EPA
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of
Research and
Development
Energy,
Minerals and
Industry
EPA-600/7-77-007
March 1977
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
-------
-------
Federal
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
-------
Agencies and Project Examples of the
vtf eo sr4>
\
<3
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Research Service
Use of Waste Material to Revegetate Strip Mined Areas
Control Instability in Mine Areas
Cooperative State Research Service
Determine Levels and Quality of Groundwater in Areas Affected
by Mining
Economic Research Service
Assess Impact of Energy Development in Northern Great Plains on
Employment Income, Population and Local Government
Forest Service
Develop Guidelines for Revegetation of Coal and Oil Shale Mined Areas
Soil Conservation Service
Develop Techniques for Planting to Reduce Erosion and Reclaim
Mined Areas
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Bureau of Standards
Develop Energy-Related Air and Water Pollutant Standard
Reference Materials
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Meteorological Interpretation and Prediction of Air Quality in Energy
Development Areas
Office of Environmental Affairs .
Assess Overall Impact of Energy Development
ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
Identify Physiologically Detrimental Agents Resulting from Major Fossil
Fuel Extraction and Conversion Technologies
Develop Control Technology for Fluidized Bed Combustion and Synthetic
Fuel Processes
FEDERAL ENERGY ADMINISTRATION
Assess the Overall Impact on Air Quality of Alaskan Oil Development
-------
Energy/Environment R & D Program
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Perform Overall Integrated Technology Assessment for Western
Energy Development
Develop Environmental Controls for Coal Cleaning, Fluidized Bed Com-
bustion, Synthetic Fuels, and Waste-as-Fuel Processes
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Identify the Effects on Cells and Cell Components of Pollutants from
Energy Technologies
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
Assess the Human Health Effects of Occupational Exposure to
Energy Technologies
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Demonstrate Regenerable and Non-Regenerable Flue Gas
Desulfurization Technology
Develop Byproduct Uses and Disposal Methods for Treatment Wastes
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Assess the Socioeconomic Impact of Energy Conservation on the
Residential Sector
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Mines
Develop and Demonstrate a Coal Washing Test Facility
Fish and Wildlife Service
Prepare Comprehensive Reports on Coastal Areas Subject to Energy
Development with Emphasis on Fish, Wildlife, and Ecological Processes
Geological Survey
Monitor Surface Waterand Groundwater Quality in Western Energy
Development Regions
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Develop Instrumentation for Remote Environmental Monitoring in
Energy Development Areas
-------
introduction
Energy is everywhere. It surrounds us. We're familiar
with jet airplanes and buses and homes full of appli-
ances. We can cook a meal at an instant's notice. We can
hop into a car and be moving 50 miles an hour in a
matter of seconds. Energy is everywhere to serve us. It is
part of our environment.
Although it is everywhere, energy is not naturally in
the forms in which we use it. In our natural environ-
ment, energy comes from the sun, or from plants, or
animals, or falling water, or the food that gives us the
energy to do what we wish. It doesn't come from a
pump, or a plug, or a dial on the stove, or a thermostat
on the wall. The forms of energy to which we are most
accustomed are not natural forms, but are processed
forms. They are processed to convert or transform
naturally-occurring forms of energy into forms more
convenient for us to use. Unfortunately, in our efforts to
concentrate and make convenient our energy supply, we
do serious damage to our environment. For example, to
make electricity for our appliances, we dig up thousands
of acres of coal. In some areas that were mined for coal
half a century ago, the land has not yet recovered, and
may be scarred forever.
But the mining of coal is only the beginning of our
environmental problems.
The coal is then burned for heat to drive our
industries and to generate electricity. In burning the
coal, we release not only heat but many chemical
substances which were trapped in the coal when it was
formed millions of years ago. Perhaps the most trouble-
some of these substances is sulfur. With some domestic
coals, if you burn a ton of coal you release about 50
pounds of sulfur into the atmosphere. And a large power
plant can burn more than 6,000 tons of coal every day
which could release over 150 tons of sulfur to the
atmosphere. The sulfur is released in the form of
compounds which have been proven to have dangerous
effects on human health as well as on the natural
environment.
As a result, whenever our common domestic energy
resources are used, we pay a price in environmental
damage. And, more and more of our domestic energy
supplies, especially coal, are going to be used if we are to
succeed in becoming less dependent on foreign energy
sources.
DEVELOPING DOMESTIC ENERGY
The Nation is committed to developing domestic
resources—coal, oil and natural gas, nuclear, solar, and
geothermal—and to a program of energy conservation.
At the same time, we as a nation are equally committed
to avoiding the widespread environmental damage which
too often, in the past, has accompanied energy resource
development.
In 1973, two Federal interagency task forces repre-
senting 23 departments and agencies were established to
develop programs to meet both goals—energy develop-
ment and environmental protection. From these task
forces, the Federal Interagency Energy/Environment
Research and Development Program has evolved. This
Program established a lasting mechanism that plans,
coordinates, and funds research and development (R&D)
on clean energy use and pollution control technology
activities within the participating governmental agencies.
-------
The United States is committed to rapid energy
development at a minimal environmental cost. To
achieve this goal, an extensive research program has been
initiated. A large portion of the research relating to the
environmental aspects of energy development is central-
ized in the Interagency Energy/Environment Research
and Development Program. These efforts are both
interagency and centralized for three reasons. First, since
the research is conducted by 17 different Federal
agencies and departments, those organizations with
expertise in a particular research area are able to
concentrate their research in that area. This helps assure
an efficient use of Federal research dollars. Second,
central planning helps assure that research gaps are filled
and that research overlaps are minimized. Third, central
coordination helps assure that the results of all the
research efforts are communicated both to the general
public and to the research community.
Overall coordination and detailed planning of the
Interagency Energy/Environment Program is the respon-
sibility of the Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry
within the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Office of Research and Development. R&D activities
under this program are performed by several Federal
agencies in addition to the EPA. The overall effort is
divided into two major programs which address:
• Process and Effects, including effects on human
health, ecology, the movement of pollutants through
the environment (dissemination), their ultimate fate,
and integrated assessment (which ties together all of
the information available on a particular energy/
environment technology).
• Control Technology, including control measures as
well as modifications to conventional processes for
energy extraction, conversion or use.
-------
Program Purpose
The more energy we create and use within our
boundaries, the more burdensome our pollution load
will become. Expansion of existing energy supplies and
development of new energy sources require accelerated
efforts to anticipate, plan for, and control the resultant
adverse health and ecological effects.
Since its establishment in 1970, the Environmental
Protection Agency has been involved in energy-related
environmental research efforts, including the develop-
ment of pollution control technology. To meet its legal
responsibilities, EPA established research programs on
removing sulfur from power plant flue gas, energy
recovery from municipal waste, fluidized bed combus-
tion (a cleaner and more efficient way to burn coal and
petroleum residue), synthetic fuels, physical and chemi-
cal coal cleaning (pre-combustion), health and ecological
effects of energy-related pollutants, and pollutant
measurement and monitoring techniques.
The national policy emphasis on development of
domestic energy supplies stimulated the formation by
EPA, in late 1974, of an Office of Energy Research
(OER) within the Office of Research and Development
(ORD). Subsequently, in June of 1975, industrial and
mineral extraction pollution control research was com-
bined with energy-related environmental research in a
new Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry (OEMI).
OEMI pursues two basic purposes—to provide a focus
for EPA's own Energy/Environment/Industry R&D ef-
forts and to serve as the coordinator of the Federal
Interagency Energy/Environment R&D Program. This
goal includes environmental protection during every
phase of development and use of domestic energy
supplies, as well as the development of cost-effective
pollution control technologies for energy systems.
COORDINATED R&D
The philosophy behind the Interagency Program
recognizes that continuity is crucial in a successful R&D
effort. Often, the "surge effect" of accelerated R&D in
response to a new problem can lead to significant waste
of both time and resources. The nature of energy/
environment research requires systematically structured,
comprehensively designed programs so that long-range
effects and unexpected problems or developments can
be assessed adequately. Within the agencies involved in
the program, there lies a reservoir of expertise and
experience which could not be mobilized by any one
agency. This resource can, through the Interagency
Program, be used most effectively.
EPA's role as coordinator of the Interagency Program
reflects the need for a sound environmental R&D
program to be conducted in parallel with the evolving
energy development programs of the Energy Research
and Development Administration (ERDA). ERDA's
mission is to aggressively pursue new energy sources and
to expand existing sources using the best technological,
economic, and environmental means available. Because
of the pressure to develop new energy sources and
technologies, ERDA cannot be expected to focus as
intensely on the environmental aspects as it does on its
primary energy development responsibilities. EPA's pri-
mary mission is environmental protection, and its
objective in the energy area is to enable ERDA's efforts
to progress as rapidly as possible while assuring that
national environmental goals are maintained. Through
this division of effort there develops a healthy, creative
tension between the two agencies to ensure well-
supported planning and strategy decisions.
-------
MULTIFUEL AND/OR NON-FUEL SPECIFIC
CONSERVATION
NUCLEAR
OIL SHALE
| 2 | OIL AND GAS
COAL
UNCTIONAL
AREAS:
-LUTANT
NTIFICATION
ANSPORT
D FATE
f\LTH
-ECTS
OLOGICAL
FECTS
NTROL
CHNOLOGY
PEG RATED
CHNOLOGY
ENERGY CYCLE STAGE:
EXTRACTION
PROCESSING
CONVERSION
UTILIZATION
ASSESSMENT
INTERAGENCY PROGRAM PLANNING STRUCTURE
Congress was cognizant of these two complementary
roles when it enacted the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974, under which ERDA was established. This Act calls
on the directors of EPA and ERDA to formulate
interagency agreements to promote cooperative Federal
Energy/Environment R&D efforts. This diversity estab-
lished by Congress should help to ensure balanced,
objective, and carefully weighed judgments. Greater
protection of the public interest resulting from such a
balancing process should foster public trust and increase
confidence in national energy and environmental policy
decisions.
The above chart shows how more than 300 major
projects in the Interagency R&D Program are organized.
Within this planning structure, all ongoing or future
projects can be quickly reviewed in terms of the energy
source involved (coal, nuclear, conservation, etc.), the
energy cycle component (extraction, processing, use,
etc.), and the functional area (health effects, control
technology, etc.). Such a structure is used both to
stimulate effective communication between researchers
involved in related areas and to help assure a balanced
and complete research program.
-------
Program Purpose
COAL-OUR NEAR-TERM ANSWER
In general, efforts to expand use of domestic energy
supplies will focus on two of the Nation's primary
resources for meeting future energy needs—coal and
nuclear energy.
Through the 1970's and early 1980's, however, only
coal use can be increased to an appreciable extent. But
increased coal use can occur only if technologies to
control emissions of sulfur oxides and other pollutants
are successfully applied. To the degree that these control
technologies can be implemented rapidly, there will be
early environmental, economic, and social benefits from
R&D efforts to control such pollutants. For this reason,
funds were weighed heavily in the 1975 and 1976
budgets toward facilitating near-term coal use: develop-
ment of flue gas desulfurization systems, analysis and
control of environmental effects from coal extraction,
characterization and monitoring of resultant pollutants,
and determination of health effects of coal conversion
processes.
A complicating factor in our ability to use coal as a
near-term answer to energy needs involves distribution
of the resource. The map shown below identifies where
our coal reserves are located and where our total energy
is consumed for electric power. Most of the new, lower
sulfur coal that can be produced in the near future is in
the Rocky Mountain and Northern Great Plains prov-
inces. Ironically, most of the electric power generation is
not here, but rather in the Northeastern and Great Lakes
regions. If the new coal is to be useful in the regions
where energy is needed, then additional action will be
required beyond mining the coal. The coal itself will be
shipped to the power plants, the coal will be converted
to a liquid or gaseous fuel for delivery to the power
plants, or new power plants will be built where the coal
is and the electricity will be transmitted where it is
needed. In any of these options R&D is required through
the Interagency Program to minimize environmental
damage which may result.
LOW SULFUR COAL RESERVES VS. STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION
88% OF RESERVE
KEY:
Hawaii: Negligible reserves and
consumption
5-1.5 MILLION KwH PER SQUARE MILE
0-06 MILLION KwH PER SQUARE MILE
12% OF RESERVE
Potentially large reserves,
minimal consumption
-------
OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES
Oil Shale sources which could be developed in
the near future are located in the western states
(as was the case with the low sulfur coal). Major
problems with oil shale development include
high cost of oil recovery and large volume of
waste shale to be disposed of. Eastern shale
deposits (light gray tint) are of lower quality
and are not economically recoverable under
present conditions.
Geothermal resource reserves are generally
located west of the Rocky Mountains. Geo-
thermal energy may be very advantageous in
some specific areas, but many unique tech-
nological and environmental problems remain
to be solved before this source will make
significant contributions toward providing clean
energy.
Offshore Oil and Gas areas are estimated to
contain considerable undeveloped reserves,
mainly along the east and gulf coasts. Accidents
during exploration, drilling, and production and
leaks and spills during transportation have a
large potential adverse impact on marine and
coastal ecosystems. Such coastal areas spawn
approximately two-thirds of our commercial
fish products, and must be protected.
-------
ENERGY/ENVIRONMENT: THE COAL EXAMPLE
Air Pollution Control
Coal Extraction
Water Pollution Control
Energy Generation
10
Land Reclamation
Integrated Assessment
-------
Program History
1975 BUDGET
The Federal energy/environment budget requests for
Fiscal Year (FY) 1975 contained a substantial increase
in energy-related environmental R&D. The administra-
tion, through EPA's budget, requested $191 million in
FY 1975 for the Energy/Environment R&D Program.
Congress authorized $134 million. Of this total, EPA
transferred approximately $53 million, or nearly 40
percent, to other agencies for implementation.
Multi-Fuel (16.3%)
Conservation (3.7%)
Waste-as-
Fuel (3.3%)
Geothermal/
Solar (0.4%)
Nuclear (2.3%)-
Oil/Shale (4.7%)
Integrated Assessment (3.5%)
Characterization, Measurement
and Monitoring (8.7%)
Processes and Effects
Program ($53.0 Million)
Health Effects (12.5%)
Environmental
Transport
Processes (3.5%)
Ecological Effects (11.1%)
Energy Resource Extraction (5.5%)
Physical/Chemical
Coal Cleaning (3.4%)
Flue Gas
Cleaning (27.6%)
Direct Combustion (6.2%)
Synthetic Fuels (5.6%)
Nuclear Waste (3.9%)
Thermal Control (2.7%)
Advanced Systems (1.7%)
Improved Efficiency (4.1%)
Control Technology
Program ($81.0 Million)
12
-------
1976 BUDGET
Multi-Fuel (7.9%)
Conservation (2.8%)
Waste-as-Fuel (4.0%)
Geothermal/
Solar (0.9%)
Nuclear (2.4%)
Oil Shale (2.3%)
Fuel Type
For FY 1976, EPA's budget requested $112 million
for the Energy/Environment R&D Program. Congress
appropriated $100 million. The interagency portion of
the program is about $34 million. Part of the reduction
is associated with direct appropriation to ERDA of $6
million of their Interagency Program allocation. Another
part is associated with the full funding, in FY 1975, by
EPA of two large flue gas desulfurization demonstrations
that accounted for a large part of the FY 1975 budget.
Characterization, Measurement
and Monitoring (8.6%)
Integrated Assessment (3.2%)
Energy Resource Extraction (6.1%)
Physical/Chemical
Coal Cleaning (4.3%)
Health Effects (13.6%)
Processes and Effects
Program ($44.2 Million)
Environmental
Transport
Processes (5.0%)
Ecological Effects (11.9%)
Direct Combustion (7.1%)
Synthetic Fuels (5.4%)
Nuclear Waste (0.6%)
Thermal Control (1.8%)
Advanced Systems (0.4%)
Flue Gas
Cleaning (26.9%)
Improved Efficiency (5.1%)
Control Technology
Program ($55.8 Million)
13
-------
The Program Today
The Interagency Program as it exists today is based
upon the Presidentially-mandated report The Nation's
Energy Future (often referred to as the Ray Report),
and on the two Federal task forces formed to develop
implementing recommendations based on the Ray
Report. The two interagency task forces were formed by
the White House Office of Management and Budget
under direction of the Council on Environmental Qual-
ity. They divided their effort between an examination of
the health and environmental effects of energy use, and
pollutant control technology for energy systems. Their
reports recommended federal funding in these two areas
which would result in closing existing research gaps
while at the same time eliminating duplication of effort
by several agencies.
Results of Task Force recommendations and the
planning and coordination by EPA with the other
agencies in the Program are becoming evident. One of
the most fundamental, but necessary, results is the
acceptance of the interagency project categories which
are now used by EPA and ERDA and are being
increasingly put into use by the other agencies. These 14
categories, which come under the general headings of
either Process and Effects or Control Technology, are
shown in the table. Projects underway in each of these
categories have already shown the success of the
Energy/Environment R&D Program, and several of these
deserve mention.
INTERAGENCY CATEGORIES
Characterization, Measurement & Monitoring
Environmental Transport Processes
Health Effects
Ecological Effects
Integrated Assessment
PROCESSES and EFFECTS
Energy Resource Extraction
Physical/Chemical Coal Cleaning
Flue Gas Cleaning
Direct Combustion
Synthetic Fuels
Nuclear Waste Control
Thermal Control
Improved Efficiency
Advanced Energy Systems
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
14
-------
PROCESS AND EFFECTS
Environmental process and effects R&D includes
efforts to determine what is a pollutant, how it travels
through the environment, how much of it is present, at
what level is it dangerous to humans and to other living
things, and what is its overall impact on all segments of
the energy/environment complex.
The Interagency Program supports R&D to provide
the answers to these questions, as the following ex-
amples in each interagency category show:
Characterization, Measurement and Monitoring—The
government's commitment to developing domestic
energy resources in the near future means, to a great
extent, the development of western coal reserves. It is
not surprising, therefore, that a major part of the
Interagency Program's monitoring R&D effort is tar-
geted at the western U.S. In nine western states EPA, the
U.S. Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration have joined forces to
monitor air and water quality and land-use patterns in
the western energy development areas. This comprehen-
sive monitoring effort is providing a vast store of
knowledge of existing environmental conditions in those
areas where energy development and processing is most
likely to occur. With this knowledge, the agencies in the
Energy/Environment Program will be able to plan for
energy development with minimal impact on nearly pure
air, clean but scarce water supplies, and existing land use
patterns. With this base of data, even the more subtle
energy development environmental impacts should be
identifiable.
The photograph below was taken by a NASA aircraft
at 55,000 feet. Through special color processes, such
pictures provide dramatic contrasts between different
land uses. This photograph shows strip mining for coal in
Montana, with mined areas and roads in white, and
natural vegetation and reclaimed areas in red. Such
overhead monitoring is proving useful in the vast areas of
the west where energy development is occurring.
15
-------
The Program Today
Environmental Transport Processes—While domestic coal
may be the main answer to increased energy production
in the near future, combustion of coal produces environ-
mental problems as well as energy. Sulfates are viewed as
a major health hazard, and the source of sulfates is
strongly suspected to be atmospheric reaction of sulfur
dioxide from coal-fired power plants. However, since
billions of dollars are at stake in the control of sulfates,
strong suspicion will not suffice. The Midwest Interstate
Sulfur Transformation and Transport Study is one of the
Energy/Environment Program's efforts to determine
how sulfates form, how they travel, and what is the most
effective means for their control. With data obtained in
the St. Louis area, the study has been able to make
determinations which eventually will lead to a full
understanding of sulfates and allow implementation of
cost-effective, scientifically defensible controls.
Health Effects-Under the umbrella of the Interagency
Program, EPA, the Energy Research and Development
Administration, the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences, and the National Institute of Occupa-
tional Safety and Health are all involved in a broad
spectrum of complementary Energy/Environment Pro-
gram projects dealing with the effects of energy develop-
ment and use on human health. As may be expected, the
major emphasis is on the health effects caused by coal
extraction, combustion, and new conversion tech-
nologies. Much of the R&D involves investigations of
potential cancer-causing substances which must be con-
trolled in new coal technologies.
Ecological Effects—Eleven agencies in the Energy/
Environment Program are involved in R&D on the
effects of energy development and use on crops, plants,
wildlife, and natural habitats. These studies range from
the future of our coastal wetlands to impacts on high
mountain streams and western deserts. Several good
examples of on-going Interagency Program research
efforts relate to potential energy-related environmental
problems in ocean, coastal and estuarine ecosystems.
These projects are being conducted by EPA, ERDA, the
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Insti-
tute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). The goal of this research is to assure the
protection of the sensitive coastal regions of the
country—regions which spawn about two-thirds of our
commercial fish catch—from serious disruption caused
by offshore, coastal or inland energy-related develop-
ment.
To support this goal, one research project involves the
development of an accurate model of an ocean/estuarine
ecosystem. Such a model will allow the testing of the
effects of various energy-related pollutants on marine
organisms. Other projects aim at determining how
energy-related pollutants, such as power plant ash and
sludge, will affect the ocean food chain, and at deter-
mining what the combined impacts will be of changes in
16
-------
temperature and metal content. Tying these and several
other projects together are the total ecological assess-
ments being conducted in the Nation's most important
coastal and estuarine areas.
Integrated Assessment—In the above discussions of
projects in the Process and Effects part of the Energy/
Environment Program, it is clear that one project
category overlaps into the next and that all are really
interrelated. This inevitable interdependency is recog-
nized in a final project category, wherein the agencies
involved in the Energy/Environment Program are work-
ing to take all factors into account, put all the pieces
together, and map out the best way to proceed toward
the compatible goals of energy development and en-
vironmental protection. Three of the major projects in
this area are the assessment of western energy resource
development, energy resource development in the Ohio
River Basin, and nationwide expansion of coal-fired
electric power plants. All of these projects take into
account energy requirements and availability, land-use
patterns and resource availability (especially water in
western coal regions), socioeconomic impact, and cul-
tural and aesthetic sacrifices that may result.
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The general heading of Control Technology R&D
includes the nine specific activity categories listed
earlier. The major emphasis here, as with Process and
Effects R&D, is on domestic coal. Accordingly, the nine
Control Technology categories have been grouped into
six major project areas related to coal production and
utilization. Coal is our most abundant energy resource
but, without adequate controls, its development can also
be most detrimental to our environment.
While fine particles and hazardous trace elements
create problems in coal production and burning, the
main concern to date has been sulfur compounds. When
these compounds are burned, they produce sulfur
dioxide and sulfates, which, when breathed, are hazard-
ous to human health. If the abundant coal is to be used,
the sulfur must first be controlled. The Energy/
Environment program has proceeded with R&D on
several approaches to control sulfur from coal use.
Energy Extraction—One of the first ways of controlling
sulfur in coal is to mine the coal that's lowest in sulfur
content in its natural state. The largest amounts of that
kind of coal are in the West, and are found in situations
where strip mining is the only practical method of
extraction. So the problem is more complex—you can
mine coal with less sulfur to control the sulfur problem,
but you have to strip-mine it in scenic, semi-arid
locations, where it is difficult to re-.establish a vegetative
cover on the disturbed land. Participants in the Inter-
agency Program, principally EPA and several agencies of
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, are now tackling
this problem with R&D programs for large-scale revege-
17
-------
The Program Today
tation and reuse or proper disposal of mine refuse, so
that strip mining can be done in a manner compatible
with environmental quality. This effort will be patterned
after the very successful interagency demonstrations at
Elkins, West Virginia, of reclamation of Eastern U.S.
surface mined areas. Here EPA, the U.S. Bureau of
Mines, the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and West Virginia state agencies con-
ducted R&D which showed that proper grading, soil
modificiation, and seeding can be used on mine spoils to
promote revegetation and restore strip-mined land. Land
in western coal areas is, of course, far drier than in the
east so the reclamation techniques will differ dramat-
ically. The approach to the problem, however, will be
similar.
Physical/Chemical Coal Cleaning-Another method of
controlling sulfur and other pollutants in coal is to
remove them before the coal is burned for energy. This
involves some form of washing the coal to remove
pyritic sulfur along with stone and other non-
combustible constituents (physical cleaning), or chem-
ically converting and leaching out the pyritic and organic
sulfur (chemical cleaning). In the interagency Program,
EPA and the Department of Interior have developed and
demonstrated several physical cleaning processes. An
outgrowth of this R&D is the multi-stream process now
being demonstrated by private industry on a commercial
scale, at the Homer City, Pennsylvania mine-mouth
power plant. In chemical cleaning, the Meyers Process,
developed with EPA support, is being tested at a pilot
plant with hopes that it will be economically competi-
tive with other sulfur control schemes such as flue gas
cleaning.
Direct Combustion—A third way to control sulfur
compounds and other pollutants in coal is through a
special burning process called fluidized bed combustion.
Here coal (or heavy residues of petroleum refining) can
be burned on a bed of chemical reactants which remove
the pollutants in the process of combustion. With
Interagency Program sponsorship, a fluidized bed Mini-
plant has been constructed in Linden, New Jersey as a
test facility. Operating successfully under a full range of
conditions, this plant is demonstrating that fluidized bed
combustion is a feasible process for using coal while
controlling pollution.
Flue Gas Cleaning—A fourth method of controlling pol-
lutants in coal is to clean them from the combustion
gases after the coal is burned. Early emphasis in this area
was on controlling sulfur pollutants. Extensive projects
are presently underway to demonstrate alternative proc-
esses to remove sulfur from flue gases. Program emphasis
is now shifting to the assessment and control of other
pollutants such as fine particles and nitrogen oxides.
Such projects are part of an overall program to identify
all major pollutants from stationary sources, assess their
impacts, and develop technologies to control them
where necessary. For several years, demonstration of
flue gas cleaning processes has been a major objective of
the Interagency Program. Key actors here have been the
EPA and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). One of
the main problems in controlling sulfur pollutants
through flue gas cleaning is the disposal of the waste
sludge which contains the sulfur and other pollutants
removed from the stack gases. At TVA's Shawnee Steam
Plant, methods are being developed both to stabilize
these sludges chemically so that they can be disposed of
safely, or, alternatively, to turn them into a useable
waste product which can be sold. A closely related inter-
agency category is Thermal Control, which concerns
eliminating not only the pollutants but also the excess
heat generated by burning coal and other fuels. EPA and
TVA R&D efforts are emphasizing reuse of the heat in
industry and agriculture. Such waste heat re-use could
dramatically increase the thermal efficiency of these
energy processes.
18
-------
Synthetic Fuels—This fifth area of R&D will allow use of
our coal resources by removing sulfur compounds and
other pollutants in processes which convert the energy
components of coal to clean-burning synthetic fuels. In
addition to removing pollutants, synthetic fuel processes
promise to produce liquid and gaseous fuels which are in
such demand. A number of synthetic fuel processes are
in commercial operation in other countries, and their
full development here will mean that our coal energy can
be used with minimal environmental pollution and that
our dependence on foreign oil will be considerably
lessened. Agencies in the Energy/Environment Program
are advancing R&D through their own research and in
support of the efforts of U.S. industry. ERDA and EPA
are especially active in this area to ensure that the
production of synthetic fuels does not release other
substances hazardous to human health and the environ-
ment.
Advanced Systems and Conservation—While fossil fuels,
and especially coal, are seen as the main near-term
energy sources requiring R&D into environmental con-
trol, other areas also receive the attention of the
Interagency Program. Nuclear fuel cycles continue to
cause environmental concern, and methods for disposal
of nuclear waste are undergoing assessment by agencies
in the Energy/Environment Program. Geothermal and
solar energy will not be without environmental impacts,
and initial assessments of these effects are nearing
completion. Finally, in the area of conservation, much
can be achieved to reduce the need for energy (and
hence the need for controls) through more efficient
energy use. Some of the most successful examples here
have been EPA-supported projects in St. Louis, Missouri;
Ames, Iowa; and a planned effort in Washington, D.C.,
and other cities which burn municipal waste with coal or
oil (with appropriate environmental controls) to produce
electrical power.
SUMMARY
EPA, in it. role as coordinator of the Federal Inter-
agency Energy/Environment R&D Program, will con-
tinue to pursue the following objectives:
Work toward increased domestic energy development
within acceptable social, economic, and environmental
limits.
Promote coordination and communication among
researchers and managers in all participating agencies.
Employ a simple, common sense R&D planning
structure.
Carry out policy recommendations of the Interagency
Task Forces.
Schedule energy/environment R&D to support de-
velopment of the domestic coal reserve as quickly and
cleanly as possible.
19
-------
Future Plans
An open and wide-ranging planning approach is being
used by EPA in its role as coordinator of the Federal
Interagency Energy/Environment R&D Program. With
input from the other participants, EPA concentrates on
strategic planning, information assessment and transfer,
and preparing a balanced overall program. Detailed
program execution and management is delegated to the
field laboratories of EPA and to the other participating
Federal agencies.
With each annual cycle of fiscal year when the
strategic planning phase is completed, EPA's role be-
comes one of coordinating and monitoring the program.
At OEMI headquarters, the specific responsibilities
include administration of the Interagency R&D Pro-
grams as well as review and communcation.
To identify new priority research needs and provide a
major forum for information exchange, "sector groups"
have been established for broad energy-related program
areas. Under the leadership of the headquarters technical
staff, each group is comprised of research personnel,
agency officials, and other representatives of partici-
pating agencies involved in related research areas. The
groups meet every three or four months to ensure that
the research needs in each problem area are adequately
covered. To date, sector groups have been established for
electric utilities, advanced fossil fuels, and western
energy resource development.
At the sector group meetings, participants present
information on topical areas from their own unique
perspectives. Sector group discussions highlight areas of
major concern, explore solutions to current and poten-
tial areas of unnecessary duplication, and identify
emerging areas of R&D opportunity. Information ex-
changed during these meetings is documented and is
used in the fine tuning of ongoing research and in the
conceptualization and planning of new R&D efforts.
Early indications are that this planning/implementa-
tion structure is a success. It was applied initially to the
$134 million FY 1975 and the $100 million FY 1976
program and the planning phases of the $97 million FY
1977 program. Improvements are being made as experi-
ence is gained. While such a structure alone cannot
achieve the coordination necessary for effective imple-
mentation of the R&D program, it provides a sound
foundation for a successful program; In any event,
continuing cooperation and communication between the
participating agencies and their laboratories is required
to ensure its success.
20
-------
Among the complex issues and problems facing Americans
as we enter our third century, two things are clear: we must have
enough energy to maintain our way of life, and we must ensure
that our energy is used in environmentally sound ways to make
that way of life more worth living. The Federal Interagency
Energy/Environment R&D Program is working to ensure that
these two goals are compatible, and that they are being achieved.
------- |