160 likes | 255 Vues
This project by AEA Technology for the UK DETR analyzes sources, measures, costs, and impacts of reducing PM10 emissions in the UK from 1997 to 2015. Focusing on power stations, it evaluates cost curves, dispersion modeling, and regional variations. Conclusions highlight measures’ costs and suggested improvements.
E N D
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 Howard J Rudd, Keith J Vincent JohnR Stedman & Ian T Marlowe Presented by Mike J Woodfield
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.
Other industry (small processes) Emission sources
Emission sources Power Stations • Major source is coal-fired stations • Gas-fired stations report zero particulate emissions(although this is unlikely) • Only a few oil-fired stations
Emission sources Power Stations Coal fired Power Stations in England & Wales, 1999
Emission reduction measures Power Stations • Upgrade Electrostatic Precipitators • Fuel Switching • FGD
Electrostatic precipitators Improving collection efficiency 1 eliminate leaks to reduce air ingress 2 (for combustion processes) optimise combustion and eliminate excess air 3 improve the voltage control system 4 optimise the rapping sequence 5 reduce the gas velocity through the device 6 replace the unit with a newer more efficient design
Electrostatic precipitators Improving collection efficiency • 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
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
FGD 2000 MW power Station • Capital cost = £100M • Operating cost = £2M/year • Overall cost = £39,000/tonne abated
Dispersion modelling • Population weighted annual arithmetic mean concentration • Contribution of each emission source • Nationally and for 6 case study regions
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.
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