FGD and DeNOx
NEWSLETTER
June 2020
No. 506
Table of Contents
MARKETS
World Coal-fired Power Generation Has Not passed 2013 Peak but Is Growing in
India, Vietnam and Indonesia
IEA Forecasts a Coal-fired Power Peak in China in 2022
INDUSTRY NEWS
Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in
the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process
Eight WTE Plants for Kazakhstan
Saltworks Treats FGD and Coal Ash Pond Wastewater
ChemTreat has Improved Method for Selenium Removal
Duke Will Use Reclaimed Wastewater in Gas Turbine Plant in Florida
Coal-fired Power Plant Retirements Chronicled by S&P
U.S. Coal Negatively Impacted by COVID
U.S. EPA Moves to Curb Ability of States to Reject Coal and Other Energy
Infrastructure
Siemens Energy Will
Be Independent Company
Indian Utility Fined for Breaching Pollution Deadline
India Abandons Coal Washing as Most Plants to Miss Deadline for Scrubbers
Eskom Bid to Avoid Pollution Controls on Medupi Hits Legal Hurdle
Court Rules U.S. Environment Agency Must Protect States from Upwind Air
Pollution
Convert Coal Plants to Biomass
ANDRITZ to Supply Flue Gas Desulfurization Plant to NTPC, India
Eskom Wants to Cancel FGD Project
Sefar Filter Bags Used in Australia, Europe and Around the World at
Coal-fired Power Plants
Hamon Orders Up in First Quarter 2020
B&W Consolidated Revenues Were $148.6 Million in the First Quarter of 2020
MARKETS
World Coal-fired Power Generation Has Not passed 2013 Peak but Is Growing in
India, Vietnam and Indonesia
There was a strongly upwards trajectory of 4-5 percent annual growth established
from 2000-2013. However, the market was entirely unprepared for global thermal
coal generation to peak in 2013. After a decline from 2014-2016, some growth
resumed from 2017-2018. However, overall global coal power generation in 2019
was lower than that evidenced in 2013.
Given the huge investment in new coal-fired power capacity across China, India
and Asia, this has been problematic; significant capacity additions have driven
capacity utilization rates down to a decade low of just 51 percent in 2019.
The unexpected global peak of thermal coal demand back in 2013 reflects a number
of factors.
India is the third largest electricity market globally. It too has seen an
unexpected electricity sector disruption. Installation rates of thermal power
net new capacity have fallen from some 20 GW annually over 2010 – 2016 to just
3-4 GW annually over the following four fiscal years, a 75 percent deceleration
in growth. A surge in renewables investment followed a halving of the required
tariffs for both solar and wind to just US$30/MWh, some 20 - 30 percent below
existing, domestic coal-fired power tariffs (and half the cost of new imported
thermal power). Prime Minister Narendra Modi has ambitiously targeted 450 GW of
renewable installs by 2030 — a fivefold expansion on the current installed base
of 86 GW. Further, electricity demand growth has been consistently below the
optimistic assumptions of the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Indian
Central Electricity Authority. This has left average coal plant utilization
rates at a decade low of just 55 percent, and stranded asset losses across the
thermal power sector have reached US$60 billion. India’s goal is
to become a $5 trillion economy by 2024, in part by investing heavily in
infrastructure, which will boost energy demand for industry and electricity
production.
Although India has succeeded in bringing some form of electricity access to
almost all its citizens, the country’s per-capita power consumption is still
low, allowing it to still grow significantly. Despite power generation from
renewables expected to increase fourfold between 2018 and 2024, the IEA expects
India’s coal power generation will increase by 4.6 percent per year through
2024, and for India’s coal demand to grow by more than that of any other country
in absolute terms over the five-year forecast period. Pakistan has recently
commissioned more than 4 GW of new coal power plants and has a similar amount
under construction. Bangladesh is about to commission the first unit of 10 GW it
has planned.
The IEA expects coal demand in Southeast Asia will grow by more than 5 percent
per year through 2024, led by Indonesia and Vietnam. The region’s strong
economic growth is expected to drive electricity and industrial consumption,
which will both be fueled in part by coal. Southeast Asia countries are also
using coal to provide electricity for their growing populations.
Coal’s future is primarily in the electricity generation markets in Asia, with
China, India, and Southeast Asia continuing to build coal-fired generating
capacity. The IEA expects generation from coal-fired power plants in Asia will
exceed the drop-in coal-fired generation in the U.S. and Europe so that coal
remains the world’s largest generation fuel over the next five years.
IEA Forecasts a Coal-fired Power Peak in China in 2022
China is the world’s biggest producer and consumer of coal. IEA expects China’s
coal consumption will plateau around 2022 due to a decline in coal use in the
residential, small industrial, and heavy industrial sectors, driven by
structural changes in the economy and the need to reduce local pollution.
Residential use of coal is a major contributor to localized pollution because it
is largely burned in an uncontrolled environment, without the technologies and
modern pollution reduction capabilities of larger users. China’s coal power
generation, however, is expected to continue to grow, just at a slower rate,
dropping its share of the power generation market from 67 percent in 2018 to 59
percent in 2024. It is believed that coal is needed to sustain China’s economic
growth and guarantee energy security in the future.
China’s reliance on coal helped it become the world’s second-largest economy,
pulling nearly a billion people out of poverty. Based on recently released
official economic data found that 65 percent of the annual growth in energy
consumption in 2019 came from fossil fuels, with coal accounting for 57.7
percent of China’s energy use. Coal plants, which burn approximately 54 percent
of all coal used in the country, provide 52 percent of generating capacity and
67 percent of electricity output.
Despite China’s generation sector being at overcapacity, China added about 40 GW
of coal-fired power capacity in 2019 — a 4 percent increase. As a result, the
coal fleet’s average utilization rate fell below 50 percent on average. Even so,
China is still building new supercritical coal-fired generators with 100 GW
under construction, which would raise current coal capacity by nearly 10
percent.
INDUSTRY NEWS
Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the
Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing processes that it would
be required to undertake in promulgating regulations under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) to ensure that information regarding the benefits and costs of regulatory
decisions is provided and considered in a consistent and transparent manner.
This proposed rulemaking addresses, among other things, issues raised in the
June 13, 2018 advance notice of proposed rulemaking, ‘‘Increasing Consistency
and Transparency in Considering Costs and Benefits in the Rulemaking Process,’’
and proposes how the concepts described in that advance document would be
implemented in rulemakings conducted by the EPA using its authorities under the
CAA. The EPA is proposing to establish procedural requirements governing the
development and presentation of benefit-cost analyses (BCA), including risk
assessments used in the BCA, for significant rulemakings conducted under the
CAA. Together, these requirements would help ensure that the EPA implements its
statutory obligations under the CAA, and describes its work in implementing
those obligations, in a way that is consistent and transparent.
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Eight WTE Plants for Kazakhstan
Central Asia’s largest country is planning to launch the ‘‘Waste-to-energy’’
project to tackle the growing mountain of trash, according to Ramazan
Zhampiissov, who chairs Kazakhstan-based International Green Technologies and
Investment Projects Center (IGTIPC).
“The problem of municipal solid waste management is relevant for Kazakhstan and
requires a systematic solution based on the use of international best
practices,’’ Kazakhstan-based Kazinform news agency quoted Zhampiissov as
saying.
As of today, nearly 85 percent of all solid waste in Kazakhstan does not get
sorted and recycled, according to the official.
“It is impossible to recycle all solid waste, so part of the waste — between 30
and 50 percent — should be recycled using waste-to-energy technology with the
further generation of electric and thermal energy at stations that use solid
household waste as a source,’’ Zhampiissov added.
Stretching between China and the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan measures over 2.7
million square kilometers (1.05 million square miles), making it the world’s
ninth-largest country.
With a population of nearly 19 million, the country annually generates an
average of 4-5 million tons of municipal solid waste (MSW). Over 120 million
tons of waste have already piled up at more than 3,000 landfills across the
country, of which only 623 comply with environmental and sanitary requirements.
At the same time, more than 9,000 unauthorized solid waste landfills have
been found last year in Kazakhstan, of which 2,700 have already been liquidated,
according to the data compiled by the country’s ecology, geology and natural
resources agency.
“If we do not deal with the problem of municipal waste disposal right now, in a
few years it will lead to the inevitable consequences for Kazakhstan’s ecology,”
the head of IGTIPC believes.
Officials in Nur-Sultan are now working to launch the ‘Waste-to-energy’’ project
which is expected to help prevent existing ecology challenges. The project
involves the study of solid waste, as well as geotechnical surveys for the
construction of waste-to-energy plants. These plants burn municipal solid waste
to produce steam in a boiler that is used to generate electricity and are of
high popularity in countries that have little open space for landfills and have
few energy resources.
Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway had the most efficient material waste
management system as of 2018, according to a report issued by the Confederation
of European Waste-to-Energy Plants. For example, Danish Copenhill
waste-to-energy plant, launched in 2017, is capable of incinerating 440,000 tons
of waste to deliver electricity and district heating for 150,000 homes annually.
Zhampiissov said Kazakhstan is eager to partner with the European countries, to
outline best practices for the launch of local waste-to-energy plants, but the
project requires attracting investors.
‘‘In general, the creation of an effective solid waste management system in the
country and the modernization of existing infrastructure require significant
investments,’’ the Kazakh official said, adding that the government will create
competitive conditions for investors.
Currently, government officials in what is Central Asia’s largest country are
developing the bill that will set specific requirements for the operation of
waste-to-energy facilities in Kazakhstan and introduce mechanisms to support
these facilities, as well as create conditions for investors to engage in the
industry.
Last year, Kazakhstan’s ecology, geology, and natural resources
agency announced that the country would launch up to eight waste-to-energy
plants, which are expected to bring at least $500 million to the industry over
the next few years. In addition, the government designed a document —the
Environmental Code — which is expected to increase the attractiveness of waste
disposal activities for both local and foreign investors.
Saltworks Treats FGD and Coal Ash Pond Wastewater
Saltworks developed a solution that removes up to 90 percent of chlorides from
FGD wastewater, meaning that the water can be re-used rather than discharged.
The solution uses Saltworks’ Flex EDR product—with proprietary
monovalent-selective membranes — enabling up to 50 percent cost savings over
alternative methods.
The same technology is now being tested by a major international mining company
to remove chlorides and boost production from what would normally be a waste
product.
The site pilot work — proving the performance of Flex EDR as a chloride kidney —
was made possible thanks to the foresight of the Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) and the support of the Department of Energy’s National Energy
Technology Laboratory, as well as Canada’s Industrial Research Assistance
Program.
The combustion of coal in thermal power plants generates large volumes of coal
combustion residuals (CCR), such as fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, and flue
gas desulfurization (FGD) materials. These CCRs are collectively referred to as
coal ash. For decades, coal ash has been managed using river or lake water to
sluice it into a large surface water impoundment (also called “coal ash pond”)
for its final settlement. Coal ash contains substances such as arsenic, boron,
selenium, and heavy metals (cadmium, copper, chromium, lead, mercury, among
others). As a result, coal ash pond water, if released into the environment
through embankment breaches and seepage of the water through the pond bottom as
leachate, may contaminate soil, rivers, lakes, and groundwater. Several U.S.
power plants are currently required by the regulators to clean up their coal ash
ponds and to treat coal ash pond waters as soon as possible.
Prior to designing a coal ash pond water treatment plant, it is important to
know its water chemistry. This will identify the constituents of concern for
treatment and the potential scaling risks. A single treatment method unlikely
removes every pollutant to meet all requirements.
Rather a plant should be designed to meet the treatment objectives and be cost
optimized for the project. This will involve an integration of multiple
treatment methods. We hereby provide a “toolbox” of treatment methods for the
most common pollutants of concern in coal ash pond waters.
Arsenic: Arsenic may exist
in coal ash pond waters as inorganic As (III), arsenate As (V) or organic
methylated arsenic compounds. The species of arsenic present in the water will
determine the treatment method. There are three options for removing inorganic
arsenite and arsenate:
The phys/chem precipitation method is often preferred as it can reduce arsenate
down to 0.01 mg/L. When arsenite is the predominant species in the water, an
oxidation step is required to convert arsenite into arsenate prior to the phys/chem
precipitation process.
Reverse osmosis has the benefit of being able to remove both inorganic and
organic arsenic. Phys/chem precipitation or physical adsorption is not effective
for organic methylated arsenic compounds. Although work is being done on
advanced oxidation processes to target only organic arsenic removal (for
example, Fenton oxidation), these are not yet commercial and may be expensive.
Boron: Two options for boron-removal are commonly used:
ion
exchange (IX) using boron-selective resin that can reduce boron
concentrations to less than 0.1 mg/L, the spent resins require regeneration
with acid and base; and
reverse osmosis (RO) under a basic condition (pH > 10), a polish step for
the treated water may be required to reduce boron to < 0.5 mg/L (a
compliance level regulated by some jurisdictions), the polish step could be
IX or a secondary RO; at an acidic condition (pH <7), boron exists as boric
acid, which is too small in radius to be rejected by an RO, boric acid will
pass through RO membranes into the treated water.
Both IX and RO options will generate a waste brine.
Selenium: Selenium may exist in coal ash pond waters as selenite Se(IV) or
selenate Se(VI). Selenite is more reactive and easier to remove than selenate.
Phys/chem precipitation using ferrous or ferric reagents is effective in
removing selenite but not for selenate. Existing selenate removal processes are
based on converting selenate into elemental selenium through biological
reduction. Although electrochemical reduction processes have been studied to
remove selenate, they are not yet commercialized and generate a large volume of
solid waste requiring disposal. Reverse osmosis will remove both selenite and
selenate, management of the reverse osmosis brine needs to be considered. In
some cases, the brine can be returned to the coal ash pond, however this will
increase the pond salt contents over time.
Heavy metals: Heavy metals (cadmium, copper, chromium, lead, mercury, and zinc)
are generally removed by phys/chem precipitation as metal oxides or metal
hydroxides. The phys/chem process may not meet stringent discharge requirements,
depending on the specific metal and its precipitate solubility. To further
reduce heavy metal concentrations after the phys/chem process, a polishing step
with reverse osmosis or scavenging agents that reacts and binds with metals may
be required.
Most metal scavenging agents are toxic so care must be taken to ensure that they
do not end up in the treated water.
Saltworks has the experience and product solutions to treat coal ash pond
waters. Our modular advanced desalination technologies (BrineRefine, Xtreme
Reverse Osmosis) can achieve ultra-high brine volume reduction and evaporator
crystallizers (AirBreather, SaltMaker) for minimal liquid discharge (MLD) / zero
liquid discharge (ZLD) can help economically treat coal ash pond waters for
discharge and manage residuals for end of life disposal.
Saltworks has the experience and product solutions to treat coal ash pond
waters. Our modular advanced desalination technologies (BrineRefine, Xtreme
Reverse Osmosis) can achieve ultra-high brine volume reduction and evaporator
crystallizers (AirBreather,
SaltMaker) for minimal liquid discharge (MLD)/zero liquid discharge (ZLD) can
help economically treat coal ash pond waters for discharge and manage residuals
for end of life disposal.
ChemTreat has Improved Method for Selenium Removal
An advanced physical chemistry technique is now available to remove selenium
from power plant FGD, ash-sluicing, ash pond, and landfill leachate wastewaters.
The process also reduces the concentration of other priority pollutants in these
water streams and represents an alternative from capital intensive biologically
based methods. The equipment needed is not exotic and is, in large measure,
standard to many wastewater systems, i.e., clarifiers, reaction tanks, and
filter presses. It may allow some plants to remain in operation, where the costs
of biological treatment processes would have tipped the balance in the other
direction.
ChemTreat’s patent-pending process SeQueste offers a physical-chemical
alternative to the biological method of selenium removal. The process utilizes
an enhanced adsorptive matrix along with process adjustments to remove selenium,
which employs conventional wastewater treatment equipment such as holding tanks
and settling & de-watering apparatus. The configuration can be designed to treat
not only direct discharge from wet scrubbers, but also stored ash pond water and
collected landfill leachate, at potentially much lower cost than the current BAT
methods. Furthermore, pilot test results indicate that the technology will lower
the concentrations of other priority pollutants, including arsenic, mercury, and
nitrate.
https://www.power-eng.com/2020/03/06/coal-fired-om-a-novel-non-biological-process-for-selenium-removal/#gref
Duke Will Use Reclaimed Wastewater in Gas Turbine Plant in Florida
A solution is on the table to increase the flow of Crystal River’s reused
wastewater to Duke Energy’s energy complex, keeping the city from paying a
penalty and polluting its watershed. Duke representatives told City Council at
its meeting Monday, June 8, 2020, their engineers could pipe the water to the
power company’s Citrus Combined-Cycle Natural Gas Plant. Crystal River already
pumps reclaimed water to Duke’s two coal units, where it’s used for pollution
control, but Duke’s demand for city water is decreasing as it uses those
facilities less, company spokeswoman Dorothy Pernu told the council.
“We are pursuing a cleaner energy solution for power generation,” Pernu said.
“We have made a commitment nationwide to reduce our carbon emissions.
Crystal River has been sending Duke between 750,000 and 800,000 gallons a day
(GPD) of reclaimed water since a $8 million, joint-funded project came online in
July 2015 for the city to pump semi-treated water from a storage tank at its
sprayfield off of North Citrus Avenue. This project helped Duke reduce the
amount of groundwater it pumped from the aquifer and kept the city from spraying
onto its 200-acre field and pollutants to runoff into nearby water systems.
Duke committed to taking reclaimed water for 20 years, with a goal to possibly
receive up to 1.5 million GPD, according to its 2010 agreement with the city
However, Pernu told council on June 8 Duke expects to lower its need for reused
water down to 350,000 GPD over the next five years, but “is committed to helping
the city find a solution.”
City Manager Ken Frink said the city agreed with Southwest Florida Water
Management District (SWFWMD) to pump at least 750,000 GPD to Duke, or else
Crystal River would have to refund SWFWMD for its investment loss.
According to Crystal River, SWFWMD contributed $2.555 million toward the city’s
reclaimed water project; the city paid $2.325 million, FDEP paid $1.118 million
and Duke paid $2.1 million. Frink said SWFWMD is willing to wait for the city to
find a remedy.
“What they want to see is progress,” he told council members, adding the city
isn’t violating any terms yet.
Jeffrey Swartz, Vice President of Duke power operations in Florida, told council
a pipe could connect with existing reclaimed-water piping to pump water into
Duke’s natural gas and coal plants, before discharging it into the Gulf of
Mexico. With this system in place, Duke could receive 750,000 GPD or more of
reclaimed water from the city. City council members were happy with Duke’s
proposal.
“We’re very thankful and happy you’re able and willing to work with us and take
care of this,” Councilman Pat Fitzpatrick said.
Swartz said the natural gas plant already pumps 30,000 gallons of drawn water
into the Gulf every minute so the added 750,000 GPD, or roughly 500 gallons per
minute, will have minimal impact to the Gulf.
There are two obstacles with making this happen: funding and permitting.
“Everything we do at the site is regulated by various environmental permits,”
Swartz said. Swartz said it could take between six and 12 months before Duke’s
application for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit is
approved, designating the city’s reclaimed water as safe to be dumped into the
Gulf.
“Depending on what the permit says, we may need to do some more treatment,” he
said. “Then we can finalize the cost and figure out funding sources.”
Coal-fired Power Plant Retirements Chronicled by S&P
Duke Energy
plans to retire 862 MW of coal capacity by 2024. This includes Units 1, 2 and 3
at the 1130-MW G.G. Allen coal-fired power plant in Gaston County, NC, and the
280-MW R. Gallagher coal-fired power plant in Floyd County, IN
The utility also has revealed plans to move up the retirement of other coal
units, including Units 4 and 5 at G.G. Allen and units at its Cayuga and Gibson
coal-fired power plants in Indiana.
AEP
recently ceased operations at the last 780-MW unit at its Conesville coal-fired
power plant in Coshocton County, OH. The plant's official retirement is set for
May 31.

Michigan-based Consumers Energy Co. spokesman Brian Wheeler said this early into
the pandemic, the company's long-term planning has not changed, but the utility
does continue to monitor industry and economic trends closely. The company's
Clean Energy Plan already called for eliminating coal from its generating
portfolio on the way to achieving net-zero emissions by 2040.
"We don't share information publicly about the status of individual power
plants, but we do forecast we will continue to move over time away from coal as
an energy source, including eliminating it altogether by 2040," Wheeler said,
noting total sales were down 10 percent in April.
Consumers Energy projects 2 million tons fewer carbon emissions from its coal
plants in 2020, a dip of about 12 percent from original projections, due in part
to the economic slowdown caused by the pandemic.
NiSource Inc. subsidiary Northern Indiana Public Service Co. plans to retire all
of its coal capacity in Indiana within the next 10 years as part of the
utility's transition to cleaner energy resources.
A new Indiana law designed to pause coal plant retirements is not expected to
"materially change" this generation strategy and it appears the coronavirus
pandemic will not either.
"Regarding our future generation plans, including our announced coal
retirements, we don't see significant changes in that direction," NIPSCO
spokesman Nick Meyer said in a May 1 email.
The long-term impact of the pandemic on the service area of the Tennessee Valley
Authority is still unclear, said TVA public information officer Jim Hopson. For
now, the majority of TVA's power is being generated by nuclear, natural gas and
hydroelectric facilities, due to scheduled outages already making most of its
fossil generating units unavailable during this period.
TVA's long-term plans include the retirement of the Bull Run coal-fired power
plant in 2023. Hopson said the TVA will wait until the timing and nature of
economic recovery is better understood before making additional determinations
Dominion Energy Inc. subsidiary Dominion Energy Virginia plans to retire the
remaining units at its 1032-MW Chesterfield coal plant in 2023 as modeled in the
utility's 2020 integrated resource plan, or IRP, filed with the Virginia State
Corporation Commission.
A new Virginia law requires Dominion Energy Virginia, known legally as Virginia
Electric and Power Co., and AEP utility Appalachian Power Co. to "retire all
generating units principally fueled by oil with a rated capacity in excess of
500 [MW] and all coal-fired electric generating units operating in the
Commonwealth" by December 31, 2024. The Virginia Clean Economy Act, which takes
effect July 1, provides an exception for coal plants co-owned with a cooperative
utility and for Dominion Energy Virginia's 624-MW Virginia City Hybrid Energy
Center. Still, Dominion models the tentative retirement of the 881-MW Clover
coal plant, which it co-owns with Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, in 2025
under all four scenarios in its IRP. The company said it could not provide an
immediate comment on how the coronavirus pandemic has impacted its coal usage or
generation planning.
South Carolina state-owned utility Santee Cooper, known legally as South
Carolina Public Service Authority, still plans to retire all four units at its
1,150-MW Winyah coal plant starting with units 3 and 4 in 2023, according to
spokesperson Mollie Gore.

"This pandemic gives a lot of validity to our new power supply plan, which
replaces the Winyah coal units and addresses future energy needs by adding
renewables, storage and natural gas in smaller, modular units," Gore said in an
email. "That flexibility is critical in allowing utilities to adjust when plans
and forecasts are turned upside down, whether that is by a pandemic — or a more
positive development like rapidly changing technology."
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association Inc.,
composed of members and public power districts in Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico
and Wyoming, said it is waiting to see the full impact of the virus and sharp
drop in oil prices. Mark Stutz, a public relations specialist with Tri-State,
said the association had not changed plans to retire its Escalante generating
station in New Mexico by the end of the year or its Craig coal-fired power plant
in Colorado by 2030.
"We do know that recent events will have a downward pressure on demand in the
short term, but we are in a strong position financially and operationally to
deal with those impacts," Stutz said.
PacifiCorp spokesman David Eskelsen said they have not determined any changes
are necessary to their current action plan, which involves retiring 2800 MW of
coal-fired generation by 2030 and nearly 4500 MW by 2038 to make way for
renewable energy and battery storage capacity.
"It is too early to be certain, because much depends on how long the public
health crisis persists," Eskelsen said.
U.S. Coal Negatively Impacted by COVID
The latest downturn in coal started in the autumn of last year as the U.S. went
into an unusually mild winter, and it has been exacerbated this year by the
coronavirus pandemic. As power demand has fallen, it has been coal-fired power
plants that have borne the brunt of the reduction in output.
U.S. power generation was down 5 percent in total in April compared to the same
month of 2019. Within that, gas-fired generation was up 1 percent and renewables
up 8 percent, but coal-fired generation was down 32 percent. In many parts of
the U.S., coal-fired power plants are a more expensive technology for power
generation than gas, wind or solar, meaning that many generation companies will
look to shut them off first.
The way that utilities have begun to operate their coal-fired power plants has
also changed, according to Matt Preston, Wood Mackenzie’s research director for
North America coal markets. Previously, many utilities, particularly in the
Midwest, chose to self-dispatch their coal units even when they were not the
lowest-cost generation available, on the grounds that cycling the units’ output
up and down increased maintenance costs. Recently that has changed, and coal
plants are operating much more as the marginal units on the grid.
Global demand for all energy sources, including coal, is already starting to
recover as lockdowns are eased. But in the U.S. and Europe, at least, it looks
as though the pandemic has accelerated the decline of coal. The outlook for coal
demand now depends on policy decisions in large emerging economies, and
particularly in China.
U.S. EPA Moves to Curb Ability of States to Reject Coal and Other Energy
Infrastructure
The US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has issued a rule amending Section 401 of the Clean Water Act to limit the
ability of state governments and authorized tribes to block energy
infrastructure such as coal and gas terminals and pipelines. The change, which
was endorsed by the peak coal lobby group the National Mining Association, sets
a one-year timetable for decisions and limits consideration of projects only to
the “point source” impacts on water quality, not broader impacts. In 2017
Washington State refused a water permit for Millennium Bulk Terminals proposed
Longview coal export facility on grounds including that it would involve the
destruction of wetlands and damage to tribal fishing rights. Legal analysts have
suggested the EPA’s change is likely to be vulnerable to legal challenge.
Siemens Energy Will
Be Independent Company
“Turning Siemens’ energy business into an independent company is a key milestone
in the successful execution of our Vision 2020+ strategy program,” said Joe
Kaeser, President and CEO of Siemens AG. “The considerable increase in the value
of our health care business shows the huge potential we can tap by further
sharpening the focus of our company. This applies to both, Siemens Energy and
the ‘New Siemens AG,’ which is concentrating on our Industrial Businesses. We’ve
now reached a major milestone in the overall realignment that is preparing the
Siemens companies for the massive technological transformations that we are
anticipating.”
The planned public listing of Siemens Energy will create a strong, focused,
global company with operations spanning the entire energy value chain, including
the service business. Thanks to its unique setup, Siemens Energy can react
quickly to customer needs and thus help meet the globally rising demand for
energy while significantly reducing carbon emissions. In the future, Siemens AG
itself will concentrate on Digital Industries, Smart Infrastructure and Siemens
Mobility. Siemens Healthineers, the company’s healthcare technology business —
which has a sharp focus on diagnostic and therapeutic imaging, laboratory
diagnostics, molecular medicine and health services — has been publicly listed
as a separately managed company since March 2018.
The new Siemens Energy will have about 91,000 employees worldwide (as of March
31, 2020). Its products will include, among other things, combined cycle
turbines, generators, transformers and compressors. In the area of wind
turbines, Siemens Energy will be a world-market leader in renewable energies due
to its 67 percent stake in Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy. As of September 30,
2019, Siemens Energy’s order backlog stood at €77 billion. In fiscal 2019,
Siemens Energy generated revenue of about €29 billion according to the Combined
Financial Statements of Siemens Energy AG as of September 30, 2019, which were
prepared on a voluntary basis. If severance charges of around €0.3 billion had
been excluded, the adjusted EBITA would have been about €1.3 billion.
At its launch, Siemens Energy will be very solidly financed: the new company
will have a large amount of capital and liquidity at its disposal right from the
start. The aim is to meet the requirements for a solid investment-grade credit
rating. According to the Combined Financial Statements of Siemens Energy AG as
of March 31, 2020, which were prepared on a voluntary basis, equity totaled
about €17.3 billion (IFRS), corresponding to an equity ratio of 37.8 percent.
Siemens Energy has been provided with liquidity equivalent to about €6.2
billion. Of this amount, around €4.1 billion will be used to settle liabilities
during the period leading up to the spin-off. In addition, a bank consortium has
confirmed a revolving credit facility of €3.0 billion.
After the spin-off, Siemens Energy will be managed separately and independently.
A so-called deconsolidation agreement signed with Siemens AG ensures this
status. Under the terms of this agreement, Siemens AG has obligated itself to
refrain from exercising any direct or indirect controlling influence over the
new company. Among other things, the agreement requires that the Supervisory
Board of Siemens Energy AG include no more than three representatives of Siemens
AG. In addition, voting rights will be limited to the extent that no decisions
on certain topics—in particular, on the election of Supervisory Board
members—can be implemented unilaterally against the wishes of the other
shareholders of Siemens Energy AG.
Indian Utility Fined for Breaching Pollution Deadline
The Central Pollution Control Board
will fine the Haryana Power Generation
Cooperation Limited (HPGCL) 1.8 million rupees (US$23,780) per month for
each of its 10 coal units that continue to operate in breach of pollution
control standards first announced in December 2015. When the new standards for
sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen and mercury emissions were first announced
the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change set the compliance
deadline as December 2017. Despite the deadline being deferred after lobbying by
utilities until December 2019, HPGCL has still not met it. HPGCL said it will
appeal against the fine.
India Abandons Coal Washing as Most Plants to Miss Deadline for Scrubbers
The Ministry of Environment, Forests
and Climate Change has amended the Environment Protection Act to delete
the requirement that any coal to be supplied to a customer over 500 kilometers
away must be washed. The requirement to reduce the ash content of coal
transported long distances was introduced in 2015. One of the justifications
recently floated for the change was that new pollution control standards on
power plants would reduce the need for coal washing. However, a new study by the
Center for Science and Environment finds that almost 70 percent of the country’s
coal plants will not comply with emission standards by the end of 2022. The
compliance deadline for the new standards was first introduced in December 2015
with the initial compliance deadline set as December 2017, then extended to
December 2019 and more recently many plants won a further extension until
December 2022.
Eskom Bid to Avoid Pollution Controls on Medupi Hits Legal Hurdle
The South African Dept. of
Environmental Affairs has stated that there is a legal process that would
allow Eskom’s plan to avoid the
installation of flue gas desulfurization equipment on the six 800-MW units of
its Medupi plant. Eskom originally agreed to install the equipment, which would
cut deadly sulfur dioxide emissions, in return for a US$3.75 billion loan from
the World Bank for the plant.
Court Rules U.S. Environment Agency Must Protect States from Upwind Air
Pollution
A federal appeals court ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
violated the law when it denied a request from Maryland and Delaware to tighten
air pollution controls at power plants in upwind neighboring states.
The decision by the three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for
the D.C. Circuit could force the EPA to impose new curbs on some coal-fired
power plants, even as the administration of President Donald Trump seeks to help
the industry by slashing environmental regulations.
The EPA is reviewing the decision, said spokeswoman Enesta Jones.
Maryland and Delaware had filed their petition to the EPA in 2018 asking for
tougher pollution limits on some 36 coal-fired power plant units in Indiana,
Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
The states had argued that those power plants were in violation of the Clean Air
Act’s “good neighbor provision” for the release of nitrogen oxides into the air.
The majority of Maryland’s ozone pollution originates from upwind states.
The EPA rejected the petition, arguing that requiring upwind power plants to add
more pollution controls to protect downwind states was not cost-effective for
the plant owners.
Richard Revesz of NYU’s School of Law and director of the Institute for Policy
Integrity filed the amicus brief on behalf of Maryland and Delaware. He said the
ruling made clear the EPA is obligated to prevent states from harming the air
quality of their neighboring states when emissions travel downwind and “can’t
cite cost as a reason to ignore the law altogether.”
Convert Coal Plants to Biomass
FutureMetrics LLC on May 6 published a whitepaper discussing how converting
existing coal-fired power plants to be fueled with wood pellets offers a low
cost, easy-to-deploy way to generate low-carbon electricity.
William Strauss, President of FutureMetrics and author of the paper, noted
coal-to-biomass conversions has been the topic of previous whitepapers published
by the company. “However, given the current COVID-19 induced disruption to our
global economy and how that may impact energy policies, it’s important to
remember that there is a relatively low-cost, easy-to-deploy, and highly carbon
beneficial energy source solution for power generation,” he wrote.
The whitepaper discusses the conversion of the Drax and Lynemouth power stations
in the U.K., and their use of wood pellets sourced from renewing working
forests. The power produced at those stations is not intermittent and variable,
Strauss stressed. Rather, biomass power plants produce baseload power that is
impossible to achieve with solar or wind.
“Wood pellets produced from sustainably managed forestry operations, when used
to produce power, do not increase the net stock of CO2 in the
atmosphere,” Strauss wrote. “The basic necessary condition for an area of
managed forests is if forest growth rate equals or exceeds the harvest rate then
the net stock of carbon held in the forest is constant or growing. Thus, the CO2
released in combustion is contemporaneously absorbed by the new growth and no
net new CO2 is added to the atmosphere.”
Within the paper, Strauss describes arguments made by those who oppose the use
of wood pellets for power generation and debunks their claims. “There is no
rational logic that can show the use of materials from responsibly and
sustainably managed forests can result in a net addition of CO2 to
the atmosphere,” he said. “As climate change consequences exponentially increase
even nations like the United States will see the value in converting some
existing high-efficiency coal fueled power stations to use wood pellets.
“That strategy avoids stranding some coal power station assets,” he continued.
“And the strategy is complimentary to a rational and pragmatic transition to a
more decarbonized future by providing renewable, reliable baseload on-demand
power.”
Note that McIlvaine has written extensively of the advantages of carbon capture
and sequestration. Drax is pursuing this initiative very actively
ANDRITZ to Supply Flue Gas Desulfurization Plant to NTPC, India
ANDRITZ has received an order
in
cooperation with its partner Tata Projects Limited
to
supply the technology and critical components for wet limestone flue gas
desulfurization (FGD) to be installed in thermal power plants Talcher (6 x 500
MW) and Vallur (3 x 500 MW) operated by National Thermal Power Corp. (NTPC),
India.
The ANDRITZ scope of supply includes the plant’s complete basic engineering as
well as detailed engineering for the absorber and other critical supplies.
Limestone flue gas desulfurization systems are well-proven and cost-effective
and have been used in power stations since the 1970s to convert the main acid
gas SO2 into gypsum. They are one of the most important sources of
gypsum for the global gypsum industry (gypsum board, drywall, and so on). Over
the years, ANDRITZ has created an advanced scrubber design with outstanding
reliability and excellent availability. Plant economics have also been
optimized, ensuring low capital and operating costs.
Eskom Wants to Cancel FGD Project
Eskom Holdings Ltd., South Africa’s biggest air polluter, is seeking to have the
terms of a $3.75 billion World Bank loan changed to avoid spending money to cut
emissions from one of its largest power plants. The 2010 loan is being used to
partly fund the construction of the 4764- megawatt Medupi coal-fired power plant
east of Johannesburg. It contains a “legal covenant” that Eskom must install
flue-gas desulfurization, or FGD, equipment at the plant by 2025 to curb
emissions of sulfur dioxide, according to the World Bank.
“Any changes to FGD on Medupi would require consent with the World Bank,” the
lender said in a reply to questions. “We understand that Eskom may be
investigating alternative solutions, however the World Bank has not received a
proposal.” Sulfur dioxide pollution causes respiratory illnesses and acid rain.
Eskom argues that in addition to being expensive, the equipment would increase
water consumption, necessitate the use of large quantities of limestone and
produce additional carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. Some of the money saved
could be used to adapt some older, coal-fired plants to use other fuel, it said.
“Installing FGD at Medupi may reduce the impact on health by a small margin, but
it will result in other negative environmental impacts,” Eskom said. Switching
older plants away from coal would reduce emissions of “sulfur dioxide, nitrous
oxide, particulates and carbon dioxide emissions.” The utility would also need
permission from the government to change its plans.
Sefar Filter Bags Used in Australia, Europe and Around the World at Coal-fired
Power Plants
Sefar
produces Pura-Tex dust filter bags and tubing made from high-quality felts.
Depending on the application, they can be designed with snap rings or felt
collars, metal bands, or drawstrings. The firm manufactures bags according to
order and clients' specifications. Their vast range of available felts in
various weights and with different surface treatments combined with their local
state of the art manufacturing facilities allow them to offer their clients the
best solution for their applications. Leading in technical fabrics for around
190 years, Sefar operates weaving mills in Switzerland, Romania, and Thailand.
With Monosuisse, the Sefar Group has its yarn production with locations in
Switzerland, Poland, Romania, and Mexico.
According to the company, "With our extensive experience in the process
filtration industry and using our local test lab facilities, we have the ability
and equipment to design a system for our clients to suit their process
application needs," commented the company spokesperson. "Our local manufacturing
facilities enable us to adapt existing designs to provide clients with a
tailor-made solution and custom-made designs to suit many other applications. We
can also integrate custom-made labels, color coding, or other designs."
Pura-Tex Sefar sells the media in Australia. One of the OEMs is BWF Enviroec.
Hamon Orders Up in First Quarter 2020
€130 million of orders were received in the 1st quarter. This is a
net increase compared with the same period last year (€66.2 million).
The Deltak unit received a large order for three recovery boilers for a
cogeneration plant in Alabama. As for the environmental business activities, the
order backlog was bolstered by a refurbishing contract for a very large
electrostatic precipitator at a copper refinery in Arizona and by another
contract in Michigan for a very high-performance wet electrostatic precipitator
for a thermal and acoustic insulation materials production line.
The majority of the orders received in Asia this quarter involve cooling
systems, including an air-cooled condenser in China and cooling towers in
Indonesia, Bangladesh and Thailand for various industries (textiles,
petrochemicals, fertilizer). On the environmental side, a new wet gas scrubber
order for catalytic cracking units confirms the appeal of the Group’s technology
and its commercial potential in the highly specialized field of oil refineries.
In terms of product lines, Hamon’s leading position in the cooling tower market
was confirmed by the large number of orders received by this unit. EMEA Hamon
technology was chosen for the air-cooled condenser for the first next-generation
combined cycle power station in Italy and in Greece, for a cooling tower which
uses seawater. Hamon has developed unique expertise with this technology, which
reduces freshwater use and avoids releasing waste heat into the ocean. Hamon was
also awarded a major contract for the renovation of two large natural draft
cooling towers in France, once again reasserting its technological expertise and
leadership.
Hamon Group is continuing to monitor, on a daily basis, the effects the global
pandemic is having on its activities. There are two main potential impacts:
A risk to the Group's ability to execute the projects it has been awarded. To mitigate this risk, the Group has taken many measures to secure the most critical components of its supply chain and preserve its engineering activities within a confinement and remote working scenario. The Group is in constant contact with customers whose initial project execution schedule may be jeopardized by the pandemic in order to work on alternative scenarios while protecting the interests of the various participants;
A risk to the Group's ability to maintain the current rate of orders, in
particular for the Customer Service segment, which depends on the teams
being able to access customers’ sites.
The fact that the energy sector is considered essential by many countries allows
customers to maintain a certain level of activity at their most important
facilities, notably for maintenance and upkeep projects, an area in which Hamon
is very active. The effects of the coronavirus on the Hamon Group’s global
business are limited by the geographical diversification of its activities and,
especially, by the fact that the Group is active in countries that are at
different stages of confinement or easing. Furthermore, the Group has taken
advantage of the various support systems implemented by the governments of the
countries in which it is active to ensure the continuity of its business
activities. It isn’t possible to quantify the effects of COVID-19 on the Group’s
financial results at this stage of the pandemic given the many uncertainties
which persist about the current crisis and, in particular, its expected duration
B&W Consolidated Revenues Were $148.6 Million in the First Quarter of 2020
Babcock & Wilcox announced a 1st quarter 2020 GAAP loss from
continuing operations of $33.5 million, an improvement of $16.3 million compared
to a loss of $49.9 million in 1st quarter 2019. Adjusted EBITDA was a
positive $0.7 million, an improvement of $5.1 million compared to negative
adjusted EBITDA of $4.4 million in the prior year period, resulting in the
company's fourth consecutive quarter of profitability on an adjusted EBITDA
basis.
On May 14, 2020, the company amended its Credit Agreement, which amendment
replaces and supersedes the previously disclosed agreement to refinance the
company's senior debt by May 15, 2020, among other things. Under the terms of
the amended Credit Agreement, and as agreed between the company, its senior
lender syndicate, and B. Riley Financial, Inc., the company's current revolving
credit facility and availability for letters of credit will be extended for two
years with a maturity date of June 30, 2022.
"As we've discussed before, many of our projects are delayed or deferred due to
the global COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken by local and national
governments to control its spread, and we are not able to fully predict the
extent of this impact at this time," said Kenneth Young, B&W Enterprises Chief
Executive Officer. "We have implemented work-at-home mandates in many locations,
and where necessary have furloughed some employees. However, we are an essential
business, and are committed to supporting our customers in critical
infrastructure industries such as power generation, pulp and paper and hospital
facilities. Despite all of these challenges, our bookings in the first quarter
roughly matched those of the prior-year period, and we are seeing our pipeline
increase as many new projects are emerging, including renewable or green energy
projects.
"Despite an operating loss on a GAAP basis, we closed the first quarter of 2020
with positive adjusted EBITDA despite the combined effects of COVID-19 and our
industry's historically weak first quarter spending patterns. This is due to the
determination and experience of the management and employee team that engineered
the turnaround of our business, and their efforts to plan and implement changes
throughout our operations in response to the unprecedented impacts of COVID-19,"
said Louis Salamone, B&W Enterprises Chief Financial Officer. "With our
financing agreement in place, we continue to focus on managing our costs and
cash flow through this crisis, while continually evaluating its effects on our
business, to support our customers in the long-term. As we evaluate the impact
of COVID-19, while it is impossible to fully predict, we expect deferrals and
delays of certain projects to affect our performance in the second quarter of
2020 and anticipate the majority of deferred projects to re-mobilize in late
2020 and through 2021."
Babcock & Wilcox segment revenues were $122.0 million in the 1st
quarter of 2020 compared to $188.6 million in the prior-year period, primarily
attributable to lower volume related to the periodic nature of large
construction new build projects. Adjusted EBITDA in the 1st quarter
2020 was $10.7 million, an increase of 17.2 percent compared to $9.1 million in
last year's quarter, primarily due to higher parts margins and the results of
costs savings and restructuring initiatives partly offset by the decrease in
revenue volume; adjusted EBITDA margin was 8.7 percent in the quarter as
compared to 4.8 percent in the same period last year. Adjusted gross profit in
the Babcock & Wilcox segment in 1st quarter 2020 was $32.9 million, a
5.7 percent increase compared to $31.1 million in the prior-year period,
primarily related to the benefits of cost reductions, partially offset by the
effects of decreased volume as described above; gross profit margin was 27.0
percent, compared to 16.5 percent in the same period last year, primarily due to
higher parts margins and the benefits of costs savings and restructuring
initiatives partly offset by the decrease in revenue.
SPIG segment revenues were $11.3 million in the first quarter of 2020 compared
to $28.9 million in 1st quarter 2019, mainly due to the ongoing
wind-down of the SPIG U.S. operation, the impact of worksite COVID-19
restrictions on services volume, and more selective bidding and focus on core
geographies and products to improve profitability. Adjusted EBITDA was negative
$1.2 million, down $1.9 million compared to positive $0.7 million in the same
period last year, driven by the decrease in revenue and lower margins due to
changes in product mix described above, as well as a $0.7 million settlement on
a legacy dry cooling project expected to facilitate the collection of related
outstanding receivables, partly offset by lower overhead fixed costs. Adjusted
gross profit declined to $0.9 million in first quarter 2020, compared to $3.7
million in the prior-year period, primarily due to the decrease in revenue,
changes in product mix and legacy dry cooling project settlement described
above. At March 31, 2020, SPIG's U.S. entity had two remaining significant loss
contracts; the first was 100 percent complete at the end of the first quarter
2020 with only performance testing remaining, which is expected be completed in
the 3rd quarter of 2020; the second was 89 percent complete at the
end of the 1st quarter of 2020 and is expected to be completed in the
3rd quarter of 2020. No additional charges were recognized on these
contracts in the 1st quarter of 2020.
Vølund & Other Renewable segment revenues were $15.3 million for the first
quarter of 2020, compared to $29.5 million in first quarter 2019. First quarter
revenues were lower compared to the prior year quarter mainly due to the
divestiture of Loibl, a materials handling business in Germany, that contributed
$7.2 million of revenue in the first quarter of 2019 and a lower level of EPC
project activity due to the completion of the European EPC loss contracts,
partially offset by the startup of two operations and maintenance contracts in
the U.K. that followed turnover of the EPC loss contracts to the customers.
Adjusted EBITDA in the quarter improved to negative $3.3 million compared to
negative $8.8 million in the first quarter last year, primarily due to the
absence of losses on the European EPC loss contracts; in the first quarter of
2020, the segment recorded a gain of $0.1 million on the European EPC loss
contracts as compared to $4.1 million of losses recorded in the first quarter of
2019, inclusive of warranty expense. The improvement also reflected the benefits
of restructuring, including lower levels of direct overhead support, warranty
expense and SG&A. The segment's adjusted gross profit was positive $1.5 million
in the 1st quarter 2020, an improvement of $4.3 million compared to
negative $2.9 million reported in first quarter 2019, primarily driven by the
absence of losses on the European EPC loss contracts and lower levels of direct
overhead support and warranty expense as described above, partially offset by
the absence of adjusted gross profit from Loibl due to its sale.