North Carolina Clean Smokestacks ACTAir Innovations

ConferenceChicago, IL

August 11, 2004

Brock Nicholson, P.E.

Deputy Director

N.C. Division of Air Quality

Clean Smokestacks Act Results from Broad Stakeholder Effort

Utility Companies Legislative Sponsors Environmental Community Division of Air Quality / Dept. of Environment

and Natural Resources Governor’s Office Attorney Generals Office State Utilities Commission Business and Industrial Community Utility Rate Payers

Background on Origin and Creation of Clean Smokestack Act

In 1st Year:• Concerns About Air Quality in Western NC• Environmental Group Efforts• NOx SIP Rule• Legislative Sponsors Ownership• Real Reductions in NC• Deal on Pollutant Caps• Cost Recovery• SAMI Finding• Support by Utility Companies

In 2nd Year:• Leadership by Governor• Creativeness by Utilities Commission and Companies• Handling of “Credits”• Support of Industry Customers• Alignment of Stars

North Carolina Clean Smoke Stacks Act

NOx & SO2 Caps on Emissions• Tons / year• Caps per Company - They decide on Controls

Phased Compliance; 1 Jan ’07, ‘09, ‘13 Actual Reductions in NC Unique Cost Recovery Feature Recommendations on Hg & CO2; Sep ‘05 Reduction Credits Held by the State SAMI: Greatest AQ Benefit for a State Comes

from Reductions in that State; but, Controls in All States Needed to Fully Solve AQ Problems

Utility Company Plans

Initial Plans Submitted22 SO2 Scrubbers36 SCR / SNCR Units Most with Combustion ControlsNOx Controls in Place Starting in

2001SO2 Scrubbers Scheduled to be

in Starting in 2005

Emissions Reductions Under Clean Smokestacks Bill

0

5 0000

1 00000

1 5 0000

2 00000

2 5 0000

3 00000

3 5 0000

4 00000

4 5 0000

5 00000

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

1998 2007 2009 1998 2009 2013NOx

(tons/year)SO2

(tons/year)

245,000

60,000 56,000

489,000

250,000

130,000

Across Class I areas and meteorological conditions, SO4 is largest contributor to aerosol mass. Organic aerosols are second largest contributor; NO3 and soils have small contributions

Most of changes in visibility in SAMI strategies due to changes in SO2 emissions

SAMI Key Findings: Visibility

Observations: SO2 Sensitivity Maps

State to State Comparison: In general, the largest change in SO4 aerosol

or SO4 deposition in a SAMI state is due to SO2 emissions changes in that state

Each SAMI state contributes to change in SO4 aerosol or SO4 deposition in neighboring SAMI states.

Daily SO4 Aerosol & its Change on July 15, 1995 for a 10% Reduction of 2010 Strategy A2 SO2 Emissions

KY WV VA

TN2010-A2 NC

AL GA SC

+0.15

+0.05

- 0.05

- 0.15

- 0.25

- 0.35

- 0.45

- 0.55g/m3

(Class 5 day)

Sips

ey, A

L

Coh

utta

, GA

Joyc

e K

ilmer

,N

C

Look

Roc

k,(S

mok

ies)

, TN

Sh

inin

gR

ock,

NC

Linv

ille

Gor

ge, N

C

Jam

es R

iver

Fa

ce, V

A

Shen

anho

ah,

VA

Otte

r Cre

ek,

VA

Dol

ly S

ods,

WV

-8.0

-6.0

-4.0

-2.0

0.0

Annual SO4 Aerosol Response to 10% Reduction in SO2 Emissions from 2010 A2 strategy

SO4

Aero

sol S

ensi

tivity

(%)

OtherFL&MSNEMWCNWVVATNSCNCKYGAAL

References / Contact

Text of Act: http://www.ncleg.net/html2001/bills/AllVersions/Senate/S1078vc.html

www.ncair.orgBrock.Nicholson@ncmail.net

919-715-0587