A Case Study for Coal Emission Reduction for

Laramie River Station and Alternative

Sources of Electricity to Acquire Sustainability

Jonathan Thompson
Undergraduate School of Environmental Science
University of Idaho
Thom5841@vandals.uidaho.edu
25 November 2012

Abstract: Coal has been labeled as the dirtiest fossil fuel used in power plants. Not only is it a
harmful source of fuel for the environment it is also a limited resource. The emissions that are
created from the process of burning coal for electricity have been regulated since the Clean Air
Act (CAA) of 1970 (7). Since the Act has been in place coal plants have been required to
improve and limit the environmental impact of burning coal. Environmental problems, global
warming and human deaths have been linked to the emissions that are emitted from burning coal
(6). This case study will discuss the environmental impacts, the sustainability of coal burning for
the future, the emissions produced by the Laramie River Station (LRS), and possible replacement
sources for electricity. The emission control practices used by coal plants like the LRS must
change as new technology becomes available and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
requires higher standards for emission control.
2

Keywords: Coal, renewable resource, nonrenewable resource, emissions, environmental impact,
turbines, solar, health, LRS.
1. Introduction
Coal plants are major environmental and health hazards that are running out of fuel. The non-
renewable resource could be eliminated within 200 years at the current consumption rate, making
this source of electricity unsustainable. New technologies have been implemented in the process
of generating electricity using coal, by lowering emissions and improving efficiency, but it is not
a permanent solution to the problem. Emissions that are generated from the process are causing
global warming and can produce acid rain, smog, as well as air toxins (13). Emissions also cause
health problems in humans including premature death and respiratory problems. Solutions to the
emission and health problems that are attributed to coal burning, have been tested and at this
time are in the beginning stages of operation. Some permanent solutions to the limited coal
resource are using alternative methods to generate electricity using renewable resources such as
wind and solar power to replace coal. During the testing and replacement processes, coal power
plants like the Laramie Power Plant are required by law to lower the pollutants from burning
coal. The measures taken to reduce the amount of emissions can be costly but will reduce the
environmental impact dramatically. In future generations the majority of fossil fuels will be
eliminated and alternative methods are vital to a sustainable future.
2. Laramie River Station
The LRS is a power plant located in Wheatland Wyoming that was put into operation in
1981, and creates 1,710 megawatts (MW) of electricity annually. The plant is owned by 6
electric utilities, with Missouri Basin Muni Power Agency having 42.27% owner ship. The
3

power plant uses 3 coal fueled generators to create 570 MW each. These coal fueled generators
use sub-bituminous coal and future projections for tons of CO2 emitted annually is 12 million
tons, down from 15 in 2006. Sub-bituminous coal has properties of bituminous and lignite
burning at a rate of 8,300-11,500 BTUs per ton of coal (3). LRS powers two grids in the U.S.
making it a very unique power plant, one generator sends electricity to the East and the other two
are connected to the west. Due to laws and regulations relating to human health, the owners of
LRS have paid millions to the public that have died or have acquired a respiratory illness because
of the pollutants from the plant. The average death costs LRS a little over $7 million and other
illnesses range from $440,000-$52 per incident. Upgrades to preventing pollution are of concern
because of the health and environmental issues that are the result of the operations in the LRS
power plant. In December of 2011 the EPA passed a law to lower the amount of mercury and air
toxins from power plants. The LRS has received a lot of negativity from the general public
because of the emissions causing a haze in the atmosphere from the burning processes of the
LRS. The poor air quality and health problems that are associated with the burning of coal in the
LRS have gotten the attention of the local and federal governments. The LRS has been working
with its own state of Wyoming to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions that was mandated in
2009 and is backed by the EPA. LRS has until 2023 to install the NOx controls. The controls that
are to be implemented were suggested to improve the poor air quality in Wyoming, referred to as
Regional Haze (9).
3. Emissions
Emissions or pollutants are part of electricity production whatever the choice of the fuel used
may be (12). The thought of coal being the dirtiest fuel on the planet is true because of the
amount of pollutants that are created from the burning process. The emissions that are emitted
4

from the process include the following; Carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxide, mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium, heavy metals, trace amounts of uranium,
hydrocarbons, volatile organic compound and airborne particles (14). Environmental issues such
as smog and ozone depletion are linked to the process of burning coal. Processes have been
implemented to attempt to remove pollutants from coal before entering the burning facility.
Removing pollutants from the coal can be energy intensive or low energy, for example coal
washing. The process of washing coal can infect the ground water, affecting the aquatic life and
wild game. Humans health is also a casualty from the pollutants both water and air borne (15).
Premature death, respiratory illness, and visual impairment are the human health costs of the
process. Green house gases (GHG) from coal are part of the global warming issue. These GHG
created are by-products of the burning process and the government is attempting to eliminate the
GHG by implementing laws and regulations. Laws such as the CAA are enforcing limitations of
emissions such as carbon dioxide and issuing fines if coal plants are not abiding by the law. The
LRS in 2006 created more than 15 million tons of CO2 that is the same as over 650 thousand
humans breathing normally for a year. In 2011 the amount of toxic emissions emitted by the LRS
ranked it as the 4
th
highest that year in the United States. The environmental tolls that coal plants
like the LRS have are the reasons for the regulations enforced by the EPA, and part of the reason
for the search for alternative fuels.
4. Types of Coal Used in the Industry
Coal mining requires a range of methods to extract the resource from the Earth. Surface mine
or underground mines require explosives, machinery to extract the resource, and haul the coal to
a coal refinery before shipment to plants like the LRS. Extracting the resource requires energy
and pollution is inevitable, with current technology and laws, using surface or underground
5

mining (10). Transportation of coal is generally accomplished by train, lowering the
environmental impact compared to using trucks. Coal ranges in quantity found in reserves and
amount of energy per ton because of the different types of coal. There are 4 types of coal that are
used in the commercial industry ranging from electricity production to heat production.
Anthracite, bituminous, sub-bituminous and lignite are the types of coal mined and used
commercially (5). Anthracite and bituminous coal have the highest concentration of carbon,
making these types of coal to having the most potential energy per ton (2). The carbon content of
the different coals varies which also implies the amount of pollutants in the coals varies. Sulfur
content of the coal for example in anthracite coal is the lowest followed by bituminous, sub-
bituminous and lignite (16). The different amounts of pollutants cause for different measures to
be taken to abide by the standards set forth by the EPA. LRS uses a coal that has high
concentrations of pollutants requiring higher pollution prevention actions than that of an
anthracite or bituminous fueled plant. Regardless of the pollution prevention actions taken by the
LRS, it is still ranked the 4
th
largest toxic plant in the nation.
4.1 Anthracite and Bituminous Coal Defined
The high concentration of carbon in anthracite and bituminous coal make these that hardest
and most dense coal types. High BTUs can be achieved from burning these coals however
anthracite is the hardest coal and is difficult to ignite. Anthracite is not mined for electricity or
steel production but it is used for heating residential and commercial buildings because of the
low ash remains. Bituminous coal has the highest BTU per ton and is extracted from the earth the
most, for trade, electricity and steel production. The bituminous coal does not have the amount of
pollutants of sub-bituminous coal but it is a contributor to global warming none the less. Sub-
bituminous coal is generally used for electricity production and the biggest reserve in the U.S. is
6

in the home state of the LRS, Wyoming. The BTUs per ton are significantly lower than
bituminous but it ignites easily and breaks down with less energy to remove pollutants before
burning. Lignite or brown coal is usually only used in electrical producing plants that are located
nearby a mine site. The high pollutant content and low BTU per ton does not justify the amount
of time, money and energy required to transport the low grade coal.
5. Clean Coal
The idea of clean coal requires a lot of testing and motivation to reduce emissions and keep
the production of electricity at the same level. The GHG, CO2, is the main emission that is
focused on when implementing clean coal technology. The goal is to remove all emissions from
the process of burning coal for future coal burning operations. Removing the CO2 can require a
high amount of energy with certain processes. Washing the coal before burning has been a fairly
simple process to remove sulfur dioxide and ash from the burning process. Washing removes
emissions from what could have been air borne but now needs to be filtered out of the water that
was used in the washing process. Pollutants that are removed can be buried or used in other
processes minimizing the pollution directly from coal. New plants can increase heat efficiency
by up to 50% of the old ones lessening the emissions per kWh. New plants are more efficient
because of the new filtering and construction procedures that are available. Other refined
materials used in the plant construction and operation also help with efficiency, e.g. insulation of
combustion chambers. Technologies have been produced to enable the capture and storage of
CO2 from coal burning known as Carbon Capture and Storage or Sequestration (CSS). This
technology of CCS could cost the power plant 20%-30% efficiency but the benefit of the CCS
for human health and the environment would compensate for the lowered efficiency. CCS has
not been fully accepted by the commercial industry but the government is trying to accelerate the
7

testing procedures as of 2010 (17). The realization of global warming and the amount of GHG
emitted from coal have also fueled the technology of harnessing a renewable resource such as,
solar or wind power to generate electricity (13).
6. A Limited Resource
During the early stages of the industrial age coal, and soon after oil were the fuels of choice.
They were abundant and generated higher heat than wood which is essential to steam production
for electricity and steel production. Coal is also being used in a variety of factories for other
metals and a source of heat for businesses as well as residential housing (1). The majority of the
coal reserves are found within the United States boarders making coal mining an economically
sound choice. Although, the U.S. is behind China in coal production, the export business of the
U.S. has benefited greatly from the coal reserves. As the coal resource demand is rising the U.S.
has reacted by increasing coal mining processes. With the increased mining and the attempts to
replace oil by liquefying coal, the coal reserves are running out. The use of coal accounts for
50% of the nations electricity production and has been used in such a manner since the 1880s.
Coal mining has been a reliable contributor to economies around the globe because of the
demand. The high coal reserve in the U.S. is acting like a diminishing savings account, if you
will. The slowed consumption and the idea of essentially eliminating the coal industry would be
hard to accept nationally. The realized truth of the diminishing coal resource and eventual
elimination has accelerated the testing of alternative methods. New technologies are being
entertained to lower the consumption and emissions of coal but not eliminate coal abruptly from
commercial use. The need for CCS and rising global warming potential found in coal has also
made alternative sources of fuel more attractive to the general public. Alternative renewable
sources such as wind turbines and solar panels are methods that have been tested and
8

implemented throughout the U.S. The applications of these sources are energy intensive and time
consuming, with some resistance from portions of the general public that are unaware of the
diminishing supply of non-renewable resources. Until the general public is educated on the un-
sustainability of using coal, the implementation process will be slowed hence the CCS and CCA.
7. Replacement Sources
Alternative renewable sources to achieve sustainability for energy production that have been
tested include wind turbines and solar panels. The alternative resources were created to lower or
potentially eliminate the production of emissions, post-construction, and ensure the production of
electricity for the future. Wind turbines have generated a great amount of confrontation because
of the immediate environmental impact from constructing wind farms. Wind turbines at this time
are the most cost effective alternative source of electricity. Wind farms in Wyoming are being
constructed annually driving the electrical production by non-renewable resources down. The
electrical production by wind in the state of Wyoming as of 2010 was 1,400 MW prolonging the
inevitable elimination of the coal resource. Permits have been given to increase the output of
wind energy in Wyoming to a possible 7,900 MW in 2016, equaling 4.6 times the amount of
electricity output of the LRS (11). The resistance from the general public has generated testing of
bird and bat mortality due to the construction of wind turbines. There is also confrontation that
wind turbines create sight pollution because of the size of the turbines. Solar panels have had
less confrontation because the panels are not as predominant as wind turbines. The lack of solar
panel construction is largely because of the cost and relying on weather conditions (4). The
demand for panels is low, and the testing facilities with the technology to build sufficient panels
are rare, driving the costs up. The elements for highly productive panels are costly and will be,
until the demand has raised enough to lower the cost of the materials. Although the amount of
9

resistance is high, turbine permits are still being issued to moving the state of Wyoming to a
more renewable resource state.
8. Conclusion
The limited coal reserves in the world have caught the attention of world leaders for many
years. The knowledge that a renewable resource was vital to future generations sparked
development, testing and application of alternative sources. Global warming due to emissions
created by the coal and other non-renewable resources has given the development for renewable
energy momentum. The emissions that are created by the burning of coal are a priority for
lowering environmental impact and human health issues. The LRS is a relatively small coal
burning plant, comparatively to the coal plants worldwide, and has a significant impact on the
environment. The technologies like the CCS are a step in the right direction to lower the
emissions while alternative methods are developed. The LRS is becoming less appealing, or
outdated, because of the pollution created by burning coal and the construction of power plants
using renewable energy. The complete replacement of the LRS by wind power could be in the
near future, as coal reserves are depleted and emission standards given by the EPA are raised.
The U.S. has been working towards a self-sustained country and the abundance of renewable
wind and solar energy is helping to achieve sustainability. Coal has been a contributor to the
national economy for many years and life support for some communities (8). Eliminating the
production of coal could be devastating economically to small communities. The slow reduction
in coal production is essential for the nation; creating new jobs to replace some of the jobs lost in
the coal industry will require time. Wind and solar energy production is an acceptable
replacement for coal and other fossil fuels used to create electricity, using renewable resources
gives hope for future generations.
10

Works Cited
1. Al-Amin, A.B.; Azam, C.D.; Assessing the Scenario Concerning Environmental
Sustainability in Malaysia. S.R.E. 2001. Vol. 6 (103-109). ISSN: 1992-2248. Available
Online: http://www.academicjournals.org/SRE/. (Accessed Online: 20 November 2012).
2. Al-Rawi, A.B.; Introducing Sand Filter Capping for Turbidity Removal for Potable Water
Treatment Plants of Mosul/Iraq. I.J.W.R.E.E. 2009. Vol. 1. (11-19). Available Online:
http://www.academicjournals.org/IJWREE/. (Accessed on: 18 November 2012).
3. Basin Electric Power Cooperative.; Laramie River Station. Available Online:
http://www.basinelectric.com/Electricity/Generation/Laramie_River_Station/index.html.
(Accessed on: 11 November 2012).
4. Bieneman, Ph. D.; A Clean Energy Strategy Could Bring New Life to the Illinois
Economy. I.D.E.S. 2008. Available Online:
http://www.ides.illinois.gov/Custom/Library/publications/PressReleases/October2008IL
MR.pdf. (Accessed On: 22 November 2012).
5. BP. Coal Production. B.P. 2012. Accessed Online:
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle800.do?categoryId=9037184&contentId=706860
3. (Accessed On: 20 November 2012).
6. Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions.; Environmental Impacts of Coal
Power: Air Pollution. U.C.S. 2012. Available Online:
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html. (Accessed online: 10
November 2012).
7. Department of Energy.; Coal-Fired Power Plants (CFPPS). N.E.T.L. Available Online:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cfpp/Issues/NOx/ReductionEfforts.htm.
(Accessed on: 15 November 2012).
8. Edwards, Andres. The Sustainability Revolution. Canada: New Society Publishers, 2010.
(59-63).
9. Finley. Proposed Wyoming Regional Haze State Implementation Plan. EPA. 2009.
Available Online: http://wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org/PDFs/EPA-Oct09Letter-
RgnlHaze.pdf. (Accessed on: 11 November 2012).
10. Guiinee, Jeroen. Gorree, Marieke. Et al. An Operational Guide to the ISO Standards.
Leiden University: V.R.O.M., C.M.L. 2001. Part 2a (46).
11. Jakle, A.B.; Geiger. C.D.; Commercial Wind Energy Development in Wyoming: Guide
for Landowners. L.R.C.D. 2011. University of Wyoming. 2
nd
Edition. (6). Available
Online: http://www.lrcd.net/index_files/Documents/Wind_Guide_2nd_ed.pdf. (Accessed
On: 22 November 2012).
12. Johnson, A.B.; Hendri, C.D.; et al; A Case Study for the Emissions Reduction for Coal
Power Plants in Viet Nam.J.I.D.C. 2012. Volume 19, (33-45), Available Online:
http://ir.lib.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/metadb/up/kiyo/AN10482914/JIDC_19-2_33.pdf.
(Accessed online: 10 November 2012).
13. Keene, Jennifer., Cornell, Saul., et al. Visions of America. New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
2010. (892-893).
14. Levin, A.B.; Americas Top Power Plant Toxic Air Polluters. E.I.P. 2011. Available
Online: http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/documents/report-
topuspowerplanttoxicairpolluters.pdf. (Accessed on: 18 November 2012).
11

15. Munier, Nolberto. Introduction to Sustainability. The Netherlands: Springer, 2005. (120-
124).
16. Omer, A.B.; Green Energy from Chemicals and Bio-wastes. I.J.B.M.B.R. 2010. Vol. 1.
(101-122). ISSN: 2141-2154. Available Online:
http://www.academicjournals.org/IJBMBR/. (Accessed on: 18 November 2012).
17. World Nuclear Association.; Clean Coal Technologies, Carbon Capture &
Sequestration. 2012. Accessed Online: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.html.
(Accessed on: 15 November 2012).