Sustainable Energypubs.awma.org/gsearch/em/2009/5/May 2009 EM.pdfMay 05, 2009 · Go read both issues if you missed them! ADVERTISING Malissa Goodman 1-412-904-6012 [email protected]

emAir & Waste Management Association

THE MAGAZINE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGERS

ThinkingGreener

The Search for Sustainable Energy

Also in this issue:

PM NAAQS: Perspectives on the recent court ruling, p. 30

ACE 2009 Preview: Top Reasons to Join Us in Detroit, p. 42

MAY 2009

A&WMA'S 102ND

ANNUALCONFERENCE& EXHIBITION

JUNE 16-19, 2009DETROIT, MICHIGAN

CONFERENCE SPONSOR

Visit www.awma.org/ACE2009for more information or to register.

Join us in Detroit in June for A&WMA’s 102nd Annual

Conference & Exhibition (ACE), the environmental industry’s premier education,

networking, and solutions event!

There is no better place than ACE to hear the latest technical information

on hundreds of current environmental topics. ACE 2009 will feature our most

impressive technical program yet, with over 145 sessions, 500 speakers, and a

diverse group of keynote presenters.

Visit www.awma.org/go/ACEtechgrid to download the full technical program

grid to find out what topics are being covered at ACE 2009.

Ready to register? Visit www.awma.org/ACE2009 for more information on this

year’s conference or to register today!

2 em may 2009 awma.orgCopyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

EM, a publication of the Air & Waste Management Association (ISSN 1088-9981), is published monthly with editorial and executive offices at One Gateway Center, 3rd Floor, 420 Fort Duquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1435. ©2009 Air & Waste Management Association. All rights reserved. Materials may not be reproduced, redistributed, or translated in any form without prior written permission of the Editor. Periodicals postage paid at Pittsburgh and at an additional mailing office. Postmaster: Send address changes to EM, Air & Waste Management Association, OneGateway Center, 3rd Floor, 420 Fort Duquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1435. GST registration number: 135238921. Subscription rates are $265/year for nonprofit libraries and nonprofit institutions and $405/year for all other institutions. Additional postage charges may apply. Pleasecontact A&WMA Member Services for current rates (1-800-270-3444). Send change of address with recent address label (6 weeks advance notice) and claims for missing issues to the Membership Department. Claims for missing issues can be honored only up to three months for domes-tic addresses, six months for foreign addresses. Duplicate copies will not be sent to replace ones undelivered through failure of the member/subscriber to notify A&WMA of change of address. A&WMA assumes no responsibility for statements and opinions advanced by contributors to thispublication. Views expressed in editorials are those of the author and do not necessarily represent an official position of the Association.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development’sElectricity Utilities Sector Projectby Simeon Cheng, China Light and Power GroupPage 8

Wind Power: Status, Barriers, and Opportunitiesby John Sherwell, Maryland Department of Natural ResourcesPage 12

FEATURESCOLUMNSPM File: Documenting Project Performance . . . 34by David Elam

Competitive Strategy:Visions of SustainabilityWhat You Can Do to MakeYour Organization’s Sustain-ability Vision Unique . . . . . 36by Richard MacLean

ASSOCIATIONNEWSAnnual Conference Preview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Looking for Reasons to Join Us in Detroit for ACE 2009?Look No Further!

In Memoriam . . . . . . . . . 43Daniel R. Stearn

Members in the News . . 43Joseph A. Martone and Jeff Peltola

A&WMA Conference Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Canadian Municipal WasteManagement Conferenceby John Nicholson

The Member Minute . . . 48Roy Cross

DEPARTMENTSMessage from the President. 4EPA Research Highlights . . 38News Focus. . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Advertisers’ Index . . . . . . . . 43JA&WMA Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Professional Development Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Calendar of Events . . . . . . . 47

The Promise of Concentrating Photovoltaic Systemsby Sarah Kurtz, National Renewable Energy LaboratoryPage 18

Appellate Court Tells EPA to Think Again about Ambient Standards for Particulate MatterIntroduction by John BachmannOn February 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued rulingson the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Ambient Air QualityStandards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) that challenged some aspects ofEPA’s proposed revisions to the PM NAAQS and upheld others. EM invited three ofthe stakeholders who participated in these proceedings to provide some perspectiveson the court’s ruling and the future of PM NAAQS.Page 30

Case Study: GM’s Advanced Propulsion Technology Strategyby Meganne Arens, General Motors Corp.Page 24

The Future of Sustainable Energy Technologiesby Miriam Lev-OnFor decades, the United States has relied on the abundant availability of low-cost energy sources such as coal and oil. Today, as the U.S. economy struggles to rebuild in the midst of deep global economic uncertainty, there are opportunities to also rebuild the nation’s energy system. This issue of EM focuses on sustainable energy technologies and the outlook for their broader implementation, including a global sustainability initiative by thepower sector, the emergence of domestic wind power and innovations in solar energy technologies, and the potentialtransformation of the automobile industry through advanced technologies and alternative fuels.Page 5

NEXT MONTH:

Advanced TransportationTechnologies

Printed on Recycled Paper

ThinkingGreener


That’s right: Why not head out to the driving rangetoday to deal with the woes of the world? (OK, sothis is a metaphor, but spring is here and TigerWoods is back on the PGA tour!) The concept isnot as loony as you might think. During the strategicplanning session at A&WMA’s Board of Directorsmeeting in March, I challenged the Board to visual-ize the Association’s future at the three- to five-yearhorizon—relatively short-term for such exercises. Ialso cautioned them not to fixate on the currenteconomic fiasco, which is easier said than done.

I evoked one of my greatest golf nemeses as a tool:Imagine yourself on a tee facing 150 yards of waterbefore the fairway starts. Golf pros “ignore” thehazard and simply drive the ball over it. However,most of us hackers just can’t get that endless expanse of water out of our minds and so splashevery time.

Today’s economic crisis is also hard to ignore, andwe should not ignore it. But it may not be wise tolet it rule our every thought either. Hence, the callto think “beyond the water hazard” for our strategicplanning. We need ideas that are lasting and notjust quick fixes.

That is not to say aggressive action for the shortterm is not appropriate, but we must still envisionwhat will be happening on the other side of theabyss. Tony Buonicore and Dianne Crocker providedsome excellent food for thought on these mattersin EM’s February issue (see “How to Recession-Proof Your Business,” page 34). And an even morethorough analysis was provided in the March issue,which included a special focus on the economy.Go read both issues if you missed them!

ADVERTISINGMalissa [email protected]

EDITORIAL Andy Knopes, CAEEditorLisa BucherManaging Editor

EDITORIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEEA. Gwen Eklund, ChairTRCAnn McIver, QEP, Vice ChairCitizens Energy GroupFerdinand B. AlidoNavistar Inc.John D. BachmannVision Air ConsultingJane C. BartonPatterson ConsultantsPrakash Doraiswamy, Ph.D.State University of New York at AlbanyJennifer B. Dunn, Ph.D.URS Corp.Steven P. Frysinger, Ph.D.James Madison UniversityJohn D. KinsmanEdison Electric InstituteAshok KumarUniversity of ToledoMiriam Lev-On, Ph.D.The LEVON GroupJulian A Levy, Jr.Exponent Inc.Mingming LuUniversity of CincinnatiCharles E. McDadeUniversity of California at DavisPaul J. MillerNortheast States for Coordinated Air

Use ManagementDan L. Mueller, P.E.CDM Inc.Chris Pepper Jackson WalkerS.T. RaoU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyDaniel R. WeissDuke Energy IndianaSusan S.G. WiermanMid-Atlantic Regional Air

Management Association

PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEEJudith C. Chow, ChairDesert Research Institute

A&WMA HEADQUARTERSAdrianne Carolla, CAEExecutive Director

Air & Waste Management AssociationOne Gateway Center, 3rd Floor420 Fort Duquesne Blvd.Pittsburgh, PA 15222-14351-412-232-3444; 412-232-3450 (fax)[email protected]

Golf Is the Answerby Rick [email protected]

So, what did the Board see three years out and beyond? We attempted to look at the problem byaddressing three specific questions: What “products”will customers value most? How can those productsbest be delivered? And how can we better focuson customer service? I intentionally use the word“customers” instead of “members.” Our membersare our most important customers, but we need to serve the entire profession if we hope to be successful in the long term.

Our strategic planning work is still in progress, butthere were no real shockers. As for products, wewant to provide more customized services for arange of needs. Delivery methods promise excitingpossibilities, especially with rapidly evolving tech-nologies. We must provide technology tools fornetworking and knowledge transfer that are burstingon the scene and are especially popular amongyounger professionals. Conferences must becomemore nimble and timely. Finally, customer serviceneeds to be front and center and continually improve. Some things are obvious and relativelyeasy, like more robust Web-based services. Otherservices require a more human touch. In the end,we all have a stake and a responsibility in this vision.

So, pull that club out of the bag, gaze confidentlybeyond the water, and show us that world-classstroke. The only other option is to go wading in thewater, and I don’t think that a pair of wet feet is avery good vision for the future of our Associationand profession.

emawma.org

em • message from the president

awma.org may 2009 em 5Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association

em • feature

We are in a time of deep global economic uncertainty. For decades, here in the UnitedStates, we have come to rely on the abundant availability of low-cost energy sources suchas coal and oil. Many experts have argued that the path we have taken will be sustainableover the long run, yet current evidence suggests the opposite. Rebuilding the U.S. economyprovides a unique opportunity to rebuild the nation’s energy system to reduce our impacton the planet while increasing the use of renewable energy technologies. President BarackObama highlighted this need in his first address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress onFebruary 24, 2009.

The Future of Sustainable Energy Technologies

This issue of EM focuses on sustainable energy technologies and the outlook for their broader imple-mentation. The articles that follow consider a range oftopics, including a global initiative by the power sector toexamine technology options that will allow it to continueto supply electricity in a carbon-constrained world; theemergence of domestic wind power and innovations inconcentrated solar photovoltaic energy technologies; andthe potential transformation of the automobile industrythrough advanced vehicle power train technologies.

To provide some context for the articles, following is abrief summary of the key benefits of renewable energyand a look at how the energy market could be trans-formed, in part, due to the specific energy efficiency andrenewable energy provisions in the recently signed U.S.government economic stimulus bill.

Key Benefits of Renewable EnergyRenewable energy is a term coined to describe energygenerated from natural resources—sunlight, wind, rain,tides, and geothermal heat—that are naturally replen-ished. Key benefits include environmental, sustainableenergy, energy security, and economic and job creation.

• Environmental Benefits. Renewable energy tech-nologies are clean sources of energy that typicallyhave a much lower direct environmental impact thanconventional energy sources. Although the productionof energy from renewable sources is not associatedwith the potentially harmful emissions and discharges

that typify fossil fuel sources, their lower energy density might require the use of larger land areas forcomparable energy production. This might result inadverse impacts on sensitive ecosystems that wouldneed to be carefully managed through robust land-use planning.

• Energy for Future Generations. Energy productiontechnologies that are based on such renewable sourcesare considered “sustainable” (i.e., they cannot “run out”).Other sources of energy are finite and could some daybe depleted. Some renewable sources, such as biomassand geothermal heat, need to be carefully managed toensure their replenishment for sustainable use.

• Energy Security. The United States’ increased dependence on imported energy has not only createda financial burden on the economy, it has also impacted the nation’s national security. Such importssometimes provide a flow of cash out to unfriendlycountries and/or organizations that might be used inways that are harmful to U.S. security.

• Jobs and the Economy. Renewable energy invest-ments are spent on materials and workmanship tobuild and maintain new facilities, rather than on costlyenergy imports. Such investments have immediate effects by creating jobs and fueling local economies.At the same time, U.S. designed and built energytechnologies offer prime exports to many countriesaround the world.

“…It begins with energy.

We know the countrythat harnesses the powerof clean, renewable energy will lead the 21stcentury. And yet, it isChina that has launchedthe largest effort in history to make theireconomy energy efficient. We inventedsolar technology, butwe’ve fallen behindcountries like Germanyand Japan in producingit. New plug-in hybridsroll off our assemblylines, but they will runon batteries made inKorea…”

Excerpt from President Obama’sSpeech to Congress, February 24, 2009

ThinkingGreener


In the most recent EIA Electric Power Monthly report, released February 13, 2009, renewable sources of electricity are shown to have experienced significantgrowth from November 2007 to November 2008, whilenuclear and coal sources both experienced declines(see EIA Electric Power Monthly, February 2009;www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html).

EIA also notes that net generation from wind sources was42.4% higher in November 2008 than in November2007, with Texas, California, Minnesota, and Illinois accounting for more than 50% of the national increase. During the same period, EIA notes a combinedincrease of 6.4% in conventional hydropower, coupledwith a 10.0% increase in other renewables, includingsolar, wind, geothermal, and biomass. Table 1 presentsthe yearly trend data for net power generation from allnonhydro renewable energy sources since 2003.

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy FundingThe EIA data indicate that renewable energy sources areincreasing their share in the overall energy consumption;however, the pace continues to be slow due to a lack offocus on technological breakthroughs and funding andincentives for market transformation. The convergence ofenvironmental considerations, economic developmentneeds, and the need to conserve energy sources haveled many U.S. states to set goals of deriving 20% ormore of their energy needs from renewable energysources over the next decade.

The recently enacted government economic stimulus billseeks to jump-start a recovery strategy that envisions investments in the energy sector as a means for creatingnew industries and for attaining long-term goals forbroader use of renewable energy technologies in themarketplace. The bill appropriates $16.8 billion (allamounts in U.S. dollars) in new funds for energy efficiencyand renewable energy programs. This funding repre-sents nearly a tenfold increase for the U.S. Departmentof Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which received only $1.7 billionin 2008. Specifically, the new EERE funding includes:

• $3.2 billion for energy efficiency and conservationblock grants to states and local governments forbroadly defined programs to promote more efficientenergy use. This program was originally authorizedby provisions of the 2007 Energy Independence andSecurity Act, but was not funded.

U.S. Renewable Energy ConsumptionAccording to the U.S. Energy Information Administration(EIA), renewable energy accounted for approximately7% of total energy consumption in the United States in 2007 (see Figure 1). Notably, renewable energy consumption averaged an annual growth rate of 3%from 2003 through 2007, as compared with just 1% fortotal energy consumption. Biofuels and wind were largelyresponsible for the increase, with five-year average annualgrowth rates of 25% and 29%, respectively, according topreliminary 2007 data.

In 2007, just over half of the renewable energy con-sumption occurred in the electric power sector, followedby the industrial sector, which accounted for nearly 30%of total renewables consumption. Rounding off the consumption of renewables were the transportation, residential, and commercial sectors that accounted for9%, 8%, and 2%, respectively. Although the electricpower sector currently consumes the most renewableenergy (51%), its use dropped between 2006 and 2007.By comparison, in 2003, the electricity sector accountedfor 59% of total renewable energy consumption.

In contrast, the transportation sector increased its renewable energy consumption by 30% in 2007, andthe residential sector’s renewable energy consumptiongrew by 12%. Residential sector growth was due primarilyto the increased use of biomass, geothermal, and solar/photovoltaic energy sources. Commercial and industrialuses of renewable energy changed little between 2006and 2007 and have remained pretty constant as a fractionof the total renewable consumption since 2003.

Coal22%

Natural Gas23%

Nuclear ElectricPower8%

Petroleum40%

Total = 101.605 Quadrillion Btu Total = 6.830 Quadrillion Btu

Solar Energy 1%

Hydroelectric 36%

GeothermalEnergy 5%

Biomass 53%

Wind Energy 5%

Figure 1. U.S. energy consumption by source for 2007.

Source: Renewable Energy Consumption and Electricity—Preliminary 2007 Statistics; U.S. Energy InformationAdministration, 2008; www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/alternate/page/ renew_energy_consump/rea_prereport.html.


• $5 billion for weatherization for dwellings owned oroccupied by low-income persons. Provisions of the Energy Conservation and Production Act originally authorized this program.

• $3.1 billion for state energy programs to develop andimplement energy conservation programs. This program was originally authorized under the 2005Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

• $2 billion for grants for the manufacture of advancedbatteries and components.

• $2.5 billion to support EERE’s applied research, development, and deployment activities, including$800 million for the biomass program, $400 millionfor the geothermal technologies program, and $50 million for efforts to increase the energy efficiencyof information and communications technologies.

• $400 million to support efforts to add electric tech-nologies to vehicles.

Separate from the EERE budget, $400 million will supportthe establishment of the Advanced Research ProjectsAgency, an agency intended to support innovative energyresearch, modeled after the Defense Advanced ResearchProjects Agency.

The bill also directs DOE to analyze the nation’s electricalgrid to determine if significant potential sources of re-newable energy are locked out of the electrical marketby a lack of adequate transmission capacity. Specifically,$4.5 billion is provided to the DOE’s Office of ElectricityDelivery and Energy Reliability for activities to modernizethe nation’s electrical grid; integrate demand-responseequipment; and analyze, develop, and implement smartgrid technologies. The funds will also support research inenergy storage technologies, efforts to facilitate recovery

from energy supply disruptions and efforts to enhance thesecurity and reliability of the nation’s energy infrastructure.

SummarySustainable, renewable energy technologies are here to stay, and there is great promise in their future devel-opment and refinement. However, in contrast to the past,where countries relied on just a small number of tech-nologies and fuels to meet their energy demands, the future approach will more likely resemble that of a portfolio of different technologies and varyingapproaches in accordance with regional preferences, resource availability (e.g., wind, sun, biomass), and technological maturity.

Although the initial drive for the implementation of thesenew technologies had its nascence in environmental protection considerations, it is only when these new technologies are fully integrated into the economy and can provide the needed energy services at a competitive price that we would truly have a durableand sustainable system.

Miriam Lev-On, Ph.D.Executive DirectorThe LEVON Group, LLCThousand Oaks, CAE-mail: [email protected]

Note: Dr. Lev-On is Chair of A&WMA’s Sustainability andClimate Change Technical Coordinating Committee.

Table 1. Net power generation by renewables, 2003–2008 (in thousand Megawatts).a

Year Wind Solar Thermal Wood-Based Waste-Based Geothermal Totaland Photovoltaic Biomass Biomass

2003 11,187 534 37,529 15,812 14,424 79,487

2004 14,144 575 38,117 15,421 14,811 83,067

2005 17,811 550 38,856 15,420 14,692 87,329

2006 26,589 508 38,762 16,099 14,568 96,525

2007 34,450 612 39,014 16,525 14,637 105,238

2008b 41,199 798 34,760 15,112 13,414 105,284Notes: aSource: EIA, 2009; b2008 data through November 2008 only.


em • feature

by Simeon Cheng

Simeon Sing-Hymn Chengworks for China Light andPower Group in Kowloon,Hong Kong. E-mail:[email protected].

Electricity demand is rising globally as economies become more electrified. The electricutilities industry is currently responsible for approximately 40% of global energy-relatedcarbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Projections suggest that power sector-related emissionsmight double by 2030.1 Therefore, it is reasonable for the energy sector to be taking alead in combating climate change.

The World Business Council forSustainable Development’sElectricity Utilities Sector Project

awma.org

Industry has developed the necessary low-carbon technologies on both the demand and supply sides.However, the current market and regulatory conditionshave failed in providing enough incentives to drive thenecessary technologies forward. Industry cannot be successful in implementing these technologies withoutappropriate government-supported policies.

There is a dual purpose for policies and measures in theelectricity utilities sector. First, they should drive investmentstoward efficient end use of electricity and low-carbon/carbon-free technologies. Second, they should ensurethat other promising technologies, such as carbon captureand storage, are brought into the market place in atimely manner.

The Electricity Utilities Sector ProjectClimate change policy advocacy is one of the main activities of the World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (WBCSD). Its Electricity Utilities SectorProject brings together nine member companies—ABB,American Electric Power, China Light and Power, Électricité

de France, Eskom, GDF Suez, Kansai Electric, Statkraft,and Tokyo Electric—representing over 400,000 MW ofelectricity generating capacity (by equity share) and servingmore than 300 million customers. This group of com-panies also represents a wide electricity generation mix,including conventional fossil fuels, renewable fuels suchas large hydro, nuclear power, and advanced coal.

The project was initiated in January 2000, bringing together the member companies to develop a deeperand more concrete understanding of the sustainabilitychallenges facing the electricity sector, examine potentialbusiness contributions, and explore policy needs.

Stakeholder EngagementStakeholder engagement is a key part of the project. Thefirst major international roundtable meeting was held in2007 in Bali, Indonesia, during the 2007 United NationsClimate Change Conference (UNCCC), December 3–15. Building on the interim report released in Bali,Powering a Sustainable Future: Policies and Measures toMake It Happen,2 three stakeholder dialogs were held


The WBCSD report, Power toChange: A BusinessContribution to a Low-Carbon Economy, was released at the 2008 UNCCC in Poland.

internationally in 2008 in Beijing (China), Johannesburg(South Africa), and Tokyo (Japan). These meetingsbrought together business, government, and represen-tatives from civil society to share their views on policythinking. All the stakeholder input solicited was fed backinto the final report, which lends the report a lot of credibility. The final report, Power to Change: A BusinessContribution to a Low-Carbon Economy,3 was released atthe following UN climate conference, the 2008 UNCCCin Pozna, Poland, December 1–12.

Sectoral ApproachA key concept described in WBCSD’s final report is asectoral approach for the electricity sector.

The electric utilities industry is very different from othersectors currently working on sectoral approaches. It ishighly fragmented on a global scale. For example, the 10 largest power companies represent less than 10% ofthe global electricity output. In addition, national aspira-tions and international obligations are largely translatedinto national energy policies that are closely tied to energy security issues. Finally, the spectrum of powergeneration technologies in the sector is wide in terms ofdirect emissions. Therefore, the electricity sector needs toestablish benchmarks by technology.

In its report, the project concludes that national aspirationsand international obligations should be translated to national energy policies that support appropriate tech-nologies in a local context. No one policy can deploy allof the technologies required, and there is no single suiteof measures that could achieve least cost “decarbonisa-tion” across all nations. Agreements on significant emission reduction targets should be established at theinternational level, as well as the promotion of low-carbontechnology transfer as relevant to each country’s shared/differentiated responsibilities and capabilities. Thereshould be international funding to help transfer tech-nologies and to pay the incremental costs of low-carbonenergy in developing countries.

Energy OptionsPrinceton University Professors Pacala and Socolowgained wide recognition for their introduction of the concept of climate stabilization wedges.4 They describeda stabilization wedge as an activity that begins now, andover the next 50 years, grows large enough to avoid 1 billion tons of carbon emissions, relative to a business-as-usual scenario. Most proposed wedges deal with decarbonizing the electricity utilities sector. For each of

these, the project asked: what is the savings potential?;what is the status of the technology?; why isn’t thiswedge growing on its own?; and what does it take tobring them into the market place? The project’s final report contains an insert, which provides a description ofeach wedge, its potential in terms of carbon emissionsreduction, the technology status, and the type of policymeasures required to drive this wedge forward.

The project also looked at the development status oftechnologies. Some technologies are already present,such as hydropower, solar water heating, and energy efficiency end-use technologies. Others such as heatpump technologies are in their early stages of deployment,while some are not close to being ready, such as hotrocks and solar grid power generation. Wind power isfairly mature and has been commercial for some time,although is not yet fully competitive. The key technologiesto the power sector still lagging behind are carbon capture and storage and generation IV nuclear power(i.e., generation IV fast breeder nuclear reactors have thepotential to extend the lifetime of uranium resources bya factor of 50 through the more efficient use of the fuel).

Carbon Capture and StorageCarbon capture and storage (CCS) has a potential savingsof 5 billion tons of carbon per year, making it a majorcontributor to carbon emissions reduction. But CCSfaces major challenges, such as high incremental costs,high technological risks, and the absence of a nationalregulatory framework for CO2 storage. Currently, in mostplaces around the world, there is no law governing whetherone can put captured CO2 into the ground, who ownsit once it is in the ground, and who is responsible for it inthe years to come. International policy mechanismswould be necessary to get projects going in developingcountries such as China and India. A key issue is that thegovernment has to be liable for the long-term storageof CO2.

Australia is among the first nations to move the regulatoryframework forward. In November 2008, it passed legis-lation to establish the world’s first framework for CO2

capture and geological storage. The legislation estab-lishes access and property rights for injection and storageof CO2 into a stable subsurface geological reservoir incommonwealth waters more than three nautical milesoffshore and provides appropriate consultation and multiple use rights with other marine users, including thefishing and petroleum industries. It also ensures pre-existing property and use rights are preserved. This is a


Figure 1. Extract from WBCSD’s Power to Change report, illustrating the maturity of different technologies and their GHG savings potential.


very clear example of how a national government is taking charge on carbon storage.

Policies to Drive TechnologyThe policies that are needed to drive technology areunique to the type and level of development of that tech-nology. If the technology is mature and competitive (orclose to being competitive), the objective of the policywould be to encourage deployment. If the technology ismature but not competitive, but would be competitivewith a carbon price, then policy measures, such as a carbontax or carbon cap-and-trade program that sends a clearsignal on the price of carbon, would work. If the tech-nology is promising but far from being mature, or farfrom being competitive even at a significant cost of carbon,then government investment in research, development,and subsidies to get the initial plants into operationwould be needed. Figure 1 is an extract from WBCSD’sPower to Change report that illustrates the maturity ofdifferent technologies and their CO2 savings potential.

ConclusionsAs businesses in the electricity sector, the companies involved in the WBCSD’s Electricity Utilities Sector Projecturgently call for international agreements on significantreductions. The project has outlined the types of policiesand measures that can be successful in promoting thedeployment of low-carbon technologies at the scaleneeded to contribute to a global reduction of emissionsfrom the sector. The project has also emphasized the critical need for focus, acceleration of key technology developments and international technology transfer, anddirect assistance to help pay the incremental costs of low-carbon energy in developing countries.

No one can defeat the threat of climate change alone.That is why companies like the ones in the project areentering the global policy arena to put forward the kindof policies that will be useful around the world and international mechanisms that will help to propel theselow-carbon technologies forward. em

References1. World Energy Outlook 2006; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, France, 2006; www.iea.org.2. Powering a Sustainable Future: Policies and Measures to Make It Happen; World Business Council for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007;

www.wbcsd.org.3. Power to Change: A Business Contribution to a Low-Carbon Economy; World Business Council for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008;

www.wbcsd.org.4. Pacala, S.P.; Socolow, R.S. Stabilisation Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies; Science 2004, 305, 968-972.


em • feature

by John Sherwell

John Sherwell is with thePower Plant Research Programat the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. E-mail: [email protected]. The energy innate in wind has been harnessed by mankind at least since recorded history.

The current renaissance in the use of wind power has been focused on electricity generation.Wind is a renewable energy resource that is globally distributed. Of particular interest isthat there are no air emissions, especially greenhouse gases, nor necessary water use associated with wind power utilization. The fact that wind is an abundant and clean energyresource has led to the current large and expanding market for wind generation.

Wind PowerStatus, Barriers, and Opportunities

awma.org may 2009 em 13Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Associationawma.org may 2009 em 13

In the wake of the oil crisis in the early 1970s, govern-ments around the world were anxious to diversify energysupply away from fossil sources, and so harnessing thewind was seen as an important component of this policyinitiative. A decade of research saw a Danish designemerge as the industry standard: the three-bladed, horizontal axis, upwind machine.

A modern wind turbine comprises a tubular tower ofrolled steel. Atop the tower is a nacelle that contains thegenerator and usually a gearbox that receives the relativelyslow rotor shaft rotation and increases it for efficient gener-ator operation. Note that direct drive options are becomingavailable. The rotor itself is commonly three-bladed witheach blade having pitch control to maximize power har-vesting at a particular wind speed. The rotor and nacelleassembly rotate on the top of the tower and are activelysteered to face into the wind.

Over time, research and development has refined andimproved these machines. In 1926, Albert Betz showedthat an ideal turbine rotor can extract a maximum of 59% (16/27) of the power in wind.1 Modern rotor designs are approaching this Betz Limit with extractionefficiencies in excess of 50%.

Wind Turbine SitingWhile Betz efficiency is a function of rotor aerodynamics,placing the turbine in an optimum wind setting is cruciallyimportant for the efficient use of the wind resource.Physics shows that the power in the wind is a function of

the wind speed cubed (i.e., Power ∝ (wind speed)3).2 Thisstrong relationship makes it especially important for windproject sites to be carefully selected and that turbines areplaced in the windiest locations on a site. A developerseeking financing for a project will typically need severalyears of hub-height wind data that show a sufficient windresource.

In addition to wind speed data, information on terrain-induced turbulence should be assessed. Excessive turbulence adversely affects turbine performance andcan increase maintenance costs. This component of turbulence is generally assessed from the wind velocityprofile with height. It is well known that wind speed increases with height—approximately logarithmically ina stable atmosphere—hence, taller towers will access better wind regimes. Further, the influence of terrain-induced turbulence decreases with height.

The second important relationship for turbines is that thepower extracted is proportional to the area swept by the rotor (i.e., Power ∝ (rotor diameter)2). The two relationships—that power output varies with the cube ofthe wind speed and the square of the rotor diameter hasresulted in steady increase in the tower height and rotordiameter of commercially available turbines. Currentmodel turbines for land-based applications are reachingthe size and weight limits for components to be transportedby road, but tower heights of approximately 100 m,rotor blade lengths of 50 m, and nameplate capacities of2.5 MW are becoming standard. For offshore installations


where barge transportation allows much larger componentsto be moved, turbines with nameplate capacities around10 MW will soon become commercially available.

The importance of siting turbines in the windiest locations has resulted in the creation of a “wind prospect-ing” business. Figure 1 shows the wind resource map forthe United States and, while substantial, it is not evenlydistributed across the country.3 There is a substantial offshore resource on the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts andin the Great Lakes, and a lesser resource in the Gulf ofMexico. Onshore locations are generally terrain-driven.For example, large areas in the Great Plains receivedown-slope flow in the lee of the Rockies. Good resourceareas are along the ridge-tops of the Appalachians,and many niche locations occur where the terrain enhances airflow.

A commercial wind-generating facility will comprise a col-lection of turbines feeding to a central substation that willprovide the connection to the electricity grid. A collectionof turbines operating in close proximity create additionalfluid dynamic complexities: a linear string of turbineswould ideally be set perpendicular to the predominantwind direction and, if space permits, additional parallelstrings will be added further downwind. Turbulence willaffect the performance of both adjacent and downwindturbines. While careful modeling and measurements areused in the detailed design of a turbine array, as a generalrule of thumb, adjacent crosswind turbines should be separated by 3 rotor diameters and downwind turbinesshould be separated by 10 rotor diameters.

A consequence of the drive to ever-bigger turbines and the need to spread these out sufficiently to reduce

Figure 1. U.S. wind resource map.


turbulence losses is that the geographic footprint of awind-powered generating facility tends to be large. Inaddition, there is an economy of scale when constructinga facility that encourages the development of a site thatcan accommodate the largest number of turbines. Onflat land, arrays may occupy up to 60 acres/MW, thoughthe area actually needed for access roads, turbine pads,and so forth, is only about one-tenth of this area. Forridge-top projects, the area/MW needed is less, but thefraction of the site disturbed increases.

Environmental and Socioeconomic ImpactsThe large landscape presence, often in rural “Greenfield”sites, has led to environmental and socioeconomic conflicts over turbine siting. Bird fatalities were an earlyconcern due, in large part, to the huge numbers of raptors killed at the Altamont Wind Project in California.There are now data to suggest that preconstruction monitoring for diurnal raptors can be a predictor of post-construction fatality, and hence, it is possible to avoidsites that are particularly important for raptor use andmigration.4

In the eastern United States, most bird fatalities involvepasserines, usually neotropical migrants that are mostoften killed at night in large episodic events usually associated with bad weather. For neotropical migrants,research has shown that nighttime station lighting candisorient birds, leading to fatality events. Minimizing station lighting—keeping substations routinely dark andhaving the fewest allowed number of aviation safetylights, having these as strobes and operating them onthe longest possible off cycle—has been shown to beprotective of birds.

An unexpected and concerning issue has arisen at windprojects mainly in the eastern United States: high bat fatalities. The fist systematic report was made in 2003during post-construction bird fatality studies at a WestVirginia wind power facility and occurred during the fallbat migration period. Bat fatalities have been observednationwide, but larger numbers have been seen at projects from the Canadian prairies to the Tennesseemountains and Oklahoma. Numbers being killed aresufficiently large to concern biologists over the long-termviability of bat populations.

This is an area of active research in the wind industry.One approach that is currently being tested at a Penn-sylvania facility is to reduce or stop the rotation of the

blades during periods of low wind speed when bat activity is highest. This is a promising solution, as the costto operators is small since there is little output at lowwind speed (i.e., turbines typically begin to generate atspeeds above 4 m/sec) and bat activity is suppressed atthe higher wind speeds when turbines begin approachingtheir rated output capacity. Other mitigation solutionsare also being studied, including deterrent devices.

The large footprint on the landscape also creates terres-trial environmental concerns: habitat fragmentation is aproblem in the shrub areas in the West and the forestedridges in the East. In the East, the ridge tops tend to behome to many rare species that are often vestigial populations left from the retreat of the glaciers after the last ice age. Protecting these habitats has created conflicts with wind project developers seeking the excellent wind resource on these same ridges. The National Academy of Sciences, at the behest of Congress,undertook a study several years ago of the impacts ofwind power development in the mid-Atlantic region.5

Socioeconomic impacts vary from nuisance impacts fornearby neighbors (e.g., noise, shadow flicker, TV, andradio interruption) to visibility impacts, perceived lossesof home values and property development opportunities,and losses of traditional tourism activity. To date, economic studies using hedonic modeling approacheshave not shown adverse effects on property values,though data sets are small. Nuisance impacts and public safety can be managed though appropriate zoning or regulation to ensure adequate setbacks fromproperty lines and dwellings.

Wind Project PermittingPermitting wind projects varies by state and is typicallymanaged either by local jurisdictions or the state, unlessthe project is located in federal waters, in which case, theMineral Management Service is the lead agency. An example of permitting in Maryland has been presentedpreviously.6 Many states have wind siting guidelines, andthe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has established an advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Com-mittee Act (FACA) to develop nationwide guidelines. TheFACA process is ongoing at this time, but review draftsare available for public comment.7 Final recommenda-tions are expected in 2009.

Commercial Power GenerationThe installed capacity of wind generation has seen

A decade of research saw aDanish designemerge as the industry standard:the three-bladed,horizontal axis, upwind machine.


tremendous growth in recent years. More than 8000MW of wind came on-line in the United States in 2008,representing approximately 40% of all new generatingcapacity. Overall, approximately 25 GW of wind is on-line in the United States. The development of this resource is encouraged at the federal level through taxcredits, in particular, the Production Tax Credit (PTC) thatwas introduced as part of the 1992 Energy Policy Act.8

PTC has been pivotal in the development of the windpower industry. However, PTC has only been authorizedfor short periods and has been allowed to lapse on occasions. This has resulted in “boom-and-bust” cyclesin the industry and still hampers project planning.

At the state level, wind is encouraged through RenewablePortfolio Standard (RPS) requirements imposed on electricity suppliers. RPS requires entities that provideelectric service to document that a minimum amount ofits electricity generation is derived from eligible renewableenergy sources. Currently, 29 states have RPS policies.RPS helps stimulate the demand for renewable energygeneration, and PTC helps provide the financial stimulusfor wind energy projects.

The intermittent nature of wind generation remains aperceptual problem for the wide acceptance of windpower. Grid operators seek two products from generators:energy as kilowatt-hours and capacity as the ability for agenerator to supply power if needed. Both of these attributes contribute to the revenues of a generating facility. Currently, renewable energy resources still contribute only a small percentage of the total powerflowing over the grid, but there have been many studiesassessing grid impacts showing that wind can be incor-porated into the grid, though higher levels of reserveand load following will be needed.

Wind forecasting is seen as an important way of improving the energy and capacity capabilities of wind

and is an active area of research. Improvements arebeing made, particularly for hour-ahead predictions.Regional forecasting is generally better than site-specificpredictions. As a result, very large wind facilities or regionalagreements among facilities may be another approachto improving participation in the energy and capacitymarkets.

The opportunity for large-scale facilities in the UnitedStates is found either offshore or in the Great Plains region. Technology for offshore generation is not as welldeveloped as onshore generation. This is especially trueoff the West Coast, where the ocean rapidly becomestoo deep for current construction techniques. Yet, manyof the load centers are located near the coastline, thuspotentially reducing power delivery problems. Conversely,projects in the Great Plains and West are far from loadcenters, and so will need significant transmission supportto bring the power to market. Currently, development isfocusing on the Great Plains region, but offshore projectsare being planned for the East Coast and the GreatLakes. Transmission is a pivotal concern for the wind industry, since the best wind resources in the UnitedStates are typically located in regions with undersizedtransmission lines.

ConclusionsIn 2007, all renewable energy resources combined contributed less than 8.5% energy consumed in theUnited States, with wind contributing approximately0.8%. The importance of wind in future renewable energy policy is reflected in a recent U.S. Department of Energy report, 20% Wind Energy by 2030.9 This report outlines an ambitious program for substantiallyincreasing the role of wind in energy supply and goesthough a step-by-step process of achieving this goal.The future of wind is bright, but much work remains tobe done. em

References1. Betz, A. Windenergie und Ihre Ausnutzung durch Windmullen; Vandenhoek and Ruprecht: Gottingen, Germany, 1926.2. See Manwell, J.F.; McGowan, J.G.; Rogers, A.L. Wind Energy Explained: Theory, Design and Application; John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester, England, 2002.3. See Wind Resource Assessment; National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO; www.nrel.gov/wind/resource_assessment.html (accessed March 20, 2009).4. Strickland, D.; Johnson, D. Overview of What We Know About Avian/Wind Interaction; National Wind Coordinating Committee Wildlife Working Group, San

Antonio, Texas, 2006.5. National Academy of Sciences. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2007.6. Sherwell, J. Windpower in Maryland: Opportunities and Challenges. Presented at A&WMA’s 98th Annual Conference & Exhibition, Minneapolis, MN, June 2005.7. See Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee Recommendations; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, March 13, 2009; www.fws.gov/

habitatconservation/windpower/Second_Release_Draft_One_Text_FAC_Briefing_3_13_09.pdf (accessed March 19, 2009).8. See Renewable Energy Policy: Tax Credit, Budget, and Regulatory Issues; RL33588; Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, Washington, DC, 2006;

www.house.gov/delahunt/RL33588.pdf (accessed March 30, 2009).9. 20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy’s Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply; U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 2008; www1.eere.energy.gov/

windandhydro/wind_2030.html (accessed March 30, 2009).

A developer seeking financingfor a project willtypically need several years ofhub-height winddata that show asufficient wind resource.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Joint Conference: International Thermal TreatmentTechnologies & Hazardous Waste CombustorsThe Joint Conference: International Thermal Treatment Technologies (IT3) & Hazardous Waste Combustors(HWC) will provide a forum for the exchange of state-of-the-art technical information on thermal treatmenttechnologies and issues related to combustion of hazardous waste. Practical applications of technical andscientific advances will be presented by experts from the international community involved with thermaltreatment technologies for the management of wastes that include: hazardous, radioactive, mixed, munitions,medical/pharmaceutical, and municipal. This conference will have a particular focus on hazardous wastemanagement, including HWC MACT status and policy updates, emission studies, testing and monitoringapproaches, and risk assessment updates.

Latest Developments in the Identification and Managementof Indoor Air Quality IssuesIndoor air quality is one of the major environmental problems facing society today. Join A&WMA and industryexperts to take a closer look at several of the critical issues surrounding indoor air quality, including: drivers forindoor air quality management; health impacts; green building; building durability problems; the relationshipbetween indoor and outdoor air quality; and new technologies and approaches to remediation. Practitioners inthe indoor air quality field working in government, industry, consulting, and research will not want to miss thechance to discuss how these issues are interconnected and to discover innovative solutions.

Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment and Reporting ProcessesThe reporting of accurate and consistent data is key to determining the success of climate action plans andmitigation measures. Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment and Reporting Processes will provide aforum to discuss advances in greenhouse gas emission estimation methods, emission inventories, andreporting. Industry experts will examine the convergence of mandatory and voluntary reporting initiatives,and emerging technical and policy issues.

Air Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky MountainsAir Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky Mountains will explore the potential impacts of oiland gas exploration and production activities on air quality in the Rocky Mountain region. Environmentalprofessionals working in the oil and gas industries, government, consulting, and academia will not want to missthis opportunity to join industry experts to discuss observations on air quality changes and air monitoring studiesin the Front Range region; positions and concerns about oil and gas; state regulatory programs and plans;industry concerns and actions to address air quality issues; and pollutant specific air quality issues.

Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of ModelsGuideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models will provide a technical forum for environmentalprofessionals to discuss proposed revisions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Guideline on AirQuality Models, the guideline that is required for use in the preparation of state implementation plans, federalconstruction permits, and state permits. Source owners, regulatory agencies, and consultants won’t want tomiss this international symposium to discuss the technical and regulatory issues associated with theseproposed changes.

VISITWWW.AWMA.ORG/EVENTS FOR MORE INFORMATION

May 18-22, 2009Cincinnati, OH

May 20-22, 2009Montreal, Quebec, Canada

August 31-Sept. 2, 2009Baltimore, MD

September 15-16, 2009Centennial, CO

October 26-30, 2009Raleigh, NC

EXHIBITSPACE

AVAILABLE


em • feature

by Sarah Kurtz

Sarah Kurtz is a principal scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory,Golden, CO, and has studiedphotovoltaic materials and devices for more than 30 years.E-mail: [email protected].

The Promiseof Concentrating Photovoltaic Systems

Many companies are thinning silicon wafers to reducecosts incrementally, while others use thin-film coatingson low-cost substrates. The most common thin-film solarpanels are made from amorphous/microcrystalline silicon,cadmium telluride, or copper indium gallium diselenidethat is grown on glass or other substrates.

Concentrating PV (CPV) systems follow a complementaryapproach that uses concentrating optics to focus the lightonto small cells using low or high concentration. Low-concentration optics typically use silicon or other low-costcells, whereas high-concentration optics use more ex-pensive, higher-efficiency cells. CPV products are mostcommonly designed for large-scale applications.

High-Concentration ApproachesConcentrator cells have recently been reaching increas-ingly impressive efficiencies, stimulating new interest inhigh-efficiency, high-concentration approaches. A solarcell’s efficiency is the percentage of light hitting the cellthat gets converted to electricity. The current record efficiency for all solar cells is 41.1% for a multijunctiondevice; the cell has three layers of high-efficiency semi-conductor material that are grown monolithically. In thisrecord cell, sunlight is concentrated by a factor of 454and then focused onto the cell.1 A summary of recordcell efficiencies is shown in Figure 1.

Today’s photovoltaic industry is growing at a rapid rate, but the industry would grow evenfaster if costs could be reduced for both the final products and the capital investment required for scaling up manufacturing. One strategy for reducing the cost of the basic unitof a photovoltaic (PV) system—the PV module—is to reduce the amount of semiconductor

material needed. The cost of silicon solar cells in a standard PV module can accountfor more than one-half of the module cost. The word “photovoltaic” refers

to the process of converting radiant energy, especially light, directlyinto electricity using specially designed cells made of semiconducting materials.

SolFocus CPV systems use reflective, nonimaging optics tofocus sunlight at 500 suns on high-efficiency solar cells.


Multijunction concentrator cells have achieved muchhigher efficiencies than any other approach and have thepotential to reach 50% in the coming years. This is notsurprising for two reasons: (1) the highest theoretical efficiencies may be achieved if multiple semiconductormaterials (with a range of band gaps) are chosen tomatch the spectral distribution of the sun; and (2) thecompound semiconductors used in these cells are direct-gap materials that can be grown with near-perfect quality.The multijunction approach has been described exten-sively in the literature.2-11

When compared with solar thermal approaches, CPVsystems provide a qualitatively different approach, typi-cally with lower water usage, greater flexibility in size ofinstallation, and the ability to respond more quickly whenthe sun returns on a cloudy day. CPV systems commonlyuse a tracking apparatus, which enables the system tofollow the sun’s direct rays. For two systems with thesame power rating, for example, the tracked CPV systemimplies relatively higher electricity production comparedwith a basic fixed flat-plate system. However, solar thermalsystems can be designed to include some storage, so asto be able to generate electricity after the sun goes down,and flat-plate systems use diffuse (or scattered) lightmore effectively than CPV systems. Just as there aremany battery technologies for different applications, we expect that there will be many successful solar technologies. CPV systems are likely to be a winningtechnology in sunny locations, especially when water useis an issue.

A decade ago, there was little commercial interest in CPV

systems for several reasons: (1) the PV market was dominated by building-integrated or rooftop applica-tions, whereas most CPV products are better suited to solar farms; (2) the record-efficiency concentrator cell was only approximately 30% efficient, compared

Figure 1. Historic summary ofchampion cell efficiencies for various PV technologies.

The highest efficiencies havebeen achieved for multijunctionsolar cells, increasing at a rate of almost 1% per year in recentyears. Multijunction cell efficiencieshave the potential to approach50% in the coming years.


systems are unlikely to achieve low costs when manufac-tured at less than tens of megawatts per year.

The growth of the PV market, and especially growth ofthe market segment that uses trackers, is an importantcontributor to the increased interest in CPV products.The potential for CPV industry growth has been widelydiscussed in recent years.4-6 Some cost analyses havepredicted that using high-efficiency concentrator cellscan lead to very low costs for solar electricity.5,6 Thesestudies imply that there is potential for cost-effective implementation of high-concentration systems even inless sunny locations.6

An additional potential advantage of the CPV approach

with approximately 40% today; and (3) the total size of the industry was about one-tenth of what it is today, making near-term, high-volume CPV system deployment unlikely.

In the past 10 years, however, the shipments by the solarindustry have doubled every two years, and the CPV industry has begun to grow rapidly. Cumulative investmentin CPV systems is now on the order of US$1 billion. Solarfields, which often use tracked systems, are becomingmore common, providing a potentially huge market forCPV products. With the overall PV market growing in thegigawatt range, CPV products have an opportunity toenter the market with production of tens or hundreds ofmegawatts per year. This is significant because CPV

SolFocus 1100 CPV panels mounted on the company’s dual-axis tracking apparatus.

A grouping of Amonix CPV panels mounted on trackers.


is the reduced need for capital investment. The growthof the silicon PV industry has been challenged by theneed for capital investment, especially in silicon-purificationfacilities. By reducing the amount of semiconductor material, the amount of capital investment needed is alsoreduced. Although no CPV company has demonstratedit to date, the relative ease of scale-up of CPV manufac-turing is logical, and could be a significant advantage ina rapidly growing market. This is especially pertinentwhen there is uncertainty about the future growth of theindustry, because investors would prefer to make smallerinvestments to achieve the same results.

Current Status of CPV Industry2008 was a very important year for the CPV industrybecause it marked the first time that multiple companiessurpassed 1 MW of installations. The status of the industryis nicely summarized by PHOTON International,12 whichestimates that 6.5 MW of high-concentration, multijunctionPV systems were installed in 2008. A recent report13 listsmore than three dozen companies that are currentlydeveloping CPV products. Although many of these companies are just getting started, others have had prototypes deployed and operating for multiple yearsand are now ramping up production. Several companiesclaim to have more than 10 MW/yr of manufacturing ca-pacity. If the world economic situation does not limit thecompanies’ ability to negotiate contracts, CPV installationrates could increase dramatically in 2009. PHOTON International estimates that 50 MW of high- and low-concentration PV systems may be installed in 2009. Evena much smaller number would imply significant growth.

Low-Concentration ApproachesThe silicon PV industry has also grown dramatically inrecent years. The industry is working diligently to cutcosts for every step of the manufacturing and installa-tion processes. Significant effort has focused on thinningthe silicon wafers with the goal of reducing the usage of silicon material. A complementary approach is to reducethe area of silicon needed by using optics to redirect thelight toward smaller cells. This approach can also be applied to thin-film PV, such as copper indium gallium diselenide or cadmium telluride. The primary cost advan-tage is achieved with even a small concentration of light.A concentration ratio of 2–4 reduces the amount ofsemiconductor material to approximately 25%–50% ofthe original cost.

The design of low-concentration systems can incorporatecomponents from both flat-plate and high-concentration

PV systems. For instance, some high-performance, flat-plate PV modules or cells can be incorporated directlyinto low-concentration designs without losing significantperformance. Similarly, the tracking systems from eitherthe high-concentration PV or from flat-plate PV systemsmay be used in low-concentration systems. The advantageof reduced semiconductor use in a concentrator systemmust be balanced with the loss of solar resource thatcomes from a reduced use of diffuse light.

A few years ago, most systems were deployed onrooftops in a fixed configuration, but, recently, the numberof systems deployed on trackers has increased. If atracker is cost effective for flat-plate modules, chancesare that it can also be cost effective for concentratormodules. Thus, the increased use of trackers for flat-plateapplications may be paving the way for CPV systems.

Currently, in terms of the number of companies andtotal investment, the development of low-concentrationsystems is lagging behind that of high-concentration systems. However, the number of companies workingon low-concentration designs has increased significantlyin recent years.12,13 The range of approaches extends

2008 was a veryimportant year forthe CPV industry...it marked the firsttime that multiplecompanies surpassed 1 MWof installations.


from conventional silicon modules with mirrors on eitherside and linear Fresnel systems (which are based on athin, light lens) to designs that can function much likeflat-plate, including holographic and luminescent con-centrators. Although in the early developmental stages,many of these companies are making good progress andare receiving substantial public recognition.

SummaryThe use of highly concentrated sunlight on very small,but highly efficient solar cells has the potential to providecost-effective, large-scale, solar-electricity generation, especially in sunny locations. More than a dozen com-panies have learned to fabricate multijunction concen-trator cells, positioning themselves to respond to the

growing demand for these cells. About three dozencompanies are developing high-concentration PV systems,and several have already deployed more than 1 MW inthe field.

Similarly, around two dozen companies are publicly developing low-concentration products that use siliconcells. The reduced need for silicon could allow thesecompanies to grow at a rate that significantly exceedsthat of the rest of the industry. Installations in 2008 surpassed 1 MW and could easily climb to tens ofmegawatts per year in the near future. Both high- andlow- concentration approaches may be poised for rapidgrowth in coming years. em

References1. See www.ise.fraunhofer.de/press-and-media/press-releases/press-releases-2009/world-record-41.1-efficiency-reached-for-multi-junction-solar-cells-at-fraunhofer-ise.2. King, R.R.; Law, D.C.; Edmondson, K.M.; Fetzer, C.M.; Kinsey, G.S.; Yoon, H.; Sherif, R.A.; Karam, N.H. 40% Efficient Metamorphic GaInP/GaInAs/Ge Multijunction

Solar Cells; Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 90, 183516.3. Olson, J.M.; Friedman, D.J.; Kurtz, S. High-Efficiency Multijunction Solar Cells. In Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering; A. Luque; S. Hegedus; eds.;

John Wiley and Sons: West Sussex, England, 2003; p. 359-412.4. Bosi, M.; Pelosi, C. The Potential of III-V Semiconductors as Terrestrial Photovoltaic Devices; Progress in Photovoltaics 2007, 15, 51-68.5. Luque, A.; Sala, G.; Luque-Heredia, I. Photovoltaic Concentration at the Onset of its Commercial Deployment; Progress in Photovoltaics 2006, 14, 413-428.6. Swanson, R.M. The Promise of Concentrators; Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 2000, 8, 93-111.7. Hering, G. X Marks the Spot; PHOTON International 2007, April, 123.8. Baur, C. Triple-Junction III-V-Based Concentrator Solar Cells: Perspectives and Challenges; Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 2007, 129, 258-265.9. Hering, G. Vertically Integrated at 520 suns; PHOTON International 2008, March, 86-87.10. Concentrator Photovoltaics; A. Luque; V. Andreev; eds.; Springer Series, 2007.11. Geisz, J.F.; Kurtz, S.R.; Wanlass, M.W.; Ward, J.S.; Duda, A.; Friedman, D.J.; Olson, J.M.; McMahon, W.E.; Moriarty, T.; Kiehl, J. High-Efficiency GaInP/GaAs/

InGaAs Triple-Junction Solar Cells Grown Inverted with a Metamorphic Bottom Junction; Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 91, 023502.12. Hering, G. Dawn of 500 Suns; PHOTON International 2008, 146.13. Kurtz, S. Opportunities and Challenges for Development of a Mature Concentrating Photovoltaic Power Industry; National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden,

CO, 2009; www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/43208.pdf.

The increased use of trackers for flat-plate applications maybe paving the wayfor CPV systems.

A&WMABuyers GuideTap into the incredible network of the Air & Waste Management Association with the A&WMA Buyers Guide. Powered by MultiView, the Guide is the premier search tool for environmental professionals. Find the suppliers you need, within the network of the association you trust.

Start your search today at awma.org.


em • feature

by Meganne Arens

Meganne J. Arens, APR, for GM Environment & Energy Communications, General Motors Corp., Detroit, MI.

The automotive industry is in a very turbulent period. However, what is certain is that today more than one-third of the world’s energy needs are met with petroleum andthat the automobile is 96% dependent on fossil fuels. Supply and availability, fuel prices,sustainable growth, climate change, and even national security all have a common denominator: oil.

CASE STUDYGM’s Advanced PropulsionTe chno l ogy S t r a t e gy


As a business necessity and as our obligation to society,General Motors Corp. (GM) believes the global auto-motive industry must develop alternative sources ofpropulsion, based on diverse sources of energy, to meetthe world’s rapidly growing demand for personal trans-portation that is sustainable and affordable to purchaseand operate. Energy and environmental leadership arekeys to GM’s future business strategy.

At GM, we believe that:• Electrically-driven vehicles are the best solution to

address society’s energy and environmental concerns.• There is no singular solution to the issue of propulsion

and energy technology. Several sources of energy willbe needed to reduce global reliance on petroleumand the automobile’s impact on the environment,while successfully meeting the growing global demandfor personal transportation.

Petroleum has been one of the world’s primary energysources for more than a century because of its relativeabundance, high energy density, and ease of transportation.As the demand for automobiles around the world hasgrown (and continues to grow), so too has the demandfor fuel to power these automobiles. Recognizing thesetrends around global energy issues, GM believes that innovation, efficiency improvements, and energy diversityare keys to sustainable global economic development.

To meet these challenges in the automotive sector, GMhas developed a strategy that is focused on utilizing avariety of advanced propulsion technologies and fuels todeliver transportation solutions to markets around theworld (see Figure 1). Challenges to development and implementation do exist. However, they are not insur-mountable and GM is working closely with key stake-holders to address these issues each step of the way.

GM’s advanced propulsion technology strategy focuseson three main areas:

1. Advanced gasoline engines and transmissions: Con-tinuously improve engines and transmissions thatachieve greater efficiency and reduced emissions.

2. Alternative fuels: Accelerate the use of alternativefuels through biofuel-capable propulsion systems.

3. Electrification: Drive the electrification of the vehicleby developing and marketing hybrids, plug-in hybrids,extended-range electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.

GM is working to bring all of these technologies to market using its global organization with common methodsand systems within the company’s global product devel-opment, manufacturing, and purchasing departments. Thegoal is to provide transportation solutions that meet the varied needs of markets around the world. Solutions for agiven area will be based on a variety of factors, includinglocal fuel resources and consumer driving patterns.

As a full-line automaker, GM is pursuing energy diversity across its product lineup by developing vehiclesthat can be powered by advanced propulsion systemsusing many different energy sources that displace petroleum. In addition to its intensive efforts to improvethe efficiency of internal combustion engines and to dis-place traditional petroleum-based fuels with biofuels likeE85 ethanol (a mixture of up to 85% denatured fuelethanol and gasoline), GM is also significantly expandingand accelerating the development of electrically drivenvehicles, including hybrids, plug-in hybrids, extended-range electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.

In the long term, GM considers a variety of energysources to have viable places within the transportationsector, including gasoline, diesel, ethanol, natural gas,and biodiesel, each contributing toward a globally diverseenergy strategy.

Advanced Gasoline Engines and TransmissionsTraditional engines and transmissions will continue toplay a significant role in transportation around the globeas newer technologies move through development,growth, and maturation phases. With this in mind, GMcontinues to make improvements to the traditional gasolineengine with features such as Active Fuel Management, atechnology that saves fuel by using only half of the engine’s cylinders when driving with a light load andthen seamlessly switching to all cylinders when neededfor brisk acceleration or for hauling heavy loads.

Other advanced technologies like Variable Valve Timingand Direct Injection also help to improve fuel economyand emissions performance in traditional vehicle systems. Additionally, the aggressive rollout of six-speed auto-matic transmission technology in GM vehicles hashelped to support the goal of improved fuel economyand reduced emissions. In fact, by the end of 2009, GM will have introduced 10 new variants of six-speedtransmissions.

GM believes that innovation, efficiency improve-ments, and energydiversity are keysto sustainableglobal economicdevelopment.


Alternative FuelsEthanolIn the near term, GM believes ethanol has the greatestpotential to displace petroleum, and the company iscommitted to working with government, academia, andindustry to promote both supply and availability.Ethanol’s benefits include that it comes from renewablesources and that it produces fewer greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions than gasoline.1 Based on results of arecently concluded nine-month study by Sandia NationalLaboratory and GM, 90 billion gallons of ethanol couldbe produced annually in the United States by 2030, offsetting up to one- third of U.S. petroleum use for approximately the same cost as expanding on-shore oildrilling and refining.2

Most ethanol today is blended into gasoline as a gasolineadditive at 10% volume, called E10. GM’s preference isE85 ethanol, which is an alternative fuel as opposed to agasoline additive. Comparatively minimal investment isrequired by manufacturers to reengineer traditional internal combustion engines to flex-fuel engines, makingthem capable of running on E85, ordinary gasoline, orany combination of the two.

More than 7 million flex-fuel vehicles are on the road inthe United States today, and more than half are GM cars

and trucks. GM is on track to make 50% of its annual vehicle production volume in North America E85-capableby 2012. In Europe, the Saab 9-5 BioPower is the best-selling flex-fuel vehicle, and Saab recently added the 9-3 line with BioPower variants. In Brazil, more than 95%of GM’s vehicles are flex-fuel-enabled, allowing the vehicles to run on 100% ethanol or a blend of 22%ethanol and gasoline. Brazil’s ethanol primarily comesfrom domestically grown sugar cane. Brazil is a net exporter of ethanol and the second-largest producer following the United States.

Ethanol as a transportation fuel has its detractors. Muchhas been written about the impact on U.S. food pricesand food availability globally because of ethanol, butafter several months in 2008 when ethanol was blamedfor record prices for corn, the bushel price of corn hasdropped by 40% from its highs, while ethanol has followed petroleum, dropping to less than half its peakprice. Meanwhile, food prices have continued to rise.3

A second criticism of ethanol, and the subject of an ongoing environmental debate, is whether and howmuch impact ethanol production directly and indirectlyaffects land use as corn production is used for ethanol instead of food and feed. The argument goes that newland in other parts of the world is converted to food

Figure 1. GM’s advanced propulsion technology.


production, releasing stored carbon because land in theUnited States that was used to grow corn for food is nowused to grow corn for ethanol.

Studies released in early 2008 that suggested ethanolproduction in the United States was leading to the burn-ing of rain forests in Brazil received significant attention.4

But in the months since their release, the conclusions ofthe studies have been criticized by numerous scientistsand scientific organizations as lacking substantiation.5

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currentlyconsidering how to count direct and indirect land usechange in GHG calculations of corn and cellulosicethanol required as part of the Energy Independenceand Security Act of 2007 that raised the RenewableFuels Standard (RFS) to 36 billion gallons per year by2022.

Corn, which is capped at 15 billion gallons of the RFS, isincreasingly being seen as a transitional feedstock tononfood biomass sources. Urban, agricultural, andforestry waste, such as corn stalks, lumber mill waste,and energy crops, are expected to be among the lead-ing feedstocks of second-generation ethanol and account

for 16 billion gallons of the RFS. Advanced biofuels areexpected to account for the remaining 5 billion gallons.

GM has alliances with two cellulosic ethanol firms,Coskata Inc. and Mascoma Corp., that are viewed asleaders in biothermal and biochemical ethanol conversionprocesses, respectively. A recent series of articles published in Biofuels, Bioproducts, and Biorefininingconcludes that most cellulosic biofuel scenarios offercomparable, if not lower, costs and much reduced GHGemissions (>90%) compared to petroleum-derivedfuels.6 According to a 2007 study by Argonne NationalLaboratory, corn ethanol averages a 19% reduction inGHG emissions compared with gasoline.7

ElectrificationThe third piece of GM’s technology strategy focuses onthe electrification of the vehicle.8 GM is a strong propo-nent of this technology, as it offers excellent perform-ance and enables zero vehicle emissions. Using electricityas the primary energy carrier can improve vehicle en-ergy consumption and lower customer costs as the elec-tric energy is generated by utility companies at ahigh-efficiency power plant.


HybridsGM’s advanced propulsion technology strategy incorpo-rates a variety of technologies that will provide increaseduse of electricity as the propulsion source for vehicles ofall sizes and types. GM’s experience with electrificationis rooted in the landmark EV1 pure electric car, andmore recently, in a variety of contemporary hybrid vehiclesthat combine internal combustion propulsion with electric drive modes. Today, GM offers several hybridversions of its cars and sport-utility vehicles.

The GM hybrid system featured on the Chevrolet MalibuHybrid, for example, saves fuel by using sophisticatedcontrols and software, as well as a unique, 36-volt electricmotor/generator mated to GM Powertrain’s 2.4L EcotecVVT four-cylinder engine. The GM hybrid system main-tains the vehicle’s sporty feel and seamlessly reduces fuelconsumption by:

• shutting off the engine when the vehicle is stopped,to minimize idling;

• restarting the engine promptly when the brake pedalis released;

• enabling extended fuel shut-off during vehicle deceleration;

• capturing vehicle kinetic energy during decelerationthrough regenerative braking to charge the advancednickel metal hydride battery; and

• performing intelligent battery charging when it ismost efficient.

When required, the GM hybrid system provides additionallaunching power from the electric motor/generator. Atwide-open throttle, such as during a passing maneuver,the system enhances acceleration by using the motor/generator to bolster the internal combustion engine.

GM’s 2-Mode hybrid system was pioneered for transitbuses in 2003. The 2-Mode hybrid system is a techno-logical breakthrough in electrification as it is scalable tovehicles of all sizes—something not practical with competitive systems. It enables two electrically variabletransmission modes that allow for high efficiency in bothlow- and high-speed operation. In addition to avoidingfuel consumption during vehicle standstill by shutting offthe engine, the system enables regenerative braking, andthe ability to increase the time the engine operates at itsmost efficient speed and load.

In the United States, GM has rolled out the 2-Mode hybrid system to the Chevrolet Tahoe, GMC Yukon, and

Cadillac Escalade full-size sport-utility vehicles, as well astwo- and four-wheel drive versions of the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra Crew Cab full-size trucks. The2-Mode system incorporates two 60-kW electric motorsand is combined with a V-8 gasoline engine that utilizesGM’s Active Fuel Management technology to deactivatecylinders and cam-phasing strategies that de-throttle theengine even further by the late closing of the intakevalves. With full-size utilities such as the Chevrolet Tahoeand GMC Yukon, the 2-Mode system increases mileageby 50% in city driving and delivers an overall fuel savings of 30%. The system provides electric drive upto 30 mph, even when the truck is loaded with cargo ortowing a trailer.

Extended-Range Electric VehiclesIn addition to hybrid vehicles, GM is also readying its first production car based on its innovative Voltec system, which is designed for electric propulsion and is adaptable to a variety of onboard power generatingsystems, such as internal combustion engines and fuel-cell engines.

The first application of this system is the Chevrolet Volt,which GM plans to introduce in late 2010. The Volt is anextended-range electric vehicle (EREV) that uses lithiumion batteries to store electric power in the vehicle. TheVolt delivers up to 40 miles of gasoline- and emissions-free driving. Volt’s on-board range-extending engine isused to create electricity after the battery’s energy hasbeen depleted. The range-extending engine, which willbe capable of using either gasoline or E85 ethanol fuel,is able to generate additional electricity to power the carfor hundreds of additional miles. The Volt can berecharged in less than three hours using a standard 240-volt electrical outlet or approximately eight hoursusing a standard 120-volt electrical outlet.

Hydrogen Fuel-Cell VehiclesIn addition to hybrids and EREVs, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles also offer an electric transportation option thatGM is pursuing. Since 2001, GM has developed arange of fuel-cell prototype vehicles to demonstrate itscommitment to advancing the technology and exploringthe viability of petroleum-free transportation. Previousconcepts included the HydroGen3, which demonstratedhow a fuel cell could be packaged in a conventional vehicle design; the Autonomy, which suggested an entirely new design ethic combined with fuel-cell and by-wire technology; and the Hy-wire, the world’s first drivable fuel-cell and by-wire vehicle.


In 2006, the Chevrolet Sequel concept fuel-cell vehiclewas demonstrated to the media, proving that fuel-cellvehicles could drive 300 miles (480 km) between hydrogen fill-ups, with its only exhaust emissions beingwater vapor. The success of the Sequel demonstrationthen helped GM to launch Project Driveway in early2008. Project Driveway is a fuel-cell vehicle market testthat is placing 100 Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell vehiclesin the hands of customers around the United States and Europe. Drivers are using the vehicles as daily trans-portation for up to three months and providing valuablefeedback to GM engineers on the driving characteristics,driving range, and other real-world evaluations of the vehicles.

Onboard vehicle fuel storage is a major challenge for implementing mainstream fuel-cell vehicles, as customerswill demand driving ranges comparable to conventionalinternal combustion-powered vehicles. Compressing thehydrogen gas for vehicle storage is still in the early stagesof technological development. Three major advancedstorage concepts remain under development, includingcomplex (destabilized) hydrides, high-pressure classic hydrides, and high-surface area/cryo-adsorbents.

GM is committed to producing a viable fuel-cell propulsionsystem that is competitive with passenger cars concerningperformance, range, and passenger and cargo space.How quickly there will be significant volumes of exciting,safe, and affordable fuel-cell vehicles on the market depends on many factors, including cost-effective andconveniently available hydrogen refueling for customers;uniform codes and standards for hydrogen and hydrogen-fueled vehicles; and supportive government policies tohelp overcome the initial vehicle and refueling infra-structure investment hurdles. No single industry can goit alone: GM is working these issues with governments,energy companies, and other interested parties aroundthe world.

ConclusionsGM recognizes that the automotive industry must bringnew technologies to market that capitalize on the benefitsof energy diversity and reduce the impact automobileshave on the environment. Local conditions also requirelocal solutions as no one technology or fuel meets theneeds of drivers around the globe. For its part, GM iscommitted to meeting and overcoming these challengesthrough continued partnership and innovation, and providing sustainable mobility to please our customersaround the world. em

References1. Laser, M. et al. Comparative Analysis of Efficiency, Environmental Impact, and Process Economics for Mature Biomass Refining Scenarios; Biofuels, Bioprod.

Bioref. 2009, 3, 247–270; doi: 10.1002/bbb.136.2. 90 Billion Gallons Biofuels Deployment Study; Sandia National Laboratory. Prepared for General Motors Corp., February 2009; www.HITECtransportation.org.3. See http://tinyurl.com/Vilsack-Ethanol-Food-Prices.4. Searchinger, T.; Heimlich, R.; Houghton, R.A.; Dong, F.; Elobeid, A.; Fabiosa, J.; Tokgoz, S.; Hayes, D.; Yu, T.-H. Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases

Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change; Science 2008, 319, 1238-1240; doi: 10.1126/science.1151861.5. Dale, B. Sound Policy Needs Sound Science; The Washington Times, November. 26, 2008.6. Wang, M.; Wu, M.; Huo, H. Life-Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Different Corn Ethanol Plant Types; Environ. Res. Lett. 2007, 2, 024001 ;

doi:10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024001.7. See Lynd, L.R. et al.The Role of Biomass in America’s Energy Future: Framing the Analysis; Biofuels, Bioprod. Bioref. 2009, 3, 113–123; doi: 10.1002/bbb.134;

and Laser, M. et al. Comparative Analysis of Efficiency, Environmental Impact, and Process Economics for Mature Biomass Refining Scenarios; Biofuels, Bioprod.Bioref. 2009, 3, 247–270; doi: 10.1002/bbb.136.

8. Tate, E.D.; Harpster, M.O.; Savagian, P.J. The Electrification of the Automobile: From Conventional Hybrid to Plug-in Hybrids to Extended Range Electric Vehicles. Presented at SAE 2008 World Congress, Detroit, MI, 2008; SAE-2008-01-0458.


em • feature

by John Bachmann

John D. Bachmann is principalof Vision Air Consulting, ChapelHill, NC. He was previously theassociate director for scienceand policy with the U.S. Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’sOffice of Air Quality Planning& Standards, and played a majorstaff role in the development of the 2006 PM standards.Bachmann is a member ofEM’s Editorial Advisory Committee. E-mail: [email protected].

The new year brought the latest chapter in the continuing saga of U.S. National AmbientAir Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) and ozone (O3).1 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated revisions that strengthened the1997 PM and O3 standards in October 2006 and March 2008, respectively. Key issuesand perspectives of several stakeholders on these NAAQS reviews were the subject of twoEM issues.2 As is the norm for NAAQS decisions, several parties filed lawsuits on behalfof stakeholders interested in strengthening or weakening the final outcome. On February24, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued rulings on the PM litigation (American Farm Bureau vs. EPA No. 06-1410 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 24, 2009)) that challenged some aspects of EPA’s decision and upheld others.

Appellate Court Tellsabout Ambient Standards for


In brief, the court found that the fine particle (PM2.5)standards “were, in several respects contrary to law andunsupported by adequately reasoned decision-making,”but denied petitioners’ challenges to the standards forcoarse particles (PM10). More specifically:

• The court granted the petitions of state and environ-mental groups and remanded the annual primaryPM2.5 standard of 15 micrograms per cubic meter(µg/m3) to EPA for reconsideration because theagency failed to explain adequately why this level is“requisite to protect the public health,” including thehealth of vulnerable subpopulations, while providing“an adequate margin of safety.”

• The court also granted environmental groups’ petitionand remanded EPA’s decision to set secondary PM2.5

NAAQS identical to the primary NAAQS, stating that“EPA unreasonably concluded that the NAAQS are adequate to protect the public welfare from adverse effects on visibility.”

These decisions are of some interest because they suggesta limit on the extent of the D.C. Court’s deference toEPA’s judgment on the interpretation of the underlyingscientific information in making these decisions. Thecourt took strong notice that the EPA Administrator’s finaldecisions for both standards were inconsistent with therecommendations and advice of the Clean Air ScientificAdvisory Committee (CASAC), as well as those of EPAstaff. They scrutinized technical aspects of the rationale.In the case of the annual primary standard, the courttook specific issue with EPA’s assessment of two long-term studies relating to children’s health. In past NAAQScases, the court has generally agreed with or deferredto EPA’s interpretation of the science, even if taking issuewith the final decision (e.g. Whitman vs. American TruckingAssociations, Inc., No. 99-1257, slip op. (Feb. 27, 2001)).

The court’s rejection of the agricultural industry petitioners’challenge to the final decision on coarse standards settleda long-standing issue that arose out of their vacatur of the1997 PM10 standards. There, they found the agency hadnot explained why using PM10, which includes both fine

and coarse particles, as the indicator for coarse PM standards was not an unreasonable double regulation offine particles. In the present case, the court found “EPAhas now cured that failure of explanation and provided areasonable rationale for its choice of PM10.”

Three of the stakeholders who participated in these proceedings have provided some perspectives below.For its part, because EPA is fairly far along in the next review of the PM NAAQS, it is likely the agency will usethe process and outcome of the ongoing review as thebasis for its response to the remand. In the meantime,EPA and states will continue to implement PM2.5 stan-dards, as the daily standard was not remanded, and theannual standard remains in place until EPA responds.

This decision has also affected the litigation on the 2008O3 NAAQS, which presents similar issues. On March10, with agreement of all of the other litigants, EPA askedthe court to hold action on the litigation “to allow time forappropriate EPA officials that are appointed by the newAdministration to review the [O3] NAAQS rule to determine whether the standards established in the [rule]should be maintained, modified, or otherwise reconsid-ered.” EPA requests 180 days to consider its options. Inthis case, any near-term action would need to be basedon the scientific and technical record established in the2008 review. Stay tuned.

References1. Bachmann, J.D. A Summary of the A&WMA 2007 Critical Review—Will the

Circle Be Unbroken: A History of the U.S. National Ambient Air QualityStandards; EM 2007 June, 27-34.

2. See EM June 2006, 8-29; and EM January 2008, 5-25.

Stakeholders’ Responses

“The health effects of PM are of such magnitudethat we consider this topic a top priority.”

Response from John Paul and Eddie Terrill, former co-presi-dents of National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA),and co-authors of the article “Setting a Protective PM Stan-dard: A View from the Frontline” (EM June 2006, 19-23);and Amy Royden-Bloom, senior staff associate, NACAA.

EPA to Think AgainParticulate Matter


In April 2006, NACAA submitted formal comments onEPA’s proposed rule to revise the PM NAAQS, as publishedin the Federal Register on January 17, 2006.1 In June2006, our main comments were expressed in an articlepublished in EM. The complete list of concerns can befound in the formal comments; several are repeatedhere, followed by EPA’s response in the final rule. Wethen note our perceived implications of the court’s deci-sion on future NAAQS.

NACAA recommended that EPA follow the advice ofCASAC and set the primary annual standard for PM2.5

in the range of 13–14 µg/m3. EPA instead retained theannual standard of 15 µg/m3. We recommended thatEPA abandon its proposal to exempt PM coarse readingsthat were influenced by agricultural or mining operationsand likewise remove its proposed changes to siting criteria. In the final rule, EPA retained the 24-hr PM10

standard without any qualifications to the indicator, anychanges to the monitor siting requirements, or anysource exclusions. Finally, we recommended that EPAadopt a secondary standard in the form of a sub-dailystandard for visibility. EPA adopted a secondary standardequal to the primary standard.

In its February 24, 2009, decision, the D.C. Court remanded the annual primary and secondary NAAQSfor PM to EPA for reconsideration.

NACAA members anticipate that new EPA AdministratorLisa Jackson will re-examine the record and the strongrecommendations of CASAC and the EPA staff paperand propose a more stringent PM2.5 annual standardand a secondary standard in a form that addresses visi-bility and other welfare issues. We stand ready to workwith EPA and the various stakeholders on the standardsand the monitoring and implementation issues that willfollow. The health effects of PM are of such magnitudethat we consider this topic a top priority.

Reference1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality

Standards for Particulate Matter; Proposed Rule; Fed. Regist. 2006, 71, 2620(January 17, 2006).

“The court told EPA in no uncertain terms that thescience matters.”

Response from Janice E. Nolen, assistant vice president of national policy and advocacy for the American Lung Association (ALA). The article “Air Quality Standards MustProtect Public Health” by Norman Edelman, MD, chiefmedical officer for ALA, appeared in EM June 2006, 24-29.

The D.C. Court gave the Obama Administration theopening to restore the integrity of the science and protect public health when it returned the 2006 PM2.5

standards to EPA in February. The court told EPA in nouncertain terms that the science matters. ALA is pleasednot only that the court agreed with our arguments, butthat the court understood the findings of CASAC andthe recommendations of EPA staff, even if the formerEPA Administrator did not.

PM is the most dangerous of the widespread air pollutants.It triggers asthma attacks, heart attacks, and strokes,among other damages; most critically, PM kills.

The 2006 revisions to the PM2.5 standards preservedthe 1997 annual standard while tightening the 24-hrstandard. Wide agreement acknowledged that the 199724-hr standard needed strengthening, so the debatecentered over the level of the annual standard. CASACand EPA staff had seen these two as halves of a holisticapproach to reducing PM2.5. They saw sufficient evidencethat the 24-hr standard needs the partnership of a com-plementary, tighter annual standard to protect againstthe risks from short-term exposure. Evidence indicatedthat a tighter annual standard would help reduce thedangerous, short-term exposures that occur below thepeak, particularly for areas that would be in compliancewith the 24-hr standard. Yet the agency blew past thescience to reach its arbitrary decision to keep the annualstandard intact. Tellingly, the court pointed out that EPA hadcontradicted the evidence and even its own past arguments.

Unfortunately, the court didn’t require EPA to follow thesame logic for coarse particles. Since the evidence thatshows that it takes both standards to protect publichealth from the harm that fine particles produce, we seeno reason to think that the dual controls would not beequally needed for coarse particles.

Other conclusions from the court provide further supportfor tighter standards. The court agreed with our argumentsthat children and other groups face higher risk and thestandards must protect them in particular. The court alsotossed out industry’s flawed logic that a lack of evidenceof harm is the same thing as evidence of safety. Withthat action, the court reminded EPA of the need to “erron the side of caution” when evidence is limited and risksare grave.

In January, a study by Pope et al.1 showed us that cleaningup the air all across the nation can have profound healthbenefits—months literally added to our lives. With this


court decision, ALA hopes that EPA will rapidly reviewthe science and, this time, follow the evidence. Such anapproach will no doubt lead to much more protectivestandards along with more aggressive steps to reducethe burden of PM.

Reference1. Pope, III, C.A.; Ezzati, M.; Dockery, D.W. Fine-Particulate Air Pollution and Life

Expectancy in the United States; N. Engl. J. Med. 2009, 360 (4), 376-386.

“This decision only adds to the chaos of the PMregulatory landscape.”

Response from Lucinda Minton Langworthy, an attorneywith the law firm of Hunton & Williams, and author of thearticle “Are EPA’s Proposed Revisions to the PM StandardsAppropriate?” (EM June 2006, 15-18); and Aaron M.Flynn, an attorney with Hunton & Williams.

On February 24, 2009, the D.C. Circuit handed down itsdecision in American Farm Bureau Federation vs. EPA. Whilethis decision clearly has a psychological impact, its immedi-ate practical effect may not be as dramatic as might, at firstblush, appear likely. The court left in place the standardsthat it found EPA had failed to justify adequately. States havealready begun planning for their implementation and forimplementation of the 35 μg/m3 24-hr standard that EPAadopted in 2006 and that was not challenged in court. EPAwill obviously have to go back and consider whether to re-vise its annual PM2.5 NAAQS and whether to set differentstandards to protect urban visibility, but the agency is already well along in a review of the PM NAAQS, begunin 2007 and planned for completion in 2011,1 in whichthose questions as well as the adequacy of the 35 μg/m3

24-hr NAAQS and the PM10 NAAQS will be addressed.It seems sensible for the agency to fold its response to theremand into this ongoing proceeding.

On another level, though, this decision only adds to thechaos of the PM regulatory landscape. EPA and thestates have yet to implement fully the PM2.5 NAAQSadopted 1997.2 While general implementation regula-tions for those NAAQS have been finalized,3 EPA actionon critical implementation issues remains pending.4

Moreover, the general implementation regulations,5

nonattainment designations for the 1997 NAAQS,6 andregulations to implement a New Source Review permittingprogram for PM2.5 are the subject of ongoing litigation.7

EPA has yet to issue implementation rules or even detailed guidance concerning how states are to implementthe 2006 rules. And, of course, EPA must now considerstill more PM NAAQS revisions, implementation of

which, if new standards are adopted, will almost certainlyoverlap with implementation of both the 1997 and2006 standards.

Perhaps the time has come for Congress to considerwhether the current statutory scheme for reviewing andimplementing NAAQS is rational and whether some adjustment would be appropriate to allow a NAAQS tobe implemented before it is revised. em

References1. Integrated Review Plan for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for

Particulate Matter; EPA 452/R-08-004; National Center for EnvironmentalAssessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,NC; March 17, 2008.

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality Stan-dards for Particulate Matter; Fed. Regist. 1997, 62, 38652 (July 18, 1997).

3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Air Fine Particle ImplementationRule; Fed. Regist. 2007, 72, 20586 (April 25, 2007).

4. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Prevention of Significant Dete-rioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs), and Significant MonitoringConcentration (SMC); Fed. Regist. 2007, 72, 54112 (Sept. 21, 2007).

5. National Cattlemen’s Beef Association vs. U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, No. 07-1227 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 12, 2008).

6. Catawba County, North Carolina vs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,No. 05-1064 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 1, 2009); See also U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency. Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Fed. Regist. 2005, 70, 944(Jan. 5, 2005).

7. Natural Resources Defense Council vs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,No. 08-1250 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 3, 2008); See also Implementation of the NewSource Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5); Fed. Regist. 2008, 73, 28321 (May 16, 2008).


em • pm file

We spend significant energy on the front-end of aproject to pitch, plan, and launch it, but we spendcomparably little time documenting project out-comes. As a result, the value of our efforts and thebenefits we provide are easily overlooked. Whileregulatory compliance and cost-avoidance mayhave been the assumed benefits of many environ-mental projects in a robust economy, these benefitsare of value only if a company is able to remain inoperation.

As project managers, we can better serve our company and clients by understanding and clari-fying project benefits at the outset, establishing ap-propriate metrics for those benefits, and thendocumenting performance in terms of metricsusing written project summaries.

A Carefully Crafted Project SummaryTo write an effective project summary, we mustbegin at the project charter stage by establishingproject objectives and relevant measurement metrics.This can be challenging for environmental projectsbecause many of them derive from regulatory requirements. For example, consider the facilitythat wants to obtain an air permit for a multifuelboiler. We can easily accept the default objective asobtaining the permit on schedule in accordancewith an established budget; however, we can better document project accomplishments by ex-panding the project objective to describe the fuelsthat the boiler will be able to burn, the operationalflexibility those fuels will offer, and the cost savingsthat fuel flexibility will provide.

Documenting these objectives in clear terms allowsus to remain on track during the permitting process

and to evaluate actual performance against thoseobjectives when the boiler is operational. Somemay dismiss these suggested efforts, arguing thatthey are common sense and obvious to those involved in the project; however, this approachprovides important historical information when anorganization is considering operational changesand staff reductions in challenging economic times.

Most of us can think of projects that were under-taken with certain cost-saving goals that were laterabandoned due to changes in management. Inthese cases, management is criticized for not understanding the issues. And while this may be afair criticism, we share responsibility if, as the technical authorities for those projects, we have notdocumented and communicated project benefitsin terms that those less familiar with the technicalaspects of the project can appreciate.

Underlying DataWhen selecting metrics for documenting projectperformance, it is easy to first think in terms of costsavings, either in absolute dollars or percentages,on a quarterly or annual basis. And while this information is indeed the “bottom line,” cost-savingsdata alone do not offer a complete picture nor dothey allow us to gauge the real value of a projectwhen looking back from a distant point in the future.We must capture the raw information—for example,kilowatt hours saved, gallons of water reclaimed,tons of feedstock saved, and tons of waste elimi-nated—that drives the cost savings. This informationwill allow us to recalculate cost savings based onthe changing value of factors that influence costs.Otherwise, we will be left to evaluate project benefits based on general inflation rates, an approach

by David Elam

David L. Elam, Jr., CIH,CQM, is principal consultantwith Summa Consultants Inc. E-mail: [email protected].

Documenting Project PerformanceAlthough nonfinancial project closeout activities can be an overlooked area inproject management (see “Paying Forward at Project Completion,” EM September2008, p. 24), these activities, particularly preparation of a carefully crafted projectsummary, can be vital to the future success of the organization and project team.


provide useful information for company commu-nications, support sustainability initiatives, demon-strate the value of an operation or an individual,and may eliminate waste. For engineering and consulting firms, project summaries can commu-nicate service value to clients at project completion,document experience of individuals and the firm,and support cross-training efforts. There’s a goodchance we’ll need project information to documentoperational performance, prepare for a new project,or to round out a resume. So the real issues arewhen we’ll prepare the project summary and whatit will contain. In conclusion, we’re better served bythinking about the project summary when we define project objectives during the project scoping phase and writing it during the projectclose-out phase. em

that neglects the variation in the individual inflationrates that likely have a greater effect on environ-mental projects. Clearly, we need to understandproject benefits in terms of the raw inputs and outputsso that we can evaluate the project in terms of itsinitial value, present value, and cumulative value.

The underlying data that drive cost savings for aproject can also benefit sustainability initiatives andgreenhouse gas (GHG) inventories. For example,consider a water reclamation system that reducesfreshwater consumption, wastewater discharges tothe publicly owned treatment works (POTW), andoffsite disposal of a hazardous waste stream.Although the project yields cost savings associatedwith reduced water use, reduced POTW fees, andreduced offsite disposal costs, additional electricityis required to operate the pumps associated withthe water reclaim system. Without documentationof the underlying data, the facility will not be ableto document the true sustainability benefits andGHG reductions that the project achieves. Instead,those unfamiliar with the project will conclude thatthe company simply increased bottom-line per-formance by purchasing more electricity. Given theexpectation of GHG regulations in the foreseeablefuture, the underlying input and output data forprojects may prove useful in documenting historicalbaselines and reductions.

Communicating Project ValueProject managers understand the value of the proj-ects we perform and manage. They are essentialto the mission of our organizations. We can betterserve our organizations by making sure that othersunderstand the value of our work. An effective wayto communicate the value of our projects is to prepare project summaries that document thescope of work, the financial aspects of project, thepeople involved on the project, and the benefitsthe project produced. Importantly, the project summary should address the project’s effect onprocess inputs and outputs so that the project valuecan be reevaluated as the cost or value of those inputs and outputs change.

For the project owner, project summaries will

FREE

ONE-YEA

R

MEM

BERSH

IP

All graduating A&WMA student members are eligible to receive a FREE one-year A&WMA

membership! Take advantage of this offer to stay connected as you transition into your role as an

environmental professional.

Just contact a member services representative at +1-412-232-3444 to receive your gift.

Graduating in June?We have a gift for you!


em • competitive strategy

Defining the Vision StatementIn the hierarchy of statements that define what a com-pany is all about, vision ranks just below mission (why itexists) and values (how the organization will behave).Strategy, key performance indicators, and implementa-tion plans follow vision. In other words, a well-defined vision statement is very important, and it’s no wonder.

A vision statement is a compelling image that helps individuals understand the future direction and achieve-ment of the organization’s purpose. It answers the ques-tions “Where are we going?” and “What will it look likewhen we get there?” A strategic vision depends on an organization’s ability to see and feel the desired state. Itstimulates action and serves as a rallying point for the

troops and a yardstick for measuring progress. It sets abroad outline for a strategy, leaving the specific details tobe worked out. Thus, while many things may change inan emerging, uncertain world, if the vision is sufficientlyrobust, it will continue to guide the organization.

A powerful vision statement contains three strategic elements:1

1. Focuses on operations2. Includes measurable objectives and metrics3. Forms or changes the basis for competition in the

industry

Two of the simplest and perhaps best-known businessexamples are GE’s “We will be #1 or #2 in each of ourbusinesses” and Federal Express’s “We will deliver thepackage by 10:30 the next morning.” These are raritiesin clarity, precision, and scope. Most corporate visionstatements sound sweeping, along the lines of “We willbe the world’s best (you fill in the blank).” Such visionsmay be inspiring, but they are of little use to drive realprogress in the absence of further definition.

The Sustainability Vision ChallengeWhile business visions may take on the aspects of inspiring bumper stickers, they are generally backed bysupporting statements that amplify what this future statewill look like. Typically, the supporting statements specifyparameters such as budgets, sales, research and devel-opment scope, new product lines, and acquisition anddivestment strategies.

Then again, sustainability visions can be backed by notmuch more than good intentions. There are a raft of reasons why this may be the case: executives may nothave a clear understanding of the sustainability dynamics

by Richard MacLean

Richard MacLean is president of Competitive Environment Inc. E-mail: [email protected] electronic files of this and his other writings visit his Web site at www.competitive-e.com

Visions of SustainabilityWhat You Can Do to Make Your Organization’sSustainability Vision UniqueSeveral years ago at an environmental conference for a major corporation, I presented a slide of vision statements for five corporations, including their own.Only around 20% of the participants could correctly identify their own company’senvironmental vision, about equal to what one would expect from randomguessing. More recently at a meeting with top business executives, not a singleone could match their competitors’ names with the respective sustainability vision statements. What is going on here?


organizational processes wander into unproductive directions. Unless you clearly understand the organization’sbusiness goals and articulate the principles of sustain-ability in adding value, your function will probably fall short in achieving its potential contribution to thecompany’s success.

Because these vision statements are so widely toutedoutside companies as evidence of their organization’s social responsibility, it may be difficult to completelyavoid the politically correct rhetoric that infuses most ofthese statements. But this attentiveness to external imageis not necessarily an issue if there are robust supportingstatements that clearly define the vision. Supportingstatements are the very specific goals and objectives thatserve as the business principles for striving toward thevision.

Procter & Gamble has done an excellent job in this regard by fleshing out its product vision statement, “Delight the consumer with sustainable innovations thatimprove the environmental profile of our products,” withvery tangible business goals and objectives. But beforewe get to these dimensions, note that the company’s loftyvision is actually much more concrete than it may seemat first read.

For example, it is possible to track customer satisfactionthrough surveys and innovation can be measured by thenumber of new products. The environmental profile alsocan be measured and tracked. While the absolutes maybe relative in the preceding measurements, the trendscan be quite definitive. This product vision is backed bya US$20 billion sales goal of “sustainable innovationproducts.” These are defined as “products with a signifi-cantly reduced (>10%) environmental footprint versusprevious or alternative products.”3

The consumer products sector is a fertile ground for sus-tainability innovation and some readers of this columnmay claim that their business does not lend itself to sucha definitive visioning process. But almost all businessesdepend on one or more key factors, such as energy use,raw material consumption, recycling and reuse, customersatisfaction, and brand recognition. All of these areashave enormous potential.

The challenge is to formulate a sustainability strategy thatwill identify these opportunities that support the organi-zation’s overall business goals. It may even be possible tostake out a niche area with potential for sector leadership.This is how you can develop a truly unique vision state-ment. How you do this step by step is beyond the scopeof this month’s column, but I will be covering various aspects of this process in upcoming columns. em

in play and be blind to what might lie ahead; or the organization(s) responsible for developing the vision maywork in near isolation and not be willing to bring forth atruly visionary vision, as it were. Indeed, managementmay only feel comfortable with a vision that seems to fit right in with the pack; hardly a strategy for gaining competitive advantage.

Another factor is that the language of sustainability hasyet to be satisfactorily defined. Visions tend to be a stringof politically correct words, each one of which is subjectto interpretation and poorly defined measurement.Sustainability is in the eyes of the beholder and there areno universally accepted definitions for terms such asleadership, social responsibility, commitment, cleanerproduction, prevention, efficiency, reliability, and protection.

“Making people’s lives better today and for generationsto come” sounds great, but how much better, by whatmeasurements, and just how many generations in thefuture? A plant manager cannot justify a budget or hirenew employees based on such vagueness.

The aforementioned reasons are obvious to seasonedprofessionals. What is not as obvious is a dysfunctionalbusiness process that may underlie all this fuzzy visioning. Business research has shown that it is extremely difficult for executive leadership teams to takeoff their functional hats and view the company holistically. 2

The net result is that sustainability visions tend to bebroad and sweeping.

Terms commonly found in vision statements, such as excellence, continuous improvement, and responsiblestewardship, are subject to personal interpretation. Unless there are quantifiable targets and definitive supporting statements to back these terms, the visionmay feel good, but it provides no meaningful direction.The top functional leadership can live with a grandiosebut unsupported fuzzy vision statement, since its lack ofpreciseness will not threaten their functional area. In theabsence of a board or CEO intervention or the eruptionof a major external threat, the status quo prevails.

Sighting 20/20 VisionWhen top leadership teams cannot decide and opt forvague language, it is necessary to explore the core busi-ness objectives. The first steps in building a sustainabilityvision are to understand the company’s current businessgoals, its vision for the future, and how your organizationhelps support and achieve these business objectives,both in the short and long term.

It seems obvious, but this single issue—synchronizing thesustainability and business objectives—is where many

Managementmay only feelcomfortablewith a visionthat seems tofit right in withthe pack; hardlya strategy for gaining competitive advantage.

References1. Hammer M.; Champy, J.

Reengineering the Corpora-tion: A Manifesto for BusinessRevolution; HarperBusiness:New York, NY, 1993, p. 156.

2. Frish, R. When Teams Can’tDecide; Harvard Business Review, November 2008, pp. 121-126.

3. P&G 2008 Sustainability Report, p. 5; www.pg.com/innovatingsustainability/index.shtml.


Improving Biofuel RecoveryProcesses for Efficiencyand SustainabilityThe 2007 Energy Independence and SecurityAct (EISA) provided for increased production ofbiofuels with, among other provisions, a specifiedshare to be derived from non-sugar or cellulosefeedstocks. EISA further established standardsfor renewable fuels achieving 20%, 50%, and60% reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions relative to conventional fuels.

GHG emissions from renewable fuels are primarily associated with feedstock production, conversion of feed-stock to fuel (i.e., “upstream emissions”), and fuel use.For corn-based ethanol, approximately 50% of the energy consumed in the production facility is due to theseparation processes of distillation and adsorption usedto recover and dry ethanol from fermentation broths,leading to significant upstream GHG emissions.

Two U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) demonstration projects showed that two emergingmembrane technologies—pervaporation and vapor permeation—can provide energy savings over traditionaltechnologies, especially for smaller systems. EPA is

actively investigating the application of these membranetechnologies to biofuel production.

PervaporationPervaporation involves the selective permeation andevaporation of compounds in a liquid feed into a vaporpermeate phase. In such a process, an alcohol-selectivemembrane would yield concentrated ethanol vaporsfrom diluted solutions, while a water-selective membranewould yield water-enriched vapors while dehydrating thefeed liquid.

In collaboration with several industrial and academicpartners, EPA’s Pervaporation Team has demonstrated anovel pervaporation-based ethanol recovery technologycalled BioSep. The BioSep technology enables produc-tion of ethanol from biomass stocks readily availablethroughout rural areas.

In one project, the targeted biomass stream was abyproduct of cheese production (i.e., deproteinated wheyliquid). A typical cheese facility will generate enoughwhey to produce on the order of one to two million gallons of ethanol per year (MGY). Although the capacityof one whey-to-ethanol facility is much smaller than the50 MGY capacity of a typical corn-to-ethanol facility, thecumulative production from hundreds of cheese facilitieswould be substantial.

Because whey liquid has high water content, it is un-economical to transport the material to a centralizedethanol production facility. A solution to this problem isan efficient, small-scale ethanol production and recoverysystem that enables the production of ethanol fromcheese whey and other low-volume byproduct andwaste streams.

In this project, EPA collaborated with membrane producer Membrane Technology & Research, Inc. (MTR),researchers from Argonne National Laboratory, and potential end-user Kraft Foods. The recovery of ethanolfrom a simulated whey process stream was demonstratedat EPA’s Test & Evaluation Facility in Cincinnati, OH.

Vapor PermeationVapor permeation is identical to pervaporation, exceptall process streams are in the vapor state. EPA researchers are currently evaluating hybrid systems,which synergistically combine vapor permeation mem-brane systems with traditional separation unit operations,such as distillation.

em • epa research highlights

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of an efficient alcohol-water separation process.


One such hybrid system developed at EPA is predicted to deliver fuel-grade ethanol using 50% lessenergy than current separation technologies, even forsmaller scale installations.

In this hybrid process, termed “Membrane AssistedVapor Stripping” (see Figure 1), the stripping columnprovides high-alcohol recoveries and low-effluent con-centrations, while the vapor compression-membranecomponent enables the efficient recovery of latent andsensible heat from both the retentate and permeatevapor streams from the membrane system.

EPA’s research team has evaluated the energy savingspotential of this hybrid alcohol-water separation processthrough chemical process simulations and has verifiedthose predictions through experiments with analog andactual bioreactor streams.

The technology is being further developed through a cooperative research and development agreement withMTR. EPA and MTR are working with several potentialendusers to adapt the technology to their biofuel production processes.

Toward Efficiency and SustainabilityThe research conducted in both demonstration projectshighlighted above supports the goals of making the entire biofuel system as environmentally neutral, energy-efficient, and sustainable as possible, and of designingproduction processes, control technologies, and treatmentsystems that lead to reduced environmental impacts. em

This month’s column was contributed by Leland Vane,chemical engineer with EPA’s National Risk ManagementResearch Laboratory.

For more information on the research discussed in this column, contact DeborahJanes, Public Information Officer, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (B205-01),Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;phone: 1-919-541-4577; e-mail: [email protected]. Disclaimer: Although this textwas reviewed by EPA staff andapproved for publication, itdoes not necessarily reflect official EPA policy.

Mark your calendars: Bidding will open June 1 and will close June 18 at 12:00 p.m.

Support future environmental professionals by biddingon an item (or 10!) at A&WMA’s Online Silent Auction!

Placing a bid is easy. Just visit

www.awma.org/go/OnlineAuction09

to view all available items and make your

bid with just a click of your mouse. From

frequent flier miles to collectibles and event

tickets, you’ll be sure to find something for

everyone.

All proceeds benefit A&WMA’s Scholarship

Endowment Trust Fund.

More Information1. Vane, L.M. Separation Technologies for the Recovery and Dehydration of Alcohols from Fermentation Broths; Biofuels, Bioproducts, and Biorefining

2008, 2, 553-588.2. Vane, L.M.; Alvarez, F.R. Membrane Assisted Vapor Stripping—Energy Efficient Hybrid Distillation-Vapor Permeation Process for Alcohol-Water

Separation; J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2008, 83, 1275-1287.3. Vane, L.M. A Review of Pervaporation for Product Recovery from Biomass Fermentation Processes; J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2005, 80, 603-629.


em • news focus

The draft would attain those cuts through an economy-wide cap-and-trade system that would require industriesto hold allowances for each ton of GHGs they emit. ButWaxman and Markey chose to avoid a battle, for now,over how the revenues raised by the sale of those allowances would be divided, which “will be addressedthrough discussions among Committee members” in theweeks ahead, according to a bill summary.

The 648-page American Clean Energy and Security Actof 2009 includes a renewable energy mandate thatwould require electricity suppliers to obtain 25% of theirpower from wind, solar, geothermal, or other renewablesources by 2025. A governor could petition to allow upto one-fifth of a state’s renewable mandate to be metthrough energy efficiency measures.

Waxman and Markey also released a detailed schedulefor committee action on the bill through Memorial Day.Markey’s Subcommittee on Energy and Environmentwill hold initial hearings on the measure the week ofApril 20 and will mark up the bill the week of April 27.The full Energy and Commerce Committee is slated to begin debating the measure the week of May 11 and “will complete consideration of the legislation by

News Focus is compiledfrom the current editionof Environment Reporter,published by the Bureauof National Affairs Inc.(BNA). For more informa-tion, visit www.bna.com.

Advanced TransportationTechnologiesTo coincide with A&WMA’s 2009 Annual Conference& Exhibition, which takes place this June in the unofficial capital of the U.S. transportation industry,Detroit, EM takes a look at emerging advancedtransportation policies and technologies, includingelectric plug-in vehicles, hydrogen fuel cells, hybrids,and rapid mass transit, along with associated infra-structure issues. In addition, EM continues its focuson climate change and related issues in 2009 withan article that reports on reducing greenhouse gasemissions from the transportation sector.

In Next Month’s Issue…

Also look for…A Summary of the 2009 Critical Review on RemoteSensing of Particulate Pollution from Space: Have WeReached the Promised Land? by R.M. Hoff and S.Christopher

• Inside the Industry

• IT Insight

• EPA Research Highlights

And a special center pullout featuring the 2009 A&WMA Honors & Awards

Waxman, Markey Propose Deep Cuts in GHG Emissions by 2020House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman(D-Calif.) released a draft climate and energy bill March31 that matches President Obama’s call for deep cuts inU.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by mid-century,but would mandate much steeper reductions by 2020than the president’s plan.

The legislation, which Waxman and the chairman of theSubcommittee on Energy and Commerce, Rep. EdwardMarkey (D-Mass.), plan to move through the full com-mittee by Memorial Day, proposes an 83% cut in emis-sions by 2050 from 2005 levels through an emissionstrading approach, matching the long-term target offeredby Obama in his fiscal 2010 budget plan.

The Waxman–Markey draft measure calls for a 20% cutin emissions by 2020, compared with Obama’s 14% cutover that period. Their 2020 target is also steeper thanthe 6% cut proposed by Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.) andRick Boucher (D-Va.) over the same period in their draftlast fall, or the 15% cut proposed by Sens. Joseph Lieber-man (I/D-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) in legislation (S. 2191) that was defeated on the Senate floor in 2008.


Memorial Day,” according to the schedule.

Carbon Capture, Vehicle Efficiency AddressedIn a statement issued with the draft March 31, Waxmansaid the climate/energy bill would create millions of clean energy jobs and reduce dependence on foreignoil while curbing GHG emissions linked to climatechange. Markey said the two chairmen will work withHouse colleagues “to ensure that we are protectingAmerican consumers and that our clean energy futurehelps all parts of the country”—a reference to regions ofthe country such as the Midwest that could be vulnerableto higher energy prices given their reliance on coal-firedelectricity generation.

The House draft would establish a carbon capture-and-storage demonstration program and incentives forcommercial-scale deployment of the technologies to sequester carbon dioxide emitted at coal-fired powerplants. The legislation also proposes a new low-carbonstandard for transportation fuels and would mandate improved appliance and building efficiency. It would direct the Obama administration to harmonize as muchas possible conflicts between federal fuel economy stan-dards and the GHG emissions standards for vehiclespromulgated by California and under consideration bythe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

In some areas, the bill closely tracks a legislative blueprintoffered by the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP),a business and environmental coalition that called for thesame short- and long-term emissions cuts proposed inthe Waxman–Markey measure. The draft bill also echoesthe USCAP proposal in devising a range of cost controlmeasures, including allowing companies to comply withmandated emissions cuts in part through offsets—projectsinside or outside of the United States that can offer reductions at a lower cost—by Dean Scott, BNA

Community Revitalization Specialist Named to Lead EPA Solid Waste OfficePresident Obama announced March 31 his intention tonominate Mathy V. Stanislaus, head of a New York-based nonprofit community revitalization group, as EPAAssistant Administrator for Solid Waste and EmergencyResponse.

Stanislaus, a former EPA assistant regional counsel in Region 2 in New York City, has more than 20 years of

experience in the environmental field, primarily in theareas of brownfields, Superfund, and solid waste, accord-ing to the White House. EPA’s Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response, which Stanislaus would direct, isresponsible for administering those three programs.

An environmental lawyer and chemical engineer, Stanis-laus co-founded and co-directs New Partners for Community Revitalization Inc., an organization whosemission is to advance the renewal of New York’s low- andmoderate-income neighborhoods through the redevel-opment of brownfield sites. He has been an adviser toEPA, other federal government agencies, Congress, andthe United Nations on a variety of environmental issues,the White House said.

As assistant regional counsel for EPA Region 2, he wasresponsible for all aspects of enforcement cases broughtunder the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Act and the EmergencyPlanning and Community Right-to-Know Act. He is aboard member of the New York City Environmental JusticeAlliance Inc. Stanislaus was born in Sri Lanka and immi-grated to the United States, the White House said. em

New Grants to Measure Progress of Environmental Programsin Protecting Human Health

EPA has awarded 10 grants totaling US$5 million to universities, state departments of public health,and one research institute to develop a new generation of markers or indicators that measureprogress in environmental programs to protect human health. The new projects were awardedthrough EPA’s Science To Achieve Results research program, and will help environmental managersevaluate the effectiveness of programs in protecting human health and the environment

Traditionally, environmental decision-makers have evaluated success by numbers, such as annualair releases, pollutant concentrations in water, or being in attainment for air quality. While thesemeasures are useful, health outcomes data will provide a new way to determine whether a programis succeeding in reducing the incidence of environmentally-related diseases, such as asthma. Theresearch results will inform the public and policy-makers about the impact of current air qualityregulations or programs and provide valuable feedback for improving regulatory or other actions.

Under one of the grants, Johns Hopkins researchers will develop state-level indicators of environmental pollution, population exposure, and population health risks by applying EPA na-tional indicators to New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection population data. Whilethe University of California at Los Angeles will use its grant to combine existing environmentalmonitoring and health survey data to develop health outcome indicators that focus on asthma-related emergency department visits, doctor’s visits, absences from school and work, medicationuse, and frequency of asthma symptoms.

For more information on the grants, go to www.epa.gov/ncer/indicators.


em • annual conference preview

What Does ACE Offer You?

Quality Technical InformationWith more than 500 presentations scheduled, ACE2009 is loaded with technical information. As always, we’reoffering sessions and courses that cover a wide range ofenvironmental topics, so whether your concentration is inair modeling, climate change, waste management, ormercury, we’ve got the information you’re looking for.

Great Keynote SpeakersThis year’s keynote program highlights the changes takingplace in the environmental arena, with presentations bykey industry leaders, including new EPA AdministratorLisa Jackson (invited) and Worldwatch Institute presidentChristopher Flavin.

The Latest Products and ServicesVisit with our over 170 exhibitors to find the best (andthe best deals) in environmental technology and inno-vation. Our ACE exhibitors will be displaying productsand services that cover every environmental profession.

Networking, Networking, NetworkingWhen times are tough, professional connections are

more valuable than ever. Mingle and share ideas withyour colleagues from around the world at ACE. Fromplanned networking events like the Grand Reception, to social tours and session breaks, you’ll have plenty oftime to exchange ideas and business cards with your fellow attendees.

Detroit: Cars, Music, and Much MoreWhile in Detroit, discover this vibrant city’s cultural attractions, exciting nightlife, and great food. From visiting the Henry Ford Museum and the Detroit ScienceCenter to catching a game at the Tigers’ Comerica Park,there are plenty of fun and interesting places to checkout during your downtime at ACE.

Attend Two Conferences for the Price of One!This year, A&WMA has partnered with the Detroit Economic Club to give ACE attendees access to TheNational Summit on Monday, June 15, at no additionalcharge! The National Summit is being held at TheDetroit Marriot Renaissance Center and will engage across-sector gathering of prominent business, government,labor, and academic leaders in debate and dialog in four areas of vital importance to America’s future in aglobal economy: technology, energy, environment, andmanufacturing.

Student and Young Professional (YP) ProgramsStudents and YPs attending ACE have full access to all ofthe regular ACE programming, as well as additionalevents designed just for them. Students and YPs canmingle during the first-ever ACE kayak trip, or at thestudent/YP social at the Detroit Beer Company. Forstudents and YPs looking for a new job or career advice,there is speed networking, career presentations, and afree résumé critique. em

Looking for Reasons to Join Us in Detroit for ACE 2009?

Look No Further!

www.awma.org/ACE2009

Despite this year’s economic uncertainties, we hope that you’ll join us in Detroit for our 102nd Annual Conference & Exhibition (ACE) this June. Perhaps now more than ever, gathering with your colleagues from around the world to share information and solutions is critical to your business and professional development.


Listed below are the articles appearing in theMay 2009 issue of the Journal. For ordering information, go to www.awma.org/journal or call1-412-232-3444.

In This Month’s Issue...Coarse Particulate Matter Apportionmentaround a Steel Smelter Plant

Evaluation of Wood Chip-Based Biofilters to Reduce Odor, Hydrogen Sulfide, and Ammoniafrom Swine Barn Ventilation Air

Extractive Sampling and Optical Remote Sensing of F100 Aircraft Engine Emissions

Evaluation of Bioaerosol Components, Generation Factors, and Airborne Transport Assoicated with Lime Treatment of Contaminated Sediment.

Measurement and Capture of Fine and Ultra-fine Particles from a Pilot-Scale Pulverized CoalCombustor with an Electrostatic Precipitator

Energy Recycling by Co-Combustion of Coaland Recovered Paint Solids from AutomobilePaint Operations

Biofiltration of Air Contaminated by Styrene Vapors on Inorganic Filtering Media: An Experimental Study

The National Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy:Rethinking the Role of National Networks

The Social Distribution of Neighborhood-ScaleAir Pollution and Monitoring Protection

A New Technique for Characterizing the Efficacy of Fugitive Dust Suppressants

Seasonal Ammonia Emissions from a Free-StallDairy in Central Texas

Development of Welding Emission Factors forCr and Cr(VI) with a Confidence Level

MAY 2009 • VOLUME 59

JOURNALIn Memory of A&WMA MemberDaniel R. Stearn • 1924 – 2009

Daniel R. Stearn, the Association’s first full-time marketing manager, passed away on February 6, 2009,at the age of 85. Stearn joined A&WMA in November1971 in response to a decision by the Board of Direc-tors to establish this new position to serve a growingAssociation. His responsibilities included inviting exhibits for the annual meeting, promoting advertisingfor the Journal and other publications, supporting the

acquisition of new members, and carrying out other public relations activities.He retired from the Association in 1989.

Stearn came to the Association after 10 years with the Instrument Society ofAmerica, where he was engaged in similar activities. He held a bachelor’s degree in journalism from Duquesne University and worked for six years as astaff correspondent for United Press International. Stearn served in World War IIwith the 509th Fighter Squadron as a radio operator and received numerousdecorations and citations.

em • in memoriam

A&WMA Past-President, Joseph A. Martone, Ph.D., CIH, QEP, has beenelected vice chair of the Utah Engineers Council (UEC). Following one year asvice chair, he will serve as chair for 2010–2011. The UEC is an umbrella organization of 15 different local chapters and sections of engineering societies.Its purpose is to advance the art and science of engineering and to provide a forum for communication among the various engineering societies.

A&WMA member Jeff Peltola, P.E., has been selected to be the American Society of Civil Engineers’ 2009 Congressional Fellow, and began his term inWashington, DC, in February. Peltola is a Past Chair of A&WMA’s Upper Midwest Section and was a member of the Local Host Committee for the 2005Annual Conference & Exhibition in Minneapolis. He has worked for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Ozone Transport Commission, andthe Central Regional Air Planning Association. In his new role, Peltola be workingwith legislative assistants on a surface transportation authorization bill, amongother issues.

em • members in the news

Advertisers’ IndexEM Advertiser (www) Go to page

Arcadis (arcadis-us.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Barr Engineering Co. (barr.com). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Baum Publications Ltd. (baumpub.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23ERM Group Inc. (erm.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr, & Huber Inc.(FTC&H; ftch.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

EM Advertiser (www) Go to page

General Motors Corp. (gm.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Front CoverGolder Associates (golder.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Lakes Environmental Software Inc. (weblakes.com). . . . . . Back CoverUL DQS Inc. (ul-dqsusa.com). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11WE Energies (we-energies.com) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33


International PerspectivesThe conference program was divided into four sessions. The first session highlighted waste man-agement practices from around the world, includingBrazil, Canada, China, the Middle East, and Sweden.

Alain David from the Waste Management Divisionof Environment Canada began the session with anoverview of the trends and opportunities with respect to solid waste management in Canada.

Magnus Schoening from the Business County Administrative Board of Skane, Sweden providedan overview of waste management practices inSweden. Energy from waste is a major part of Sweden’s integrated waste management solution.Combined heat and power facilities are very popular,since heat recovery is 90% efficient. Also, a tax islevied to discourage waste disposal at landfills.

In many parts of the world, a single waste streamdestined to landfill is still a popular choice for wastemanagement. In China, the Middle East, Brazil, andthe Caribbean, for example, the move to waste diversion and thermal treatment is slowly emerging,but still lags behind Europe and North America.

Norm Nuttal of Stantec cautioned against the useof high-tech solutions to solve waste managementissues in developing countries. He suggested thatprogressive, practical solutions should be the focusin developing countries.

New and Emerging TechnologiesThe second session focused on new and emergingwaste management technologies, including thermaltreatment, anaerobic management of organic waste,and the latest developments in landfill design.

Recent opinion polls in Canada show that the vastmajority of Canadians (83%) are in favor of energy-from-waste solutions. There is great potential inCanada for the use of thermal treatment technology,since recent data compiled by Statistics Canadashow that only 3% of residual solid waste inCanada is currently thermally treated, the rest(97%) is landfilled.

Ron Richter from Veolia described a modern mass-burn energy-from-waste facility. These typesof facilities comprise 95% of all energy-from-wasteplants in the world. For mass-burn incinerators tobe cost-effective, they need to be built to handlelarge quantities of waste (i.e., greater than 200,000tons per year). Such incinerators work best in com-munities with good recycling programs in place(i.e., metal and organics are not part of the feedstream) as the feedstock to the incinerator has ahigh BTU value.

Gasification systems are also growing in popularitythroughout the world, since the synthetic gas thatis generated from such facilities is as clean as naturalgas. A major factor for installations is the currentprice for electricity. Presentations were given by

em • association news

Conference HighlightsCanadian Municipal Waste Management

Canadian Municipal Waste Management ConferenceNovember 12–14, 2008 • Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

More than 80 people attended A&WMA’s two-day specialty conference on integrated wastemanagement in November, which examined how municipalities can find the best solutions tomanage solid waste.

by John Nicholson

John Nicholson, M.Sc., P.Eng.,is a management consultantwith Environmental BusinessConsultants. E-mail:[email protected]


representatives from several gasification vendors,including Alter Nrg, Enerkem, O.E. Gasification,and Plasco.

Some gasification companies are adding a chemicalprocess facility on the back end of the gasificationunit to produce ethanol and methanol. As such,they do not consider their process to be thermaltreatment. For example, the City of Edmonton andEnerkem have partnered on the construction of a100,000 ton/yr gasification system. The estimatedcost of the facility is $70 million (Canadian dollars).

Life-Cycle Costs of Waste ManagementSession three began with AECOM’s Konrad Fitctneroffering an overview of what integrated wastemanagement is and why it is a useful tool for municipalities. At is core, integrated waste man-agement is the application of the waste managementhierarchy (i.e., reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, andresiduals) and local priorities (i.e., financial, envi-ronmental, and social). Fitctner provided examplesof how the application of integrated waste management solutions at various municipalities resulted in providing different solutions to managingsolid waste.

During the panel discussion, panelists agreed that

municipalities need to include the life-cycle costsfor various waste management solutions, so thatthe long-term implications of landfilling are clearlyunderstood against more progressive solutions,such as composting and gasification.

Advanced Integrated Waste ManagementThe final session of the conference focused on specific examples of integrated waste managementin practice, including Edmonton, Ottawa, Strath-cona County (Alberta), and Vancouver.

The challenge of integrated waste management inOttawa, Canada’s Capital, is that more than 70% of the total solid waste generated is from the institutional, commercial, and industrial or “private”sector. These waste generators are focused on theleast expensive waste solution, which is landfilling.

The session concluded that the key to long-termsuccess of an integrated waste management systemis not to commit to one solution (i.e., landfilling).By using an integrated approach with multiple solutions, ranging from reduction of waste to com-posting to energy recovery, a municipality will havethe flexibility to balance economic, social, and environmental priorities. em

Conference attendees learnedthat the City of Edmonton andEnerkem havepartnered on theconstruction of a100,000 ton/yrgasification system.


The following course is being held in conjunction with thespecialty conference, Joint Conference: International ThermalTreatment Technologies and Hazardous Waste Combustors,May 18–22, 2009, Cincinnati, OH.

MAY 18 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-285: HWC MACT, Trial Burn/Risk Burn Compliance TestingInstructor: Douglas Saathoff, Executive Vice President,Metco Environmental Inc.This course will provide practical information for conductinga successful trial burn, risk burn, or hazardous waste com-bustor (HWC) Maximum Achievable Control Technology(MACT) performance test. Specific roles, preparation steps,and responsibilities will be discussed for each of the partiesinvolved in the test program, with details on organizing asuccessful team. The impact of regulatory requirements ontest plan design will be addressed, as will U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency methods for emissions measure-ment, associated quality assurance/quality control, andmethod limitations.

The following course is being held in conjunction with thespecialty conference, Latest Developments in the Identificationand Management of Indoor Air Quality Issues, May 20–22,2009, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

MAY 20 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-134: Indoor Air Quality in Office BuildingsInstructor: Tedd Nathanson, Indoor Air Quality ConsultantThis course is intended for professionals interested in themultidisciplinary field of indoor air quality (IAQ). CommonIAQ issues will be discussed, including the differences between occupational health and safety (industrial hygiene)and comfort criteria and best practices; sources of indoorpollutants; the investigative process; heating, ventilation, andair conditioning systems; measurement equipment; problemresolution; water damage restoration principles; mold remediation; and the accommodation of persons with environmental sensitivities.

The following two courses are being held in conjunctionwith the specialty conference, Harmonizing Greenhouse GasAssessment and Reporting Processes, August 31–September2, 2009, Baltimore, MD.

AUGUST 31 (8:00 A.M.–12:00 P.M.)AIR-128: GHG Emissions ManagementInstructors: Katherine N. Blue, Managing Consultant, andRam Ramanan, Ph.D., P.E., Principal Consultant, Trinity Consultants Inc.Learn the latest on this timely topic, including significant regional, U.S., and international policy developments related to climate change and methods of effective GHGemissions management. Real-world case studies and exercises demonstrate how to prepare effective GHG inventories according to World Resources Institute/

World Business Council for Sustainable Development(WRI/WBCSD) Greenhouse Gas Protocols and other frequently used protocols. Participants will also learn aboutvoluntary program options, carbon risk management andstrategy development, carbon offsets and emissions trading,emissions reduction opportunities, and benchmarking bestpractice companies.

AUGUST 31 (1:00 P.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-129: Getting Started with Your Greenhouse Gas(GHG) Program: Practical Considerations for ManagingGHG Emissions in an Evolving ClimateInstructor: Terri Shires, URS Corp.

Climate change is receiving significant attention in theUnited States. States and regional organizations are takingaction now through voluntary and mandatory programs,while a myriad of federal activities are being explored. Thefinancial community and shareholders are questioning companies about potential exposures, their impact on sharevalue, and what specific actions are being taken to mitigatethese risks. Companies recognize that they will be affected,but are looking for guidance and direction in this uncertainand rapidly evolving GHG landscape.

The following two courses are being held in conjunctionwith the specialty conference, Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models, October 26–30, 2009,Raleigh, NC.

OCTOBER 26 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-298: Introduction to the CALPUFF Modeling SystemInstructors: Joseph S. Scire, CCM, Vice President, Earth Tech Inc.CALPUFF has been designed by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) as a guideline model for long-range transport applications and for use on a case-by-casebasis for both near- and far-field applications in complexflow situations where steady-state conditions do not apply.This course will provide an overview of the modeling systemand its capabilities, including recent developments.

OCTOBER 27 (8:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M.)AIR-297: Introduction to AERMODInstructors: Robert Paine, CCM, QEP, and Jeff Connors,both with AECOM Inc.AERMOD was adopted on December 9, 2005, by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a replacementfor the ISCST3 model, which has been in use in variousforms for 25 years. The advanced model will require theuser community to become acquainted with new conceptsin air quality modeling. This course provides an overviewof AERMOD’s features and performance. It discusses implementation issues regarding this new model. Severalcomputer exercises and debugging sessions are providedon CD as part of the course. Attendees should plan to bringa laptop with a CD drive to the session. em

For more infor-mation about the courses andconferences onthis page, go towww.awma.org/events.

em • professional development courses

awma.org Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Association may 2009 em 47

NOVEMBER1–5 International Society for Exposure Science

(ISES) 2009 Annual Conference: Transforming Exposure Science in the 21st Century, Minneapolis, MN

17 A&WMA Rocky Mountain States Section’sConference on Air Quality Issues in theRocky Mountain Region, Golden, CO;[email protected]

2010MARCH22–26 Air Pollution and Health: Bridging the Gap

from Sources to Health Outcomes, An International Specialty Conference by theAmerican Association for Aerosol Research,San Diego, CA; www.aaar.org/index2.cfm?section=Meetings_and_Events

MAY17–20 Joint Conference: International Thermal

Treatment Technologies and HazardousWaste Combustors, San Francisco, CA

JUNE22–25 A&WMA’s 103rd

Annual Conference & Exhibition, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

AUGUSTAug 30 Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Mega –Sept 2 Symposium, Baltimore, MD

SEPTEMBER11–16 15th World Congress of the International

Union of Air Pollution Prevention Associations (IUAPPA): Achieving Environmental Sustainability in a Resource Hungry World, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

NOVEMBER1–4 Symposium on Air Quality Measurement

Methods and Technology, Los Angeles, CA

2009MAY18–22 Joint Conference: International Thermal

Treatment Technologies and HazardousWaste Combustors, Cincinnati, OH

20–22 Latest Developments in the Identificationand Management of Indoor Air Quality Issues, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

28 Overview of the EPA Proposed GreenhouseGas Inventory RuleWebinar, 2:00 - 4:00 p.m. Eastern

JUNE16–19 A&WMA’s 102nd Annual Conference

& Exhibition, Detroit, MI

AUGUSTAug 31 Harmonizing Greenhouse Gas Assessment–Sept 2 and Reporting Processes, Baltimore, MD

SEPTEMBER15–16 Air Quality Impacts of Oil and Gas

Production in the Rocky Mountains, Centennial, CO

21–25 Energy Efficiency and Air Pollutant Control, Wroclaw, Poland; www.energy-air-wroclaw.pwr.wroc.pl

OCTOBER4–6 A&WMA Florida Section’s Annual

Conference, Captiva Island, FL; [email protected]

20–22 ASTM International Committee E50 on Envi-ronmental Assessment, Risk Management,and Corrective Action, Atlanta, GA;www.astm.org/COMMIT/E50.htm

25–29 International Air Quality VII Conference, Arlington, VA; www.undeerc.org

26–30 Guideline on Air Quality Models: Next Generation of Models, Raleigh, NC

em • calendar of events

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

CALGARY 2010

Events sponsored and cosponsored by the Air &Waste Management Association (A&WMA) arehighlighted in bold. For moreinformation, call A&WMAMember Services at 1-800-270-3444 or visit theA&WMA Events Web site:www.awma.org/events.

To add your events to this calendar, send to: Calendar Listings, Air & Waste Manage-ment Association, One GatewayCenter, 3rd Floor, 420 FortDuquesne Blvd., Pittsburgh, PA15222-1435. Calendar listingsare published on a space-available basis and should be received by A&WMA’s editorialoffices at least three months inadvance of publication.

Go online for the most up-to-date events informationwww.awma.org/events

48 em may 2009Copyright 2009 Air & Waste Management Associ-ation

em: What inspired you to become an environmentalprofessional?Cross: I began my career with an engineering and construc-tion firm in the late 1980s. Following this I worked in thechemical industry and then the steel industry. During this time,environmental issues were a growing concern in all industries.My first assignment was an incinerator retrofit in Arkansas, andfrom there I spent the next 13 years studying combustion.

What environmental leader do you admire most?There are actually two from a company once known as FourNines Inc.: Joseph Santoleri and Bill Dostmann. Joseph wasa principal with the company and answered the phone lateone evening to give a struggling “green horn” some adviceon how to solve a combustion problem. Joseph treated mewith the respect of a seasoned veteran. He sent Bill to myrescue. I worked with Bill for many months on this project.One day, we took a trip to a machine shop outside of LittleRock to modify spray nozzles. I will never forget the look onBill’s face. He was like a kid in a candy store as he took meon a tour of the shop, showing me all the antique equip-ment. He inspired me to never stop learning.

What advice would you give to students and/oryoung professionals just starting out in the field?Environmental engineers are bred from all disciplines of engineering. Take every opportunity to learn while workingin the field—and never stop asking questions. The environ-mental industry will never stop growing as the next cutting-edge technology is born from what we do not know andfrom that which we can formulate questions.

What does A&WMA membership mean to you?Networking, camaraderie, and most of all a venue for passing the insight of veterans to rookies. A&WMA offers

opportunities to learn and share information critical to the development of the environmental industry while sustaining the world’s natural resources.

Are you currently working on any interesting projects?Most of my current work is involved with the reduction ofpollutants from coal-fired power plants using calcium-basedreagents in scrubbers. Future projects will focus more onthe treatment and minimization of a precious natural resource—water.

What are your proudest accomplishments as an environmental professional?My first published paper on nitrous oxide reduction; my firststart-up of a wet flue gas desulpherization system at a coal-fired power plant; and my involvement in the IT3 Conference,where I will become the Technical Chair in 2010 and 2011.

What’s the single biggest environmental problem facing the world today?Much of the decision process for solutions to our environ-mental problems begins in our legislature and with pressurefrom other nations. The result is that the technical expertsare required to force-fit a solution to the problem instead ofbeing fully involved in the definition and solution of theproblem. Our current struggles lie with how to resolve thetrue environmental problems facing this world in light ofthe current economy and enlightening those individualswho blindly ignore scientific expertise.

How do you like to let off steam?Coaching baseball for my three sons, bowling, and playingtrumpet. I also love to umpire baseball, where I am certifiedwith the State of Pennsylvania and the American Legion. Ihave also been invited to umpire at the Field of Dreams inCooperstown, NY, this summer.

MinuteRoy E. Cross, Jr.Technical Market Manager—FGTCarmeuse Lime & StonePittsburgh, PA

Joined A&WMA in 1999

Allegheny Mt. Section

Association leadership roles held: Technical Chair (2010–2011), Technical Vice Chair(2008–2009), and member of the Program AdvisoryCommittee (2004–present) for the International ThermalTreatment Technologies (IT3) Conference, cosponsoredby A&WMA

em • association news

The Member

“A&WMA membership offers networking,camaraderie, andmost of all a venuefor passing the insight of veteransto rookies.”

Each month, this page profiles a different A&WMA member to find out what makes them tick at work and at home.

Tell Us What Makes You Tick!The Member Minute is a greatway to share your experiences,work, and accomplishementswith A&WMA’s membershipand EM readers. Want to seeyour photo and story high-lighted in EM, or do you wantto recommend someone to be featured? Just e-mail yourcontact information to EMManaging Editor Lisa Bucher at [email protected] for consideration.

Documents

Sustainable Energypubs.awma.org/gsearch/em/2009/5/May 2009 EM.pdfMay 05, 2009 · Go read both issues if you missed them! ADVERTISING Malissa Goodman 1-412-904-6012 [email protected]