Landfill-Gas-to-Energy Projects

Sergio GuerraKansas Department of Health and Environment

Bureau of Air

1.0-Background 2.0-Landfill emissions 3.0-Subpart WWW 4.0-Landfill gas beneficial projects 5.0-Incentives for LFG utilization projects 6.0-Permitting challenges

1. Background

Types of Landfills

Class I hazardous waste landfills Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills Construction & demolition (C&D) landfills Agricultural waste, mining waste, high-

volume industrial waste landfills

Developing Federal Rules

Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

of 1976 (RCRA) Subtitle C for Hazardous Waste (HW) Landfills Subtitle D for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)

Landfills

RCRA Subtitle D

40 CFR 257 Open Dump Inventory of 1978 Required an inventory of open dumps vs.

landfills Open dumps had to upgrade or close within 5

years Sanitary landfills could remain open

40 CFR 258 Sanitary Landfill Rules of 1991 Upgraded landfills well beyond the old

definition

Subtitle D Provisions

Location Restrictions Operating Criteria Design Criteria Groundwater Monitoring Landfill Closure Post-Closure Care Financial Assurance

Clean Air Act Regulation Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 started air

regulation of landfills Spawned landfill regulation by

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) / Emission Guidelines (EG)

Title V Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

Biggest impact is from NSPS NSPS requires gas collection at all large landfills – includes

most landfills today

2. Landfill Emissions

Landfill Gas (LFG)

Landfill gas is generated by the decomposition process in landfills

Creates mostly methane and carbon dioxide And trace volatiles Methane is the principal component of

natural gas Can be flammable and explosive Can be used as a fuel

Landfill Gas (LFG)

Methane a greenhouse gas Methane absorbs terrestrial infrared radiation (heat)

that would otherwise escape to space (GHG characteristic)

Methane as GHG is over 20x more potent by weight than CO2

Landfills were the second largest human-made source of methane in the United States in 2006, accounting for 22.6% generated

Landfill Gas Hazards

Methane can migrate from landfills and burn or explode in confined space

Has caused injury and death Trace gases can create odor problems Trace volatiles can create air pollution

Landfill Gas Benefits The methane in landfill gas can be captured and

used as a fuel Common LFGE applications are:

Direct-use (boiler, heating, direct thermal) Combined Heat & Power (engine, turbine,

microturbine) Electric (engine, turbine, microturbine)

There are 400 LFGE projects in the U.S. And another 200 elsewhere in the world today

3. NSPS Subpart WWW

NSPS (New Source Performance Standards) for MSW Landfills, 40 CFR Part 66 Subparts Cc and WWW, promulgated March 12, 1996 requires control of landfill gas when the landfill capacity exceeds: 2.5 million m3 AND 2.5 million megagrams AND NMOC emissions exceed 50 megagrams/yr

Effect of the NSPS• Air Emissions become a concern• Increased scrutiny of landfill air emissions• New Permit and Regulatory RequirementsMore Monitoring and TestingMore RecordsMore Reports

Importance of NSPS

Applicability: Primary trigger based upon the landfill meeting the Area Source Criteria in 40 CFR 63.1935(a)(3)

Importance of NSPS

Compliance: Landfills compliance is based upon the NSPS, EG or Approved Alternative as per the NSPS/EG(40 CFR 63.1955(a) or (c))

NSPS - Applicability

The NSPS applies to MSW landfills for which construction, modification, or reconstruction commences on or after May 30, 1991

Control Requirement

• Design capacities greater than or equal to 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3

• NMOC Emissions Greater than 50 Mg/yr

NMOC Emissions

• 40 CFR 60.754(a)(1)(i)n

MNMOC= 2 k Lo Mi ( e-kti) (CNMOC) (3.6 x10-9)i=1

• 40 CFR 60.754(a)(1)(ii)

MNMOC=2 Lo R (e-kc - e-kt) (CNMOC) (3.6 x10-9)

1.00

10.00

100.00

1000.00

1976

1986

1996

2006

2016

2026

2036

2046

Year

Mg/

YrNMOC Emission Rate

CAA

AP-42

Tier 1; 40 CFR 60.754(a)(2)

• No Testing Required• Default Equation Values are Used• Calculation & Report Required Within

90 days of being affected40 CFR 60.757(b)(1)(i)(B)

Tier 2; 40 CFR 60.754(a)(3)

• CNMOC Determination Required • Calculation & Report Required Within

180 days after the first 50 Mg exceedance

40 CFR 60.757(c)(1)

Tier 3; 40 CFR 60.754(a)(4)

• k Determination Required • Calculation uses the Tier 2 CNMOC• Calculation & Report Required Within 1

year after the first 50 Mg exceedance40 CFR 60.757(c)(2)

GCCS planLandfill Gas Collection and Control System Design Plan required within 1 year of the first report which the emission rate equals or exceeds 50 Mg per year.

40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(i) and 60.757(c)

Collection System Requirements Maximum gas flow rate Collect Gas from all areas in which

solid waste has been placed for: 5 years or more if active; or 2 years or more if closed or at final

grade. Sufficient Extract Rate Minimize off-site Migration

Control System : #1

• Open flare; or • A control system designed and

operated to reduce NMOC by 98% by weight; or

[40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(A) & 40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(B)]

Control System: #2(a)

• A enclosed combustor which reduces NMOC by 98 weight percent or reduce the outlet NMOC concentration

[40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(B)]

Control System: #2(b)

Reduce the outlet NMOC concentration to less than 20 parts per million by volume, dry basis as hexane at 3 percent oxygen.

Control System: #3

• Route the collected gas to a treatment system that processes the collected gas for subsequent sale or use

[40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(C)]

GCCS Startup

Installation of Landfill Gas Collection and Control System Completed within 30 months after reporting NMOC emissions 50 Mg/yr

40 CFR 60.752(b)(2)(ii)

Reporting Requirements #1

• Initial and annual design capacity report• NMOC emission reports (Annual or 5 year

Reports)• Notification of increases in design

capacity and NMOC emissions

Reporting Requirements #2

• Submittal of design plans and construction permit applications

• Compliance certifications• System Removal Reports• Annual Emission Report• Excavation in Asbestos Areas

Recordkeeping #1

• Control and Emission Exceedances• Location of Asbestos• Waste Acceptance Rate• Asbestos Waste Shipment Records

Recordkeeping #2

• Gas Collection and Control Equipment Operating Parameters

• New Well Installation• Monitoring Parameters

Landfill Air Regulations - MACT MSW Landfill MACT (Maximum Achievable

Control Technology), 40 CFR Part 63-Subpart AAAA applies to those NSPS regulated landfills requiring control (NMOC emissions 50 Mg/yr or more), and requires:

Immediate control of landfill gas from bioreactors

Startup, Shutdown, & Malfunction (SSM) Plan Semiannual Reporting Continuous monitoring of control device

operating parameters

Title V Requirement June 10, 1996 for MSW landfills that

commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991 but before March 12, 1996;

Ninety days after the date of commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction for MSW landfills that commence construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996.

4. Landfill Gas Beneficial Projects

Landfill Gas and Green PowerA Winning Combination

Dual benefit destroys methane and other organic compounds in LFG

Offsets use of nonrenewable resources (coal, oil, gas) reducing emissions of SO2, NOX, PM, CO2 LFG is a recognized renewable energy resource

(Green-e, EPA Green Power Partnership, 33 states, Sierra Club, NRDC)

LFG is generated 24/7 and projects have online reliability over 90%

LFG can act as a long-term price and volatility hedge against fossil fuels

Common LFGE applications

Direct-use (boiler, heating, direct thermal)

Combined Heat & Power (engine, turbine, microturbine)

Electric (engine, turbine, microturbine)

State of the National LFG Industry (April 2009)

At least 485 operational projects in 44 states supplying: 12 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and 85 billion

cubic feet of LFG to direct-use applications annually Estimated ‘09 Annual Environmental Benefits

Carbon sequestered annually by ~19,500,000 acres of pine or fir forests, or

CO2 emissions from ~199,000,000 barrels of oil consumed, or

Annual greenhouse gas emissions from ~15,700,000 passenger vehicles

Estimated Annual Energy Benefit Powering more than 889,000 homes and

heating nearly 614,000 homes

Diversity of Project TypesElectricity Generation

Internal Combustion Engine

(range from 100 kW to 3 MW)Gas Turbine

(range from 800 kW to 10.5 MW)

Microturbine (range from 30 kW to 250 kW)

File Last Updated: April 2009

5. Incentives for LFGE projects

LFG and State Renewable Portfolio Standards

Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) –requires utilities to supply a percentage of power from renewable resources 28 states plus District of Columbia have an RPS

Renewable Portfolio Goal (RPG) – same as RPS except an objective not a requirement 5 states have an RPG

LFG is eligible as a renewable resource for 33 states and District of Columbia

LFG and RECs Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)

Equivalent to 1 MWh of renewable energy generation

From $5 to $50 per MWh (0.5 to 5 cents per kWh)

Companies looking to reduce their environmental footprint purchase RECs from utilities using LFG DuPont – 170 million kWh from biomass & LFG Pitney Bowes – 10% of electricity from wind & LFG Staples – 46 million kWh/year of RECs, 90% from

biomass & LFG

Public and Private Entities Moving to Reduce GHG Emissions

Voluntary Markets Currently where most GHG activity occurs Examples - Chicago Climate Exchange, Blue

Source

Compliance Markets Rapidly evolving, will become the dominant

market Led by Massachusetts and California and

regional efforts

Emissions Trading of LFG Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) is an example of a

voluntary GHG reduction and trading program Offers a credit of 18.25 metric tons CO2 per metric ton of methane

combusted Applicable for LFG collection and combustion systems placed into

service after 12/31/98 Prices range from $1 to $6.50 per metric ton (market factors affect

pricing) Only landfills not required by federal law (e.g., NSPS) to combust

LFG are eligible Landfill methane emission offsets brochure at

www.chicagoclimateexchange.com

Federal Financial Incentives Section 45 Production Tax Credit (PTC)

Electricity generation – 1.0 cent/kWh Placed in service by 12/31/13 10-year window for credits Under Economic Stimulus Bill: Short-term option to select a

one time 30% investment tax credit (Section 48) or convert into a 30% cash grant

Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs) National allocation of $2.4 billion In 2008, IRS granted issuance of 45 bonds for LFGE projects

Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI) Local/state government or non-profit electric co-op facilities Online by 10/1/16 Payment for first 10 years of operation

Many Untapped LFG Resources Currently ~520 candidate landfills with a total gas

generation potential of 200 billion cubic feet per year (~12,000 MMBtu/hr) OR electric potential of 1,180 MW (~9.5 million MWh/yr)

If projects were developed at all these landfills, estimated Annual Environmental Benefit =

Carbon sequestered annually by ~11.5 million acres of pine or fir forests OR annual greenhouse gas emissions from ~9.2 million passenger vehicles, AND

Annual Energy Benefit = Powering 698,000 homes OR heating 1.4 million homes per year

Many Untapped LFG Resources (cont.)

~500 landfills have a gas collection system but no energy project Potential of 263,000 MMBtu/day or 1,040 MW

~95 landfills have an energy project and excess LFG available Potential of 60,000 MMBtu/day or 235 MW

~970 landfills do not have a gas collection system Potential of 206,000 MMBtu/day or 815 MW

Untapped LFG-Carbon Credit Resources

Currently ~470 landfills without an operational project and indicated to not be currently required by federal regulation to collect & combust LFG More than 1.3 million short tons CH4/yr reduction potential (26

MMTCO2E/yr or 7 MMTCE/yr) Gas generation potential of ~115 billion cubic feet/yr (~6,700

MMBtu/hr) OR electric potential of ~640 MW (~5 million MWh/yr) If projects were developed at all these landfills,

estimated Annual Environmental Benefit from CH4 reduction =

Carbon sequestered annually by ~5.7 million acres of pine or fir forests OR annual greenhouse gas emissions from ~4.6 million passenger vehicles, AND

Annual Energy Benefit = Powering 377,000 homes OR heating nearly 838,000 homes per year

6. Permitting Challenges

Single vs. Separate SourcesCollocated sources are considered a single source when the following three criteria are met.

1. Contiguous or adjacent property2. Same two-digit primary SIC code (or one facility is

considered a support facility to the other) – 4953: Refuse Systems– 4911: Electric Services (other electric power generation)

3. Common Control

[40 CFR Sections 70.2, 71.2, 63.2, 51.165(a)(1)(i) and (ii), and 51.166(b)((5) and (6))]

Common Control Issues

Liability Aggregate emissions Financing Insurance

Common Control

Presumption: Company locating on another’s land establishes a common control relationship.

Rebuttal of presumption of common control is the burden of the source.

Decided on a case by case basis.

Determination of common control [Letter to Peter Hamlin from U.S. EPA Region VII- 9/18/1995]

Need to ask questions about interaction between two companies.Do the facilities share: common workforces, plant managers,

executive officers? equipment, other property, or pollution

control equipment? intermediates, products, byproducts?

Determination of common control

What is the dependency of one facility on the other?

Does one operation support the operation of the other?

What is the dependency of one facility on the other?

Who is ultimately responsible for compliance with Subpart WWW?

Example 1 Landfill has agreed to sell LFG to energy plant Energy plant is built on leased land from landfill Energy plant will control valve to route LFG to engines or

flare Whenever LFG is not used, it will be flared at the landfill Parties do not have any financial interest in one another

Up to 70% of energy plant’s needs could be met by LFG Engines at energy plant may run on different types of

liquid fuels, supplemented by landfill gas Engines cannot operate using only landfill gas

Example 1 May 1, 2002 EPA determination from Judith Katz

at EPA Region III regarding: Maplewood Landfill and Industrial Power Generation

Corporation (INGENCO) Landfill and Energy plant are NOT under

common control There are no financial interest in one another Do not share intermediates, products, byproducts etc. Maplewood receives power through local power utility

(won’t receive power directly from INGENCO) No arrangements for Maplewood to accept

INGENCO’s municipal solid waste Finally, neither facility is dependent on the other. If

either of them shut down they can continue to operate at full capacity.

Example 2 Landfill has agreed to sell LFG to energy plant Energy plant is built on leased land from landfill Energy plant will control valve to route LFG to engines or

flare Whenever LFG is not used, it will be flared at the landfill

At some point Landfill parent company “A” also owned stock in energy plant. Stock on energy plant were sold back Transfer of stocks still needed approval from Landfill company “A”

Energy plant depends on landfill as its only source of fuel Energy plant and landfill cannot sell or transfer gas

without approval from landfill company “A”

Example 2 May 11, 2009 letter from Ronald Brosellino at EPA

Region II regarding: Common control determination for Ocean County Landfill (OCL)

and Manchester Renewable Power Corp. (MRPC) Landfill and Energy plant are under common control for

PSD, NSR, and title V programs of Clean Air Act Landfill’s parent company still retained control over stocks from

Energy plant. Dependence of MRPC on OCL for its source of fuel Landfill’s parent company had control over sale or transfer of

landfill gas for both companies Companies shared tax credits Existing title V permits for OCL and MRPC must be reopened and

reissued to both companies as a single source

Example 3

Landfill has agreed to sell LFG to energy plant Energy plant is built on leased land from landfill Energy plant will control valve to route LFG to engines or

flare Whenever LFG is not used, it will be flared at the landfill Parties do not have any financial interest in one another

Engines at energy plant may run on different type of fuel (i.e. propane) but clearly not the intention

Engines can operate using only landfill gas

Oak Grove Landfill and Oak Grove Power Producers

KDHE determined both companies were under common control

A construction approval was issued to energy plant

Energy plant is also required to apply for Class I permit

Air emissions are to be aggregated for air permitting purposes

LFG beneficial projects in Kansas

Treatment facility SouthTex at Deffenbaugh landfill in Johnson Co., KS

(in operation) LFGE facility

Rolling Meadows Landfill, Shawnee Co., KS (in construction)

Oak Grove Power Producers, Crawford Co., KS (permitted)

Boiler combusting LFG Abengoa Bioenergy from Brooks Landfill at Sedgwick

Co., KS

Guidance and Info• USEPA’s Websites

NSPS -http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/landfill/landflpg.htmlMACT (AAAA) -http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/landfill/lndfillpg.htmlUSEPA Applicability Determination Index (ADI) http://cfpub.epa.gov/adi/index.cfmLandfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP)http://www.epa.gov/landfill/index.htm

Sergio Guerra Bureau of Air, KDHE sguerra@kdheks.gov (785) 296-0365