Canada quietly asks EPA to weaken anti-pollution measures

Globe and Mail ^ | Oct. 17, 2009 | Martin Mittelstaedt

[opentalk]

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed tough new measures to reduce the health toll from air pollution around the Great Lakes by forcing lake freighters to stop burning dirty bunker fuel.

But the plan has an unusual opponent: The Canadian embassy in Washington has quietly asked the EPA to weaken the measures, arguing that they could harm trade. It wants ships to be allowed to continue using the high-polluting fuel and to instead install smokestack scrubbers that would clean up their emissions. The Canadian recommendation, if accepted, could delay the clean-air measure for years, because the technology for the scrubbers does not yet exist.

The embassy asked the EPA to make the changes in a letter last month, marking a rare instance in which Canada has lobbied the United States to weaken air-pollution controls designed to reduce health problems linked to breathing dirty air. Because winds carry contaminants back and forth across both sides of the Canada-U.S. border, the EPA proposal would also lead to air-quality improvements in Canada.

The Canadian position is supported by the Great Lakes shipping industry, which is warning that the costs of complying with the proposed environmental regulations are so high that they will force companies to scrap some of the iconic steamers that now ply the lakes carrying everything from salt to iron ore.

[1rudeboy]

For your list.

[La Lydia]

But, but...I thought Canada was environmentally superior to us.

[VOA]

“The Canadian embassy in Washington has quietly asked the EPA to
weaken the measures, arguing that they could harm trade. It wants ships
to be allowed to continue using the high-polluting fuel and to instead
install smokestack scrubbers that would clean up their emissions.”

LOL...
I guess that kid on the John Stossel special on “global warming”
must wonder what is going on when he sees/hears this.

After he fervently told Stossel that “Canada is MELTING!!!”.

(Of course, that’s what the wise elementary-school “educators”
probably told the little boy about a hundred times a day!)

That Stossle special aired maybe somewhere in the time of maybe
four-five years ago (sorry, I can remember the precise year).

[VOA]

“But, but...I thought Canada was environmentally superior to us.”

You’d think that from what you see/read.
But they are by-and-large good folks that are just trying to make
a buck and get by.

I remember an extended family member from Canada telling me that
“All Americans think about is money.”

Well, I respect my elders, so I didn’t challenge him. Also because many
Americans do at least LIKE (not LOVE) money as it’s a necessary
item in their lives (unless they’ve joined a religious order with
vows of poverty...in which case they might do something like make
wine or some other product and the money is turned over to the order.).

But some years later, I learned that Canadians, on average,
save a lot
more than Americans (this was maybe 20 years ago).

I’m a nice guy...and love my extended family.
So I never mentioned this “obsession” some Canadians seem to have
with money!

Now on socialized medicine in Canada...I have gently tried to lead
my Canadian relatives “into the light”.
But if Obama and Co. can, they’ll make sure my efforts have all
been “for naught”.

[La Lydia]

I wasn’t attacking Canada. I was pointing out that we are told by numerous sources in this country that they are “superior” to us in many ways, their wonderful, flawless, socialized health care system, their “more tolerant” immigration policies, and their “enlightened” environmental policies. I think Canadians are pretty much good guys, except for the squish-heads they have sent to Hollywood.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

There are 25 or 26 Great Lakes steamships that are affected by this EPA over reach. Each boat has 30 employees. This is 750 or more lost jobs.
The bigger boats have piston engines and can switch to distillate. The older "steamers" can't use diesel because of its viscosity.

[thackney]

I thought the regulations are to remove the sulfur from the heavier oil, not to discontinue the use of the heavy oil.

This is just following the steps already taken in road diesel. The same legislation was passed with multiple implementation steps.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

There appears to be a limit to the amount of sulfur that can be removed from residual oil. The 2010 spec is 1 percent and 2012 is .10.
The actual result will be to drive the oil off the lakes and in to industrial users that abut the lakes. In Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ontario, etc., the max sulfur for resid is still 1.5 percent.

[Freddd]

EPA needs to be dismantled.

[thackney]

I do not agree the is a physical limit to the removal.

I now work for a company with a lot of refinery process design engineers and we specialize on the heavy end, although our biggest strength is coking.

It is an economic, not a physical limit. However, depending on fuel alternatives, that may have the same result.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The US Coast Guard has thrown another ‘ringer’ into the Great Lakes fuel equation. About two years ago, many of the steamers began to use lower gravity residual oil, which is more commonly available from modern refineries. The USCG issued a rule preventing use of any oil less than 10 API gravity in bunkers on the theory that 10 API oil when spilled would float vs. heavier oil which would not. They based the new rule on OPA-90, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, written by the USCG and passed by congress.

[Charles Martel]

The Canadian recommendation, if accepted, could delay the clean-air measure for years, because the technology for the scrubbers does not yet exist.

Not entirely true - the scrubber technology does exist, but has never been installed completely aboard ship (existing systems are located on the dock and cover the ship smokestacks with a flexible "sock" while the vessel is in port). The dockside facilities are large, because they can accomodate multiple vessels. The scale could be reduced for shipboard use.

Whether it is cost-effective relative to using a cleaner-burning fuel... well, that's another question.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The lowest sulfur I've seen in a straight run N6, from US and Canada, meeting 380 CST is 1.2 percent. Some of the pyrolysis oils might qualify on sulfur but these typically are too thin visc to work in a steamer. The EPA has constructed a trap on one end and the USCG has put a box on the other end.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The newer Great Lakes boats can switch to distillate. In fact, they usually begin and end the season on N2FO. These are the 1,000 footers that run Pielstick and other big medium speed diesel engines. There are a couple of 1950s vintage steamers that were re-powered over the last decade. The new engines have the capability to switch.
25 or 26 steam turbine steamers remain. These are the smaller vessels that can run the rivers, delivering smaller bulk cargoes like salt, stone and coal. Incidentally, the steamers usually have the best chefs.

[thackney]

It is just a matter of time, money and space to add additional processing to remove more sulfur.

It just might work out more economic to export the resids and the ships that use them.

The following are examples of the comparisons that would get made:

http://www.fwc.com/publications/tech_papers/oil_gas/desulfur.doc

http://www.fwc.com/publications/tech_papers/oil_gas/ARTC.pdf

http://www.fwc.com/publications/tech_papers/files/ImpactLowSulphurBunkersRefineryPAPER.pdf

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I'd like to see the scrubber installed on a steam ship.
A pal who recently retired from the Lakes put it this way,"If we spend millions on scrubbers we might as well go whole hog: full nuclear power."

[fanfan]

Thanks for the ping, 1rudeboy.

[fanfan]

But, but...I thought Canada was environmentally superior to us.

Under our previous Liberal government, we signed Kyoto, and watched as our emissions went higher than yours.

[Army Air Corps]

Thanks for that bit of info.

[fanfan]

You’re welcome, AAC.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

That's what's happening now. Most US resids are exported via big cargoes out of the USGC.

[thackney]

Yes, it has already begun.

While the production has decreased.

[Publius6961]

Canada quietly asks EPA to weaken anti-pollution measures

What?

And put all these parasi.. errr criminal leeches on the real job-search list?

Your Taxes at Work

[fanfan]

Could you explain those graphs for a regular old Joe?

Would residential fuel oil would be Oil and Natural Gas?
Who are you exporting it to?

[thackney]

It is residual, not residential.

Residual is the general classification for the heavier oils, known as No. 5 and No. 6 fuel oils, that remain after the distillate fuel oils and lighter hydrocarbons are distilled away in refinery operations. It is used in steam-powered vessels in government service and inshore powerplants. No. 6 fuel oil includes Bunker C fuel oil and is used for the production of electric power, space heating, vessel bunkering, and various industrial purposes.

The core refining process is simple distillation, illustrated in a stylized fashion above. Because crude oil is made up of a mixture of hydrocarbons, this first and basic refining process is aimed at separating the crude oil into its "fractions," the broad categories of its component hydrocarbons. Crude oil is heated and put into a still -- a distillation column -- and different products boil off and can be recovered at different temperatures. The lighter products -- liquid petroleum gases (LPG), naphtha, and so-called "straight run" gasoline -- are recovered at the lowest temperatures. Middle distillates -- jet fuel, kerosene, distillates (such as home heating oil and diesel fuel) -- come next. Finally, the heaviest products (residuum or residual fuel oil) are recovered, sometimes at temperatures over 1000 degrees F. The simplest refineries stop at this point. Most in the United States, however, reprocess the heavier fractions into lighter products to maximize the output of the most desirable products, as shown schematically in the illustration, and as discussed below.

This heavy, thick fuel oil is exported to a lot of different places. Keep in mind this is what is left from the crude oil after the valuable products like gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and others have already been removed. Some more lighter products can be created, but it takes more expensive processing for limited return.

Exports of Residual Fuel Oil by Destination:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_expc_a_EPPR_EEX_mbblpd_a.htm

I hope that helps, let me know if you have further questions. The pictures are links to further detail.

[fanfan]

I missread Residual, and didn’t even realize it.
Thank you thackney.

That was a perfect explanation of how different fuels are made. I had no idea.

It must be hard to be patient sometimes. ;-)

[thackney]

Perfect explanations are easy when copied from someone else.

Those were the result of your tax dollars at work with the Energy Information Administration.

Glad to help, God Bless.

[fanfan]

You went to the trouble of finding it it. Thanks.

All my best to you.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Welcome back. You’ve been missed.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

A couple years ago, US heavy oil made it into the Mediterranean, backing our Russian resid for the first time. Our high sulfur resid typically goes to power plants or industrial plants in Africa (aluminum industry uses a lot) or to Eastern Europe to back out expensive Russian gas.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

our= out

[Clive]

-

[sbMKE]

Most of the 25 or 26 named “endangered” ships are already laid up, have been laid up, and/or haven’t had work this year.

The jobs are already lost because the industry is way down.

The lake fleet is only running at around 50% capacity - now is the perfect time to cull the fleets of old and obsolete ships and to replace them with American made updates - using Great Lakes Shipyards.

How ‘bout giving the shipyard guys a shot at working for a change?

[Catholic Canadian]

Naw, we have a conservative government up here now.

[La Lydia]

Lucky you. Some days I feel like my country is being turned into a people’s republic.

[Catholic Canadian]

Hopefully ours might turn back from one. Unfortunately your left is doing to the United States what they helped our left in Canada achieve some time ago as their ‘testing’ grounds.

[La Lydia]

That is horrible. I apologize sincerely.