substation

BACT ASSE

cember 1, 

n, the agenc

-down BACT

Workshop M

1. Identify 

pecific emiss

2. Eliminate

3. Rank rem

rchy; 

4. Evaluate 

5. Select BA

omic, enviro

plicant propo

necessary. 

A staff, it wa

nations to ide

E

TION

fines BACT

ACT determi

tal, and econ

may be mor

presently no

2.2 above, th

ycle gas tur

d by PSE: 

GE 7FA.05 f

GE 7FA.04 f

Siemens SGT

GE LMS 100

W emergency

mately 890 b

n breakers c

ESSMENT M

1987 memo

cy recommen

T analysis p

Manual, 1990

all available

sion unit for

e all technica

maining cont

most effecti

ACT, which 

onmental, an

oses to imple

During PS

as agreed th

entify the top

 as emission

inations are 

nomic impac

re stringent, 

o GHG emis

hree air emis

rbine genera

frame turbine

frame turbine

T6-5000F4 f

0 aeroderiva

y generator

rake-horsep

ontaining SF

METHODOL

orandum fro

nded use of 

process consi

): 

e control tec

r the regulate

ally infeasib

trol technolo

ive controls a

will be the m

nd/or energy 

ement the m

E’s June 16

hat PSE’s BA

p current con

5-1

n limits “bas

made on a 

cts, and othe

but not less

sion standar

ssion source 

ator(s), for w

e; 

e; 

frame turbine

ative turbines

(Caterpillar 

ower (bhp))

F6. 

LOGY 

om the EPA

a “top-down

ists of five s

chnologies w

ed pollutant u

le control te

ogies by con

and docume

most effectiv

impacts. 

most effective

6, 2010 pre

ACT analys

ntrol levels a

sed on maxim

case-by-cas

r costs. 

s stringent th

rds for the Pr

types are pr

which four e

e; or 

s. 

with Model

, or similar m

A Assistant 

n” methodol

steps (from t

with practica

under evalua

chnologies;

ntrol effectiv

ent results; an

ve practical 

e or "top" av

eapplication 

sis would re

achieved in p

GHG

Fredonia GHG

mum degree

se basis, tak

han other app

roject’s prop

roposed for t

equipment o

l C18 ATAA

make and m

Administra

logy for det

the EPA’s D

al potential f

ation; 

veness and t

nd

option not r

vailable cont

meeting w

ely on recen

practice. 

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

e of reductio

king into acc

plicable emi

posed source

this project:

options are b

AC Tier 2 en

odel). 

ator for Air

termining BA

Draft New So

for applicati

tabulate a co

rejected, base

trol strategy,

with Ecology

nt relevant B

lysis

31.docx 

on for 

count 

ission 

es. 

being 

ngine 

r and 

ACT. 

ource 

ion to 

ontrol 

ed on 

, Step 

y and 

BACT 
SECTIO

Three so

turbines i

• E

• C

• In

lo

Because 

technolog

2006 to d

5.2.1 E

BACT d

turbine g

RBLC c

Applicati

PSD poll

for GHG

5.2.2 C

In additi

determin

evaluated

states be

Emission

control o

The CAR

The last 

turbine w

A well-d

Californi

by the CE

identify s

certificat

#approve

BACT em

PSD Perm

emission 

5.3 B

This sect

2011. No

Code (W

in Sectio

ONFIVE

ources were 

in the past 5

EPA’s RACT

California Ai

nformation f

ocal air quali

BACT dete

gy and oper

date were inc

EPA RBLC

etermination

generator un

ontains a w

ion summar

lutants for n

Gs were found

California BA

ion to eval

nations listed

d. California

ecause Cali

n Rate (LA

options. 

RB BACT C

BACT dete

was dated 19

documented s

ia, any new p

EC prior to c

similar large

tion projects 

ed). Air perm

mission limi

mit Applicat

ns from simp

BACT FOR G

tion address

ot directly r

WAC) 173-40

n 9 of the PS

E

reviewed to

 years (2006

T/BACT/LA

r Resources 

for Californi

ity managem

erminations 

rating exper

cluded in thi

ns identified

nits since 20

wide range o

rizes the ran

natural gas an

d in the RBL

ACT Determ

uating BAC

d in the C

a BACT det

ifornia’s BA

ER) require

Clearinghous

ermination e

99. These de

source of rec

power plant 

construction

e utility-scale

are summar

mits to constr

itations. Cali

tion. To date

le cycle gas 

GAS TURB

ses PSD BA

related to B

07 performan

SD Permit A

o identify re

6 to date): 

ER Clearing

Board (CAR

a Energy Co

ment district 

generally b

rience impro

is analysis. 

d in the RBL

06 are listed

of BACT e

nges of BAC

nd diesel-fir

LC for simpl

inations 

CT determin

CARB Clear

terminations 

ACT definit

ements, whi

se was revie

entered into 

etermination

cent power p

unit similar 

n. The CEC’s

e simple cyc

rized at http:

ruct for each

ifornia BAC

e, no PSD BA

turbines in C

BINES 

ACT require

BACT, comp

nce standard

Application. 

5-2

elevant BAC

ghouse (RBL

RB) BACT C

ommission (C

findings. 

become incr

ove over tim

LC for large

d in Table 5

mission lim

CT emission

red gas turbin

le cycle gas 

nations repo

ringhouse a

are often m

tion is equ

ich does no

ewed. This d

the clearing

ns are consid

plant permitt

in size to PS

s power plan

cle gas turbin

//www.ener

h identified s

T determina

ACT determ

California. 

ements for G

pliance with

d and mitigat

CT determin

LC), 

Clearinghou

CEC) power

reasingly st

me, only pro

e utility-scale

5-1 of the P

mitations. Ta

n limits foun

nes. No topturbines. 

orted in the

and CEC p

more stringen

uivalent to 

ot consider 

database is n

ghouse for u

dered outdate

ting informa

SE’s propose

nt siting case

ne power pro

rgy.ca.gov/si

siting case w

ations are sum

minations hav

GHGs that b

h applicable 

tion requirem

GHG

Fredonia GHG

nations for 

use, and 

r plant siting

tringent as 

ojects that w

e simple cyc

PSD Permit 

able 5-2 of 

nd in the R

-down BAC

e RBLC, C

permitting in

nt than deci

federal Low

the econom

no longer re

utility-scale 

ed. 

ation is the C

ed project m

e list was rev

ojects (curre

itingcases/al

were reviewe

mmarized in

ve been com

became effe

Washington

ments for GH

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

simple cycle

g cases, inclu

emission co

were approv

cle industria

Application

the PSD P

RBLC for va

CT determina

California B

nformation 

isions from 

west Achiev

mic feasibili

egularly upd

simple cycl

CEC. In 

must be certif

viewed to 

nt and past C

l_projects.ht

ed to identify

n Table 5-3 o

mpleted for G

ective Janua

n Administr

HGs, is addr

lysis

31.docx 

e gas 

uding 

ontrol 

ved in 

al gas 

. The 

Permit 

arious 

ations 

BACT 

were 

other 

vable 

ty of 

dated. 

e gas 

fied 

CEC 

tml 

y

of the 

GHG 

ary 2, 

rative 

essed 
SECTIO

Detailed 

Permit A

(CO2) is 

Sumas an

reported 

combined

combined

emission

gas turbi

Therefor

GWPs o

contribut

analysis f

Although

Washing

(lb/MWPSD Perm

proposed

GHG em

shutdown

Project a

start-ups 

operating

BACT fo

pollutant

5.3.1 S

Accordin

2011), av

designs, 

polluting

by the pe

Project a

Fuel sele

Viable ex

gas produ

Accordin

emission

Fuel effi

fuel burn

During e

generator

generatio

considere

ONFIVE

GHG emis

Application a

by far the d

nd Mint Far

to Ecology

d are less tha

d CH4 and N

ns contribute

ines both in

e, it is reaso

of 21 for CH

te less than 3

focuses on C

h there is no

gton has an e

hr) for base

mit Applica

d Project. 

missions are

ns compared

are all capab

and shutdo

g modes (oth

or GHGs is d

ts. 

Step 1: Avail

ng to EPA's 

vailable con

the use of 

g processes t

ermit applica

re summariz

ection. The 

xisting local

uces less CO

ng to EPA A

ns than burnin

icient engine

ned. More ef

early project

r options th

on. The four

ed along wit

E

sions calcul

and results 

dominant G

rm Generatin

y and NWC

an 0.01% by

N2O emission

e more than 

nclude select

onable to exp

H4 and 310

3 percent to t

CO2 emission

o federal new

emission pe

eload power 

tion, Washin

 a function

d to full load

ble of achiev

owns on th

her than start

determined b

able Contro

recent PSD 

ntrol techno

add-on cont

that would fu

ant need not 

zed below. 

type of fu

 fuel options

O2 than burn

AP-42 emissi

ng natural g

e technology

fficient engin

t developme

hat could b

r simple cyc

th two additi

lations are p

are summar

GHG pollutan

ng Stations i

CAA) demo

y weight of s

ns are less th

99 percent o

tive catalyti

pect a simila

0 for N2O (

the Project’s

ns from the g

w source pe

erformance s

plants (WA

ngton's EPS 

 of fuel co

d operation. 

ving fast sta

he GHG em

t-up and shu

by the same

ol Technolog

and Title V 

logies shou

trols and co

fundamentall

be consider

el burned d

s for the Pro

ning fuel oil 

ion factors, b

as, but highe

y. CO2e emi

nes emit less

ent evaluatio

e used to s

cle gas turbin

ional simple

5-3

provided in 

rized in Tab

nt for the P

in 2009 (req

onstrated th

source-tested

han 1 percen

of the CO2e

ic reduction 

ar emissions

(the GWP o

s total CO2e

gas turbine s

erformance s

standard (EP

AC 173-407

does not ap

nsumption w

The four sim

art-ups and 

missions. Th

utdown) whic

e five step to

gies 

Permitting 

ld include l

ombinations 

ly redefine t

red. Potentia

determines th

oject include

due to the lo

burning disti

er overall CO

issions are th

s CO2e relati

ons, PSE id

satisfy the P

ne generator

e cycle gas tu

Attachment

bles 3-1 and

roject. Prev

quired by W

hat actual e

d CO2 emissi

nt of a gas tu

e total. (Note

(SCR) and

s relationship

of CO2 is 1

emissions. F

stack(s). 

standard (NS

PS) of 1,100

-130). As d

pply to peak

which is m

mple cycle g

shutdowns, 

his BACT a

ch dominate

op-down pro

Guidance fo

lower emitti

of the two.

the nature of

ally available

he amount 

e natural gas 

ower carbon

illate fuel oi

O2e emission

he direct resu

ive to the am

dentified sev

Project’s ra

r models nam

urbine engin

GHG

Fredonia GHG

ts A-1 and 

d 3-2 above.

vious source 

WAC 173-407

emissions of

ion rates. Co

urbine’s CO2

e: the Suma

d oxidation 

p for the Pro

), these two

For these rea

SPS) for GH

0 pounds pe

discussed in 

king power p

minimal duri

gas turbines 

which redu

analysis foc

e GHG emiss

ocess outline

or Greenhou

ing processe

. However, 

f the source

e control tec

of GHG po

and fuel oil

n/hydrogen c

il produces l

ns. 

ult of the am

mount of elec

ven modern,

apid-start pe

med in this 

ne generator 

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

A-3 of the 

. Carbon dio

testing at P

7, and previ

f CH4 and 

onverted to C

2e emissions

s and Mint 

catalyst sys

oject). Even

o pollutants

asons, this B

HGs; the Sta

er megawatt

Section 9 o

plants such a

ing start-ups

proposed fo

uces the effe

cuses on no

sions. 

ed above for

use Gases (M

es, practices

inherently l

s being prop

chnologies fo

ollutants em

l. Burning na

count in met

less CH4 and

mount and ty

ctricity prod

, efficient en

eaking elect

application 

r models (58

lysis

31.docx 

PSD 

oxide 

PSE’s 

ously 

N2O 

CO2e, 

. CO2

Farm 

tems. 

n with 

s will 

BACT 

ate of 

-hour 

of the 

as the 

s and 

or the 

ect of 

ormal 

r PSD 

March 

s and 

lower 

posed 

or the 

mitted. 

atural 

thane. 

d N20 

ype of 

duced. 

ngine 

tricity 

were 

 MW 
SECTIO

Pratt and

technolog

the latter

the Proje

Ignoring 

less GHG

technolog

As stated

and often

for contin

are more

The mod

generatio

start and 

can take 

since the

structura

time char

and othe

operator 

unit is sta

increase 

major ma

Both Sie

that coul

these ar

construct

types of 

interest o

“test” cu

In contra

operating

proven te

in use. 

capacity 

demand. 

being ab

them, on

It may b

generatin

predictab

minimum

which is 

ONFIVE

d Whitney 

gy (17 MW 

r three option

ect’s capacity

a longer sta

G emissions

gy; however

d previously

n short-term

nuous opera

cost-effectiv

dern CCCT 

on needs. In

stop than a 

anywhere fr

e unit was l

l damage to

racteristic, C

er consumab

seeks to run

arted in orde

annual main

aintenance o

mens and G

d have the c

e unproven

ted and oper

facilities rar

of PSE’s rat

stomer for su

ast, the simp

g loads with

echnologies.

PSE’s purp

that is cap

PSE needs 

ble to start g

ly to restart 

be possible 

ng needs in

ble. Howeve

m size of ven

above the c

E

FT8-3’s an

Wartsila mo

ns, banks of

y requiremen

artup to full

s per MW-h

r, it is not an

y in this app

peak power

ation applica

ve for peakin

power plan

n other word

peaking pow

rom 3-8 hou

last operated

o the steam 

CCCTs are ex

bles required

n the unit for

er to justify t

ntenance co

outages whic

GE have rece

capability to 

n technolog

rated a fast s

rely operate 

tepayers to t

uch a plant. 

ple-cycle tu

hin approxim

. Note that th

pose in expa

pable of res

to respond 

generators q

them again w

to use the

n application

er, PSE’s pe

ndors’ curre

capacity that

nd 41 MW

odel 18V50D

f three to ten 

nts. 

l load, a com

hr of electri

n available te

lication, the

r demand on

ations, simpl

ng applicatio

nt is design

ds, they are d

wer plant op

urs to start an

d, as they r

generating u

xpensive to 

d to bring th

multiple da

the expense 

osts for CCC

ch are costly.

ently announ

come up to 

ies. To P

start CCCT. 

as expected

take on this 

urbines that 

mately 10 m

he GE Fram

anding the F

sponding qu

to real-time

quickly, oper

when system

ese fast star

ns when st

eaking gener

ently propos

t PSE is see

5-4

W GE LM6

DF’s). Due t

or more eng

mbined cycl

icity generat

echnology th

 Project obj

n PSE’s syst

le cycle com

ons. 

ned to serve

designed to o

perates. In P

nd reach 100

require very

unit and stea

start due to 

he entire un

ays, or at the 

of the start. 

CTs and can

.

nced plans to

partial load

PSE’s know

 This presen

d in the first

type of tec

PSE is con

minutes, and

me 7FA.05 is

FGS is to p

uickly and r

e changes in

rate them fo

m demands re

rt CCCT un

tart times a

ration needs

ed new fast 

eking to mee

6000’s), plu

to the indivi

gine generat

le combustio

ted due to 

hat would m

jective is to 

tem. Althoug

mbustion turb

e intermedi

operate for l

PSE’s exper

0% load, dep

y careful the

am turbines

the amounts

nit up to tem

very least, a

 In addition

n significant

o offer fast s

d within as fe

wledge, neit

nts substanti

t generation.

chnology risk

sidering can

d most of th

s new techno

provide addi

reliably to 

n electricity 

or a short-pe

equire. 

nits to addr

and steady-s

s do not fit 

t start combi

et projected 

GHG

Fredonia GHG

us one recip

idual genera

tors would b

on turbine (

the higher e

meet the Proj

respond to 

gh a CCCT 

bines are be

ate and bas

long periods

rience comb

pending on t

ermal mana

s. Because 

s of fuel, bac

mperature. 

a whole day 

n, frequent st

tly reduce t

start version

few as 10 mi

ther compa

ial technolog

. It would n

k. PSE is u

n start and r

he turbine o

ology that is

itional “pea

rapid chang

demand, wh

eriod of tim

dress interme

state load r

that profile

ined cycle u

needs. This

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

procating en

ating capaciti

be needed to 

CCCT) prod

efficiency o

ect requirem

rapidly chan

is more effi

est suited for

seload elect

s of time bet

bined cycle p

the length of

agement to a

of this long

ck feed elect

Accordingly

for each tim

tart-ups gene

the time bet

ns of CCCT 

inutes. How

any has act

gical risk as 

not be in the

unwilling to

reach stead 

options are 

 yet to be pr

aking” gener

ges in elect

hich often m

me, and then

ediate elect

requirements

e. In additio

units is 270 

s technology

lysis

31.docx 

ngine 

ies of 

meet 

duces 

of the 

ments. 

nging 

ficient 

r, and 

tricity 

tween 

plants 

f time 

avoid 

g start 

tricity 

y, the 

me the 

erally 

tween 

units 

wever, 

tually 

these 

e best 

 be a 

state 

wellroven 

rating 

tricity 

means 

n stop 

tricity 

s are 

n the 

MW, 

y also 
SECTIO

currently

This high

operate to

Using co

it is not a

Carbon 

sequestra

GHG con

CO2 is th

As noted

permits d

turbines. 

Calpine R

Portland 

gas turbin

practice. 

PSD Perm

the Palm

solar tech

EPA’s B

1) the us

technical

and Amb

SE 09-01

EPA con

(i.e., by p

the PHPP

EPA also

capture a

Ecology’

emission

Available

the flue 

simple-cy

demonstr

turbine u

5.3.2 S

In this st

they are n

identified

First, exc

gas is no

ONFIVE

y offers cont

her minimum

o support PS

ombined cyc

an available 

capture an

ation (CCS) 

ntrol techno

he dominant 

d above, the 

did not iden

Voluntary B

Russell City

General Ele

ne. In both v

The use of n

mit Number

mdale Hybrid

hnology and

ACT analys

se of new th

lly infeasible

bient Air Qu

1, Section 7

ncluded that 

pipeline) wa

P and was n

o concluded 

and sequestr

’s request.) E

ns from the P

e technologi

gas of a co

ycle combu

rated in prac

unit(s). 

Step 2: Elimi

tep of the B

not feasible 

d in Step 1 sh

clusive use o

t reasonably

E

tinuous emis

m load woul

SE’s generat

le technolog

technology o

nd sequestra

should be c

ologies are c

carbon com

EPA RBLC

ntify any BA

BACT analy

y Energy Ce

ectric’s Port 

voluntary BA

natural gas a

r SE 09-01 w

d Power Proj

d two combi

sis for GHG 

hermally eff

e in EPA’s 

uality Impact

7.1.4). While

transport of

as not feasib

not consider

that it is no

ration option

EPA found t

PHPP’s prop

ies necessary

mbustion tu

ustion turbin

ctice for the

nate Techn

BACT analy

for impleme

hould be elim

of natural ga

y available at

ssion guaran

ld reduce the

tion system n

gy would req

option for co

ation. Acco

considered a

urrently dem

mpound emitt

C, California

ACT determ

yses were pe

enter Project

Westward II

ACT analyse

as the primar

was recently

ect (PHPP) 

ined cycle G

emissions fr

ficient CCCT

BACT analy

t Report – P

e EPA deter

f the captured

le. As a resu

red beyond 

t necessary 

ns are both 

the use of th

osed CCCTs

y to capture,

urbine exist.

nes in pea

e scale or ap

ically Infeas

ysis, potentia

entation at th

minated as n

s as fuel is n

t the Project 

5-5

ntees only a

e number of

needs. 

quire the Pro

onsideration

ording to rec

a potentially

monstrated in

ted by the Pr

a BACT Cle

inations for 

erformed for

t, a combine

I Project, wh

es, CCS was

ry fuel was c

y issued by E

in southern 

GE Frame 7F

rom the CCC

Ts, and 2) t

ysis (see EP

Palmdale Hy

rmined that, 

d CO2 from 

ult, CCS was

BACT Step

to evaluate t

analyzed in 

hermally eff

s. 

, compress, t

However, e

aking applic

pplication sim

sible Option

ally availabl

he proposed 

not feasible f

not feasible b

location, ye

at approxima

f hours at wh

oject objectiv

n in this BAC

cent EPA gu

y available c

n practice fo

roject’s prop

earinghouse 

GHG emis

r two project

ed cycle com

hich includes

s found to b

considered B

EPA Region

California. T

FA CCCTs

CTs consider

the use of C

PA Region I

ybrid Power 

in general,

the PHPP to

s found not 

p 2. Because

the feasibilit

more detail

ficient techn

transport, inj

experience w

cations is l

milar to the

ns 

le control te

Project. In t

for applicatio

because ther

et PSE may n

GHG

Fredonia GHG

ately 50% lo

hich the Proj

ve to be red

CT evaluatio

uidance, car

control optio

for simple cy

posed new so

and a review

ssions from 

ts permitted 

mbustion tur

s a simple cy

e unavailabl

BACT. 

n IX on Octo

The propose

to generate 

red two cont

CCS. CCS w

IX. August 

Project PSD

CCS is tech

o potential s

to be techni

e transport w

ty of CO2 st

l below for 

nology to be 

nject, and seq

with CCS te

limited, and

 Project’s p

echnologies 

this case, thr

on to the Pro

re may be tim

need to oper

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

oad or 135 

ject unit(s) c

efined; there

on. 

rbon capture

on. Howeve

ycle gas turb

ources. 

w of recent 

simple cycl

in late 2010

rbine project

ycle GE LM

le or infeasib

ober 18, 201

ed PHPP inc

electrical po

trol technolo

was eliminat

2011. Fact S

D Permit Nu

hnically fea

equestration

ically feasibl

was not fea

torage. (Note

PSE’s Proje

BACT for

quester CO2

echnologies 

d has not 

proposed new

are eliminat

ree of the op

oject. 

mes when na

rate the Proje

lysis

31.docx 

MW. 

could 

efore, 

e and 

er, no 

bines. 

CEC 

e gas 

0: the 

t, and 

MS100 

ble in 

11 for 

cludes 

ower. 

ogies: 

ed as 

Sheet 

umber 

asible, 

n sites 

le for 

asible, 

e that 

ect at 

GHG 

from 

with 

been 

w gas 

ted if 

ptions 

atural 

ect to 
SECTIO

meet its 

Project o

Second, o

the Proje

quality m

emission

Ambient 

Third, CC

will be ca

CCS con

the CO2

sequester

There are

combusti

the CO2

combusti

produce 

combusti

although

gas turbin

The Glob

cover a w

demonstr

would h

examined

the propo

Pre-comb

fired gas

gas to a n

the Proje

generatio

As show

post-com

capture p

economic

has a sig

from a na

Project, w

percent t

SCR and

capture a

ONFIVE

obligation to

operating wil

of the availa

ect location 

modeling d

ns would sig

Air Quality

CS is not fe

arried forwa

nsists of five 

2 stream, (3

ring the CO2

e three categ

ion: capture

 from the 

ion: perform

a flue gas th

ion capture 

, as mention

nes for an ap

bal CCS Ins

wide range 

ration projec

have influen

d that are in

osed new un

bustion tech

s turbine fac

non-carbon f

ect, and mo

on. 

wn in Table 5

mbustion cap

portion of th

cs of capturi

gnificantly h

atural gas po

while burnin

to 4 percent 

d oxidation c

at a coal plan

E

o serve its c

ll be very inf

able engine t

because it c

demonstrated

gnificantly e

y Standard (N

asible at thi

ard into subse

stages: (1) 

3) transport

2. 

gories of pro

e the CO2 fr

flue gas st

m the combu

hat is mostly

is the only o

ned previous

pplication sim

stitute publi

of industries

cts. Such de

nced their c

n the permitt

it(s) at FGS.

nology has n

ilities such 

fuel (i.e., hyd

ore importan

5-1 only one

pture of CO

he project is

ing CO2 are 

higher conce

ower plant (

ng natural ga

in the stack

catalysts (se

nt is easier an

customers. In

frequent. Th

technologies

could not sat

d that offsi

exceed the n

NAAQS) at l

s Project. A

equent steps

capturing C

ting the CO

ocesses used

rom the fuel

tream result

ustion proces

y CO2. Of the

option consi

sly, CCS ha

milar to the 

shes lists of

s, and captu

emonstration

cost effectiv

ting, constru

. 

not been dem

as PSE’s Pr

drogen), wou

ntly has not 

e of the proj

O2 at the Bo

 still under 

substantially

entration of 

typically ab

as, range fro

k gas after a

ee Attachme

nd substantia

5-6

nstances wh

he Project wi

s, the Wartsil

tisfy other a

ite impacts 

new federal

locations nea

As noted bel

s of the BAC

CO2 from the

O2, (4) inje

d to capture

l prior to co

ting from t

ss in an envi

e three proce

idered poten

as not been d

Project’s pro

f active and

ure and stora

n projects m

veness. Fo

uction or ope

monstrated i

roject. It wo

uld substant

been demo

ojects evalua

oundary Dam

construction

y different f

(approxima

out 3 percen

m 3% to 4%

air has been

nt A of the 

ally more co

hen backup f

ill be fueled 

la 18V50DF

air permittin

from the 

l 1-hour nitr

ar the FGS. 

low, howeve

CT analysis.

e flue gas str

ecting the 

CO2 from t

ombustion, (2

the combus

ironment ric

ess categorie

ntially ready

demonstrate

oposed new 

d potential C

age technolo

may have rec

or this BAC

eration stage

in practice fo

ould involve 

tially reduce

onstrated to 

ated by the G

m coal fired

n. It has not

for a coal-fir

ately 13perce

nt). Estimate

% for the gas

n added to m

Project’s P

ost effective

GHG

Fredonia GHG

fuel oil is ne

primarily by

F is not techn

ng requireme

Wartsila 1

rogen oxide

er, at Ecolog

 

ream, (2) com

CO2, and 

the flue gas 

2) post-com

stion proces

ch in oxygen

es used to ca

y for comme

ed at scale w

unit(s). 

CCS projects

ogies, and m

ceived incen

CT Analysi

es to see if a

for predomin

costly conv

 the overall 

date for ga

Global CCS

d power pla

t operated. 

red plant bec

ent) as com

ed CO2 conc

s turbine exh

moderate tem

PSD Applica

than at the P

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

eeded to kee

y natural gas

nically feasib

ents. Ambien

8V50DF en

e (NOx) Nat

gy's request, 

mpressing/d

(5) perman

stream: (1)

mbustion: ca

ss, and (3) 

n instead of 

apture CO2, 

ercial applica

with simple 

s. These pro

many of them

ntive funding

s, projects 

any are simi

nantly natura

version of na

fuel efficien

as turbine p

 Institute ut

ant, and the 

Furthermore

cause exhaus

mpared to ex

entrations fo

haust, and fr

mperatures a

ation). Thus,

Project’s 

lysis

31.docx 

ep the 

s. 

ble at 

nt air 

ngine 

tional 

CCS 

drying 

nently 

) preapture 

oxyair to 

postation, 

cycle 

ojects 

m are 

g that 

were 

lar to 

al-gas 

atural 

ncy of 

power 

tilizes 

CO2

e, the 

st gas 

xhaust 

or the 

rom 2 

at the 

, CO2
SECTIO

Project N

Val Verd

(formerly

Enid Fer

Shute Cr

Facility 

Sleipner 

Great Pla

Weyburn

In Salah 

Snøhvit C

Century 

Occident

Lost Cab

Illinois In

and Seq

Boundar

Capture 

Demonst

Agrium C

Kemper 

(formerly

Gorgon C

Project 

Source: 

ONFIVE

Large-S

Name 

e Natural Ga

y Sharon Ridg

rtilizer 

reek Gas Pro

CO2 Injectio

ains Synfuels

n-Midale Proje

CO2 Storage

CO2 Injection

Plant (former

tal Gas Proce

Lar

bin Gas Plant

ndustrial Carb

uestration Pro

ry Dam Integr

and Sequest

tration Projec

CO2 Capture 

County IGCC

y Plant Ratclif

Carbon Dioxid

Global CCS I

E

Scale Integra

 in Pe

Large-s

s Plants 

ge) 

cessing 

n 

s Plant and 

ect

e

n

rly 

essing Plant) 

rge-scale inte

bon Capture 

oject

rated Carbon 

ration 

ct 

with ACTL 

C Project 

ffe) 

de Injection 

nstitute 2011

ated CCS Pro

ermitting, Co

Location

scale integra

Texas, US

Oklahoma

USA 

Wyoming, 

North Sea,

Norway 

Saskatche

Canada 

Wilaya de 

Ouargla, 

Algeria 

Barents Se

Norway 

Texas, US

egrated CCS

Wyoming, 

Illinois, US

Saskatche

Canada 

Alberta, 

Canada 

Mississipp

USA 

Western 

Australia 

, The global s

5-7

Table 5-1

ojects Listed 

onstruction a

Indus

ated CCS pro

A Natura

Proce

, Fertiliz

Produ

USA Natura

Proce

, Natura

Proce

wan, Synth

Natura

Natura

Proce

ea, Natura

Proce

A Natura

Proce

S projects in 

USA Natura

Proce

SA Chem

Produ

wan, Coal P

Gene

Fertiliz

Produ

i, IGCC

Gene

Natura

Proce

status of CCS

1

 by the Glob

and Operatio

stry Ca

ojects in Ope

al Gas 

essing Pre

zer 

uction Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

hetic 

al Gas Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

Permitting o

al Gas 

essing Pre

mical 

uction 

Ind

Se

Power 

ration Pos

zer 

uction Pre

 Power 

ration Pre

al Gas 

essing Pre

S: 2011, Canb

GHG

Fredonia GHG

bal CCS Instit

on 

pture Type 

eration 

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

or Constructi

e-combustion

dustrial 

paration 

st-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

e-combustion

berra, Austral

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

tute 

Primary 

Storage 

Enhance

Recovery

Enhance

Recovery

Enhance

Recovery

Offshore 

Formatio

Enhance

Recovery

Onshore 

Formatio

Offshore 

Formatio

Enhance

Recovery

ion 

Enhance

Recovery

Onshore 

Formatio

n

Enhance

Recovery

Enhance

Recovery

Enhance

Recovery

Onshore 

Formatio

lia 

lysis

31.docx 

Option 

ed Oil 

y

ed Oil 

y

ed Oil 

y

Saline 

ons 

ed Oil 

y

Saline 

ons 

Saline 

ons 

ed Oil 

y

ed Oil 

y

Saline 

ons 

ed Oil 

y

ed Oil 

y

ed Oil 

y

Saline 

ons 
SECTIO

predomi

impleme

to PSE’

Boundar

The Glo

storage 

operatio

several p

most are

were no

Mitchel

Sufficie

for the M

CO2 cap

econom

located 

without 

neither o

PSE is a

Florida 

Compar

PSE’s p

plant (n

Siemens

steam tu

Bellingh

was ope

the cont

operate 

Corpora

http://ww

operate 

Apparen

plant op

attempte

sale dur

facility w

PSE bel

facilities

the purp

EPA.

ONFIVE

inantly gasented at the 

s proposed P

ry Dam nor 

obal CCS In

demonstrati

on due to eco

projects. Th

e not compar

o longer econ

l Energy pro

nt data were

Mitchell En

pture and se

mically feasib

in Norway 

CCS, the o

of the Norwe

aware of a c

Power and 

red to other 

proposed Pro

now jointly 

s Westingho

urbine in a c

ham Cogene

erated on a f

trol device 

in peak lo

ation, 2011

ww.fluor.co

as a peakin

ntly, continu

peration cha

ed at the Be

ring the dem

would be an

lieves that th

s, and remai

poses of this

E

fired combu

Boundary D

Project. Ope

would they 

nstitute’s list

ion projects 

onomic reas

he primary so

rable to the p

nomically fe

oject involve

e not readily

nergy project

equestration

ble. Two pro

and were sl

other project

egian projec

apture techn

Light (FP&L

projects in T

oject, so it is

owned by N

ouse W501D

combined cy

eration Facil

fraction of th

ceased after

ad shaving 

. Econami

m/econoami

ng plant duri

ued operatio

anged from 

llingham pla

monstration p

n inconsisten

his technolog

ns undemon

s BACT ana

ustion turbin

Dam power p

rational cost

be applicabl

t does not in

that were b

ons. Readily

ource of exh

proposed Pro

easible. Thre

ed a range o

y available t

t as compare

stopped at 

oposed natu

lated to incl

t is on hold.

cts has imple

nology that w

L) natural g

Tables 5-1 a

s discussed 

NextEra En

D5 combustio

ycle configur

lity. Reviewe

his facility’s 

r increased 

mode whic

ne FG Pl

ine/Pages/fa

ing the 14 y

on of the Ec

baseload op

ant. The pla

project; this 

nt and unrelia

gy remains i

nstrated for s

alysis, CCS 

5-8

ne(s). In su

plant is unpro

t effectivene

le to the prop

nclude a han

uilt and ope

y available in

haust from th

oject, and al

ee of these p

f combustio

to assess the

ed to the pr

the Mitche

ural gas CCC

lude post-co

 Due to pro

emented CCS

was develope

gas turbine p

and 5-2, FP&

in greater d

ergy and SU

on turbines, t

ration (EPA,

ed on June 2

exhaust for 

natural gas 

ch rendered 

lus FAQs. 

aqs.aspx). Th

years when t

conoamine F

peration to p

nt’s capture

is not a via

able source o

n a class of 

simple cycle 

is considere

ummary, the 

oven to date 

ess data are n

posed Projec

ndful of pos

erated over t

nformation i

hese projects

ll stopped wh

projects incl

on devices, o

e similarity o

roposed Proj

ell Energy f

CT power p

ombustion C

oject econom

S. 

ed and teste

power plant 

&L’s project

detail below.

UEZ Energy

two heat rec

, 2006. Appl

23, 2011). F

r 14 years fro

 prices in 2

the capture

Reviewed 

he Bellingha

the Econoam

FG system b

peaking ope

d CO2 was t

able option f

of CO2 for sa

demonstrati

peaking app

ed in Step 3 

GHG

Fredonia GHG

 post-combu

 and not dire

neither readi

ct. 

st-combustio

the years, bu

is summariz

s varied con

hen capture 

lude/included

one of which

of the post-c

ject; howeve

facility when

plant project

CO2 capture; 

mics and fun

d on a demo

in Bellingha

t appears to 

. The Bellin

y Generatio

covery steam

lication for F

luor’s Econo

om 1991 to 

2004-2005 f

e plant une

on June 

am cogenera

mine process

became infea

eration. Seq

transported 

for the Proje

ale. 

ion projects 

plications to 

at the requ

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

ustion CO2

ectly compar

ily available

on CO2 captu

ut are no lo

zed in Table 

nsiderably, al

and sequestr

d gas turbin

h was a gas t

combustion 

er, it is know

n it was no 

ts in Table 

one is oper

nding uncert

onstration sc

am, Massach

be more sim

gham cogen

on) consists 

m generations

Fuel Oil Fle

oamine FG p

2005. Opera

forced the u

economical” 

6, 2011;

ation plant 

s was in ope

asible when

questration w

offsite by tr

ect since a p

for combine

date. Howe

est of Ecolo

lysis

31.docx 

capture 

rable 

e for the 

ure and 

onger in 

5-2 for 

lthough 

ration 

nes. The 

turbine. 

capture 

wn that 

longer 

5-2 are 

rational 

tainties, 

cale at a 

husetts. 

milar to 

neration 

of two 

s, and a 

exibility 

process 

ation of 

unit “to 

(Fluor 

from: 

did not 

eration. 

n power 

was not 

ruck for 

peaking 

ed cycle 

ver, for 

ogy and 
SECT

ProjecName AEP MountaLubbocTexas MitchelEnergyN-ReNSouthwNaturkrKarsto Power Statoil Mongst

IONFIV

t Loca

aineer 

West

VirginUSA 

ck, Lubb

Texa

ll 

y

Bridg

Texa

west

Carls

NM 

raft 

Plant 

Karst

Norw

tad 

Mong

Norw

VE

ation Indu

tnia, 

CoaPow

Gen

bock, 

as 

Gas 

geport, 

as 

Gas heat

engiturbi

sbad, 

Gas plus refor

exha

to, 

way 

Natu

Gas ComCycl

gstad, 

way 

Natu

Gas ComCycl

ustry Cap Typ

l 

wer 

eration 

Pos

com

boiler Pos

com

ters, 

nes, 

nes 

Pos

com

boiler 

NH3 

rmer 

aust 

Pos

com

ural 

mbined 

e 

Pos

com

ural 

mbined 

e 

Pos

com

5-9

Oth

pture 

pe 

PrSto

Op

stmbustion On SaFostmbustion 

En

OilRe(EO

stmbustion EnOil Restmbustion EnOil Restmbustion Aqstmbustion SaFo

her Post-Com

imary 

orage 

ption 

OD

nshore 

aline 

ormations 

OprS2020

nhanced 

l

ecovery 

OR) 

O19N

nhanced 

l

ecovery 

O19N

nhanced 

l

ecovery 

C19

quifers 

O20Cpoin

aline 

ormations 

20

propdadepr

GH

Fredonia GH

mbustion CC

Operating 

ate 

Operated pilot 

roject from 

eptember 

009 to May 011 

Operated 

982-1984. 

ow closed 

Operated 

991-1999. 

ow closed 

Closed in 

990s 

Opened in 

007 without 

CCS. CCS 

ostponed 

ndefinitely 

012 roposed peration ate for emonstration roject. 

G BACT Ana

HG BACT 2011.1

CS Projects n

CommentsDue to the climate poleconomy, tShut downuneconomCaptured 5EOR was rCaptured 1due to ecoAlthough thscrubbing finstalled laFunding fountil 2016, 

alysis

10.31.docx 

not Listed by

s/Status 

current unce

licy and the c

the project wa

 when EOR w

ical, Captured

500 ton/day C

rendered une

104 ton/day o

nomic reason

he plant was 

for CO2 emis

ter. 

or commercial

and still unce

Table 5-

y the Global 

rtain status o

ontinued wea

as put on hold

was rendered

d 1200 ton/da

CO2, shut dow

conomical f CO2, bud sh

ns 

built without g

ssions, this ma

operations p

ertain. 

-2 

CCS Institut

f U.S. 

ak 

d. 

ay CO2 

wn when 

hut down 

gas 

ay be 

ushed back 

te – Propose

References

http://www.ahttp://www.wpture%20Ovand ENERGY INonshore carhttp://www.wpture%20Ovand ENERGY INonshore carhttp://www.mand ENERGY INonshore carhttp://www.phttp://seque

d or with O

s

aep.com/enworleyparso

verview%20

NSTITUTE, 

rbon capturworleyparso

verview%20

NSTITUTE, 

rbon capturme.unm.edu

NSTITUTE, 

rbon capturpower-techn

estration.mit
SECTIO

Potentia

and their

173-407-

a contain

departme

the green

a conside

Enhance

Californi

enhanced

formation

locations

beds. For

pipeline)

opportun

transport

fields in 

definition

would be

obtaining

uncertain

permanen

recovered

formation

G

been pro

performe

Weyburn

demonstr

CO2 sequ

if suffici

western W

meet Wa

result, ve

serve as

geophysi

Another 

underlie 

southern 

of the P

 

1

 Report of

August 20

ONFIVE

al Sequestra

r feasibilities

-110) require

nment syste

ent and that 

nhouse gases

eration in the

ed Oil Reco

ia, eastern T

d oil and nat

ns that are n

s are also pro

r use in EOR

, and injecte

nities do no

tation of CO

Washington

n of “perma

e a very ex

g, permits, 

n. Also no

nt sequestra

d CO2 wou

n and oil fiel

Geologic Seq

oposed and 

ed at Sleipn

n in Canada1

rated long-te

uestration. F

ently capped

Washington,

ashington’s 

ery few form

s pathways 

ics data are a

geologic se

tight cappi

Washington

Project site. 

 

f the Interagenc

10

E

ation Option

s in western 

e that perma

m using a m

creates a hig

s will remain

e following r

very – CO2

Texas, and s

tural gas rec

no longer pro

oposing or u

R, the CO2

ed into the w

ot exist in 

O2 to distant 

n, it is unlik

anent seques

xpensive and

land, rightsote that not 

ation. The C

uld need to 

ld equipmen

questration

some are cu

ner in the N

for the prim

erm operatio

or example,

d by imperm

, as geologic

permanency

mations in th

for the CO

available to c

equestration

ng formatio

n State. Such

In theory, 

 

cy Task Force 

ns. Potential

Washington

anent seques

method that

gh degree of

n contained 

review. 

has been us

outhern Alb

covery (EOR

oductive usin

using compr

must be com

well fields. D

the Pacific

EOR operat

kely that inj

stration” quo

d time-cons

-of-way and

every oil f

O2 acts like

be separat

nt would nee

– Geologic

urrently und

North Sea, S

mary purpose 

on at the sca

deep saline

meable layer

c faulting an

y requireme

his area are 

O2 to migr

confirm the 

n example i

ons. This op

h basalt form

a third geo

on Carbon Cap

5-10

l alternative

n State are br

tration achie

t is in accor

f confidence

for at least o

sed in other r

berta) and in

R) operations

ng typical dr

ressed CO2 t

mpressed, tra

Due to the la

c Northwes

tions. Based

jection into 

oted above. 

suming prop

d easements

field would 

e a solvent a

ted and rein

ed to be reaso

c sequestrat

der research 

Snøhvit in th

of EOR. No

ale required 

 formations 

rs. Deep sali

nd fractures r

ent. The reg

likely to be

rate. PSE u

viability of d

is CO2 injec

ption is cur

mations are n

ologic seque

pture and Stora

s for CO2 se

riefly review

eve the “rete

rdance with

e that substan

one thousand

regions of N

n other parts

s to recover 

rill and pum

to recover m

ansported in

ack of oil an

t and pipe

d on the kno

coal beds w

 Developin

position. Fur

s for a long

satisfy Wa

and is recov

njection or 

onably leak 

tion technol

and develo

he Barents S

o geological 

for this Proj

could store 

ine formatio

raise the que

gion is high

e free of fra

understands 

deep injectio

ction into d

rrently being

not available

estration opt

age, US EPA, 

GHG

Fredonia GHG

equestration

wed. Washin

ention of gre

h standards 

ntially ninet

d years.” Th

North Ameri

s of the wor

additional o

mp technique

methane from

n large quan

nd gas produ

lines do no

own geology

would satisf

ng a pipeline

rthermore, t

g pipeline t

ashington’s 

vered along w

reused con

proof. 

ogies other 

opment. CO2

Sea, In Salah

sequestratio

ject solely fo

CO2 for lon

ons are not a

estion wheth

hly active te

actures and 

that insuff

on options in

deep basalt 

g researche

e within a rea

tion would 

OAR, Climate

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

n are listed b

gton rules (W

eenhouse gas

approved by

y-nine perce

his requirem

ca (e.g., sou

rld to supple

oil from geo

s. Note that 

m unminable

ntities (usual

uction areas, 

ot exist for

y of existing

fy the regul

e for this pr

the feasibili

to EOR fiel

requirement

with the oil

nsumptively,

than EOR

2 sequestrati

h in Algeria

on project ha

for the purpo

ng periods of

a viable opti

her storage w

ectonically.

faults that m

ficient deep

n western W

formations

d by Battel

asonable dis

be to comp

e Change Divis

lysis

31.docx 

below 

WAC 

ses in 

y the 

ent of 

ent is 

uthern 

ement 

ologic 

other 

e coal 

lly by 

EOR 

r the 

g coal 

latory 

roject 

ity of 

lds is 

ts for 

. The 

, and 

have 

ion is 

a, and 

as yet 

ose of 

f time 

ion in 

would 

As a 

might 

p-hole 

WA. 

s that 

lle in 

stance 

press, 

sion, 
SECTIO

transport

where oc

In all thre

more) an

these ge

demonstr

S

olivine o

source of

undevelo

develope

(likely by

process t

be of a la

access to

landfill o

disposal 

In

However

need to b

uses suc

eventuall

usages o

No large

Project si

Note also

disposal 

Although

project, t

5.3.3 S

The rema

proposes

natural g

operating

total annu

CO2 capt

gas stream

is 90 pe

compress

estimated

alone. Du

ONFIVE

t and inject 

cean waters a

ee cases, the

nd injected. A

eologic sequ

rated in prac

ilicate Mine

or serpentinit

f such silica

oped, making

ed, the mine

y rail) and th

to react the c

arger physic

o the site, e

of sufficient

sites at or ad

ndustrial R

r, to meet W

be permanen

h as weldin

ly result the

f CO2 do no

e-volume pe

ite, and no p

o that additio

related to th

h PSE does 

they are carr

Step 3: Rank

aining contr

 to use the l

gas, using UL

g history, PS

ual use to no

ture process

m of a powe

ercent of th

sion process

d 7 percent o

ue to increas

E

liquid CO2

are deep. 

e CO2 would

As mentione

uestration a

ctice. 

eral Reactio

te) can be re

ate materials

g the minera

rals, would 

he resultant 

collected CO

al scale than

etc. A relativ

t capacity w

djacent to the

Reuse – In th

Washington S

ntly consump

ng operation

e CO2 being

ot qualify as

ermanently-c

pipeline syste

onal CO2 em

e options lis

not conside

ied forward 

k Remaining

rol options c

east emitting

LSD only w

SE expects 

o more than 

es are curre

er plant. The

he CO2 prod

ses are ener

of the gross 

sed auxiliary

deep into th

d need to be c

ed above, CO

approaches

ons – Resea

eacted with 

s exists in n

al unavailab

need to be 

solid waste 

O2 with the s

n the Project

vely large l

would need t

e FGS site to

heory CO2 f

State require

ptive (i.e., no

ns that use 

g released b

s permanent 

consumptive

ems are loca

missions wou

sted above. 

r these CCS

into the nex

g Control Op

consist of CC

g feasible fu

when natural 

fuel oil use 

336 hours (p

ntly limited 

erefore, the m

duced durin

rgy intensiv

electricity p

y electric loa

5-11

he tectonic

compressed,

O2 pipelines 

are innovat

arch has sho

CO2 to form

northwestern

ble for the P

transported 

would need

silicate mine

t itself, requi

andfill woul

to be used. 

o support the

from the pro

ements for p

ot rereleased

CO2 as a s

back into th

sequestratio

e CO2 indus

ally available

uld result from

S technologi

xt step of the 

ptions 

CS, fuel cho

uel choice, w

gas is not re

to be very 

per turbine f

to 90 perce

maximum C

ng the comb

ve. If the P

produced wo

ad required to

subduction 

, transported

do not exist

tive techno

own that som

m stable soli

n Washington

Project. Unti

to the Proje

d to be dispo

erals, the em

iring additio

ld need to b

There are 

ese activities

oject could

permanent s

d into the atm

shielding ga

he atmosphe

on and woul

strial uses a

e to transpor

m compress

ies to be fea

 BACT anal

oice, and tur

which is to fu

easonably av

infrequent a

for the GE L

ent or less re

O2 capture r

bustion proc

Project’s pro

ould be consu

o operate th

GHG

Fredonia GHG

zone offsho

d long distan

t in Washing

ologies that 

me ultramaf

id (carbonate

n, but the m

il such time 

ect site from

osed. Due to 

mission contr

onal land, dev

be develope

no existing 

s. 

be sold for 

sequestration

mosphere). T

s, or dry ic

ere. Thus, t

ld not reduc

are known t

rt it, as stated

sion, long-ran

asible for the

lysis at Ecolo

rbine/engine

uel the Proje

vailable. Bas

and propose

MS100 opti

emoval of C

rate assumed

cess. The C

oposed unit(

umed by the

e CCS syste

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

ore in the Pa

nces (200 mil

gton. All thr

have not 

fic minerals

e) compound

mineral depo

as the depo

m a long dis

the nature o

rol project w

velopment o

ed or an exi

rail transpo

industrial r

n, that use w

Typical indu

ce manufact

typical indu

e CO2 emiss

to exist nea

d above. 

nge transpor

e FGS expan

ogy's reques

e efficiency.

ect primarily

sed on the F

es to limit U

on). 

CO2 from the

d for this ana

CO2 capture

(s) had CCS

ese two proc

ems, and resu

lysis

31.docx 

acific 

les or 

ree of 

been 

(e.g., 

ds. A 

osit is 

osit is 

stance 

of the 

would 

of rail 

isting 

ort or 

reuse. 

would 

ustrial 

turing 

ustrial 

sions. 

ar the 

rt and 

nsion 

st. 

. PSE 

y with 

FGS’s 

ULSD 

e flue 

alysis 

e and 

S, an 

cesses 

ultant 
SECTIO

increased

emission

proven to

factors, a

percent r

Tables 5-

efficienc

CCS, res

decreases

percent m

analysis, 

lb/MW-h

emission

PEAKER 

ALTERNAT

Manufacture

Technology 

Heat rate @

(Btu/KWh (H

Fuel CO2 C

 (lb/MMBtu 

Fuel CO2e(2

(lb/MMBtu (

CO2e Emiss

(lb/MWh) 

Rank 

(1= lowest e

 (1) CCS = CO

(2) The fuel C

Natura

lb

lb/

ULSD –

lb

lb/

(3) In complia

Notes: 

• PS

re

ac

wi

• Fo

pr

ONFIVE

d fuel used 

ns per net M

o reduce/rem

application o

reduction in C

-3 and 5-4 c

ies and CO2

spectively. T

s (i.e., heat 

more fuel be

the six turb

hr. When CC

ns efficiency 

Efficiency 

IVES 

er 

@ Full-Load 

HHV)) 

ontent 

(HHV))(2)

2)(3)

(HHV)) 

sions 

emitting) 

O2 capture, comp

CO2 content is ba

al Gas – The Pro

-CO2/MMBtu (H

/lbmol-CO2 / 12.

– The Project’s d

-CO2/MMBtu (H

/lbmol-CO2 / 12.

ance with WAC 

SE in 2009 to m

esults were subm

ccount for appro

ithout CCS for ca

or consistency, h

rocess. 

E

to meet th

MW-hr would

move other 

of post-com

CO2e emissi

ompare and 

2e emissions

The rank ord

rate is high

ing burned p

bine options 

CS is includ

range of 120

and CO2e Em

LMS-100 

GE 

Aero 

9,007 

115.9 

116.8 

1,052 

1 

pression, and se

ased on the follow

oject’s design nat

HV) = (0.7422 lb

.01 lb/lbmol-carb

design distillate f

HV) = (0.8716 lb

.01 lb/lbmol-carb

173-407-120, 17

measure N20, CH

mitted to Washin

ox. 99.27% of to

alculations in this

heat rate estimate

he increased

d be less tha

GHGs such

mbustion CO

ions. 

rank PSE’s 

s in lb/MW

der is the sam

her) when C

per MW-hr f

fall within a

ded in the a

0 to 143 lb/M

missions from

LM-6000

GE 

Aero 

9,871 

115.9 

116.8 

1,153 

2 

equestration. 

wing design assu

tural gas fuel is 7

b-carbon / 1.0 lbbon) = 115.9 lb/M

fuel is 87.16 wt-%

b-carbon / 1.0 lbbon) = 163.4 lb/M

73-407-140, and

H4 and CO2 emis

ngton Departmen

tal CO2e emissio

s table. 

es are based on

5-12

d auxiliary e

an 90 percen

h as CH4, SF

2 capture w

six feasible

W-hr of electr

me with and

CCS is inclu

for each eng

a CO2e emis

analysis, the

MW-hr. 

Table 5-3 

m Available 

0 7FA.05

GE

Frame

10,145

115.9

116.8

1,185

3 

umptions and ca

74.22 wt-% carbo

fuel) * (1 lb-fuel /

MMBtu (HHV) 

% carbon with a h

fuel) * (1 lb-fuel /

MMBtu (HHV) 

d 173-407-230, f

ssions at the Mi

nt of Ecology th

ons. Therefore, 

ISO conditions a

electric load

nt. CO2 capt

F6, and N2O

would achiev

e turbine opti

ricity genera

d without CC

uded, resulti

gine option. W

ssions efficie

e six turbine

Turbine Opt

5 5000

Sieme

e Fram

5 10,15

9 115

8 116

5 1,18

4

alculations: (HHV

on with a higher 

/ 23,473 Btu-HHV

higher heating va

/ 19,550 Btu-HHV

four quarterly so

nt Farm and Su

at year. Based 

total CO2e = 11

and were used f

GHG

Fredonia GHG

d, the net r

ture process

O. After acco

ve at most a

ions based o

ated, withou

CS. Estimate

ing in appro

When CCS i

ency range o

e options fal

ions without

0F4 7FA

ens G

me Fra

52 10,

.9 11

.8 11

86 1,1

5

V = higher heating

heating value of 

V) * (1,000,000 B

alue of 19,550 Bt

V) * (1,000,000 B

ource tests were 

umas Generating

on those source

15.9 / 0.9927 = 

for the preliminar

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

eduction in 

es have not

ounting for

an estimated

on their estim

ut CCS and 

ed fuel effic

oximately 7

is excluded i

of 1,052 to 

ll within a 

t CCS(1)

A.04 F

GE P

ame A

,193 10

5.9 1

6.8 1

191 1

5

g value) 

23,473 Btu/lb. 

Btu / 1 MMBtu) *

tu/lb. 

Btu / 1 MMBtu) *

performed by U

g Stations, and t

e tests, CO2 em

116.8 lb/MMBtu

ry technology scr

lysis

31.docx 

CO2

been 

these 

d 88.5 

mated 

with 

iency 

 to 8 

in the 

1,235 

CO2e 

FT8-3 

P&W 

Aero 

0,570 

115.9 

116.8 

1,235 

6 

* (44.01 

* (44.01 

URS for 

the test 

missions 

 (HHV) 

reening 
SECTIO

PEAKER 

ALTERNAT

Manufacture

Technology 

Heat rate @

(Btu/KWh (H

Fuel CO2 C

 (lb/MMBtu 

Fuel CO2e(2

(lb/MMBtu (

CO2e Emiss

(lb/MWh) 

Rank 

(1= lowest e

(1) CCS – CO

(2) Based on 

total CO2e e

Notes: 

• Fo

pr

• H

The least

option is

from fur

turbine o

“most eff

5.3.4 S

In this s

considere

cost effec

As ment

sequester

a scale o

for the F

estimate 

estimates

performa

turbine w

In Nove

Laborato

and with

NETL es

ONFIVE

Efficiency a

IVES 

er 

@ Full-Load 

HHV)) 

ontent 

(HHV)) 

2)

(HHV)) 

sions 

emitting) 

O2 capture, comp

2009 source tes

emissions. There

or consistency, h

rocess. 

HV = higher hea

t efficient, h

 also one of

rther consid

options emit 

fective contr

Step 4: Evalu

step, the opt

ed technicall

ctiveness. 

tioned above

r CO2 from t

r application

FGS expansi

for impleme

s prepared b

ance impacts

were develop

ember 2010,

ory (NETL) p

hout CCS sy

stimated a $7

E

and CO2e Em

LMS-100 

GE 

Aero 

9,647 

11.6 

12.5 

120 

1 

pression, and seq

sting at PSE's Mi

fore, total CO2e 

heat rate estimate

ting value. 

highest emitt

f the most ex

deration dur

significantly

rols” for ana

uate Most Ef

tions found 

ly feasible w

e, the techn

the flue gas 

n similar to 

ion project, 

enting one of

by others. P

s associated 

ped and ther

, the U.S. 

published co

stems instal

76 per ton c

T

missions from

LM-6000

GE 

Aero 

10,645

11.6 

12.5 

133 

2 

questration. 

int Farm and Sum

= 115.9 / 0.9927

es are based on

ting option 

xpensive an

ing prelimin

y less CO2e 

alysis in Step

ffective Con

to be the 

were further

nologies nec

of a combus

the Project’s

PSE has n

f the CCS op

PSE is not 

with the add

refore was no

Department

ost and perfo

led. For a n

ost of CO2 a

5-13

Table 5-4 

m Available T

0 7FA.05

GE

Frame

10,973

11.6

12.5

137

3 

mas Generating 

7 = 116.8 lb/MMB

ISO conditions a

is the Pratt 

nd offered no

nary engine

per MW-hr

p 4. 

trols and Do

most effecti

evaluated re

cessary to c

stion turbine

s proposed n

ot attempted

ptions discus

aware of an

dition of CC

ot able to us

t of Energy

ormance esti

net 550 MW

avoided usin

Turbine Optio

5 5000

Sieme

e Fram

3 10,96

11.6

12.5

137

4

Stations, CO2 em

Btu (HHV) withou

and were used f

& Whitney 

o significant

eering evalu

r and are, th

ocument Re

ive at minim

elative to the

capture, com

e exist but ha

new unit(s).

d a projectssed above.

ny studies w

CS systems t

se such estim

y (DOE) N

imates for fo

W natural gas

ng post-comb

GHG

Fredonia GHG

ons with 90%

0F4 7FA

ens G

me Fra

65 11,

6 11

5 12

7 13

5

missions accoun

ut CCS. 

for the preliminar

FT8-3. Bec

t advantages

uations. The

herefore, con

esults 

mizing CO2

eir emission 

mpress, trans

ave not been

Because CC

specific or 

Instead, PSE

where estim

to a simple c

mates as par

National Ene

ossil fueled p

s-fired comb

mbustion CCS

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

% CCS(1)

A.04 F

GE P

ame A

,021 1

1.6 

2.5 

38 

5

nt for approx. 99.

ry technology scr

cause this tu

s, PSE dropp

e remaining

nsidered to b

2e emissions

performanc

sport, inject

n demonstrat

CS is not fea

site-specific

E considered

mates of cost

cycle combu

rt of this ana

ergy Techno

power plants

bined cycle p

S compared 

lysis

31.docx 

FT8-3 

P&W 

Aero 

1,463 

11.6 

12.5 

143 

6 

.27% of 

reening 

urbine 

ped it 

g five 

be the 

s and 

e and 

, and 

ted at 

asible 

c cost 

d cost 

t and 

ustion 

alysis. 

ology 

s with 

plant, 

to an 
SECTIO

analogou

Energy P

Novembe

provided

social co

(OAQPS

Emission

larger fac

(Environ

Technolo

2011). 

There are

plant con

plant suc

increase 

cycle pla

• T

w

n

th

ex

p

av

• T

co

un

g

th

• T

d

ci

A

co

a 

fr

ad

w

 

2

 There are

the princip

natural gas

simple cyc

ONFIVE

us combined 

Plants, Volu

er 2010. DO

d in Attachm

ost of carbon

S), June 17, 2

ns from Elec

ctor, the $7 

n, Combinedogy Analysis

e a number 

ncept presen

ch as the Pro

the actual c

ants: 

The DOE-NE

with a capaci

ew unit(s) w

han 3,200 ho

xpenses and

eaking unit 

voided. 

The CO2 cap

oncept utiliz

nit(s) at FG

enerators (H

he CO2 captu

The CO2 cap

issipate pro

irculating w

Additional he

ooling tower

dedicated h

rom the CO2

ddition, the 

which was co

 

e multiple conf

pal study author

s-fired combine

cle gas turbine 

E

cycle plant 

ume 1: Bi

OE/NETL-20

ment A. This

n recently cit

2011) Panel 

ctric Utility S

per ton rec

-Cycle Comb

s, Kalama E

of important

ted in the D

oject’s propo

ost per ton o

ETL combin

ty factor of 

would operat

ours per turb

d other fixed

compared t

ture system 

zed steam f

GS will not 

HRSG) or an

ure system. S

pture and co

cess heat. T

water system

eat rejection

r and a corre

heat rejection

2 capture an

DOE-NETL

ooled to 85°

 

flicting cost val

r, Mr. James B

ed cycle gas tu

applications. 

without CC

ituminous C

010/1397) 2. 

s is more th

ted by EPA 

Outreach M

Steam Gene

ently propos

bustion Turb

Energy Cente

t differences

DOE-NETL r

osed new un

of CO2 avoi

ed cycle con

85 percent (

te as a peaki

bine annually

d costs wou

to a base-lo

would requ

from the ste

have a stea

n auxiliary b

Such additio

ompression 

The DOE-N

m and cool

n duty was a

esponding in

n system wo

d compressi

L combined 

°F with heat

lues in the NET

Black, confirme

urbines. Mr. Bla

5-14

S (NETL, C

Coal and N

An explanat

han three tim

(EPA Offic

Meeting with

erating Units

sed BACT t

bine Project 

er. Prepared

s between a 

report, and a

nit(s). These

ded above th

ncept was as

equivalent to

ng unit with

y (2,400 hou

uld be sprea

oaded plant, 

uire process 

eam cycle p

am source. A

boiler would

ons would in

systems wo

NETL combi

ling tower 

accomplishe

ncrease in cir

ould be requ

ion systems 

cycle conce

t being rejec

TL study. In a 

ed that $76 is th

ack also confir

Cost and Perf

Natural Gas 

tion of the te

mes the $20

ce of Air Qu

h SERs: Rule

s (page 62))

threshold fo

Greenhouse

d for Kalama

combined c

a simple cyc

e differences

the $76 per t

ssumed to op

o 7,446 hour

h expected h

urs for the fra

ad over far 

resulting in

steam. The 

portion of th

Addition of

d be required

ncrease the co

ould require

ined cycle c

to reject h

d by the ad

rculating wa

uired to diss

for the prop

ept had a flu

cted to the a

September 27,

he correct valu

rmed that he is

GHG

Fredonia GHG

rformance Ba

to Electric

erm "cost of

0 per ton C

uality Plannin

emaking for 

), and it exc

r the Kalam

e Gas Best A

a Energy Ce

cycle power 

cle combusti

s, as discusse

ton value cit

perate as a b

rs at full loa

hours of oper

ame turbine 

fewer opera

n a higher c

DOE-NETL

he plant. Th

f either heat

d to supply 

ost per ton C

e a heat rej

concept alre

heat from t

ddition of sev

ater flow rate

sipate suffic

posed new u

ue gas tempe

atmosphere 

, 2011 email to

ue for CCS app

s not aware of a

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

aseline for F

city. Revisio

f CO2 avoide

O2e approxi

ng and Stan

Greenhouse

ceeds, by an 

ma Energy C

Available Co

enter, LLC, 

plant such a

on turbine p

ed below, fu

ted for comb

base-loaded p

ad). The prop

ration of no 

options). Ca

ating hours 

cost per ton 

L combined 

he proposed

t recovery s

process stea

CO2 avoided

ection syste

eady had a 

the steam c

veral cells t

es. It is likely

cient process

unit(s) at FG

erature of 29

through the

o URS Corpora

plications with 

any cost numbe

lysis

31.docx 

Fossil 

on 2, 

ed” is 

imate 

dards 

e Gas 

even 

Center 

ontrol 

June 

as the 

power 

urther 

bined 

plant, 

posed 

more 

apital 

for a 

n CO2

cycle 

d new 

steam 

am to 

d. 

em to 

large 

cycle. 

to the 

y that 

s heat 

GS. In 

90°F, 

e heat 

ation, 

ers for 
SECTIO

re

fr

lo

re

fo

co

sy

D

• T

in

in

su

b

• T

th

h

co

The cost 

CCS sys

considera

Given th

viable fo

to the cos

The five 

evaluated

CCS. Al

effective 

In order 

assumes 

electricity

annual co

option. In

considers

additiona

Table 5-5

removal,

of using 

further C

5.3.5 S

Ecology 

options. 

criteria p

ONFIVE

ejection syst

rom 741°F t

oad. Cooling

ejection syst

or the CO2

oncept. The

ystem cost f

DOE-NETL r

The DOE-NE

njection into

ntroducing la

uch geologic

etween the F

The DOE-NE

he CCS syst

igher projec

ompared to t

per ton of C

stems are, th

ation in this 

hat carbon ca

r the Project

st, further an

most efficie

d below for r

ll five optio

feasible fue

to make an 

that using 

y per year, 

osts (using s

n order to de

s the fifth-r

al CO2e emis

5 summarize

the analysis

the other tu

CO2e reductio

Step 5: Selec

has request

Such an ev

pollutants. In

E

tem. The flue

to over 1,10

g the flue 

tem with a c

capture an

ese two fact

for the propo

report. 

ETL report a

o a saline for

arge quantiti

c formations

FGS facility 

ETL combin

tem for the p

ct costs per

the DOE-NE

CO2 avoided

herefore, fo

BACT analy

apture, alone

t and any of 

nalysis of seq

ent available

relative emi

ons are very

el choice for 

apples-to-ap

any of the 

and that nat

standard boo

etermine the

ranked optio

ssions avoid

es the cost an

s treats the 7

urbine mode

ons would co

ct the BACT

ted that this

valuation is 

n a traditiona

e gas temper

0°F, depend

gas to temp

cooling duty

nd compress

tors combin

osed new un

assumed a C

rmation at a 

ies of CO2 f

s available w

and a suitab

ned cycle con

proposed new

r ton of CO

ETL concept

d is much hi

ound to be n

ysis for GHG

e, is demons

the sequestr

questration i

 and feasible

ssion perform

y efficient. A

any of the tu

pples compa

five options

tural gas wo

ok life and d

e marginal co

on to be th

ded for the ot

nalysis. For 

FA.04 as the

els to furthe

ost between 

T

 BACT ana

fundamenta

al BACT an

5-15

rature for the

ding on the 

peratures ap

y many time

sion systems

ned would s

nit(s) at FGS

CO2 transpor

depth of 4,0

for permanen

within a 50 

ble geologic 

ncept require

w unit(s) at 

O2 captured

t. 

igher than cu

not cost eff

Gs. 

strated in the

ration option

is not warran

e turbine gen

mance and c

As explaine

urbine gener

arison of the

s, the Proje

ould be used

discount rate

ost per ton o

he base case

ther four opt

purposes of

e base case, 

er reduce CO

$710 and $4

alysis includ

ally differen

nalysis, the r

e proposed n

turbine, amb

pproaching 

es greater th

s for the D

significantly

S compared 

rt distance o

055 feet and

nt sequestrat

mile radius 

formation w

ed a CCS sy

FGS. Econo

for the pro

urrently acce

fective and 

e above ana

ns listed in St

nted for this 

nerator optio

cost effectiv

d above, th

rator options

e cost of CO

ect would ge

d as the fue

e assumptio

of additional

e, and dete

tions. 

f calculating 

and calculat

O2e emissio

4,660 per ton

de an evalua

nt than a tra

relative effec

GHG

Fredonia GHG

new unit(s) a

bient condit

85°F would

han the cooli

DOE-NETL 

y increase th

to the costs

of 50 miles 

d characteris

tion. PSE is 

of the facil

would impact

ystem about 

omy of scal

oposed new

eptable econ

were remov

alysis not to 

tep 3 would 

BACT analy

ons in Table

veness withou

he Project w

s. 

O2e reduction

enerate 131

l. Total CO

ons) were ca

l CO2e remo

ermines the 

the cost of i

tes the addit

ons. The ana

n of CO2e re

ation of the 

aditional BA

ctiveness of 

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

at FGS will r

tions, and tu

d require a 

ing duty req

combined 

he heat reje

s presented i

via pipeline

stics conduci

not aware o

lity. The dis

t the project 

twice as lar

e would resu

w unit(s) at 

nomic thresh

ved from fu

be economi

add signific

ysis. 

es 5-3 and 5-

ut the additi

will use the 

n, this evalu

,400 MW-h

2e emission

alculated for 

oved, the ana

cost per to

incremental 

ional cost pe

alysis shows

emoved.

different tu

ACT analysi

add-on poll

lysis

31.docx 

range 

urbine 

heat 

quired 

cycle 

ection 

in the 

e with 

ive to 

of any 

stance 

cost. 

rge as 

ult in 

FGS 

holds. 

urther 

ically 

cantly 

-4 are 

ion of 

most 

uation 

hrs of 

s and 

each 

alysis 

on of 

CO2e 

er ton 

s that 

urbine 

is for 

lution 
SECTIO

control t

equipmen

BACT re

electric g

selected 

will depe

operation

use a mo

more ex

technical

begin con

Cost ben

gas peak

emission

$4,660 p

is far in e

such incr

offsets. T

carbon an

threshold

identified

to requir

environm

PSE prop

expensiv

approval 

F7A.04, 

proposed

5.4 B

As stated

filled bre

a result o

For the 

technolog

circuit br

first tech

technolog

Air Qual

Section 7

5.4.1 S

Two typ

applicatio

ONFIVE

technologies

nt are evalu

equires an ap

generating fa

a single mak

end upon a v

nal performa

ore expensiv

xpensive mo

lly feasible t

nstruction. 

nefit guidanc

king turbine

n rate of 1,19

er ton cost a

excess of co

remental co

These increm

nd, by an ev

d cited abov

d in Table 5

re a project 

mental impac

poses to use 

ve option, the

to implemen

GE F7A.05,

d BACT emi

BACT FOR S

d previously

eakers. A sm

of unavoidab

October 18

gies: 1) diel

reakers with

hnology bas

gy was selec

lity Impact 

7.6.1). 

Step 1: Avail

pes of bre

ons: SF6-fill

E

s is consider

uated. It shou

pplicant to pu

acility. In fa

ke or model

variety cons

ance, reliabi

ve model bec

odel. Moreo

today may p

ce for GHG 

s. The cost 

91 lb/MW-hr

associated wi

sts ordinarily

osts are orde

mental costs 

ven greater m

ve in Sectio

-5 satisfy BA

to use a sp

cts of the dif

any one of f

e LM6000, w

nt any one o

, Siemens SG

ssion rate of

SWITCHYA

y, the Projec

mall amount o

ble leakage. 

8, 2011 PHP

lectric oil or

h 0.5% annu

sed on poten

cted as BAC

Report – Pa

able Contro

akers are 

ed and oil-fi

red. Here, h

uld be kept 

urchase a pa

act, at this p

l. PSE’s ultim

siderations, i

ility and ma

cause of ope

over, some 

prove to be u

BACT has 

effectivene

r from the 7F

ith additiona

y considered

ers of magn

greatly exce

margin, the r

n 5.3.4. PSE

ACT require

pecific turbi

fferent mode

four most co

will not be pu

of the follow

GT6-5000F4

f 1,191 lbs/M

ARD BREAK

t’s proposed

of the GHG 

PP PSD pe

r compresse

ual leakage r

ntial advers

CT (see EPA

almdale Hyb

ol Technolog

commercial

illed. Moder

5-16

however, di

in mind tha

articular mak

oint in the d

mate decisio

including eq

aintenance is

erational or m

turbine mo

unavailable o

not been pr

ess evaluatio

FA.04 turbin

al CO2e emis

d "achievabl

nitude higher

eed the $20

recently prop

E contends 

ements for G

ine model, 

ls make it in

ost effective t

ursued for th

wing four high

4, and GE L

MW-hr CO2e

KERS 

d new 230 k

pollutant SF

ermit cited

d air circuit

rate and leak

se environm

A Region IX

brid Power 

gies 

ly available

rn breakers a

ifferent choi

at EPA has n

ke and mode

development

on about wh

quipment ava

ssues. PSE m

maintenance

odels that a

or infeasible

rovided by E

on in Step 4

ne base case 

ssion reduct

le" in traditio

r than the c

per ton CO2

posed $7 per

that all of 

GHG. Not on

but in this 

nappropriate 

turbine mod

he Project. T

hly efficient

LMS100, all 

e. 

kV switchya

F6 is emitted

above, EPA

t breakers, a

k detection s

mental and e

X. August 20

Project PSD

e for high

are designed 

GHG

Fredonia GHG

ices for the

never taken 

el of turbine 

t of the Proj

hich turbine 

ailability, co

may, for ex

e advantages

appear to b

e by the time

EPA to date 

4 demonstra

satisfies BA

tion using alt

onal BACT 

current mark

2e approxim

r ton GHG c

the top five

nly would it

case, the re

 to exclude a

dels in Table

Therefore, PS

t gas turbine

of which m

ard will inclu

d from switch

A Region IX

and 2) enclo

systems. EP

energy impa

011. Fact Sh

D Permit Nu

h-voltage ut

with efficie

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

 primary pr

the position

engine for a

ject, PSE ha

engines to in

ost, start-up 

xample, deci

s provided b

be available

e PSE is rea

for simple 

ates that a 

ACT. The $7

ternative tur

analyses. In

ket price of

mate social co

cost-effectiv

e turbine m

t be inapprop

elative costs

any of them.

 5-5. The mo

SE requests 

 options: the

meet or excee

ude 10 new

hyard breake

X evaluated

osed-pressure

PA eliminate

acts. The se

heet and Am

umber SE 0

tility switch

nt seals to 

lysis

31.docx 

roject 

n that 

an 

as not 

nstall 

time, 

ide to 

by the 

e and 

ady to 

cycle 

CO2e 

710 to 

rbines 

ndeed, 

f CO2 

ost of 

eness 

models 

priate 

s and 

. 

ost 

e GE 

ed the 

w SF6-

ers as 

d two 

e SF6

ed the 

econd 

mbient 

09-01, 

hyard 
SECTIO

 

Emissio

Plant Ca

Generatio

@

Heat rate, 

Fuel CO

Fuel CO2

Plant CO

(

Annual 

Emissions

CO2e Re

Un

Cost

Plant 

PSE 

An

Fixed O&

Firs

F

R

FOM Le

Variab

(

Firs

V

R

VOM Le

Fuel ($

Firs

F

R

Fuel Le

AllCapit

Annu

Total Leve

Levelized C

B

Incre

Ef

($

(1) PSE assu

historical i

ONFIVE

Increm

ons Calculations

apacity, net (MW

n (MW-hr), 200M

@ 7.5%CF 

net (Btu/kWh, HH

2 Rate (lb/MMBtu

HHV) 

2e Rate (lb/MMBt

HHV) 

2e Emissions Ra

lb/MW-hr) 

CO2e Emissions

(tons/yr) 

s Rank ( 1 = lowe

emitting) 

duction from Bas

nit (tons/yr) 

t Calculations 

Book Life (yrs) 

Discount Rate 

nnual O&M 

M (FOM) ($/kWt-Year FOM ($/y

FOM Escalation 

ate(1)(%/yr)

evelized Cost ($/

ble O&M (VOM) 

($/MW-hr) 

t Year VOM ($/y

VOM Escalation 

ate(1)(%/yr) 

evelized Cost ($/

$/MMBtu, HHV) 

st Year Fuel ($/yr

Fuel Escalation 

ate(1)(%/yr) 

evelized Cost ($/y

In CapEx ($) 

tal Recover Fact

(%) 

ual CapEx ($/yr) 

elized Annual Co

($/yr) 

Cost (Savings) O

Base ($/yr) 

emental Costffectiveness 

$/ton CO2e) 

umes an escala

nflation.

E

mental Emiss

LM

 

W) 

MW 

HV) 

u, 

tu, 

ate 

s

est 

se 

 

yr) 

r) 

/yr) 

 

 

r) 

/yr) 

r) 

yr) 

or, 

 

ost 

 

Over 

 

ation rate of 3%

T

sion Reductio

MS100 

199.7 

131,400 

9,007 

115.9 

116.8 

1,052 

69,118 

1 

9,101 

35 

8.10% 

 

 15.71 

 3,136,522 

3.00% 

4,063,695 

 3.58 

 470,713 

3.00% 

609,858 

8.08 

9,562,840 

3.00% 

12,389,669 

279,000,000 

8.67% 

 24,182,437 

 41,245,660 

 6,462,059 

$710 

% as an average

5-17

Table 5-5 

n Cost Analy

LM-6000 

165.1

131,400

9,871

115.9

116.8

1,153

75,748

2 

2,471

35

8.10%

19.06

3,146,952

3.00%

4,998,100

4.34

570,584

3.00%

906,221

8.08

10,480,159

3.00%

16,644,959

274,000,000

8.67%

23,749,060

46,298,340

11,514,739

$4,660

e inflationary n

sis for Five T

7FA.05

 

1 2

0 131

1 10

9 1

8 1

3 1

8 77

3 

1

 

5

% 8.

 

 

6 1

 

2 2,403

% 3.0

0 3,113

 

4 1

 

4 1,560

% 3.0

1 2,021

8

9 10,771

% 3.0

9 13,955

0 198,000

% 8.

 

0 17,161

 

0 36,252

 

9 1,468

0 $3

number. This n

GHG

Fredonia GHG

Turbine Option

5000F

 

09.4 20

,400 131,

,145 10,

15.9 11

16.8 11

,185 1,

,850 77,

4 

368 

 

35 

10% 8.1

 

 

1.48 11

 

,015 2,436,

00% 3.0

,360 3,156,

 

1.88 10

 

,650 1,350,

00% 3.0

,987 1,750,

8.08 8

,068 

10,778

00% 3.0

,056 

13,964

,000 

191,00

67% 8.6

 

,729 16,555,

 

,133 35,426,

 

,532 642,

,987 $2,

number falls w

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

ns 

F4 7FA.0

 

07.1 

,400 13

,152 1

15.9 

16.8 

,186 

,904 7

5

315 

 

35 

10% 

 

 

1.76 

 

,339 2,24

00% 

,534 2,91

 

0.28 

 

,846 1,40

00% 

,164 1,81

8.08 

8,50

0 10,82

00% 

4,68

5 14,02

00,0

00 185,00

67% 

 

,002 16,03

 

,384 34,78

 

,784 

,043 

within the range

lysis

31.docx 

04 

182.3 

31,400 

10,193 

115.9 

116.8 

1,191 

78,219 

0 

35 

8.10% 

12.32 

 

46,140 

3.00% 

10,111 

 

10.68 

 

02,785 

3.00% 

17,457 

8.08 

22,030 

3.00% 

21,083 

00,000 

8.67% 

 

34,949 

 

83,600 

$0 

$0 

e of 
SECTIO

minimize

performa

leakage i

applicatio

5.4.2 S

Both brea

5.4.3 S

Oil-filled

5.4.4 S

Although

risks. An

breaker. 

breakers 

5.4.5 S

Based on

reasons. 

follow m

replacem

prior to p

in-servic

appropria

5.5 B

A dieselgenerator

gas turbin

a natural 

Emergen

BACT gu

Bay Area

District (

guideline

applicabl

standards

greater t

Standard

2006). N

the NSPS

that apply

ONFIVE

e SF6 leakag

ance during 

is immeasur

on to estima

Step 2: Elimi

aker types ar

Step 3: Rank

d breakers ar

Step 4: Evalu

h oil-filled b

n oil release

SF6 has als

have proven

Step 5: Selec

n industry ex

In order to 

manufacturer

ment of these

placing them

e breakers. B

ate. 

BACT FOR E

-fired genera

r technology

ne(s) and oth

gas outage, 

ncy generato

uidelines and

a Air Qualit

(SCAQMD) 

es require n

le EPA NSP

s for non-roa

than 761 bh

ds for Statio

Note that eme

S. PSE is no

y to GHGs f

E

ge. Limited li

the guarant

able during 

ate SF6 emiss

nate Techn

re technicall

k Remaining

re ranked as 

uate Most Ef

breakers con

e and/or fire

so proven t

n to be more

ct the BACT

xperience, P

minimize c

r recommend

e breakers. In

m into servic

Breakers fou

EMERGEN

ator is propo

y is not a fea

her power p

such as in th

or BACT det

d determinat

ty Managem

and San Jo

new station

PS or CAR

ad CI engine

hp, or 560 

onary Comp

ergency eng

ot aware of 

for emergenc

ifetime guar

teed life of 

the guarante

sions is cons

ically Infeas

ly feasible. 

g Control Op

the top cont

ffective Con

tain/emit no

e could resu

o be a mor

 reliable. 

T

PSE strongly

chances of 

ded procedu

n addition, P

ce, and will p

und to be lea

CY GENER

osed as the 

asible option

lant systems

he event of a

terminations

tions publish

ment District 

aquin Valley

nary emerge

RB tier stan

es currently 

brake-kilow

pression Ign

gines are exe

any GHG B

cy standby C

5-18

antees offere

the equipm

ee period. Th

servatively h

sible Option

ptions 

trol option be

trols and Do

o GHGs, oil 

ult in the ev

re effective 

y prefers SF6

SF6 leakage

ures and sch

PSE will dou

perform mo

aking will be

RATORS

only technic

n because th

s if a power 

a strong earth

s are much l

hed in the RB

(BAAQMD

y Air Pollut

ency compr

dards for n

apply to new

watt (bkW) (

ition Combu

empt from th

BACT deter

CI engines. 

ed by breake

ment. PSE ex

he 0.5% ann

high. 

ns 

ecause they 

ocument Re

presents oth

vent of ove

insulating m

6-filled break

e into the at

hedules for 

uble check n

onthly intern

e serviced to

cally feasibl

here is a risk 

grid outage 

thquake. 

less commo

BLC and by

D), South Co

tion Control

ression igni

non-GHG ai

w stationary

(EPA, Fina

ustion Engin

he more strin

rminations o

GHG

Fredonia GHG

er manufactu

xperience in

nual leakage

do not emit 

esults 

her environm

erheating an

medium, an

kers for relia

tmosphere, 

operation, m

new breaker 

nal gas pressu

o stop the le

e option. A 

k of significa

occurred at 

on than gas 

y California D

oast Air Qua

l District (SJ

ition (CI) e

r pollutants

y emergency

al New Sour

nes, 71 FR 

ngent Tier 4

or emission 

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

urers addres

ndicates that

e rate used in

any GHGs. 

mental and s

nd rupture o

nd therefore

ability and s

PSE propos

maintenance

units for lea

ure checks o

eak or replac

natural gasant damage t

the same tim

turbines. Cu

Districts. Cu

ality Manage

JVAPCD) B

engines to 

s. Federal T

y standby en

rce Perform

39154. July

4 requiremen

standards to

lysis

31.docx 

s seal 

t SF6

n this 

safety 

of the 

, SF6

safety 

ses to 

e, and 

akage 

on all 

ced as 

-fired 

to the 

me as 

urrent 

urrent 

ement 

BACT 

meet 

Tier 2 

ngines 

mance 

y 11, 

nts in 

o date 
SECTIO

For the O

purchase

with NS

maintain

Impact R

At time 

certified 

Section 5

different 

Project, a

For GHG

that any c

from sch

Applicati

cannot b

emergenc

ONFIVE

October 18, 

d engines w

SPS require

ing efficienc

Report – Palm

of purchase

by the man

5.1 and Att

make/mode

a Tier 2 certi

G BACT pur

change in en

heduled testin

ion Attachm

e reliably pr

cy standby g

E

2011 PHPP

would be the 

ements (for 

cy (see EPA

mdale Hybri

, the Projec

nufacturer t

tachment Ael emergenc

ified engine 

rposes, the p

ngine efficien

ng of the em

ment A-12 for

redicted, is n

generator me

P PSD perm

most energy

other poll

A Region IX

d Power Pro

ct’s proposed

o meet Tier

-9 of the PS

cy standby g

will be spec

proposed em

ncy would h

mergency ge

r estimated h

not included

eets BACT.

5-19

it cited abov

y efficient av

utants) will

. August 20

oject PSD Pe

d new emer

r 2 standard

SD Permit A

generator is 

cified at time

mergency ge

have little eff

nerator are e

hourly emiss

d in this em

ve, EPA Re

vailable and 

l ensure pr

11. Fact She

ermit Numbe

rgency stand

ds. The Cat

Application

selected du

e of purchase

enerator will

ffect on Proje

estimated to

sion rates). A

mission estim

GHG

Fredonia GHG

egion IX ass

that operatin

roper maint

eet and Amb

er SE 09-01,

dby generato

terpillar eng

meets thes

uring detaile

e. 

l be operated

ect emission

o be about 24

Actual emer

mate. Therefo

 BACT Anal

G BACT 2011.10.

sumed that n

ng in compl

tenance, the

bient Air Qu

, Section 7.3

or engine w

gine identifie

e standards,

ed design fo

d so infrequ

ns. CO2 emis

4 tpy (see P

gency use, w

ore, the prop

lysis

31.docx 

newly 

liance 

ereby 

uality 

3.1). 

ill be 

ed in 

, If a 

or the 

uently 

ssions 

Permit 

which 

posed 
The “cos

increases

would in

CO2 avoi

Followin

changes i

explained

technolog

The cost

reduce C

realized: 

Cost CO

($/ton) 

The cost 

year or $

time. The

(analogou

expenses

from wea

Cost of

 ($/MW

The grea

with CC

plant ove

5.3.4, bot

a peaking

st of CO2 av

s or decrease

ndicate that r

ided indicate

ng is an expl

in power pla

d, specifical

gies. 

t of CO2 avo

CO2 emission

O2 Avoided =

of electricity

 per hour, di

e expenses o

us to a mort

s), variable o

ar and tear), 

f Electricity =

W-hr) 

ater the capi

S, the great

er a given t

th of these tr

g simple cyc

voided” is a 

es the cost r

educing CO

es that reduc

lanation of h

ant capital co

ly when it c

oided is a fu

ns, measure

= Electric

CO2 em

y is a functio

ivided by the

of a power p

tgage payme

operating cos

and fuel cos

= Cost

tal cost diff

er the cost o

time period, 

rends occur 

cle power pla

metric used

equired to p

2 emissions 

cing CO2 em

how the cos

ost and oper

comes to imp

function of t

d in $ per M

city Cost wit

missions with

on of the exp

e amount of

plant are com

ent on a hou

sts (e.g., wat

sts (natural g

t of Capital +

Net Am

ference betw

of CO2 avoi

the greater

when compa

ant. 

A-1

d to show ho

produce elect

produces ele

missions incre

st of CO2 av

rating hours 

plementing 

the increase 

MW-hr, divi

th CCS – El

hout CCS – C

penses of a p

f electricity s

mprised of fo

use), the fix

ter, chemica

gas or ULSD

+ Fixed/Var

mount of Ele

ween a powe

ided. In add

r the cost of

aring a base

Explanat

ow impleme

tricity. A ne

ectricity cos

eases the cos

voided is ca

have on the 

CCS proces

or decrease

ided by the 

lectricity Co

CO2 emissio

power plant 

sold by the p

our basic co

xed operating

als, and other

D in this case

riable Operat

ectricity Pro

er plant with

dition, the le

f CO2-avoid

loaded com

tion – Cost

Fredonia GHG

enting CO2 e

egative cost 

st savings. A

st of electric

alculated. Th

cost of CO2

sses for elect

e in the cost

reduction in

st without C

ons with CCS

over time, m

plant over th

omponents: th

g cost (main

r maintenan

e). 

ting Costs + 

oduced (MW

hout CCS an

ess electricit

ded. As disc

mbined cycle 

Attachme

of CO2 Avo

G BACT 2011.10.

emission con

per CO2 avo

A positive cos

city produced

he influences

2 avoided are

tricity gener

t of electrici

n CO2 emis

CCS ($/MWS (tons/MW

measured in 

at same peri

he cost of ca

nly plant sta

ce costs resu

 Fuel Cost ($

W-hr) 

nd a power 

ty produced 

cussed in Se

power plant

ent A 

ided

31.docx 

ntrols 

oided 

st per 

d. 

s that 

e also 

ration 

ity to 

ssions 

-hr) 

W-hr)

$ per 

iod of 

apital 

affing 

ulting 

$) 

plant 

by a 

ection 

t with