
Managing coal ash and storage ponds at fossil fuel plants has been one of the biggest challenges for utilities with a prominent coal fleet across the U.S. |
The Tennessee Valley Authority executive charged with determining the best way to manage coal ash containment and disposal does not expect major changes to the utility's commitment to the issue, even if federal environmental requirements change.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is considering revising regulations for coal ash storage and the reuse of recycled ash material. But the TVA remains committed to pursuing plans to re-evaluate its coal ash management and clean up materials at storage sites across its power plants, said Joe Hoagland, vice president of enterprise relations and innovation for the federal power provider.
"We started on this path frankly right after Kingston, which was even before these regulations came along," Hoagland said in an Oct. 2 interview. "We adjusted plans to make sure we're aligning with the current rule, and if they make changes for that rule, we'll make adjustments if we need to in order to comply. But we're pretty much on the path of what we're going to do and we think that will continue."
The EPA is specifically considering changes to its Coal Combustion Residuals, or CCR, rule which was developed in the wake of the TVA's Kingston 2008 coal ash spill. Such changes include nixing a threshold that triggers an environmental review at CCR landfills, and exempting "temporary" storage of unencapsulated ash on the land from the federal rule's disposal requirements. Critics have raised concerns that the rollbacks would let electric utilities unsafely store an unlimited amount of coal ash.
U.S. utilities face economic and environmental pressure to retire their coal fleets, and the TVA is no exception, after the Kingston accident, which spilled 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash and 327 million gallons of water. In May, TVA CEO and President Jeff Lyash tapped Hoagland to work with the utility's business units and other industry players on ways to improve methods for cleaning up and storing coal ash.
During an August board meeting, Lyash described coal ash as "one of the bigger cost risks and environmental risks to TVA in the future" as the utility considers options for removing ash at retired and operating coal plants. The company on Oct. 4 published a draft environmental impact statement for coal ash at the retired Thomas H Allen coal plant that considers moving the materials to an existing offsite landfill and closing the plant's three storage ponds. The TVA already decided to not close ash impoundments in place.
Hoagland, who has worked on regulatory and technology issues related to coal ash, is assembling an independent panel of experts to advise the TVA on best practices for removing or storing residuals, such as converting ash from wet to dry and long-term monitoring of groundwater for contamination.
"All of those processes are fairly technical and require expertise in different areas," Hoagland said. "We're bringing together a panel of folks that are experts in each of those areas to help us evaluate the plans that we've put in place and the activities we intend to do and help us make sure we're not missing something and that we're doing things in a way that is the best in the industry."
At the August board meeting, the TVA approved an integrated resource plan that includes retiring the last unit at the Paradise coal plant in Muhlenberg County, Ky., and the Bull Run coal plant in Anderson County, Tenn., and contemplates the retirement of an additional 2,200 MW of coal capacity, depending on economics. The utility also plans to increase solar capacity by between 1,500 MW and 8,000 MW by 2028 and by up to 14,000 MW by 2038.
A recent report by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis estimates that the growth in solar and natural gas in the Southeast could force the retirement of numerous coal-fired plants there, as the region has seen its drop in coal generation accelerate past the national average. But despite growing pressure from environmental activists, politicians and the public for utilities to act on climate change, Hoagland said the TVA's decisions on coal and renewables are rooted in economics.
"[Our resource plan] demonstrates we'll have reduced reliance on coal over time, but that demonstration is based on economics of operation, not directly on climate change," Hoagland said. "It does show we're doing more solar, we're going to be doing those things that are definitely reducing our carbon footprint, but that's being driven by the fact that it's now economical to do things like large-scale solar and other renewables."
