the costs of reducing pm 10 emissions and concentrations in the uk
DESCRIPTION
The costs of reducing PM 10 emissions and concentrations in the UK. A project carried out by AEA Technology for the UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) - Contract No EPG 1/8/59. Howard J Rudd , Keith J Vincent JohnR Stedman & Ian T Marlowe. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The costs of reducing PM10 emissions and concentrations in the UK
A project carried out by AEA Technology for the UK Department of the Environment, Transport
and the Regions (DETR) - Contract No EPG 1/8/59
Presented by Mike J Woodfield
Howard J Rudd, Keith J Vincent
JohnR Stedman & Ian T Marlowe
Slide 2
Objectives
Identify main sources and their emissions Identify possible emission reduction measures and
their costs Construct cost curves for reductions in emissions Use dispersion modelling to convert the emission
cost curves into cost curves based on concentration.
Develop these curves for different years from 1997 to 2015 inclusive, with particular interest for 2003 to 2010.
Carry out the analysis both nationally and for a number of carefully chosen regions in the UK.
Identify the effect of emission reduction measures on emissions of other pollutants.
Slide 3
Emission sources
Source 1998kilotonnes(kte)
cumulative %of totalemission
Road transport (tailpipe, tyre and brake) 39.9 21.9%
Domestic combustion 26.4 36.4%
Power stations 23.5 49.3%
Quarrying 23.3 62.1%
Road transport (road dust re-suspension) 18.9 72.5%
Iron & steel industry 6.47 76.1%
Other industry (combustion) 5.33 79.0%
Offshore own gas use 4.25 81.4%
In-house electricity generation in industry 4.14 83.6%
Construction 3.83 85.7%
Refineries (combustion) 3.71 87.8%
Other industry (small processes) 3.44 89.7%
Cement production 2.86 91.2%
Slide 4
Emission sources
Major source is coal-fired stations Gas-fired stations report zero particulate
emissions(although this is unlikely)
Only a few oil-fired stations
Power Stations
Slide 5
Emission sources
Power Stations
Station Operator Commission-ing Year(c)
Declared Netcapacity (MW)
TotalParticulate1998 (tonnes)
TotalParticulate1999(tonnes)
PM10 1998(tonnes)
PM10 1999(tonnes)
Blyth Nitrogen Two Limited 1958 -196 456 (A) + 626 (B) 573 51.1 458 40.3Aberthaw B Npower plc 1967 - 1978 1455 1270 801 918 641Cottam PowerGen (UK) plc 1968 - 1970 2008 2648 2322 2118 1858Didcot A(a) Npower plc 1969 - 1975 1470 +490 1100 820 840 660Drakelow C Eastern Merchant
Generation Ltd1965 - 1996 976 507 437 414 350
Drax AES Drax Power Ltd 1961 - 1974 3870 2640 2100 2112 1700Eggborough Eggborough Power Ltd 1967 - 1969 2005 2680 2110 2150 1680Ferrybridge C Edison First Power Ltd 1966 - 1968 1470 2967 3025 2374 2420Fiddlers Ferry Edison First Power Ltd 1969 - 1973 1926 2143 2000 1714 1600Fifoots Point (d) AES Fifoots Point Ltd 1999 370 no data no dataHigh Marnham Eastern Merchant
Generation Ltd1959 - 1962 945 1444 979 1155 783
Ironbridge B Eastern MerchantGeneration Ltd
1967 - 1970 970 732 315 586 252
Kingsnorth PowerGen (UK) plc 1961 - 1973 1455 3205 2564Ratcliffe PowerGen (UK) plc 1966 - 1970 2000 112 97 89 77Rugeley B Eastern Merchant
Generation Ltd1969 - 1972 996 544 370 435 296
Tilbury B Npower plc 1965 - 1972 680 1000 751 781 601West Burton Eastern Merchant
Generation Ltd1966 - 1968 1972 2371 1010 1897 808
Willington B National Power plc 1963 188 142 332 114 266
Coal fired Power Stations in England & Wales, 1999
Slide 6
Emission reduction measures
Upgrade Electrostatic Precipitators Fuel Switching FGD
Power Stations
Slide 7
Electrostatic precipitators
1 eliminate leaks to reduce air ingress2 (for combustion processes) optimise
combustion and eliminate excess air3 improve the voltage control system4 optimise the rapping sequence5 reduce the gas velocity through the device6 replace the unit with a newer more
efficient design
Improving collection efficiency
Slide 8
Electrostatic precipitators
Assume all UK power stations have already achieved a stack concentration of 50mg/m3 by applying measures 1 to 4 above.
Table shows costs for option 5 above
Improving collection efficiency
20mg/m3 10mg/m3
Capital cost £3M £5MOperating cost £40k £62kLifetime 25 years 25 yearsOverall cost £3,000/tonne
abated£3,800/tonneabated
Slide 9
Fuel Switching
Close down old coal fired plants Replace with efficient modern CCGT stations
Capital cost of new CCGT station = £300/kWe of generating capacity
Fuel cost saving = £3,000/MW of generating capacity
Overall cost = £5,600/tonne abated
Slide 10
FGD
Capital cost = £100M Operating cost = £2M/year Overall cost = £39,000/tonne abated
2000 MW power Station
Slide 11
Cost CurveCost Effectiveness of Measures for Reducing UK PM10
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
Emission Remaining (kTonnes)
Mar
gina
l Cos
t of A
bate
men
t Mea
sure
(k£/
tonn
e)
1998
2000
2005
2010
2015
Slide 12
Dispersion modelling
Population weighted annual arithmetic mean concentration
Contribution of each emission source Nationally and for 6 case study regions
Slide 13
Regional Analysis
Slide 14
Concentration cost curve
1.E+00
1.E+03
1.E+06
1.E+09
1.E+12
1.E+15
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Concentration, g m-3
Ab
ate
men
t co
st (
£)/
g m
-3
National
Glasgow
West Yorkshire
Manchester
West Midlands
Neath
London
Slide 15
Conclusions 1
Many measures for reducing PM10 emissions are very expensive in terms of the cost per tonne abated.
Reducing emissions below 80 kte/y is virtually impossible using measures applied to stationary sources alone.
Reducing emissions to about 100kte may be feasible, although the costs to industry would still be quite high.
Slide 16
Conclusions 2
The contribution of stationary sources to ambient concentrations, both nationally and in the case study regions, are all small compared with the contribution of road transport
Measurements to better characterise: Domestic gas combustion and Quarrying
would be highly beneficial