Power - June 2014

J
u
n
e

2
0
1
4

V
o
l
.

1
5
8

N
o
.

6
Vol. 158 No. 6 June 2014

Be Prepared
for 316(b)
How NERC CIP 5 Will Affect
Your Plant
Long-Term Effects of Cycling
Gas Units
Advanced Combustion Turbine
Update
ELECTRIC POWER 2014
Roundup
Toshiba International Corporation is proud to be a single-source
solution for your application demands, offering a complete product
lineup of electric motors, adjustable speed drives, and motor
starters. From R&D to after-market service, our full range of in-
house services give our customers easy and efficient access
to some of the best services in the world. These are just a few
reasons why our customers prefer Toshiba. One Call. One Solution.
O N E C A L L . O N E S O L U T I O N .
1-800-231-1412
toshiba.com/tic
Visit Us!
Booth #1014
CIRCLE 1 ON READER SERVICE CARD
June 2014
|
POWER www.powermag.com 1
ON THE COVER
The final Clean Water Act Section 316(b) rule will require characterization of organisms
subject to impingement. In this photo, collected organisms are being kept alive while they
are identified, counted, and measured prior to release. If the final rule calls for optimization
of fish-handling systems, impinged organisms may need to be held for one to three days
to monitor latent mortality. Courtesy: Mark Mohlmann of Ecological Associates Inc.
COVER STORY: WATER REGULATIONS
22 Site-Specific Factors Are Critical for Compliance with Final 316(b) Existing
Facilities Rule
No, cooling towers are not the only option for complying with the long-awaited
Clean Water Act regulation of cooling water intake structures at existing power gen-
erating plants. However, making the best selection to achieve required rates for both
impingement and entrainment mortality require evaluating the range of potential
technologies based on a number of highly site-specific factors. Use the guidance
provided here to assess the risks and opportunities of the candidate approaches.
SPECIAL REPORT: NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
28 Introduction to NERC CIP Version 5
Do you know on which side of the bright line your generating facility falls for the new
North American Electric Reliability Corp. Critical Infrastructure Protection (NERC CIP)
standards? Even if your facility is designated as Low impact, you will be required to
develop and implement security policies that address four specific areas of concern.
32 Identifying CIP Version 5 Assets in Generation
The asset identification process in NERC CIP Version 5 is much more complicated
than in previous versions. Learn the right ways to identify the cyber assets that are
in scope for CIP Version 5.
34 When Old Systems Meet New Realities: Adding Security Controls to
Generating Plants
Whether or not your plant falls under the new CIP standards, odds are you need to
add or update cybersecurity controls. An engineer who has been there and done that
alerts you to likely challenges and best practices.
FEATURES
GAS-FIRED GENERATION
38 Managing the Changing Profile of a Combined Cycle Plant
When a plant thats been run in baseload mode has to switch to flexible operation,
its not just a matter of more frequent starts. From changes in staffing, inspections,
and monitoring, to different maintenance practices and alarm management, theres
a long list of things to think about to keep the plant running smoothly.
44 Recent Innovations from Gas Turbine and HRSG OEMs
The boom in gas-fired power has manufacturers rushing to fill the demand for new
plants, upgrades, and repowering. Whether youre looking for turbines, steam equip-
ment, or better emissions control, its a buyers market with some exciting develop-
ments being introduced.
FUELS
48 HECO Successfully Cofires Biofuel as No. 6 Oil Substitute
Island power systems that lack indigenous fuels for baseload capacity face unique
challenges, especially when they have renewable portfolio goals. Hawaiis largest
generator seems to have found one viable option for flexible, cleaner fuel use.
Established 1882 Vol. 158 No. 6 June 2014
22
44
In this web exclusive (associated with
this issues features at powermag.com),
youll get the inside scoop on AWEAs
WINDPOWER 2014 and the wind sectors
postproduction tax credit future.
A Wind Power Vision
32
Primary systems
Supervision and control (governor, frequency,
voltage, AGC, etc.)
Dynamic response
Startup, shutdown
Exciter
Protection relays
Power stabilizers
www.powermag.com POWER
|
June 2014 2
WORKFORCE
54 New Technology Is Key to Recruiting New Power Workforce
Our update on workforce trends in the power sector finds that training in new plant
technologies as well as training that uses technology are both essential to engage a
much-needed new generation of workers.
ELECTRIC POWER 2014 ROUNDUP
64 Lessons in Resiliency and Risk
ELECTRIC POWER 2014 in New Orleans began with keynote presentations by Rod
West, Entergys executive in charge of risk mitigation and disaster response, and
Microsofts Brian Janous, who is driving energy strategy for one of the nations larg-
est and most innovative electricity self-generators. What they shared has relevance
for every reader of this magazine.
66 Veterans Bring Needed Skills to the Utility Industry
New this year at ELECTRIC POWER: the Faraday Awards to recognize employers,
programs, and partnerships that have successfully elevated the careers of American
veterans in the electricity industry.
70 The Word for Gas Is Flexibility
Yes, flexibility is a now-familiar marketing pitch for gas-fired generation, but pre-
sentations in the gas track included discussion of some new ways of delivering flex-
ibility via operation, design, and technology innovations.
72 Fuel Flexibility Is the Gift That Keeps Giving
If the word for gas is flexibility, the phrase for coal is fuel flexibility. Careful fuel
blending can deliver lower costs and increased profits for coal plants competing
against gas and renewables.
74 The Dynamic Challenge of Integrating Variable Resources
By now, its common to assume that gas-fired generation is the best way to firm
up variable renewable resources, but overreliance on gas poses its own problems.
Could a new energy imbalance market be part of the solution?
76 Just Hop on the Bus, Gus: 13 Ways to Hack a Power Plant
Those who think that power plant cybersecurity isnt their concern are the most likely to
make their plant most vulnerable to attack. Dont be the weakest link in the security chain.
DEPARTMENTS
SPEAKING OF POWER
6 Whos Talking About Climate Change?
GLOBAL MONITOR
8 Europe Moves to Phase Out Renewable Subsidies
8 Power Sector Link to Water Is Deep, Complex
10 China Starts Construction of HTR Demonstration Plant
12 THE BIG PICTURE: Power Plus
14 NYISO Opens Smart Control Center
14 POWER Digest
FOCUS ON O&M
18 Robust Bearings Tested for Brazils Belo Monte Hydro Project
18 New Enclosure Solution Enables Remote Monitoring of Battery Backup Systems
LEGAL & REGULATORY
20 FERC Takes First Steps in Harmonizing Gas and Electricity Markets
By Thomas W. Overton, JD
COMMENTARY
84 MISO Prepares for Hurricane Season
By Todd Hillman,Vice President of MISO South
Connect with POWER
If you like POWER magazine, follow us on-
line for timely industry news and comments.
Become our fan at facebook.com/
POWERmagazine

Follow us on Twitter
@POWERmagazine
Join the LinkedIn POWER
magazine Group
54
66
8
2014 started off badly for the South African energy industry, but as this sponsored
report from Global Business Reports notes, current troubles could prompt future genera-
tion diversification. Page 57
Sponsored: Shining a Light on South Africas Power Plans
siemens.com/energy
Siemens SGT-8000H series gas turbines are capable
of performing at efciency levels of more than 60
percent. That means a 85,000-ton reduction in CO
2

emissions every year compared with todays
conventional combined cycle plants. But the story of
the most powerful commercially operating gas
turbine in the world doesnt end there. The
SGT6-8000H 60Hz turbine also delivers extreme
reliability, operational exibility and faster start-ups
while minimizing life-cycle costs. Its the ultimate in
gas turbine technology that saves you money while
helping to save our environment.
One of the largest turbines on earth.
One of the smallest impacts on earth.
The SGT6-8000H is both powerful and efficient, using less fuel with
lower emissions for a very sustainable future.
|
June 2014 4
Visit POWER on the web: www.powermag.com
Subscribe online at: www.submag.com/sub/pw
POWER (ISSN 0032-5929) is published monthly by Access
Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Road, Second Floor, Rock-
ville, MD 20850. Periodicals Postage Paid at Rockville, MD
20850-4024 and at additional mailing offices.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to POWER, P.O. Box
3588, Northbrook, IL 60065-3588 . Email: pwr@omeda.com.
Canadian Post 40612608. Return Undeliverable Canadian
Addresses to: IMEX Global Solutions, P.O. BOX 25542, Lon-
don, ON N6C 6B2.
Subscriptions: Available at no charge only for qualified exec-
utives and engineering and supervisory personnel in electric
utilities, independent generating companies, consulting en-
gineering firms, process industries, and other manufacturing
industries. All others in the U.S. and U.S. possessions: $107
for one year, $171 for two years. In Canada: US$112 for one
year, US$188 for two years. Outside the U.S. and Canada:
US$227 for one year, US$368 for two years. Payment in full
or credit card information is required to process your order.
Subscription request must include subscriber name, title,
and company name. For new or renewal orders, call 847-501-
7541. Single copy price: $25. The publisher reserves the right
to accept or reject any order. Allow four to twelve weeks for
shipment of the first issue on subscriptions. Missing issues
must be claimed within three months for the U.S. or within
six months outside U.S.
For customer service and address changes, call 847-559-
7314 or fax 847-291-4816 or e-mail pwr@omeda.com or
write to POWER, P.O. Box 3588, Northbrook, IL 60065-3588.
Please include account number, which appears above name
on magazine mailing label or send entire label.
Photocopy Permission: For licensing and reprints of
POWER magazine content, please contact Wrights Media at
877-652-5295 or niademarco@wrightsmedia.com.
Executive Offices of TradeFair Group Publications: 11000
Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042. Copyright
2014 by TradeFair Group Publications. All rights reserved.
EDITORIAL & PRODUCTION
Editor: Dr. Gail Reitenbach
editor@powermag.com
Consulting Editor: Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
Associate Editor: Thomas Overton, JD
Associate Editor: Sonal Patel
Associate Editor: Aaron Larson
Contributing Editors: Brandon Bell, PE; Charles Butcher; David Daniels, PE;
Steven F. Greenwald; Jeffrey P. Gray; Jim Hylko; Kennedy Maize;
Dick Storm, PE
Senior Graphic Designer: Michele White
Production Manager: Tony Campana, tcampana@accessintel.com
Marketing Manager: Cristane Martin
GENERATING COMPANY ADVISORY TEAM
Melanie Green, Director, Strategic Planning & Analysis, CPS Energy
Randal S. Livingston, VP of Power Generation, Pacific Gas & Electric
Sharon Pfeuffer, Director and Chief Engineer, Fossil Generation, DTE Electric
ADVERTISING SALES
Associate Publisher: Matthew Grant
Southern & Eastern U.S./Eastern Canada/
Latin America: Matthew Grant, 713-343-1882, mattg@powermag.com
Central & Western U.S./Western Canada: Dan Gentile, 512-918-8075, dang@powermag.com
Northeast U.S. Ed Mueller, 309-278-8120, edm@powermag.com
UK/Benelux/Scandinavia/Germany/
Switzerland/Austria/Eastern Europe: Petra Trautes, +49 69 5860 4760, ptrautes@accessintel.com
Italy/France/Spain/Portugal: Ferruccio Silvera, +39 (0) 2 284 6716, ferruccio@silvera.it
Japan: Katsuhiro Ishii, +81 3 5691 3335, amskatsu@dream.com
India: Faredoon B. Kuka, 91 22 5570 3081/82, kuka@rmamedia.com
South Korea: Peter Kwon, +82 2 416 2876, +82 2 2202 9351, peterhkwon@hanmail.net
Classified Advertising
Diane Burleson, 512-337-7890, dburleson@powermag.com
POWER Buyers Guide Sales
Diane Burleson, 512-337-7890, dburleson@powermag.com
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Audience Development Director: Sarah Garwood
Fulfillment Manager: George Severine
CUSTOMER SERVICE
For subscriber service: pwr@omeda.com, 847-559-7314
Electronic and Paper Reprints: Wrights Media, sales@wrightsmedia.com, 877-652-5295
List Sales: Statlistics, Jen Felling, j.felling@statlistics.com, 203-778-8700
All Other Customer Service: 713-343-1887
BUSINESS OFFICE
TradeFair Group Publications, 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042
Senior Vice President: Jennifer Schwartz
Vice President and Publisher: Michael Grossman, 713-343-1887, mgrossman@accessintel.com
Vice President, Energy and Engineering Events: Daniel McKinnon
Energy Events Content Director: David Wagman
ACCESS INTELLIGENCE, LLC
4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor, Rockville, MD 20850
301-354-2000 www.accessintel.com
Chief Executive Officer: Donald A. Pazour
Exec. Vice President & Chief Financial Officer: Ed Pinedo
Exec. Vice President, Human Resources & Administration: Macy L. Fecto
Divisional President, Business Information Group: Heather Farley
Senior Vice President, Corporate Audience Development: Sylvia Sierra
Senior Vice President & Chief Information Officer: Robert Paciorek
Vice President, Production, Digital Media & Design: Michael Kraus
Vice President, Financial Planning & Internal Audit: Steve Barber
Vice President/Corporate Controller: Gerald Stasko
rolls-royce.com
Trusted to deliver excellence
A natural fit for any
environment.
Trent 60 attributes support todays energy markets with outstanding
adaptability and flexibility making it a natural fit for any
environment. It is the most efficient and powerful aeroderivative
gas turbine designed for cyclic operation, fast starting and
restarting, unsurpassed load rates and environmental performance.
The Trent 60 with its unrivalled availability and reliability
combines these formidable traits to blend seamlessly and profitably into
your operating conditions.
|
June 2014 6
SPEAKING OF POWER
E
veryone, it seems. From Bloomberg
Businessweek to Rolling Stone, from
ELECTRIC POWER (EP) to Platts Global
Power Markets conferences, this spring ev-
eryone was talking about climate change.
The topic is no longer taboo, even among
executives of power companies.
More than a dozen years ago, former
BP CEO John Browne may have been
among the first in the energy industry to
talk publicly about the threat of climate
change and industrys responsibility to
participate in addressing that threat, but
these days, there are few climate change
deniers among industry leaders. Even when
they disagree about the degree to which
human activity causes climate change
or express legitimate concern about the
costs of reducing emissions of greenhouse
gases (GHGs), those responsible for both
quarterly earnings and long-term business
sustainability (both economic and envi-
ronmental) are learning first-hand why
they need to both talk about and act in
response to climate change.
Recent media and event coverage of
the matter has had as much to do with
responses to climate change effects as
with national and international climate
reports or anticipated U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) GHG rules. While
regulatory entities develop GHG-reduction
policies aimed at limiting climate change,
countries, utilities, and enterprising com-
panies are already making adaptive chang-
es in response to current climate change
consequences. Some may profit; others
will pay.
Talking Winners and Losers
The worlds failure to take meaningful ac-
tion on climate change may one day be
seen as the gravest mistake of our time,
began an unsigned editorial in the Apr. 14
Bloomberg Businessweek. Three weeks later,
the same magazine ran an article about how
Greenland hopes to profit from easier access
to minerals, thanks to its swiftly melting
ice sheet. Aleqa Hammond, the countrys
first female prime minister, is spearheading
efforts to mine everything from gold, plati-
num, diamonds, and rubies to zinc, iron,
uranium, and rare earth minerals.
Though Greenland may become a net
winnermany of its 56,000 residents
will have to move from proposed mining
locations sooner, and from coastal areas a
bit latermany more nations and people
face myriad challenging consequences,
which is why utility executives are talk-
ing openly about responding to climate
change (see Lessons in Resiliency and
Risk in this issue).
Acting to Limit Climate Change
For the U.S. power industry, June is ex-
pected to be the month when the EPA re-
leases its final rule on GHGs emitted by
existing fossil-fueled power plants, and
Administrator Gina McCarthy has been
point person for that effort. As Rolling
Stone magazine described her in its May
8 article, Obamas Last Shot, she has
a kind of gruff charm that suggests shes
anything but a tree-hugging elitist.
With her blue collar Boston background,
McCarthy has more in common with coal
miners and coal plant workers than with
the well-heeled lobbyists on both sides
of climate change politics, so I take her
seriously when she says (and as many in
this industry have confirmed) that the EPA
has listened carefully to concerns that the
GHG regulations for existing plants need to
be flexibleboth to ensure grid reliability
and to minimize economic impacts. (This
issue went to press before release of the
final rule, but well be examining its im-
plications, and legal twists and turns, over
the coming months in print and online.)
Threats to Generation
Climate change isnt just a threat to coal-
fueled power plants because of recent and
anticipated regulations. Its also a threat
in many less-predictable ways, from con-
strained water availability to extreme
weather events that may damage a plant
itself or make fuel delivery impossible.
Utilities like Louisiana-based Entergy
and New Jerseys Public Service Electric
& Gas (PSE&G) that have recently had to
cope with unusually severe hurricanes are
learning to adopt new prevention, miti-
gation, and recovery strategies. PSE&G
Chairman, President, and CEO Ralph Izzo
has been quoted as saying, Climate
change is the preeminent issue of our
time, with the power to transform both
our company and our industry. PSE&G has
a multipronged carbon-reduction strategy
but also planned to spend $2.6 billion to
harden its infrastructure (the Board of
Public Utilities approved much less, closer
to $1 billion, in early May). And in Feb-
ruary, New York regulators required ConEd
to factor climate risks into all its forward
planning and implement state-of-the-art
measures to protect its system from those
risks. Over the next four years, ConEd
plans to spend $1 billion on storm hard-
ening and resiliency measures.
Meanwhile, the vendor community is in-
troducing new tools to help address inten-
sifying challenges. Just two examples are
Schneider Electric and Space-Time Insight.
Schneider Electric provides independent,
location-specific weather forecasting
services that range from load prediction
to determining safe times to erect and
perform maintenance on wind turbines.
Among the technology products provided
by Space-Time Insight is one that helps
utilities predict where their grid might fail
during severe weather and identify where
repairs are needed after such events.
Climate changeintensified severe
weather can wreak as much havoc on re-
newable power generation as on fossil or
nuclear generation. Stepping up to develop
and deploy cost-effective and technically
viable solutions to reducing GHG emissions
(especially those that dont incur a water
use penalty) while also hardening infra-
structure and preparing for post-event res-
toration are the responsibilities of those
involved in all forms of electricity genera-
tion, because climate change doesnt care
what your politics or beliefs are, nor what
technology provides the electrons that
power your computer and refrigerator.
Gail Reitenbach, PhD is POWERs
editor (@GailReit, @POWERmagazine).
Whos Talking About
Climate Change?
Using the power of moving water,
hydropower is the oldest and most
reliable form of renewable energy.
MWH has nearly 100 years of industry
expertise and is committed to providing
the engineering solutions to power the
world.
mwhgl obal .com/energy
HYDRO.Power
H Y D R O P O W E R S E R V I C E S :
PLANNI NG AND PERMI TTI NG
PRELI MI NARY AND DETAI LED DESI GN
CONSTRUCTI ON MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
|
June 2014 8
Europe Moves to Phase
Out Renewable Subsidies
New rules adopted by the European Com-
mission (EC) in April will gradually phase
out renewable energy subsidies that cur-
rently bolster the European Unions (EUs)
48-billion-a-year clean energy industry.
The rules stem from an investigation
into Germanys renewable energy subsi-
dies, which have sent renewables share of
the countrys power portfolio soaring but
led to market distortions. As it issued the
rules, the EC called on Europe to meet am-
bitious 2020 climate targets at the least
possible cost for taxpayers and without
undue distortions of competition in the
single market.
Many renewables sources have reached
a scale and a level of maturity that allows
them to compete with more commensurable
sources, EU Commissioner for Competition
Joaquin Almunia told reporters on April 9.
It is time for renewables to join the mar-
ket. The new guidelines provide a framework
for designing more efficient public support
measures that reflect market conditions, in
a gradual and pragmatic way.
The new Energy and Environmental
State Aid Guidelines, which will be valid
from July 1, 2014, until the end of 2020,
foresee the gradual introduction of com-
petitive bidding processes for allocating
public support but offer the blocs 28
member states flexibility to take account
of national circumstances. In 2015 and
2016, a pilot phase will be launched to
test competitive bidding procedures in a
small share of new renewable power ca-
pacity. Small installations (less than 6 MW
of wind power or 1 MW of other renew-
ables such as solar or biomass) will be ini-
tially exempted, but tender processes will
be obligatory for all new installations as
of 2017.
The guidelines also call for the gradual
replacement of feed-in tariffs with more
market-based types of aids such as feed-
in premiums. The premiums will not apply
when prices on the market are negative,
which means generators will have no in-
centive to generate electricity under neg-
ative prices. Small installations will still
benefit from a special program, however,
and the rules do not affect installations
that are already in place (Figure 1).
Significantly, the rules also seek to al-
leviate the very high burden of charges
levied for the funding of renewables for
68 energy-intensive companies. But that
measure was criticized by energy-inten-
sive sectors as well as by renewable en-
ergy advocates, who cautioned that it
would shift the costs for the transition
to cleaner energy disproportionately onto
private consumers and small businesses.
The European Aluminum Association said
more would need to be done to restore Eu-
ropes industrial competitiveness, calling
for more compensation measures for costs
related to climate and energy policies.
The rules also back cross-border energy
infrastructure in support of a single Euro-
pean energy market, and they permit aid
to secure adequate generation when there
is a real risk of a reliability lapse. That
means aid for so-called capacity mecha-
nisms is possible if a state demonstrates
that adequate capacity cannot be deliv-
ered without state intervention.
Power Sector Link to
Water Is Deep, Complex
The interlinkages between water and en-
ergy are complex and run deep, warns a
United Nations (UN) World Water Develop-
ment water and energythemed report re-
leased this March. As global water demand
(in terms of withdrawals) is projected to
increase 55% by 2050, driven by a 400%
demand surge in manufacturing, 140% in
thermal power generation, and 130% in
domestic use, freshwater availability is
expected to be badly strained.
About 90% of global power generation
is water intensive. Thermal power plants,
in particular, are responsible for 43% of
total freshwater withdrawals in Europe,
nearly 50% in the U.S., and more than
10% of the national water cap in China,
the report asserts. Meanwhile, to mitigate
climate change and address energy secu-
rity concerns, many nations have endorsed
ambitious targets to double the share of
renewables in the total power mix by
2030many depending on hydropower
and gas generation to address intermit-
tency of wind and solar. All power gener-
ating sources use at least some water for
cooling purposes (Figure 2).
The power sectors dependence on wa-
ter introduces vulnerabilities, it finds, as
periods of water scarcity and elevated
temperatures can force power plants to
shut down or reduce their output. And,
as climate change induces more extreme
weather events, the sector is exposed to
higher levels of risk.
At the same time, energy is required for
water provision, not only for pumping and
1. A subsidy ceiling. New renewable
projects installed in the European Union after
July 1, 2014, will be subject to new rules that
will gradually phase out renewable subsidies.
This image shows WIRSOLs 8.1-MW crystal-
line solar plant on the 11-hectare roofs of pfen-
ning logistics GmbHs distribution center in
Heddesheim, southern Germany. Completed
in August 2013, it is one of Europes largest
rooftop solar projects. Courtesy: WIRSOL
2. Water use for electricity gener-
ation by cooling technology. Cour-
tesy: World Energy Outlook 2012 OECD/
IEA, 2012, figure 17.4, p. 510
Notes: * Includes trough, tower and Fresnel
technologies using tower, dry and hybrid cool-
ing, and Stirling technology. ** Includes binary,
flash, and enhanced geothermal system tech-
nologies using tower, dry, and hybrid cooling.
With worldwide energy consumption expected to double to an estimated 39.0 billion MW hours
by 2040, Fluors experts are committed to providing industry-leading solutions, innovation, and
technologies that bring strategic value to our clients capital projects. With more than 20 years
of experience building gas-red power plants, Fluor recently completed Dominions 590 MW
combined cycle project, the Bear Garden Generating Station. www.fuor.com

2
0
1
3

F
l
u
o
r
.

A
l
l

R
i
g
h
t
s

R
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

A
D
G
V
0
9
8
9
1
3
.
FLUORS LEGACY AS YOUR ASSET
Fluors Power Business
Fossil Generation, Renewables, Alternate
Technologies, Nuclear, Transmission, and
Operations & Maintenance.
|
June 2014 10
treatment but also desalination. Use of desalination has increased
significantly over the last 20 years, the report says, surging on costs
that have reportedly dropped below $0.50 per cubic meter (m
3
).
More than 16,000 desalination plants exist worldwide today with
a total operating capacity of roughly 70 million m
3
/dayand that
operating capacity could nearly double by 2020, industry observers
suggest. But desalinated water involves the use of at least 75.2
TWh/year, which is about 0.4% of global power consumption, and
it continues to be an expensive solution for developing countries or
large water users.
Water shortages put coal generation particularly at risk, the
World Resources Institute (WRI) warned in a separate March-
released report. The global research organization in July 2012
estimated that 1,199 new coal-fired power plants with a total in-
stalled capacity of more than 1,400 GW have been proposed in 59
countriesthough more than 75% of that is slated for China and
India alone. But more than 50% of the worlds largest coal-produc-
ing/consuming countries face high to extremely high levels of
water stress (Figure 3), attributable to many competing demands
on water resources, it said. Ranked at the top of the high water-
stress risk list for major coal producers/consumers is Kazakhstan,
followed by India, South Korea, Australia, Indonesia, Japan, South
Africa, China, the U.S., Germany, Poland, Russia, and Columbia.
China, whose coal-fired capacity accounts for more than 66%
of its national total power capacity, has average water resources
of only 1,730 m
3
/yr per capitabarely above the UNs water
scarcity market. Eight Chinese provinces have fewer than 500
m
3
/yr per capita of total available surface water, on par with
Middle Eastern countries such as Jordan or Syria. Worsening mat-
ters further is that two-thirds of Chinas coal mines are located
in the water-stressed north, which means at least 58% of its
existing coal fleet competes heavily for water with industrial,
agricultural, and domestic resources.
However, recognizing future water challenges to its energy
sector, Chinas Ministry of Water Resources recently announced a
water allocation plan that specifies water-use efficiency and dis-
charge requirements for existing coal plantsincluding manda-
tory air cooling technology for those facing water scarcityand
requires all new coal mines to submit a water resources planning
study. Meanwhile, Chinas State Council has set down three na-
tional goals for water: To cap annual maximum water use nation-
wide at 700 billion m
3
, improve industrial water-use efficiency
to an internationally advanced level, and protect water quality.
Those are a step in the right direction, the organization says,
even though China could see increased production costs in the
short term as it could be more expensive to access alternative
water supplies, address ongoing regulatory changes, and guard
against potential disruptions, the report says.
For India, the outlook is much more dire. More than 70% of
that countrys power plants are located in water-stressed or water-
scarce areas. Water risks will be borne more prevalently by unregu-
lated generatorsthose not shielded by protective regulations
enjoyed by Indias state-owned power sector. However, a national
policy framework calls for a 20% improvement in water efficiency
nationally through regulatory mechanisms, encouraging conserva-
tion and wastewater minimization, the WRI says. While the frame-
work also calls on water users, generators included, to optimize
recycling and reuse practices, several other measures could help
utilities in stressed regions. These include building backup supply
reservoirs and desalination plants, regulator water audits, and con-
crete standards for water consumption in the power sector.
China Starts Construction of HTR
Demonstration Plant
Construction of Chinas first high-temperature gas-cooled reactor
(HTR) demonstration plant kicked off this April after pouring of con-
crete for the basemat of the Generation IV reactor was completed.
Though approved in 2005, Chinas State Council suspended
development of the Shidaowan-1 plant (Figure 4) in Shandong
Provincea high-priority National Major Science and Technology
projectfollowing the Fukushima disaster in 2011.
According to the World Nuclear Association, the demonstration is
expected to begin operating in 2017 and will feature twin HTR-PM
(pebblebed module) units that will drive a single 210-MW turbine.
At least 18 other HTR units are proposed for the Shidaowan site. Part
of the Rongcheng Nuclear Power Industrial Park project, the site will
also demonstrate CAP1400 unitswhich are domestically sourced
advanced reactors based on Westinghouses AP1000 design.
The HTR-PM units, which are expected to lead to commercial
versions, will use pebble bed fuel and helium coolant, each with
a single steam generator.
The plant is being built by a joint venture led by China
Huaneng Group (the countrys largest generator, but which has
no nuclear capacity), China Nuclear Engineering & Construction
Group, CNEC Corp, and Tsinghua Universitys Institute of Nuclear
and New Energy Technology. The engineering, procurement, and
construction contract signed in 2008 involves Shanghai Electric
Co. and Harbin Power Equipment Co.
3. Water woes. While about 90% of global power generation is
water intensive, several countries face varying degrees of water scar-
city, stress, or vulnerability. Courtesy: United Nations World Water De-
velopment Report 2014: Water and Energy
4. Back to life. Basemat concrete pouring for Chinas first twin
high-temperature gas-cooled reactors was completed in April at the
Shidaowan site in Shandong Province. Plans call for as many as 18
generation IV reactors to be built at the site. Courtesy: China Nuclear
Engineering Corp.
Putting Nature to Work
A utility client was looking for ways to reduce selenium
and mercury from the industrial waste stream of a coal-red
power plant. Their focus was on nding tools to preserve
environmental quality. Chris Snider led the team of client,
academic and Burns & McDonnell professionals in nding
the solution: constructed wetlands. At the end of an intensive,
2-acre pilot project a $3 million investment the client
has a blueprint to move on to a larger-scale wetlands that
will be a cost-effective, engineered lter for reducing
elements to below regulatory compliance levels.
WHERE WATER
and
POWER MEET
CUSTOMI ZED WATER SOLUTI ONS THAT FI T YOUR POWER PLANT
Chris is a recognized technical leader in landll design and coal
byproduct handling. He has 18 years of experience with solid waste
disposal and landll-related subsurface investigations. He is one
of our experienced power plant professionals who can help you identify the
water alternative that ts:
Zero liquid discharge
Customized wastewater treatment and water management
Constructed wetlands
Landll and pond management
Bottom ash handling
9400 Ward Parkway
Kansas City, MO 64114
www.burnsmcd.com/water-team
E n g i n e e r i n g , A r c h i t e c t u r e , C o n s t r u c t i o n , E n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d C o n s u l t i n g S o l u t i o n s
|
June 2014 12
Chemicals
29%
Rening
18%
Paper
14%
Commercial/
Institutional
13%
Food
8%
Other
manufacturing
7%
Other
industrial
6%
Metals
5%
82.4 GW
of CHP is installed at
more than 4,200 U.S.
industrial and
commercial
facilities*
*as of July 2013. Source: ICF CHP Installation Database
U.S. CHP APPLICATIONS TODAY
Sources: OECD/IEA 2013, Euroheat & Power 2013
4.4 GW
total CHP capacity
is in development
or under
construction*, 2.6
GW at <100 MW
sites
40 GW
of new CHP by 2020
National target set
in Obama Executive
Order (2012)
87%
of capacity is
for industrial
applications
71%
of capacity is
natural
gasred
1.4 GW
added in
20112012 at
320 sites
CHP SHARE OF NATIONAL POWER PRODUCTION AROUND THE WORLD
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
A
u
s
t
r
i
a
B
u
l
g
a
r
i
a
C
r
o
a
t
i
a
C
z
e
c
h

R
e
p
.
D
e
n
m
a
r
k
E
s
t
o
n
i
a
F
i
n
l
a
n
d
F
r
a
n
c
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
I
c
e
l
a
n
d
I
t
a
l
y
J
a
p
a
n
L
a
t
v
i
a
L
i
t
h
u
a
n
i
a
N
e
t
h
e
r
l
a
n
d
s
P
o
l
a
n
d
R
o
m
a
n
i
a
S
l
o
v
a
k
i
a
S
l
o
v
e
n
i
a
S
w
e
d
e
n
S
w
i
t
z
e
r
l
a
n
d
U
K
U
.
S
.
Several countries around the world are boosting investment in cogenerationalso known as combined heat and power
(CHP)to meet broader energy and environmental goals. Specically in the U.S., a 2012 White House executive order,
increasing interest from states, a promising natural gas supply and price outlook, and environmental rule compliance
strategies are driving CHP growth. The bulk of future additions (32%) is centered on commercial applications.
Copy and artwork by Sonal Patel, a POWER associate editor
S
.

K
o
r
e
a
THE BIG PICTURE: Power Plus
www.elster.com
Precise
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
-
l
e
a
d
i
n
g
G
l
o
b
a
l
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
-
f
o
c
u
s
A
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
S
a
f
e
M
e
t
e
r

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
P
e
r
m
a
s
e
r
t
A
C
-
2
5
0
Q.Sonic
Accurate
M
e
t
e
r

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
P
r
e
c
i
s
e
I
n
s
t
r
o
m
e
t
P
e
r
m
a
s
e
r
t
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

M
e
t
e
r
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
Elster
Versatile
C
o
s
t
-
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
P
e
r
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
Safe
R
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
Global
P
r
e
c
i
s
e
E
l
s
t
e
r
Meter Services
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
A
C
-
2
5
0
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

M
e
t
e
r
V
e
r
s
a
t
i
l
e
Q.Sonic
Global
C
o
s
t
-
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
R
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
I
n
s
t
r
o
m
e
t
S
a
f
e
P
r
e
c
i
s
e
E
l
s
t
e
r
AC-250
Precise
R
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
A
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
-
f
o
c
u
s
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
E
l
s
t
e
r
G
l
o
b
a
l
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

M
e
t
e
r
P
e
r
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
o
m
e
t
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
e
d
R
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
A
c
c
u
r
a
t
e
Q
.
s
o
n
i
c
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
Accurate
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
-
l
e
a
d
i
n
g
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
P
r
e
c
i
s
e
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y
-
l
e
a
d
i
n
g
Customer-focus
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
e
d
Safe
Q.Sonic
M
e
t
e
r

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
s
t
-
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
Permasert
Gas Depot
AC-250
Versatile
P
e
r
m
a
s
e
r
t
Reliable
Precise
Gas Depot
A
C
-
2
5
0
S
a
f
e
R
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
Global
Safe
I
n
s
t
r
o
m
e
t
G
a
s

D
e
p
o
t
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

M
e
t
e
r
Global
Precise
S
a
f
e
E
l
s
t
e
r
www.elster.com/gas
Elster provides best-in-class measurement and regulation products, systems and
solutions for the safe control and delivery of natural gas across the globe.
|
June 2014 14
NYISO Opens Smart Control Center
The New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) this April re-
placed its 44-year-old primary power control center with a state-
of-the-art facility in Rensselaer County that is outfitted with digital
monitoring technologies and harnesses grid control technologies
installed in the operators June 2013completed smart grid project.
The $75 million Department of Energy (DOE)funded smart grid
initiative, conducted in partnership with eight transmission-own-
ing utilities and power authorities, deploys phasor measurement
units that allow the grid operator to detect irregularities, predict
problems, and take corrective action. It relays system conditions
at a rate of 60 times per second (360 times faster than before) and
includes capacitor banks to improve transmission system efficiency
by reducing line losses. The new primary control center helps inte-
grate and process this significantly higher volume of data.
The 64,000-square-foot (ft
2
) facility features a 2,300-ft
2
video
wall (Figure 5)the largest of its kind in North Americathat
captures more than 3,000 live status points presenting key elec-
tric system operations data and information. The former control
center in Guilderland, built in 1969, will now serve as backup.
According to NYISO, the $38 million facility also enables im-
proved integration of renewable power by deploying resource man-
agement tools such as wind forecasts, meteorological conditions,
and generation output data. The DOE said in a statement that the
new control center gives NYISO and neighboring grid control areas
a far more expansive and in-depth view of the power grid.
POWER Digest
Australia Releases Emissions Reduction Fund White Paper.
Australias Ministry of Environment on April 24 released its
Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) White Paper, formally setting out
the final design of the carbon buy-back scheme that the current
administration has proposed to replace the countrys carbon tax
and emissions trading scheme. Under the proposed ERF, which
will extend from July 2014 to 2020, the government will use
funds from a pool of capital to support direct action by in-
dustry to reduce emissions. Through 2017, it will spend A$1.55
billion ($1.43 billion) and later, A$1 billion ($952 million) to buy
back lowest-cost abatement through reverse auctions. Auctions
will start in the second half of 2014 and run quarterly.
Belarus Ostrovets Nuclear Plant Gets Full Construction
OK. The Belarus Department of Nuclear and Radiation Safety
(of the Ministry of Emergencies) on April 29 issued state-owned
nuclear plant builder Belarus AEC a full construction license for
the first of two units at the Ostrovets plant. First concrete for the
1.2-GW AES-2006 model VVER reactor was poured in late 2013. The
FROM
ENGINEERING
ANALYSIS TO
ADVANCED NDE,
LOOK TO
STRUCTURAL
INTEGRITY
We Connect the Dots
Over the past 30
years, Structural
Integrity has built
a team of over
200 industry experts providing comprehensive
solutions to the energy industry. We connect the
dots from problem to resolution, from regulations
to compliance, from nondestructive examination, to
engineered solutions, even custom equipment.
You can look to us for our:
Knowledge of power plants, codes, and how
things work.
Extensive experience and leadership.
High quality, hard work, and responsiveness.
Call us today and well connect
the dots for you.
Scan the QR Code for more information
www.structint.com/power
( 8 7 7 - 4 S I - P O W E R )
8 7 7 - 4 7 4 - 7 6 9 3
5. A connecting wall. The New York Independent System Op-
erators new 64,000-ft
2
primary power control center captures more
than 3,000 live status points presenting key electric system operations
and data information to enhance grid reliability and support smart grid
efforts. Courtesy: NYISO
|
June 2014 16
twin-reactor project is being built by Russias AtomStroyExport
via a $10 billion turnkey contract. The first unit is expected to be
completed in November 2018 and the second in July 2020.
CEZ Pulls Plug on Temelin Nuclear Expansion. Czech pow-
er utility CEZ on April 10 canceled a tender to expand the Temelin
nuclear plant after the Czech government announced it would not
offer state support to the 10 billion project. Bidders to the ten-
der for two new 1.2-GW reactors include Toshibas Westinghouse
and Russias Rosatom. State-owned CEZ cited Europes turbulent
electricity sector for canceling the tender. While originally the
project was fully economically feasible given the market price of
electricity and other factors, today all investments into power
plants, which revenues depend on sales of electricity in the free
market, are threatened, it said.
White Rose CCS Qualifies for ECs NER300 Grant. Capture
Powers proposed 426-MW White Rose carbon capture and storage
(CCS) demonstration project is the only eligible CCS venture submit-
ted for consideration that qualified for the European Commissions
NER300 program as of the mid-April deadline. The $3.3 billion proj-
ect could receive, as soon as this summer, a 300 million ($413
million) grant under the initiative to establish CCS demonstration
projects in the European Union should developers Drax, Alstom, and
BOC make a final investment decision to proceed with the project.
The UK government earlier this year awarded an engineering and de-
sign contracts for the White Rose project and SSE Energys gas-fired
Peterhead project as part of a 1 billion CCS Competition.
In April, meanwhile, Drax filed suit against the UKs Department
of Energy and Climate Change after one of the generators two large-
scale biomass units, which were in the running for substantial sub-
sidies, was deemed ineligible. Instead of receiving a minimum price
at which it can sell power under a new contracts for difference
program as previously indicated by the government, the second unit
will now only qualify for the old direct subsidy system.
TenneT Awards Contract for New German 900-MW Off-
shore Connector. Dutch-German grid operator TenneT on Apr.
15 awarded its 12th offshore grid connection contract to a con-
sortium comprising Siemens Energy, Petrofac, and Prysmian.
The new 1 billion line, BorWin3, will connect remote offshore
wind farms in the German North Sea to the onshore grid using
direct current (DC) technology by 2019. Three other lines, the
60-MW (AC) Alpha Ventus, the 400-MW (DC) BorWin1, and 108-
MW (AC) Riffgat, are now operational. This year, the 800-MW (DC)
DolWin1 and 576-MW (DC) HelWin1 will become operational, and
at least seven other lines, BorWin3 included, are under construc-
tion or have been awarded. At least 7.5 billion have been ear-
marked to install 6.5 GW of offshore wind power in Germany by
2020. When BorWin3 is completed, TenneT will have developed
7.1 GW of connection capacity by 2020. The feat also involves
developing nine large offshore converter platforms and laying a
total of 4,000 kilometers of submarine and land cables.
Ireland-to-UK Wind Power Export Effort Is Dead. Ireland
and the UK on Apr. 13 failed to conclude an intergovernmental
agreement for the Midlands Energy Export Project, which called for
wind power from 2,300 proposed turbines installed in Ireland to be
exported to the power-strapped UK by 2020. The two governments
said they were unable to reach an agreement as envisaged.
Jordan Starts Construction of 117-MW Wind Project. Jor-
dan in late April launched construction of the 117-MW Tafila wind
power farm. The $285 million project being developed by the
Tafila Wind Farm Co. could generate up to 400 GWh/year when
commercially operational in 2015.
Sonal Patel is a POWER associate editor (@POWERmagazine,
@sonalcpatel).
A Global Power Company
Comprehensive SCR/CO
and Exhaust Systems
Rely on Braden to engineer and build a complete
back-end solution, including SCR/CO for simple
cycle plants. Our over 45 years as the preferred
supplier of GT auxiliary systems for turbine OEMs
gives us unparalleled experience: more than 1,500
simple cycle exhaust projects completed to date.
Braden Capabilities:
www.braden.com
Ammonia
Vaporization Skids
Noise Control
SCR/NO
x
Catalyst
AIG Design for Low
Ammonia Slip
CO Catalyst
Simple Cycle GT
Exhaust Flow
Management
Tempering Air Systems
CFD
Ammonia Storage and
Supply
Exhaust Stacks
In-House CFD and
Acoustic Modeling
Large Subassemblies
Minimize Fit-Up Issues
NH
3
Injection
Powering
the Future.
An industry innovator,
Kiewit Power has extensive
experience in the gas-red,
air quality control systems,
power delivery, renewable
and nuclear markets. Kiewit
serves the power industry
through a number of its
subsidiaries, such as Kiewit
Power Constructors Co.,
Kiewit Power Engineers
Co. and TIC-The Industrial
Company (TIC).
As a full EPC provider, our
in-depth market knowledge
and industry-leading
projects show how Kiewit is
committed to clients and to
remaining a power pioneer.
Kiewit Power Group Inc.
9401 Renner Boulevard
Lenexa, KS 66219
(913) 928-7000
kiewit.com
Leader in EPC
installations for
TODAYS
ADVANCED
GENERATION
TECHNOLOGIES
|
June 2014 18
Robust Bearings Tested for Brazils Belo
Monte Hydro Project
Brazils Belo Monte hydropower project includes a complex of
dams, numerous dikes, and a series of canals supplying two dif-
ferent power stations with water. With a rated capacity of 11,233
MW, it will be the countrys second-largest and the worlds third-
largest hydropower generating station behind Chinas Three Gorg-
es and Brazils Itaipu installations.
Project owners wanted a reliable, water- and debris-resistant
material that would allow extended service for the facilitys wick-
et gates. The components needed to withstand the harsh 24-hour
operating conditions at the dam and provide a minimum service
life of 20 years.
As part of the search process, Norte Energiathe compa-
ny formed to build and operate the Belo Monte hydroelectric
planttested GGB Bearing Technologys HPM self-lubricating,
filament-wound bearings (Figure 1) to determine their suitabil-
ity for the wicket gate application. The materials used in the
bearings were specifically developed for hydropower applica-
tions and offer resistance to impact and corrosion, high static
and dynamic load capacity, and 75% less weight than equiva-
lently sized metallic bearings.
Powertech Labs conducted the testing in accordance with
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers specifications. The testing simu-
lated actual operating conditions at Belo Monte, including the
use of water from the Xingu River, where the project is being
constructed. The bearings were subjected to tests that were
modified to simulate 30 years of operation rather than the stan-
dard 13 years.
The bearingsconsisting of a fiberglass-reinforced, ep-
oxy resin support layer and a sliding layer of polyester fibers
with polytetrafluoroethylene and other additiveswere first
subjected to a static load with rotary and oscillating motion
under both dry and wet conditions. They then underwent ac-
celerated wear testing with a dynamic radial load on a journal
moving continuously plus or minus one degree. The static load
remained constant, but the dynamic load was paused every 15
minutes to simulate a turbine wicket gate opening plus or mi-
nus 15 degrees.
The bearings performed well with little evidence of operating
stress. Significantly, it was demonstrated that their coefficient of
friction and wear rate decreased as running time increased, which
allowed the project engineers to design the turbines with smaller
servomotors. Engineers now use the essential data provided from
the testing when specifying self-lubricating bearings in hydro-
power turbines to achieve longer service life and maintenance-
free operation.
GGB HPM bearings are used in more than 25 hydropower proj-
ects worldwide, including on the largest water turbine in the
world at the Chinese Xiangjiaba hydropower plant. That Three
Gorges Corp. project contains four Francis turbines, each with a
rated capacity of 850 MW, which were fitted with bearings with
an inner diameter of 520 mm and a length of 370 mm.
Edited by Aaron Larson, a POWER associate editor
(@AaronL_Power, @POWERmagazine).
New Enclosure Solution Enables Remote
Monitoring of Battery Backup Systems
With 4.4 million customers and nearly 46 GW of generating capac-
ity, Atlanta-based Southern Co. has doubled the size of its super-
1. A 3D view of a self-lubricating, filament-wound
bearing. There have been some locations using this type of bearing
since 2007 with no failures reported. The life expectancy for the mate-
rial is at least 20 years. Courtesy: GGB Bearing Technology
2. GE-MDS radio enclosure system with battery test
remote monitor. The remote monitoring of battery backup sys-
tems was an essential reliability feature for Southern Co.s supervisory
control and data acquisition system. Courtesy: Ventev
June 2014
|
visory control and data acquisition (SCADA)
system in the past three years and now has
approximately 4,000 devices. Critical power
backup systems must be ready if commer-
cial power fails.
Bob Cheney, team leader for the Pow-
er Delivery Test Lab at Southern Co.,
contacted Chad Briddell, product man-
ager at Ventev, the manufacturing divi-
sion of TESSCO Technologies, because
he needed an off-the-shelf enclosure
that would house essential SCADA com-
munications devices. Cheney needed
the enclosures to be fully integrated
by the factory with all the components
pre-configured. He was also hoping
Ventev would design and include a very
important new component.
I had not been able to find anything
already on the market that would test
the backup battery and send reports back
to me, explained Cheney. When the AC
power is down, the system rests on the
backup battery to keep things going. The
whole system can go down because a little
$30 battery dies. I needed something that
would be able to tell me the battery is
good or the battery is bad. You have to
understand, Alabama is home to several
automobile manufacturers. When the pow-
er goes down, theyre not working, and we
hear about it.
The Ventev team met with Cheney to
develop a customer-specific solution.
They started with Ventevs radio-specific
outdoor wireless enclosure containing
ample power for two radios, radio inter-
face, and environmental protection. The
design easily accommodates components
such as networking equipment, power
conversion equipment, cable grounding,
and lightning protection, all of which
can be installed in the Ventev factory
prior to deployment. The collaboration
resulted in a radio-specific outdoor
wireless enclosure for Southerns SCADA
devices (Figure 2).
After that, the team worked to address
the most important item on Cheneys
wish list. Ventev engineers designed
and manufactured a new productthe
innovative battery test remote monitor
(BTRM)to perform automatic battery
load tests and send alerts via simple
network management protocol, text, or
email using Ethernet or DNP3 commu-
nication protocols. The first-to-market
technology allows remote monitoring of
battery health for backup supplies relied
upon to relay critical data.
The BTRM sits on the thin rail be-
tween the power supply and the battery
charger, Briddell said. On a user-de-
fined schedule, it takes the AC power
offline, forces the load of the system
to be supported by the batteries, and
then it monitors the voltage of the bat-
teries as it degrades over time. If that
rate differs from the factory settings or
the factorys normal conditions, then it
raises a red flag.
Batteries have an operational lifespan
that can be reduced by environmental fac-
tors. Extreme temperatures are the worst
enemy of batteries. The BTRM system of-
fers a simple solution because it is a pass
or fail test. It doesnt provide a lot of data
that needs to be analyzed or reviewed. The
test will simply identify when a battery is
in trouble and needs to be replaced.
Ventev did what no one else had been
able to do, said Cheney. They created an
enclosure that can let me know the health
of the backup battery.
Edited by Aaron Larson, a POWER as-
sociate editor (@AaronL_Power,
@POWERmagazine)
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Water Steam Sampling and Analysis Systems for
Saudi Electricity Company Power Plant PP10
All our systems are designed, manufactured and tested in Switzerland
SWAN SYSTEME AG www.swansystems.ch
Special features:
Advanced PLC based system with local HMI
Communication to and from DCS via redundant Modbus TCP
Automatic measurement validation of all process values
|
June 2014 20
FERC Takes First Steps
in Harmonizing Gas and
Electricity Markets
Thomas W. Overton, JD
A
fter two years of work, about a dozen conferences and
meetings, and multiple rounds of comments, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) announced on Mar.
20 that it was ready to begin the process of changing its rules to
better harmonize the natural gas and electricity sectors.
The process began in early 2012 when FERC first called for
comments from the industry on various aspects of gas-electric
interdependence, in light of the growing importance of natu-
ral gasfired power and several incidents that had highlighted
potential problems in making sure gas-fired plants had fuel to
operate when needed, without disrupting supplies for other us-
ers. The response was enthusiastic enough that FERC scheduled a
series of technical conferences to gather information and opin-
ions on the best path forward.
One of the main issues that arose was the lack of coordination
between the gas day and electric day. Both sectors use day-ahead
scheduling, but some important physical and operational differ-
ences exist. While FERC recognized that some of thesesuch as
vastly different storage methods and capacities, as well as differ-
ent speeds at which gas and electricity travelare inherent in
the nature of the products, others involve business practices that
have created arguably unnecessary conflicts.
End of the Guessing Game
For example, in many markets, gas-fired generators, most of
whom rely on interruptible pipeline service, must reserve gas
transportation services before they know for sure how much elec-
tricity they will be committing to produce. If they chose to wait
until their commitments are known, they risk not having enough
fuel to meet them. While not always a serious concern, this risk
becomes acute during periods of constraint. (For some examples,
see New England Struggles with Gas Supply Bottlenecks in the
June 2013 issue and About That Gas-Fired Power Boom in
the April 2014 issue, available at www.powermag.com.)
Accordingly, FERCs Mar. 20 Proposed Rule would do three
things:
Move the start of the gas day up by 5 hours, from 9 a.m. Cen-
tral Time to 4 a.m. Central Time.
Delay the start of the first day-ahead nomination opportunity for
pipeline scheduling by 90 minutes, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Change the structure of the gas day to create four intraday
nomination cycles from the current two.
The rationale behind these changes is to allow electric utili-
ties to finalize their scheduling before gas-fired generators must
submit nomination requests for gas transportation service to the
pipelines, as well as to increase flexibility for shippers during
the gas day. The gas day currently begins during morning ramp
or morning peak periods for generators, which creates the risk
they may run out of gas from the previous day. The change would
reduce this risk by moving the start of the gas day well before
the morning ramp.
Likewise, delaying the first nomination cycle would allow elec-
tric markets to clear when gas markets are most liquid, at the
start of the day-ahead nomination process. Thus, gas generators
would know what their commitments are before they must begin
arranging fuel to meet them, allowing them to make reservations
at the most economic time.
More Flexibility
The additional intraday nomination cycles are intended to address
a couple of concerns. First, they will give independent system
operators with large fleets of gas generators, like PJM, more flex-
ibility in addressing real-time fluctuations in electricity demand.
Second, generators in the Southwest, where firm transpor-
tation service is more common for gas-fired plants, are handi-
capped in making the best use of it. Under the current system,
the last nomination cycle in which these generators can request
firm service and be assured of getting it is at 8:00 a.m. Pacific
Time (the second intraday deadline at 2:00 p.m. Pacific does not
allow firm shippers to bump interruptible service requested in
an earlier cycle). This is a problem when peak demand in their
areawhich can spike rapidly as large amounts of solar go off
the griddoes not occur until around 5:00 p.m., which greatly
reduces the value of expensive firm service.
FERCs proposed rule would change the current intraday nomi-
nation deadlines from 10:00 a.m. (bumping allowed) and 5:00
p.m. (no-bump) to 8:00 a.m. (bump), 10:30 a.m. (bump), 4:00
p.m. (bump) and 7:00 p.m. (no-bump) (all Central Time). Though
some shippers already offer additional nomination cycles, this
rule would standardize the practice nationwide. Further, for these
shippers, the rule clarifies that bumping is permitted under such
additional nomination schedules up until the no-bump deadline
in the new rule.
The rule contains one additional change concerning transporta-
tion contracts. FERC currently allowsbut does not requirepipe-
line companies to offer multiparty contracts under which multiple
shippers can share in the same interstate capacity under a single
service agreement. The change would make this option mandatory.
The goal, again, is increasing options for gas-fired generators.
FERC is giving the gas and electric industries, through the
North American Energy Standards Board, until Sept. 24, 2014, to
reach a consensus on the proposed rule and any revisions. Wheth-
er or not a consensus is reached, comments on the proposal, and
the consensus standards, if any, will be due 60 days later.
Thomas W. Overton, JD is a POWER associate editor
(@thomas_overton, @POWERmagazine).
Answers for industry.
Eectric Power
Transporlalion
lnduslrial Aulomalion
Information
backbone for
a industries
Continuous operation and profitability go hand in hand
in the electric power industry. No one knows this better
than Siemens: we offer the most reliable and efficient
utility communications solutions on the market. Our
RUGGEDCOM portfolio includes products that are fully
compliant with IEC 61850-3, IEEE 1613, IEEE 1588 and
IEC 62439-3 standards. RUGGEDCOM switches, routers
and software solutions were designed with the utility
environment in mind to ensure reliable communications
under any conditions that an IED can survive.
Communications can be that rugged.
siemens.com/ruggedcom
Rugged communications
for the electric power grid
E
2
0
0
0
1
-
F
6
7
0
-
P
8
2
0
-
X
-
7
6
0
0
|
June 2014 22
WATER REGULATIONS
Site-Specific Factors Are Critical
for Compliance with Final 316(b)
Existing Facilities Rule
O
n May 16, 2014, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is scheduled
to release its long-delayed final 316(b)
rule for existing facilities. The rulewhich
was supposed to have been issued Apr. 17
after the previous extension and which now
is expected while this issue is at the printer
affects several hundred facilities that employ
cooling water drawn from Waters of the
United States at design rates of 2 million
gallons per day (mgd) and greater. Affected
facilities are facing the need to document cir-
cumstances at their facilities, and many will
need to evaluate alternatives to their cooling
system, develop a compliance approach, and
potentially install costly retrofits.
The EPA has struggled for many years to
develop a rule that is workable and survives
legal challenge; in fact, the final rule will ad-
dress a portion of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
written more than 40 years ago. Earlier at-
tempts at rulemaking have been the subject
of review by several federal courts, and the
rulemaking process has been under federal
court oversight resulting from a 1993 lawsuit.
While several factors have contributed to the
EPAs delays, the statutory language itself
has created challenges for the rulemaking as
well as in the definition of best technology
available (BTA).
The statutory language is brief and de-
ceptively simple: 316(b). Any standard
established pursuant to section 301 or sec-
tion 306 of this Act and applicable to a point
source shall require that the location, design,
construction, and capacity of cooling water
intake structures reflect the best technology
available for minimizing adverse environ-
mental impact.
Although the statute does not define ad-
verse environmental impact, in the early
years of implementation, ecosystem-level
impacts were commonly assessed. In the past
20 years, the EPA has gravitated toward de-
fining adverse environmental impact as mor-
tality due to impingement (trapping of aquatic
organisms on the cooling water intake struc-
ture [CWIS]) and entrainment (passage of
aquatic organisms through the CWIS and the
downstream cooling system). It is common
for the EPA to consider rates of impingement
and entrainment (such as organisms/time or
organisms/volume) and to target reductions
in impingement mortality (IM) and entrain-
ment mortality (EM) rates commensurate
with closed-cycle cooling. Use of closed-
cycle cooling and reduced intake velocity are
essentially required for new facilities under
the Phase I rule promulgated in 2001.
Whether IM and EM rates result in ad-
verse environmental impact is less material
to the EPAs approach than demonstrating re-
duced rates, similar to reduced effluent con-
centrations. Such a reliance on rates and their
reduction stems in part from the statutes
reference to the parts of the CWA that call
for the development of technology-based and
water qualitybased effluent limits (sections
301 and 306, respectively) as models for the
The long-awaited cooling water rule for existing power plants is also one of the
most complicated when it comes to determining a cost-effective compliance ap-
proach. Though the promised flexibility of the final rule is welcome, it also means
that generating units subject to the rule have many factors to balance before mak-
ing a technology choice.
Mark Gerath, Steve Cibik, and John Burnett
Courtesy: HDR
Fluid control solutions. Right. Now.
We are the worlds leading supplier of solenoid valves with rock-solid reliability in controlling
flows of air, gas, water, oil, and steam across the globe. And were reinforcing that leadership
by setting new industry standards for service and delivery. So we work to ensure callbacks
within 4 hours, onsite technical response within 24 hours, and shipment of many popular models
within 1 day with our ASCO Today program. When it comes to fluid control, theres only one supplier
that absolutely wont waste your time. Youre looking at it: ASCO.
I DONT HAVE TIME TO WASTE.
My success is measured by the minute. I cant
depend on products that arent up to my standards
or dont arrive when I need them.
Failure is not an option.
1-800-972-ASCO (2726) | www.ascovalve.com/RightNow | e-mail: info-valve@asco.com

The ASCO trademark is registered in the U.S. and other countries. The Emerson logo is a trademark and service mark of Emerson Electric Co. 2014 ASCO Valve, Inc.
Scan this QR code*
to learn more about
ASCO Fluid Control
Solutions. Right. Now.
*Requires QR code reader.
WATER REGULATIONS
|
June 2014 24
BTA assessment. Those sections of the CWA
deal with means of effluent treatment and
protection of water quality for chemical and
physical qualities of water.
Importantly, these qualities are subject to
chemical, physical, and biological treatment
processes that are generally transferable from
one facility to another. In contrast, the inter-
action of aquatic organisms with the CWIS
is highly site-specific, and assessment of po-
tential adverse environmental impacts as well
as alternative control measures can be poorly
transferable among facilities. In its final rule,
the EPA is expected to acknowledge the im-
portance of site-specific factors in its approach
to BTA for both IM and EM. As we describe
in this article, proper consideration of site-spe-
cific factors will be key to achieving cost-ef-
fective compliance with the final 316(b) rule.
Though it may seem premature to make
recommendations prior to a final rule, based
on the proposed rule, comments made by the
EPA publicly and privately, and the general
tone and approach taken by the EPA in this
particular rulemaking, we believe that the
issues addressed here are sure to be central
to compliance with the final rule. Given the
complexity of the compliance schedule and
process, the need for planning and potentially
assembling a multi-disciplinary team, and the
implications that chosen compliance methods
may have on overall unit operation, we be-
lieve it is important for generating companies
to understand the process and consequences
of various approaches as soon as possible.
Important Site-Specific Factors
When considering rates of IM and EM, po-
tential adverse environmental impact, and al-
ternatives for BTA, virtually every aspect of
the assessment can differ dramatically from
facility to facility. Some illustrations of the
variable factors are grouped here into three
broad categories:
The nature of impingement and entrain-
ment. Rates of impingement and entrain-
ment may vary from facility to facility by
several orders of magnitude. The value
of commercially and recreationally im-
portant species as well as threatened or
endangered species is also highly vari-
able from facility to facility. The degree to
which a given species will be a species of
concern often depends upon the resource
agency. For example, some agencies are
very troubled by the loss of invasive spe-
cies that now serve as forage base, while
other agencies believe that the losses of
such invasive species can be discounted.
Additionally, the potential for losses at the
CWIS to actually result in adverse envi-
ronmental impact at the ecosystem level
differs among facilities.
Potential effectiveness of, and constraints
on, BTA alternatives. Site-related factors
can make a single technology effective at
one site and essentially infeasible at an-
other. Such factors include weather, debris
loading, temporal variation of the source
water level, the presence of an intake canal
and the availability of additional shore-
line, spatial constraints on construction at
the facility, nearby land uses, and nature
of the generating facility itself. To provide
examples concerning the last two factors:
Operation of evaporative cooling towers
in the proximity of an airport or highway
may present safety issues related to fog
formation and runway/roadway icing, and
a facilitys existing condensers may not
withstand increased back-pressure associ-
ated with closed-cycle cooling.
The economics of the BTA alternatives, in-
cluding costs to the facility and attending
social costs. The factors that affect technol-
ogy effectiveness and feasibility often also
affect the technologys costs. For example,
a longer fish return will be more costly and
is also likely to result in less survival of
the returned organisms, particularly in
extreme weather. Beyond these relatively
direct effects, the economic environment,
the price of fuel, the status of the electri-
cal grid, and the other site-specific factors
also have the potential to drive facility and
social costs of retrofits. Evaluation of BTA
at a facility should considerand, in many
cases, quantifythese complex costs as a
part of a site-specific assessment.
As discussed below, though the final rule
is expected to approach BTA for IM and EM
in very different ways, proper accounting of
the numerous site-specific factors must be
considered in assessing the BTA options for
both. In addition, effective communication
to facility staff, company management, and
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permitting agency (hereaf-
ter NPDES Director) of how these factors fa-
vor or disfavor different BTA options should
be clearly stated in the reports called for by
the final rule.
BTA Approach for Impingement
Mortality
In the final rules approach to BTA for IM, the
EPA is widely expected to offer streamlined
approaches that equate specific technology
attributes (such as closed-cycle cooling, low
through-screen velocity, existing offshore ve-
locity caps, and fish-friendly screens and
fish returns) to substantial reductions in IM
and designation as BTA (Figure 1). Though
this resembles a one size fits all approach,
the availability of different approaches as
well as a de-emphasis on monitoring to dem-
onstrate compliance should make for a work-
able approach to BTA for IM.
The EPA is also expected to delay the need to
assess and retrofit for IM BTA until after a deter-
mination of EM BTA, thus avoiding the potential
for double jeopardy in the form of having to
re-retrofit based on an EM assessment that fol-
1. Multiple technology options.
Traveling water screens with fish protection
measures, such as this one, are widely ex-
pected to be one of several technology op-
tions for complying with the cooling water
rules impingement mortality requirements.
Courtesy: HDR
Schedule to Avoid Double Jeopardy?
The schedule of activities in the final rule
is a major interest to the regulated com-
munity. Although the timing of various
required studies and reports is important,
the coordination of the best technology
available (BTA) determination for impinge-
ment mortality (IM) and entrainment mor-
tality (EM) is of great concern.
Under the 2011 proposed rule, retrofits
to address BTA for IM would have been
required within eight years. The BTA as-
sessment for EM was understood to follow
the IM-related assessment. Of course, this
put the facility at risk of installing one
technology to address IM and then poten-
tially having to change that technology
to address EM.
We understand that the EPA has con-
sidered the industrys comments and that
the final rule will postpone the retrofit to
address IM until the BTA for EM has been
determined. A second sidebar discusses
another schedule-related issue: the timing
and purpose of IM and EM monitoring.
WATER REGULATIONS
June 2014
|
lows an IM retrofit. (See sidebar Schedule to Avoid Double Jeopardy?
for the implications of a possible alternative sequence.)
The final rule also will likely offer the potential to demonstrate
that some combination of existing and newly installed technologies
and operational measures reduces IM to a level commensurate with
closed-cycle cooling. The level anticipated is an approximately 75%
reduction in IM relative to an unmitigated CWIS. The applicant must
demonstrate this level of reduction to the satisfaction of the NPDES
Director, likely through some combination of literature-based assess-
ment and monitoring in the field.
The expected final rule also allows the NPDES Director to find that
a CWIS is BTA when it impinges a de minimis quantity of fish per
year, potentially defined as equal to or less than 1,000 fish per year.
Although this would be an attractive alternative for the small number
of facilities that qualify, the benefit should be weighed against the
cost and risk of any ongoing monitoring required.
As we consider the IM BTA options, it is useful to consider several
questions relative to the facility and its CWIS:
Does the CWIS already match any of the technologies that confer
BTA? Unfortunately for most of the facilities covered by the now
suspended 316(b) Phase II rule, the answer to this question is likely
to be no.
Does the existing CWIS contribute meaningfully to the reduction
of impingement mortality in ways that are not defined by the BTA
technologies? For example, does it draw water from an area with
low fish densities relative to other nearby locations? If it does, can
that reduction be reliably and cost-effectively quantified as part of
the combination approach? What additional measures might be in-
stituted to reach the percentage reduction specified in the final rule
or de minimis thresholds?
What are the approximate site-specific costs and constraints on the
impingement BTA technologies? Are some technologies precluded by
cost of installation and operation (such as retrofit to closed-cycle cool-
ing) or by other issues (including lack of access to shoreline property
necessary to expand the CWIS and reduce through-screen velocity)?
When necessary, how will optimization and/or compliance monitor-
ing affect the cost of the measure as well as the risk to compliance?
For example, the proposed 316(b) rule of 2011 called for ongoing
demonstration that post-impingement survival for Ristroph-type
screens was, on average, higher than 88% for species of concern.
Given variations in survival rates, such a standard presented unac-
ceptable risks to compliance. Though the final rules anticipated
reliance on optimization of post-impingement survival is less risky,
it would lead to additional costs and should be managed with the
agency so that minimum survival rates are not required.
Do the IM BTA approaches contribute substantially to reductions
in EM? We believe that facilities employing closed-cycle cooling
should be considered compliant with the EM BTA even in the rare
cases when actual intake flows exceed 125 mgd. Other measures that
contribute to reduced IM may also meaningfully reduce the rates of
EM. These include use of wedgewire screens (such as the one shown
in the photo at the top of this article) with reduced through-slot ve-
locity that have been shown to also reduce entrainment rates, as well
as placement of intakes in habitat that have reduced populations of
both impingeable and entrainable organisms.
In short, what approach or combination of approaches confers reli-
able compliance at the lowest cost and lowest risk? In many cases,
there will be a clear winner when all factors point to a single BTA
approach. In others, the best approach may require compromising
one factor, for example, cost of installation and operation, in favor
of another, such as regulatory certainty. We should expect that such
factors may be difficult to compare quantitatively (for example,
capital cost vs. certainty of compliance) and that, in some cases,
risk analysis may be warranted.
These questions must be first addressed within the internal project
team in order to define the compliance strategy and the best approach
to BTA for IM. The answers should also be soundly and convincingly
presented to the regulatory agencies using the reports and analyses
called for by the final rule and in full consideration of the conditions
present at a site.
BTA Approach for Entrainment Mortality
All indications are that the final rules approach to considering BTA
for EM will be appropriately dominated by site-specific factors. For
facilities explicitly captured by the EM standards in the final national
ruleexpected to be those with an actual intake flow of 125 mgd or
greaterfour reports will be required to help the NPDES Director
assess BTA at an affected facility:
The reports called for under 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)122.21(r)(9)or report (r)(9)will define a program for
documenting the rates of EM of fish and shellfish, including listed
species, and then implement that program to document the rates.
The (r)(10) report will present the technical feasibility and costs
(both facility-level and social) of technologies that could reduce
EM, including retrofit to closed-cycle cooling.
The Benefits Valuation Studyor (r)(11) reportevaluates the
monetized and nonmonetized benefits of EM reductions associated
with different mitigation measures.
The (r)(12) reportor Non-water Quality and Other Environmen-
tal Impacts Studymust present a site-specific discussion of other
effects of EM mitigation measures such as potential increased air
emissions and water consumption.
Factor(s)
Report per 40
CFR 122.21(r)
Costs Benefits
High rates of entrainment, presence
of listed species, commercial/recre-
ational species, potential ecosystem
level effects
9, 11
Decrease in thermal impacts 11, 12
Decrease in thermal refuge and winter
fishery
11
Increased cost of retrofit and opera-
tion
10
Increased ease of retrofit 10
Increased performance and reliability
of technology
11
Reduced plant efficiency, increased
emissions/MW
10, 12
Decrease in grid reliability 12
Increase in power prices 12
Increase in consumptive water use 12
Increase in noise and other environ-
mental impacts
12
Table 1. Site-specific factors that may affect costs
and benefits of entrainment mortality reduction mea-
sures. Costs are those that occur at the facility level, both positive
and negative, while benefits (again both positive and negative) occur
in the environmental and social context. Source: ECT Inc.
WATER REGULATIONS
|
June 2014 26
We note that the NPDES Director will retain
the authority to regulate EM at existing facilities
with actual intake flows of less than 125 mgd
under a Best Professional Judgment standard
but that the standards are not to be explicitly de-
fined beyond the generic statutory language for
Section 316(b) provided previously.
Each of the reports (r)(9) through (12) is
expected to be subject to peer review under
a process that is managed by the applicant
but overseen by the agency. After reviewing
these reports, the NPDES Director must con-
sider the factors defined in 40 CFR 125.98(e)
in reaching a decision about what constitutes
BTA for EM at a facility.
We believe that these four reports and the
decision criteria available to the NPDES Di-
rector should be viewed as an integrated effort.
Not only do the data from one report often
contribute to the analyses of the other efforts,
but the reports could overlap in parts of their
scope, making coordination necessary to avoid
duplication and ensure consistency.
The best example of the overlap is that reports
(r) (10, 11, and 12) all deal in some way with
facility and social costs (or negative benefits) and
benefits (or negative costs). The interrelationship
is illustrated in Table 1, which summarizes the
factors in the various reports that affect costs and
benefits of a facility retrofit.
Just as the issues affecting impingement
mortality vary among facilities, the fac-
tors that affect the costs and benefits of EM
controls will also differ dramatically. For
example, the EPA has acknowledged that
some sites are so highly constrained that
installation of cooling towers is essentially
infeasible, while other sites have more space
available. Similarly, annualized rates of en-
trainment, and the potential for impacts to
listed species, can vary by orders of magni-
tude between facilities.
Although we believe that, at the great ma-
jority of facilities, costs for a cooling tower
retrofit will greatly outweigh the benefits (in
fact, we believe such trends are apparent in the
EPAs own supporting documents for the pro-
posed rule), demonstrating this to the NPDES
Director will be relatively simple at some fa-
cilities and more difficult at others. Therefore,
in planning and executing the analysis of EM
BTA, we believe that it is constructive to con-
siderin a conceptual, weight-of-evidence
fashionthe ratio of all potential costs rela-
tive to all potential benefits.
The variety of factors outlined in Table 1
should be assessed for the candidate technolo-
gies at a facility to identify those that are criti-
cal to driving the cost-to-benefit ratio as well
as those that may require more extensive, or
controversial, analysis. For some technolo-
gies, such as installation of fine mesh screen
panels, the costs to the facility may be rela-
tively low compared with retrofit to closed-
cycle cooling. On the other hand, the benefits
of such a retrofit at the screen, based on the
actual rate of ichthyoplankton exclusion from
the cooling system and their return alive to the
source water, may also be low.
Of course, the most significant effort is likely
to focus on putting the costs and benefits of a
potential retrofit to closed-cycle cooling in
proper perspective. The final rules widely an-
ticipated call to include social costs provides the
opportunity to go beyond the direct engineering,
construction, and operation costs at the facility
to consider secondary effects such as changes
in the price of power to consumers, changes in
employment associated with reduced facility
dispatch, and loss of recreational resource value
associated with reduced winter fishery.
In the end, a technically sound, integrated
summary that is well calibrated to the issues
and risks at a facility should be presented to
the NPDES Director. Though the final rule
may be construed to call for potentially com-
plicated and costly analyses, we believe that
at many facilities a more streamlined ap-
proach can be used to demonstrate the costs
and benefits of EM reduction measures. Dia-
log with the agency early in the process will
facilitate this outcome.
On the other hand, there are likely to be
facilities where, due to the level of impacts or
the stance of the agency, analysis of closed-
cycle cooling retrofits may require consider-
able effort. In these cases, it will be important
to understand the full range of potential anal-
yses, how they relate to the site, and how best
to present them to the agency.
Planning and Communicating Are
Plant Responsibilities
Based on our experience with 316(b) and
other regulatory programs, we want to em-
phasize that it is important to plan the 316(b)
compliance process. The rule will be complex
and have several specialized definitions and a
long sequence of required steps (see sidebar
Schedule and Scope of IM and EM Moni-
toring). Many of the steps are expected to be
poorly defined, including in their relationship
to other parts of the process. Development of
a robust schedule of the steps required at each
facility will be important.
Fully understanding the rule, including pro-
posed changes to 40 CFR and the preamble as
well as the supporting documents, will be essen-
tial. Key definitions are expected to be incom-
plete and will require interpretation. Available
options should be carefully considered.
The final rule invests the NPDES Direc-
tor with considerable authority, particularly
relative to EM. Although the criteria avail-
able to the NPDES Director for assessing
entrainment BTA are defined at 40 CFR
125.98(e), there is considerable discretion
available. Similarly, the peer review process
for the EM assessment will bring third-party
reviewers to the process. The National Ma-
rine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish & Wild-
life Service also may play a substantial role
in planning of the studies, interpretation of
the results, and recommending BTA. All of
these circumstances argue that careful plan-
ning and regular communication with the
agencies will be helpful both in minimizing
the potential for a re-do of analyses and
ensuring cost-effective compliance.
The final 316(b) rule has the ambitious
goal of regulating the interaction between
complex, dynamic biological systems and
engineered facilities. To do this, it requires
application of several disparate disciplines in
the context of facilities that vary dramatically
relative to a number of key factors. We be-
lieve that cost-effective compliance with the
rule demands careful and creative planning to
understand the risks and opportunities of the
candidate approaches.
Mark Gerath (mgerath@ectinc.com)
and Steve Cibik (scibik@ectinc.com)
are prinicipal scientists at ECT Inc. John
Burnett (john.burnett@hdrinc.com) is CWA
316 practice leader at HDR.
Schedule and Scope of IM and EM Monitoring
With the expectation that the final rules
submittals will be coordinated with the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permit renewal, the timing and
nature of impingement mortality (IM) and
entrainment mortality (EM) monitoring
may present schedule challenges.
Monitoring might be performed for
several reasons, including: understanding
potential monetized benefits, design and
optimization of newly installed technolo-
gies, estimation of the reductions in IM
and EM from some baseline condition,
and/or for compliance assessment.
The nature of programs to achieve these
goals is likely to vary, particularly in tim-
ing relative to any retrofits. For rates as-
sociated with the existing cooling water
intake structure, we believe that data col-
lected during the Phase II effort will often
be adequate. The 2011 proposed rule was
confused relative to the timing and pur-
pose of IM and EM monitoring. We hope
that the final rule is clearer and more
practical relative to the scope and timing
of any monitoring.
A World of Solutions
Visit www.CBI.com
SOLUTIONS FOR
THE GLOBAL
POWER INDUSTRY
A Trusted Team of Power Experts

Throughout the life cycle of a power plant, you can depend
on CB&I to be there every step of the way. With one of the
broadest ranges of capabilities and a heritage spanning
125 years, we bring unmatched experience to our clients in
the global power industry.
CB&I can provide everything from site studies to total
turnkey engineering and construction, as well as competitive
enhancement of existing facilities.
Whatever stage your power plant is in, call on CB&I
as your single-source provider for comprehensive
power plant services.
ENGINEERING, PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES AND CONSULTING
MODULE CONSTRUCTION AND DELIVERY
COMMISSIONING AND STARTUP
MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS
DECOMMISSIONING AND DECONTAMINATION
Harry Allen
Generating Station
Nevada, USA
|
June 2014 28
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
Introduction to NERC CIP Version 5
Even if your generating facility was exempt from previous versions of NERCs
Critical Infrastructure Protection standards, the latest version dramatically
steps up the number of facilities encompassed, so the odds are high that
your plant will be within its scope.
Steven Parker
T
he North American Electric Reliability
Corp. Critical Infrastructure Protec-
tion (NERC CIP) standards Version 5
represents the first major change in require-
ments and approach since its predecessor,
Urgent Action Standard 1200, was approved
more than a decade ago. The most notable
change is the tiered impact rating system,
which classifies bulk electric system (BES)
Cyber Systems into High, Medium, and Low
categories. This approach results in all cyber
assets that could impact BES Facilities being
in scope for the CIP standards.
Because the standards become effective
less than two years from now (Table 1) and
cover so many more facilities than previ-
ous standards (in version 5, all generating
plants that meet the BES definition will be in
scope), now is the time to become thoroughly
familiar with the latest version to ensure the
reliability of the system we all depend upon.
In previous CIP versions (Version 3 being
the most recent, as Version 4 was effectively
omitted), only those generation facilities de-
termined to be Critical Assets by their owner/
operators were required to comply with the
standards. Even then, a wide range of assets
were excluded simply by avoiding the use
of routable communication protocols. The
result was that a broad swath of generation
facilities had virtually no compliance obliga-
tions under the CIP standards.
Version 5s tiered classification brings all
BES generating facilities into scope for at
least some requirements. A new bright line
approach to identifying cyber assets that
qualify for protection under the CIP stan-
dards ensures that most systems used in the
operation of any BES generation facility will
be in scope for at least some requirements.
Cyber assets meeting certain criteria will be
grouped into systems and assigned a High,
Medium, or Low impact rating based upon
the characteristics of the facility they support.
For example, BES Cyber Systems at plants
larger than 1,500 MW may receive a Me-
dium impact rating, while most black-start
units will be Low impact. All such systems,
referred to officially as BES Cyber Systems,
will be assigned at least a Low impact rating
and will be required to comply with at least a
portion of the requirements.
There is a single requirement for Low-
impact BES Cyber Systems, but that single
requirement has a broad scope. Generators
are required to develop and implement secu-
rity policies that address four specific areas
of concern: security awareness, physical se-
curity, remote access connections, and inci-
dent response. The rest of this article focuses
on these basic considerations that apply to all
BES Cyber Systems.
The importance of the implementation re-
quirement cannot be ignored. Simply creating
policies will not be sufficient for compliance.
Policies must be implemented through the
deployment of processes, procedures, and
controls that meet the objectives described in
the written policies. Significant flexibility is
provided with respect to the design of con-
trols, but the stated objectives must be met,
and generators will be audited against what
has been implemented.
Security Awareness
The responsibility for security falls, to some
extent, on each and every individual within
an organization. Security attacks often take
advantage of individuals who ignore, or are
unaware of, basic security precautions.
For example, the most effective (and com-
monly used) initial attack vector into an orga-
nization is email. (See also Just Hop on the
Bus, Gus: 13 Ways to Hack a Power Plant in
this issue.) Attackers send messages designed
to convince an individual to open an attach-
ment or click a link. Upon doing so, security
vulnerabilities can be exploited, giving con-
trol of the victims machine to the attacker,
and with it, an entry point to an organiza-
tions internal computer networks, including
the generation control systems.
To strengthen security, CIP Version 5
requires that programs be implemented to
promote awareness of security risks and re-
inforce secure precautions that should be
taken. The development and implementation
of such a program is one of the four required
protections for Low-impact systems.
A security awareness program should be
broadly applicable across an organization.
Although it is not necessary to track aware-
ness messages to ensure that each individual
receives every message, the program should
be developed and executed in a manner that
makes it likely that all individuals in the orga-
nization will regularly receive such messages.
Simply creating policies will not be suffi-
cient for compliance. Policies must be imple-
mented . . . and generators will be audited
against what has been implemented.
Milestone Date Reference
Industry approval of Version 5 11/5/12 http://bit.ly/1jX35sF
NERC Board of Trustees approval 11/26/12 http://bit.ly/1nsAQY7
NERC petition to FERC for approval 1/31/13 http://bit.ly/QJ7ruQ
FERC approval (Order 791) 11/22/13 http://1.usa.gov/1iHeh03
Published in Federal Register 12/3/13 Federal Register pages 72755 -72787
Effective date of rule 2/3/14 Federal Register pages 72755 -72787
Effective date of standards 4/1/16 http://bit.ly/1mJERr9
Table 1. NERC CIP 5 milestones. Source: EnergySec
|
June 2014 30
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
Many such general security awareness
messages are appropriate for general audi-
ences across an organization. For example,
tips on the selection and use of strong pass-
words help ensure compliance with pass-
word policies and reduce the likelihood of
passwords being guessed. Another common
topic is email security. General awareness of
the types of risks posed by email, including
how to recognize the attacks that are often
sent via email, can substantially reduce the
probability, or at least the frequency, of suc-
cessful intrusions via this method.
Physical Security
The second area of concern that requires poli-
cy action is physical security, a control that is
critical to the overall security of any digital sys-
tem. If an attacker can gain physical access to
a computer system or other electronic device,
full compromise of the device is nearly assured.
Likewise, physical access to network ports or
communication media can allow an attacker
to intercept, interfere with, or even inject mes-
sages onto a network. In control environments,
this can have catastrophic consequences.
Access to BES Cyber Systems and associ-
ated networks should be restricted to only those
personnel who require access for the perfor-
mance of their jobs. Physical security controls
must be implemented to enforce access restric-
tions and to allow for the detection of unauthor-
ized access. Such controls can be preventive,
or detective. Preventive controls are designed
to prevent unauthorized access from occurring.
Examples are fences, walls, doors, and locked
cabinets. Detective controls are designed to
emphasize the detection of unauthorized access
and would activate an appropriate response
procedure. Examples include alarm systems,
video surveillance, and guard patrols.
Remote Access Connections
The third area of concern is remote electronic
access. The single greatest reason that cyber-
security is such a significant issue today is the
tremendous increase in connectivity of critical
systems and the global reach of the Internet.
Any system that is connected to the Internet
even indirectly through multiple other systems
or networks, and even if a plant worker is un-
aware of those connectionshas some risk of
compromise by motivated parties.
Although attacks can also be conducted
locally by individuals that gain physical ac-
cess, the near ubiquity of network connectiv-
ity has enabled attacks that many engineers
would find inconceivable. Remote connec-
tivity to systems increases the pool of poten-
tial attackers by orders of magnitude, while
simultaneously reducing the cost, difficulty,
and risk an attacker must overcome.
Remote connections come in many forms
and are used for many purposes. Internet ac-
cess, dialup, serial connections, wide area
networking, and wireless are examples. These
may exist for many legitimate business pur-
poses including employee remote access, ven-
dor support, operational control, and business
partner communications. A good CIP Version
5 process requires that such connections be
controlled and monitored to reduce the likeli-
hood of successful intrusions and to detect and
quickly respond to those that do occur.
Incident Response
Despite the best efforts of organizations to
protect their cyber assets, successful attacks
are likely to happen, at least occasionally. Or-
ganizations must be prepared to respond ap-
propriately to such events not only because
the potential financial costs of equipment mal-
functions or worse can be enormous but also
because the longer a security breach is unad-
dressed, the greater the potential damage not
only to an individual facility but also to other
facilities and the interconnected grid.
Incident response plans should be estab-
lished to effectively handle intrusions and
other cybersecurity events. These should in-
clude the identification and training of per-
sonnel who will be responsible for the initial
response, investigation, and containment, as
well as notification and escalation proce-
dures to senior management, legal, and com-
munications staff.
Plans should include provisions for external
notification of law enforcement and other ap-
propriate agencies or organizations such as the
Department of Homeland Securitys Industrial
Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response
Team (ICS-CERT), the Electricity Sector
Information Sharing and Analysis Center
(ES-ISAC), and/or other state and local author-
ities. Plans should also allow for the involve-
ment of commercial incident response and
forensic investigation specialists, as needed.
Recent Developments
Although there is a dramatic expansion of sys-
tems that are in scope for NERC CIP Version
5, there is still room for improvement. In its or-
der approving Version 5 of the CIP standards,
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) raised concerns regarding the lack of
specific requirements for Low-impact systems.
Although the standard requires that policies
be developed and implemented in four key ar-
eas, there are no specific requirements, and
no criteria against which to measure the ef-
fectiveness of controls that are actually put in
place. The lack of specific requirements leaves
FERC with little oversight or assurance that
security risks will be adequately addressed.
To correct this situation, FERC has direct-
ed NERC to either develop new requirements
for Low-impact BES Cyber Systems or de-
velop objective criteria that can be used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the controls that
are deployed.
Although it is not yet known which ap-
proach will be taken or what potential spe-
cific controls may be required, the objectives
are clear, as is the need. Organizations should
develop and deploy controls that provide pru-
dent protections in the four identified areas
of concern. Although some adjustments may
need to be made based on the actual require-
ments developed by NERC, those organiza-
tions that have worked proactively to address
these areas of risk will be both more secure,
and better positioned for compliance.
The concern over cybersecurity risks to criti-
cal infrastructure, of which power generation is
a significant element, is unlikely to wane in the
foreseeable future. In fact, the issue is receiving
increasing scrutiny from the federal govern-
ment and, recently, state utility commissions
and legislatures. The expectation that critical
infrastructure operators will proactively and ef-
fectively address cyber risks is increasing.
Additionally, with respect to the NERC
CIP standards, there is an active effort to shift
the focus of audit and enforcement away from
a strict measurement against specific require-
ments toward a qualitative assessment of in-
ternal controls. This move will reinforce the
need for holistic approaches that emphasize
real security rather than mere compliance.
Compliance requirements can be an effec-
tive catalyst to kickstart cybersecurity efforts,
but if they remain the only focus, long-term
success is unlikely. Holistic efforts that view
cybersecurity as a means to compliance, rath-
er than assuming compliance is the basis for
security, are the only effective way to address
both concerns now and into the future.
Steven Parker, CISA, CISSP is president
and a founding director of Energy Sector
Security Consortium (EnergySec). He has
been engaged in electricity sector critical
infrastructure protection for more than a
decade, including eight years at PacifiCorp.
He was also part of the team that estab-
lished the NERC CIP audit program at the
Western Electricity Coordinating Council.
The near ubiquity of network connectivity
has enabled attacks that many engineers
would find inconceivable.
PCL.com
We are consLrucuon parLners who respond Lo Lhe unlque consLrucuon needs
of cllenLs ln Lhe power, cogenerauon, oll and gas, peLrochemlcal, and mlnlng
lndusLrles. We are passlonaLe abouL whaL we do and abouL creaung successful
ouLcomes for our cllenLs whlch lead Lo our muLual success.
We look beyond Lhe lmmedlaLe pro[ecL needs Lo see Lhe blgger plcLure: Lo
undersLand your buslness goals, share your vlslon of success and work urelessly
Lo exceed your expecLauons.
TOGETHER
WE BUILD
SUCCESS.
525 MW Combined
Cycle Power Plant
Mona, Utah
|
June 2014 32
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
Identifying CIP Version 5 Assets in
Generation
The latest version of Critical Infrastructure Protection standards applies to dif-
ferent facilities and assets than previous versions, so the first, critical step
in compliance is to determine which facilities and assets are subject to the
new standards.
Tom Alrich and Donovan Tindill
G
enerators of electric power face a big
effort to comply with the upcoming
North American Electric Reliabil-
ity Corp. Critical Infrastructure Protection
(NERC CIP) Version 5 (V5) cybersecurity
standards. Whether or not your facility has
had to comply with previous NERC CIP
standards, a plants cost of compliance will
depend directly on the number of cyber
assets that are in scope. This article is in-
tended to give a basic overview of how gen-
erators can identify the cyber assets in scope
for CIP V5.
Is It a Bulk Electric System Facility?
The first step is to determine if a facility is
in scope for CIP V5 at all. According to the
new Bulk Electric System (BES) definition,
if a generating facility is connected to the
grid at 100 kV or higher, it is a BES facility
(with a few exceptions), and it is in scope
for CIP V5.
The next step is determining whether the
plant is Medium or Low impact under
V5. Generation facilities are not considered
High impact; this status is reserved for
BES control centers that meet specific crite-
ria. For the criteria for classifying facilities in
CIP V5, see Attachment 1 of CIP-002 version
5 (written as CIP-002-5) online (http://bit.ly/
ShrWQJ).
There are only two criteria in NERC CIP-
002-5 that classify generation as Medium
impact. In Attachment 1 of CIP-002-5, a
generating station is Medium if a group of
generating units at a single plant location
can generate 1,500 MW. Additionally, a gen-
erating station is Medium if the Planning Co-
ordinator or Transmission Planner informs
you that your plant, or specific unit(s) in the
plant, are required to operate for reliabil-
ity purposes (reliability must run). If your
plant does not meet one of these two criteria,
it is defined as Low impact.
If your generating station is considered
Low impact, there is no requirement to iden-
tify individual Low-impact cyber assets, and
this will remain true for the new Low-impact
requirements being developed by NERC in
response to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commissions directive in Order 791. As a
Low-impact asset, the rest of this article wont
directly apply to your generating station.
However, if your whole plant or individual
unit(s) are Medium impact, the first step is to
inventory your cyber assets, defined as pro-
grammable electronic devices. This includes
servers, workstations, distributed control sys-
tem (DCS) controllers, programmable logic
controllers (PLC), and other devices involved
in the operation of the generating station.
However, not all cyber assets will be
in scope for CIP V5, even at a Medium-
impact facility. Those that are in scope
are called BES Cyber Assets. These are
grouped into BES Cyber Systems, to
which the CIP V5 requirements apply.
There are two basic approaches to identi-
fying BES Cyber Systems: bottom-up and
top-down. These arent mutually exclusive;
in fact, at least two of the NERC regions rec-
ommended that NERC entities use both ap-
proaches, because it is possible that some
BES Cyber Systems will be missed if only
one is used.
Bottoms Up
In the bottom-up approach, generators would
evaluate each cyber asset in operation in a
plant (for example, servers, operator stations,
routers, switches, PLCs, remote terminal
units, and so on) and determine if it meets
the definition of BES cyber asset, according
to the NERC Glossary: A Cyber Asset that
if rendered unavailable, degraded, or mis-
used would, within 15 minutes of its required
Primary systems Secondary systems
Supervision and control (governor, frequency,
voltage, automatic generation control, etc.)
Water treatment
Dynamic response Fuel source (gas pipeline, coal handling, storage, etc.)
Startup, shutdown Emissions control, fly ash, flue gas desulfurization
Exciter Flame scanners, oxidizers
Protection relays ICCP communications
Power stabilizers Vibration (if required to start up unit)
Network infrastructure
Table 1. Typical generation cyber assets and systems. Source: Honeywell
The best starting point for inventorying
cyber assets is the control system drawings,
network drawings, and IP address lists.
June 2014
|
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
operation, misoperation, or non-operation,
adversely impact one or more Facilities,
systems, or equipment, which, if destroyed,
degraded, or otherwise rendered unavailable
when needed, would affect the reliable op-
eration of the Bulk Electric System.
This isnt an easy definition to digest, but
it essentially says that the cyber asset must
have an impact on the Bulk Electric System
within 15 minutes if it is misused, degraded,
lost, or compromised. Impact on the BES
typically means impact on the generating
station that hinders or prevents it from ful-
filling its purpose (that is, generating power
when required).
For example, the DCS will very likely
have an impact in under 15 minutes, so the
component cyber assets will be BES cyber
assets. In another example, characteristics
of a particular coal-handling system might
allow it to be inoperable for hours or days
before the plant has to shut down, so its
coal-handling cyber components wont be
BES cyber assets.
The best starting point for inventorying
cyber assets is the control system drawings,
network drawings, and IP address lists. Gen-
erator control becomes the starting point, and
other systems are next (Table 1). In a typical
control system, about half the devices are IT-
type technology (computers or networking)
and the remainder are control system devices
(including DCS controllers, serial converters,
and PLCs). All these cyber assets require in-
spection and inventory, plus a determination
on whether or not each cyber asset meets the
BES cyber asset definition (it affects the BES
within 15 minutes).
Once BES cyber assets have been identi-
fied, they need to be grouped into BES Cyber
Systems. This is an exercise left to the discre-
tion of the generator. Generators can reduce
compliance paperwork by grouping many
BES Cyber Assets into a single large BES Cy-
ber System. However, if a generator defines
the BES Cyber Systems too expansively, the
generator may end up including BES cyber
assets that dont meet the definition, unnec-
essarily increasing the compliance effort.
As a general rule, most consultants familiar
with CIP will create BES Cyber Systems by
grouping cyber assets that work together to
fulfill a function (such as control, continuous
emissions monitoring system, or protection).
Take It from the Top
The top-down approach starts with the BES
Reliability Operating Services (BROS),
which are discussed in the Guidelines and
Technical Basis of CIP-002-5. The BROS
are reliability services that BES facilities can
provide to the grid. Table 2 identifies those
BROS that would typically apply to genera-
tion owners (GO) and generation operators
(GOP). (If the BROS dont make immediate
sense, refer to Table 1, which lists potential
BES Cyber Systems in a power plant.)
The systems that fulfill one or more BROS
should all be considered potential BES Cy-
ber Systems. But because a BES Cyber
System is composed of BES Cyber Assets,
you need to go back to the BES Cyber As-
set definition and make sure it still applies.
For instance, if a potential BES Cyber Sys-
tem doesnt have a 15-minute impact on the
Bulk Electric System, then it wont be a BES
Cyber System, even though it does fulfill a
BROS function.
Before a potential BES Cyber System
becomes an actual one, there is one more step
to take. The generator needs to go back to the
definition of BES cyber asset (cited above)
and make sure each potential BES Cyber
System meets the definition. In particular,
some potential BES Cyber Systems may
not pass, as they dont have a 15-minute im-
pact on the BES.
To summarize the top-down approach:
Identify the BES Reliability Operating Ser-
vices that are performed by the generating
station and then identify the BES Cyber
Systems that execute or enable one or more
BROS. The BES Cyber System classification
as Medium or Low depends on the impact
level of the plant.
Large Plants
If a generating facility meets Criterion 2.1
of Attachment 1, there is a further provision
in that criterion that states: the only BES
Cyber Systems that meet this criterion are
those shared BES Cyber Systems that could,
within 15 minutes, adversely impact the re-
liable operation of any combination of units
that in aggregate equal or exceed 1500 MW
in a single Interconnection.
This statement indicates that the generat-
ing facility could be Medium impact, but it
may have few or no Medium-impact BES
Cyber Systems, because a BES Cyber Sys-
tem has to have the capability of affecting the
entire generating station. A good example of
this condition is a DCS that controls only 800
MW of generation at a 1,600-MW facility
and has no capability to affect the full 1,600
MW at the site. In this example, the plant
would be Medium impact, but the DCS is a
Low-impact BES Cyber System.
Generators looking to reduce their CIP
compliance burden by taking advantage of
this provision need to keep in mind that sim-
ply stating that the BES Cyber Systems can-
not affect 1,500 MW will not be sufficient.
They will need to prove this position by
showing the work related to the identification
of BES Cyber Systems through the bottom-
up and top-down approaches. The generator
must also document why each BES Cyber
System doesnt affect 1,500 MW and show
that it isnt networked with other BES Cyber
Systems that do affect 1,500 MW.
Complex Determinations
The asset identification process in NERC
CIP Version 5 is much more complicated
than it was in CIP Versions 1 through 3. If a
generating station will be classified as Low
impact in V5, the process wont be exces-
sively difficult. But owners of Medium-im-
pact generating stations will require a deep
understanding of how to identify cyber as-
sets in scope. The cost and effort required
to achieve NERC CIP V5 compliance will
depend heavily on this understanding.
Tom Alrich (tom.alrich@honeywell
.com) is energy sector security lead for
Honeywell International and focuses on
the electric power industry and compli-
ance with NERC regulations for cyber
and physical security. Donovan Tindill,
CISSP, senior security & compliance con-
sultant, Honeywell Industrial IT Solutions,
specializes in cybersecurity for industrial
automation and control systems for a
wide variety of industries and has been
involved with NERC CIP compliance
since 2005.
Entity registration RC BA TOP TO DP GOP GO
Dynamic response X X X X X X
Balancing load and generation X X X X X X X
Controlling frequency X X X
Controlling voltage X X X X
Managing constraints X X X
Monitoring and control X X
Restoration X X X
Situational awareness X X X X
Inter-entity coordination X X X X X X
Table 2. BES Reliability Operating Services. Source: CIP-002-5.1 Guidelines and
Technical Basis
|
June 2014 34
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
When Old Systems Meet New
Realities: Adding Security
Controls to Generating Plants
Whether or not your power plant falls under the new Critical Infrastructure
Protection standards (and many more will than in the past), you should
be adding security controls. Here are some lessons learned to help you
manage that process.
Michael Toecker, PE
O
n August 14, 2003, large parts of the
Northeast and Midwest of the U.S.
and the Canadian province of On-
tario experienced one of the largest black-
outs in history: 61,000 MW of electric
load were lost, affecting the lives and busi-
nesses of about 50 million people in the af-
fected areas. The U.S. and Canada created
a joint commission to study the blackout,
determine its causes, and develop recom-
mendations to reduce the potential for fu-
ture outages. The discovered causes of the
Northeast Blackout were condensed into
four groups (summarized from Northeast
Blackout report, pp. 1819):
Failure of entities to assess and understand
the inadequacies of their power system.
Inadequate situational awareness leading
to lack of recognition that the system had
deteriorated.
Inadequate vegetation management along
transmission rights-of-way.
Failure of reliability organizations to
provide effective real-time diagnostic
support.
The commission made 46 recommen-
dations to reduce the possibility of future
outages, and the severity of ones that might
still occur. The most interesting part of this,
considering the causes identified, was that
15 recommendations directly addressed
physical and cybersecurity issues, while
neither physical nor cybersecurity was
identified as a major cause of the blackout.
The Security Working group ruled out a cy-
ber attack and unintentional consequences
of a currently active virus (SQL Slammer),
but it identified how technology had con-
tributed to the blackout due to degraded
situational awareness.
The implication here is clear: A third of
the Northeast Blackout recommendations
were related to improved cyber and physi-
cal security because the investigation showed
how poor the cybersecurity of the EMS/
SCADA (energy management system/super-
visory control and data acquisition) systems
used for managing the grid was.
These recommendations led directly to
development of the North American Elec-
tric Reliability Corp. (NERC) Urgent Ac-
tion 1200 standards during 20042005 and
the creation of the NERC Critical Infra-
structure Protection (CIP) standards, which
we have today.
Generation was never a part of the Urgent
Action 1200 standards, but attention has shifted
over the past several years due to awareness that
generators are a crucial part of a reliable grid.
NERC CIP Version 5
The latest edition of the NERC CIP stan-
dards should be NERC CIP Version 5. I say
should because the Federal Energy Regu-
latory Commission has directed NERC to
make changes to the standards that will likely
result in a Version 6 in 2015. These changes
cover four major areas, one of which ad-
dresses a lack of objective requirements for
Low-impact assets. The majority of North
American generating facilities that have not
had specific technical and procedural regula-
tions so far will fall into that category. (For
more on determining facility and asset clas-
sifications, see Identifying CIP Version 5
Assets in Generation in this issue.)
Generation facilities will likely be classi-
fied as either Medium or Low impact, based
on a set of bright-line criteria identified in
CIP-002-5. If your facility is a Medium im-
pact one, youll have a set of prescriptive
requirements to follow, but a Low-impact
facility currently has a requirement for a
security policy, and not much else, until the
NERC development efforts are complete.
(Often Painful) Lessons Learned
When applying cybersecurity controls, you
are going to run into problems. Many of the
major control systems in power generation
plants are of an older variety and havent
been updated due to a combination of cost
concerns and sufficient current reliability.
Although network perimeter strategies will
generally have little effect on older systems,
the CIP-007-5 protections are another mat-
ter entirely.
Below I discuss two common challenges
Ive encountered while involved in cyberse-
curity upgrades at generation plants, so that
engineers responsible for their own upgrades
can plan appropriately to either avoid them or
understand how to resolve them.
Lesson Learned: Old Code Can Be In-
compatible with Modern Cybersecurity
Tools. The origins of many plant control sys-
tems, especially distributed control systems
(DCSs), go back to the mid-1980s, and a lot
of the code from that era can still be found
in our systems and devices. There has sim-
ply not been a major reason to change, as the
hardware platforms for these control systems
are controlled by the same companies that
write the code. This code persists, and can
form an impediment to some cybersecurity
controls because it was simply not designed
from a maintainability and security perspec-
tive the way more modern code must be.
Old code affects systems in various ways
when adding cybersecurity. One way is that
older code isnt developed to take advan-
tage of multi-core systems. This can lead
to performance bottlenecks that inhibit the
functionality of cybersecurity controls run-
ning alongside the DCS software and that
degrade the performance of some control
systems to an unacceptable level.
Large-Scale Power. Fast.
This is not your typical power plant.
When Uruguays national utility urgently needed large-scale power to
hedge its hydroelectric dependency, it called on APR Energy. As the
worlds largest provider of fast-track mobile turbine power, APR Energy
delivers large blocks of power within weeks, not years with solutions
that easily integrate into existing infrastructure. We help keep the power
on in Uruguay and in many other countries around the globe.
Learn more at
aprenergy.com/fastpower
Day 1 Day 8 Day 24 Day 42
|
June 2014 36
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
Another is that older code often uses hooks
and operating system features that were once
commonplace but are no longer acceptable,
and systems continue to use these features
in an unsupported manner. The most popular
feature that old code uses is running in kernel
mode instead of user mode.
Kernel mode is a highly privileged mode
of operation that allows full control of a sys-
tem, but it runs the risk of crashing system
processes. The modern convention is to write
user-mode programs that make use of care-
fully constructed kernel interfaces, so that
crashes are limited (and for various other
reasons). Using kernel mode was once a
necessary evil when processing and memory
resources were far more scarce, and the DCS
needed everything to maintain a high level of
functionality. The argument now is that pro-
cessing and memory are far more plentiful,
so a new design decision is needed that pri-
oritizes reliability and maintainability in an
environment of resource abundance.
Heres an anecdotal example. I found sev-
eral years ago that a major power DCS ven-
dor was shipping modern workstations with
quad core processors, but it had disabled all
but one core to ensure that its code ran. This
was due to the old code being designed to run
as a single process; it was not capable of be-
ing swapped between the different cores due
to concurrency issues.
When the time came for generators to add a
basic cybersecurity protectionanti-virus
the system wasnt capable of running both
the anti-virus and the DCS at the required ef-
ficiency. This led to hangs, slowdowns, and
other problems that were quickly blamed on
the anti-virus, as it was the last thing added to
the system. Making the situation worse was
the tendency of anti-virus to scan each and
every file as it was opened. Anti-virus will in-
tercept calls to open files and will lock them
until scanning is complete. DCS systems, of-
ten because of old code, make significant use
of file operations and are capable of opening
and closing hundreds or thousands of files in
the course of a day. An assumption I made
while looking at the problem was that the old
code was written with an older design phi-
losophy that assumed exclusive access to the
file system, and it reacted badly when this as-
sumption was challenged by the anti-virus.
Many generators disregard this old code
argument and maintain that their DCS is
functional and that it performs its duties to
the level of expectation. I would argue that
the DCS may be functional, but it is rapidly
losing its functionality as the rest of the world
moves past it.
A good analogy is the use of hot sticks in
power. Hot sticks used to be made of wood;
they were functional and got the job done.
However, the excessive maintenance and up-
keep needed to keep them safe, along with
pressure from U.S. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration requirements and in-
surance companies, made wooden hot sticks
obsolete, and they have been replaced with
fiberglass. In a similar way, older code is be-
ing rendered obsolete due to the pressures of
cybersecurity and NERC CIP regulations;
consequently, newer code that can be better
maintained should be the new specification
going forward.
Lesson Learned: Controls Upgrades
Hold Surprises. Vendors to the generation
industry have stepped up in the past five
years, and most have support for NERC CIP
activities. Generally, this starts with a CIP-
007 R2 port/service specification, and slowly
increases in scope as the vendor gets more
involved in how its systems should be se-
cured. These vendor-supported activities rely
on having control system software that is at a
specific patch and revision level and having a
generator commit to maintaining that level.
This often results in a required control
system upgrade, where workstations, serv-
ers, network equipment, and potentially DCS
controllers must be replaced or modified to
ensure effective operation of those controls.
Considering the planning and testing that
must go into upgrading control systems, this
will not be a quick change-out, and it never
has been. Whats different today is that plants
that have procrastinated will have far more
systems to upgrade.
For many generators, engaging in a controls
upgrade for the sole purpose of adding cyber-
security controls will be daunting, so dont
delay. Determine your exposure, and make
your plans far ahead of when NERC requires
compliance, especially if you already know
you will be a Medium-impact facility with
Medium bulk electric system cyber systems.
Ive had the opportunity to talk to the
critical infrastructure group at Burns & Mc-
Donnell (disclosure: Im a former employee-
owner), who have supervised many of these
upgrades over the past several years. They of-
ten recommend a full factory acceptance test
(FAT) to ensure the functionality of the con-
trol system and to exercise the cybersecurity
controls in a consequence-free environment.
This helps to identify problems in the control
system and to ensure corrections are made
before a system reaches the site.
Because there are often multiple control
systems that must integrate with one an-
other, and may even share a common set of
security controls, Burns & McDonnell often
recommends an integrated FAT to bring all
For more information, call Wrights Media at 877.652.5295 or visit our
website at www.wrightsmedia.com
Logo Licensing | Reprints | Eprints | Plaques
Leverage branded content from Power Magazine to create a more powerful
and sophisticated statement about your product, service, or company in your
next marketing campaign. Contact Wrights Media to fnd out more about
how we can customize your acknowledgements and recognitions to enhance
your marketing strategies.
Content Licensing for
Every Marketing Strategy
Marketing solutions ft for:
Outdoor
Direct Mail
Print Advertising
Tradeshow/POP Displays
Social Media
Radio & Television

June 2014
|
NERC CIP COMPLIANCE
the vendors into the same space to test the
integrated components of the control sys-
tems. This is good practice, as the integration
points between control systems are often the
most prone to incompatibility problems.
Specific tasks during the FAT should include:
Testing functionality of the control system
and the security system.
Validating that ports and services meet
specifications.
Testing anti-virus while in operating con-
ditions.
Patching systems, and validating patch
management procedures on the system.
Creating, testing, and securing user and
machine accounts.
Validating that security monitoring is cap-
turing relevant logs.
Redesigning One-offs and
Ancillary Systems
Every generator has a one-off system or
two, or an ancillary system that has been
basically ignored for years because it just
worked. These systems will be surprises
when you add cybersecurity controls, as
they will likely have little vendor support in
the way of cybersecurity and an unknown
upgrade path. Most of these discoveries fol-
low the rule of the last 20% of the project
takes 80% of the time.
Encountering one of these systems will
likely cause a flurry of activity, because
it wont fit into the cybersecurity model
youve created for the rest of your control
system. This is likely to be a system with
limited connection to a good, monitored
network. Such systems will usually be old-
er, missing patches, and sometimes have no
upgrade path.
It will be tempting to leave these systems
operating as one-offs and not do the rede-
sign to bring them into your cybersecurity
model. Resist this temptation, as manu-
ally conducting cybersecurity activities is
a human performance issue that increases
the risk of both noncompliance and com-
promise. Take the effort to identify these
systems as quickly as possible, make the
necessary network adjustments, and work
with your security and control system ven-
dors to include these systems in the cyber-
security model.
Share Lessons Learned
The addition of cybersecurity at your facility
is going to bring with it a lot of changes, and
its going to introduce problems as well. At
best, you will encounter changes in systems,
in procedures, and in how you look at main-
taining your control systems in the future.
The key to successfully adding these controls
is first ensuring that you have a plan and then
executing that plan while watching for prob-
lems to develop.
This article mentions just a few of the
common problems likely to surface when
adding security to an existing system. To
gain a more comprehensive understanding
of your situation, network with your peers
and user groups to identify other potential
problems as well. A larger community-
based effort will be needed over the next
few years to increase communication be-
tween generators who have cybersecurity
and CIP responsibilities.
We are in the business of producing com-
petitive and efficient electric power, but re-
liability is everyones responsibility, and
security is a component of reliability.
Michael Toecker, PE (toecker
@context-is.com) is a consulting engineer at
Context Industrial Security and has extensive
experience in NERC CIP compliance, control
system security, and how to implement both
in the context of power generation.
V
IS
IT
O
U
R

P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
IO
N

2+3 JUNE AT 2:00 PM
BOOTH 7B50
A
T
P
O
W
E
R
G
E
N

E
U
R
O
P
E
P.O. BOX 162, 2300 AD LEIDEN, THE NETHERLANDS TEL +31 71 5792444 FAX +31 71 5792792 EMAIL INFO@NEM.NL WEBSITE WWW.NEM-GROUP.COM
FIELD ACCELERATED STEAM TECHNOLOGY (FAST) IS PROVIDED BY THE LEADERS IN FAST
START HEAT RECOVERY STEAM GENERATOR TECHNOLOGY: DRUMPLUS AND BENSON.
NEM Patented DrumPlus
TM
Design:
Unrestricted Gas Turbine Ramp Up State of the Art
Meets challenging Emission Regulations Proven Technology
BUILD FAST
START FASTER
N
E
M
2
6
6
NEM IS A GLOBAL LEADER IN HRSG TECHNOLOGY
|
June 2014 38
Managing the Changing Profile of
a Combined Cycle Plant
Whether its market forces or other factors leading to a change in operating mode,
going from baseload to flexible operation places substantial new stresses on
a plant and its staff. Knowing what youre getting into is key to successfully
managing the transition.
Neva Espinoza, Bill Carson, and Rick Roberts
W
ith the growing need for opera-
tional flexibility across the power
industry, the combined-cycle gas
turbine (CCGT) fleet is increasingly being
subjected to load-following and cyclic opera-
tion. This change in operating mode is intro-
ducing new types and higher rates of damage
and can result in reduced performance and
increased operation and maintenance (O&M)
and repair costs. To meet these challenges,
todays fleet is taking strategic and tactical
measures, and the Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) is compiling information on
effective approaches and best practices.
Changing Landscape
Over the past decade, the pattern of duty
modes and plant dispatch of CCGT plants
has changed. This change involves a general
shift for CCGT plants from baseload to flex-
ible operation with increased frequency and
level of cycling of these plants.
Flexible operation is broadly defined as
any mode of operation other than baseload,
and includes several specific types of duty
modes. Two-shifting is starting up and shut-
ting down a plant each day to meet load de-
mand during periods of high demand. Double
two-shifting is starting up and shutting down
a unit twice a day to match the early morning
and evening peaks in load demand. Load fol-
lowing is operating online for more than 48
hours, with varying load throughout the day
as demand changes. Many times these plants
turn down to some minimum load when de-
mand is low.
Whatever the duty mode, flexible opera-
tion typically involves more frequent start-
ups, more rapid ramping, low load operation,
and more frequent shutdowns or layup.
Factors contributing to this trend include
reduced overall demand following the eco-
nomic recession, competition, changes in
fuel prices, aging plants, demand for a more
reliable power grid, and stricter environmen-
tal controls. In some regions, one key factor
is the increasing deployment of intermit-
tent renewable generation, such as solar and
wind, which is dispatched as must-take and
forces fossil plants to provide load-balancing
services. In this context, relatively small dif-
ferences in costs and reliability can make a
large difference in station ranking, leading to
many older, less-efficient CCGT plants being
required to load follow.
Effects of Flexible Operation
CCGT plants have less operating flexibility
than conventional steam plants, which can
be run down to 40% of rated output, while
CCGT plants have difficulty in getting below
60%. A further problem is the length of time
that it takes for the heat recovery steam gen-
erator (HRSG) plant to achieve full output.
Hence, although a CCGT plant may be able
to produce power relatively quickly, it is not
really suitable for load-following until some
time after startup.
EPRI research has identified a number of
common damage mechanisms related to cy-
cling. Cycling load is associated with stress-
es from varying temperatures and pressures,
which can trigger fatigue and fatigue-related
damage mechanisms.
Thermal Fatigue. The most common
problem resulting from cycling is thermal
fatigue damage, which manifests itself in the
form of material deformation, cracking of in-
dividual components, or mechanical failure
of structures. This mechanism is caused by
the large temperature swings associated with
flexible operation.
Thermal Mechanical Fatigue. This
mechanism, which occurs in rotating compo-
1. Wide range of challenges. This graphic details the many areas of potential cycling
damage in a combined-cycle plant. Courtesy: EPRI
|
June 2014 40
nents such as turbine blades, vanes, and other
hot-section components, is caused by ther-
mal expansion and contraction, reinforced by
mechanical strains associated with centrifu-
gal and torsional loads.
Differential Thermal Expansion. This
damage occurs when components undergo
high thermal growth relative to surround-
ing components. This mechanism can affect
combustor cans, boilers, and HRSGs.
Corrosion. Two-shifting or any other op-
eration that challenges the ability of the plant
to maintain water chemistry can lead to in-
creased corrosion and accelerated component
failure. This mechanism can manifest itself
as increased problems with corrosion-fatigue
of economizer tubing and stress corrosion in
steam turbines (STs).
Impaired Performance of Environ-
mental Control Equipment. Load follow-
ing and other modes of flexible operation can
affect the performance of selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) systems.
Figure 1 shows the types of potential cy-
cling-related damage that might be expected
in different areas of a CCGT plant.
What are the consequences of this damage?
Recent investigations found that a change
from baseload operation to operating under
cycling conditions can result in increased
capital spending for component replacement,
increased routine O&M costs due to equip-
ment wear-and-tear, lower availability due
to higher failure rates and outage times, and
higher fuel consumption due to operating in
less than an optimal manner (more stops and
starts and more load changes), negatively af-
fecting unit heat rate. Also, when a unit is
subjected to cyclic operation, reliability can
suffer. These consequences can lead to a unit
becoming less reliable and more expensive to
operate, resulting in a lower dispatch order
and increased need for additional flexibility,
effectively creating a spiral of cycling opera-
tion leading to more cyclic operation.
In 2013, an EPRI study investigated the
impact of cycling on the O&M costs of
CCGTs with capacities of 110 MW to 492
MW. The results showed that the strongest
indicator of annual O&M costs was the
number of equivalent hot starts (EHS) that a
unit performs. The study assumed a hot start
equals 1 EHS, a warm start equals 3 EHS,
and a cold start equals 5 EHS.
The same study explored the equivalent
forced outage factor (EFOF) for CCGT plants
operating in both baseload and cycling modes.
EFOF is the fraction of a given operation pe-
riod in which a unit or a train is not available
due to forced outages. This particular param-
eter is very useful in measuring forced outages
in cycling power plants, because it takes into
account the derating hours.
Findings showed that the average EFOF
value for CCGT plants operating in the cy-
cling regime is about 3% higher than the
plants operating in the baseload mode in the
first six years of operation and about 1.5%
higher between six to 20 years of operation.
EFOF for cycling plants increases much
more abruptly between 20 and 30 years of
operation compared with baseload plants.
Figure 2 shows the average EFOF versus
lifetime EHS for CCGT plants operating in
cycling regimes.
The study also looked at the equivalent
planned outage factor (EPOF) for CCGT
plants operating in baseload and cycling
modes. Planned outages normally refer to
the removal of a unit from service to perform
work on specific components that is sched-
uled well in advance and has a predetermined
duration, such as annual overhaul, inspection,
and component testing.
In general, increased routine maintenance
is required due to increased levels of wear-
and-tear when a plant moves from baseload
operation to cyclic mode. Results showed
the planned outage levels for cycling CCGT
plants are within about 6% to 9% during the
first six years of operation and within about
4% to 6% for the next 14 years of operation.
The EPOF achieves its minimum level be-
tween 10 and 14 years. During the major
component wear-out period, which is near
the end of life (assuming major components
at or near end-of-life have not been replaced),
the EPOF value for cycling CCGT plants in-
creases to about 15% to 18%. Figure 3 shows
the average EPOF versus lifetime EHS for
CCGT plants operating in cycling regimes.
Another recent EPRI study documented
23 cases in which major HRSG components
unexpectedly reached end-of-life. Many of
these failures can be attributed to more fre-
quent cyclic operation than originally antici-
pated in the plant design. For components to
have a full design life, the factors anticipated
by the designer need to be similar to those ac-
tually experienced by the plant components
in service. These factors include the operat-
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400 3,000 3,600 4,200
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

f
o
r
c
e
d

o
u
t
a
g
e

f
a
c
t
o
r

(
%
)
Equivalent hot starts
2. More starts, more outages. This chart shows the average equivalent forced outage
factor v. lifetime equivalent hot starts for combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) plants operating in
cycling regimes. Source: EPRI
Mean Upper limit Lower limit
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

p
l
a
n
n
e
d

o
u
t
a
g
e

f
a
c
t
o
r

(
%
)
Equivalent hot starts
Mean Upper limit Lower limit
3. Planned outages increase. This chart shows average equivalent planned outage
factor vs. lifetime equivalent hot starts for CCGT plants operating in cycling regimes. Source:
EPRI
June 2014
|
ing temperature and pressure conditions,
temperature rates of change, external stresses
imposed by support systems, and corrosion
rates. If one or more of these variables dif-
fers from values anticipated by the designer,
a premature failure can occur.
Examples of documented cases of prema-
ture failures included weld failures in high-
pressure steam flow nozzles, catastrophic
leakage of high-pressure drum manway clo-
sures, turbine steam lead drainpipe failures,
parallel slide-gate valve failures, ST bypass
desuperheaters, lateral wye failures, freeze
damage, duct burner-related damage, and su-
perheater and reheater tube buckling.
Mitigation Measures: Operations
In recent years, EPRI has conducted sev-
eral studies to better understand how CCGT
plants are responding to changing operating
conditions. The following is a sampling of
lessons learned from the studies.
Culture Change. An important factor
for success in transitioning from baseload to
cycling operation is the unit managements
understanding that a culture change is neces-
sary at the site. This change has to begin with
unit management, and the changes will need
to be communicated to and understood by
unit staff. This transition will require leaders
who are willing to make tough choices, have
excellent communication skills, and have the
ability to help people in the plant understand
the reasons for the change and its impact on
the company, plant, and staff.
Four elements of plant culture, when
implemented, can properly aid in the transi-
tion from baseload to cycling operation: (1) a
change management plan, which provides a
step-by-step plan for guiding any change; (2)
a communication plan for informing staff of
changes; (3) personnel involvement, for en-
gaging personnel in the changing operations;
and (4) human performance improvement,
for providing training in new procedures and
avoiding human errors.
One priority for a cycling unit that once
was a baseload unit is to keep people focused
on having the unit ready when it is called to
operate. Staff must feel a sense of urgency
about their new operating role. The key to
success will be keeping people focused on a
day-to-day basis and ensuring a clear under-
standing of the goals of a cycling plant.
Mike Woodhouse, who managed Scottish-
Powers Rye House Power Station, a 700-
MW CCGT plant in Hertfordshire, England,
that shifted from baseload to cycling opera-
tion due to market conditions, describes the
importance of plant culture this way: Our
plant was fairly robust to begin with, so the
physical changes to the plant were pretty
minimal. The majority of it, the key thing,
was the peopledeveloping optimized op-
erating procedures and training the staff in
them.
Flexible Operations/Optimization Tri-
als. Prior to embarking on full flexible op-
erations, the plant management team should
plan a series of flexible operation/optimiza-
tion trials. Following the trials, a flexible
operations procedure should be written that
captures best practices developed during the
process.
According to Woodhouse, this is a criti-
cal part of planning. As part of our upfront
planning, we conducted trials so that opera-
tors could get used to starting and stopping
the plant. The data from those trials was used
to help us understand what was working and
what needed to be changed.
Operations Procedures. For plants
transitioning from baseload duty, existing
operational procedures will typically be bi-
ased toward steady-state operations and will
require a review as part of the planning phase
for flexible operations. Two shiftrelated op-
|
June 2014 42
erational procedures should be reviewed and
updated. Following the flexible operations
trials, site operational procedures will need
to be updated to reflect the lessons learned
and best practices developed. New consid-
erations that should be incorporated into up-
dated cycling procedures include changes to
setpoints, normal operating bands, and ramp
rates.
Startup and Shutdown. For a baseload
plant, startup and load following are histori-
cally not given a great deal of management
attention, because the few starts that do oc-
cur are usually following overhaul periods
where intrusive work has been undertaken
that will introduce reliability issues, such as
interlocks not set and valve open/close limits
being out of calibration. For a plant to oper-
ate in a flexible mode, reliability issues must
be addressed in a more systematic approach,
with the emphasis on continual improvement
derived from teams responsible for various
areas of plant reliability.
Generally, if startup reliability is effective-
ly managed, shutdowns will also be reliable
because the same components (for example,
GT gas valves/boiler feed and steam valves)
are used. However, emphasis should be on
measuring trips from low load while shutting
down; these steps can often be overlooked in
the high operations workload of a shutdown.
Review of startups and shutdowns may
highlight needed changes. In plant trials,
we learned that the control system needed to
be improved, says Woodhouse. When the
plant was operating in baseload, if the control
system didnt work optimally at startup, it
was not a priority. But for flexible operation,
we had to make changes to allow smoother
and faster starts.
Staffing Levels. Staffing levels for base-
loaded plants are typically based on steady-
state operation, where minimal operator
intervention is expected. Introduction of flex-
ible operations will change the responsibilities
and time commitments at different staff po-
sitions. Flexible operations trials can help to
identify the needed changes in staff levels.
When the plant was a baseload plant, our
operations staff took responsibility for some
maintenance activities, says Woodhouse.
In that regime, once the plant was up and
running, the operating workload diminished.
But under cycling, the operations staff no
longer had time for maintenance tasks, so
we had to enlarge and strengthen our main-
tenance team.
Staff Training. The changing skill re-
quirements of flexible plant operation will
require a review of the plant operations train-
ing process. Consideration should be given
to the following: (1) increasing the knowl-
edge in CCGT thermodynamics to support
the operators decision-making in startup/
shutdown scenarios; and (2) sourcing CCGT
simulator training when diagnosing sequence
faults and managing transients (for example,
high or low drum level can be undertaken).
A training program should be implemented
to develop two-shift operation skills, and a
method should be put in place to share les-
sons learned from shift to shift.
Continuous Improvement Process. An
effective approach for plants transitioning
from baseload to flexible operation is imple-
menting a continuous improvement process.
This technique involves identifying and
analyzing failures on a continuous basis and
using that information to make changes in
procedures to avoid future failures. When put
in place over time, these continual improve-
ments result in significant overall gains in the
major business metrics such as production
cost, reliability, quality, and lead time.
Once youre under way in flexible opera-
tions, its important to learn as you go, says
Woodhouse. Our continuous improvement
program gave us a structure to analyze every
failure to start and every drop in load, to find
a solution, and to feed that solution back into
the processes.
Monitoring. As the plant enters an opera-
tional state not previously experienced, a re-
view should be undertaken of the operational
teams plant inspections. For example, plant
items that will now be cycled frequently
(feedwater valves, fuel gas control valves,
and boiler casings, for example) will be more
vulnerable to performance deterioration.
We found we had to do more frequent in-
spections, says Woodhouse. We were able
to reduce their rate as we got more mature.
But initially we did inspections of the gas
turbines and boilers every three months. The
biggest issue we found was thermal cycling-
induced cracks in the GT outlet ducts, which
meant we had to go in every three months
and complete inspections and weld repairs in
the ducts.
Minimum Stable Generation (MSG).
Depending on an individual plants commer-
cial characteristics, achieving a low MSG
may be preferable to completely starting or
stopping the plant, when plant damage costs
and the risk of failure to start are taken into
account. Reducing a plants MSG can be
achieved by the same management strategy
as optimizing flexible operation; indeed, a
move to a low MSG is usually the first option
as a plants efficiency starts to dictate mini-
mized generation over loss-making periods,
such as overnight.
Plant Preservation (Layup). A strategy
document and operations procedures should
be developed for plant preservation during
layups of different duration. (See Layup
Practices for Fossil Plants in the February
2013 issue, online at www.powermag.com.)
Increased Levels of Automation. The
levels of plant automation should be reviewed
before the start of flexible operation trials to
ensure that the existing automation is func-
tioning to design and to identify any potential
improvements. During the review, consider-
ation should be given to the increased opera-
tor intervention required during the startup
and shutdown plant phases of operation to
ensure that the operators can maintain an
overview of the process at all times.
Mitigation Measures: Maintenance
Frequent cycling also impacts maintanence
practices, and changes need to be made to
adapt to the added stresses placed on the
plant.
Maintenance Team Structure. If the
team structure is unchanged from baseload
operation, that structure will not reflect the
new maintenance team challenges under the
flexible operating regime. The site mainte-
nance manager needs to produce a new team
structure capable of delivering the revised
maintenance requirements.
Time-Based Equipment Inspections.
The maintenance regime of a baseload plant
may use time-based equipment inspections
extracted from original equipment manufac-
turer (OEM) manuals. The existing routine
time-determined tasks in the maintenance
management system should be reviewed.
Where possible, the regime should be moved
to condition-based maintenance inspections,
thereby reducing the frequency of intrusive,
major inspections. In addition, the preven-
tive maintenance basis should be reviewed as
new stressors and failure mechanisms have
been introduced.
Changing Maintenance Strategies.
Each GT and heat recovery boiler design
will have differing responses to the effects
of flexible operation. The OEM should be
consulted for any design-related issues that
will form a boundary for flexible operation.
For example, an OEM will have a limit on
the number of starts or equivalent operating
hours (EOHs) between inspections. A com-
mercial decision will need to be made either
to restrict the number of plant starts to stay
within the current inspection regime or to op-
erate starts unconstrained and flex the timing
of GT inspections.
HRSG: GT Exhaust Duct Cracking.
The exhaust gas duct from the GT to the first
flexible expansion joint is at risk of stress-in-
duced cracking, particularly in welded areas.
The internal surface and external cladding of
the duct should be regularly inspected during
GT outages. Damage should be ground out
and repaired during a scheduled outage.
June 2014
|
GT: Accelerated Degradation of Hot
Gas Path (HGP) Components. HGP com-
ponents may fail before reaching the de-
signed EOH limit. These components should
be monitored during inspections. The OEM
should be consulted to design flexible, oper-
ation-resistant components.
ST: Thick-Section Cracking. Thermal
stresses develop due to a mismatch between
the temperature of the admitted steam and the
metal in the first-stage region of the turbine.
These high stresses can initiate and propagate
cracks in the inner and outer casings and ro-
tors. Possible measures include following the
OEMs recommended starting and loading
procedures, installing steam bypass systems,
and installing thermocouples to monitor criti-
cal temperatures and temperature differen-
tials during starting, loading, and unloading.
Instrumentation and Controls: Alarm
Systems. If the alarm system is not careful-
ly managed, operators can be deluged with
low-priority alarms and status change mes-
sages when the plant is at its most dynamic
on startups and shutdowns. Alarm manage-
ment should be reviewed to incorporate find-
ings from the flexible operation trials. A plan
should be created to eliminate unactionable
alarms, bad actors, and alarm floods to prop-
erly manage plant status changes. (See How
to Avoid Alarm Overload with Centralized
Alarm Management in the February 2010
issue, online at www.powermag.com.)
What are the chief lessons for plants chang-
ing their operating profiles? Woodhouse sees
two main messages. One big learning point
is that preparation and planning are key. Do
as much as you can upfront before you com-
mercially start flexible operations. Dont
expect to blindly go into it and see what hap-
pens. Once you get into it, youll have more
than enough facing you day to day. The other
learning point is that after youre under way,
you want to have some kind of continuous
improvement process in place because youll
be faced with a lot of issues, and unless
youve got a process to capture and manage
them all, you can get overwhelmed.
Future EPRI Research
In 2014, EPRI is planning several research
studies to assist combined-cycle plants in op-
erating more efficiently and avoiding damage
under conditions of operating flexibility.
One project in 2014 will help plants design
a systematic approach to reducing minimum
load for coal-fired units, with a combined-
cycle plant project to follow in 2015. The
project will use lessons from plants that have
successfully achieved minimum loads as part
of EPRIs ongoing Operational Flexibility
Implementation Case Studies. The project
will include a web-based tool to aid in op-
erational tests necessary to achieve a lower
minimum load.
Another project will develop an integrated,
holistic procedure for plant layup (2014) and
provide a web-based tool (2015) that guides a
unit through the critical steps for plant layup.
The authors wish to acknowledge Mike
Woodhouse (mjwpower@gmail.com), who
served as operations, engineering, and plant
manager at Rye House Power Station in
Hertfordshire, England, for 14 years.
Neva Espinoza (nfox@epri.com) is man-
ager of the Operations Management and
Technology Program, Bill Carson
(bcarson@epri.com) is manager of the
HRSG Dependability Program, and Rick
Roberts (rroberts@epri.com) is senior
technical specialist, all at EPRI.
the ONE
reference
source you
must have
CONTACT: Book Sales, 11000 Richmond, Suite 690
Houston, Texas 77042 | books@powermag.com
Tel: 832-242-1969 Fax: 832-242-1971
www.powermag.com/powerpress
POWER magazines online store offers a
variety of industry resources that youll come
to rely on. For a full list of products, visit
www.powermag.com/powerpress
NEW ONLINE STORE
THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NY & NJ
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
FOR REPLACEMENT, REHABILITATION
OR REDESIGN OF THE COGENERATION
PLANT AND RELATED
INFRASTRUCTURE AT JOHN F. KENNEDY
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
The Port Authority is seeking information to replace, rehabilitate or
redesign the cogeneration plant and related infrastructure at the
John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK). A facility inspection is
scheduled for Thursday, June 5, 2014, at 10:00AM. All interested
parties shall meet at JFK, Building 14, Jaimaica, New York. Please
RSVP to Mr. Jim Steven via e-mail at jsteven@panynj.gov to confirm
attendance and/or receive travel directions. Valid photo ID is required
to gain access to facility.
RFI# 37799 is available on-line at http://www.panynj.gov/business-
opportunities/bid-proposal-advertisements.html?tabnum=5. Addenda
to the RFI, if any, will be posted at this website. Monitor the
advertisement on the website to ensure your awareness of
any changes. If you have any technical problems accessing the
documents online, email us at askforbids@panynj.gov or call us at
(201) 395-3405 for assistance.
RFI DUE DATE: 6/26/2014. Responses will be accepted until
2:00 pmon the due date indicated and as instructed in the solicitation
document. Refer to the RFI for submission instructions. A valid
photo ID is required to gain access into the building, if you are
hand delivering.
|
June 2014 44
Recent Innovations from Gas
Turbine and HRSG OEMs
Demand for natural gasfired power plants is perhaps more intense than its ever
been. That means a big market to serve, and new opportunities for innovation.
The major manufacturers are all working hard to stay ahead of the curve.
T
here is no hotter market in power gen-
eration than gas.
According to the Energy Information
Administration (EIA), the U.S. is projected
to add just under 60 GW of new generating
capacity between 2013 and 2017. More than
half of thatand fully three times as much
as the next-closest technology, solarwill be
natural gasfired.
If you suspect numbers like that have
manufacturers of combined cycle power
plant technology excited, youd be correct.
The rapidly growing market is not grow-
ing in a vacuum, however. Though the U.S.
may be adding almost 35 GW of gas-fired
capacity by 2017, its also adding at least 15
GW of wind and solar. That means the gas
fleet of the future needs to be ready to back
up large amounts of intermittent generation,
and thats a role manufacturers are moving
briskly to fill. Numerous advances in tech-
nology that will allow combined cycle plants
to start faster, ramp faster, respond more rap-
idly to grid fluctuations, and do it all more
cleanly and efficiently are in development or
have just been introduced to the market.
Reduced Emissions
One of the challenges of backing up intermit-
tent generation with gas is that this operation-
al mode can significantly increase emissions.
This occurs for several reasons. First, op-
erating gas turbines at low loads produces
higher levels of CO and NO
x
. Conventional
combined cycle plants typically need to be
brought up to full power in phases to allow
the rest of the plant to heat up safely. Waiting
out these low-load hold points dramatically
increases overall emissions.
Second, rapid changes in turbine output
disrupt fuel and selective catalytic reduc-
tion (SCR) equilibrium. The additional pilot
fuel required during load changes causes in-
creased NO
x
production, and when turbine
load is changing, maintaining accurate am-
monia injection in the SCR is more challeng-
ing: Too little means increased NO
x
out the
stack; too much means ammonia slip.
The major turbine manufacturers such
as Siemens and General Electric (GE) have
recently introduced fast-starting plant tech-
nology that is designed to address the first
problem (such as the Siemens Flex-Plant
used at the Lodi Energy Center in Califor-
nia, a 2012 POWER Top Plant). Improve-
ments to heat recovery steam generator
(HRSG) design enable such plants to start
up very quick and avoid low load holds that
increase emissions.
Addressing transient SCR emissions, how-
ever, requires operational changes in addition
to design adjustments. Siemens is introduc-
ing a solution it calls Clean-Ramp, which is
designed to be integrated into the Flex-Plant
solution (Figure 1).
This technology changes how the gas tur-
bine is controlled so that the emissions con-
trol system can accurately predict changes
in turbine exhaust when a load change is re-
quested. The exhaust molar flow rate is cal-
culated based on factors such as combustion
airflow, fuel flow, historical performance,
and so on. This information is used to predict
NO
x
emissions, and the system then adjusts
the ammonia injection flow rate accordingly.
This allows the plant to stay at baseload emis-
sion levels even when the load is changing.
Siemens claims this allows a plant to ramp
continuously at rates above 30 MW/minute
while keeping NO
x
emissions under 2 ppm.
GE has developed a similar product in
its GEN II SCR control. This solution pairs
a Rapid Response plant and GEs OpFlex
Startup Ammonia Control to reduce overall
startup emissions. GEN II measures specific
equipment and emissions parameters and, us-
ing model-based control technology, controls
the ammonia to the SCR to reduce emissions
and ammonia slip.
Retrofits
New plants arent the only ones benefitting
from new technology. With a large number
of older gas-fired plants seeing increased
run time with the fall in gas prices, manu-
facturers are offering upgrades that allow
these projects to capture increases in output
and efficiency.
1. Tight targets. NRG Energys El Segundo Energy Center near Los Angeles, a Siemens
Flex-Plant 10, incorporates Clean-Ramp technology to meet the areas stringent emissions con-
trols. Courtesy: NRG
June 2014
|
GE has been offering its Advanced Gas
Path (AGP) upgrade solution for several
years to increase the output, efficiency, and
availability of its workhorse 7F line. It re-
cently expanded this offering to its 9E and
9F turbines. The AGP solution involves
improved blade aerodynamics and better
sealing, as well as advanced materials and
improved cooling technologies to allow
higher operating temperatures. The physi-
cal improvements are paired with OpFlex
model-based control software to deliver ad-
ditional performance improvements.
Alstom recently rolled out its MXL2 up-
grade package for its line of GT13 turbines.
The MXL2 upgrade consists of a completely
new blade design to boost aerodynamic ef-
ficiency in the compressor and turbine,
optimized sealing and tighter clearances, im-
provements to the combustor, and enhanced
cooling design (Figure 2).
Alstom says the upgrade will improve the
power and efficiency of legacy turbines, as
well as stretch maintenance and inspection
intervals. The upgrade offers two modes of
operation: M (for maximum output and ef-
ficiency) and XL (for extended life). Oper-
ating modes can be switched with the press
of a button, allowing generators to increase
output when market demand is high but re-
duce stress on components during periods of
reduced need. (For more on mitigating the
effects of new operating modes, see Man-
aging the Changing Profile of a Combined
Cycle Plant in this issue.)
New Turbines
Whether intended for new plants, retrofits, or
repowering, gas turbine techology continues
to evolve. Updated models of several work-
horse designs are debuting this year.
GE introduced its steam-cooled H-class
turbines more than 10 years ago, designs that
have become a staple in the companys line-
up. This year, GE is rolling out two new air-
cooled H-class turbines, the 9HA and 7HA.
The 9HA.02 offers 592 MW of output at bet-
ter than 61% efficiency in 1 x 1 combined
cycle mode, and can reach full output in un-
der 30 minutes (Figure 3). In simple cycle,
it puts out 470 MW at 41% efficiency. The
9HA has a 14-stage compressor, a 16-cham-
ber dry low-NO
x
combustor, and a four-stage
air-cooled hot gas path.
The smaller 60-hertz 7HA offers up to 486
MW at greater than 61% efficiency in 1 x 1
combined cycle mode and can reach full out-
put in as little as 10 minutes. Both turbines are
designed to be installed considerably faster
than previous models through the use of mod-
ularized and preassembled components.
Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems
(MHPS) is also rolling out an air-cooled
2. Ready to roll. Alstoms MXL2 turbine is designed to improve power and efficiency on
legacy systems. Courtesy: Alstom
3. Big air. GEs new 9HA air-cooled turbine
offers up to 592 MW in combined cycle mode.
Courtesy: GE
4. Evolution. Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems is upgrading its J-series line of large-frame
gas turbines, like the one shown here, with the air-cooled M501JAC. Courtesy: MHPS
|
June 2014 46
update to its turbine line with the 60-hertz
M501JAC (Figure 4). MHPSs steam-cooled
J-series turbines, which operated at tempera-
tures of 1,600C, were introduced in 2011 and
have been deployed mostly in Asia, with sev-
eral plants coming online in 2013 and 2014.
The M501JAC adds an optimized air-
cooled combustor from the M501GAC
model and offers output of up to 450 MW in
combined cycle mode at better than 61% ef-
ficiency. The cooling holes in the turbine are
also optimized for reduced gas temperatures.
The M501JAC offers improved operational
flexibility, such as by shortening the starting
time while maintaining the same level of per-
formance as the M501J. First shipments are
expected in 2015.
New Approaches to Simple Cycle
Not all of the action is in combined cycle.
MHPS is developing an approach to simple
cycle turbine generation that could poten-
tially equal or exceed combined cycle gen-
eration in efficiency. The technology, which
is currently being commercialized for release
later this year, is called AHAT, or advanced
humid air turbine. AHAT takes a simple cy-
cle turbine and uses humidified compressed
air for combustion. The combustion air is
cooled by water atomization, compressed in
the compressor, and then passed through a
humidification tower. The humidified air is
then heated in a heat exchanger using the tur-
bine exhaust before entering the combustor.
The water vapor in the exhaust is then recov-
ered and returned to the humidifier.
The method is similar to steam injection
but adds far more water to the combustion
process. MHPS has been developing the tech-
nology since 2000. A pilot project using an
MHPS H-50 turbine was launched in 2010,
and the company plans to commercialize it
this year. The H-50 turbine with AHAT out-
performed the same turbine in combined cy-
cle mode, achieving 70 MW output at 50.6%
efficiency. MHPS believes efficiencies above
60% are achievable with larger turbines.
MHPS is also developing a related retrofit
product called Smart AHAT, which involves
adding significant steam injection to a com-
bined cycle arrangement, with AHATs water
recovery system added to the exhaust.
New HRSG Technology
HRSG manufacturers have also been work-
ing to meet the demand for more flexible
operations. NEM USAs DrumPlus design
is engineered to combine the advantages of
drum-type HRSGs with the responsiveness
of once-through design.
In the DrumPlus, the drum is replaced by a
knock-out vessel with external separator bot-
tles. The smaller drum has a relatively thin wall
and is thus subject to lower thermal stresses
with changes in output. The reduced volumes
of both steel and water give the DrumPlus the
dynamic capabilities of once-through steam
generation, as well as the increased lifetime.
These lower stresses eliminate the need for
hold points on the gas turbine during startup,
which allows faster startups, more cold starts,
and more rapid load changes. DrumPlus
HRSGs are able to handle 10-minute start-
ups with no reduction in life. The El Segundo
plant shown in Figure 1 employs a DrumPlus
HRSG design (Figure 5).
Alstom is also offering HRSG designs for
increased cycling. The Alstom OCC approach
employs reduced header thicknesstotube
thickness ratio, single-row harps, and finned
tubes with no bends. These changes reduce
thermal stress by reducing areas of tempera-
ture difference and adding thermal flexibility
to areas of the HRSG that will experience rap-
id changes in temperature with faster cycling.
Nooter/Eriksen is developing several op-
tions for increased cycling and faster startup.
These include the use of stronger materials,
multi-drum designs, and thinner drum walls.
Looking Ahead
This highly competitive market is sure to
continue evolving. The demands from in-
creased renewable generation are certain to
increase pressure on the gas turbine fleet to
become even more flexible and responsive,
both in upgrades to existing plants and in
new plants yet to be constructed. Whatever
your role, these are definitely interesting
times for natural gas.
Thomas W. Overton, JD is a POWER
associate editor (@thomas_overton, @
POWERmagazine).
5. Fast starts. NEM USAs DrumPlus HRSG design, shown here at NRGs El Segundo En-
ergy Center, allows for fast starts and rapid cycling with no reduction in life expectancy. Source:
POWER/Tom Overton
|
June 2014 48
FUELS
HECO Successfully Cofires Biofuel
as No. 6 Oil Substitute
The Hawaiian Electric Co. has conducted a full-scale demonstration test of a
sustainable biofuel at its 90-MW Kahe Unit 3, located on the island of
Oahu. HECO is committed to using biofuels as one means to reduce its
dependence on imported low-sulfur fuel oil and to meet the requirements
of the states renewable portfolio standard and Clean Energy Initiative.
Robert C. Carr and David McDermott
A
ll states were not created equal, partic-
ularly when it comes to indigenous re-
serves of fossil fuels. North Dakota is
experiencing a boom in oil production, which
has increased almost 10-fold since 2005, and
natural gas production from the Marcellus
shale depositunder New York, Pennsylva-
nia, and West Virginiahas increased about
13 times since 2007. In fact, oil and gas pro-
duction has been the fastest growing segment
of U.S. industry since 2007. Hawaii, on the
other hand, meets 90% of its energy needs
using imported oil.
In 2008, a partnership between the state of
Hawaii and the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) launched the Hawaii Clean Energy
Initiative (HCEI) with the goal of making
the state energy independent. As you might
expect, the HCEI Road Map relies heavily
on solar, wind, sea, and geothermal energy
sources, as well as biofuel and waste-to-ener-
gy projects (see Expanded Honolulu WTE
Plant Delivers Triple Benefits for Oahu in
the March 2013 issue or online at powermag
.com). Compared to most of the U.S., Hawaii
is endowed with an abundance of renewable
energy resources.
Hawaiian Electric Co. (HECO), the larg-
est power generator in the state, owns several
low-sulfur fuel oil (LSFO)fired conventional
steam plants that are candidates for cofiring
liquid biofuels. Liquid biofuels are attractive
because at least a portion of the needed sup-
ply can be grown and refined locally as long
as the right market conditions exist. HECO
views liquid biofuels as potential bridge fu-
els until other renewable energy resources
can be brought online in the future.
Designing the Demonstration Test
The Kahe Plant, the largest generating station
in Hawaii, consists of six oil-fired generators
with a total capacity of 650 MW (Figure 1).
HECO designed a test program to fire and
cofire (with LSFO) environmentally sustain-
able crude palm oil. HECOs 90-MW, tan-
gential-fired Kahe Unit 3 was selected for the
full-scale cofiring project conducted between
Jan. 4 and 28, 2011. Blends using between
0% and 100% biofuel were tested between
38 MW (baseload) and 88 MW (near full
load). The test program was designed to as-
sess the operating limitations when using
biofuel without:
Major equipment modifications
Violating environmental compliance re-
quirements
Derating generating capacity
Compromising the ability to operate the
unit on LSFO
Palm oil was chosen because its character-
istics are similar to those of LSFO. However,
the higher heating value of palm oil is ap-
proximately 14% less than for LSFO, which
results in increased fuel flow per burner (from
8 gpm for LSFO to 9.1 gpm for palm oil) in
order to maintain the required heat input into
the boiler and avoid boiler derating.
HECO imported 1.6 million gallons of
palm oil from Malaysia for its demonstration
project, although it plans to procure locally
produced fuels as they become available (see
sidebar). The palm oil was transported by
ship in stainless steel tanks and then stored in
a dedicated oil tank at Kahe.
A parallel fuel supply system was installed
so biofuel could be independently controlled
and fed to the boiler without LSFO cross-con-
tamination. The new palm oil fuel-handling
system included the addition of two new bio-
fuel pumps, a static blender, and a fuel heater
1. Six-unit plant. Kahe Unit 3, the test unit, is a 90-MW gross tangential-fired boiler,
originally manufactured by Combustion Engineering Corp. (now Alstom), that has design steam
conditions of 1,005F and 1,965 psig. The Kahe plant consists of six boilers fired with low-sulfur
fuel oil with a total capacity of 650 MW. Courtesy: Combustion Components Associates
|
June 2014 50
FUELS
bypass valve as well as replacement of the sec-
ondary fuel oil pumps and installation of two
viscometers, various control valves, several
new flow meters, and various other valves. The
fuel supply piping arrangement also allowed
operators to quickly secure the palm oil sup-
ply and return to 100% LSFO should the need
arise. HECO required the new supply sys-
tem to be a permanent installation controlled
by the plants distributed control system and
designed and installed to meet National Fire
Protection Association guidelines.
Another important difference between bio-
fuel and LSFO is the biofuels much lower vis-
cosity (~133 SSU for palm oil versus ~1,600
SSU for LSFO at 122F). This difference re-
quired the fuel supply system to carefully
control fuel oil temperature as the blend ratio
of LSFO and biofuel changed during the test-
ing to maintain pump performance and good
oil atomization. The pour point of palm oil is
<80F. This means that fuel tanks holding palm
oil may require protective lined berms. LSFO
solidifies at ambient conditions.
The ash, sulfur, and fuel nitrogen contents
and carbon-hydrogen ratio of biofuel are
much lower than for LSFO. Consequently,
emissions of SO
2
, particulate matter, NO
x
,
and CO
2
were expected to be lower than
when firing LSFO.
CCA Combustion Systems, a division
of Peerless Mfg. Co., was retained to per-
form the baseline LSFO emissions tests,
develop the computational fluid dynamic
(CFD) model used to predict palm oil im-
pacts on boiler performance, and to design
and supply a unique atomizer that would al-
low cofiring from 100% palm oil to 100%
LSFO with no loss in maximum load or
unit turndown capability (minimum load is
25 MW). CCA was also tasked with man-
aging the demonstration test, determining
boiler performance and plant heat rate, and
extrapolating the results of the demonstra-
tion test to all HECO steam plants. HECO
performed NO
x
emission tests following the
demonstration test.
Unique Atomizer Design
HECO contracted with CCA to design and
fabricate new mechanical, spill-return atom-
izer assemblies for the biofuel demonstration
test. The design criteria for the new fuel at-
omizers were ambitious:

Operate at approximately the same supply/
return pressures as the existing atomizers.
Have the same spray quality but not ad-
versely impact spray angle at low loads.
Must not inhibit full-load operations nor
impact unit turndown.
Operate with fuel blends from 100%
LSFO to 100% palm oil.
Must accommodate 14% more flow when
burning 100% palm oil due to lower heat
content.
Prior to the biofuel demonstration test the
What Is Palm Oil?
Palm oil is a vegetable oil produced
from the red fruit of oil palms, each
about the size of a strawberry. The oil
is favored by the food industry because
of its relatively low cost and because it
is one of the few with highly saturated
vegetable fats. In fact, 65% of all veg-
etable oil traded internationally is palm
oil. Indonesia and Malaysia produce
about 85% of the worlds palm oil.
Palm oil is a recent entry into the
global biofuel market. Malaysia began
refining the tropical vegetable oil
primarily used in consumer goods like
snack foods, soaps, and cosmeticsinto
a biofuel and blends about 10% palm oil
with diesel fuel for use in automobiles.
Palm oil is semi-solid at room tempera-
ture. Palm oil also has been used as a
fuel for biodiesel-fueled power plants in
various countries, including in Europe
and Asia.
Palm oil is considered by experts to
be carbon neutral because the oil is
merely returning carbon dioxide to the
atmosphere that was obtained earlier
through photosynthesis. However, some
environmental groups oppose the use
of palm oil biofuels because palm oil
plantations require deforestation, which
more than offsets the positive effects
as a carbon sink. The Roundtable on
Sustainable Palm Oil, established in
2004, publishes standards and certifies
the production of sustainable palm oil.
About 15% of the worlds palm oil pro-
duction was certified as sustainable in
2013, as was the oil burned by HECO
during the demonstration project.
Since this demonstration test was
completed, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has determined that
palm oil is a nonsustainable, renewable
fuel because expanding its production
will necessitate clearing virgin forests,
and palm husks generate methane, a
greenhouse gas.
23923
Now you can have a collection
of Marmaduke Surfaceblow
troubleshooting stories for your own library.
Visit store.powermag.com for your copy.
Available in a PDF format. 321 pages.
Missing
Marmaduke?
Steve Elonka began chronicling the exploits of
Marmaduke Surfaceblowa fictional six-
foot-four marine engineer with a steel brush
mustache and a foghorn voicein POWER in
1948, when he raised the wooden mast of the
SS Asia Sun with the help of two cobras and a
case of Sandpaper Gin. Surfaceblows simple
solutions to seemingly intractable plant
problems remain timeless. This anthology,
first published in 1979, highlights many of
Marmadukes exploits that occurred during
his early years (pre-WW I) through the 1960s.
Surfaceblows knowledge comes from
hands-on experience operating steam
power plants and all manner of machinery.
Later in the series a son, Guy Newcomen
Surfaceblow, was introduced. He is a
university-trained engineer who also has field
experience that gives him credibility when
working with hard-boiled characters in the
boonies. The characters name was coined
from Marmaduke, a Scottish name, and
Surfaceblow, which is the action of removing
impurities from a steam boiler.
Here, you will find all of Surfaceblows
adventures consolidated into a single volume.
Many of the stories were inspired by actual
events.
July 28-31
Baltimore, Maryland
Hyatt Regency Baltimore
on the Inner Harbor
Mark your calendar now for the BEST technical conference in power generation
If you want to engage in operating,
maintenance, and equipment issues with
the experts inside the power plant, as well
as nd out the latest methods and cutting edge
technology that can improve how
power plants operate in the future, then
you are invited to attend.
Media Sponsor
ASME 2014 Technical Tracks:
Track 1 Fuels & Combustion, Material Handling,
Emissions
Track 2 Steam Generators
Track 3 Heat Exchangers & Cooling Systems
Track 4 Turbines, Generators & Auxiliaries
Track 5 Plant Operations & Maintenance
Track 6 Reliability, Availability & Maintainability
(RAM)
Track 7 Plant Systems, Structures, Components &
Materials Issues
Track 8 Simple & Combined Cycles
Track 9 Advanced Energy Systems Renewables
(Wind, Solar & Geothermal)
Track 10 Energy-Water Nexus
Track 11 Thermal Hydraulics & CFD
Track 12 Nuclear Plant Design, Licensing &
Construction
Track 13 Performance Testing & Performance Test
Codes
Track 14 Student Paper Competition Track
For more information, go to:
www.asmeconferences.
org/POWER2014
Copyright 2014 Ingram Image Ltd.
Photo at top: Copyright 2000-2014 Dreamstime
|
June 2014 52
FUELS
oil atomizer used at Kahe Unit 3 was a me-
chanically atomized, spill/return, four-piece
assembly. The spray plate was a conical
design with a single orifice that produced a
uniform conical spray. The supply and re-
turn pressures at maximum load were typi-
cally 890 psig and 310 psig, respectively, and
the differential pressure between supply and
return pressures was maintained constant at
approximately 580 psid over the load range.
Turndown for the atomizers was from 90
MW to 38 MW (baseload) with all burners
in service.
To reduce flame impingement problems
experienced historically at low load on the
furnace sidewalls adjacent to the burners, an
alternate split-flame atomizer spray plate
was provided. The split flame produced a
flatter, nonconical spray that can be oriented
to reduce flame impingement. Two prototype
split-flame atomizer assemblies were used in
the biofuel demonstration:
100% split-flame atomizer designed for op-
timum performance firing 100% biofuel.
50/50 split-flame atomizer designed for
optimum performance firing a blend of
50% LSFO and 50% biofuel.
In addition to providing the proper flow
rate characteristics and narrower spray angle
at low load, the split-flame atomizers reduced
NO
x
emissions approximately 20% for LSFO
firing compared to the original atomizers.
Visual inspection when burning palm oil
showed the flames were very uniform and
well attached under all operating condi-
tions. It was not possible to visually dis-
tinguish a 100% LSFO flame from a 50%
biofuel/50% LSFO flame. At 70% biofuel
the flames were more transparent and less
bright. At 100% biofuel, the oil spray skirts
were transparent and a blue-colored flame
halo was observed at the flame stabi-
lizer. The flames were less bright than at
70% biofuel but still intense. Moreover, the
split-flame atomizers significantly reduced
but did not completely eliminate sidewall
impingement at low load. As expected,
opacity and visual emissions went from
~2.8% to below 0.5% as the ratio of biofuel
increased from 0% to 100%.
Furnace exit gas temperature (FEGT) for
the two split-flame atomizers was essentially
equal over the load range. For LSFO, the
average FEGT at 100% load for the split-
flames was approximately 140F higher than
for the conical atomizers used prior to the
biofuel tests. This is believed to be a result
of the longer flames (low NO
x
) produced by
the split-flame design, which reduces near-
burner fuel/air mixing rates. NO
x
emissions
were approximately 20% lower for the split-
2. Stack gas temperatures rise. Kahe Unit 3 furnace exit gas temperature (FEGT)
produced by different blends of palm oil and LSFO are illustrated. The test was conducted at
nominal O
2
, and 100% split flame atomizers. Source: Combustion Components Associates
2,700
2,650
2,600
2,550
2,500
2,450
2,400
2,350
2,300
2,250
2,200
2,150
2,100
2,050
2,000
F
E
G
T

(
F
)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Biofuel/LSFO blend ratio (%)
100% 50/50
88 MW
60 MW
38 MW
3. Attemperation water flow increase. This chart shows Kahe Unit 3 furnace exit
gas temperature (FEGT) and attemperation (superheater and reheater) water flow versus palm
oil fraction. The test was conducted at 88 MW, nominal O
2
, and with 100% split-flame atom-
izers. Source: Combustion Components Associates
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
A
t
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
k
l
b
/
h
r
)
RH spray SH spray FEGT
2,800
2,700
2,600
2,500
2,400
2,300
2,200
2,100
2,000
F
E
G
T

(
F
)
0 35 50 70 85 100
Palm oil fraction (%)
June 2014
|
FUELS
flame atomizers. Furnace residence times
were sufficient to provide good fuel burnout,
so opacity levels were not increased. FEGT
and gas emissions data measured in the up-
per furnace were reasonably well balanced
across the furnace.
Excellent Test Results
The palm oil/LSFO blend ratio was selected
based on total heat input into the boiler. This
approach to in-line fuel blending provided
accurate and repeatable results. The unit load
response when burning up to 100% palm oil
was comparable to burning LSFO alone. The
viscosity of the blended fuels was a constant
135 SSU up to 70% palm oil. At 100% palm
oil, the viscosity decreased to ~85 SSU; how-
ever, the performance of the fuel atomizer
was not affected.
Boiler turndown met the test plan goals.
The unit was able to cycle from full load (90
MW) down to 25 MW when burning 100%
LSFO. The fuel oil controls limit minimum
load to ~25 MW. When burning 100% palm
oil, the minimum demonstrated load was 38
MW using existing burner controls, although
with further combustion control tuning it
is expected that minimum load on palm oil
could be reduced.
Excellent flame stability was observed at
all fuel blends, unit load, and fuel tempera-
tures when using the split-flame atomizer.
Visible emissions (opacity) were also lower
when burning 100% palm oil.
The FEGT, measured below the nose of
the furnace, the superheat and reheat tem-
peratures and sprays, and boiler heat flux
were measured during the demonstration
test (Figures 2 and 3). NO
x
emissions with
palm oil blends were well within permitted
limits (Table 1). At 88 MW, NO
x
on LSFO
was 300 parts per million by volume dry
(ppmvd) but dropped to 213 ppmvd when
burning a 70% palm oil mix and to 202 pp-
mvd with 100% palm oil. Figure 4 illus-
trates NO
x
emissions
The impact on plant efficiency when
cofiring different percentages of palm oil
was calculated from the test data. At full
load, the negative effects on efficiency
when burning 100% palm oil included 11F
higher stack gas temperature and ~17%
higher water content in the flue gas than
when burning LSFO.
However, the excess O
2
in the flue gas
was nearly 1% lower than when burning
LSFO. Unburned carbon and CO emissions
changes were negligible for both fuels.
However, 100% palm oil generally required
increased superheater and reheater attem-
peration compared to 100% LSFO, which
will decrease boiler efficiency. The existing
boiler system was adequate to provide the
increased attemperation needed. The sweet
spot for optimum boiler operation based on
attemperation rates was a blend of 70% bio-
fuel and 30% LSFO.
The plants adjusted heat rate, taking into
account superheater and reheater sprays,
excess oxygen, stack gas temperature, and
water in the flue gas (15% higher) increased
48 Btu/kWh when burning 70% palm oil,
which reflects a slight decrease in boiler ef-
ficiency. However, burning 100% palm oil
increased plant heat rate further, primarily
because of higher attemperation rates. At
biofuel blends of 70% and higher the test
data showed that a reduction in excess O
2

of roughly 1 percentage point is possible
with the same or lower opacity compared to
LSFO firing.
The low ash content of the palm oil also
reduced particulate matter and unburned car-
bon emissions. Another positive side effect
was reduced frequency of sootblowing and
cleaner furnace walls.
Program Goals Achieved
The 30-day demonstration project achieved
every goal set for the testing. The in-line
blending system provided maximum opera-
tional flexibility for a biofuel that may have
fuel property variations between deliveries.
More importantly, there were no operational
or emission limitations identified that would
restrict any palm oil/LSFO blend ratio. And,
by extension, the testing did not reveal any
operational or emission limitations that
would preclude using the biofuel at any other
HECO units that now burn LSFO.
Robert Carr(carr@cca-inc.net) is
project manager at CCA Combustion
Systems. David McDermott is operations
and maintenance engineer for Hawaiian
Electric Co.
4. NO
x
emissions drop. NO
x
emissions dropped as the percentage of palm oil in-
creased, for three atomizer configurations. The test was conducted at 88 MW, nominal O
2
, and
with 100% split-flame atomizers. Source: Combustion Components Associates
Conical 2009 100 SF 50/50 SF
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
N
O
x

e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s

(
l
b
/
M
M
B
t
u
)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Palm oil blend (%)
Species Low-sulfur fuel oil 70% Biofuel 100% Biofuel
O
2
, % dry 3.39 3.07 3.45
NO
x
, ppmvd (lb/MMBtu) 300 (0.38) 223 (0.28) 212 (0.27)
CO, ppmvd 1.5 0.6 0.6
SO
2
, ppmvd (lb/MMBtu) 192 (0.342) 64 (0.114) 11 (0.0197)
CO
2
, lb/lb fuel (lb/MMBtu) 3.217 (169.3) 2.942 (166.9) 2.824 (165.6)
Table 1. Controlled emissions. The average emissions recorded subsequent to the
demonstration test are shown for different fuels and blends using split-flame atomizers. Data
were collected at 88 MW and under nominal O
2
conditions. SO
2
and CO
2
emissions are calcu-
lated from fuel properties. Source: Combustion Components Associates
|
June 2014 54
WORKFORCE
New Technology Is Key to
Recruiting New Power Workforce
With so many career options to choose from, what can the power generation
industry do to draw young people into the fold? Well, if you visit a modern
educational institution, you may find that technology and advanced simu-
lators can make the profession seem pretty inviting.
Aaron Larson
I
t is an exciting time to be a part of the
energy industry. New technology is be-
ing developed in almost every sector of
the business. The coal industry is working on
carbon capture and storage solutions, nuclear
professionals are creating new Generation IV
reactors, solar developments include things
like photovoltaic windows for skyscrapers,
and energy storage solutions continue to
improve, with some experts predicting an
explosion of grid-scale deployments as soon
as this year (see The Year Energy Storage
Hit Its Stride in the May issue of POWER,
online at powermag.com).
There are a lot of job opportunities in the
industry as well. Because such a large number
of employees are eligible to retire in this de-
cade, the Energy Providers Coalition for Edu-
cation (EPCE) expects that 62% of employees
in the energy industry will need to be replaced
by 2020. For the most part, these jobs must
be filled locally and cant be outsourced over-
seas, which means personnel with the right
training and education can pretty much punch
their ticket to a well-paying job with excellent
benefits. (For more on education and employ-
ment trends, see the sidebar.)
While the U.S. unemployment rate has
been on a steady decline since October 2009,
it still stood at 6.7% as of March 2014. Peo-
ple are looking for jobs; the problem is that
most of the currently unemployed just arent
qualified to fill the utility industrys needs.
They dont have the necessary training for
the positions.
Industry-Focused Education
Across the United States, utility compa-
niesevery one of themhas a relationship
with a community college or a university,
said Matt Sadinsky, CEO of Prequalified
Ready Employees for Power International, a
talent development and recruiting company
for the energy industry. The connection bene-
fits both partners. The utility gains a valuable
future employee resource, because students
of the institution will be trained to meet the
needs of the companyassuming that the
curriculum includes courses appropriate to
utility work. The college or university place-
ment office gets a potential hiring resource
that is looking for its qualified graduates. It is
definitely a win-win situation.
Otter Tail Power Co.s Big Stone Plant
(BSP) offers an example of one such suc-
cessful partnership. (Disclosure: I am a
former BSP employee.) BSP is a 475-MW
coal-fired power plant in eastern South Da-
kota. In 2006, Plant Manager Jeff Endrizzi
could see the writing on the wall. The plant,
then staffed with 75 personnel, had dealt
with very little employee turnover up to that
pointaveraging only one retirement every
18 monthsbut Endrizzi projected that the
plant would see 51 employees head for the
door between 2012 and 2025 based upon the
ages of the staff at the time.
I took a chart to Lake Area Technical In-
stitute (LATI) in Watertown, S.D., in 2006 to
explain our expected needs, Endrizzi said.
LATI had established programs for elec-
tronics, robotics, welding, and machining,
and we had hired several graduates in the
past. However, our upcoming retirements
were from the mechanical maintenance and
operations departments, and no program at
LATI, or any other technical institute in the
area, trained candidates for these positions.
Endrizzi met with Deb Shephard, the vice
president of LATI at the time, to discuss possi-
ble program additions at the school. Although
BSPs needs alone werent great enough to
support new programs, Endrizzi encouraged
Shepard to visit with other facilities in the area
to determine if there was a broader regional
need. Those conversations led LATI to develop
its energy technology program and, later, an
energy operations program. BSP employees
continue to serve in an advisory capacity for
each of those programs, as well as for LATIs
welding and robotics programs.
Our rural location can add to the chal-
lenges of attracting workers, said Endrizzi.
To counter that, Otter Tail provides schol-
arships for technical institute students in
pertinent programs and works to maintain
relationships with the students and instruc-
tors in those programs. Those of us that live
here understand and appreciate the benefits
of small town life, but that isnt enough at
times, Endrizzi added.
Online Resources
While utilities work with their local institu-
tions, online learning resources have expand-
ed greatly with the Internet. (See Going the
Distance: Online Courses for Power Industry
Professionals in the June 2012 issue or on-
line at powermag.com.) EPCE was formed in
2000 as a nonprofit alliance of industry in-
dividuals, utilities, companies, associations,
unions, and other organizations to work to-
gether to develop the most relevant and time-
ly energy education programs.
Offered entirely online, EPCEs educational
programs have been developed by the industry,
for the industry. EPCE does not offer courses
itself; instead, it partners with colleges and uni-
versities that are among the best in the nation
at providing education online. Classes are fully
accredited and completely transferrable.
EPCEs educational partners include
Clemson University, Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Bismarck State College (BSC),
Excelsior College, and VHS Collaborative.
According to EPCE, studies have shown
that students in online courses perform bet-
ter than those learning the same material
through face-to-face instruction, so this new
educational model seems to be working.
A Long Track Record
Of course, online classes are not for everyone;
some prefer the traditional approach. With its
main campus in Bismarck, N.D., BSC has
been training personnel to enter the energy
industry for quite some time. In 1970, the
school identified an industry need for elec-
trical line workers, and it began a program
to fill that niche. The programs success led
to the development of the first power plant
June 2014
|
WORKFORCE
More Education and Employment Trends
Power generators depend upon personnel with a wide range of
backgrounds, from those with certification in specific trades to
engineers with degrees in everything from power, mechanical,
chemical, and nuclear engineering to computer engineering. That
diverse skill and educational background mix makes it difficult to
draw a complete picture of trends that may affect specific sectors
of the industry, especially as many surveys lump power plant em-
ployment into a generic utilities or energy category. However,
a few recent studies of engineering education and energy industry
employment trends offer some valuable observations.
More Engineers
A February 2014 report by the National Science Board notes that
the number of bachelors degrees in engineering has increased over
the past two decades, consistently accounting for about one-sixth
of all bachelors degrees. It used to be said that potential engi-
neering students and power industry candidates were being drawn
to computer science fields instead, but although the number of
computer science degrees rose through the dotcom glory days,
they have since declined and have leveled off more recently.
Nuclear Engineer Training
Nuclear power plants have the most rigorous employment require-
ments and, hence, merit a separate look. A report by the Oak Ridge
Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), Nuclear Engineering
Enrollments and Degrees Survey, 2013 Data, surveyed 32 U.S.
universities with nuclear engineering programs and found that the
number of college students graduating with majors in nuclear en-
gineering increased between September 2012 and August 2013.
According to the report, 655 students received bachelors degrees
with majors in nuclear engineering in 2013. Thats a 7% increase
over 2012, 25% higher than 2011, and the highest number report-
ed in 30 yearsbut still 20% below the peak years in the 1970s.
The 362 nuclear engineering masters degrees awarded in 2013
(the highest number since 1980) represented an increase of 9%
over 2012 and 31% over 2011. Doctorates granted in 2013 (147
total) were 23.5% higher than in 2012, 30% higher than in 2011,
and the highest since 1972.
However, the ORISE report showed that enrollment in nuclear
engineering programs declined from the previous year. In 2013,
nuclear engineering enrollments for undergraduate and graduate
students were down 9% and 5%, respectively. While the number of
bachelors degrees awarded is likely to remain in the 630 to 650
range in 2014, the number of students graduating with bachelors
degrees in nuclear engineering in 2015 will likely decrease to less
than 600, the reports authors concluded.
The ORISE report found that most nuclear engineering students
didnt plan to stop with a bachelors degree, but for those seek-
ing employment after that degree, nuclear utilities were the most
likely employer.
Salary Level and Growth
Though engineering jobs in the power sector pay quite well when
compared with average U.S. salaries, especially when benefits
packages are considered, the field does not show the fastest salary
growth, according to a 2013 Economic Research Institute report,
Tracking Salary Trends by Education Level and Degree.
Those with a BS in power systems engineering, for example, ex-
perienced some of the lowest annual salary growth, an average of
1.97%, among those who held degrees in STEM (science, technol-
ogy, engineering, and mathematics) fields between 1998 and 2012,
while those with a BS in mechanical engineering saw an average
2.08% salary growth. Nevertheless, average 2012 salaries for those
two groups ($84,138 and $63,867 respectively) were higher than
for those with a BS in fields such as natural resources conservation,
environmental sciences, agricultural sciences, and chemistry.
Technology Skills Gap
A new Manpower survey of the energy industry released May 5,
Strategies to Fuel the Energy Workforce, found that the jobs
employers globally have trouble filling, across all sectors, are the
same as those the energy industry is struggling to fill now and
into the future: skilled trade workers, technicians, engineers, and
IT staff. The report points to three factors overall that are contrib-
uting to a shortage of skilled workers at both entry and senior lev-
els: aging workforce, rapid technology and innovation advances,
and a breakdown in education at every level.
The technology gap problem is especially wide for potential job-
changers, Manpower found: The need for technology skills for
front-line leadership jobs also make career transfers from the con-
tracting, coal or construction industries difficult. Front-line lead-
ers now use a laptop to report back with spreadsheet programs,
and linemen often must troubleshoot electronic devices attached
to equipment up on the lines. However, many career changers have
limited computer literacy skills.
New, more tech-savvy hires may face the opposite challenge: In
some subsectors, such as utilities, they may lack familiarity with
the older analog infrastructure that remains in use today.
Among the Manpower reports recommendations for addressing
the talent shortage are giving vocational training value; marketing
to the future pipelineincluding underrepresented populations
such as military veterans (see the related article in this issue),
women, and minorities; developing an intellectually agile work-
force; and getting back to STEM basics.
How Many Jobs Need to Be Filled?
In the U.S., predictions of weak electricity demand growth may be
related to projections by the Department of Labor that utilities (as
a general category, not just power) will see negative job growth
between 2012 and 2022. In fact, it predicts a drop from 554,200
in 2012 to 497,800 in 2022.
However, a Manpower chart shows an average of about 50% of
U.S. and Canadian energy sector employees eligible for retirement
in the next 10 years, so that still leaves a substantial number of
positions to fill. In the utilities subsector, the Manpower study
projects 100,000 new jobs will be created by 2020, when a sub-
stantial number of utility employees reach retirement age. It adds
that solar and wind sectors will see slower but steady growth by
2020, with wind power jobs projected to double by 2030.
Gail Reitenbach, PhD, Editor
|
June 2014 56
WORKFORCE
technology program in the country, which the
school began offering in 1976. The program
expanded to include process plant technol-
ogy in 1981.
The school has continued to expand its of-
ferings, including providing online courses
beginning in 2000, nuclear training in 2004,
and maintenance offerings in 2007, which
was also the year that the Department of En-
ergy (DOE) designated BSC as the National
Power Plant Operations Technology and Edu-
cation Center. In 2008, the school began of-
fering a bachelors degree program in energy
management, and the $21 million National
Energy Center of Excellence (NECE)a
106,200-square-foot, state-of-the-art build-
ing that currently houses the colleges energy
programs and some administrative offices
went into service (Figure 1).
BSC boasts that it has trained thousands
of energy employees in all U.S. states. In
fact, there was at least one student from ev-
ery state and Canada among the 1,359 credit-
seeking energy program students in 2013. A
handful of international learners were part of
the enrollment as well.
Modern Facilities
More than two-thirds of the money for BSCs
NECE came by way of donations from busi-
nesses and individuals, combined with fed-
eral, state, and local funding, the largest
single portion of which was $5 million from
the DOE. In addition to funding the facility,
the money has been used on some high-tech
training equipment.
The labs at BSC include a control room
simulator (Figure 2), which was paid for by
Great River Energy (GRE) in exchange for
use of the simulator to train and qualify its
operators. The distributed control system for
the simulator utilizes software identical to that
used at GREs Coal Creek Station, a coal-fired
power plant with twin 600-MW units. In addi-
tion to two on-campus simulators, BSC also
has two online simulators that allow student
access from anywhere in the country.
Other state-of-the-art labs include a truck-
driving simulator that is used to prepare stu-
dents to obtain their commercial drivers
license, which is required for line workers.
The simulator provides a realistic semi-truck
driving experience, requiring students to shift
gears, maneuver around obstacles, and use mir-
rors in the same way they would when driving
a real truck. The seat and steering wheel are
mounted on a moving, vibrating platform that
enhances the experience, while large screens
display the environment being navigated. The
school also owns a semi-truck and trailer for
actual on-road training.
An operating thermal power plant with
a natural gasfired, water-tube boiler is an-
other hands-on training tool for students at
the college. Complete with a distributed
control system, the boiler produces steam
to operate a single-stage turbine and small
generator. The plant utilizes all of the con-
ventional equipmentdeaerator, condenser,
feed pumps, and the liketypically included
in a utility-scale plant.
Physical pumps, motors, and valves with
cutaway sections for easy viewing of inter-
nal components are another useful learning
tool. In addition to these, BSC has modern
training stations for process control systems,
mechanical drive systems, electrical con-
trol modules, and hydraulic instrumentation
components (Figure 3).
They Gotta Wear Shades
The futures so bright for most of the power
program students that they should prob-
ably be wearing welding helmets to cut the
glare. Graduates of accredited educational
programs catering to the power industry
are finding high demand for their services.
BSC reports that its placement rate has been
in the high 90s for more than a decade and
that seems unlikely to change anytime soon,
based on the EPCE statistics.
The biggest challenge is finding candi-
dates who are interested in working in a plant
or industrial setting. Although the money is
generally agreed to be good, many young
people feel the jobs are dirty and monoto-
nous. While impressive schools with shiny
new toys may coax students in the doors,
utilities will need to utilize new techniques to
keep new employees engaged and interested.
For example, as a December 2013 report
(Power and Utilities Changing Workforce)
by PricewaterhouseCoopers noted: Even
state-of-the-art utilities, however, still need to
be able to speak the language of todays tech-
nology driven generation. And while some
organizations have been experimenting with
new digital technologies and e-learning ap-
proaches to attract and retain younger people,
most still lack appropriate training skills and
procedures. Training manuals in the form
of three-inch ring binders and a classroom-
based, instructor-led approach simply may not
be attractive to a digital generation that wants
to learn largely online and at its own pace.
Aaron Larson is a POWER associate
editor (@AaronL_Power,
@POWERmagazine).
1. The National Energy Center of Excellence. This four-story buildingbuilt on a
hillside and shown here from the top of the hillincludes labs, classrooms, and administrative
offices for Bismarck State Colleges energy programs. Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
2. Control room simulator. The simu-
lator is an excellent tool for training students
on plant operation. It allows instructors to en-
ter system anomalies, which require students
to identify and respond to alarms and unusual
plant conditions. Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
3. Lab training modules provide
hands-on experiences. The electrical
control and hydraulic instrumentation modules
shown here are just a sample of the mockups
used at BSC. Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
tent requirements in IPP projects is a fac-
tor that will spur on the local manufacturing
industry. According to Dr. MKhulu Mathe,
manager of energy materials at CSIR: It is
the governments position that 50% of the
materials should be made locally. Another
reason for that is that increased competi-
tion forces a normalization of prices and
compelled developers to have a realistic
mark up.
Increased local content requirements will
be pushing IPPs to be creative on the for-
mulation of their tariffs when they can get
cheaper products and services from China.
Programs must be sustainable for a reason-
ably long period of time; otherwise there is
no real incentive for manufacturers to set
up manufacturing facilities in South Africa,
said Kieran Whyte, director, national prac-
tice head for projects and infrastructure
from DLA Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, a leading
South African law frm.
Many entrants, especially in the solar mar-
ket, continue to import their products from
China, but are mindful of the local content
requirements and local job creation.
As Eco Green Energy, we aim to work
with the local community, as we do not
want to threaten the local industry with
imports from China. We see it as an oppor-
tunity to develop, not only the energy that
is needed here in South Africa, but also to
create more jobs, said Dalibor Nikolovski,
general manager of solar solutions provid-
er, Eco Green Energy.
Econet is a well-known mobile service
provider in Africa that has recently branched
out into the providing solar solutions
to remote clients. As a newcomer on the
scene, Econet is already building local ties
and manufacturing capabilities All the
design concepts are done in South Africa
and all the installation and supervision
is local, so our products are South Afri-
can products, said Luc Tanoh, CEO of
Econet Solar.
Coal the Present and
Gas the Future
Coal generation will continue to
predominate the energy sector until 2020
through new builds as well as the up-
grade of Eskoms existing feet. As Ste-
phen Leatherbarrow of Robor noted: One
needs to bear in mind that South Africa has
5
Global Business Reports // POWER SOUTH AFRICA
June 2014
5
an abundance of coal resources which will
maintain and create jobs for many years
to come. If well managed, coal is still
one of the cheapest forms of energy in
South Africa.
Yet, while coal is an important resource
for base load, the expectations are that,
post 2020, the focus will shift signifcantly.
Endress + Hauser in South Africa under-
stands the challenges of the sustainability
of thermal projects going forward and it
remains to be seen what Eskoms plans
are beyond Medupi and Kusile, said Rob
MacKenzie. There are many new opportu-
nities that are presenting themselves such
as gas which is a better alternative to coal.
Stephen Moore, CEO of MHPSA, a merger
between Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and
Hitachi, said: MHPSA are focused on ther-
mal power so we are keen on pushing that
www.gbreports.com
Global Business Reports
POWER SOUTH AFRICA
|
June 2014 64
Lessons in Resiliency and Risk
Keynote presentations at ELECTRIC POWER 2014 focused on new threats to
power generators that range from climate change to a business environment
that includes increasing numbers of large customer-generators. The take-
away: Traditional utilities can survive the new challenges, but only if they are
prepared and flexible.
Gail Reitenbach, PhD
C
limate change is changing the odds of
extreme weather events, Entergys Rod
West told the audience at the opening
keynote session of ELECTRIC POWER
2014. West, who serves as Entergys execu-
tive vice president and chief administrative
officer, led the team responsible for the $250
million reconstruction of New Orleans elec-
trical infrastructure after Hurricane Katrina.
Though this years conference and exhibi-
tion began on Apr. 1 in New Orleans, Wests
comments were no April Fools joke. En-
tergy, which operates as a traditional utility
in the South and a merchant generator in the
North, owns and operates about 30 GW of
capacity, including 10 GW of nuclear power.
Though one might think its Gulf Coast as-
sets vulnerability to hurricanes would be the
most significant weather-related threat, West
noted that Entergy assets in all areas have
been hit by extreme weather.
Prepare, Harden, and Engage
We understand storms, West (Figure 1) as-
serted as he delivered his keynote on risk and
resiliency for power companies.
Not only is climate change increasing the
odds of extreme weather events, but the loss-
es from those events are also increasing, he
explained. West acknowledged that, often to
the chagrin of our colleagues, Entergy has
been at the forefront of addressing the impli-
cations of climate change. It also has moved
away from an all-or-nothing discussion of
climate change. Instead, its a conversation
about managing risk.
To that end, in 2004 the company en-
gaged with a team of consultants and other
Gulf Coast entities to develop a fact-based
assessment of risk to the U.S. Gulf Coast.
One key finding: The Gulf Coast faces ex-
pected cumulative losses over $350 billion
by 2030 as a result of environmental risks.
Even events not directly caused by climate
change are exacerbated by it.
If you are affected by climate change
impacts, he said, its just loss, whether you
believe in climate change or not. The con-
versation Entergy has is about resilience. But
its not just about hardening infrastructure.
Though hurricanes are some of the most dra-
matic and destructive weather events, the largest
cumulative destruction is caused by thunder-
storms, high wind, tornados, and winter storms,
which means all regions are vulnerable.
Resilience isnt just a concern for the Gulf
Coast, as the East Coast learned during Hur-
ricane Sandy. West suggested that after seeing
the devastation that Sandy wrought, it became
more obvious that planning, preventing, and
restoring service after extreme weather events
is a national priority that requires three ac-
tions: prepare, harden, and engage.
West spent some time detailing the im-
portance of engaging utility customers in
these steps. Because restoration of electricity
service can take weeks after a major event,
customersindustrial, commercial, and res-
identialmay need to be prepared for long
outages or have backup plans.
The costs of inaction surpass those of invest-
ment in preparation and hardening, West argued.
One of the approaches Entergy and the State of
Louisiana have taken is familiar to the nuclear
industry: defense in depth. The elements of that
strategy include, but are not limited to, building
and maintenance of levees and coastal wetlands.
Coastal wetlands are an important compo-
nent of that defense-in-depth strategy because,
as West underscored, its not just a tree-hug-
ger issue. The loss of coastal wetlands affects
energy industries all along the Gulf and has
additional economic impact. Especially given
the importance of the energy and related in-
dustries to the Gulf Coast region, the State of
Louisiana has developed a plan to reverse the
loss of coastal wetlands known as the Gulf
Coast Adaptation Study.
Entergys approach appears to be paying off.
West noted that as a result of efforts the compa-
ny has made, outage restoration after Hurricane
Isaac was faster than for the previous several
storms: Ike, Gustav, Rita, and Katrina.
When Large Customers Become
Large Generators
Brian Janous (Figure 2), director of energy
strategy for Microsoft, made the second key-
note presentation. As is the case with many
other large technology companies, including
Google and Apple, Microsoft is committed to
providing much of its own power, including
carbon-free electricity.
To help explain why Microsoft has gone so
deeply into the business of developing gen-
eration, Janous said that the company looks
1. Rod West. Entergys executive vice
president and chief administrative officer de-
livered the first of two keynote addresses
at ELECTRIC POWER 2014 in New Orleans.
Courtesy: POWER
2. Brian Janous. Microsofts director of
energy strategy gave attendees insight into
the energy strategy of large nonutility gen-
erators that have not traditionally been self-
generators. Courtesy: POWER
June 2014
|
at data as a form of energy. Energy is used
to produce electricity, which is distributed as
data. In one slide, Janous demonstrated all
the points at which energy is lost, from power
plant to transmission to end use at a data cen-
ter. By the time you reach the server, 99% of
the energy is lost, according to Microsofts
analysis. By bringing energy production to
its data centers, Janous explained, Microsoft
can reduce overall losses and optimize the
energy supply chain.
In fact, Microsoft is doing more than set-
ting up generation outside the fence of its
data centers. In collaboration with the Univer-
sity of California, Irvine, its developing an in-
rack fuel cell process that puts generation and
end-use equipmentserversside by side on
racks. In February this year, the company ran
a successful demonstration that Microsoft said
boosted the electrical efficiency of its fuel cell
system from 39.8% to 53.3% by cutting out
much of the electrical conditioning systems.
It also cuts out transmission losses.
The company announcement of the test
claims that, If this approach were scaled up
across the United States, we anticipate that
fuel cell stacksin which the fuel cell is in-
tegrated directly into the server rackcould
double energy efficiency while cutting out
numerous points of failure that occur in tra-
ditional electrical transmission.
Beyond onsite generation, the company is
also investing in renewable generation sited
elsewhereits first such agreement is a 20-
year power purchase deal from a 110-MW
wind farm to be developed near Dallasand
feeding it to the grid because the company
has a policy of being carbon neutral. In fact, it
even has a corporate-wide price on carbon that
easily justifies these capital expenditures.
Distributed and Centralized Are
Not the Only Options
The argument made by many that traditional
centralized power generation will be supplant-
ed by distributed generation (DG)thereby
constituting a cataclysmic disruption of the
power industrywasnt one made by Janous,
to the likely surprise of many listening. In fact,
he pointed to Silicon Valley as the source of
much of the hype about DG overthrowing tra-
ditional utilities (Microsoft is headquartered
more than 800 miles north of Silicon Valley, in
Redmond, Wash.).
Janous argued that the future will be neither
solely centralized nor distributed. The future
is integrated, he predicted. And data (an un-
surprising claim from the likes of a tech com-
pany) will be the enabling factor to integrate
distributed and centralized generation. In that
new, integrated world, Janous sees utilities de-
livering different types of services, including
networked refrigerators and energy storage.
What if utilities arent interested in new
business models? Whether they encourage
DG or not, Janous said, it will happen. That
said, Silicon Valley tech companies underes-
timate the barriers to disrupting the tradition-
al utility infrastructure, he said.
It appears that even behemoths like Micro-
soft see value in the interconnected grid. As an
example of how utilities might play in the new
world, he suggested that diesel generators cur-
rently used as backup for data centers could
represent an opportunity for utilities to be in-
volved in site-based generationpresumably
if they could dispatch it or possibly even own
and lease those distributed power plants.
Though most companies dont look at en-
ergy beyond the next few years, Janous said
Microsoft is making a long-term commitment
to it. Of course, the company founded by the
now-richest man in the world has more op-
portunities to do this than the average enter-
prise, but that doesnt make it an anomaly.
Gail Reitenbach, PhD is POWERs editor
(@GailReit, @POWERmagazine).
|
June 2014 66
Veterans Bring Needed Skills to
the Utility Industry
As reports abound about the aging workforce in U.S. power plants, ex-military per-
sonnel offer battle-tested dependability and proven leadership to an industry
in need of their skills.
Aaron Larson
W
e all know someone who either
is, or was, in the military. In fact,
many utility industry professionals
were once in the military themselves. Person-
nel learn many valuable lessons in the armed
forces. Teamwork, discipline, reliability,
dedication, initiative, and leadership are all
important traits instilled in military members.
The ability to give and follow directions, get
along with others, work under pressure, and
conform to rules are drilled into service men
and women in all branches from the day they
sign on the dotted line.
In case you hadnt noticed, many, if not
all, of those traits are important in the power
sector too, so when you need someone who
can be counted on to do a job in accordance
with detailed requirements, consider a cur-
rent or ex-military member. Yes, I said cur-
rent; many active reserve and National
Guard members are working in power plants
across the country and are doing a great job.
Although it requires a little extra effort to
schedule around weekend duty and summer
drills, many companies are successfully han-
dling that task.
During the ELECTRIC POWER Confer-
ence & Exhibition (EP) held in New Orleans
in early April, the first-ever Faraday Awards
were presented in the EP Theater. The awards
were part of the Veterans in Power (VIP) ini-
tiative and recognized employers, programs,
and partnerships that have successfully fo-
cused on elevating the careers of American
veterans in the energy industry.
The awards are named after Michael
Faraday, who published work on electro-
magnetic rotationthe principle behind the
electric motorand discovered electromag-
netic inductionthe principle behind the
electric transformer and generatorin the
early 19th century.
A Ready Resource
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported
in March that the unemployment rate for vet-
erans who served on active duty in the U.S.
Armed Forces at any time since September
2001a group referred to as Gulf War-era
II veteranswas 9.0% in 2013. With a total
of 2.8 million Gulf War-era II veterans, that
leaves a pool of 252,000 well-qualified per-
sonnel waiting in the wings for an opportu-
nity to utilize their technical skills. Utilities
stand to benefit, if they can find a way to tap
this resource.
The Faraday Awards recognize outstand-
ing efforts in the electric power sector to re-
cruit, train, retain, and mentor veterans who
are entering or reentering civilian careers af-
ter serving their country in the armed forces.
Awards were presented in three categories.
American Electric Power (AEP) and In-
cremental Systems Corp. were recognized
for their investor-owned utility and small
business partnershipPower4Vets. Pow-
er4Vets is a workforce development training
program that prepares military veterans to
become North American Electric Reliabil-
ity Corp. (NERC)certified power system
operators through simulation training and
focused studies. It also provides coaching
and mentoring for job interviews, resume
preparation, and job placement assistance.
Since its inception, 61 veterans have become
NERC certified, 57 have transitioned from
military to power industry careers, 36 have
transferred from other jobs to power industry
careers, and 68 have trained for, or upgraded
to, better jobs in the industry.
Scott Smith, senior vice president of trans-
mission strategy and business operation for
AEP, noted that AEP employees more than
20,000 people. When it began its veterans
hiring initiative, roughly 9% of the work-
force was made up of ex-military personnel.
Since that time, the percentage of veterans
has risen to 12%.
The second award was given to Siemens
Energy and Central Piedmont Community
College for their Apprenticeship Charlotte
program, which aims to build a pipeline of
qualified employees by combining class-
room and workplace learning. One unique
aspect of the program is that Siemens Ener-
gy pays apprentices while they are attending
classes and also reimburses them for tuition
and books.
The third award was presented to Do-
minion Resources and the Center for En-
ergy Workforce Development for their
Troops to Energy Jobs program. The team
was recognized as an outstanding example
of an investor-owned utility partnership
with a nonprofit organization. Troops to
Energy Jobs began as a pilot program in
September 2011 and launched nationally in
June 2013. Dominion has hired more than
270 military veterans, which equates to
about 25% of Dominions new hires since
the program began.
These three have really stood out, not just
by success of the number of veterans hired,
but their view of the program and the way that
they integrate for long-term retention, said
Matt Sadinsky, CEO of Prequalified Ready
Employees for Power International, who col-
laborated with EP to present the awards.
Making the Link
Connecting with veterans can be challeng-
ing, especially in areas of the country far
from military bases. We had a veterans re-
1. American Electric Power (AEP)
and Incremental Systems Corp.
(IncSys) Faraday Award presenta-
tion. Left to right: David Wagman, ELEC-
TRIC POWER; Matt Sadinsky, Prequalified
Ready Employees for Power International;
Scott Smith, AEP; Mike Anderson, AEP; Robin
Podmore, IncSys; and David Miranda, Pow-
er4Vets. Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
Follow the maze to the end.
When it comes to a facilitys maintenance schedule there
is no end. Planned maintenance is integral in any asset
management program to ensure safe operations and to
maximize uptime. Team provides a number of services to
assist witn sonodulod maintonanoo. Wo navo tno hoxibility
and resources to provide maintenance services through-
out the world according to your schedule.
TEAM experts are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,
365 days a year. Call TEAM today: 1-800-662-8326
www.teamindustrialservices.com
Bolting/Torquing
Concrete Repair
Emissions Control
Exchanger
Services
Field Machining
Fitness for Service
Heat Treating
Hot Tap/Line Stop
Isolation Test Plugs
Leak Repair
Manufacturing/
Engineering
Mechanical
Integrity
NDE/NDT
Inspection
Specialty Welding
Turnkey Tank
Program
Valve Insertion
Valve Repair
TEAM Services
Start
Here
|
June 2014 68
source center that really wasnt staffed with
veterans. It was staffed with normal college
advisors, and that didnt work. Veterans like
to talk to veterans. Thats where we learned
our lesson, said Bill Dillon, associate dean
for business and industry learning at Central
Piedmont Community College.
The way that you can collaborate to get
the word out is by word of mouth, Pow-
er4Vets Program Manager David Miranda
said. There [are] enough military veterans
out therein these pools that we have with
great candidatesthat are going to be great
fits for any utility across the entire country.
Roger Collins, technical training special-
ist for Siemens Energy, noted that military
personnel are used to working with the lat-
est in technology. They come to us with a
skillset that cant be picked up in just the
general population. Theyre motivated to
learn, theyre accustomed to being trained,
they have a very good sense of dutya good
sense of purposethat makes it easy for
them, Collins said. They may not have the
exact skills that were looking for, but theyre
able to be trained.
The average age of a system operator in
America is 56, and 50% of them will retire in
the next three to five years, Sadinsky said.
With that kind of employee turnover looming
on the horizon, utilities need to look for em-
ployment candidates who can hit the ground
running. Military veterans are one resource
that should not be overlooked.
Aaron Larson is a POWER associate
editor (@AaronL_Power,
@POWERmagazine).
2. Siemens Energy and Central Piedmont Community College (CPCC)
winners. Left to right: David Wagman, ELECTRIC POWER; Matt Sadinsky, Prequalified Ready
Employees for Power International; Dawn Braswell, Siemens Energy; Bill Dillon, CPCC; and
Roger Collins, Siemens Energy. Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
UDI WHOS WHO AT ELECTRIC POWER PLANTS
Enhanced PDF version now available
The 2014 UDI Whos Who Directory covers more than 4,500
U.S. and Canadian generating plants. The directory provides:
Nearly 8,100 plant management and support
contact names, titles, and primary job functions.
Basic plant operating statistics for more than 1,500
power stations, including:
Generation (MWh)
Availability (%)
Heat rate
Capacity Factor (%)
Power plant design characteristics
Choose which purchase option that best suits your needs:
Hardcopy Book
Enhanced Directory PDF (CD-ROM)
Mailing List (CD-ROM), Enhanced Directory PDF & Hardcopy Book
For more detailed information and a list of all available data, visit us online at UDIDATA.COM or contact the UDI Editorial team at UDI@Platts.com.
2014
Mark Your Calendars
ELECTRIC POWER EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE
LAS VEGAS, NV
NOVEMBER 5 6, 2014
THE BELLAGIO HOTEL
Western electric power markets face daunting challenges that command the attention of policy makers,
power providers, and myriad stakeholders all across the WECC region. Chief among these are issues related
to transmission, renewable energy integration, carbon emission reductions, water availability, and federal land
use policies.
EPEC West addresses strategic issues at the rst annual conference in Las Vegas, Nevada:
Energy imbalance markets
Californias energy storage directive
Long-haul transmission to bring remote renewable resources to load centers
Water-energy issues and regional cooperation
Join us November 5 6, 2014 in Las Vegas
www.EPECevents.com
EPEC West is exclusively for executives and will provide an environment to discuss
challenges and explore a range of strategies that address the rapid change impacting
Western electricity providers.
From the organizers of ELECTRIC POWER
24015
|
June 2014 70
The Word for Gas Is Flexibility
As an ever-changing power mix and growing renewable contributions chal-
lenge grid stability, flexible gas generation looks to be more important
than ever, panelists at ELECTRIC POWER 2014 reported.
W
ith the gas-fired power sector in
continual flux, blessed by plentiful
gas supplies but faced with uncer-
tain fuel costs and competition from intermit-
tent renewable generation, plant owners must
make flexibility and responsiveness a priori-
ty. That was the message from the natural gas
track at the ELECTRIC POWER Conference
held in New Orleans, April 14.
Flexible Operations
Rob James, product manager for Neuco,
discussed a project optimizing heat rate and
ramp rate at Dynegys Independence com-
bined cycle plant in Osewgo, N.Y. The 1,042-
MW dual 2 x 1 facility began bidding into
the New York Independent System Operator
frequency regulation market about four years
ago. Dynegy later retained Neuco to help
maximize the plants capability for high
ramp rate ancillary services. This meant find-
ing ways to optimize the dynamics of the
combined cycle process and enhancing day-
ahead capability prediction.
By using sophisticated modeling software
to predict demand trends, the plant is able
to deploy its duct burners ahead of time to
increase steam turbine output and preserve
highramp rate gas turbine capacity. The
model then turns the duct burners off as soon
as they are no longer needed in order to main-
tain plant efficiency. Timing the duct burners
is important when selling into the regulation
market because the gas turbines can reach
maximum output below total plant output
well before the heat recovery steam genera-
tor (HRSG) heats up, which can compromise
the plants committed ramp rate. If the duct
burners are timed properly, the plant can sell
all its power into the regulation market while
still bidding at gas turbine ramp rate.
Nikhil Kumar, director of energy and util-
ity analytics, Intertek Asset Integrity Man-
agement, reviewed a study of combined
cycle and simple cycle gas turbine operating
performance from 2002 through 2012. The
study was intended to characterize trends
and effects of cycling operation. Not surpris-
ingly, the data showed substantial increases in
average capacity factors at these plants, but
also increased number of starts and ramping
episodes. This places greater stress on a plant,
meaning steps must be taken to increase equip-
ment resiliency. Among the countermeasures
that can help deal with increased cycling are
installing additional thermocouples in the
HRSG to better monitor temperature changes
and better monitoring and control of HRSG
chemistry. More effective steps can be taken
if planning begins at the design stage.
Flexible Design
Increased penetration from intermittent
renewable generation is challenging com-
bined cycle plant profitability as increased
cycling (see related article, Managing the
Changing Profile of a Combined Cycle
Plant in this issue) sends maintenance
costs up while lucrative baseload roles are
taken by wind and solar. However, renew-
able generation rarely follows forecasts
precisely, leaving plenty of gaps needing
to be filled. Properly designed plants can
ramp quickly and stay profitable by pursu-
ing opportunities in ancillary markets, as
several speakers explained.
Omar Rubio of Siemens Energy described
two major ramping episodes in Germany and
California last year, when multiple gigawatts
of renewable generation came off the grid
over a short period of time, and grid operators
had to ramp up major amounts of convention-
al generation to replace it. Such episodes will
only become more common, and that means
1. Gas projects roll on. Dennis Finn of Wrtsil gives a report on a gas engine plant in Alaska during the ELECRIC POWER natural gas
track as panelists Udo Zirn, Chris Marks, and Joe Ferrari look on. Source: POWER/Tom Overton
June 2014
|
a big opportunity for fast-starting combined
cycle plants that can meet the need.
Gordon Smith, chief consulting engineer
with GE Power & Water, discussed two of
the main challenges of fast starts: stresses
on the HRSG and managing NO
x
emissions.
Relatively minor HRSG design changes
can minimize thermal stresses and increase
steam turbine responsiveness. Meanwhile,
predictive modeling to better manage NH
3

additions to the selective catalytic reduction
system can help keep emissions under con-
trol even when turbine output is erratic.
Flexible Technology
Flexibility takes other forms than combined cy-
cle gas turbines, of course, as several presenters
reviewing the performance of reciprocating en-
gines alongside renewable generation reported.
Chris Marks, mechanical engineer with
Burns & McDonnell, described the devel-
opment and construction of Mid-Kansas
Electric Co.s 110-MW Rubart Station gas
engine plant in western Kansas, which
is coming online this year. The area is a
major producer of wind energy, and Mid-
Kansass cooperative profile includes 179
MW of wind capacity out of a total of 733
MW. Thats created a need for balancing
from highly flexible but efficient genera-
tion. Mid-Kansas ultimately chose a 10-unit
plant powered by Caterpillar G20CM34 gas
engines. The plant can ramp from 0% to
100% load in only 8 minutes, with flat ef-
ficiency across a wide operating range.
Dennis Finn, business development man-
ager for Wrtsil North America, reviewed
a similar gas engine project in Alaska, the
Matanuska Electric Associations (MEAs)
170-MW Eklutna Generating Station in
Palmer, northeast of Anchorage (Figure 1).
In Alaska, the highest loads are in the winter,
while summer demand can be very light. The
area is also seismically active. MEA chose a
Wrtsil-supplied gas engine plant (powered
by 10 18V50DF dual-fuel engines) because
of their high reliability, rapid dispatch, and
low maintenance requirements. The plant
will be able to continue operating down to
40F and remain online (by switching to fuel
oil) even in the event of an earthquake. Con-
struction began in early 2013 and the plant is
expected to come online by January 2015.
Advances in turbine technology are also in-
creasing generation options. Udo Zirn, man-
ager, turbine systems for Mitsubishi Hitachi
Power Systems Americas (MHPS), presented
a new technology that MHPS is preparing to
roll out. Called AHAT, or advanced humid
air turbine, it involves feeding humidified
compressed air into a simple cycle turbine to
increase efficiency. Combustion air is cooled
by wet evaporative cooling and is then passed
through a humidification tower and heated in
a heat exchanger using turbine exhaust be-
fore entering the combustor. The water vapor
in the exhaust is then recovered and returned
to the humidifier.
MHPS has been developing the technol-
ogy since 2000. A pilot project using an H-50
turbine was launched in 2010, and MHPS
plans to commercialize it this year. The H-50
turbine with AHAT outperformed the same
turbine in combined cycle mode, achieving
70 MW output at 50.6% efficiency. Zirn said
MHPS believes efficiencies above 60% are
achievable with larger turbines.
MHPS is also developing a related retrofit
product called Smart AHAT, which involves
adding significant steam injection to a combined
cycle arrangement, with AHATs water recov-
ery system added to the exhaust. (For more on
AHAT, see Recent Innovations from Gas Tur-
bine and HRSG OEMs in this issue.)
Thomas W. Overton, JD is a POWER
associate editor (@thomas_overton,
@POWERmagazine).
|
June 2014 72
Fuel Flexibility Is the Gift That
Keeps Giving
Against the backdrop of low-priced natural gas and increasing renewable capacity,
finding ways to stay competitive as operating costs continue to rise at coal-
fired power plants is getting increasingly difficult. Fuel flexibility can help keep
coal plants in the mix.
Aaron Larson
A
ll power plants must continually strive
to control operating expenses, but it is
particularly important for coal-fired
facilities to cut costs these days to stay com-
petitive while meeting ever-more-stringent
environmental requirements. By some es-
timates, the addition of a modern air qual-
ity control system (AQCS)including ac-
tivated carbon injection, selective catalytic
reduction, flue gas desulfurization (FGD),
and baghouse componentscan result in a
50% increase in operating expenses due to
the cost of consumables, such as activated
carbon, ammonia, and lime, as well as addi-
tional labor to operate and maintain the extra
equipment.
Worse yet, these estimates dont take into
account catalyst or bag and cage replace-
ments; additional steam, water, and auxiliary
power usage; or by-product transport costs.
With the additional overhead expenses, find-
ing savings in other areas is imperative. De-
veloping a fuel flexibility strategy is one way
some companies have found to save a signifi-
cant amount of money.
During the ELECTRIC POWER Con-
ference & Exhibition (EP) held in New Or-
leans this April, Daniel Donochod, PE, fuel
flexibility strategy manager for Duke En-
ergy (Figure 1), gave a presentation entitled
Keeping Coal CompetitiveFuel Flexibil-
ity. In it, Donochod explained how Duke
Energy has diversified its fuel mix and, in the
process, positioned itself for better environ-
mental compliance.
Duke Energy is the largest electric utility
in the U.S., with about $114 billion in assets
and roughly 58 GW of generating capacity.
Like many companies, its generation port-
folio has changed dramatically since 2005.
Back then, coal accounted for about 55% of
total output, but the company estimates that in
2015 coal will fuel only 38% of its electricity
output. During the same period, natural gas
fired generation is expected to increase from
5% to 24%, essentially picking up all of the
lost coal generation and more.
Although Donochod noted that there arent
1. Fuel diversification. Daniel Dono-
chod, PE of Duke spoke about fuel flexibility.
Source: POWER/Aaron Larson
PRBCUG Focuses on Safe Coal Handling
Andy Dobrzanski, Mark Collett, and Dave
Markle were among the presenters at the
Powder River Basin Coal Users Group (PRB-
CUG) annual conference held Mar. 31 to
Apr. 3, 2014, in conjunction with the ELEC-
TRIC POWER Conference in New Orleans.
The PRBCUG provides in-depth presen-
tations and discussions promoting the
safe, efficient, and economic use of PRB
coals by companies that currently use,
or are considering the use of PRB coals.
While several speakers mentioned house-
keepings important role in the safe opera-
tion of facilities, other topics were also
covered in depth.
One was fly ashhandling systems and
PRB coal ash. Dobrzanski, fuel supply
manager for DTE Energys Monroe Power
Station, noted that PRB coal fly ash size is
typically finer than bituminous fly ash and
normally has very low unburned carbon due
to the reactivity of the fuel. The majority
of the ash is removed as fly ash70% to
90% of the total quantityin a baghouse
or electrostatic precipitator.
Although Dobrzanski said that bottom
ash systems at Monroe are still wet sys-
tems, problems such as the Dan River ash
spill are putting pressure on the industry
to move toward dry ash systems. There
are different types of systemshydraulic,
mechanical, pneumatic, and vibratory sys-
temsthat collect bottom ash dry, Dobr-
zanski said. Those are some of the items
that we need to look at going forward to
meet the standards that Im sure will be
developed very shortly.
Mark Collett, director of mining and
minerals for River Consulting, discussed
electrical standards and area classifica-
tions. There should be an electrical clas-
sification drawing for every substation in
the plant so you can always look on that
and see how an electrical area is classi-
fied, said Collett. If you dont know
what the classification of the areas of the
plant are, theres something wrong.
Hot work procedures were also a hot
topic, but one cant talk about hot work
without discussing fire protection. Duke
Energys Dave Markle noted that the only
guidance that the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration provides coal
plants is that if they have decided to have
a fire protection system, then it must be
maintained. We are responsible for fire
protection ourselves, he said. Theres no
guidance for it, except if you have it, you
maintain it. In other words, just like so
many things, Its up to us!
June 2014
|
many new coal plants being considered in the
U.S., the ones that are still in operation need
to be maintained, invested in, and stay com-
petitive. Because fuel expense is such a large
part of a power plants operating cost, there
are big opportunities for plants that have fuel
flexibility. (For more, see Fuel-Flexible
CFBs Add Flexibility to Resource Plans in
the May issue, online at powermag.com.)
The process of moving toward fuel flex-
ibility requires a team effort. It demands
station management to be on board to help
promote the strategy. Fuel procurement per-
sonnel, central engineering, outage and proj-
ect group members, environmental staff, and
perhaps most importantly, operators and pro-
duction managers must all collaborate for the
program to be successful.
Donochod suggested that having a dedi-
cated team that is focused on fuel flexibility
is important. When you have people focus
on something, you dont get them pulled in
a bunch of different directions. Theyre fo-
cused on the mission, he said.
Every plant is different, but some items
that need to be considered when developing
a fuel diversity strategy include: fuel-han-
dling systems, potential slagging and foul-
ing concerns, SO
3
mitigation capabilities,
combustion issues, FGD operation, and
wastewater treatment. In some cases, the
coal will be drier, resulting in more dust.
Chute liners may be necessary to prevent
plugging issues. Additives may be needed,
such as magnesium hydroxide, to keep the
slag friable and improve sootblowing ef-
fectiveness. Getting the boiler combustion
tuned properly prior to making changes
is also very important. A lot of testing is
usually necessary, so starting with a good
baseline allows easier evaluation of future
adjustments.
Blending is also a critical factor for fuel
flexibility. Coal is not coal, Chuck Renner,
inspection and performance testing manager
for SGS Minerals Services, said during an-
other coal track breakout session. What he
meant by the statement is that there is a great
deal of variability in coal from different parts
of the country (see sidebar) and world. Even
coal from the same mine can vary consider-
ably from one seam to another.
With that in mind, the primary objective of
blending is to mix the coal to maximize uni-
formity. Producing the desired blend requires
accurate information about coal quality and
proper control of the proportions blended.
You cant control what you dont measure,
said Renner. A competent quality assurance
plan includes verification of sampling, analy-
sis and weighing equipment, and methods.
In order to achieve consistent results,
representative samples and precise analysis
are required. Acceptable blending can result
in increased profits. Renner noted that one
plantburning three million tons of coal per
yearwas successful in blending 10% of a
much less expensive product, which saved
the company $3 million.
Lowering fuel costs through fuel di-
versity isnt usually free, however. Senior
management needs to be involved because
investments are often required. Donochod
said, Try to get your funding separate from
your maintenance capital. Dont get into a
dogfight with maintenance capital, because
youll never win. Strategic projects need to
have their own bucket.
In the end though, the investment can
pay off. From January 2012 through Febru-
ary 2014, Duke Energys Carolina stations
saved $160 million in fuel costs. Once the
investment has been made and fuel flexibil-
ity is an option, it is the gift that keeps on
giving.
Aaron Larson is a POWER associate edi-
tor (@AaronL_Power, @POWERmagazine).
4
th
ANNUAL
ANNUAL MEETING
HOST UTILITY:
Participate in Asias premier
Sub-Bituminous Coal Users Conference!
The Asian SBC Users Group is THE place for generating
companies who use, or are considering the use of,
sub-bituminous coals for power generation:
Network with hundreds of generating company industry professionals in one place
Discover best practices to safely and efciently handle and burn SBCs
Access in-depth industry solutions
Experience new technologies impacting the SBC consumer industry
Tour Glow Energy Public Companys GEHCO 1 Coal-red Plant
Register today! www.asiansbcusers.com
23646
OCTOBER 13 - PLANT TOUR
OCTOBER 14-16 - CONFERENCE
BANGKOK, THAILAND
AMARI WATERGATE HOTEL
|
June 2014 74
The Dynamic Challenge of
Integrating Variable Resources
All aspects of system operations are tested by unique challenges as more variable
energy resources are connected to the grid.
Sonal Patel
T
he share of non-hydro renewables in
total U.S. power generation shot up to
6.5% in 2013 from 2.4% in 2003, ac-
cording to the Energy Information Adminis-
tration (EIA). The past five years alone have
been specifically marked by a growth spurt
for wind and solar powerso-called variable
energy resources because the power they
produce is less predictable compared to power
from conventional technologies. Combined,
wind and solar power generation soared to
4.4% of the nations total generation in 2013,
compared to 1.49% in 2009 (Figure 1).
But, while the growth of these variable
resources is a blessing for the planet and
for people, it poses myriad challenges for
grid operators who must deal with inherent
swings, or ramps, in power output, said ABB
Director of Marketing Francisco Tacoa at the
ELECTRIC POWER 2014 renewables track
session on integrating renewables.
Generators, too, are being forced to tackle
a host of issues, he said. These include fac-
toring in the need for more flexible genera-
tion resources, meeting demand for real-time
energy requests, and evolving plant key per-
formance indicators to accommodate vari-
able renewables. Then they must minimize
damage to assets not designed for intermit-
tency, run power plants not designed for
highly variable generation, and coordinate an
automated and wide generation dispatch.
These issues will only gain more urgency
in the future, Tacoa noted. Backed by renew-
able portfolio standards (RPS) and federal
tax incentives, more than 50 GW of wind
capacity is projected to be installed in the
Western Interconnection while about 20 GW
are expected to be installed in the Eastern In-
terconnection by 2020.
An Energy Imbalance Market
Tacoa outlined an interesting proposal in the
Western Interconnection to address the an-
ticipated increase in variable generation over
the next several years that calls for its smaller
balancing authority areas (BAAs) to pool
their variable and conventional generation
resources to improve operational efficiency
over a wider area. This sub-hourly, real-time
Energy Imbalance Market (EIM) would
provide centralized, automated, and region-
wide generation dispatch for imbalances. A
working group comprising several western
BAAs, the Western Governors Association,
and a number of other stakeholders is making
plans to link the entire Western Interconnec-
tion to the EIM.
The idea is gaining backers on a smaller
scale, too: In mid-April, MidAmerican En-
ergys newly purchased NV Energy filed
a request with the Nevada Public Utilities
Commission to voluntarily participate,
starting in October 2015, in a regional
5-minute EIM agreed to in 2012 by the
California Independent System Operator
(CAISO) and MidAmericans northwestern
utility PacifiCorp. NV Energy has said its
EIM participation could benefit all partici-
pating parties in the range of $9.2 million
to $29.4 million annually.
Nevertheless, the EIM concept isnt with-
out its critics. Beyond concerns about exor-
bitant startup costs, cost shifting, and new
reliability problems, the American Public
Power Association points out that an EIM
has the potential to quickly evolve into a
regional transmission organizationwhich
historically developed incrementally, with
continual additions of more complex and
costly centralized market features. And, it
says, an EIM could suffer similar problems:
complex and costly market-pricing mecha-
nisms, price volatility, and an absence of
cost-effective measures to ensure resource
adequacy. (See tablet sidebar next page.)
The proposed Western Interconnection
EIM does not require any formal coordi-
nated unit commitments, but it does not pre-
clude it down the road, said Tacoa.
There also are other options to balance
generation and load in BAAs, he said, in-
cluding area-control error pooling, advanced
dynamic scheduling, or an intra-hour trans-
action accelerator platform.
More Flexible Generation
Resources
For generators, the growth of variable gen-
eration has underscored the need for more
flexible generation resources, Tacoa said,
and if two key considerations were to be
identified, they are speed and efficiency. Gas
turbines are at least 20% more efficient than
steam boilers, which can take up to 12 hours
to warm up. And, while todays gas turbines
2011
Share of total
generation:
5%
(208 TWh)
2012
Share of total
generation:
5.7%
(232 TWh)
2013
Share of total
generation:
6.5%
(266 TWh)
2010
Share of total
generation:
4.5%
(180 TWh)
2009
Share of total
generation:
4%
(156 TWh)
Wind Solar Geothermal Wood biomass Other biomass Other renewables
1. A growth spurt. Compared to 2009, the share of U.S. renewable generation that is not
conventional hydropower has increased 2.5%. From 2009 to 2013, wind generation increased
from 74 TWh to 167 TWh, while solar generation grew from 891 GWh to 9.2 TWh. Source: EIA
June 2014
|
can get up to 150 MW in 10 minutes, next-
generation aeroderivative gas turbines prom-
ise even faster starts. Gas-fired engines win
on a number of fronts beyond the efficiency
factor, including ambient temperature opera-
tion without a derating factor, lower water
consumption, flex fuel, heat rate, and lead
time, Tacoa said.
But gas, too, has its shortfalls, as Jeff
Kopp, business consulting manager at Burns
& McDonnell explained. Kopp presented a
case study highlighting CAISOs efforts to
address integration issues that are immi-
nent in its operation region, though he un-
derscored that Californias challenges are
unique compared to other states because
the state has an RPS of 33% by 2020. That
means forecasted high levels of variable
resources are becoming a reality: CAISO
projects that it will need to reliably meet net
load, manage about 3 GW of intrahour load-
following needs, and provide nearly 13 GW
of continuous up-ramping capability within
a 3-hour time period.
That will require more frequent dispatches
and the starting and stopping of flexible gas-
fired generators, which will potentially incur
more wear and tear and increase failure on
generation components, leading to increased
forced outages. (For more on the long-term
effects of increased cycling, see Managing
the Changing Profile of a Combined Cycle
Plant in this issue.) Added to that, lower
capacity factors for dispatchable generation
combined with potential reduced energy
prices could result in decreased energy mar-
ket revenues for the gas fleet.
Ultimately, CAISOs efforts to stabilize
wind through gas generationwhere gaps
were filled using market purchase or engine
dispatch, whichever was cheapershowed
that the annual levelized cost of energy
(LCOE) from wind, gas, and the market was
less pricey ($51/MWh) than from wind and
gas only ($55/MWh), Kopp showed. These
and factors such as a high sensitivity to gas
prices determined that moving toward mar-
ketwide balancing may be a better practice,
he said.
Other Options
Yet another option to accommodate variabil-
ity is through power storage. ABBs Tacoa
outlined several existing approaches such as
pumped storage hydropower, compressed
air energy storage, and several forms of
distributed battery-based power storage.
(For more on the state of energy storage,
see our May cover story The Year Energy
Storage Hit Its Stride, online at powermag
.com.) However, a number of roadblocks to
deploy storage alternatives exist, he said,
such as siting and permitting storage facili-
ties, negative environmental impacts, taxing
land demands, long lead times, and invest-
ment needs that must be ascertained without
a clear return on investment.
For Steve Fine, vice president at ICF In-
ternational, the challenges of operating a
grid with high renewable penetration span
different time scales for all system operation
entitiesfrom less than a minute to years
(Figure 2). Different variable resources will
also require unique responses, he suggested.
Higher penetrations of photovoltaics, for
example, lead to increased ramping require-
ments that could stress system resources.
But renewable generators, too, bear risks,
Fine pointed out. Transmission congestion
and inflexible supply exacerbated by intermit-
tent generation increase risks to investments
in renewables owing to a higher likelihood
of negative energy revenuesforcing the
generator to pay to produce poweror eco-
nomic and involuntary curtailment.
So many dynamic challenges to the inte-
gration of variable resources will ultimately
require a fresh approach to managing the
grid, said Fine.
Sonal Patel is a POWER associate edi-
tor (@sonalcpatel, @POWERmagazine).
2. Minute and lengthy. The technical feasibility of a future with high renewable energy
penetration requires an adequate level of analysis on all aspects of system operations at differ-
ent time scales. Source: ICF
Local Regional Systemwide
Less than a
minute
Several
minutes
to an hour
124 hours
Years
Power
quality
Voltage
management Regulation
System
stability
Load
following/
ramping
Distribution
efficiency
Congestion
management
Transmission
efficiency
Unit
commitment
Generation
adequacy
Transmission
adequacy
Imbalanced Markets
For more on the possible implications of the proposed
energy imbalance market mentioned in this article, see
the May 9 blog post by Bracewell & Giuliani LLP attorneys
titled Intervenors Urge Caution from FERC on CAISO-
PacifiCorp Energy Imbalance Market. Youll find it at http://
bit.ly/1sKuvaH or by using the Read the latest link under
POWERblog on our homepage, powermag.com.
While youre visiting the blog, youll find other FERC-
related posts, including Terrible Twins Challenge FERC on
Enforcement Policies.
|
June 2014 76
Just Hop on the Bus, Gus: 13 Ways
to Hack a Power Plant
Have you done anything today to put your power plant at risk of attack? Are you
sure? Even if you think that plant security isnt your job, it is.
By Kennedy Maize
F
orty years ago, musical genius Paul Si-
mon outlined 50 Ways to Leave Your
Lover. In New Orleans in early April
at the ELECTRIC POWER Conference,
Mike Firstenberg of Waterfall Security Solu-
tions laid out 13 ways to lose your industrial
control network. Waterfall, based in Phila-
delphia, specializes in protecting industrial
control systems (ICSs), including those in
the electricity business.
13 Attack Types
Here are Firstenbergs 13 ways that com-
puter hackers, for malicious purposes or just
for kinky kicks, can avoid the firewalls your
company thought would protect you and take
over critical ICSs. This includes the many el-
derly, very vulnerable SCADA (supervisory
control and data acquisition) systems, which
are almost always these days interconnected
with the enterprises overall information
technology (IT) network.
#1. Phishing. This is the easiest, most
common, way to bust into an allegedly pro-
tected network and involves getting respons-
es to spam, or fake emails, or what some refer
to as drive-by download. An email arrives
from someone you know, telling you to click
on the cool URL showing a picture of a kit-
ten and kids that you wont want to miss. You
click. Its a fake. Youve been spear-phished,
and the phisherman now owns your network.
#2. Social engineering. Steal that pass-
word. Do you know where your passwords
are? They may be written on a label on the
backside of a keyboard or a desk drawer or
written on a post-it note on your office bul-
letin boardcommon and dangerous prac-
tices. Your ICS may have come from the
vendor with a default password, which your
techs have never changed. The most common
default password: 1234567890.
#3. Compromise the domain control-
ler. Create a fake account and ride it through
the front door and into the guts of the con-
trol system. Log on as a customer or vendor,
create an identity and a password, and its
open sesame.
#4. Attack exposed servers. The quick
path around the firewall is to use a struc-
tured query language (SQL) injection. Ac-
cording to Wikipedia, this is when malicious
SQL statements are inserted into an entry
field for execution (for example, to dump the
database contents to the attacker).
#5. Attack the ICS clients. This ap-
proach is to compromise the servers at the
heart of the interconnected ICS.
#6. Session hijacking. This is a common
trick using WiFi access points for monitor-
ing user traffic as it accesses the mother ship.
It is also known as cookie hijacking. This
is particularly common when users are con-
nected with open-access WiFi networks. So
dont log on in the Starbucks or McDonalds
and let the hackers eat your cookies.
#7. Piggybacking on the systems vir-
tual private network (VPN). This is another
common tactic of hackers and is extraordi-
narily easy to accomplishalso a problem
with free WiFi access points. In the days after
Firstenbergs presentation, it became public
that there is a serious bug in the OpenSSL se-
curity software widely used in VPN systems.
The analysts gave it the name Heartbleed.
#8. Exploit firewall vulnerabilities. Fire-
walls arent hardware in the cyber world. They
are software, and they have bugs, well known
to hackers (and obtainable easily over the
Internet). One well-known access to exploit
firewalls is through vendor systems that have
bugs the enterprise firewall cant detect.
#9. Errors and omissions in the fire-
walls themselves. The smallest errors soon
get exposed for those probing ICS systems,
and they get posted on the Internet. Hackers
know far more about the vulnerabilities of
your systems than you do.
#10. Forged Internet Protocol address-
es. If an attacker can fake an Internet address
that fools the firewall, its easy access. This
is also known as IP spoofing and is a com-
mon, often successful, hacker tactic.
#11. Bypassing the network security.
There is available software that will trans-
late a web page into a foreign language and
thus bypass the site security measures. There
are also anonymizers, proxy sites, and tun-
neling software readily available to bypass
firewalls.
#12. Physical access to the firewall.
If you can touch it, you own it. So control-
ling physical access to the ICS system can
be crucial for protection. Who is that person
sitting at the terminal keying away to a fair-
thee-well?
#13. Sneaker net. If an attacker can get
to the firewall through a physical device
(Stuxnet, which gained control of Irans con-
trol system to corrupt operation of its nuclear
enrichment centrifuges, apparently was intro-
duced on a USB device), the attacker controls
the system. Thats game over.
Getting Real About Cyber
Protection
This is a continually evolving environment,
said Firstenberg. Ten years ago we never
expected we would be doing this. And what
we have now learned is that what you dont
know will hurt you.
Firewalls, said Firstenberg, are often the
first step any site makes when starting down
the road to cybersecurity. But its only a first
And the Winners Are...
Our most-read stories from
POWERnews in April were:
Report: GE in Talks to Buy
Alstom
Coal and Nuclear Nearly
Invisible at Platts Global
Power Markets
Industry Leaders, Experts
Testify on How to Keep the
Lights On
Get POWERnews stories
while theyre fresh: Subscribe
for free at powermag.com.
For more information email
info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
or visit PUMPTURBO.TAMU.EDU
REGISTER
for the 43
rd
Turbomachinery and 30
th
Pump Symposia
ONL I NE REGI STRATI ON
PUMPTURBO.TAMU.EDU
|
June 2014 78
step, and all of the 13 ways he mentioned will
defeat firewalls.
Its not news that the bulk electric system
is vulnerable to cyber attacks. The North
American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC),
under the direction of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, has been work-
ing for years on what has become an ever-
changing landscape of rules and regulations
to protect critical infrastructure, known
to those who speak the jargon as CIP for
critical infrastructure protection standards.
NERC is now on the fifth iteration of its CIP
standards, aimed at protecting the bulk power
system, with version 3 in force and version
5 now leapfrogging the stillborn version 4.
(For more detail, see the set of special reports
on NERC CIP 5 in this issue.)
How to make sense out of the labyrinthine
course of the NERC cybersecurity program and
its multiple versions? Mike Radigan of ABB
and Kim Legelis of Industrial Defender, a com-
pany specializing in protecting control systems
in energy industries, including electricity, oil,
and natural gas (and recently acquired by de-
fense behemoth Lockheed Martin), presented a
paper on the cybersecurity landscape for indus-
trial control systems and CIP 5.
They noted that the Department of Home-
land Securitys Industrial Control System Cy-
ber Emergency Response Team (ICS-CERT)
recently reported 200 attacks in a six-month
period, a drastic increase, with most target-
ing the energy sector. Attempts ranged from
brute force to sophisticated. While most
cybersecurity programs are focused on pro-
tecting enterprise IT systems, industrial con-
trol systems present different characteristics.
Enterprise IT, they noted, seeks to protect
information, while ICSs are keyed to physi-
cal processes. Enterprise IT is looking to pre-
vent financial loss, while ICS threats are not
only financial but also threaten public health
and safety and the environment. Enterprise
ITs focus is on central servers, while an
ICS is by its nature widely distributed. En-
terprise IT protection aims for 95% to 99%
system availability; ICS is looking for 99%
to 99.999%.
Cyber incidents are real, and cybersecu-
rity for industrial control systems must be
taken seriously, said Radigan. But it is a
challenge that can be met.
The latest CIP standards are much more
risk-based, compared to the checklist ap-
proach of previous NERC standards. The
early NERC CIP standards relied on com-
pliance rather than real security. Version 5
represents a change in thinking by NERC
to security, said Radigan. Its not compli-
ance, but it is giving those covered a means
to manage more effectively in order to pro-
tect security. In this regard, he said, and other
speakers also noted, keeping up with cyber-
security protection has gone far beyond the
conventional utility approach of maintaining
manual computer spreadsheets for tracking
critical infrastructure protection. The paper
outlined four important aspects of keeping
up with cybersecurity:
Automation: Manual efforts take too long
and are error prone.
Timeline requirements: Make sure things
get done on timeor earlier!
Data analysis: Data from across devices
and systems related and supporting vari-
ous requirements are vulnerable.
Documentation and reporting: Excel is
not your friend.
The bottom line, Radigan and Legelis said,
is, Prepare your organization for the coming
NERC CIP v. 5 requirements and for reason-
able protection against cyber threats.
Kennedy Maize is a POWER
contributing editor.
POWER maga/i re |wERrews COAL POWER
GAS POwER MANAGI NG |wER |wER |orJ|uu|
uuwe|ao. cua |wER currect
Co|ee|s i r |wER ELECTRI C POWER
To subscribe, visit
www.powermag.com/subscribe
or call 847-763-9509.
www.powermag.com
If you need information on
the global power
generation industry,
look to first.
IN PRINT, IN PERSON, AND ONLINE
Written for engineers, operators and
maintenance technicians in the power
generation, oil, chemical, paper and other
processing industries. The Valve Primer
provides a basic knowledge of valve types
and designs, materials used to make
valves, where various designs should and
should not be used, factors to consider in
specifying a valve for a specific application,
how to calculate flow through valves, and
valve maintenance and repair.
If you are involved in valve selection,
specification, procurement, inspection,
troubleshooting or repair, you will find a
wealth of information in this resource.
180 Pages, Hardcover
Now Available
The Valve Primer
Order your copy online at http://store.powermag.com/
or call 888-707-5808.
24035
Features
Oak Creek Power Plant Upgrades Cooling Water System
Presents information on a wide variety of valves and explains the operational basics of the thousands
of valves that are found in power stations, refineries, plants and mills throughout the world
Includes over fifty illustrations depicting various valve types and how they operate
Contains valuable information that cannot be found in any other single source
|
June 2014 80
Tom Haarala
612-202-0765
thaarala@cdims.com
Todd Bradley
810-229-7900
tbradley@cdims.com
www.cdims.com
Layup Desiccant
Dehumidification
& Filtration Units
for long term layup
of power generation
equipment. For over
35 years of drying
solutions contact:
3905 Power Connect Classified_Power Connect Clas
READER SERVICE NUMBER 207 READER SERVICE NUMBER 203
George H. Bodman
Pres. / Technical Advisor
Offce 1-800-286-6069
Offce (281) 359-4006
PO Box 5758 E-mail: blrclgdr@aol.com
Kingwood, TX 77325-5758 Fax (281) 359-4225
GEORGE H. BODMAN, INC.
Chemical cleaning advisory services for
boilers and balance of plant systems
BoilerCleaningDoctor.com
24 / 7 EMERGENCY SERVICE
BOILERS
20,000 - 400,000 #/Hr.
DIESEL & TURBINE GENERATORS
50 - 25,000 KW
GEARS & TURBINES
25 - 4000 HP
WE STOCK LARGE INVENTORIES OF:
Air Pre-Heaters Economizers Deaerators
Pumps Motors Fuel Oil Heating & Pump Sets
Valves Tubes Controls Compressors
Pulverizers Rental Boilers & Generators
847-541-5600 FAX: 847-541-1279
WEB SITE: www.wabashpower.com
FOR SALE/RENT
444 Carpenter Avenue, Wheeling, IL 60090
POWER
EQUIPMENT CO. wabash
READER SERVICE NUMBER 200
CONDENSER & HEAT EXCHANGER TOOLS
CLEANERS, PLUGS, BRUSHES
John R Robinson Inc.
PH # 800-726-1026
e-mail: jrrinc@earthlink.net
www.johnrrobinsoninc.com
Turbine Controls
Woodward, GE, MHC
Parts and Service
TurboGen (610) 631-3480
info@turbogen.net
NEED CABLE? FROM STOCK
Copper Power to 69KV; Bare ACSR & AAC Conductor
Underground UD-P & URD, Substation Control Shielded
and Non-shielded, Interlock Armor to 35KV, Thermocouple
BASIC WIRE & CABLE
Fax (773) 539-3500 Ph. (800) 227-4292
E-Mail: basicwire@basicwire.com
WEB SITE: www.basicwire.com
Opportunities in Operations and Maintenance,
Project Engineering and Project Management,
Business and Project Development,
First-line Supervision to Executive Level Positions.
Employer pays fee. Send resumes to:
POWER PROFESSIONALS
P.O. Box 87875
Vancouver, WA 98687-7875
email: dwood@powerindustrycareers.com
(360) 260-0979 l (360) 253-5292
www.powerindustrycareers.com
Media Blasting Services
www.molemaster.com
Toll Free: 800.322.6653 Fax: 740.374.5908
info@molemaster.com
Regardless of the surface,
MoleMaster has a media
blasting solution for you.
From Dry Ice to Walnut Shells,
Mo|eMaster does Abras|ve
B|ast|ng safe|y and efc|ent|y.
CONDENSER OR GENERATOR AIR COOLER TUBE PLUGS
THE CONKLIN SHERMAN COMPANY, INC.
Easy to install, saves time and money.
ADJUSTABLE PLUGS- all rubber with brass insert. Expand it,
install it, reverse action for tight t.
PUSH PULL PLUGS-are all rubber, simply push it in.
Sizes 0.530 O.D. to 2.035 O.D.
Tel: (203) 881-0190 Fax:(203)881-0178
E-mail: Conklin59@aol.com www.conklin-sherman.com
OVER ONE MILLION PLUGS SOLD
CAREERS IN POWER
NAES Corporation is a leading provider of
3rd party O&M services to the Independent
Power Industry. As we continue to grow, we
have constant needs for power professionals
across the nation.
For more info, log onto:
www.naes.com/careers
The City of Garland, Texas has an excellent career
opportunity for a Transmission Planning Manager.
Competitive salary, retirement and benets!
View description & apply online at www.garlandtx.gov.
Garland Power & Light
Power To Provide
A World of
Services
Operations &
Maintenance
Engineering &
Technical Services
Maintenance &
Construction
425.961.4700
email sales@naes.com
www.naes.com
June 2014
|
PRODUCT Showcase
QuestInspar.com
PipeArmor
Rehabilitates
Critical Pipe Systems
Stop Leakage, Corrosion
and Extend Design Life
Cooling water
Boiler blow down
Water supply
Robotic Lining Solution
All Geometries Any Axis
4 to >174
Keep Power and
Water Flowing

Fabri c Fi l t er
Bag Test i ng
Why Do Third Party QA/QC?

Ensure that the bags you
receive meet the detailed
specifications.
Maximize your bag life.
Minimize downtime.
Eliminate pressure drop creep.
Improve bag quality.
Documentation for litigation.
For more details log onto
www.etsi-inc.com

540-265-0004
Ad #2 June
GAS TURBINES FOR SALE
LM6000
FRAME 9E
FRAME 5
50/60Hz, nat gas or liq fuel,
installation and service available
Available for Immediate Shipment
Tel: +1 281.227.5687
Fax: +1 281.227.5698
John.clifford@woodgroup.com
s premium showcase
for the latest products and
technologies in the power
generation industry.
To subscribe to the e-letter, please Contact
Cristane Martin
cmartin@accessintel.com
24110
AMEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47. . . . . . . . 23
www.amec.com/power
Apollo Valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29. . . . . . . . 16
www.apollovalves.com
APR Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35. . . . . . . . .
www.aprenergy/fastpower
ASCO Valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23. . . . . . . . 14
www.ascovalve.com
ASME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47. . . . . . . . 23
www.asme.org
Braden Manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16. . . . . . . . 10
www.braden.com
Burns & McDonnell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . 6
www.burnsmcd.com
CB&I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27. . . . . . . . 15
www.cbi.com
CIRCOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65. . . . . . . . 26
www.circorenergy.com
Elster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. . . . . . . . 7
www.elster.com/gas
Ethos Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49. . . . . . . . 24
www.ethosenergygroup.com
ExxonMobil Asia Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39. . . . . . . . .
www.mobilindustial.com
Fluor Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . 5
www.fluor.com
HARCO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41. . . . . . . . 21
www.harcolabs.com
Kiewit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17. . . . . . . . 11
www.kiewit.com
Mitsubishi Hitachi Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 3 . . . . . 28
www.psa.mhps.com
MWH America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . 4
www.mwhglobal.com
NEM Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37. . . . . . . . 19
www.nem.nl
PCL Industrial Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31. . . . . . . . 17
www.pclindustrial.com
Port Authority of NY & NJ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43. . . . . . . . 22
www.panynj.gov
Rolls Royce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . 3
www.rolls-royce.com
Schweitzer Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71. . . . . . . . 27
www.selinc.com
Siemens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . 2
www.siemens.com/energy
Siemens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21. . . . . . . . 13
www.siemens.com/ruggedcom
Structural Integrity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14. . . . . . . . 8
www.structint.com
Swan Analytical Instruments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19. . . . . . . . 12
www.swan.ch
TEAM Industrial Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67. . . . . . . . 30
www.teaminc.com
Toshiba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 2 . . . . . 1
www.toshiba.com/tic
Young & Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . . . . . 9
www.yf.com
Zeeco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 4 . . . . . 29
www.zeeco.com
ADVERTISERS INDEX
Enter reader service numbers on the FREE Product Information Source card in this issue.
Page
Reader
Service
Number
Page
Reader
Service
Number
June 2014
|
Iechni ca| art i c| es, coa| power news, b| os, opi ni on,
and i nf ormat i on.
Easy ret ri eva| of archi ved C0AL P0wER f eat ures.
| nst ant access t o our advert i sers f or more i nf ormat i on
about t hei r product s.
Ihe abi | i t y t o comment on st ori es and share your know| ede
wi t h t he coa| burni n power p| ant communi t y.
Vi si t t he on| i ne home of C0AL P0wER-www. power ma. com
|rom the edi tors of P0wER: Ihe enews| etter devoted to
the coa| fi red power enerati on i ndustry
POWER
Subscribe today: subscribe@coalpowermag.com
|
June 2014 84
COMMENTARY
A
s hurricane season begins this year, utilities across the
Gulf Coast will have a new partner as they work to keep the
lights on after extreme weather events. Starting in late
2013, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) ex-
tended its service area from 11 states in the Midwest to cover Ar-
kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. As the regional trans-
mission organization that serves the Gulf Coast region, MISO is
now responsible for ensuring the reliability of the electric grid
for 42 million people.
As the grid operator for 15 states and the Canadian province
of Manitoba, MISO has wide-ranging experience dealing with ex-
treme weather events. Whether it is bitterly cold subzero tem-
peratures, extreme heat, floods, or tornados, MISO ensures the
reliable delivery of electricity across its service area. With the
start of hurricane season, MISO will put that experience to work
helping utilities in the Gulf Coast region get the lights back on
following hurricanes and other extreme weather.
Utilities across the South are no strangers to preparing for and
addressing the damage caused by hurricanes. (Ed.: See Lessons in
Resiliency and Risk in this issue.) Entergy, the largest utility across
the MISO South region, has won numerous awards from the Edison
Electric Institute for storm restoration. Starting in 2012, MISO be-
gan working with Entergy and other utilities in the South region to
coordinate procedures and planning in preparation for ensuring the
quickest and most efficient response in any storms aftermath.
What MISO provides is a comprehensive overview of the larg-
est regional transmission organization region in the U.S. to help
ensure reliability to as many customers as possible. MISOs tools
and data will provide an extra set of eyes to monitor the grid
before, during, and following a storm to help get the lights back
on as soon as possible.
MISOs broad regional view and state-of-the-art reliability
tools enable improved reliability for the region through trans-
mission system availability. This provides $93 million to $140
million dollars in benefits across the entire MISO region, accord-
ing to MISOs most recent value proposition.
Grid-Monitoring Tools
A major vulnerability during hurricanes is the damage to data cen-
ters that contain critical information needed for utility operations
in a region. When IT facilities are damaged, utilities have diffi-
culty monitoring system reliability. MISO has been working to ad-
dress this issue through the Keep State Estimator Solving project,
a simple name for a project that will have a large impact.
MISOs State Estimator is a tool that provides the largest and
most in-depth view of the electric grid. The system uses so-
phisticated algorithms that gather data from nearly 300,000
data points from across the MISO system to predict events and
conditions that could compromise reliability. The accuracy and
frequencyMISOs State Estimator solves every 60 to 90 sec-
ondsprovides system operators with invaluable information on
grid conditions.
As MISO expanded its service territory into the South Region,
it worked closely with utilities to better understand how weather
impacts their system performance. This allowed MISO to update
the State Estimator to provide a better look at grid reliability
during and after extreme weather events.
Additionally, MISOs Real Time Contingency Analysis tool evalu-
ates and lists the worst single contingencies that could occur,
given the current state of the electrical grid, andmore impor-
tantlyhow the system would react for each. By running 12,000
contingencies that provide constantly updated information, sys-
tem operators are in a much better position to manage those con-
tingencies and head off potential problems before they occur.
Equipped with these tools providing a wide-area view of the sys-
tem, MISO is able to coordinate with utilities in the region to provide
the best independent picture of possible scenarios and contingencies
and how the power system may be affected when damaged.
Working in Concert with Utilities
As a hurricane approaches the region, MISO amplifies its coordi-
nation with utilities in the region. In particular, MISO will coor-
dinate with utilities and regulators in the region to evaluate the
impact of evacuations on load demand and unit availability.
When a storm is moving across the region, MISO, as a 24/7/365
operation, constantly monitors the bulk electric system for dis-
ruptions. Additionally, MISO can utilize state-of-the-art tools to
mitigate overloads of the system or prepare for the next contin-
gency, loss of a facility. MISO brings more than 10 years of reli-
ability and market experience that will help prepare the electric
system for issues following extreme weather.
MISO also works closely with utilities as they conduct restora-
tion activities. The utilities will identify the extent of the dam-
age and provide that information to MISO. Priority No. 1 is the
safety of those involved in restoring power and those affected
by outages.
As linemen repair damage throughout the region, MISO will be
overseeing and approving restoration activities on high-voltage
transmission lines that connect different utilities before they are
brought back into service. This coordination ensures the connec-
tions are made in a reliable fashion to prevent further disruptions
to customers or any cascading issues on the entire system.
MISO is trained, prepared, and equipped with best-in-class
tools and experience to proactively assist utilities in the region
when this seasons first hurricane rolls through. That experience
and knowledge means quicker restoration and getting the lights
on faster for customers in affected areas. And although MISO
cannot control the forces of Mother Nature, we can be a critical
part of getting things back to normal.
Todd Hillman is vice president of MISO South (misoenergy.org).
MISO Prepares for
Hurricane Season
Todd Hillman
Keeping your plant efcient while
maintaining environmental compliance
Power Generation Products
Environmental Control Solutions
After Market Services
With over 50 years of experience and many successful projects around the world, Mitsubishi Hitachi
Power Systems America Energy and Environment is an industry leader in Power Generation and Air
Quality Control Systems. Our proven technologies include Fabric Filters, Enhanced All Dry Scrubbers,
Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization, SCR Systems, Catalyst, Low NO
x
Burners, and Coal-to-Gas Conversions.
Our Air Quality Control Systems signicantly reduce your emissions to comply with CSAPR, MATS,
and upcoming environmental regulations with minimum capital investment, low operating costs, high
reliability and no effect on unit operations like ramp rate or turndown.

Ask us about our total plant solutions. Visit us online to learn more about our world-class capabilities.
Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems
America Energy and Environment, Ltd.
645 Martinsville Road Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
1-908-605-2800
www.psa.mhps.com
power.info@psa.mhps.com
Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems Americas, Inc.
100 Colonial Center Parkway Lake Mary, FL 32746
1-407-688-6100
www.mhpowersystems.com
Make Fuel Flexibility Your New Standard
Operating Procedure.
Experience the Power of Zeeco.
boiler burners duct burners burner management
combustion control ignition systems
Explore our global locations at zeeco.com
Zeeco, Inc.
22151 E 91st St.
Broken Arrow, OK 74014 USA
+1-918-258-8551
sales@zeeco.com
Zeeco, Inc. 2014
Fact is natural gas is the new standard to meet emissions regulations.
Let Zeeco take the anxiety out of switching to or adding natural gas to
your power facilitys fuel sources.
Zeecos 35-year history of combustion and environmental successes
make us the logical choice to convert coal-red power to natural gas,
or add gas-red capability to existing burners that meet all emissions
and efciency targets. In a combined cycle facility, ZEECO
low-NOx
duct burners also assist in meeting clean-air standards.
Its time you introduced the fuel exibility that keeps power and steam
generating for years to come.
Global experience. Local expertise.
ZEECO
Free-Jet Boiler Burner

ZEECO
Low NOx Duct Burner


Power - June 2014

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Power - June 2014

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

J

1-800-972-ASCO (2726) | www.ascovalve.com/RightNow | e-mail: info-valve@asco.com

Radio & Television

Free-Jet Boiler Burner

Low NOx Duct Burner

Potrebbero piacerti anche