1 / 34

Sarnia-Lambton Case Studies – Sustainability & Eco-Efficiency

Sarnia-Lambton Case Studies – Sustainability & Eco-Efficiency. Sarnia-Lambton Economic Partnership March, 2009. Contents. Sustainability and Eco-Efficiency Kalundborg, Denmark 1997 Environment Canada Case Study SLEP Facilitated Case Studies LGS-Westroc Synthetic Gypsum Opportunity

elmo-doyle
Télécharger la présentation

Sarnia-Lambton Case Studies – Sustainability & Eco-Efficiency

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Sarnia-Lambton Case Studies – Sustainability & Eco-Efficiency Sarnia-Lambton Economic Partnership March, 2009

  2. Contents • Sustainability and Eco-Efficiency • Kalundborg, Denmark • 1997 Environment Canada Case Study • SLEP Facilitated Case Studies • LGS-Westroc Synthetic Gypsum Opportunity • TransAlta Sarnia Regional Cogen Project • Lessons Learned

  3. Sustainable Development “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” “Our Common Future” – Final Report Brundtland Commission, 1987 • Recommended that international governments should meet to look at how to best reduce the effects of human activities on the environment for future generations • Led to First Earth Summit in Rio, Brazil - 1992

  4. Sustainable Development • Late 1980s / Early 1990s – concept gaining acceptance in the main stream • October 1990 – International Institute for Sustainable Development – practical examples • Personal Realization – “Hey, Sarnia-Lambton was doing this before we knew what it was.”

  5. Eco-Efficiency • Endorsed at First Earth Summit “the concept of creating more goods and services while using fewer resources and creating less waste and pollution” • Promoted as a concept of sustainability

  6. Town of Kalundborg, Denmark • Classic example of eco-industrial development and industrial symbiosis • Energy and waste exchanges amongst various industrial enterprises • Evolved over a period of 25 years • All resource exchanges were developed with profit maximization as the main goal

  7. Town of Kalundborg, Denmark • Industrial enterprises • Asnaes Coal-fired power plant • Statoil Oil refinery • Novo Nordisk Novozymes pharmaceutical plant • Gyproc Nordic East wallboard manufacturer • Municipal utility

  8. Town of Kalundborg, Denmark • Energy and waste exchanges • All exchanges originate at the Cogeneration Coal Fired Power Plant • Heat is exported to houses in the municipality through district heating system • Steam to pharmaceutical plant and oil refinery • Synthetic gypsum to wallboard manufacturer • Flyash used for road building and cement production

  9. Environment Canada Case Study “Opportunities for Industrial Ecological Parks in Canada, Case Study: Sarnia-Lambton Industrial Complex” • Seven case studies of industrial partnerships for reduction and recycling of process residuals • Two of Note • LGS-Westroc Synthetic Gypsum Arrangement • Energy Joint Venture – Bayer, Dow, and NOVA

  10. Energy Joint Venture • Early 1990s – Ontario Hydro – 3 consecutive years of double digit rate increases – affecting competitiveness of local petrochemical and refining complex • SLEP facilitated meeting of large industrial companies to discuss issue • Result was ongoing negotiations between companies and Ontario government • Spring 1994 – Formal announcement of the Joint Venture • Became operational in 1995

  11. Energy Joint Venture – Key Features • Electricity was generated by gas-fired turbines at the Dow Site and by steam turbines at Bayer • Steam was used internally by Bayer and Dow and was supplied to the NOVA styrene plant • In service generation capacity - 120 MW at Dow and 30 MW at Bayer • Electricity not utilized by Bayer or Dow was sold to Ontario Hydro at a negotiated rate for transmission and was repurchased by NOVA at its Sarnia styrene plant and three manufacturing sites in St. Clair Township

  12. Energy Joint Venture – Case Study Conclusion “In a more competitive electricity market, there could be opportunities for a larger cogeneration facility in the contexts of an eco-industrial park” • This recommendation was the catalyst for the Economic Partnership to explore a large scale regional cogeneration facility

  13. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity December 1985 • Ontario’s Countdown Acid Rain Regulations • Ontario Hydro directed to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions by 60% from its 1981 rate of 490,000 metric tonnes by 1994 • Four proven technologies for scrubbing emissions – all processes produce a gypsum cake / slurry that would have to be land filled • Generic name for process – Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD)

  14. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity Fall 1987 / Spring 1988 • Ontario Hydro begins planning of project • Gypsum byproduct management options – Dedicated land fill or Utilization as a raw material for building materials (cement, wallboard) • Environmental Interest Groups – lobbying to ensure gypsum is utilized as a raw material • Sarnia-Lambton Community - lobbying to have FGD system installed at Lambton Generating Station • SLEP – began to investigate potential manufacturers that could utilize the gypsum – Could we attract a new industry to Sarnia-Lambton?

  15. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity Spring and Summer 1989 • SLEP – Receiving requests from GTA realtor looking for large parcels of land in close proximity to LGS • Advised client was Mississauga based Westroc Industries • Westroc analyzing various options and business case for utilization of the synthetic gypsum • SLEP working with Westroc staff to facilitate a greenfield plant in St. Clair Township

  16. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity September 1989 • Ontario Ministry of Environment grants approval for installation of FGD facilities subject to 12 conditions • Most important condition – “The scrubbing process must be designed and operated to produce commercially quality byproducts, such as cement or wallboard gypsum, instead of a waste which will have to be placed into a landfill site. Ontario Hydro must take steps to sell these products including the documentation of status negotiations with interested cement and wallboard companies”

  17. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity October 1989 • Ontario Hydro Board – Approval for first pair of FGD facilities at LGS – To be in operation by 1994 at a cost of $450 million • Westroc Analysis – If one pair of scrubbers are installed at LGS, the quantity of gypsum does not justify building a greenfield plant in St. Clair Township • Westroc’s initial proposal to Ontario Hydro – Gypsum will be shipped to existing Mississauga wallboard plant • Decision on Lambton plant will not be made until Ontario Hydro decides on scrubber installation on the remaining units – timing 1992

  18. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity 1991 and 1992 • Ontario Hydro facing financial crisis • Uncertainty as to provincial energy policy • Corporate reorganization underway • The decision on installation of LGS scrubbers is delayed

  19. LGS-Westroc Gypsum Opportunity June 1993 • Ontario Hydro Board Decision – No scrubbers on remaining LGS units September 1993 • Westroc signs 15 year contract to purchase 200,000 tonnes of gypsum per year from LGS • Decision is made to expand Mississauga plant

  20. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility June 1997 • Environment Canada Case Study – Catalyst for concept • Ontario Petrochemical Task Force – electricity costs are not competitive with competing jurisdictions in Alberta and U.S. Gulf Coast • SLEP begins to explore opportunity • Could we create a unique Sarnia-Lambton Energy Advantage? – low cost power as an investment attraction tool

  21. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility Summer 1997 • Initial consultations with local industrial companies • Imperial Oil Manager of Utilities – energy park concept had some merit • Contact information for TransAlta business development personnel is provided November 1997 • Ontario Ministry of Energy releases “White Paper” • Parameters identified for full competition in the Ontario electricity market by 2000 • Encouragement of private sector generation projects where they made economic sense

  22. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility December 1997 • Meeting with TransAlta and Sarnia Hydro (now Bluewater Power) • TransAlta personnel – Very knowledgeable of the overall steam and electricity requirements of the major industrials • A Sarnia regional cogen facility was feasible given direction of provincial energy policy • SLEP to organize January 1998 meeting inviting all major power users to discuss potential for project

  23. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility Meeting - January 23, 1998 • Well attended – over 30 attendees – all major industries at the table • SLEP Objective – Can we create a unique energy advantage for industry retention and expansion? • TransAlta presentation – outlined operating parameters of a potential facility • Projected economics with electricity and steam production capabilities generated considerable interest • Catalyst for major industrials to organize as a group and investigate the concept

  24. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility Meeting - January 1998 • Given neutral role, SLEP was asked to become secretary/administrator of the group • Participant Companies - • Bayer (now LANXESS) • Dow • Imperial Oil • Montell (became Basell) • NOVA • Sarnia Hydro (now Bluewater Power) • Shell • Suncor

  25. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility February 1998 • Request for Proposal created and issued to 6 North American power development companies • Key Information Requested - • Cogen development and operating experience • Financial capacity • Experience and strategy in influencing deregulated electricity markets • Plant’s technical configuration • Project financing plan • Electricity and steam pricing proposal

  26. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility February and March 1998 • SLEP liaison role between 6 developers and industry participants • Ongoing meetings of project team • SLEP meetings with developers • During process, two developers combined efforts to submit one proposal and one developer decided not to submit proposal

  27. Sarnia Regional Cogen Facility April, May 1998 • 4 Proposals received • Presentations from developers • Evaluation of proposals • By late May, TransAlta was selected as developer • Formal announcement of TransAlta’s selection creating national media attraction – First large scale project announced in the evolving Ontario electricity market

  28. TransAlta – Original Plans and Schedule • Construction to begin April 1999 • Plant to be located on former Owens-Corning Fiberglas site (now VIP Industrial Park • Plant would begin operations by Spring 2001 • Operating Parameters – • 523 MW of electricity • 1.6 million pounds of steam per hour • Capital Cost - $405 million • Electricity and steam to be sold to 7 industrial clients; Sarnia Hydro also a customer • Provide lower cost power to new industries

  29. The Reality • Project negotiations began in June 1998 and formal decision to proceed announced in September 2000 • TransAlta purchased the assets of the Energy Joint Venture and located on Dow Sarnia Site • Construction began in January 2001 • Plant became operational in March 2003 • Electricity sold to Lanxess, Dow and NOVA • Steam sold to Lanxess, Dow, NOVA and Suncor • No sales to Bluewater Power

  30. What Happened • Ongoing commercial negotiations affected by different corporate cultures • Preferential transmission rate not granted to TransAlta – St. Clair Township sites could not be supplied • Delays and uncertainty determining various market rules • Market rules that came into effect were not conducive to a truly competitive electricity market • Indecisiveness of provincial energy policy (i.e. Ongoing delays in opening market to competition) • Inherent bureaucratic nature of provincial institutions – No sense of urgency as related to business development • Politics dictating policy

  31. Lessons LearnedDevelopment of Sustainability Initiatives • Dependent on Government Policy • Ontario’s Countdown Acid Rain Regulations • Byproduct must be utilized for commercial purposes • Transition to a competitive electricity market • Profit motivation private sector investment • Westroc saw a business development opportunity • To improve competiveness of Sarnia-Lambton Industrial Complex, the need to lower power costs • TransAlta – business development opportunity • Both projects were incorporated into existing industrial infrastructure with some modifications

  32. Lessons LearnedDevelopment of Sustainability Initiatives • Long time perspective in project development • LGS-Westroc – 4.5 years • TransAlta – 5 years in development • Government policy and regulatory decisions do not happen quickly and WILL be delayed • Ontario Hydro – 4 years for decision on installation of second FGD facilities at Lambton Generating Station • Ontario Government – 2 year delay in opening electricity market to competition

  33. Lessons LearnedDevelopment of Sustainability Initiatives • Inherent bureaucratic nature of long standing institutions can create delays and barriers • No sense of urgency in addressing business development priorities and issues • Support the status quo and resistant to change • It’s easier to think outside of the box when you have minimal knowledge of complex issues • You can’t always get what you want (with apologies to the Rolling Stones)

  34. Sarnia-Lambton Economic Partnership www.sarnialambton.on.ca 519.332.1820 265 Front Street North, Suite 107 Sarnia ON Canada N7T 7X1

More Related