This document summarizes a presentation given at the Michigan Energy Forum on balancing energy and environmental demands when developing new energy facilities. It discusses the need to consider energy systems holistically and analyze alternatives while accounting for reliability, costs, and impacts. Renewables offer sustainability benefits but also require environmental review during siting. A balanced, diverse energy portfolio is ideal, incorporating natural gas, renewables, and alternatives like advanced coal with carbon capture or nuclear. Public involvement is important in developing solutions.
3. Reducing Nox
Selective catalytic reduction systems (SCRs) operational since 2005 . (3/4).
Convert nitrogen oxide (NOx) to harmless N2 and water.
90% emission reduction .
Reducing SO2
(Contribute to formation of acid rain and fine particulates. )
Flue Gas Desulfurization systems (FGDs) operational since 2009. (2/4).
Dec. 2013 (U1) Apr. 2013 (U2)
>90% emission reduction. SP = 97%, Gypsum = 14tons/hour
Reducing Mercury and particulates
On units where both SCRs and FGDs have been installed. (2/4)
mercury emissions reduced by 80 percent.
Summer 2014, 2 additional SCRs and FGDs in service.
3
5. 20 MW per Unit x 4
80MW towards Environmental. ~8,000 homes
Monroe Power Plant is also proud of the following
environmental achievements:
- Wildlife Habitat Council "Lands for Learning" site since 1999
- Certified to ISO 14001 in 2003
- Monroe County Corporate Citizen of the Year
- Designated a DEQ Clean Corporate Citizen in 2008
- State of Michigan Lotus Blossom Habitat
5
11. Generic Site Selection for Commercial
Nuclear Power Plants
Rebecca L. Steinman, P.E., Ph.D.
November 7, 2013
12. Summary of Key Siting Considerations
Atmospheric Science
Air Quality
Economics
(Benefits Assessment)
Radiation
Protection
Socioeconomics/
Environmental Justice
Human Health
Terrestrial
Ecology
Archaeology/
Cultural Resources
Power Marketing
(Alternative Energy
Sources)
Hydrologic Sciences
(Surface and Groundwater)/
Water Use
Geology/Seismic
Transportation/
Land Use
Aquatic
Ecology
Nuclear Safety/
Fuel Cycle /
Waste
Accident Analysis
Water
Quality
13. Commercial Nuclear Siting Process
Site Selection Studies
• Identify sites (greenfield, brownfield, existing fossil-fired or
nuclear power plants) in region of interest
• Use constraint mapping of GIS data to identify candidate
areas within the ROI
• Select potential sites from the candidate areas
• Rank potential sites to identify those for further consideration
as candidate sites
• Conduct field reconnaissance to obtain first-hand information
about each candidate site and its surrounding area
Alternative Site Analysis
• Quantitatively evaluate impacts of each candidate site
• Determine whether any candidate site would be environmentally
preferable to the proposed site
14. Alternative Site Analysis
Alternative Site Analysis compares environmental
impacts of constructing and operating a nuclear power
plant at each site
Hydrology, water quality and
water availability
Socioeconomic factors including
aesthetics, cultural resources
and environmental justice
Aquatic resources including
wetlands, essential fish habitat Population distribution and
density
and endangered species
Terrestrial resources and land Air quality
uses including endangered
Radiological and nonspecies
radiological health impacts
Transmission corridors
Postulated accidents
15. Federal, State, and Local Organization Coordination
Consultation with State Historic Preservation Office
and/or Tribes regarding potential cultural and historic
resource impacts
Consultation with natural resource agencies regarding
threatened and endangered species
Coastal Zone Management Act consistency review
Clean Air Act conformity analysis
Preparation of mitigation plans, if necessary
16. Identifying and Ranking Candidate Areas
Criteria Category
Screening Criteria
Seismic
Exclude areas < 25 mi. from capable faults
Exclude areas < 5 mi. from surface faults
Population
Exclude counties where population density >
300 persons per sq. mi
Water Availability
Exclude areas not within 5 mi. of water bodies
Dedicated Land Use
Exclude federal & state parks, monuments,
wildlife areas, wilderness areas, historic sites
Regional Ecological
Features
Exclude significant known, mapped wetlands,
threatened & endangered species habitat
Transmission
Exclude areas > 15 mi. from 525 kV lines and/or
230 kV nodes
Rail
Exclude areas > 10 mi. from existing lines
17. Identify Candidate Sites from List of Potential Sites
Iterative process to narrow the list of potential sites to
at least four candidate sites using suitability criteria
(NUREG-1555 recommended)
• Water supply availability
• Flooding potential
• Distance to population centers
• Known hazardous land uses
near the site
• Protected species or habitat
near the site
• Acres of identified wetlands on
the site
• Cost to construct access to
nearest rail line
• Cost to construct transmission
to nearest node
• Geology/Seismology
• Land acquisition costs
• Known cultural resources
on/near site
18. Water Supply Availability
Reliable water source available
under all postulated natural
event or site-induced conditions
Comply with water use and
consumption statutory
requirements
Minimize impact on habitats
Operate well below permissible
thermal and chemical effluent
concentrations for surface water
or ground water discharge
• NRC 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50
• EPA-approved State standards
• Federal Water Pollution Control Act
19. Population Considerations
Nearest distance between an area with more than
25,000 residents must be at least 1.33 times greater
than the distance from the reactor to the LPZ boundary
• Low population zone (LPZ) – area immediately surrounding the
Exclusion Area (EA)
Weighted transient population averaged over any radial
distance out to 20 miles does not exceed 500
person/sq. mile
• Transient population – people who work, reside part-time, or
engage in recreational activities, but are not permanent residents
Special populations (hospitals, prisons, etc.) which
might require evacuation under extreme situations
20. Emergency Planning
Site characteristics cannot
impede adequate protective
action development
Emergency planning zones
(EPZ) for plume exposure out to
10 miles
Ingestion planning EPZ out to
50 miles
Evacuation time estimate (ETE)
helps assess site suitability, but
there is no specific time limit
Proximity to other hazardous
facilities, military installations, or
airports whose evacuation might
impact the NPP site
21. Ecological Systems and Biota
Preservation of important habitats
(both terrestrial and aquatic)
• Breeding areas, nursery, feeding, resting,
and wintering areas; wetlands; seasonal
concentrations of species
• Proportion of habitat affected by construction and operation
activities compared to the region overall (> 2-3%)
Migratory pattern disruption
Entrainment, impingement, or entrapment of aquatic
organisms
22. Economic and Societal Impacts
Prohibited from impacting Federal, State, or locally
designated scenic, recreational, or cultural areas
• Historical / cultural preservation desires of the community
• Minimize visual impact to residential, recreational, scenic or
cultural areas
Fair treatment of all people regardless of race, ethnicity,
culture, income, or educational level
Local labor supply, tax basis, and economic impacts of
preemptive land use
24. References
EPRI Siting Guide: Site Selection and Evaluation
Criteria for an Early Site Permit Application (Siting
Guide), March 2002
NRC Regulatory Guide 4.7, Revision 2, General Site
Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations
25. Chuck Hookham, P.E.
Vice President
Balancing Energy and
Environmental Demands
New Energy Facilities
November 7, 2013
Clockwise from Top Left: Dry Lake Wind Project | Heber, AZ; Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge
Construction | Nevada/Arizona; Port Washington Generating Station | Port Washington, WI
26. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
What is an “Energy System”?
Delivers power/motive force, or change a natural
media (water, air, fuel) into usable form (“need”)
Requires human intervention for production
Has impacts, including those on environment
Forms of Energy Delivery
Transportation (motive force)
Space conditioning (heating/cooling air)
Process use (converting water to steam)
Electricity (power, light, manufacturing,
computing)
27. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
Energy Conversion
Involves source with limits on
availability (sustainable)
Has environmental impacts
Requires efficiency and economic
considerations
Must be delivered reliably and
safely at time of need
Electricity as Energy
Generation
Transmission/distribution
End use quality
28. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
New Generation, Transmission, Distribution
“Need” must be confirmed by Owner (e.g., dispatched
power)
Base system defined to meet need (e.g. coal-fired plant)
Alternatives Analysis performed
Generation alternatives
Delivery system (grid, distributed generation, facility)
Economic impacts (COG, delivered cost to end user)
Regulatory compliance
Environmental impacts
Siting analysis
“Rules” are different depending on Owner
29. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
Current Energy Situation
Large use of coal, natural gas, and nuclear
generation; renewables growing as a result of
Portfolio Standard, PTCs, benefits
Distribution of electricity by wires, heating fuel by
pipeline, and vehicle fuel by truck
Balancing low cost, reliability, flat demand tied to
economy, environmental impact, resiliency
Changes coming; new systems needed
Environmental Impacts
Airborne emissions (combustion GHGs)
Freshwater use
Inhabitants (e.g., birds, bugs, bunnies)
Challenges siting any new energy system
(NIMBY, regulations, resources)
Baby Steps!
30. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
Siting New Energy Requires Differing Environmental Study
(even renewables, storage, DG must be studied)
Typical Requirements include:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Land Use, Zoning, Ownership
Biological Assessment
Cultural Survey
Hazmat/ASTM Phase 1/2
NEPA Analysis
Water Resources/Rights
Wastewater/Solid Waste
Noise
Specialties (e.g. flicker)
Agency Coordination
Public Involvement
31. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
• Renewable Energy offers Sustainable Solution to Some of Michigan’s
Needs, While Minimizing Most Environmental Impacts
Source: “Readying Michigan to Make Good Energy Decisions”, presented by J. Quackenbush/S. Bakkal, Nov. 4, 2013
32. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
• HDR Study of Michigan’s Energy “Portfolio”:
Opportunity Exists for Mix of Gas-Based
Dispatchable Power and Renewables as
Existing Portfolio Ages.
• Nuclear, Advanced Coal with CCS, and
Proposed Mid-Michigan-based Biomass
Gasification Plant (VC Energy/HTI)
Distributed Generation are Alternatives.
• Cost for Renewable Energy Continues to
Decline; Barriers Such as Tax Credits,
Integration, Capital, Regulatory Policy Exist.
• Wind and Biomass Opportunities “Now”; Solar
PV in “Wings”.
• Technologies such as Dry Cooling and Zero
Liquid Discharge Exist to Reduce
UP Garden Wind Farm (Heritage
Environmental Impacts.
Sustainable Energy)
33. Michigan Energy Forum
Balancing Energy and Environmental Demands
Balancing Changing Energy Needs
and Environmental Impacts
Every “need” requires custom solution
Alternatives analysis with practical
acceptance criteria imperative
Public involvement throughout
Resiliency an increasing driver
(cyber, storms, technology, efficiency)
Natural gas paradox
Utility delivery vs. alternatives (DG, ES,
community solar, others)
Growing renewable integration
SUMMARY: Need “Balance” to
Assure Sustainable/Secure Energy
Future – Maybe a National Energy
Policy?
Clockwise from Top Left: Brandon Shores Generating Station | Baltimore, MD; Rialto Regional Biosolids
Processing Facility | Rialto, CA; Hickory Ridge Landfill Solar PV Cap, | Atlanta, GA
Good evening. Thank you Randall for that introduction. I was asked to speak to you tonight about the process for siting nuclear power plants. In this presentation I am focusing on site selection for new plants, but there are also a number of environmental considerations, many of them similar to what I will discuss this evening, related to the extension of an operating plant’s license.The licensing process for a new nuclear reactor is understandably complicated. In general, the US NRC is the government authority ultimately responsible for the review and approval of new nuclear projects, although, there are numerous opportunities for other government organizations, as well as the public to become involved in the process.
One of the first steps for obtaining a licensing to build and operate a new nuclear plant is to convince the regulatory bodies that the best location possible is being selected. The process requires the applicant to identify and evaluate a preferred site and at least 3 alternate sites that satisfy: (1) NRC site suitability requirements, (2) NEPA alternative site analysis requirements, and (3) the business objectives established by the applicant. There is a logical, analytical process for evaluating potential sites for the construction and operation of one or more reactor(s), which includes the investigation and evaluation of a number of competing factors as illustrated in this figure.
Site selection is a four step process by which the applicant screens the Region of Interest (ROI) for possible locations of a new build site such as an existing power plant or brownfield site. From there the applicant uses tools such as GIS to identify and rank candidate areas within the ROI. Then at least four potential sites are selected from the top ranking candidate areas for additional study. On-site testing and evaluation is performed to determine the preferred site using successive analytical evaluation steps. Each of the potential sites selected for additional study must be qualitatively evaluated to demonstrate that the preferred site is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.
Alternative site analysis compares environmental impacts of constructing and operating a nuclear power plant at each site. A number of different types of characteristics are evaluated as shown in the two columns at the bottom of this slide. I will briefly touch of several of these items during the remainder of my presentation.
The first step in the site selection process is to screen the ROI to eliminate those areas that are either unsuitable or significantly less suitable than other potential siting areas. A comprehensive GIS database is often utilized to rank candidate areas. The GIS database utilizes data inputs from a variety of sources including Federal, State and local resources. Some examples of these are provided on this slide.
The initial identification and ranking of candidate areas is performed mostly using GIS. The types of data that are mapped and some sample generic evaluation criteria are provided on this slide. For example, seismic features, population distribution., or access to existing transportation lines or utilities. Using the same criteria, a more detailed look at the initial list of areas will be performed. Sites that have insufficient land area to accommodate a new Reactor, significant population growth concerns, transmission challenges, or water quality/thermal concerns will be excluded from the list of potential sites.
At this point, the potential site list is narrowed down to a minimum of four candidate sites that are further evaluated and ranked by summing Composite Suitability Ratings for specified selection criteria. It is somewhat interesting to note that it is the licensees responsibility to “prove” that the best site has been selected by rigorously evaluating three alternative sites and quantitatively demonstrating that the alternative sites are less desirable than the selected reference site. In the interest of the limited time available this evening, I will only touch on a few examples of the suitability criteria in greater detail on the next 4-5 slides.
Nuclear power plants require reliable sources of water for steam condensation, service water, emergency core cooling, and other functions. The water requirements for a nuclear power plant are that sufficient water volume be available for cooling the plant during normal operations and normal shutdown, for the ultimate heat sink, and for fire protection. Limitations imposed by existing laws or allocation policies govern the use and consumption of water during normal operations.When water is in short supply or the local habitat dictates, may plants opt to recirculate hot water through cooling towers, artificial ponds, or other types of impoundments. But in all cases, the plant is required to meet effluent discharge restrictions on thermal and chemical releases to minimize impact on the surrounding habitats.
10 CFR 100.21(h) states that reactors should be located away from densely populated areas. As you have undoubtedly noticed, nuclear power plants tend to be located in fairly rural areas that are not too far from cities that have large power needs. Locating reactors away from densely populated areas is part of the defense-in-depth philosophy. It also facilitates emergency planning and preparedness and reduces potential doses and property damage in the event of a severe accident. Examples of specific considerations regarding population distribution include: SUMMARIZE THE SLIDE BULLETSOTHER NOTES/BACKGROUNDCumulative population at a distance divided by the area enclosed by that distance
As I mentioned on the previous slide, emergency planning and preparedness is also a large factor in the ability to license a specific site. 10 CFR 50.47(a)(1) requires reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency. This requires evaluation of two emergency planning zones – the plume exposure pathway is evaluated out to a distance of 10 miles and the ingestion pathway is evaluated out to a radius of 50 miles. Plants must prepare evacuation plans for different types of events and evaluate the acceptability of the estimated time to properly implement protective actions as part of the site suitability evaluation. Proximity to other facilities and how those facilities might impact evacuation must also be considered. The exact size and configuration of the EPZ is determined in relation to local emergency response capabilities, land characteristics, topography, access routes, and jurisdictional boundaries.
Kind of switching gears, lets briefly discuss the evaluation of impacts to ecological systems. It is important to balance the costs of design and operational practices against the benefits of protecting ecologically sensitive areas. Important considerations include (1) the uniqueness of the habitat in the region, (2) the relative amount of the habitat that would be potentially destroyed or damaged relative to the total available habitat or (3) the vulnerability of the reproductive capacity of important species. Both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems must be considered and often the aquatic scenarios are the driving factor for specific choices related to cooling options. It might even surprise you to learn that some operating power plants have received awards for creating protected habitats for certain species inside their plant boundaries due to the limitations on human access to the areas.
Social, economic, and cultural considerations are important factors determining siting policy. Currently, plants are prohibited from sites that significantly impact current or future scenic, recreational, or cultural areas. Numerous organizations such as the federal national parks service, landmarks program, national register of historic places, US department of interior, and state and local governments must be contacted to ensure that all of these protected areas are avoided when siting a plant.February 11, 1994, the President issued an executive order that requires each Federal executive branch agency to identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low income populations resulting from its actions. The memorandum accompanying the Executive order directed Federal executive agencies to consider environmental justice – the fair treatment of all people regardless of race, ethnicity, culture, income, or education level. As a result, the NRC has voluntarily committed to undertake environmental justice reviews as part of its NEPA responsibilities. Additionally, siting evaluations must consider how the siting, construction, and operation of a plant my impact local communities. Some of the things considered include local labor supply, changes in the tax basis, or impacts to local community services.BACKGROUNDExecutive Order 12898, “Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations.”
All of the evaluations previous mentioned, as numerous others that were not discussed this evening go into the process of ranking the candidate sites to facilitate the identification of an environmentally preferred site for the construction and operation of a new nuclear facility. But this is only 1 piece of the overall input in to new plant license – I could spend a lot more time than I have allotted tonight to discuss the numerous other inputs needed for the licensing of a new nuclear power plant.My final slide simply lists two documents where you can find additional detail related to most of the items I discussed tonight. Thank you for your attention. Are there any questions?