EPA	
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of
Research and
Development
Energy,
Minerals and
Industry
EPA-600/7-77-072a
July 1977
          ENERGY FROM THE WEST:
          A PROGRESS REPORT OF
          A TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
          OF WESTERN ENERGY
          RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
          VOLUME I  SUMMARY

          Interagency
          Energy-Environment
          Research and Development
          Program Report

-------
                 RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

 Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
 gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
 vironmental technology.  Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
 planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
 The nine series are:

      1.   Environmental Health Effects Research
      2.   Environmental Protection Technology
      3.   Ecological Research
      4.   Environmental Monitoring
      5.   Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.   Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7.   Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8    "Special" Reports
      9.   Miscellaneous Reports

 This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series.  Reports in this series result from the
 effort funded  under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment  Research  and
 Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
 health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
 tems. The  goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
 energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
 essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
 ses of the  transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
 effects; assessments of, and development of, control  technologies for energy
 systems, and  integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
 mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
 Cinergy f rom  the
 A Progress Report of a
 Technology Assessment of
 Western Energy  Resource Development
Volume I
Summary Report
By
Science and Public Policy Program
University of Oklahoma
Irvin L. White
Michael A. Chartock
R. Leon Leonard
Steven C. Ballard
Martha W. Gilliland

Radian  Corporation

F. Scott LaGrone
C. Patrick Bartosh
David B. Cabe
B. Russ Eppright
David C. Grossman
Timothy A. Hall
Edward J. Malecki
Edward B. Rappaport
Rodney K. Freed
Gary D. Miller
Julia C. Lacy
Tommy D. Raye
Joe D. Stuart
M. Lee Wilson
                                            Contract Number 68-01-1916
                                            Prepared for:
                                            Office of Research and Development
                                            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                            Washington, D.C. 20460
                                            Project Officer
                                            Steven E. Plotkin
                                            Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry

-------
                           DISCLAIMER
     This report has been reviewed by the Office of Energy,
Minerals and Industry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and approved for publication.  Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.

-------
                           FOREWORD

     The production of electricity and fossil fuels inevitably
creates adverse impacts on Man and his environment.  The nature
of these impacts must be thoroughly understood if balanced
judgements concerning future energy development in the United
States are to be made.  The Office of Energy, Minerals and
Industry (OEMI), in its role as coordinator of the Federal
Energy/Environment Research and Development Program, is
responsible for producing the information on health and
ecological effects - and methods for mitigating the adverse
effects - that is critical to developing the Nation's environ-
mental and energy policy.  OEMI's Integrated Assessment Program
combines the results of research projects within the Energy/
Environment Program with research on the socioeconomic and
political/institutional aspects of energy development, and
conducts policy - oriented studies to identify the tradeoffs
among alternative energy technologies, development patterns, and
impact mitigation measures.

     The Integrated Assessment Program has utilized the
methodology of Technology Assessment  (TA) in fulfilling its
mission.  The Program is currently sponsoring a number of TA's
which explore the impact of future energy development on both
a nationwide and a regional scale.  For instance, the Program
is conducting national assessments of future development of the
electric utility industry and of advanced coal technologies
(such as fluidized bed combustion).  Also, the Program is
conducting assessments concerned with multiple-resource develop-
ment in three "energy resource areas":

                     o  Western coal states
                     o  Lower Ohio River Basin
                     o  Appalachia

     This report describes the results of the first phase of
the Western assessment.  This phase assessed the impacts
associated with three levels of energy development in the West.
The concluding phase of the assessment will attempt to identify
and evaluate ways of mitigating the adverse impacts and
enhancing the benefits of future development.
                               111

-------
     The report is divided into an executive summary and four
volumes:

                     I  Summary Report
                    II  Detailed Analyses and Supporting
                          Materials
                   III  Preliminary Policy Analysis
                    IV  Appendices
                                        >tephe^i J. Gage
                               Deputy Assistant Administrator
                             for Energy, Minerals, and Industry
                               IV

-------
                            PREFACE


     This  is  a  progress  report  of  a  "Technology  Assessment
of Western Energy  Resource  Development" being conducted
by  an interdisciplinary  research team  from  the Science  and
Public Policy Program (S&PP) of the University of Oklahoma and
the Radian Corporation of Austin, Texas, for the Office of Energy,
Minerals and Industry (OEMI), Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under contract No. 68-01-1916.
This technology assessment  (TA) is one of several being conducted
under the Integrated Assessment Program established by OEMI in
1975.  Recommended by an interagency task force, the purpose of
the Program is to identify economically, environmentally, and
socially acceptable energy development alternatives.  The overall
purposes of this particular TA are to identify and analyze a
broad range of consequences of energy resource development in the
western U.S. and to evaluate and compare alternative courses of
action for enhancing desirable consequences and mitigating or
eliminating undesirable ones.
     The development of six energy resources (coal,  geothermal,
natural gas, oil, oil shale, and uranium)1 in an eight-state area
(Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota,  South
Dakota, Utah,  and Wyoming) is to be assessed.   For this study,
these states comprise the area referred to as either the "West"
or "western U.S.".  The time frame for the assessment is the
period 1975 to 2000? however, selected impacts resulting from
shutting down energy developments beyond 2000 are also analyzed.
     The Project Director is Irvin L. (Jack) White,  Assistant
Director of S&PP and Professor of Political Science at the
University of Oklahoma.  Michael A. Chartock,  Assistant Professor
of Zoology and Research Fellow in S&PP,  and R. Leon Leonard,
Associate Professor of Aeronautical,  Mechanical, and Nuclear
Engineering and Research Fellow in S&PP, are Co-Directors of the
S&PP portion of the research team.  Team members from S&PP are:
Steven c. Ballard, visiting Assistant Professor of Political
Science; Martha W. Gilliland, Systems Ecologist? Edward J.
Malecki, Assistant Professor of Geography? Edward B. Rappaport;
Visiting Assistant Professor of Economics; Rodney K. Freed,
Graduate Research Assistant (Law); Timothy A.  Hall,  Graduate
Research Assistant (Political Science),  and Gary D.  Miller,
Graduate Research Assistant (Civil Engineering and Environmental

      Geothermal resource development was not considered during
the first year.

-------
Science).  Professors Ballard, Gilliland, Malecki, and Rappaport
are also Research Fellows in S&PP.  James L. Loud, a graduate
student in Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences, assisted
with the air impact analyses.
     F. Scott LaGrone, Vice-President and C. Patrick Bartosh,
Program Manager, are the directors of the Radian part of the
team.  Team members at Radian are:  Thomas W. Grimshaw, Staff
Geologist; Joe D. Stuart, Manager, Atmospheric and Computer
Sciences Division; David B. Cabe, Staff Meteorologist; B. Russ
Eppright, Senior Engineer; David C. Grossman, Staff Meteorologist;
Julia C. Lacy, Senior Biologist; Tommy D. Raye, Senior Chemical
Engineer; and M. Lee Wilson, Senior Noise Control Engineer.
     Several persons no longer with S&PP or Radian participated
in the research upon which this report is based.  Three are now
in graduate school at other institutions:  Gary N. Bloyd at
Carnegie-Mellon University, Lori L. Serbin at Ohio University,
and Patrick Kangas at the University of Florida.  Frank Calzonetti,
a graduate student at the University of Oklahoma,  is now working
with another research group.  Gerald M. Clancy, William D. Conine,
and E. Douglas Sethness,  Jr. have moved from Radian to other
corporate positions,  Clancy to become Vice-President of PROCON,
Des Plaines,  Illinois; Conine to become Environmentalist, Energy
Minerals-U.S. & Canada, with Mobil Oil Corporation, Denver,
Colorado; and Sethness to become Regional Manager of CDM Corpo-
ration, Austin,  Texas.
     This report is divided into three parts.  Part I consists of
five chapters that describe and summarize the results of the
first year effort and briefly outline plans for the remainder of
the project.  In Part II, the results of the detailed site-specific
and regional impact analyses are reported; and in Part III, the
energy policy system is described and a more extended identifi-
cation and definition of policy problems and issues is presented.
     The scale and complexity of this TA have made it impossible
to complete all of the component parts of a TA during the first
year.  The major effort has been focused on developing and testing an
analytical framework,  with special emphasis being  placed on
impact analyses.  Consequently, this is not a report of a complete TA;
it is a progress report on what has been accomplished during the
first year of a multi-year study.
                              VI

-------
                                 ABSTRACT
     This is a progress report of a three year technology assessment of
the development of six energy resources (coal, geothermal, natural gas,
oil, oil shale, and uranium) in eight western states (Arizona, Colorado,
Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah,  and Wyoming) during
the period from the present to the year 2000.  Volume I describes the
purpose and conduct of the study, summarizes the results of the analyses
conducted during the first year, and outlines plans for the remainder of
the project.  In Volume II, more detailed analytical results are presented.
Six chapters report on the analysis of the likely impacts of deploying
typical energy resource development technologies at sites representative
of the kinds of conditions likely to be encountered in the eight-state
study area.  A seventh chapter focuses on the impacts likely to occur if
western energy resources are developed at three different levels from the
present to the year 2000.  The two chapters in Volume III describe the
political and institutional context of policymaking for western energy
resource development and present a more detailed discussion of selected
problems and issues.  The Fourth Volume presents two appendices, on air
quality modeling and energy transportation costs.
                                    vii

-------
                         READER'S GUIDE
     This report is divided into four volumes.  In addition,
an executive summary provides a brief description of the major
research results of this western assessment.

     Readers interested in a general description of the assess-
ment results should read Volume I.  Chapters I and II describe
the context and methodological framework of the assessment.
Chapter 3 provides a summary description of the impact analysis,
e.g., water and air impacts, population changes, etc.  Chapter
4 summarizes some policy implications of these results,
although the assessment is still in the early stages of policy
analysis at this time.  Chapter 5 briefly describes what the
reader can expect from the second phase of the project.

     Readers interested in particular geographical areas might
be interested in one or more of the six site-specific chapters
(Chapters 6-11) of Volume II which describe in detail results
pertaining to the following areas:  Kaiparowits/Escalante,
Utah; Navajo/Farmington, New Mexico; Rifle, Colorado; Gillette,
Wyoming; Colstrip, Montana; and Beulah, North Dakota.  Readers
interested in site-specific air, water, socio-economic and
ecological impacts will find these discussed in subsections
2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, of each chapter in this volume.
Chapter 12 in volume II describes the results of the regional
analyses.  This chapter should be particularly valuable to
readers interested in transportation, health, noise and
aesthetic impacts, which are not discussed in the site-specific
chapters, and subjects  (such as water availability) which tend
to be regional rather than site-specific in nature.

     Volume III represents a first step in the identification,
evaluation and comparison of alternative policies and
implementation strategies.  Chapter 13 presents a general over-
view of the energy policy system.  Chapter 14 identifies and
defines some of the principal problems and issues that public
policymakers will probably be called on to resolve.  The
categories of problems and issues discussed are:  water
availability and quality, reclamation, air quality, growth
management, housing, community facilities and services, and
Indians.
                              Vlll

-------
Volume IV provides two technical appendices:

o  a discussion of alternative approaches to modeling
   air quality in areas with complex terrain

o  cost comparisons of unit trains, slurry pipelines and
   EHV transmission lines
                          ix

-------
                         TABLE  OF  CONTENTS

                             VOLUME I

                          SUMMARY  REPORT

                                                              Page
Foreword
Preface                                                          v
Abstract                                                       yii
Readers Guide                                                 viii
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Acronyms  and Abbreviations                          xviii
Conversion  Table                                               xxi
Acknowledgements                                              xxii
PART I:  INTRODUCTION                                            1

CHAPTER 1:  THE CONTEXT OF WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCE
            DEVELOPMENT                                          2

1.1  INTRODUCTION                                                2
1.2  NATIONAL ENERGY GOALS                                       3
1.3  WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCES                                    4
1.4  SELECTED FACTORS AFFECTING  LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT            8
1.5  PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES                                     11
1.6  SCOPE                                                      12
1.7  OVERALL ASSUMPTIONS                                        12
1.8  DATA SOURCES                                               12

CHAPTER 2:  CONDUCT OF THE STUDY                               13

2.1  INTRODUCTION                                               13
2.2  CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK                                       14
2.3  INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM  APPROACH                           17
2.4  SUMMARY                                                    21

CHAPTER 3:  THE IMPACTS OF WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCE
            DEVELOPMENT:  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS              22

3.1  INTRODUCTION                                               22
3.2  AIR QUALITY                                                30

                                 xi

-------
                                                             Page

3.2.1  introduction                                            32
3.2.2  Variations by Technologies                              32
3.2.3  Variations in Existing Conditions                       41
3.2.4  Summary of Technological and Location Factors           44
3.2.5  Data and Research Limitations                           47
3.3  WATER AVAILABILITY AND QUALITY                            48
3.3.1  Introduction                                            50
3.3.2  Variations Among Technologies                           50
3.3.3  Variations in Existing Conditions                       59
3.3.4  Summary of Technological and Site-Specific Factors      65
3.3.5  Data and Research Adequacy                              69
3.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL                           70
3.4.1  introduction                                            71
3.4.2  Variations Among Technologies                           71
3.4.3  Variations in Existing Conditions                       77
3.4.4  Summary of the Interactions Between Technological
       and Location Factors                                    83
3.4.5  Data Limitations                                        86
3.5  ECOLOGICAL                                                87
3.5.1  Introduction                                            89
3.5.2  Variations by Technologies                              89
3.5.3  Variations by Existing Conditions                       96
3.5.4  Summary of Technological and Locational Factors        104
3.5.5  Data and Research Limitations                          107
3.6  HEALTH EFFECTS                                           107
3.6.1  Introduction                                           109
3.6.2  Variations by Technologies                             109
3.6.3  Variations in Existing Conditions                      116
3.6.4  Summary of Interactions of Technological and
       Locational Factors                                     117
3.6.5  Data Limitations                                       119
3.7  TRANSPORTATION                                           121
3.7.1  Introduction                                           121
3.7.2  Variations Among Technologies                          121
3.7.3  Variations Among Existing Conditions                   125
3.7.4  Summary of the Interactions Among Technological
       and Locational Factors                                 127
3.7.5  Data Adequacy                                          127
3.8  AESTHETICS AND NOISE                                     128
3.8.1  Introduction                                           129
3.8.2  Variations by Technologies                             129
3.8.3 • Variations by Existing Conditions                      130
3.8.4  Summary of Interactions of Technological and
       Locational Factors                                     131
3.8.5  Data and Research Limitations                          133
3.9  SUMMARY                                                  133
3.9.1  Technological and Locational Factors that Cause
       Impacts                                                133
3.9.2  Export Versus On-Site Conversion                       135
                               XII

-------
                                                            Page

CHAPTER 4:  POLICY PROBLEMS AND ISSUES                       139

4.1  INTRODUCTION                                            139
4.2  WATER                                                   140
4.2.1  Water Shortages                                       140
4.2.2  Water Quality                                         141
4.3  AIR                                                     143
4.3.1  Emission Control Technologies                         143
4.3.2  Non-Significant Deterioration                         145
4.3.3  Enforcement                                           145
4.4  PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT                          146
4.4.1  Services and Facilities                               146
4.4.2  Intergovernmental Relations                           147
4.5  RECLAMATION                                             148
4.6  CONCLUS ION                                              149

CHAPTER 5:  PLANS FOR COMPLETING THE PROJECT                 151

5.1  INTRODUCTION                                            151
5.2  BACKGROUND AND SUPPORTING MATERIALS                     151
5.3  THE FINAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORT                  153
                            VOLUME II

           DETAILED ANALYSES AND SUPPORTING MATERIALS


PART II:  INTRODUCTION                                       154

CHAPTER 6:  THE IMPACTS OF ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
            AT THE KAIPAROWITS/ESCALANTE AREA                157

6.1  INTRODUCTION                                            15 7
6.2  AIR IMPACTS                                             162
€.3  WATER IMPACTS                                           179
6.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL IMPACTS                 198
6.5  ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS                                      230
6.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AT KAIPAROWITS/ESCALANTE     246

CHAPTER 7:  THE IMPACTS OF ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
            AT THE NAVAJO/FARMINGTON AREA                    248

7.1  INTRODUCTION                                            248
7.2  AIR IMPACTS                                             254
7.3  WATER IMPACTS                                           275
7.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL IMPACTS                 296
7.5  ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS                                      326
7.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AT NAVAJO/FARMINGTON         347


                              xiii

-------
                                                             Page

CHAPTER 8:  THE  IMPACTS OF  ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
            AT THE RIFLE  AREA                                 350

8.1  INTRODUCTION                                             350
8.2  AIR IMPACTS                                              354
8.3  WATER IMPACTS                                            375
8.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND  POLITICAL  IMPACTS                  396
8.5  ECOLOGICAL  IMPACTS                                       425
8.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS FROM  RIFLE SCENARIO          440

CHAPTER 9:  THE  IMPACTS OF  ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AT THE
            GILLETTE AREA                                    443

9.1  INTRODUCTION                                             443
9.2  AIR IMPACTS                                              447
9.3  WATER IMPACTS                                            471
9.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND  POLITICAL  IMPACTS                  496
9.5  ECOLOGICAL  IMPACTS                                       527
9.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AT GILLETTE                  546

CHAPTER 10:  THE IMPACTS  OF ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
             AT  THE COLSTRIP AREA                            549

10.1  INTRODUCTION                                            549
10.2  AIR IMPACTS                                             553
10.3  WATER IMPACTS                                           571
10.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL IMPACTS                595
10.5  ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS                                      628
10.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF  IMPACTS  AT COLSTRIP                  647

CHAPTER 11:  THE IMPACTS  OF ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
             AT THE BEULAH  AREA                               649

11.1  INTRODUCTION                                            649
11.2  AIR IMPACTS                                             654
11.3  WATER IMPACTS                                           671
11.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL IMPACTS                694
11.5  ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS                                      721
11.6  OVERALL SUMMARY OF  IMPACTS                              735

CHAPTER 12:  THE REGIONAL IMPACTS  OF  WESTERN  ENERGY
             RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT                            739

12.1  INTRODUCTION                                            739
12.2  AIR IMPACTS                                             746
12.3  WATER IMPACTS                                           763
12.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND POLITICAL IMPACTS                794
12.5  ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS                                      865
12.6  HEALTH EFFECTS                                          897
12.7  TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS                                  916

                               xiv

-------
                                                            Page

12.8  NOISE IMPACTS                                          935
12.9  AESTHETIC IMPACTS                                      952
12.10  SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT REGIONAL IMPACTS               956
                           VOLUME III

                   PRELIMINARY POLICY ANALYSIS


PART III:  INTRODUCTION                                      961

CHAPTER 13:  THE ENERGY POLICY SYSTEM                        963

13.1  INTRODUCTION                                           963
13.2  HISTORY OF THE ENERGY POLICY SYSTEM                    964
13.3  PARTICIPANTS IN THE ENERGY POLICY SYSTEM               966
13.4  ENERGY POLICY SUBSYSTEMS                               983
13.5  CONCLUSIONS                                            990

CHAPTER 14:  SELECTED PROBLEMS AND ISSUES                    993

14.1  INTRODUCTION                                           993
14,2  WATER                                                  993
14.3  RECLAMATION                                           1012
14.4  AIR                                                   1029
14.5  GROWTH MANAGEMENT                                     1040
14.6  HOUSING                                               1068
14.7  COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES                     1076
14.8  INDIANS                                               1091
14.9  REFINEMENT AND EXTENSION OF POLICY ANALYSIS           1106

Glossary                                                    1109

Appendix A  TECHNICAL NOTE:  AN INVESTIGATION OF COMPLEX TERRAIN
            MODELING APPROACHES USING THE STEADY-STATE
            GAUSSIAN DISPERSION MODEL                    Vol. IV
Appendix B  ROUTE SPECIFIC COST COMPARISONS:  UNIT
            TRAINS, COAL SLURRY PIPELINES AND EXTRA
            HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION                    Vol. IV
                               xv

-------
                         LIST OF FIGURES

                            VOLUME I

                                                             Page

1-1   General Distribution of Coal,  Crude Oil/Natural
        Gas, Geothermal,  Oil Shale,  and Uranium Resources
        in Eight Western  States                                 5
2-1   A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Physical
        Technologies                                           15
3-1   Energy Resource Development                              23
                         LIST OF TABLES

                            VOLUME I

                                                             Page

1-1     1973 Annual Production and Proven Reserves  of
          Selected U.S.  Energy Resources in Eight-State
          Study Area                                            6
3-1     Site-Specific Energy Developments                      25
3-2     Regional Energy Developments                           27
3-3     Required Regional Facilities                           29
3-4     Air Emissions for Conversion Facilities                 33
3-5     A Comparison of Predicted Peak Ground-Level
          Concentrations of Pollutants from Urban
          Sources and Energy Facilities,  1990                  39
3-6     Emission Controls Required for Power Plants to
          Meet all Standards at each of Seven Sites            44
3-7     Summary of Air Quality Problems                        46
3*-8     Water Consumption by Technology                        51
3-9     Water Use Reduction Using Wet/Dry Cooling               54
3-10    Water Requirements Associated with Population
          Increases                                            55
3-11    Liquid Effluents from Technologies                     56
3-12    Water Availability and Water Demand                    60
3-13    Total Dissolved Solids in Surface and Groundwater       62
3-14    Water Requirements for Each Technology by Site          64
3-15    Wet Solids Residuals for Each Technology by Site        66

                               xvi

-------
                                                           Page

3-16   Summary of Water Problems                              67
3-17   Construction and Operational Manpower  Requirements
         for Energy Facilities                                73
3-18   Manpower Requirement  for Energy Facilities             75
3-19   Summary of Social,  Economic, and Political Problems    84
3-20   Land Use by Technology                                90
3-21   Rainfall Averages in  the West                          98
3-22   Land Use for Surface  Coal Mines by  Site                98
3-23   Plant Communities and Their Productivity               100
3-24   Summary of Ecological Problems                         105
3-25   Ambient SC>2 and Particulate Concentrations Which
         Result from Power Plant Emissions with  the
         Amount of Emission  Control Required  to  Meet
         Federal New Source  Performance Standards             110
3-26   Sulfate Concentrations and Their Health Effects        112
3-27   Ambient Hydrocarbon Concentrations  Which  Result
         From Urban Expansion and Energy Facilities           114
3-28   Radioactivity in Coal                                 117
3-29   Summary of Health Effects Problems                     118
3-30   Impact Causing Factors                                134
                              xvn

-------
              LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AC
acre-ft/yr
AEC
AGA
AOG
API
AUM
BACT
bbl
bbl/day
bcf
BIA
BLM
Bte(e)
Bte(th)
Btu
CAA
CAP
cfs
CO
COG
dB
dBA
DC
DOI
EHV
EPA
ERDA
ERDS
ESP
FDA
FEA
FHA
F.I.R.E.
FPC
FWPCA
GACLA
gpd
gpm
HC
HEW
HMO
HUD
alternating current
acre feet per year
Atomic Energy Commission
American Gas Association
associations of government
American Petroleum Institute
animal unit month
best available control technology
barrel(s)
barrel(s) per day
billion cubic feet
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Land Management
British thermal unit  (electric)
British thermal unit  (thermal)
British thermal unit
Clean Air Act
Central Arizona Project
cubic feet per second
carbon monoxide
Council of Governments
decibel
decibel(s) A-weighted
direct current
Department of the Interior
extra-high voltage
Environmental Protection Agency
Energy Research and Development Administration
energy resource development systems
electrostatic precipitator
Food and Drug Administration
Federal Energy Administration
Farm Home Administration
Finance,  Insurance, and Real Estate
Federal Power Commission
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Governors' Advisory Council on Local Affairs
gallons per day
gallons per minute
hydrocarbons
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Health Maintenance Organization
Department of Housing and Urban Development
                             xvaii

-------
HVAC
IUOE
kV
Ib/acre/yr
LCRB
Ldn
L.F.
MESA
mgd
rog/Jl
mg/m3
MMcf
MMcfd
MMgpd
MMmtpy
MMscfd
MMtpy
MWe
NC
NCA
NEPA
NERA
NIIP
NO 2
NOX
NPC
NRG
NSD
NSPS
OCAW

DCS
OPEC
ORV
PCi/g
PH
PNA
ppm
PUD
Q
Q
RD&D
REPO
RDS
SEAS
SIP
SO 2
S&PP
SRI
SWIA
TA
tcf
high voltage alternating current
International Union of Operating Engineers
kilovolt(s)
pounds per acre per year
Lower Colorado River Basin
day-night equivalent sound level
load factor
Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration
million gallons per day
milligrams per liter
milligrams per cubic meter
million cubic feet
million cubic feet per day
million gallons per day
million metric tons per year
million standard cubic feet per day
million tons per year
megawatt-electric
not calculated or not considered
National Coal Association
National Environmental Policy Act
National Economic Research Associates
Navajo Indian Irrigation Project
nitrogen dioxide
oxides of nitrogen
National Petroleum Council
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
non-significant deterioration
New Source Performance Standards
Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International
  Union
outer continental shelf
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
off-road vehicle
picocuries per gram
acidity/alkalinity
polynuclear aromatics
parts per million
planned unit development
1015 British thermal units
quad(s)
research, development, and demonstration
Western Governors' Regional Energy Policy Office
Rural Development Service
Strategic Environmental Assessment System
state implementation plan
sulfur dioxide
Science and Public Policy Program
Stanford Research Institute
Southwest Wyoming Industrial Association
technology assessment
trillion cubic feet
                               xix

-------
TDS             total dissolved solids
TOSCO           The Oil Shale Corporation
tpd             tons per day
tpy             tons per year
U.B.C.          Uniform Building Code
UCRB            Upper Colorado River Basin
yg/m3           micrograms per cubic meter
UMRB            Upper Missouri River Basin
UMW             United Mine Workers
USGS            U.S. Geological Survey
ZDP             zero discharge of pollutants
                                xx

-------
    CONVERSION  TABLE   ENCLOSED   IN   TUBE   CONTAINER,

    PLEASE   REDUCE.
                                      CONVERSION  TABLE
                  LENGTH
1 feet - 3.048 x 10"  meters

English to Metric
1 mile - 1.609 kilometers - 1609 meters
1 yard • .9144 meter - 9144 centemeters
                                                                        PRESSURE
                                                     English to Metric
1 pound  per square Inch (pel) -  .6804
    atmosphere « 703.1 kilogram per
    square meter
                    AREA
1 square feet  - 9.29 x 10"  square meters

English Equivalent

1 .square mile  - 640 acres

English to Metric
1 square mile  «  2.590 square kilometers •
    259.0 hectares - 2,590,000 square meters
1 acre » .004047  square kilometer «
    .4047 hectares • 4047 square meters
                    WEIGHT
English Equivalent

1 ounce (avoirdupois) - 437.5 grains  (troy)

English to Metric
1 shore ton (2,000 pounds) * .9066 metric
    tons - 906.6 kilograms
1 pound - .4536 kilogram
1 ounce - 2.8349 grams
                     VALUES
 1 watt - 3.4129  British thermal unit per
     hour - 1.433 x 10"2 Kg-calories per
     minute
 1 British thermal unit - 2.S2 x 10-2 calories
 Centigrade degrees x 9/5 +32 - Fahrenheit
     degrees
 1 erg - 9.486 x  10"11 British thermal unit
 1 calorie - 3.968 x 10'3 British thermal
     unit
 1 Joule • 9.486 x 10~* British thermal
     units
 1 Kilowatt - 5.692 x 101 British thermal
     unit per minute
 1 KWHr - 3.413 x 10^ British thermal untti
               FLOW RATE
1 cubic foot per second - 3.28 x 10"2 feet
    per second
1 cubic foot per minute • 4.720 x 10"1
    liters per  second

English to Metric
                                                     1 cubic  foot per second > 4488 gallons per
                                                         minute - 723.8 acre per  year « .02832
                                                         cubic meters per second
                                                     1,000,000 acre feet per year - 3.9126
                                                         3.9126 cubic meters per  second
               VOLUME  AND CAPACITY
                                                     1 barrel oil - 9.7 x IQl gallons
                                                     1 million gallona per day » 1.54723 cubic
                                                         feet per second
                                                     1 milligram per liter « 1 parts per million

                                                     English Equivalent
 1  acre-foot » 43,560 cubic feet »
     325,900 gallons
 1  cubic yard - 202 gallon* (liquid)
 1  cubic foot - 7.481 gallons (liquid)

 English to Metric
 1  cubic yard * .7646 cubic me ten -
    764.6 liters
 1  cubic foot - .02832 cubic meters
    26.32 liters
                                                  xx i

-------
                       ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
     The research reported here could not have been completed
without the assistance of a dedicated administrative support
staff.  In a very real sense, these persons are an integral part
of the interdisciplinary team approach to technology assessment
described in Chapter 2.  At the University of Oklahoma, this
staff is headed by Janice K. Whinery, project specialist, and
includes:  Kathy K. Stephenson, Clerical Supervisor; Sharon S.
Pursel, Sheila M. Peterson, Karen M. Hammers, Judy L. Williams,
Emily Parker, Christina J. Stearns, and Marti F, Doan, secretaries;
Martha Jordan, Head Research Team Assistant; David Sage, Warren
Dickson, and Martha Wooton, Research Team Assistants.  At Radian
Corporation the staff is headed by Mary Overstreet and includes:
Millie Massa, Cheryl Goad, Lillian Anagnos, Mary Dunnebacke,
Faith George, Gae Lee, and Mary Ann Mayfield.  Susan Fernandes
has assisted as librarian at Radian.  At the University of Oklahoma:
Mark Elder has assisted as technical editor for the entire report;
Joan Haines assisted as technical editor for the Executive Sum-
mary; Richard Geary, Graphic Services, Mary Ellen Kanak, Depart-
ment of Zoology, Warren Dickson, S&PP, Wendy Oberlin, an under-
graduate in Fine Arts, and Nancy Ballard did the graphic arts.
Peggy Neff was Clerical Supervisor during the first year and
assisted in the production of the draft report.

     An Advisory Committee and numerous individuals, corporations,
government agencies, and public interest groups have assisted the
team.  The names of the members of the Advisory Committee and
consultants are listed separately below. Others who have assisted
are far too numerous to list here.  Needless to say, no member of
the Advisory Committee, consultant, or any other individual or
agency is responsible for the content of this progress report.
The report is the sole responsibility of the interdisciplinary
research team conducting this study.
                              xxn

-------
                       ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Mr. John Berraingham
Attorney
Denver, Colorado
 (formerly Regional Represen-
tative for the Secretary, U.S.
Department of Commerce)

Governor Jack Campbell
President
Federation of Rocky Mountain
  States
Denver, Colorado

Ms. Sharon Eads
Attorney
Native American Rights Fund
Boulder, Colorado
Dr. Thadis W. Box
Dean
College of Environmental Studies
Utah State University
Logan, Utah
Mr. Bill Conine
Environmentalist
Energy Minerals—U.S. and Canada
Mobil Oil Corporation
Denver, Colorado

Mr. Michael B. Enzi
Mayor
Gillette, Wyoming
Mr. Lionel S. Johns             Mr. Kenneth Kauffman
Program Manager                 Chairman
Office of Technology Assessment Water for Energy Management Team
U.S. congress                   U.S. Department of the Interior
Washington, D.C.                Engineering and Research Center
                                Denver, Colorado
Mr. S.P. Mathur
U.S. Water Resources Council
Washington, D.C.
Mr. Leonard Meeker
Attorney
Center for Law and Social
  Policies
Washington, D.C.
Dr. Richard Meyer
Acting Staff Director
Western Governors'  Regional
  Energy Policy Office
Denver, Colorado
Dr. Raphael Moure
Industrial Hygienist
Oil, Chemical, and Atomic
  Workers Union
Denver, Colorado
                              XX 111

-------
                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE
                           (continued)
Mr. Bruce Pasternack            Mr. Robert Richards
Booz, Allen, Hamilton           Field Project Supervisor
Bethesda, Maryland              Kaiser Industries
(formerly Assistant Admini-     Sunnyside, Utah
strator, Policy and Program
Evaluation, Federal Energy
Administration, Washington,
B.C.)

Mr. H. Anthony Ruckel           Mr. Warren Schmechel
Regional Lawyer                 President and Chief Operating
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund    Officer
Denver, Colorado                Western Energy company
                                Butte, Montana

Mr. Vernon Valantine
Colorado River Board of
  California
Los Angeles, California
                           CONSULTANTS

Professor Edward H. Allen       Mr. Frederick R.  Anderson,  Jr.
Department of Political Science Executive Director
Utah State University           Environmental Law Institute
Logan, Utah                     Washington,  D.C.

Professor John Baden            Ms. Pamela Lane Baldwin
Department of Political Science 9300 Cornwell Farm Road
Utah State University           Great Falls,  Virginia
Logan, Utah

Professor Larry W. Canter       Mr. Joseph Coates
Director, School of Civil       Office of Technology Assessment
  Engineering and Environmental Washington,  D.C.
  Science
University of Oklahoma
Norman,  Oklahoma
                              xxiv

-------
                          CONSULTANTS
                          (continued)
Professor A. Berry Crawford
Director
Resource Related Policy
  Research Program
Utah State University
Logan, Utah

Professor Bobbie Foote
School of Industrial
  Engineering
University of Oklahoma
Norman, Oklahoma
Professor Kurt Finsterbusch
Department of Sociology
University of Maryland
College Park, Maryland
Professor Gerald Garvey
Department of Politics
Princeton University
Princeton, New Jersey
Professor Lynton Hayes          Professor Arnold G.  Henderson
Department of Political Science School of Architecture
University of West Florida      University of Oklahoma
Pennsacola, Florida             Norman, Oklahoma
Dr. Thomas E. James, Jr.
Programs of Research and
  Education in Leadership and
  Public Policy
Ohio State University
Columbus,  Ohio

Professor Daniel B. Kohlhepp
College of Business
  Administration
University of Oklahoma
Norman, Oklahoma

Professor E.S. Rubin
Program in Engineering and
  Public Affairs
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Professor Bernard Udis
Bureau of Economic Research
University of Colorado
Boulder, Colorado
Professor Charles 0. Jones
Department of Political Science
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Dr. John Reuss
Director of Science and Technology
National Conference of State
  Legislatures
Denver, Colorado

Professor Richard L. Stroup
Department of Agricultural
  Economics and Economics
Montana State University
Bozeman, Montana
                              xxv

-------
     Numerous  other persons  have  also  assisted  the  team,
particularly by responding to a request for comments and sug-
gestions on the draft versions of this report.  These include:

                           UNIVERSITY
Mr. Gary N. Bloyd
Department of Engineering and
  Public Policy
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Professor Thomas E. Gesell
University of Texas Health
  Science Center at Houston
Houston, Texas
Dr. Daniel N. Miller, Jr.
Director and State Geologist
The Geological Survey of
  Wyoming
University of Wyoming
Laramie, Wyoming

Professor Stanley M. Pier
University of Texas Health
  Science Center at Houston
Houston, Texas
Professor F. Lee Brown
Department of Economics
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Professor R.A. Mill
Chairman, College of Health
Department of Human Ecology
  and Environmental Health
University of Oklahoma
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Professor James W. Patterson
Chairman, Illinois Institute
  of Technology
Armour College of Engineering
Chicago, Illinois
Professor Richard K. Severs
University of Texas Health
  Science Center at Houston
Houston, Texas
                         SUBCONTRACTORS
Federation of Rocky Mountain
  States
(Phillip Burgess, Vice
  President and Executive
  Director)
Denver, Colorado
Water Purification Associates
 (Harris Gold, Project Manager;
 and Ronald Probstein,  Senior
 Partner)
 Cambridge, Massachusetts
University of Illinois
(Michael Rieber, Research
  Professor, Center for Advanced
  Computation; and Shao Lee Soo,
  Professor of Mechanical
  Engineering)
Urbana, Illinois
                              socvl

-------
                              STATE
Mr. Jack Barnett
Executive Director
Western States Water Council
Salt Lake City, Utah
Mr. Andrew L. Bettwy
State Land Commissioner
State Land Department
State of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Mr. Dick Burgard                 Ms. Judith H.  Carlson
Environmental Program Manager    Special Assistant to the
Environmental Improvement Agency   Governor
Santa Fe, New Mexico             Helena, Montana
Mr. Lee C. Gerhard
Assistant State Geologist
North Dakota Geological Survey
Grand Forks, North Dakota
Mr. Ival Goslin
Executive Director
Upper Colorado River Commission
Salt Lake City, Utah

Mr. Tom Lynch
Chief, Energy Programs
Office of Economic Planning and
  Development
Phoenix, Arizona
Mr. J.L. Thomas
Department of Health and
  Environmental Sciences
Environmental Sciences Division
State of Montana
Billings, Montana
Mr. Gary B. Glass
Staff Geologist
The Geological Survey of
  Wyoming
Laramie, Wyoming

Mr. Jeff Jackman
Mercer County Land Use
  Administrator
Stanton, North Dakota

Mr. Wilson G. Martin
Planner
Department of Developmental
  Services
State of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah

Mr. Ron Zee
Energy Resources Board
State of New Mexico
Santa Fe, New Mexico
                            RESEARCH
Dr. Andrew Ford
Los Alamos Scientific
  Laboratory
University of California
Los Alamos, New Mexico
Mr. Martin V. Jones
President
Impact Assessment Institute, Inc
Bethesda, Maryland
Mr. L. John Hoover
Assistant Division Director
Energy and Environmental
  Systems Division
Argonue National Laboratory
Argonne, Illinois

Mr. James W. Sawyer, Jr.
Senior Research Associate
Resources for the Future
Washington, D.C.
                              xxvi i

-------
                            RESEARCH
                           (continued)
Mr. Richard A. Schmidt
Project Manager
Advanced Fossil Power Systems
Electric Power Research Institute
Palo Alto, California
                            INDUSTRY
Mr. Robert E. Anderson
Senior Analyst
Control Data Corporation
Rockville, Maryland

Mr. J.E. Cotter
Industrial Programs Manager
TRW Environmental Engineering
  Division
Redondo Beach, California

Mr. Thomas F. Hoffman
Manager, Public Relations
Consolidation Coal Company
Minot, North Dakota
Mr. Frank Odasz
Manager, Rocky Mountain Area
Energy Transportation Systems,
  Inc.
Casper, Wyoming

Mr. Roger E. Rinaldi
Western Gear Corporation
Tulsa, Oklahoma
Mr. John Clement
ANG Coal Gasification Company
Bismarck, North Dakota
Mr. R.S. Cramer
Director, Environmental Affairs
Standard Oil Company of
  California
San Francisco, California

Mr. Leo A. McReynolds
Research and Development
  Department
Phillips Petroleum Company
Bartlesville, Oklahoma

Mr. R.N. Pratt
General Manager
Kennecott Copper Corporation
Utah Copper Division
Salt Lake City, Utah

Mr. Frederick R. Scheerer
Exploration Manager
Atlantic Richfield Company
Denver, Colorado
                             FEDERAL
Mr. L.K. Bressler
Regional Director
United States Department of
  the Interior
Bureau of Reclamation
B i11ings, Mon tana
Mr. Grant Davis
Associated Program Manager for
  Research
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Billings, Montana
                              xxviii

-------
                             FEDERAL
                           (continued)
Mr. Dudley Favor
Regional Administrator
Federal Energy Administration
Lakewood, Colorado
Mr. Donald B. Gilmore
Geologist
Monitoring Systems Research
  and Development Division
U.S. Environmental Protection
  Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada

Mr. H.R. Hickey
Chief, Applied Research and
  Education Staff
Tennessee Valley Authority
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Ms. Joyce Kelly
Staff Member
Council on Environmental
  Quality
Washington, D.C.

Mr. Marvin Singer
Director, Division of Environ-
  mental and Socio-economic
  Programs
Energy Research and Development
  Administration
Washington, D.C.
Ms. Polly Garrett
Director, Socioeconomic Programs,
  Data Collection Office
Federal Energy Administration
Lakewood, Colorado

Mr. Roger P.  Hansen
Special Studies Staff
U.S. Environmental Protection
  Agency
Research Triangle Park,  North
  Carolina
Mr. Miles D. LaHue
Environmental Specialist
Air Quality
U.S. Department of the Interior
Geological Survey
Grand Junction, Colorado

Mr. Wyatt M. Rogers, Jr.
Western Interstate Nuclear
  Board
Lakewood, Colorado
Mr. Herschel H. Slater
Physical Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection
  Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning
  and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North
  Carolina
     Finally,  two  persons at  EPA have  provided invaluable
assistance, Steve Plotkin, the Project Officer,  and Terry Thoem
of EPA's Region VIII office in Denver.  Steve has been a helpful
critic and tireless in his efforts to locate fugitive data,
promote coordination with other studies,  and assist the team in
countless other ways.  Terry has provided the same kinds of
assistance at a regional level.
                              XXIX

-------
                     PART I:  SUMMARY REPORT

                          INTRODUCTION


     Part I consists of five chapters.  Chapter 1 sets the
context of western energy resource development by identifying
national energy goals, describing the role of western energy
resources in the achievement of these goals, and enumerating
the  purposes  and  objectives  of  the  3-year  study  and this
first-year report.  Chapter 2 describes the conceptual framework
being employed in the study and how it is being implemented by
the Science and Public Policy Program-Radian interdisciplinary
research team.  The remaining three chapters summarize the
results of the site-specific and regional impact analyses com-
pleted during the first year, briefly discuss some of the policy
problems and issues that have arisen or are likely to arise, and
outline plans for the remaining years of the study.  Chapters 3
and 4 constitute a summary progress report of what the team has
accomplished during the past year; they do not summarize the
results of a complete technology assessment.  More detailed
impact analysis  results  are  reported  in  Chapters  6-12,  and a
more  extensive  discussion  of  problems  and  issues  is  pre-
sented in Chapters 13 and 14.  The plans for the remainder of the
project are briefly outlined in Chapter 5 and will be elaborated
in a separate work plan report.

-------
                            CHAPTER 1

       THE CONTEXT OF WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCE  DEVELOPMENT
1.1  INTRODUCTION

     Given its substantial and diverse energy resources, the
western U.S. is a prime regional candidate for increasing domes-
tic energy production.  In fact, publicly announced coal devel-
opment projects to be completed by 1985 would more than double
the number of surface mines  (46 to 97) and underground mines
(44 to 91) in the eight-state area within which energy resource
development is being assessed in this study.1  These developments
would increase coal production in the study area from 56.6 to
362.7 million tons per year.2  During the same period, 60 new
coal-fired electric power generating and 15 coal conversion
facilities would be constructed.3  Other proposed developments
have been announced for oil shale and uranium, both of which
exist in large quantities within the eight-state area.

     In short, given a national energy policy of increasing
domestic energy production and already announced plans, it
appears that large-scale energy development within the western
U.S. is an impending reality.  The overall purpose of this study
is to determine what the consequences of large-scale development
are likely to be.  This study is intended to contribute to a bet-
ter understanding of the desirable and undesirable economic,
environmental, institutional, social, and other consequences of


      The eight states are Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New
Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.  Data on
existing mines are from U.S. Congress, House of Representatives
Committee on Science and Technology,  Subcommittee on Energy
Research, Development and Demonstration.  Energy Facts II, pre-
pared by the Science Policy Research Division, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.  Washington, D.C.:  Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1975.  Data on planned development are
from Corsentino, J.S ., Projects to Expand Fuel Sources in Western
States, Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8719.  Washington,
D.C.:  Government Printing Office,  1976.

     2Ibid.

-------
large-scale energy development in the West.  In particular,  it is
intended to inform policymakers concerning their policy options
for either controlling or influencing the scale, rate,  pattern,
and timing of development.  However, some of the factors that
will help to determine what actually happens in western energy
resource development are external to and in some cases  beyond
the control of policymakers in the region.  In this chapter,
several of these external factors are identified to set the con-
text within which western energy resource development will take
place.  In a final section, the purposes and objectives of the
study are then related to this context.

1.2  NATIONAL ENERGY GOALS

     In his 1976 energy message, President Ford identified three
major national energy policy goals:  to reverse, in the near
future, the U.S.'s increasing dependence on foreign oil; to
achieve, by 1985, a national invulnerability to the disruptive
potentials of oil embargoes; and to mobilize the nation's tech-
nology and resources to supply a significant share of the free
world's energy needs after 1985.1  These goals have been estab-
lished in response to energy problems the U.S. has experienced
during the past few years, and their overall objective  is to
lessen U.S. energy dependence on foreign sources.2

     As the federal agencies charged with primary responsibility
for developing energy policies for the U.S., the Energy Research
and Development Administration  (ERDA) and the Federal Energy
Administration (FEA) have announced plans and programs  designed
to achieve the above goals.3  In its 1976 National Plan for
Energy Research,  Development and Demonstration/ ERDA calls for a
broad-based strategy that includes both conservation and diver-
sification of energy resource development.  Several elements of
this strategy call for developing energy resources in the western
U.S.  For example, a major short-term thrust of this program is


      U.S., President.  "1976 Energy Message."  Cited in U.S.,
Energy Research and Development Administration.  A National Plan
for Energy Research, Development and Demonstration;  Creating
Energy Choices for the Future, ERDA 76-1.  Washington,  D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1976, p. vii.

     2U.S., President.   "1975  State  of the  Union Message."
Cited in U.S., Energy Research and Development Administration.
A National Plan for Energy Research, Development and Demonstra-
tion;  Creating Energy choices for the Future, ERDA 76-1.  Wash-
ington, D.C.:  Government Printing Office, 1976, p. vii.

      Other agencies with major energy responsibilities include
the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection
Agency.

-------
 to increase the direct use of coal; for the mid-term, high priority is
 assigned to obtaining liquid fuels from oil shale.1  The plan
 also recognizes that these energy developments will result in
 "rapid development of extraction sites in the Northern Great
 Plains and Rocky Mountain Region...".2

      FEA, in its 1976 National Energy Outlook, developed a com-
 prehensive energy forecast and policy assessment.  This forecast
 indicates that major increases in coal consumption are expected
 during the coming decade.3  Thus, coal production in the West
 would increase sharply;  for example,  a 600-percent increase in
 Northern Great Plains coal production is  anticipated by 1985.4
 This is almost 280 million tons more  than the amount now being
 produced there.  FEA's forecast also  calls for the continued
 production of oil and natural gas in  the  West and for major
 increases in the production of other  western energy resources
 (such as oil shale,  uranium,  and geothermal).5

 1.3  WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCES

      As stated earlier,  the western U.S.  contains a variety of
 energy resources,  including  coal, oil shale,  uranium,  oil,  gas,
 and geothermal resources. The general  distribution of these
 resources in the eight-state  study area is shown in Figure 1-1.
 Coal is by far the most  abundant energy resource in the eight-
 state area.   As shown  in Table 1-1, the area's 199 billion tons
 of  demonstrated coal reserves represent a greater energy output
 potential than  the  other five study  resources combined.
      U.S., Energy Research and Development Administration.
A National Plan for Energy Research, Development and Demonstra-
tion:—Creating Energy choices for the Future. 1976.  Washington,
D.C.:  Government Printing Office, 1976.

      Ibid., p. 53.  The emphasis on developing western resources
would be even greater if less of a contribution from nuclear
power was anticipated.

      U.S., Federal Energy Administration.  1976 National Energy
Outlook.  Washington, D.C.:  Government Printing Office, 1976,
p. *"
      Ibid., pp. 63 'and 133.

-------
                                                       Crude Oil/Natural Gas
                                                       Oil Shale
                                                       Uranium
                                                       Geothermal
                                                       Coal
FIGURE  1-1:
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF COAL, CRUDE  OIL/NATURAL GAS,
GEOTHERMAL, OIL  SHALE, AND URANIUM RESOURCES  IN
EIGHT WESTERN  STATES

-------
   TABLE  1-1:   1973 ANNUAL PRODUCTION AND PROVEN RESERVES
               OF  SELECTED U.S. ENERGY RESOURCES IN
               EIGHT-STATE STUDY AREA
Resources
Coalc
Oild
Natural Gase
Oil Shalef
Uranium?
Geo thermal0
Annual
Production3
1973
(1015 Btu's)
1.1
2
1.9
0
5.5
0
Reserves"
Reserves
(1015 Btu's)
4,000
14
22
2,340
170
9
Percent of
U.S. Total
37
7
8
100
90
10
Btu's = British thermal unit(s)

 U.S., Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on
Science and Technology, Subcommittee on Energy Research,
Development, and Demonstration.  Energy Facts, II, Com-
mittee Print.  Washington, D.C.:  Government Printing
Office, 1975.

 Reserve figures for coal, oil, natural gas, oil shale,
and uranium are from:  House Subcommittee on Energy RD&D.
Energy Facts, II.  Figures for geothermal energy are from:
White, D.F. and D.L. Williams, eds.  Assessment of Geo-
thermal Resources of the United States-1975, Geological
Survey Circular 726.  Washington, D.C.:  Government Print-
ing Office, 1975.

 Assumes an average of 10,000 Btu's/pound for western coal
and 12,400 Btu's/pound for coal nationally.

 Assumes 5.6 million Btu's/barrel:  356 million barrel
production and 2,527 million barrel reserves (42-gallon
barrels).
£
 Assumes 1,031 Btu's/cubic foot for dry natural gas.

 University of Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy Program.
Energy Alternatives;  A Comparative Analysis.  Washington,
D.C.:  Government Printing Office, 1975; and Radian Corpo-
ration.  A Western Regional Energy Development Study,
Final Report, 4 vols.  Austin, Tex.:  Radian Corporation,
1975.

"House Subcommittee on Energy RD&D.  Energy Facts, II.
Uranium production uses 1974 data.

-------
 Forty-eight percent  of  these  coal  lands  are  owned by the federal
 government,  and substantial amounts  are  owned by Indian tribes.1

      Coal production in the study  area exceeded 70 million tons
 in 1973,  more than 80 percent of which was surface-mined.2  In
 addition  to being low in sulfur content, many western coals occur
 in thick  seams near  the surface, which also  enhances the attrac-
 tiveness  of these coals to developers.   As a result, the number
 of surface coal mines in the  West  has increased during the past
 five  years,  while the number  of underground  mines has remained
 relatively unchanged.

      Demonstrated oil shale reserves in  the  study area are esti-
 mated at  418 billion barrels  (bbl).3  AS with coal, the federal
 government owns the  major share of this  resource.4  However,
 unlike coal,  no commerical oil shale production has yet taken
 place. In spite of  the large quantity of oil shale resources,
 difficulties in planning, mining,  and efficiently and econom-
 ically converting the resource to  a  usable fuel have restrained
 development.5

      Although highly dependent on  ore quality and recoverability,
 estimates  of uranium reserves  in the study area range from 200
 thousand  to  300 thousand tons  of yellowcake.6  Large  uncer-
 tanties surround the availability  of uranium resources, most of


       U.S.,  Department  of the  Interior, Bureau of Land Manage-
 ment .  Draft Environmental Impact  Statement;  Proposed Federal
 Coal  Leasing Program, 2 vols.  Washington, D.C.:  Government
 Printing Office,  1974,  p. 1-208.
      2
       U.S.,  Federal  Energy Administration.   1976 National Energy
 Outlook.   Washington, D.C.:   Government Printing Office, 1976,
 p.  172.  Estimated total  U.S.  production was 639 million tons.

       University of  Oklahoma,  Science and Public Policy Program.
 Energy Alternatives;  A Comparative Analysis.  Washington, D.C.:
 Government Printing  Office, 1975,  pp. 2-7.  This total repre-
 sents  only reserves  of  the highest quality category, this is
 virtually  all of the nation's  demonstrated oil shale reserves.
      4
       Some ownership is  in dispute and will probably have to be
 determined by the courts.

       S&PP.   Energy  Alternatives..  Chapter 2.  Oil shale has
been  developed  in other countries.

      U.S., Energy Research and Development Administration.
 Statistical Data  of  the Uranium Industry, Jan. 1. 1975.  Grand
 Junction,  Colo.:  Energy Research  and Development Administration
 1975,  p. 20.

-------
which are  located in northwestern New Mexico and in Wyoming.
Subsurface mineral rights for about two-thirds of the lands
thought to contain significant uranium resources are held by the
federal government.  In  1975, 11 thousand tons of yellowcake was
produced in the area.  This represented more than 90 percent of
total U.S. production.

     Oil production from the West in 1973 was about 356 million
bbl, a large percentage  of the remaining proved western reserves
of  2.5 billion bbl.l  Gas production in the West was about 1.9
trillion cubic feet (tcf) in 1973 or almost 10 percent of the
remaining  reserves of 21 tcf.  At current consumption rates, this
quantity of gas would meet national needs for a single year.2

     Although none of the Rocky Mountain and Great Plains states
is  using geothermal energy commercially, exploration and experi-
mental development are taking place in several locations.
Resources  have not been  accurately characterized, and estimates
vary from  as little as  1 thousand megawatts-electric  (MWe)3  of
recoverable generating capacity to as high as 150 million MWe for
the entire West.4  Most  estimates of known reserves range from
5 thousand to  6 thousand MWe of capacity, 5 an
-------
and  regulations,  competing  land  uses,  and  attitudes toward
development.  Thus, although not the focus of this study,  iden-
tification of some of these factors is important to understanding
the context within which western energy development is and will
continue to take place.

     Energy demand is affected by (among other things) price,
availability, level of economic activity,  and public perceptions.
Demand projections indicate increases, although at lower growth
rates than in the past.1  However, the demand for electricity
should continue to grow at a rate almost twice as fast as over-
all energy demand, and a gradual shift from the use of oil and
gas to coal and nuclear materials for generating electricity is
expected.2

     The price of oil has largely been a product of the current
seller's market in petroleum created by worldwide increases in
oil consumption, decreasing production in consuming nations, and
a greater ability of producing nations to act in concert.  The
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has now
gained control over the majority of oil producing operations and
effectively determines the price of oil and, thereby, the price
of many other energy resources.3

     Recent oil price increases have made coal and uranium more
economically attractive fuels and have stimulated interest in
oil shale and geothermal resources, as well as in enhanced
recovery of domestic oil.  For example, the U.S. and  several
other countries have greatly increased their coal exports in
recent years.4  However, importing uranium for domestic use has
      The demand for energy has increased at a rate of about 7
percent per year over the past decade.  During the past 2 years,
however, U.S. energy demand has actually diminished, from 74
quadrillion British thermal units (Btu1 s) per year in 1973 to 71
quadrillion Btu's by the end of 1975.  See U.S., Federal Energy Admin-
istration.  "Overview." Monthly Energy Review (March 1976) , p. 13.

     2U.S., Federal Energy Administration.  1976 National Energy
Outlook'  Washington, D.C.:   Government Printing Office, 1976,
p. xxiv.

      The price of Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC) oil varied from $1.89 to $2.00 per barrel (bbl) between 1955 and
1970.  In January 1972, the price was $2.18; in October 1973, it rose
to $5.12. In January 1974, following the October embargo, OPEC oil
was $11.65.  in January 1976, the price was about $14.00 per bbl.

      In contrast to oil, trade in  coal has been based on bilat-
eral agreements between private purchasers  and producers.

-------
been prohibited since the mid-1960's.1  Although this policy has
resulted in relatively high U.S. uranium prices, it has also pro-
vided stability for uranium mining operations in the Rocky Moun-
tains  and  the  Northern  Great  Plains. 2

     While high energy prices have stimulated new interest in
western energy resources, there is no guarantee that prices will
remain high.  As noted, energy prices are being supported through
the efforts of an international cartel, OPEC, and do not directly
reflect production costs.  Future decreases in price are quite
possible, leading  investors  to  be wary  of  investing  in new
projects (such as coal gasification), even though such projects
might appear to be profitable at current prices.  Risk factors
such as these may significantly impede the availability of capi-
tal for certain kinds of western energy resource development.

     The availability of raw materials, manpower, and equipment
will also help to determine development schedules and production
rates for western energy resource development.  For example,
many resource-rich sections of the study area have marginal
water supplies.  Thus, meeting the water needs of large-scale
energy developments could result in inadequate water supplies
for some users.

     Large and/or rapid resource developments will be constrained
by available skilled manpower pools.  Also, foreseeable equip-
ment problems range from the probable inadequacy of existing
railroads to the questionable ability of industry to manufacture
large numbers of specialized pieces of equipment (such as drag-
lines and high-pressure vessels for gasification and liquefaction
facilities) in a timely manner.

     A wide range of environmental and social factors will also
influence decisions to develop western U.S. energy resources.
For example, environmental quality has been described as both a
major reason for and a potential obstacle to development in the
region.  Low-sulfur western coal is an attractive substitute for
more polluting fuels.  Conversely, the "Big Sky" of the Northern
Great Plains and the undisturbed vistas of the Rocky Mountains
and canyonlands are widely recognized as national resources.  In
fact, there are current efforts in the Congress to produce fed-
eral legislation designed to maintain or improve the quality of
such resources by, for example, establishing non-degradation
standards for air.
      Yager, Joseph A., and Eleanor B. Steinberg.  Energy and
U.S. Foreign Policy, a report to the Energy Policy Project of
the Ford Foundation.  Cambridge, Mass.:  Ballinger, 1974, p. 21,
     2Ibid.
                               10

-------
     Although only  a few  of these  selected factors  will
substantially influence  the development  of western  energy
resource development, the above examples are sufficient to indi-
cate that the energy developments assumed in this study may not
take place.  However, the sites and rates of the western U.S.
energy resource developments that do occur will  probably be
largely determined by the range of factors, events,  and policies
either suggested in this chapter or analyzed in  this study.

1.5  PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

     As stated earlier,  the overall purpose of this  3-year tech-
nology assessment (TA) are:  to identify a broad range of the
desirable and undesirable consequences likely to result from the
development of western U.S. energy resources; and to identify,
evaluate, and compare policies that will promote desirable conse-
quences and eliminate or mitigate undesirable ones.   During the
first year, the research team's principal objective  was to
develop and begin implementation of an analytical framework for
conducting a large-scale, complex TA.  The analytical framework
that has been developed is described briefly in Chapter 2 and
detailed in the First Year Work Plan for a Technology Assessment
of Western Energy Resource Development.1To date,the develop-
ment and implementation of the framework has emphasized struc-
turing the required impact analyses and reporting and integrating
the results that these preliminary analyses have produced.  While
we believe that the research team has established the conceptual
and analytical appropriateness of the framework, the impact
analysis results reported in this progress report are incomplete
and preliminary.  Also,  only the most tentative preliminary steps
have been taken in the policy analyses.  Our original expecta-
tions for what could be accomplished during the first year were
higher, but the first-year accomplishments, as detailed in this
report, have still been substantial.

     As Chapter 2 and the first-year work plan indicate, pro-
ducing a TA report that accomplishes the policy purposes of this
study includes involving potential users of the final report in
the research process.  Further, if their participation is to be
taken seriously, these potential users must see preliminary
materials that are incomplete and unpolished.  Thus, a draft of
this report was widely circulated within the region and among
federal agencies to solicit comments and suggestions.  This final
progress report incorporates changes responsive to the comments
and suggestions produced by that solicitation.
      White, Irvin L., et al.  First Year Work Plan for a Tech-
nology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.
Washington, D.C.:  Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.

                               11

-------
 1.6  SCOPE

      As  the  title  indicates,  the  scope  of  the  study  is  limited
 spatially to eight states  in  the  western U.S.:  Arizona, Colo-
 rado,  Montana,  New Mexico, North  Dakota, South Dakota,  Utah, and
 Wyoming.   This  area is  defined  on the basis  of the location of
 large quantities of the six energy resources on which the  study
 is focused.

      The  time period covered  by the study  is 1975 to 2000.

 1.7  OVERALL ASSUMPTIONS

      The  Science and Public Policy Program-Radian interdisci-
 plinary  research team incorporated a number  of general  assump-
 tions  into the  research plan  for  this study.   For example, the
 study assumes that the  state  of society will not change in any
 fundamental  way during  1975-2000.   The  study also assumes  that
 there  will be no major  war, extended economic  depression,  wide-
 spread mass  social unrest, major  restructuring of social and
 political structures and institutions,  or  drastic shifts in
 societal  values.!   Participation  in energy policymaking is
 expected  to  continue to include a broad range  of interests.

     One  of  the most fundamental  assumptions made by the research
 team  is that policymakers must  continue to deal with uncertainty
 in  making policies  for  western  U.S.  energy resource  development.
 While  knowledge will increase,  more data and information will
 be  accumulated, and the consequence of  development will be better
 understood,  uncertainty will  not be eliminated.

 1.8 DATA SOURCES

     Data used  in  this  first-year  study are  drawn almost entirely
 from a variety  of  secondary sources such as  environmental  impact
 statements and  reports  prepared for government agencies.   As
 noted  in  the objectives, data gaps  and  inadequacies  are being
 identified.   A  separate report  on  data  and research  adequacy is
 being  prepared.
      These assumptions will be varied in the policy analyses to
be performed during the next phase of the study.

                               12

-------
                            CHAPTER 2

                      CONDUCT OF THE STUDY
2.1  INTRODUCTION

     Technology assessment (TA) is the applied research tool used
in this study to achieve the purposes and objectives stated in
Chapter 1.  As a research activity undertaken to inform policy-
makers, the development of TA has been motivated largely by the
observation that the introduction, extension, and/or modification
of a technology can produce a broad range of economic, environ-
mental, social, institutional, and other consequences.1  The
fundamental purpose of a TA is to attempt to inform policymaking
by:

     1.  Anticipating and systematically identifying, defining,
         and analyzing the range of consequences likely to
         result from the introduction, extension, and/or modi-
         fication of a technology.

     2.  Identifying, evaluating, and comparing alternative
         policies for dealing with these consequences.

     3.  Identifying, evaluating, and comparing alternative
         strategies for implementing those policy options
         found to be feasible.2

     Although both the term and research activity known as  "tech-
nology assessment" have been in existence since the mid-1960's,
neither an empirical theory nor a methodological orthodoxy has been
      For a recent description of, TA, see Arnstein, Sherry R.
and Alexander N. Christakis, eds.  Perspectives on Technology
Assessment.  Jerusalem, Israel:  Science and Technology Pub-
lishers, 1975.
     2
      Terms such as "feasibility" and "desirability" are defined
on the basis of specified criteria at appropriate places in the
substantive parts of this report.


                                13

-------
 developed. 1 The conceptual framework used by the interdisciplinary
 team conducting this study is a product of the applied policy
 research experiences of the  University of  Oklahoma's  Science and
 Public Policy Program (S&PP)  over the past six years.   This
 framework and how it has been implemented  by the  S&PP-Radian
 research team during the first year of this study are  briefly
 described in the following sections.

 2.2  CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK2

      The general conceptual  framework used in the TA  is shown  in
 Figure 2-1.  Basically,  the  diagram shows  that when a  technology
 is deployed,  impacts are produced by  the interaction  of the tech-
 nology's inputs and outputs  and the environmental conditions
 existing at the place of deployment.3  Since some of  these
 impacts may be perceived to be significant,  public and/or private
 policymakers may select development policies designed  to create
 or enhance  desirable impacts  and either eliminate or mitigate
 undesirable ones.   In choosing from among  the range of available
 policy alternatives,  policymakers are limited by  a variety of
 economic, legal,  technological,  social,  institutional,  and other
 constraints.   These same constraints  also  limit the choice of  a
 strategy for implementing the selected policy alternatives.

      The variety of descriptive  and analytical tasks implicit  in
 this  framework can  be divided into three phases:   Descriptive,
 Interactive,  and Integrative.   In the Descriptive Phase,
      This  lack of both a theory and methodology is discussed in
Kash, Don E., and Irvin L. White.   "Technology Assessment:  Har-
nessing Genius."  Chemical and Engineering News, Vol. 49  (Novem-
ber 29, 1971), pp. 36-41; and Arnstein, Sherry R., and Alexander
N. Christakis, eds.  Perspectives on Technology Assessment.
Jerusalem,  Israel:  Science and Technology Publishers, 1975.  For
a review of methods and techniques  applicable to technology
assessment, see Coates, Joseph F.   "Technology Assessment—A Tool
Kit."  CHEMTECH (June 1976), pp. 372-83.
     2
      This conceptual framework is  described in more detail in
Chapter 2 of White,  Irvin L.,  et_al.,  First Year Work Plan of a
Technology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.
Washington, D.C.:U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.

      Although perhaps not the most precisely correct term,
impact is the term now used most often to denote effects.  Dic-
tionary definitions of the term do  include the words striking
and impingement, both of which produce effects.  As used here,
impact can refer to both an interaction and effects of interaction.

                               14

-------
                             EXISTING
                            CONDITIONS
                  OUTPUTS
IMPACTS
         INDIVIDUAL
         AND GROUP
        PERCEPTIONS
i



J
1


i
\
f-UVV IOOUCO



i wiri_c.iwti
STRATf
1
                                                            PROBLEMS
                                          POLICY
                                      ALTERNATIVES 8
FIGURE 2-1:   A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING PHYSICAL TECHNOLOGIES

-------
technologies and existing conditions are delineated.^-  These
descriptions include the identification of input requirements
(such as water, capital, materials and equipment) and outputs
and residuals  (such as high-Btu gas, sulfur dioxide, and noise).2
The descriptions of existing conditions include the laws and
regulations that control the technology's deployment (such as
land use and air and water quality laws and regulations) and
climate, ecological system, and land-use patterns.

     In the Interactive Phase, both the first and higher order
impacts likely to result from the deployment of a particular
technology under specified existing conditions are identified
and analyzed.  Given the lack of a standardized TA methodology,
a variety of quantitative and qualitative methods are used to
analyze and evaluate both standard category impacts (such as air
and water quality) and synergistic impacts resulting from the
interactions of other impacts.  Finally, the significance of
impacts is determined by applying criteria such as the magnitude
of the impact, whether it is reversible, and how costs and bene-
fits are distributed.3

     In the Integrative Phase, problems, issues, and relevant
policymaking systems are identified and defined.  Although prob-
lems and issues will arise independently, impacts identified in
the Interactive Phase will be a major source of problems and
issues to which policymakers must respond.  The analysis of
problems  and  issues  introduced from  either  or  both  sources
includes identifying and evaluating alternative policies for


      The term "existing conditions" refers to physical environ-
mental conditions such as air dispersion potential and ground-
water availability, ecological conditions such as plant and
animal species, and social conditions such as social infrastruc-
ture and demography.
     2
      Baseline data on technologies are presented in energy
resource development systems  (ERDS) which also include character-
ization of the resources and social controls  (the laws and regu-
lations that control the deployment of the technologies).  The
ERDS developed in this study will comprise part  of the background
and supporting materials to be made available.  The existing con-
ditions data required by the impact analyses are presented in
Chapters 6 through 12.

     3See Chapter 4 of White, Irvin L., et al.   First Year Work
Plan for a Technology Assessment of Western Energy Resource
Development.   Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protection
Agency, 1976.  The criteria for determining the  significance of
impacts are  listed in Chapter 5 of the First Year Work Plan.  The
criteria actually used are specified when they are applied in
Chapters 6 through 12 of this report.

                                16

-------
responding to these problems and issues and developing alternative
strategies  for  implementing alternative policies.  in the inte-
grative Phase,  both policy and implementation strategies are
evaluated and compared on the basis  of their costs and benefits.

2.3   INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM APPROACH2

      The conceptual framework briefly described above was imple-
mented in this  study by  the S&PP-Radian research team.  Since,
as noted above, there is no generally approved TA theory or
methodology,  research team members were selected to provide the
variety of  disciplinary  perspectives and the range of expertise
in analytical methods and techniques needed to conduct the
descriptive,  interactive, and integrative tasks.  Two kinds of
research resources were  needed:   the in-depth, narrow expertise
required to accomplish specific tasks, and a collegial capa-
bility to produce an integrated synthetic assessment product
useful to policymakers.  In short, while the TA could not be
conducted without the research skills of narrowly trained spe-
cialists, no  single research perspective or set of analytical
tools could be  allowed to dominate the study.

      In July  1975, the research team began developing a detailed
work  plan for a preliminary TA which was expected to be com-
pleted within the first  year of the  project.  In addition to
providing greater insight into the structure and conduct of a
study of this magnitude, two major benefits resulted from this
planning effort.  First, internal reviews of the work plan pro-
vided a means for determining whether the S&PP-Radian personnel
could be molded into an  effective interdisciplinary research
team.  Transforming a group of individuals into an interdisci-
plinary team  always presents problems, but in this case accom-
plishing the  transformation was especially challenging because
members of  the  team were drawn from  two very different kinds of
organizations separated  geographically by several hundred miles.
      White, Irvin L., et al.  First Year Work Plan for a Tech-
nology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.  Wash-
ington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.  The
various measures to be used in evaluating costs and benefits are
also listed in Chapter 5 of the First Year Work Plan.
     2
      For a more detailed discussion of the interdisciplinary
team approach see:  Kash, Don E., and Irvin L. White.  "Tech-
nology Assessment:  Harnessing Genius."  Chemical and Engineering
News, Vol. 49 (November 29, 1971), pp. 36-41; and White, Irvin L.
"Interdisciplinarity," pp.  87-96 in Arnstein,  Sherry R.,  and
Alexander N. Christakis, eds.  Perspectives on Technology Assess-
ment.  Jerusalem, Israel:  Science and Technology Publishers,
1975.

                               17

-------
      The  second benefit consists of extensive contacts that the
 research  team  established with persons and organizations in both
 the  public  and private sectors.  These contacts were made to
 educate the team  to  inform and involve persons likely to be
 affected  by western  energy development and/or who might be poten-
 tial users  of  the team's research reports.  Most of the initial
 contacts  were  made in person.  However, when the team's draft
 first-year  work plan was prepared, approximately 500 copies were
 distributed throughout the region and among the energy and envi-
 ronmental agencies of the federal government.  This distribution
 served at least two  purposes:  it informed interested individuals
 that the  study was in progress, and it provided an opportunity
 for  individuals and  organizations to make comments and sugges-
 tions while the work plan was still in its formative stage.

      The  team  structured its analyses by constructing seven sce-»
 narios.   Six of these scenarios are site-specific, and the other
 covers the  entire eight-state study area.  These scenarios were
 constructed to provide for the analyses of a combination of
 existing  conditions  and technologies.  The preliminary analytical
 results produced  during the first year were then used to develop
 the  generalizations  about local, subregional, and regional
 impacts and critical technological and locational factors pre-
 sented in Chapter 3.  In subsequent years, these results will
 also be the starting point for policy analyses.

      In preparing the first year work plan, the research team
 identified  specific  analytical tasks that had to be completed to
 achieve the TA's  stated purpose and objectives.  Within the over-
 all  structure  provided by the conceptual framework, individual
 team members were assigned responsibilities for designing spe-
 cific parts  of the detailed work plan, and outside consultants
 were used to provide expertise lacking within the team itself.
 These work  plan parts were then reviewed by the entire team,
 revised,  and integrated into a preliminary draft.

      This preliminary draft of the work plan was reviewed by
 consultants  and the  research team, then redrafted before being
 distributed to the individuals and organizations mentioned pre-
 viously.  On receipt of comments and suggestions generated by
 this  distribution, another internal review was scheduled, and a
 critical  review panel of key consultants was established.  Thus,
 the  final version  of the first year work plan was the product
 of multiple  internal reviews, consultant reviews, and the com-
 ments  and suggestions received from approximately 100 respondents
 to the public  and private sector distribution.

      Shortly after the work plan was completed, an advisory com-
mittee was  established.  Members of this committee provide a
 link between the  interdisciplinary research team and many of the
key parties-at-interest likely to be affected by the development
of western energy resources.  At its first meeting, this committee

                               18

-------
reviewed the work plan, discussed a draft outline of this report,
and made suggestions for changes and additions to the project
during the second and third years.  The committee also reviewed
the draft first year progress report.  This group will continue
to act in an oversight advisory capacity throughout the study.1

     Concurrent with the production of the work plan, the research
team gathered data and drafted descriptions of the energy resource
development systems2 for the six energy resources included in
the study.  These describe the technologies deployed and existing
conditions for each of the scenarios used to structure analyses
during the first year.  Data used in these descriptive tasks were
taken almost exclusively from secondary sources.  As with the
work plan, individual team members were given specific assign-
ments, and their work was subjected to an extensive critical
review, primarily internally.

     Together, the characterization of the technologies and
existing conditions contained in these descriptions provided the
information needed to determine impacts.3  One or more team mem-
bers were assigned primary responsibility for analyzing impacts
in the categories of:   air; water; social, economic, and polit-
ical; ecological; health effects; noise; transportation; net
energy; and aesthetics.4

     Procedural and methodological details of the analyses con-
ducted are provided in the impact analysis chapters in Part II,
and a methodological appendix is included in this report.  In


      However, the advisory committee is not responsible for nor
do its members necessarily endorse or agree with the content of
the work plan or this report.
     +\
      Draft versions of six energy resource development systems (ERDS)
are now being circulated separately for review.  These ERDS include a
description of the resource base, the technologies used to develop the
resources, the inputs and outputs (including both products and resid-
uals) for each technology, and the laws and regulations that apply to
the deployment and operation of each technology.

      This should not be interpreted to mean that all information
and data requirements have been adequately met.   The team col-
lected the best available information and data for use in the
impact analyses conducted during the first year.  A separate
report is being prepared on data availability and adequacy and
research needs.
     4
      Impacts were analyzed at four levels:  local,  subregional,
regional,  and national.  However, not all impacts were analyzed
at all four levels.  See the Introduction to Part II and Chapters
6 through 12.

                                19

-------
general, analyses in each category began with the identification
of  initial changes likely to occur when the hypothesized energy
developments take place.  For example, the air impact analysis
included determining changes in ambient concentrations of air
pollutants; and the social, economic, and political impact anal-
yses  included determining gross population changes that should
be  expected.  Identifying these initial changes also served as
the beginning point for tracing the higher order impacts likely
to  occur  (for example, secondary air quality and social infra-
structure impacts).

      In many instances, an impact in one category will produce
an  impact in another.  For example, increased concentrations of
an  air pollutant may produce a health effect.  Consequently,
information on these kinds of impacts was exchanged among team
members as impacts were determined within each category.  How-
ever, the planned systematic tracing of impacts within and among
categories is incomplete at present.

      The results of the analyses conducted by individual team
members were also reviewed using the internal team critiquing
process described above.  This review mechanism is intended to
provide a check on the adequacy of the analyses, to insure the
transfer of impact information among team members, and to insure
that  synergistic impacts are not overlooked.

      As shown in Part II, these separate impact analyses were
brought together in an overall analysis of each of the seven
scenarios,  in turn, these seven summaries provided a basis for
the tentative generalizations concerning the technological and
existing conditions relationships that are formulated in Chapter
3.  Had there been time, these impact summaries and generaliza-
tions would have been the beginning point for policy analyses.
Since these research results were not available, the policy
analyses are just getting underway at this time.  Consequently,
Chapters 4, 13,  and 14 are limited to a preliminary description
of the social and institutional context for western energy
resource development and the identification and preliminary defi-
nition of a few selected problem and issue categories.  In no
sense are these chapters a report of policy analyses that have
been completed.   The preliminary identifications and definitions
are included to indicate where the team stands in acquiring back-
ground knowledge on the particular problems and issues and to
elicit suggestions and comments from reviewers.  As described in
Chapters 4 and 5,  now that the initial compilation of the results
of impact analyses is available, the major emphasis of the proj-
ect will be shifted to policy analyses.
                                20

-------
2.4  SUMMARY

     The  "Technology  Assessment  of  the Western Energy  Resource
Development" being conducted by the S&PP-Radian research team is
a multi-year effort; this report describes the progress the team
has made during the first year.  A major effort has been to
develop and implement a conceptual framework based on the obser-
vation that the interaction of development technologies with the
conditions existing at their deployment locales will produce
impacts, some of which will require advance planning and the
establishment of guidelines by public and/or private policy-
makers .

     In implementing the conceptual framework, the team defined
the descriptive, interactive, and integrative tasks implicit in
it and structured the study by constructing seven energy resource
development scenarios specifying combinations of technologies
and existing conditions.  On the basis of the analyses of the
seven scenarios, the team was able to formulate a few preliminary
generalizations about what impacts will occur and to begin to
consider what can be done to deal with them.

     Given the scale and complexity of this TA, it has not been
possible to complete even a preliminary TA during the first year.
This progress report reflects the emphasis that has been devoted
to impact analyses.  Although these analyses must be extended
and refined, the first-year effort provides a basis for shifting
our emphasis from descriptive and interactive to integrative
tasks, and from impact analyses to policy analyses during the
remaining years of the study.
                               21

-------
                            CHAPTER 3

       THE IMPACTS OF WESTERN ENERGY RESOURCE  DEVELOPMENT:
                     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


 3.1  INTRODUCTION

     This study is to assess the development of coal, geothermal,
 natural gas, oil, oil shale, and uranium resources in eight
 states.  Development alternatives for all these resources, except
 geothermal, have been considered during the first year, although
 coal resource development has been emphasized.  As shown in
 Figure 3-1, coal development alternatives include surface and
 underground mining, on-site electrical power generation, gasifi-
 cation, liquefaction, and the export of raw coal by unit train
 and slurry pipeline.  Electricity will be transported by extra-
 high voltage transmission lines, and gases and liquids by pipe-
 lines. 1

     Underground mining, surface retorting, and transport by
 pipeline make up the oil shale resource development alternative
 considered during the first year.  Oil and natural gas develop-
 ment is limited to conventional drilling and transportation by
 pipeline,  uranium development is limited to surface mining,
 milling, and rail transportation.

     As described in Chapter 2, the organizing concept used to
 structure the impact analyses is based on the observation that
 impacts occur when a technology interacts with the conditions
 that exist at the location where the technology is deployed.


      Development alternatives are described in more detail in
 the Introduction to Part II and in Chapters 6-12.  Detailed
 descriptions of the technological alternatives for developing
 each of the six resources are presented in energy resource devel-
 opment systems prepared as background and supporting materials
 for the impact and policy analyses.  These descriptions provide
 baseline data on the technologies  (demands, products, and resid-
 uals) , characterize the resources, and describe the principal
 laws and regulations that apply to the deployment and operation
 of the technologies.  See White, Irvin L., et al.  Energy
 Resource Development Systems for a Technology Assessment of
Western Energy Resource Development.  Washington, D.C.:  U.S.,
 Environmental Protection Agency, forthcoming.

                               22

-------
    EXTRACTION
CONVERSION
TRANSPORT
Surface Mine
                                 Direct Export
Underground Mine f-.-'.v..
              i£:i::  COAL
               Slurry Plant
                                      Gasification/ r
                                      Liquefaction
                                                       -Voltage Lines
Oil/Gas Wells
                    KK:
          NATURAL GAS OR OIL _____________  *
                                                           Pipeline
            FIGURE 3-1:  ENERGY RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT


                                23

-------
What  these  impacts  are  depends  on:   the  demands  the technology
creates  and the  products  and  residuals  it produces;1  the physical
and social  environmental  conditions  that exist at  the site  (such
as present  population,  lifestyle, topography, and  climate); and
the scale,  rate,  pattern,  and timing of  the  development.

      Seven  energy resource development  scenarios were used to
organize various combinations of the development alternatives
shown in Figure  3-1 and to structure the impact  analyses con-
ducted during  the first year.  Six of these  scenarios call for
the deployment of typical  energy development technologies at
representative sites in the eight-state  study area.   The seventh
scenario calls for  three  levels of energy development within the
eight-state area from the  present to the year 2000.

      Table  3-1 identifies  the six sites  selected,  lists hypo-
thetical energy  developments  at each, and indicates when each
development is to begin and facilities are to be operational.
As Table 3-1  indicates, several process  mixes, development sched-
ules,  and scales of development have been included in the sce-
narios.   The  table  reflects the emphasis given to  coal during the
first  year  of  the project.  The development  hypothesized at each
site  is  not intended to correspond to the plans  that  individual
energy companies have announced.  The number and mix  of tech-
nologies was  chosen to  provide  for the analysis  of a  variety of
technology  and location combinations.

     Table  3-2 indicates the  total quantities of energy required
from the western U.S. at three  national  levels of  energy con-
sumption in 1980, 1990, and 2000.  This  table also shows the role
of each  of  the six  resources  in producing these  total quanti-
ties.2  To  complete the picture of the regional  development


       Outputs  include both  products  and  residuals,  products are
what the technology is  intended to produce,  such as syncrude and
shale  oil.  Residuals are by-products, such  as sulfur dioxide and
particulates.
     2
       The three  levels  of  development, or cases, were established
using  the Stanford  Research institute's  (SRI) interfuel compe-
tition model.  The model and the three  cases are described in Chapter
12 and.in more detail in SRI Decision Analysis Group, Cazalet, Edward,
et  al. A Western  Regional  Energy Development Study;   Economics,
Final Report, 2 .Vols.  Menlo Park, Calif.:  Stanford Research Insti-
tute,  1976.  The  three  levels now appear to  be too high and the
resource mix called for inappropriate.   Both the levels and mix
will be modified  for  the remainder of the project.  These modifi-
cations will be described  in White,  irvin L., et al.  work Plan
for Completing a Technology Assessment of western  Energy Resource
Development.  Washington,  D.C.:  U.S., Environmental  Protection
Agency,  forthcoming.
                               24

-------
                                  TABLE  3-1:   SITE-SPECIFIC ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS'
to
Ul
Site
Kaiparowits/
E sealants


Navajo/
Farmington






Rifle






Gillette







Hypothetical Energy Development
Coal -Deep Mine-Electrical Generation-
Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal -Deep Mine-Electrical Generation
Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal-Surface Mine-Electrical Generation-
Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal-Surface Mine-Lurgi High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal-Surface Mine-Synthane High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal-Surface Mined Synthoil Liquefaction
Pipeline (100,000 bbl/day)
Oil Shale-Deep Mine-TOSCO II-Upgrade-Pipeline
(50,000 bbl/day)
Oil Shale-Deep Mine-TOSCO II-Upgrade-Pipeline
(100,000 bbl/day)
Coal-Deep Mine-Electrical Generation-
Transmission (1,000 MWe)
Oil-Wells-Pipeline (400 wells, 50,000 bbl/day)
Coal-Surface Mine-Rail Transport (25 MMtpy)
Coal-Surface Mine-Slurry Pipeline (25 MMtpy)
Coal-Surface Mine-Electrical Generation-
Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal-Surface Mine-Lurgi High-Btu Gasification-
Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal-Surface Mine-Synthane High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Start-Date

1976

1979

1982

1977

1987

1997

1982

1987

1977
1982
1977
1982

1977

1982

1992
On-Line

1983

1987

1985

1980

1990

2000

1985

1990

1980
1985
1980
1985

1985

1985

1995

-------
                                              TABLE 3-1:   (Continued)
to
Site
Gillette





Colstrip







Beulah









Hypothetical Energy Development
Coal-Surface Mine-Synthoil Liquefaction-
Pipeline (100,000 bbl/day)
Gas-83 Wells-Beneficiation-Pipeline
(250 MMcfd)
Uranium-Surface Mine-Milling-Rail (1,000
metric tons yellowcake per year)
Coal-Surface Mine-Electrical Generation-
Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal-Surface Mine-Lurgi High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal-Surface Mine-Synthane High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal-Surface Mine-Synthoil Liquefaction
Pipeline (100,000 bbl/day)
Coal (Lignite) -Surf ace Mine -Electrical
Generation-Transmission (3,000 MWe)
Coal (Lignite) -Surf ace Mine-Lurgi High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal (Lignite) -Surf ace Mine-Lurgi High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal (Lignite) -Surf ace Mine-Synthane High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Coal (Lignite) -Surface Mine-Synthane High-Btu
Gasification-Pipeline (250 MMcfd)
Start-Date

1997

1976

1982

1977

1987

1992

1997

1977

1979

1974

1992

1997
On -Line

2000

1979

1985

1985

1990

1995

2000

1980

1982

1987

1995

2000
                                                                    MMtpy  = million  tons per year
                                                                    MWe  =  megawatts-electric
bbl/day = barrels per day
MMcfd = million cubic feet per day

aSee Chapter 3, White, Irvin L., et al.  First Year Work Plan for a Technology Assess-
ment of Western Energy Resource Development.  Washington, B.C.:   U.S., Environmental
Protection Agency, 1976.  As explained in Chapter 3, these hypothetical developments
are not intended to be identical with announced plans for these same sites.

-------
                                    TABLE 3-2:    REGIONAL  ENERGY DEVELOPMENTS



Resource and
Levels of Development8
Coal
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Oil Shale
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Uranium Fuel
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Gas (Methane)
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Domestic Crude Oil
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Total Q's
Nominal
Low Demand
Low Nuclear Availability
Total U.S. Production



1980

15.12
13.36
17.72

.001
.001
.001

5.34
4.56
1.48

23.73
23.12
24.30

21.10
21.16
21.02

65.29
62.20
64.52
(Q's)


1990

25.12
20.24
35.43

.92
.86
.84

13.90
10.40
.78

26.02
24.61
26.55

25.96
25.37
26.02

91.92
81.48
89.62



2000

50.99
38.65
71.01

8.07
6.68
7.88

26.10
18.80
.34

18.34
17.69
18.78

22.79
22.62
23.36

126.29
104.44
121.37

Projected Production in the Eight-State Study Area
1980

Q's

5.03
4.28
6.18

.001
.001
.001

4.77
4.15
1.35

1.97
1.99
1.97

1.69
1.74
1.66

13.46
12.16
11.16
Percent
U.S. Total

33.3
32.0
34.9

100.0
100.0
100.0

89.3
91.0
91.2

8.3
8.6
8.1

8.0
8.2
7.9




1990

Q's

12.61
9.80
17.50

.92
.86
.84

13.64
9.46
.71

2.08
1.89
2.10

1.32
1.34
1.30

30.57
23.35
22.45
Percent
U.S. Total

50.2
48.4
49.4

100.0
100.0
100.0

91.1
91.0
91.0

8.0
7.7
.7.9

5.1
5.3
5.0




2000

Q's

29.93
22.11
39.48

8.07
6.68
7.88

23.75
17.11
.31

1.06
1.19
1.09

1.03
.90
1.03

63.84
47.99
49.79
Percent
U.S. Total

58.7
57.2
55.6

100.0
100.0
100.0

91.0
91.0
91.2

5.8
6.7
5.8

4.5
4.0
4.4




to
        Q = 10   British thermal units.  One Q =« 179 million barrels  of oil, ^60 million tons of western coal, or
            one trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

        aSee Chapter 12 for a description of the three levels of development.

-------
being assessed, Table 3-3 identifies the number and kinds of
facilities that would be required for each resource.

     Together, these seven scenarios provide an organizing ana-
lytical structure for estimating impacts likely to occur when
typical energy development technologies are deployed under rep-
resentative existing conditions.  Results of the six site-
specific  impact analyses are reported in Chapters 6-11.  These
results are the basis for the conclusions concerning local
impacts and generalizations about technologies and existing con-
ditions included in this chapter.  Likewise, the levels of
development, facilities, and time frame outlined in Tables 3-2
and  3-3 provide the structure for the analysis of regional
impacts described in Chapter 12; the results of those analyses
are  the basis for the summary discussion of regional impacts and
the  factors which cause them.

     At this stage in the study, the research team's impact
analyses  are incomplete.  For example, within the time con-
straints  of the first year, it has not been possible to give
sufficient attention to technological alternatives  (such as other
environmental controls), systematically tracing impacts, the
introduction of impacts from one impact analysis category  into
another,  possible synergistic effects, and sensitivity and para-
metric analyses.  Consequently, the results reported in Chapters
6-12 and  summarized in this chapter are tentative and prelimi-
nary.  The first-year effort has emphasized developing and
testing an analytical structure capable, over the duration of
the  study, of providing results on which to base well-informed,
meaningful policy analyses.  In implementing this analytical
framework, a few apparently new findings have emerged anu  -'ch
"common knowledge" about the impacts of energy development has
been confirmed.

     This chapter summarizes what the Science and Public Policy-
Radian research team has learned to date about impacts and draws
some tentative conclusions about the technological and loca-
tional interactions.  Specifically, the goal is to identify
those technological and locational factors that produce sig-
nificant  impacts.^  These conclusions are discussed in seven
      The criteria used to determine the significance of an
impact are:  magnitude; rate; reversibility; distribution;
standards; uniqueness; uncertainty; social and political values;and
national goals.  See Chapter 5 of White, irvin L., et al.  First
Year Work Plan for a Technology Assessment of western Energy
Resource Development.  Washington) D.C.:  U.S., Environmental
Protection Agency, 1976.
                               28

-------
                                     TABLE 3-3:   REQUIRED REGIONAL FACILITIES




Facility
Coal Minesb
Gasification
Liquefaction
Electric
Power
Generation
Oil Shale
Uranium Fuel

Gas (Methane)
Domestic
Crude Oil



Facilitv
i. en* J- x x wj'
Size
5 MMtpy
250 MMscfd
100,000 bbl/day


3,000 MWe
100,000 bbl/day
1,000 tpy of
yellowcake
250 MMscfd

100,000 bbl/day
Number of Facilities Required8

Nominal

1980
60
0
0


8
0

16
22

8

1990
149
3
0


18
5

42
23

6

2000
351
47
1.5


23
42

79
12

5

Low Demand

1980
51
0
0


6
0

14
22

8

1990
116
2
0


13
5

32
21

6

2000
260
28
2


17
35

57
13

4.5
Low Nuclear
Availability

1980
73
0
0


9
0

5
22

8

1990
207
0
0


24
4

2
23

6

2000
466
42
1


40
41

1
12

5
fO
10
        bbl = barrels

        MMscfd = million  standard cubic feet per day

        MMtpy = million tons per year .

        •a
         Total number required in the given year.
MWe = megawatts-electric
tpy = tons per year
         This includes the mines for export, gasification,  liquefaction,  and electric power  genera-
        tion.

-------
categories:   air,  water;  social, economic, and  political;  eco-
logical; health effects;  transportation; and aesthetics and
noise.   Impacts within each category are identified as being pri-
marily a consequence of the technology, conditions  existing at
the deployment location,  and the interaction of technological and
locational  factors.
3.2  AIR  QUALITY1
                          HIGHLIGHTS
       CRITICAL FACTORS

          Two  te.chnological ^actons can significantly a^e.ct ail
          quality impact*:   emissions quantities  and labon. inten-
          Thie.e.  locational ^ac.tofii> can al&o ^-igni^icantly a
          the.&e.  4.mpact& :   coal ckanact tick ,  d*.&pe.fi&-ion
          te.th.no logy .
                        &OULI c.i tkan by any  oth&i
         technology.

       AMBIENT AIR STANDARDS
          Peafe  gJiound-le.ve.1
          and hydx.oc.atibon& produced by  e.ne.tigy  sie.late.d
          de.ve.lopme.nt ann atually hlghe.*. than  tho&e. ptLodac.e.d by
          the. energy 6ac.4.li.t4.e.& thim* nlv e,t> .
      The conversion technologies considered  are coal-fired
electric power plants (with 80-percent removal of sulfur dioxide and
99-percent removal of particulates), Lurgi and Synthane gasifica-
tion, Synthoil liquefaction, and TOSCO II oil shale retorting.
These findings are on the basis of both equivalent energy and
the size facilities deployed in our scenarios.


                                30

-------
  Fugitive  hi/dioc.aibon concentrations resulting  ^tom oi£
  &ha£e. retorting,  £iquef(actiorc, and na.tu.iat gas  produc-
  tion are  expected to exceed the. 6e.de.ial  3-nour  standard.


  SO? concentrations resu£iing rfrom oi£ sha£e  retorting
  die, expected  to  exceed the. he.de.iat 3-nour and  Cotoiado
  24-hour standards.


  It A.& expected that 96.6- to 99 ,7-pe.ice.nt tiz.mova.JL  o
  pafittdi  can re^u^t ^n v-to£at^on o<5  Ambient Air and
                   Deterioration increments.
  99.3- to  99.£-percent removal o
-------
 3.2.1  introduction

      Air quality impacts can vary significantly depending  on the
 choice of technology and location.   Both types  of factors  and
 impacts that result when they are combined are  discussed  in this
 section.

 3.2.2  Variations  by Technologies

      The two technological  factors  that  affect  air quality
 impacts most significantly  are the  quantities of criteria  pollu-
 tants  emitted^  and labor intensiveness.   in the case  of elec-
 tric power generation,  the  extent to which emission control tech-
 nologies are employed greatly affects  emission  quantities.

 A.   Emissions and  control Technologies

      Some emission differences among technologies are  basically
 independent of location and are almost entirely a function of
 the  configuration  of the technology.   Not  only  are there choices
 among types of conversion facilities but,  in the case  of elec-
 tric power plants,  in air pollution environmental controls  as
 well.3

 1.   Emissions

      Table 3-4 presents  criteria  pollutant  emissions data  for
 five conversion  facilities  of a size likely to  be sited in  the
 West and on an equivalent energy  basis for  each conversion  alter-
 native.   Data for  the electric power plant  in Table 3-4 assumes
 that 99  percent  of  the particulates  and 80  percent of  the  sulfur
 dioxide  (S02)  are  removed by  emissions control  technologies.  In
 general,  this degree  of  control is  required to  meet ambient air
 standards  in  the eight-state  study  area.  At several of our
 sites,  a  lower level  of  control than this would meet New Source
 Performance Standards but a higher  level would  be required  to
      "Criteria  pollutants"  refer  to the  six pollutants  for
which ambient air quality  standards  are  set:   sulfur dioxide,
particulates, nitrogen  dioxide ,  carbon  monoxide, non-methane
hydrocarbons  (HC), and photochemical  oxidants  .  Although tech-
nically only non-methane HC is covered,  the more inclusive term
HC is generally used.  The HC limit serves as a guideline for
oxidants.
     2
      Very little ozone and nitrogen dioxide are emitted; rather
they are formed by chemical reactions in the atmosphere.

      Emissions control is an integral part of the plant design
for synthetic fuel technologies.


                               32

-------
                             TABLE  3-4:   AIR EMISSIONS FOR  CONVERSION FACILITIES*
LO
U)
Conversion Facility
Typical Size (pounds per hour)
Power Plant b (3000 MWe)
Lurgi Gasification
(250 HMcfd)
Synthane Gasification
(250 MMcfd)
Synthoil Liquefaction
(100,000 bbl/day)
TOSCO II Oil Shalec
(100,000 bbl/day)
Equivalent Energy
(pounds per 10" Btu in
produc t) .
Power Plant
Btu (e)
Btu (th)
Lurgi Gasification
Synthane Gasification
Synthoil Liquefaction
TOSCO II Oil Shalec
Particulates

1110-3010

430-510

205-685

315-755

260




0.12-0.29
0.04-0.10
0.04-0.05
0.02-0.07
0.01-0.03
0.01
S02

4350-14000d

400-680

240-970

940-1180

3070




0.41-1.38*!
0.14-0.47d
0.04-0.07
0.02-0.09
0.04-0.05
0.13
NOX

14320-21080

2325-2810

930-2110

1350-5770

1140




1.4-2.06
0.5-0.7
0.22-0.29
0.09-0.20
0.06-0.24
0.05
CO

1330-2170

310-370

160-200

220-1350

100




0.09-0.21
0.03-0.07
0.005-0.03
0.002-0.02
0.008-0.01
0.004
HC

400-650

45-60

20-60

1660-4610

1430




0.03-0.06
0.01-0.02
0.005-0.03
0.006-0.01
0.06-0.19
0.06
              bbl - barrels                         CO • carbon monoxide               MWe • megawatts-electric
              Btu « British thermal units           HC - hydrocarbons                  NO*- oxides of nitrogen
                (th - thermal and e - electric)     MMcfd - million cubic feet/day     S02 " sulfur dioxide

               These numbers represent the range of emissions found in the site  specific  scenarios; the facilities
              are assumed to be operating at a full load.

               99-percent particulate removal and 80-percent SO. removal.

               No range is available for TOSCO II because the process  was hypothesized at only one site.
                   scrubbers not been hypothesized for the power plants,  these numbers would be about five times
              larger.

-------
meet  Non-Significant Deterioration  increments  for Class  II
areas.1

      On  the basis  of both  the  size  facility  deployed  in  our  sce-
narios and equivalent  energy,   electric power  plants  with scrub-
bers  emit  more  of  four criteria pollutants  (SC>2/ particulates,
NC>21  and carbon monoxide)  than any  other  type  of conversion
facility (Table 3-4).   Coal gasification  plants emit  less pollu-
tants than electric plants in  all categories,  and synthoil lique-
faction  produces more  hydrocarbon  (HC) emissions than other  coal
and oil  shale synfuels facilities of  the  size  deployed in our
scenarios.

      The results of our first-year  impact analyses  indicate  that
fugitive HC emissions  from liquid processing facilities  (oil
shale retorting and coal liquefaction) and from natural  gas  pro-
duction  can be  expected to result in  ambient HC concentrations

      1Current Non-Significant  Deterioration  (NSD) requirements
are based on an area classification system which divides the  nation' s
"clean air" areas (i.e., areas where the air quality is better than
that  allowed by ambient air standards) into  three classes.   Each
class permits progressively larger  incremental additions  (or
"allowable increments") to concentrations of sulfur dioxide and
 particulates.   Class I areas are generally pristine, such as national
 parks, but may include any area in which it is decided to limit growth
or development,   class III areas permit deterioration to national
ambient  secondary  standards.   At present, all  NSD areas  are
designated Class II.  Procedures have  been established for states
 (and  Indian reservations)  to redesignate  areas as either Class  I
or Class III.

      2This is the  case both when emissions are taken  per British
thermal  unit  (Btu) of  electrical output and  per Btu of thermal
input to the plant.  Comparing  electrical energy to energy in
oil and  gas can be misleading  since electricity has high quality
uses  not possible  with oil and gas  (such  as  running motors and
lighting).  Hence, if  electricity was used only for high quality
demands, it would  be worth about three times as much  as  thermal
energy in oil and  gas.   Only about half of electricity is so
used, however,  and the remainder is used  for heat,  for which a
direct comparison  with oil and gas can be justified.   Numerically,
on a  Btu-thermal basis,  electricity is valued  as the  energy  con-
tent  of  the coal which feeds the power plant.  On a Btu-elec-
trical basis, the  electricity  is valued as the energy content of
the electrical  energy  is produced.  In the power plant,  the
energy produced when measured  in Btu-electrical is about 3 times
less  than the energy as measured in Btu-thermal.  Neither measure
is exactly comparable  to the energy content  of oil and gas.  A
Btu-electrical  is  more  valuable than  a Btu of  oil and gas; but  a
Btu-thermal in  the power plant  case is less  valuable  than oil
and gas made from  coal.

                                34

-------
that exceed the federal 3-hour standard of 160 micrograms per
cubic meter (yg/m3).L  Because they are emitted at or near ground-
level, the total amount of fugitive HC emitted need not be large
to produce the high concentrations often associated with these
facilities.   The highest concentrations are expected to be pro-
duced by oil shale retorting  (up to 52,000 yg/m3), followed by
coal liquefaction (21,500 to 25,100 yg/m3) and natural gas pro-
duction (1,000 yg/m3).  Conventionally produced natural gas
affects ambient levels of HC more than the Lurgi and Synthane
coal gasification processes (which range from 14 to 38 yg/m3).

     The 100,000 barrels per day  (bbl/day) oil shale plants that
we analyzed will also exceed the federal 3-hour and Colorado
24-hour ambient S02 standards.3  As indicated in Chapter 8, this
violation is in part attributable to plume impaction on high
terrain.4

2.  The Effect of Control Technologies on Emissions from Power
    Plants

     The extent to which SC>2 scrubbers will be used on electric
power plants in the western U.S. is still unclear.5  w.e expect
power plants without S02 scrubbers to emit five times the S02
values indicated in Table 3-4.   Due to the very low sulfur con-
tent of coal at some locations, New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) could be met without scrubbers.^  However, our analysis of

      The federal 3-hour standard for ambient concentrations  is
measured between 6 and 9 a.m.  This is the time period during
the day when they are characteristically highest.
     2
      Leaks in valves and fittings and from fuel oil storage
tanks account for most fugitive hydrocarbon emissions.

      The Colorado 24-hour ambient sulfur dioxide standard is 150
micflograms per cubic meter.  The predicted concentration is more
than 10 times the level allowed by this standard.
     4
      Plume impaction occurs when stack plumes run into elevated ter-
rain because of limited atmospheric mixing and stable air conditions.
It primarily occurs when atmospheric mixing is minimal  (wind speeds
less than 5 to 10 miles per hour, clear sky, pre-dawn hours).

      The use of scrubbers will depend on many factors including
their economic impact on the  cost of electricity, the develop-
ment of new control  technologies, and the extent to which  Non-
Significant Deterioration requirements are made more strict.

      The values in Table 3-4 assume 80-percent sulfur dioxide removal,

      See Chapter 6  (Kaiparowits/Escalante), 8  (Rifle),  and 9
(Gillette) .

                               35

-------
 impacts at these sites indicate that at least one federal ambient
 SC>2 standard could be violated.   Further, at three other sites,2
 plants equipped with scrubbers that remove only enough S02 to
 meet NSPS will exceed at least one federal and some state stan-
 dards.  In addition, plumes at all sites will generally not meet
 the 20 percent opacity standard without a high level of particu-
 late removal (99.3-99.8 percent).

 3.  Emission Levels and Non-Significant Deterioration Require-
     ments

      Our results indicate that coal gasification and liquefac-
 tion plants can meet all Non-Significant Deterioration (NSD)
 increments.  However, oil shale retorts and power plants (even
 with scrubbers) may cause Class II increments to be exceeded
 locally and Class I increments to be exceeded in nearby national
 parks.  Both oil shale developments included in our scenarios
 would violate all class II S02 and particulate increments.   Power
 plants also appear likely to violate Class II NSD requirements.
 In four of the  locations,  power plants exceed either one or both
 of the Class II 24-hour particulate and SC-2 increments.

      The buffer zones required to meet Class I NSD increments
 range in size from 5 to 75 miles.4  By far, the largest is
 required for electric power plants,5 an average of about 52 miles.
 Buffer zones for Lurgi,  Synthane,  and Synthoil are roughly


       All the above conclusions are based  on dispersion modeling
 results that are inherently approximate.   The accuracy of the
 Gaussian-type dispersion models used in this study is generally
 accepted to be  ±100 percent.   However,  evidence is beginning  to
 accumulate that the models  may be  as accurate as ±50 percent.
 See Appendix A  for  details.
      2
       See  Chapters  7 (Farmington) ,  10  (Colstrip) ,  and 11 (Beulah) .
                                        *                      «
       See  Chapters  6 (Kaiparowits/Escalante),  7 (Farmington),
 8  (Rifle),  and  11  (Beulah).
     4
      Allowable increments  for Class  I  areas  apply to all new
 sources whether located within or  outside  the Class  I area.  This
 effectively  establishes  a buffer zone  around class I areas
 within which  new facilities cannot be  sited since  pollutants  from
 the  facility  must be diluted by atmospheric mixing to achieve
 the  low concentrations allowed.  The distance required  for  this
 dilution to take place determines  the  size  of the  buffer  zone,
 which varies by facility  type,  size, and the  effectiveness  of
 emission controls.

      This assumes 80-percent  sulfur, dioxide  and 99-percent
particulate removal.


                                36

-------
equivalent, averaging from 9 to 14 miles.  The restrictive stan-
dard for all conversion technologies is either the 3- or 24-hour
S02 increment.

     At present, buffer zones are a siting consideration only in
areas where there are numerous national parks that are poten-
tially Class I areas.  If national forests are designated Class I
areas, buffer zones will be a consideration throughout the eight-
state area.

4.  Summary
                                    1                        p
     In summary, total SC>2 emissions  and emission densities
would increase at all locations in the west, with the largest
increases occurring in eastern Montana and western North Dakota.
When scrubbers are used on electric power plants, the plants
analyzed in the six site-specific scenarios are predicted to meet
federal ambient air quality standards.  At the locations where
scrubbers are not needed to meet New source performance standards,
at least one federal ambient SC<2 standard could be exceeded.
Class II increments will often not be met by electric power plants
and oil shale facilities.

     Given the levels of development postulated in our eight-
state scenario, S02 levels in eastern Montana and western North
Dakota in the year 2000 will approach those presently found in
many industrialized states  (emissions exceeding 2 million pounds
per year and emissions densities as high as 29 tons per year per
square mile in North Dakota) .-*  Assuming a S02-to-sulfates
      Given the typical coals used in our scenarios, electric
power plants in New Mexico, Montana, and North Dakota will exceed
federal New Source Performance Standards for sulfur dioxide
emissions unless scrubbers are installed.
     2
      Emission densities are estimated as tons of sulfur dioxide
emitted annually per square mile.

      See Chapter 12 for details on current emissions and densi-
ties.  That chapter also describes levels of energy resource
development, distribution of facilities in the eight-state study
area, coal compositions, and scrubber and precipitator configu-
rations.


                               37

-------
 conversion rate of 1 percent,   total emissions and emission den-
 sities at these levels can cause a reduction in long range visi-
 bility and possibly constitute a health hazard.^

 B.  Labor Intensiveness

      The second technological  factor that significantly affects
 air quality impacts is the labor intensiveness of a technology.
 Our impact analyses indicate that peak ground-level concentra-
 tions of particulates, N02»   and HC produced by energy related
 urban development can be higher than those produced by energy
 development facilities themselves.4  For example, in all our sce-
 narios,  annual particulate concentrations from urban sources (7-
 30 yg/m-3)  exceed those from energy facilities (0.3-1.8 yg/m3) .
 These high concentrations result from the release of pollutants
 at or near ground level in urban areas by such sources as auto-
 mobiles  and home heating.  Total emissions of pollutants in the
 urban area are small in comparison to those emitted by an energy
 conversion or production facility; in fact, less than 10 percent
 of the total pounds per year emitted come from urban sources.
 However,  because pollution from urban Sources are released close
 to the ground, they cause high concentrations; this occurs
 because  pollutants released near ground level experience little
 or no mixing and dilution,  whereas pollutants released from tall
 stacks experience considerable mixing and dilution prior to
 reaching  ground level.

      Table 3-5 summarizes the  projections from our scenarios for
 peak ground-level concentrations of pollutants originating from
 urban sources  and from energy  facilities  in 1990.   Note that the


       Most  estimates  of sulfate  formation in the plumes of coal
 fired power plants  with particulate  control use  a conversion rate
 of 1  to 3 percent.  Up to 20-percent  rates  have  been used for oil-
 fired  power plants.   See  U.S., Congress,  House of Representatives,
 Committee on Science  and  Technology,  Subcommittee on Environment
 and the Atmosphere.   Review  of Research Related  to Sulfates  in
 the Atmosphere,  committee Print.   Washington,  D.C.:   Government
 Printing Office,  1976.
      2
      Health effects  are  discussed in Section 3.6.

      The oxides of nitrogen emitted by energy  facilities occur  in
 several molecular forms, generally designated NOX.   Ambient  air
 standards are  set in  terms of nitrogen dioxide  (N02)•  In measuring
emissions, whatever combination of NOX occur  are  converted to NO2
according to their molecular weights  to allow comparison with the
N02 standards.
     4see section 3.4  for details  on  the  increases  in  population
that can be  attributed  to energy resource development.


                               38

-------
TABLE  3-5:
                             A COMPARISON  OF  PREDICTED  PEAK GROUND-LEVEL CONCENTRATIONS  OF
                             POLLUTANTS  FROM  URBAN  SOURCES AND ENERGY  FACILITIES,  1990a
                             (micrograms  per  cubic meter)
Po 1 lu tan t^x-*""'^
^^-""''standardb
S02
Annual 80
24 hour 365
3 hour 1300
Particulate
Annual 60
24 hour 160
H02C
Annual 100
HC
3 hour 160
Kaiparowits
Urban
8
27
48
16
54
26
481
Facility
4.4
51
229
1.6
18
11
46
Farming Con
Urban
16
54
96
30
102
48
871
Facility
3.3
84
459
1,8
67
6.5
78
Rifle
Urban
2
0
0
20
68
d
571
Facility
11
131
1,901
1.2
103
4.4
52.100
Gillette
Urban
14
48
84
27
92
41
780
Facility
1.6
51
323
.4
19
4.6
1
78
Colstrlp
Urban
5
17
30
10
34
16
270
Facility
2.7
90
657
.5
23
3.6
69
Beulah
Urban
4
14
24
7
24
11
180
Facility
.4
6.9
35
.3
5.7
1.8
14
                          so,,
                                sulfur dioxide
HC - hydrocarbons
NO. " nitrogen dioxide                  '

*The data displayed In this table are  taken from the discussions of pollutants  from urban sources  and from energy  facilities described
In Chapters 6-11.  Those discussions  further elaborate these data and provide  data points for other years (1980,  2000) and for other
towns and facilities not summarized here; the data from both urbaft sources and facilities represent peak, not average concentrations.
Since several scenarios have more than one energy facility, an effort was made to use the facility with highest peak concentrations
to compare to urban sources.  For each scenario, the facility used, for comparison in this table was:  Kaiparowits:  power plant;
Farmington:  power plant/mine combination; Rifle:  100,000 barrels per day TOSCO II plants; Gillette:  power plant/mine combination;
Colstrlp:  power plant/mine combination; Beulah:  Lurgl/plant mine.

blhe lowest applicable ambient air quality standard is listed here.  Each of the scenario chapters (6-11) lists both primary and
secondary standards.

cEstimates  of N02  concentrations at facilities were  based on  the assumption  that all  oxides of  nitrogen (NOX)  would
be converted to N02.  For urban concentrations, it was assumed that 50 percent of the NQx would be converted to ITCy  See the Intro-
duction Pare II for an elaboration.

'Sloe calculated.

-------
 concentrations  of particulates, NC>2/  and HC produced by urban
 sources  nearly  always  exceed  those  from the energy  facility.^

      The models used to  estimate air  impacts also suggest that
 these concentrations are not  likely to increase consistently
 as  urban population increases, but  rather  to increase rapidly as
 the total urban population  rises to about  15-20 thousand people
 and at a progressively slower rate  thereafter.   Thus, small or
 new towns in  the West  are likely to experience a high percentage
 increase in ambient pollutant levels  as population  increases,
 while larger  towns  (such as Farmington) will experience rela-
 tively little change.3

 C.   other Technology-Related  Impacts

      Other air  impacts analyzed were  long-range visibility,
 cooling  tower fogging  and icing, cooling tower salt deposition,
 fine particulates, oxidants,  and weather modification.  Findings
 in  each  of these areas are based on preliminary results and are
 mostly qualitative.  None of  these  impacts appears  to be large
 except for the  visibility reductions  which, at the  sites analyzed,
 averaged 8 percent on  an annual basis.  Reductions  may be sub-
 stantially larger during  episodic conditions.  Thus, the gener-
 ally excellent  visibility in  the region  (characteristically 65-
 70  miles)  could be restricted in the  vicinity of the plants, and
 the plumes from many plants would be  visible.  Plumes can also
 extend long distances  from a  facility, allowing sulfate forma-
 tion to  darken  the plume.


      Some sulfur dioxide (SOo)  concentrations from urban sources
exceed those from the energy  facilities.   However,  annual and 24-
hour concentrations of SO? from both urban sources and facilities
are well below federal ambient standards.
      2
       Projected  concentrations from urban  sources are derived
 from both emission rates  and  dispersion potential.  The projec-
 tion  that  concentrations  increase rapidly  up to a point  (15-20
 thousand  people) and progressively  slower  thereafter is based on
 several  important and  debatable assumptions.  First, emission
 rates  from urban sources  are  assumed  to be directly  (or linearly)
proportional  to  the number of people  in the town.   Secondly, the
population densities of different-size towns are assumed to
remain relatively constant.   Thus,  since urban emission concen-
trations  are measured  at  a point in the center of town, pollution
sources more  than 1 or 2  miles from the center will have little
effect on  concentrations  measured there.  For towns larger than
15-20  thousand,  it is  assumed that  new pollutant sources will be
located  increasingly further  from the center of town and thus
have only  marginal impact on  concentration levels.
     3
      See Section 3.4 for data on labor intensiveness.


                               40

-------
     Energy development is also likely to produce smog and fogging
impacts.  Background HC, in combination with oxides of nitrogen
in plumes, provides the potential for oxidants (smog)  downwind of
the plant.  Fogging is common in the winter in the west,  and
cooling towers will exacerbate this problem downwind of plants.
Due to low humidities, fogging will not be a problem during other
seasons.

3.2.3  Variations in Existing Conditions

     Many air quality impacts can be attributed to variations in
existing conditions at different locations in the west.  Many of
these existing conditions are geographical or meteorological in
nature, such as rugged terrain, poor dispersion potential, and
the proximity of resources or sites to Class I or class II areas.
Other existing conditions affecting air quality include charac-
teristics of the coals found in different locations, the size of
communities located in the vicinity of the resource development,
ambient air quality, and state air quality standards.

A.  Coal Characteristics

     Although low sulfur is an advantage commonly attributed to ,
western coals,  many western coals  also have low  heating  values.
The sulfur content of the coals used in our analyses range from
0.5 to 1.0 percent by weight and heating values ranged from 6,950
to 11,300 Btu's per pound.  As a result of these variances, sul-
fur emissions on a per-million Btu's basis are not necessarily
low.  Assuming that 100 percent of the sulfur in the coal is con-
verted to SC>2» the Kaiparowits, Rifle, and Gillette coals meet
the New Source Performance Standard of 1.2 pounds of SC>2 emitted
for every 1 million Btu's of coal burned.  For the other coals
to meet the standard, only 52-73 percent of the sulfur could be
converted to SC>2 in the boiler? that is, 27-48 percent of the
sulfur would have to be retained in the ash.  However, less than
80-percent conversion  (greater than 20-percent sulfur retention)
is unlikely.2


      See the Introduction to Part II  for the characteristics  of
the coal used in these analyses.
     2
      One study of power plants burning North Dakota lignite
found cases in which the sulfur retention rate was much greater
than 20 percent; that  is, less than 80 percent of the sulfur in
the coal was converted to sulfur dioxide. However, on 33 of the 46
test days in the study, the 1.2 pounds; per.million British thermal
units emission limit was exceeded anyway. The amount of sulfur re-
tention was found to be a function of boiler design and the sulfur con-
tent of the coal.  See Gronhovd, G.H., P.H. Tufte, and S.J. Selle.
"Some Studies on Stack Emissions from  Lignite Fired Plants."
Paper presented at  the 1973 Lignite Symposium, Grand Forks, North
Dakota, May 9-10, 1973.

                               41

-------
      A related consideration is the  variability of sulfur  content
 among and within coal fields and within a  single seam.   This
 variation could conceivably result  in some high-sulfur  coal  (up
 to 3-5 percent)  being used in plants designed exclusively  for
 low-sulfur coal.  This is  usually prevented by blending high-  and
 low-sulfur coals to produce a coal  feedstock with an  average sul-
 fur content capable of meeting low-sulfur  requirements.  Although
 low-sulfur coal will be used wherever possible, such use will  be
 constrained both by coal ownership and how easily the coal can
 be mined.

      The mining plan developed for a coal  mine usually  details
 the procedure  for blending coals based on  the analysis  of  core
 samples taken  from several sites in  the mine area.  However, it
 is also becoming common for coal customers to require coal sup-
 pliers to guarantee a maximum sulfur content in their contracts.

 B.  Terrain and Dispersion Potential

      Another significant existing condition influencing  air
 quality in the eight-state area  is terrain,  most notably the com-
 plex terrain found in western Colorado and southern Utah.  Our
 impact analyses  suggest that the complex terrain in southern Utah
 can contribute to high ground-level  concentrations of pollutants
 as a consequence of plume  impaction.   In northwestern Colorado,
 ambient levels of SO2 are  predicted  to exceed the federal ambient
 secondary standard (3-hour average)  when the plume from the
 100,000 bbl/day  oil shale  plant  interacts  with the rugged terrain
 features  in the  area.   These SC>2 violations  are  likely  to  occur
 less than 30 percent of the  time.  in  the  Kaiparowits/Escalante
 area,  predicted  ambient levels produced by plume impact ion
 approach  but do  not exceed ambient standards.

      At our other site-specific  scenario locations, the  terrain
 is less rugged and plume impaction does not  normally  occur.  In
 these  cases, increased concentrations  are  predicted to  result
      These results were obtained using a modified Gaussian air
dispersion model.  Although other routines, such as potential
flow models, have been used to project impacts in rough terrain,
no consensus exists regarding the most appropriate model.  How-
ever, the modifications made in this analysis were designed to
account for previous limitations of Gaussian-type models in
rough terrain.  See Appendix A.
                               42

-------
from other conditions such as plume looping and limited vertical
mixing.1

     Dispersion meteorology is variable over the eight-state area.
By itself, poor dispersion does not cause violation of standards
at anyone site.  However, when combined with other factors, such as
complex terrain, it can exacerbate what already may be a problem.

     An overview of the effect of site specific variations is
presented in Table 3-6.  This table shows the level of control
required for power plants to meet all standards at our six sites.
To meet all ambient air standards, Class II increments, and appli-
cable state standards,  96.6-99.7 percent of the particulates and
58-93 percent of the SC>2 would have to be removed.  The specific
requirement depends on the site.

     Due to Colorado's strict SC»2 standards, any facility located
in that state will require the removal of more S02 than in any of
the other seven states.  A higher percentage of SC>2 removal is
required to meet Colorado's standard than to meet federal Class II
NSD increments.  State standards are also restrictive in North
Dakota for both SC>2 and NOX.  Emissions from facilities located
in North Dakota can meet the federal Class II NSD SO2 increment
but not the state standards.  Similarly, approximately 70-percent
NO  removal would be required to meet North Dakota standards.2
  J\

C.  Other Site Specific Variations

     Two other factors that vary by site can exacerbate air qual-
ity problems:  the size of the community in which the facility
is located, and the proximity of a facility to potential Class  I
NSD areas.  As noted above, the percentage change  in air quality
will be greater when a facility is located  in a small community
than when it is located in a large town.  As a  result,  in
sparsely populated areas such as southern Utah, the change in  air
quality will be relatively greater even though  the absolute  level
of ambient concentrations may be the same as in more densely
populated areas.


      Plume looping  (i.e., when plumes rise, sink to the earth or
roll in response to breezes, air currents or eddies) occurs when
winds are less than 5 miles per hour and solar  radiation is  strong
 (summertime, midday, clear sky).  Large thermal eddies  cause
plumes to roll thus transporting undiluted plume segments rapidly
to ground level.  Limited mixing occurs when a  strong  inversion
exists slightly above the plume height and  stops  the upward
mixing of the plume.  The plume is constrained  vertically
between this "lid" and  the ground.
     2
      Sulfur dioxide scrubbers also remove some percentage of
oxides of nitrogen, perhaps as much as 40 percent.

                                43

-------
         TABLE  3-6:
EMISSION CONTROLS REQUIRED FOR POWER
PLANTS TO MEET ALL STANDARDS AT EACH
OF SEVEN SITES3

Siteb
Gillette
Kaiparowitsc
Farmington
Colstrip
Beulah
Rifle
Escalante
Percent Removal
SO2
58
61
70
79
83
92
93
Particulates
96.6
98.3
99.5
98.3
98.8
99.0
99.7
               S02 =  sulfur dioxide
               3
               All air quality standards  include
               federal ambient and Class II  incre-
               ments  as well as applicable state
               standards.  State standards are
               restrictive only in Colorado  and
               North  Dakota.

               Except for Rifle, power plants are
               3,000-megawatts-electric  (MWe); the
               plant  at Rifle is 1,000 MWe.

               GEven  though they are included in
               the same site-specific scenario,
               the Kaiparowits and Escalante power
               plants were analyzed separately.
     Class I NSD areas  (such as national parks) may present some
problems where they are widespread or occupy large amounts of
land  (as in southern Utah), but very few are located in the coal
regions of the Northern Great Plains.  Proximity to Class I NSD
areas will make development siting more difficult, particularly
in the case of electric power plants where large buffer zones are
required.

3.2.4  Summary of Technological and Location Factors

     In combination, some technological and locational factors
can cause air quality impacts to be particularly severe.  These
impacts can often be mitigated by choosing a different technology
for the problem site, a different site for the problem technology,
or an entirely different technology-site combination.
                               44

-------
     This summary identifies technology-l.ocation.al combinations
that cause critical air quality problems.   By so doing,  it  also
suggests combinations that could mitigate  these problems.   The
problems that can arise because of technology-location combina-
tions are identified in Table 3-7.  The table also indicates  the
technology and locational factors that cause the problem.   Note
that nearly all the critical problems are  caused by either
electric power plants or oil shale retorting facilities.

     In some locations in the west, New Source performance  Stan-
dards  (generally the least restrictive set of federal standards
for conditions in the eight-state area) cannot be met by electric
power plants without scrubbers.  This problem is a consequence
of the heat and sulfur contents of the coal.

     At most locations, Class II NSD standards will be violated
by electric power plants even when scrubbers with an 80-percent
efficiency for 862 are used.  The existing ambient air quality,
dispersion potential, and terrain characteristics in southern
Utah, Colorado, North Dakota, and Montana make these areas  par-
ticularly susceptible to the problem.  To mitigate the problem,
Class II NSD increments would have to be relaxed, scrubbers with
a higher removal efficiency would have to be employed, or the
coal would have to be exported for conversion elsewhere.

     Terrain characteristics in southern Utah and western Colo-
rado are such that regular violation of several federal or state
ambient air standards will occur as a result of emission from power
plants  (with scrubbers) and from  oil shale retorting facilities.
Mitigation will require very high scrubber efficiencies or
exporting the coal.

     In Colorado'and North Dakota, state air quality standards
will determine the level of control required.  Emissions from the
electric power plant and oil shale facility  sited at Rifle, Colo-
rado exceed Colorado's SC«2 standards,  and  the electric power
plant  sited at Beulah, North Dakota exceeds  North Dakota's S02
and NC>2 standards.  Mitigation will require  either the relaxa-
tion of state standards, the use  of scrubbers with higher removal
efficiencies, or exporting the coal.

     Siting problems  in  southern  Utah  and  western Colorado will
be exacerbated by the  proximity of sites to  Class I NSD areas,
principally national parks.  The  buffer zone required  is greatest
for electric power plants.  Mitigation will  require either the
relaxation of Class  I  NSD  increments,  the  use  of  scrubbers with
higher efficiencies,  or  exporting the  coal.

     The  labor  intensity of conversion facilities, particularly
the operating  labor  requirements  of  synthetic  fuels  facilities.
                               45

-------
                     TABLE 3-7:   SUMMARY OF AIR QUALITY  PROBLEMS
           Air Quality Problems
                                           Combinations  of Factors  that Cause the Problem
      Technological Factors
      Locational Factors
Violations of  federal New Source
Performance Standards as  well  as
other  standards  in Farmington,
Colstrip, and  Beulah areas
     Emissions  from power
     plants without scrubbers
     Sulfur content and
     heating value of
     the  coal
Violations  of Class  II  NSD
Standards  (especially in southern
Utah,  Colorado,  North Dakota,  and
Montana)
     Emissions  from power
     plants  with scrubbers
     Existing  ambient air
     quality,  dispersion
     potential,  terrain
Violation  of ambient standards
especially in. southern Utah and
Colorado
     Emissions from power
     plants with scrubbers
     and oil shale proces-
     sing facilities
     Rough  terrain
 Requirements for strict S02 control in
 Colorado and strict S0? and NO  control
 in North Dakota
     Emissions from power
     plants with scrubbers
     and oil shale proces-
     sing facilities
     State  air  standards
 Potential siting problems, especially
 in Utah and Colorado depending on how
 Class I NSD areas are defined
     Emissions from conver-
     sion facilities,  es-
     pecially power plants,
     required buffer zones
     Proximity to Class  I
     areas  (national  parks
     and possibly national
     forests)
 Larger concentrations of several
 pollutants produced by urban sources
 than by facilities.  Largest increase
 in towns under 15,000
     Labor intensiveness,
     especially synthetic
     fuels technologies
     Community size
NSD = Non-Significant Deterioration
NO  = oxides of nitrogen
SO,
sulfur dioxide

-------
results in greater ambient concentrations of particulates,  nitro-
gen oxides, and hydrocarbons being caused by urban sources  than
by the energy facilities.  If the community in which development
takes place is small (e.g., most communities  in  southern Utah),
the percent change in ambient air quality as a result of urban
sources will be great.   Mitigation may require the export of
coal from these sites rather than mine-mouth conversion.

     In general, this summary suggests that facilities in Wyoming,
Montana, and New Mexico are likely to have the fewest air quality
problems.  In these states, applicable federal and state stan-
dards can be met with the least percentage removal of S02 and
particulates by emission control technologies.  But in no case
can all standards be met without the use of some emission con-
trol, specifically scrubbers.

     Facilities located in southern Utah and western Colorado
will present the greatest problems unless removal percentages are
quite high.  In Colorado, this is largely due to state SC>2  stan-
dards and, to some extent, the terrain in the oil shale area of
western Colorado.  Southern Utah appears to have a restrictive
combination of  factors affecting air quality, a combination  of
poor dispersion potential and complex terrain that could result
in frequent violation of ambient standards and Class I areas that
are in close proximity to development sites.

3.2.5  Data and Research Limitations

     The analysis and findings produced during the first-year
effort have been limited by both data availability and research
limitations.  The areas of greatest data inadequacy concern
trace elements and trace organic emissions from energy facili-
ties, particularly from advanced energy facilities such as coal
gasification,  coal liquefaction, and oil shale retorting.  The
principal reason for these data inadequacies is that full-scale
units of these technologies have not become operational, thus no
measurements of these trace emissions have been possible.
     Another area of limited data availability is atmospheric
formation of nitrates and other nitrogen compounds.  Research in
this area is just beginning, and only preliminary results are
currently available.

     Data on SC<2 removal rates for low-sulfur western coals  is
another limitation.  While it appears technically feasible to
build scrubbers capable of removing very high percentages of SC>2
(e.g., 93 percent), data regarding the actual use of scrubbers
on low-sulfur coal or on the economic trade-offs involved is
limited.

     Finally,  conclusions regarding the relative concentrations
of pollutants produced by urban and energy facility sources  are


                               47

-------
 preliminary, owing  to  the  lack  of data  on urban emissions from
 towns under 50,000.

      Suitable models were  not available for predicting the
 impact of western energy facilities  on  short-term visibility,
 long-range transport of pollutants from tall stacks,  visibility
 during episodic air conditions,  secondary air pollutants such  as
 oxidants and sulfates, and regional  air quality.   Although pre-
 dictive models exist,  none was  considered suitable for use durinc
 the first year of the  project.1
                                    r\
 3.3  WATER AVAILABILITY AND QUALITY


                          HIGHLIGHTS


      • CRITICAL FACTORS
          Foul fiactofiA that vafiy among te.ch.no to gle.A can signifi-
          cantly a^ect watefi Impacts:  watefi tiequlfiements; tabol
          Intenslvene&s; amount and composition ojj e^luents  fifiom
          facilities and enefigy-fielated population Incfieas es ; and
          the disruption oft aqulfiefis.
          fou.fi locatlonal fiactofis c.an
                i.mpactA:  wate.fi availability; wate.fi quality;  coal
                           and
       WATER REQUIREMENTS
                   powe.fi plant* fie.qu.lfie. mofie. uiate.fi than any othe.fi
          conve.fiAlon technology.

          Lufigi. fie.qu.4.fiz& le.&& wate.fi than any othe.fi &yn&ue.l tech-
          nology,

          Cooling  account*  fiofi up to 96 pe.fice.nt (with a median
          value o£ BO percent]  OjJ the. total watei lequlfiement* o&
          coal  and oil &hale convention technologies.
      Suitability  in  this  content refers to model requirements
for complex data and  resulting expense in application.
     2
      The conversion  technologies considered include coal-fired
electric power plants,  Lurgi  and Synthane gasification, Synthoil
liquefaction/ and  TOSCO II oil shale retorting.  Slurry pipelines
were also considered.   All facilities use wet cooling and all
their effluents are discharged into on-site evaporative ponds.

                                48

-------
   Waten nequlnements  fan mining and neclamatlon ane an
   onden orf magnitude  less than that tie.qu.4.Ji ed  fan mlne-
   moath convenslon complex.es.

   Watcn nequlnements  fan enengy-nclated  population
   Incneas es ane, on the.  average, ono.-te.nth  that fan con
WATER AVAILABILITY

  Waten ion energy development -t* less  cleanly available.
  In  the. Colorado R/cue/t  Ba^^n than Jin the.  Uppe.fi M4.&&OU.1J,
  Ba.4^.n;  anqaantl^e.d  6e.de.tial and-lndlan vaate.fi light*, the,
  le.gal Atatu* o£ unused alloc.ate.d flights,  and othe.fi
  u.nanAu)e.tie.d que.&ti,on& make. the. availability o& u)ate.n
  u.nc.e.italn In both
   B(/  the. ye,ati 2000, a  low-de.ve.lopme.nt &c.e.nan.lo would
   n.e.qulfie. 28-^52 pe.ft.ce.nt  o& the. tuifiace. wate.fi appafie.ntly
   available. In the. Uppe.fi Colorado Batln;  a  hlgh-de.mand
   &c.e.nafilo would ieo.tu.ie 43-71 pe.fite.nt.

MINIMIZING WATER REQUIREMENTS

 '  Wate.fi consumption by conve.fi&lon fiacllltle.* could be,
   fie.duce.d by up to 72  pe.nce.nt l& we-t/dfiy  fiathe.fi than we.t
   cooling uicfie. u&e.d.

 '  Wate.fi consumption vaile.* significantly  by location fan
   the. same, coal conve.fislon te.chnology.

EFFLUENTS

 '  Tne quantity and composition o& e.^lu.e.nts &fiom the. coal
   conve.fislon plants vafile.s with location.   Ton a glve.n
   pnoce.ss the. quantity o£ waste. e.^lue.nts  vanle.s by a
   &acton 0($ faun de.pe.ndlng upon location.   E^lue,nts finom
   gasification ane. almost e.ntlne,ly ash whe.ne.as e.^lue.nts
   &nom e.le.ctnlc powcn  plants ane. compnlscd  o{ appnox.1-
   mate.ly e.qual amounts o& ash and sludge.  &nom £lue. gas
   dcsulfanlzatlon.

 '  The. ash and sulfiun conte.nt of, coal ane.  lange,ly ne.spon-
   slble. fan the. site vanlatlon In the. quantity o
-------
        '  P-t4c.ftcu.g-t.wc} ti^tmntA into Q.vcLpofia.t-Lva pond-it po4e4 a
          pate.nt
-------
            TABLE  3-8:     WATER  CONSUMPTION  BY  TECHNOLOGY
Technology
Fover Generation
Per Btu (th)e
Per Btu (e)
Lurgi Gasification*
Synthane Gasification
Synthoil Liquefaction8 .
TOSCO II Oil Shale Retort
Slurry Pipeline1
Si«d
3,000 MWe
250 MMscfd
250 MMscfd
100,000 bbl/day
100,000 bbl/day
25 MHmtpy
Water Consumed
ERDSb
Acre-Feet
Per Year
29,000
6,710
9,090
17,460
16,650
18,390
Gallons/106
Btu In Product
54
157
28
38
28
29
14
WPAC
.Ac re -Feet
Per Year
23,880-29,820
3,310-5,640
7-.670-8.670
9,230-11,750
12,920
19,170
Gallons/106
Btu In Product
43-54
127-159
14-24
32-36
15-19
23
15
bbl - barrels                                                MMscfd  - million standard cubic feet per day
Btu * British thermal  units  (th  - thermal and e - electric)    MWe - megawatts-electric
MMmtpy » million metric  tons per year

*No mining, reservoir  evaporation, or reclamation requirements are included  in the ERDS data.  WPA data
include water for reclamation  for only those areas with less than 10  inches  annual precipitation.

 The ERDS or Energy Resource Development Systens descriptions prepared  for this  study will be distributed
separately.  They are  based  on:  University of Oklahoma, Science and  Public  Policy Program.  Energy
Alternatives;  A Comparative Analysts.  Washington, D.C.:   Government Printing Office, 1975 and Radian
Corporation.  A Western  Regional Energy Develocment Study. Final Report,  4 Vols.  Austin, Tex.:  Radian
Corporation, 1975.

°Water Purification Associates.  Water Requirements for Steam-Electric  Power Generation and Synthetic Fuel
plants in the Western  United States. Final Report, for University of  Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy
Program.  Washington,  D.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protection Agency,  forthcoming.

dLoad factors are:   70 percent for electric power; 90 percent for gasification,  liquefaction, and oil sh«l«
processing; and 100 percent  for slurry pipeline,

'per Btu; thermal refers to  the coal, per Btu; electric refers to the electricity.   34-percent efficiency
Is assumed.  See footnote 2  on page 34 for a discussion of the energy value  of electricity at compared to
thermal energy.

£The heating value of  the product is assumed to be 950 Btu's/standard cubic  feat.

*The heating value of  the product is assumed to be 6.29 x 10  Btu's/bbl.

 Th* heating value of  the product la assumed to be 5.66 x' 10  Btu'«/bbl/day.

 The heating value of  the coal is assumed to be 10,275 Btu's/bbl/day.
                                                   51

-------
      As indicated in Table 3-8,  both in terms of facility size
 and equivalent energy,  electric power generation requires more
 water than any of the synthetic fuel technologies.   This is true
 whether the energy produced is valued as thermal energy or as
 electricity.1  Water requirements for Lurgi gasification,  Syn-
 thoil liquefaction,  and TOSCO II oil shale processing do not
 differ significantly.  However,  Synthane gasification requires
 1.4 to 2.6 times more water than Lurgi gasification2 and more
 than any other synthetic fuels technology.  Note that minimizing
 water requirements in the design and operation of these facili-
 ties makes a significant difference in water consumption.3  For
 example, when water consumption  is minimized,  Synthoil consumes
 half as much water as it does when consumption is not minimized.

      In comparison,  a surface coal mine"* requires only 2-6 gal-
 lons of water per million Btu's  of coal mined (1,200-4,000 acre-
 feet per year).5  This  is an order of magnitude less than  con-
 version technologies require.  Moreover,  some of the required
 water can come from  mine dewatering.   In short,  water require-
 ments for exporting  coal by rail are  negligible in  comparison
 to  mine-mouth conversion.

 2.   The Effect of Wet/Dry Cooling on  Water Requirements

      Water for cooling  represents 20-96 percent of  the total
 water requirements of energy facilities,   with the  exception of
 oil  shale retorting,  cooling is  the largest single  water user for
      For a discussion of the  comparison of  electrical  to  ther-
mal energy, see footnote 2 , p. 34 .
     2
      How much less depends primarily on the moisture content of
the coal being used since the  Lurgi process  accepts wet coal and
uses the moisture, although at an economic cost.

     3Water Purification Associate's  (WPA)estimates are for the
process design that would minimize water up  to the point where
minimizing water use would increase economic cost.  It  might be
technologically feasible to reduce water requirements even
further.  The WPA report itself should be consulted for a
description of how estimates were calculated.

      This assumes that the mine is sized to supply one of these
technologies and that water is used for dust suppression and
reclamation.

      White, Irvin L., et al.  Energy Resource Development Sys-
tems for a Technology Assessment of Western  Energy Resource
Development.  Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental  Protection
Agency, forthcoming.
                                52

-------
energy conversion technologies.1  As indicated in Table  3-9,  the
use of wet/dry rather than wet cooling can reduce total  require-
ments as much as 72 percent.2  Using wet/dry cooling  for elec-
tric power generation would result in the largest savings in
terms of quantity of water saved.   The wide range in  water
savings for Lurgi gasification is  due to variations  in coal
moisture content among sites; unlike other technologies, Lurgi
uses  the  water in the coal directly.^

3.  The Effect of Labor Intensity  on Water Requirements

     Table 3-10 gives estimates of the additional water  required
by the population increases associated with facility  construc-
tion and operation.4  while this water demand averages an order
of magnitude lower than demands for facilities,  it is not insig-
nificant.' Treatment and distribution systems will be required
to supply the water,  in the case  of a technology such as gasi-
fication,  where water requirements by the population during  peak
construction are 4.5 times that required during  operation, over-
building treatment and distribution systems for the construction
work force is a potential problem.

     Water for domestic use in small communities and rural areas
is nearly always obtained from groundwater.  In conjunction with
withdrawals for mine dewatering and agricultural purposes,
aquifer depletion is a potential problem.

B.  Water Effluents

     Water effluents from energy facilities and population
increases are discussed below.

1.  Effluents from Energy Facilities

     The effluents removed as wet- and dry-solids are listed in
Table 3-11 for each technology.  Effluents from oil shale retort-
ing are the largest:  111,800 tons of wet-solids and  97,200 tons
of dry-solids per day, most of which is spent shale.  Effluents
from coal synfuels facilities do not differ significantly in
amount, but they do differ in composition.  An electric power
plant produces nearly equal amounts of both ash and flue gas
desulfurization sludge, whereas effluents from coal gasification
are almost entirely ash.


      Spent shale disposal is the largest consumer of water for
oil shale processing.
     2
      However, the dollar cost of cooling could increase.

      The implications of this in terms of energy efficiency are
discussed below.

     4Data on the labor intensities of technologies are  presented
in Section 3.4.

                               53

-------
                            TABLE  3-9:   WATER USE  REDUCTION USING WET/DRY  COOLING5
ui
Technology
Power Generation
Lurgi Gasification
Synthane Gasification
Synthoil Liquefaction
TOSCO II Oil Shale Retort
Size
3,000 MWe
250 MMscfd
250 MMscfd
100,000 bbl/day
100,000 bbl/day
Fraction of Water
Use for Cooling
Wb
80-91
53-96
65-70
67-87
22
Maximum Water Use
Reduction Using
Wet/Dry Cooling
%
60-68
40-72
49-53
50-65
17
Acre-Feet
per Year0
16,230-17,940
2,230-2,540
3,840-4,220
5,880-6,550
2,170
bbl = barrels
MMscfd = million standard cubic feet per day
                                                           MWe = megawatts-electric
           aTotal water use and fraction used for cooling are based upon Water Purification Asso-
           ciates.  Water  Requirements for  Steam-Electric  Power  Generation  and Synthetic
           Fuel  Plants in  the Western United States,  Final Report,  for University of
           Oklahoma,  Science and  Public  Policy  Program.  Washington,  D.C.:   U.S.,  Environ-
           mental  Protection Agency,  forthcoming.  The  range in  values for  these  data  is
           due principally to site specific differences.
            Power generation load factor is 70 percent; for synthetic fuels, 90 percent.
           includes water use in mining.
                                                                               This
            "Range  in  amount of water  saved  is due  to  site-specific variations.

-------
           TABLE 3-10:
WATER REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH POPULATION INCREASES9
Water Requirements
{acre-ft/yr)b
Technology
Coal
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Gasification
Liquefaction
Power Plant
Oil Shale
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Retort and Processing
Peak Construction

71
275
1,570
1,750
853

239
239
900
Operation

323
1,490
350
1,800
260

388
694
382
     Assumes 150 gallons per capita per day, a multiplier of
    2 to account for added service personnel during construc-
    tion, and a multiplier of 3.5 to account for families and
    service personnel during operation.  Labor intensities
    are taken from Section 3.4.

     To convert acre-ft/year to gallons per day, multiply by
    893.
     In no case is wastewater to be discharged directly into
surface or groundwater systems; wastewater will be treated and
recycled on-site.  Wet- and dry-solids from coal conversion
facilities are discharged into on-site evaporative holding ponds.
Spent shale is dumped into ravines.   As a result, water quality
problems from effluent disposal do not arise from direct dis-
charge but from indirect runoff to surface water and seepage to
groundwater.  Runoff from spent shale and water leaching through
the shale represent major potential water quality problems, par-
ticularly from spent shale dumped into ravines.  Total quantities
are large, and thus the potential for salt contamination is great.

     In the case of effluents from coal conversion technologies,
the actual amounts do not vary greatly, but the content of power
plant  effluent and synthetic fuels  from  coal effluent is


      Under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act Amendments of 1972, §§  301, 402? 33 U.S.C.A.  §'§  1311,
1342 (Supp. 1976), a permit may be required for this.
                                55

-------
                                TABLE  3-11:    LIQUID EFFLUENTS  FROM TECHNOLOGIES
Technology
Power Generation0

Lurgi Gasification*1

Synthane Gasification"
A
Synthoil Liquefaction

TOSCO II Oil Shale Retortf

Size
3,000 MWe
70-7.. L.F.
250 MMscfd
90-7. L.F.
250 MMscfd
90-7. L.F.
100,000 bbl/day
90-7. L.F.
100,000 bbl/day
90-7. L.F.
Wet-Solids
Tons/Day^
3,140-14,510

1,960-8,220

1,950-7,780

3,380-14,540

111,800

Pounds /106
Btu in Product
(e) 33-152
(th) 11-52
18-77

18-73

12-51

440

Dry-Solids
Tons /Day
1,810-9,850

1,380-6,120

1,390-6,010

2,540-11,140

97,200

Pounds /106
Btu in Product
(e) 19-103
(th) 6-35
13-57

13-56

9-39

384

Ui
           bbl =  barrels
           Btu =  British  thermal unit
           L.F. = load  factor
MMscfd = million standard  cubic  feet per day
MWe = megawatts-electric
           Tfater Purification Associates.  Water Requirements  for Steam-Electric Power Generation and Synthetic Fuel
            Plants in  the Western United States. Final Report,  for University of Oklahoma,  Science and Public Policy
            Program.   Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental  Protection Agency, forthcoming.

            The range  of values is that found at the six sites  analyzed.

            Per Btu (th) refers to the coal; per Btu (e) refers to the electricity.  34-percent efficiency is assumed.
           See  footnote 2 on p. 34 for a discussion of the energy value of electricity as compared to thermal energy.

            Assumed heating value of product to be 950 Btu's  per cubic foot.
           e                                               ft
            Assumed heating value of product to be 6.29 x 10  Btu's/bbl/day.

            Assumed heating value of product to be 5.66 x 10  Btu's/bbl/day.

-------
 substantially different.1   if  accumulations  of wet-solids  con-
 taining  heavy metals,  trace elements,  and  complex  aromatic hydro-
 carbons  are  released  accidently,  they  could  produce  acute  effects
 in local surface  waters.2   The quantities  involved are quite
 large; based on the data in Table 3-11,  12.6-101.6 million tons
 of solids will accumulate  over 25 years  from just  one facility
 at one site.

      in  addition  to berm failures that may allow pollution of
 surface  waters, seepage  from holding ponds can contaminate ground-
 water aquifers.   The  degree of contamination depends on the com-
 position of  materials  in the ponds, holding  pond design, liner
 design,  pond management techniques, and  the  characteristics of
 nearby aquifers and of the soil overlaying the aquifer.  in turn,
 contaminated aquifers  may  introduce pollutants into  local springs,
 seeps, and streams.   The quality  of water  in a polluted surface
 stream will  usually improve dramatically within 1-2 years  after
 pollution sources are  eliminated;  however, polluted aquifers
 require  much longer periods (depending on  local geologic and soil
 conditions)  to cleanse themselves.3

      The disposal of  effluents from scrubbing or ash removal is
 regulated under the Federal water Pollution  Control Act Amend-
 ments  (FWPCA)  of  1972.4  croundwater quality is regulated  under
 state laws in Colorado and New Mexico  and, if it is used as a
 source of drinking water,  under the Safe Drinking  Water Act of
 1974.5   state solid waste  disposal laws  and  regulations may also
 apply to on-site  evaporative holding ponds.  As noted earlier,
 the FWPCA may also apply to the disposal of  spent  shale.
      Actual concentrations of various heavy metals and trace
elements are scheduled for analysis during the second year of
this study.
     2
      Holding pond berm design must be site-specific, and
failures are common in areas where previous design experience is
not available. See Smith, E.S.  "Tailings Disposal—Failures and
Lessons,"  in Aplie, C.L. and G.O. Argall,  eds.   Tailing  Disposal
Today.  San Francisco, Calif.:  Miller-Freeman, 1973, p. 358.

     3Pettyjohn, Wayne A., ed.  Water Quality in a Stressed
Environment.  Minneapolis, Minn.:   Burgess, 1972.

     4Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972,
§§ 1311,1342 (Supp. 1976).

     5Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, §§ 1424, 42 U.S.C.A.
§§ 300h-3.

                               57

-------
 2.   Effluents  from Population  Increases

      The population  increases  associated with energy development
 will impose  increased demands  on wastewater treatment facilities.
 Table 3-10 gives  the water demand of population increases.
 Assuming that  half of the water used must  later be treated in a
 sewage treatment  plant,1 sewage treatment  plants capable of
 treating 0.03-0.8 million gallons per day  (depending on the tech-
 nology) will be required to serve the additional population.  The
 total solids content of raw domestic sewage ranges from 500 to
 1,000 milligrams  per liter,2 so that the wet-solids generated by
 population increases range from 0.06 to 3.3 tons per day  (depend-
 ing  on the technology and solids content of the sewage).  This is
 disposed of  as sludge; it can  either be buried in a landfill,
 used as a soil conditioner, or fermented to produce methane.
 These quantities  are at least  one thousand times less than the
 solids generated  by energy facilities.  As a result, the water
 quality problem associated with population increases is not one
 of the quantity of the wastes  generated but of providing adequate
 treatment facilities.

      Even in the  quantities projected, untreated or poorly
 treated effluents can cause degradation in surface waters.
 Treatment facilities  in  many  communities in  the  eight-state
 area are already  finding it difficult to meet the 1977 federal
 and  state effluent standards.  When the need for sewage treat-
 ment is higher during the construction phase of a facility and
 power plant, it may be impractical to build sewage treatment
 plants to serve peak construction work forces since they would
 be underutilized  later.

 C.   Aquifer  Disruption

      Underground  and surface coal, oil shale, and uranium mining
 can  produce  both  surface and groundwater impacts,  underground
 and  surface  mines intercept groundwater aquifers, requiring mine
 dewatering operations that may deplete aquifers and, in some
 cases,  create  an  excess water  disposal problem.3  In the area
 near Rifle,  the oil shale being mined is an aquifer that supplies


       In urban areas, the percentage of water use which must
 later be treated  as sewage is  75-80 percent; we have assumed 50
percent since  some of this population will be rural and served
by septic tanks.

      2P.H. McGauhey.  Engineering Management of water Quality.
New York,  N.Y.:  McGraw-Hill,  1968.

      3Sometimes the water obtained from dewatering operations can
be used to supply water for mining, reclamation, and facility
needs.

                               58

-------
Piceance creek.  Mine dewatering could reduce  the  base  flow  of
Piceance Creek to 0 (see Section 8.3).

3.3.3  Variations in Existing Conditions

     Existing conditions at individual sites and for the region
as a whole will affect the type and degree of  water impacts. The
most important variables are the quantity, quality, and access-
ibility of water, the characteristics of the energy resource,
particularly coal, and the climatic conditions.   Other, less
important variables will also be identified.

A.  water Availability

     Water availability estimates and the water  requirements for
energy development are shown in Table 3-12.-^  As indicated in
the table, by 2000 water requirements for the  Low Demand case^
(1 gasification plant, 1 slurry pipeline, 3 power plants, and
35 oil shale facilities) would require 28-52 percent of the  sur-
face water available in the Upper Colorado River Basin,  water
requirements for the Low Nuclear Availability case  (2 gasifica-
tion plants, 10 power plants, and 41 oil shale facilities) con-
stitute 43-71 percent of the water available.   These percentage
ranges do not include water required by the added population
since domestic water often comes from groundwater supplies.

     Water availability does not appear to be a problem in the
Upper Missouri River Basin as a whole; the water not already
allocated is well in excess of anticipated requirements
(Table 3-12) .  However, water supplies may .be inadequate  in
parts of the Upper Missouri River Basin; for example, demands on
the Yellowstone River subbasin are substantial.   Moreover, much
of the resource development will occur in areas well away from
surface water supplies.  If surface water is used to supply
development  in these areas, long pipelines will have to be con-
structed,  in addition, if water demands for energy development
are as high  as 1 million-acre feet per year (the Low Demand Case),
the navigation season on the Lower Missouri may be  reduced.
Available data indicate that water for the  "normal" 8-month navi-
gation season would be adequate in 24 of the 75 years  analyzed.
      Both estimates are questionable, availability estimates
because of inadequate data and unresolved water rights and allo-
cation questions, and requirements estimates because of inade-
quate data, particularly for synfuel technologies that have not
been deployed on a commercial scale.
     2
      See Section 3.1 and chapter 12 for a definition of the
three demand cases.

                               59

-------
          TABLE 3-12:  WATER AVAILABILITY AND WATER DEMAND
                       (acre-feet per year)
Surface Water
Availability1*
Water use by the Regional
Scenario in the year
2000" assuming nominal
consumption0
Conversion facilities
Population increases
Total
Water use by the Regional
Scenario itv the year
2000b assuming water
use minimization^
Conversion facilities
Population increases
Total
Upper Colorado
River Basin
1,540,000-2,090,000
754,163-1,038,693
44,550-54,870
798,713-1,093,563
536,172-836,381
44,550-54,870
580,722-891,251
Upper Missouri
River Basin
19,880,000
993,542-1,811,634
60,370-98,900
1,053,912-1,910,534
766,984-1,486,942
60,370-98,900
827,354-1,585,842
^ot allocated as of 1975, these are estimates only

 See Chapter 12 for a definition of these scenarios, the range in
values represents the low demand and low nuclear availability cases.

CWhite, Irvin L., et al.  Energy Resource Development Systems for a
Technology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.  Wash-
ington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, forthcoming.

 Water Purification Associates.  Water Requirements for Steam-
Electric Power Generation and Synthetic Fuel Plants in the Western
United States. Final Report, for University of Oklahoma, Science and
Public Policy Program.  Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental
Protection Agency, forthcoming.
                               60

-------
The number o^ years when there would be no navigation season ,
would increase from 0 at present to about 11 out of 75 years.

      A great deal of uncertainty also exists with regard to
water rights in the Upper Missouri River Basin.   These uncer-
tainties appear likely to be less significant than in the Upper
Colorado River Basin because a greater excess flow is available.
However, allocations in the Yellowstone River Basin are currently
under review, and the Montana Fish and Game Department and Water
Quality Bureau have applied for instream flow allocations which,
if granted, would curtail major diversions in Montana for either
energy or agricultural use elsewhere.  Agricultural demands,
particularly for irrigation, are also expected to increase in
the future.

     The possibility of obtaining groundwater for both energy
facilities as well as increased populations is also site-specific.
The Upper Colorado has less groundwater available than does the
Upper Missouri,  in both basins, only a part of the water require-
ments of conversion facilities could be met by groundwater.

     The most important aquifers in the Upper Colorado River
Basin are in alluvial deposits along rivers and streams.  These
aquifers are recharged at a rate of 4 million acre-feet per year
(twice the water available from surface streams) and store a
total of 115 million acre-feet at a depth of less than 100 feet.
Greater quantities occur in deeper reservoirs.  While the use of
some part of the 4 million acre-feet per year recharge rate would
not constitute aquifer mining, it would affect the streams which
themselves depend on groundwater to maintain low flows.  Never-
theless, groundwater is a potential source for energy development
in the Upper Colorado that has not been examined closely.

     There are also numerous aquifers in the Upper Missouri River
Basin.  A total of 860 million acre-feet is estimated to be
stored in the upper 1,000 feet of rock in the basin.3  However,
withdrawal rates are often constrained by low permeability.  The
Madison aquifer is the most likely source of water for conversion


      U.S., Army, Corps of Engineers, Missouri River Division,
Reservoir Control Center.  Missouri River Main Stem Reservoirs
Long Range Regulation Studies, Series 1-74.  Omaha, Nebr.:  Corps
of Engineers, 1974.
     2
      Price, Don, and Ted Arnow.  Summary Appraisals of the
Nation's Ground-Water Resources—Upper Colorado Region, U.S. Geo-
logical Survey Professional Paper 813-C.  Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1974.

      Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee.  The Missouri  River
Basin Comprehensive Framework Study, 7 Vols.  Denver, Colo.:
U.S., Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 1971.

                               61

-------
facilities; however, its use will be expensive because it is
deeply buried in most areas within the basin  (7,500 feet at
Colstrip).

B.  The Quality of Available Water

     Table 3-13 gives an indication of water quality in the Upper
Colorado and upper Missouri River Basins.  Only total dissolved
solids are included because this is the variable that most
affects pretreatment for use by energy facilities or populations.
Other water quality parameters can be important locally.  As
Table 3-13 indicates, there is little difference in the quality
of surface water in the two basins.  For the six sites studied,
the White River near Rifle had the lowest total dissolved solids
(181 milligrams per liter),(mg/£), while Lake Powell near
Kaiparowits had the highest (475-677 mg/A).

     Groundwater is normally higher in dissolved solids than
surface water but concentrations can vary considerably.  Quality
is best close to the recharge site.  Because recharge sites are
usually at higher elevations in the mountains, quality generally
decreases as elevation decreases.
 TABLE 3-13:
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS IN SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER
(milligrams per liter)
Basin
Upper Colorado River Basin
Green River
Upper Ma ins tern
San Juan
Upper Colorado River
Region Outlet
Upper Missouri River
Bighorn8
Tongue2
Powder3
Yellowstone9
Knife3
Missouri Mainstem
Madison Aquifer
Montana
North Dakota
Surface
Water

307-1,688
207-621
159-447

558

585
380
1,425
525
970
440



Groundwater
1,000-40,000













500-1,000
3,000-10,000
     Measured in  the Fort Union Coal  Region.
                               62

-------
     The Environmental Protection Agency National Interim Pri-
mary Drinking water Regulations do not specify a  maximum level
for dissolved solids.  The U.S. Geological Survey Classification
System calls water fresh if the dissolved solids content is  less
than 1000 mg/A; water is considered suitable for livestock if
dissolved solids are less than 2,500 mg/A.

C.  Coal Characteristics and Climate

     The coal characteristics at a site determine the quantity
of wet solids in the effluent.  in general, the  coal character-
istics have only a small effect on process water requirements
except for the Lurgi process where coal moisture is important.
Climatic conditions principally affect cooling water require-
ments and thus can have a large effect on total  plant water con-
sumption.

1.  water Requirements

     Table 3-14 summarizes water requirements by site.  The data
indicate that water requirements for facilities  in the Northern
Great Plains  (Beulah, Colstrip, and Gillette) are less than those
in the Four Corners Area  (Navajo/Farmington and Kaiparowits/
Escalante).  water requirements at Beulah are least, averaging
22 percent lower than those at Navajo/Farmington.  A Lurgi gasi-
fication facility at Beulah will use 42 percent less water than
at Farmington.

     The moisture content of the coal is the principal cause of
these site variations in the case of synthetic fuels.  Lurgi
makes direct use of the water  derived from the coal, thus
accounting for the large variations in this process's water use
by site; for other synthetic fuel processes, the water in the
coal is assumed to be lost.  The moisture content of coals at
the six sites studied range from 13 percent at Rifle to  36 per-
cent at Beulah.

     Variations in the water requirements among sites for elec-
tric power generation result from two factors.  The first factor
consists of differences  in flue gas desulfurization water
requirements  (due to differences in the sulfur content of coal).
The second factor, consists of differences  in the average tem-
perature and humidity at each  site; the hotter and more humid
the air, the  less cooling water it can absorb via evaporation.

2.  water Effluents

     The ash  and sulfur  content of coal are  largely responsible
for site variations  in quantities of effluent.  At the six sites
studied, coal ash content ranges from 5 percent at Rifle  to  19
percent at Navajo/Farmington,  and sulfur  content ranges  from
0.5 percent at Kaiparowits/Escalante to 1.0  percent at Colstrip.


                                63

-------
               TABLE 3-14:   WATER REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY  BY  SITE*
Site
Kaiparowits/Escalante
Navajo/Farmington
Rifle
Gillette
Colstrip
Beulah
Water Requirements
(1,000 acre-ft/yr)
Electric Power
Generation
29.82
29.21
28.47
25.84
26.66
23.88
Lurgi
NC
5.64
NC
4.21
4.62
3.31
Synthane
NC
8.67
NC
7.78
7.81
7.67
Synthoil
NC
11.75
NC
9.23
10.30
10.09
TOSCO II
NC
NC
12.92
NC
NC
NC
Slurry
Pipeline
NC
NC
NC
19.17
NC
NC
acre-ft/yr = acre-feet per year.
NC = not considered.

^ater Purification Associates.  Water Requirements for Steam-Electric Power Generation
 and Synthetic Fuel Plants in the Western United States, Final Report, for University of
 Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy Program.
 Protection Agency, forthcoming.
Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental
 For a 3,000 megawatt-electric power plant at 70-percent load factor, for 250 million
cubic feet per day gasification facilities at 90-percent load factor, 100,000 barrels
per day coal liquefaction and oil shale processing facilities at 90-percent load factor
and a 25 million tons per year slurry pipeline at 100-percent load factor.

-------
Coal with a high ash content will produce larger bottom or fly
ash effluent streams, and coal with a high sulfur content will
produce larger quantities of scrubber sludge effluent.

     Table 3-15 indicates how the quantity of wet-solids effluent
varies by site.  For all coal to fuel and power generating pro-
cesses, the largest variation between sites is more than a factor
of four, with a range at Navajo/Farmington of 2.8-5.3 million
tons per year and a corresponding range at Gillette of 0.7-1.3
million tons per year.  The large quantity of effluent at Navajo/
Farmington is associated with the high ash content of the coal
(19 percent).  Coal at Rifle has the lowest ash content (5 per-
cent) , and power generation there results in the smallest amount
of wet-solids, five times less than at Navajo/Farmington.

     The trace element composition of effluent streams is largely
a function of the trace elements present in the coal.  The extent
to which these vary by site or region in the West is largely
unknown.

D.  Other Variables

     Other factors that vary by site and affect water impacts are
the water requirements of reclamation and the soil and aquifer
characteristics at a site,  water requirements for reclamation
vary primarily as a function of climate and coal seam thickness.
These requirements are expected to be highest in the arid South-
west where rainfall is smallest, particularly during the summer
growing season, and where coal seams are generally thinner
(10.3 feet at Kaiparowits/Escalante).!

     Soil and aquifer characteristics are important to the fate
of effluents.  Those characteristics vary widely both regionally
and locally;  thus, they are particularly important when locating
a disposal pond.  Low soil permeability (as in clay) is desirable
to prevent seepage of effluents.  Conversely, higher permeability
(as in loamy soils)  is desirable in septic tank drain fields to
provide higher capacity and better filtration of sewage effluents.

3.3.4  Summary of Technological and Site-Specific Factors

     Some technology-related problems, in combination with
certain site characteristics, cause water impacts to be particu-
larly severe.  These severe impacts can often be mitigated by
choosing a different technology for the problem site, a different
site for the problem technology, or an entirely different tech-
nology-site combination.  Table 3-16 lists the problems that can
arise because of technology-site combinations and indicates what
technology- and site-related factors cause what problems.


      Reclamation potential is discussed in Section 3.5.


                               65

-------
               TABLE 3-15:  WET SOLIDS RESIDUALS FOR EACH TECHNOLOGY BY SITE*



Site
Kaiparowi ts /E s calante
Navajo/Farmington
Rifle
Gillette
Colstrip
Beulah
Wet-Solidsb
(MMtpy)
Electric Power
Generation
5.30
5.00
1.14
1.32
3.01
2.65

Lurgi
NC
3.00
NC
0.72
1.27
1.20

Synthane
NC
2.84
NC
0.71
1.12
1.08

Synthoil
NC
5.31
NC
1.23
2.07
2.00

TOSCO II
NC
NC
40.81
NC
NC
NC
Slurry
Pipeline
NC
NC
NC
-
NC
NC
MMtpy = million tons per year
NC = not considered

 water Purification Associates.  Water Requirements for Steam-Electric Power Generation
 and Synthetic Fuel Plants in the Western United States. Final Report, for University of
 Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy Program.  Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental
 Protection Agency, forthcoming.

 For a 3,000 megawatt-electric power plant at 70-percent load factor, for 250-million
cubic feet per day gasification facilities at 90-percent load factor, 100 barrels per day
coal liquefaction and oil shale processing facilities at 90-percent load factor and a
25-million tons per year slurry pipeline at 100-percent load factor.

-------
TABLE 3-16:  SUMMARY OF WATER PROBLEMS
Water Problems
Severe water shortages
generating water rights
conflicts
Groundwater contamination
from facility effluent
Surface water contaminants
from domestic sewage
Aquifer disruption
Combinations of Factors that Cause the Problem
Technological Factors
Conversion facilities
(especially electric
power generation)
Conversion facilities
(especially oil shale
processing)
Electric power
generation, coal
gasification
Mining
Locational Factors
Upper Colorado River
Basin (especially New
Mexico) , moisture con-
tent of the coal, climate
Soil permeability and
aquifer depth
Small communities or
others with treatment
facilities operating
near capacity.
Location of the aquifer
relative to the seam

-------
     Water  for energy conversion facilities is apparently less
 available in  the Upper Colorado River Basin than in the Upper
 Missouri River Basin.  Water for energy development in New Mexico
 is particularly limited.  Since  electric  power  generation
 requires more water than any other conversion technology, a worst-
 case combination in terms of water impacts is to site an electric
 power plant in New Mexico.  Further, the generally low moisture
 content of  southwestern coals and the hot climate means that
 energy conversion will require more water in that area.

     Groundwater availability for energy conversion is highly
 uncertain in  both the Upper Colorado and Upper Missouri River
 Basins.  There is undoubtedly more groundwater in the Upper
 Missouri River Basin than in the Upper Colorado River Basin, but
 the amounts in the Upper Colorado cannot be ignored as a source
 for energy development.  Mitigation of water use shortages and
 conflicts may require the use of wet/dry cooling (particularly
 in the Southwest)  or the export of coal from the Upper Colorado
 River Basin.

     If groundwater contamination through seepage from evapora-
 tive holding  ponds (which retain the liquid wastes from power
 generation and coal-synthetic fuels)  is to be prevented, careful
 siting of these ponds will be required.  Prevention of ground-
 water contamination via seepage through spent shale remains an
 unsolved problem since spent shale will not be held in lined
 ponds.  In the vicinity of evaporative holding ponds and spent
 shale disposal sites, soil permeability should be low and aqui-
 fers at great depth.   The longer any seepage remains in the soil
 prior to migrating to an aquifer, the more contaminants that can
 be absorbed by the soil.  Given the uncertainties surrounding
 the probable  increase in seepage rates over time, mitigation
 calls for strict design standards-for evaporative holding ponds
 and new approaches to spent shale disposal.

     Surface water contamination from untreated or poorly treated
 domestic sewage is a potential  problem wherever and whenever
 population increases outstrip the capacity of sewage treatment
 plants.  The problem can be critical when construction workforces
 are in excess of operating workforces, as in the case for an
 electric power plant and coal gasification plant.  Small commu-
 nities, where the capacity of sewage treatment facilities is
 limited and effluent quality is marginal,  are particularly sus-
 ceptible to sewage overloads.   Mitigation calls for policies
 that require sewage treatment expansion prior to the construction
 of a conversion facility or for temporary  sewage treatment
 arrangements during the construction phase.

     Aquifer disruption, with concomitant reduction in ground-
water flow to surface streams,  is a potential problem wherever
mining takes place within an aquifer.  Mitigation may require
 reclamation of the mined areas  as mining proceeds (rather than


                               68

-------
reclamation after the life of the mine).  The problem will be
lessened to the extent that groundwater flow is reestablished and
the  length of time the flow is disrupted kept to a minimum.

3.3.5  Data and Research Adequacy

     The water impact analyses conducted to date confirm what
others have found, that the assessment of the water impacts of
western energy resource development are severely handicapped by
the high degree of uncertainty about water availability,  while
this handicap is discussed most frequently in the context of
surface water, primarily in the upper Colorado River Basin, the
lack of knowledge about groundwater is a handicap as well.  (See
Chapters 4 and Section 14.2.)

     At present, uncertainties concerning the impacts of ground-
water on energy development and vice-versa are primarily due to
the  lack of an adequate data base.  The location of aquifers,
their depth, their rate of recharge, and the quantity and quality
of the available water are all highly uncertain.  As indicated
in Chapters 12 and 14, rights questions are now being raised with
regard to groundwater.  Also,  as groundwater and surface water
interrelationships receive more  attention, the questions and
issues that have previously been associated only with surface
water are also being raised in connection with groundwater.  The
effect that using municipal wastewater for irrigation will have
on surface and groundwater quality and recharge rates is still
being debated.

     Information is inadequate to assess problems that could
occur as a result of discharging effluents into on-site evapora-
tive ponds.  These effluents,  including trace elements, have not
been quantified, and any interactions that could occur in the
region are unknown.  For much of the eight-state study area,
construction and operating practices for holding ponds are not
well developed? therefore, it is difficult to estimate a failure
rate for them.

     Finally, the water needs  of each of the technologies need
to be improved with data from commercial operations under these
environmental conditions and with the various types of coal
found in the western region.  These data are not currently avail-
able for any technology except electric power generation,  infor-
mation is also needed on the extent to which water requirements
can be minimized and the changes in the quantity and quality of
effluents which result when alternative water treatment tech-
nologies are used.
                               69

-------
3.4  SOCIAL, ECONOMIC,  AND POLITICAL


                          HIGHLIGHTS

     • CRITICAL FACTORS

       • Tftiee technological factors  can significantly
         the. social,  economic, and political impacts o£ energy
         development'   labor intensity,  capital intensity, and
         Ac.he.du.l4.ns .
       • Six. to catio nal factors can  also  significantly
         these  impacts:  community size and location, capabil-
         4.t  ofa  e.x.J.At titutio n& ,  hi.& tomcat ou.t-mj.gtia-
         tton,  ch.ax.acte.si4.&tj,c& o£ the.  JLoc.a.1 lotion,
         6-inanci.at co nd , and the. cu.ttu.ie. and
         an a/tea.

       LABOR INTENSITY

       • The. tie.qu.4.JLe.me.ntA (Jot housing,  &ckoot&, and othe.1  public
         and private,  fiac-i-tit-ie.* and  4etv.tc.e4 ane. £aige.ty de.te.fi-
                by  the.  tabon •inte.n&'ity  o£  the, e.ne.igy de.ve.-topme.nt
                       de.p£oye.d.
         On an  zquivaltnt e.ne.igy 6a4-t4,  tabon. rLe.qu.iie.me.nt&
         coat gasification ane. QHe.ate.H-  than jjo/t the. othzn  conve.1
         Aion te.chnotogie.& con&ide.n.e.d;  oil &hale. fintontinQ  and
         e.le,ctft.ic  poweA. Qe.ne.fiation Jie.qu.ifie. the. te.a&t  [on a  pe.fi-
         Btu
         Lange.  di^e.^e.nce-i> between  construction and opziating
         labofi  >ie.quix.e.me.nt& exaceAba^e  population- tie.late.d  im-
         pacts.   In such case.s, se.ivice.s  and facilities will  be.
         inadequate, during the. construction phase, or ove.rbuilt
             the.  operations phase..
       ' Among  conversion technologies,  coal gasification  has  the
         largest  di^erence between  construction and operation
         phase  labor requirements; coal  liquefaction has the
         smallest.

       SCHEDULING

       • The scheduling ofi the construction OfJ multiple  facili-
         ties within the same area can  either exacerbate or
         minimize the ejects ojj cU|Jf{e/tence4 in construction  and
         operating  phase labor requirements.
                                 70

-------
       CAPITAL INTENSITY

        •  The. capital inte.n6i.ty o& a. technology i& an indicate ft.
          potential tax. ie.ve.ntie. and pe.ft.&onat  income. inc.ne.a& z& ,
                         tichnologie.4 ate capital inte.n&ive. and
          can produce public  ievenue4 -in exce-54  0(5 added public
          expend-Ctu-te tequ-t/iemen-ta  ovei £ne long te.ft.rn.
          PJiope.ft.ty tax.e.4 aft.e.  ge.ne.ft.ally not available. du.i4.nQ aon
          &tiuc.t
-------
help determine the pace and extent of migration to an area, as
well as the financial and managerial capability of local govern-
ments to provide services and capital facilities.

A.  Labor Requirements

     Labor-intensive energy resource developments will attract a
large number of people to jobs in development areas and magnify
social, economic, and political impacts.  A growth rate of more
than 7 percent will double population in less than 10 years and
tend to produce serious dislocating impacts. -1-

     Further, labor forces will vary during the construction
phase and between the construction and operation phases of an
energy facility.  One overall labor indicator that facilitates a
comparison of technologies is the ratio of peak construction
personnel to operational personnel requirements  (Table 3-17).  A
high ratio indicates that more workers are needed during con-
struction than during operation.  This results in excess require-
ments for housing, schools, and other public and private services
during the construction phase and increases the likelihood that
services and facilities will be inadequate and that quality of
life will decline locally.  Coal gasification, electric power
generation, and oil shale retorting exhibit the highest ratios,
indicating that demands on local communities will be large during
construction and much smaller during operation.  Conversely, coal,
uranium, and oil shale mining exhibit an inverse relationship.

     Obviously, if an energy resource development requires a
substantially greater labor force during construction, a local
building program designed to meet construction population needs
will result in an excess of permanent facilities over the long
term.  Likewise, when the construction phase of a development
lasts for several years, long-term facility needs may also be
      See, for example, Ford, Andrew.  Summary Description of the
BOOMl Model.  Los Alamos, N.M.:   Los Alamos Scientific Labora-
tory, 1976; and University of Denver, Research Institute.  The
Social, Economic, and Land Use Impacts of a Fort union coal Pro-
cessing Complex, Final Report, for U.S., Energy Research and
Development Administration.  Springfield, va.:  National Tech-
nical information Service, 1975.  FE-1526.


                               72

-------
   TABLE 3-17:
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL MANPOWER
REQUIREMENTS FOR ENERGY FACILITIES
Facility


Coal
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Gasification
Liquefaction
Power Plant
Oil Shale
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Retort and
Processing
Crude Oil
Production0
Natural Gas
Production0
Uranium
Open Pit Mine
Underground Mine
Milling
Manpower Requirements3
(Man-Years)
Construction
Duration
(years)

5
6
5
7
8

4
4

6

7

5

5
5
3
Peak
Employment

210
820
4,680
5,220
2,540

710
710

2,680

3,920

1,700

80
440
90
Operation



550
2,530
590
3,060d
440

660
1,180

650

2,050

790

180
840
110
Ratiob



.4
.3
8.1
1.7
5.8

1.1
.6

4.1

1.9

2.2

.4
.5
.8
 The listed requirements are for the typical  size  facilities
shown in Table 3-6.   Data are from Carasso.M., et al.  The Energy
Supply Planning Model.   San Francisco,  Calif.:  Bechtel Corpora-
tion, 1975, vol. 1,  pp. 6-30 to 6-31 and  involve  uncertainties
-10 to +20 percent;  data for developing technologies (coal lique-
faction, gasification,  and oil shale processing) involve  uncer-
tainties of -30 to +75  percent.

 The ratio expressed is Construction/Operation.  The larger the
ratio, the greater the  employment decline  when construction ends.

 Includes exploration (including dry holes),  development, and
production,  see Carasso, et al.  Energy Supply Model, pp. 6-7
to 6-15.                  	   	  	   	

 Ibid.  This figure  is  among those with the greatest uncertainty.
In addition, economics  of scale  are not incorporated into coal
liquefaction facilities over the 21,700 barrels  (bbl)- per day
plant assumed by Bechtel.
                               73

-------
overestimated.1  On the other hand, a building program designed
primarily for the population size expected over the long-term may
result  in inadequate facilities for most of the construction
period,  in such a case, some facilities problems can be alle-
viated  rather easily, but others cannot.  For example, schools
can  schedule double sessions and/or erect temporary facilities
to accommodate the excess of pupils, but medical facilities may
become  overloaded and attracting additional medical personnel to
the  area may be difficult.  Most doctors would probably be
unwilling to establish practices in these areas, knowing that
they might be forced to relocate within a few years.  Similarly,
local landlords and investors would not be likely to build ade-
quate housing for the short-term population, knowing that the
demand  for housing will drop markedly within a few years.

     A  second indicator of labor intensity is the sum of peak
construction and operation manpower requirements (Table 3-18).
This indicator suggests that coal liquefaction, crude oil pro-
duction, and coal gasification are the most labor-intensive tech-
nologies for the energy outputs of the facilities assumed in our
scenarios.  However, this ordering changes somewhat when uniform
energy  output of 10J-5 Btu's per year is assumed; under this
assumption, coal gasification and liquefaction require the
greatest amount of labor.  The labor intensity of electric power
generation depends on how the energy produced is measured,  if
measured as output electricity, its labor intensity is similar
to that for coal synthetic fuels; if measured as thermal input,
its  labor intensity is similar to that of an underground coal
mine.   By both measures, uranium mining and milling and surface
coal mining are low in overall manpower requirements.

     Larger work forces contribute both directly and indirectly
to population increases to communities near energy development
sites.  Larger populations mean larger demands for housing,
public  facilities, and public and private services, as well as
greater stress on roads and streets and law enforcement agencies.
Thus, any large and rapid increase in population creates a sub-
stantial demand for additional services and facilities from local
governments.
      John S. Gilmore's descriptions of boom and bust have
included several examples.  One of these is Kenai, Alaska, where
the response to the construction of a petroleum development com-
plex resulted in excess housing, retail services and public
facilities.  See Gilmore, John S., Keith D. Moore, and Diane M.
Hammond.  Synthesis and Evaluation of Initial Methodologies for
Assessing Socioeconomic and Secondary Environmental Impacts of
Western Energy Resource Development, working Paper #2 for U.S.,
Council on Environmental Quality.  Denver, Colo.:  University of
Denver, Research Institute, 1976.

                               74

-------
        TABLE 3-18:  MANPOWER REQUIREMENT FOR ENERGY FACILITIES
Facility
Coal
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Gasification
Liquefaction
Power Plant
Btu (e)
Btu (th)
Oil Shale
Surface Mine
Underground Mine
Retort and
Processing
Crude Oil
Production
Natural Gas
Production
Uraniumc
Open Pit Mine
Underground Mine
Milling
Assumed Facility Size

12.7 MMtpy
12.7 MMtpy
250 MMcfd
100,000 bbl/day
3,000 MWe



140,000 tpd
140,000 tpd

100,000 bbl/day

100,000 bbl/day

250 MMcfd

1,200 tpd
1,200 tpd
1,200 tpd
Manpower Requirement sa
(Man Years)
For
Assumed
Facility

760
3,350
5,270
8,280
2,980



1,370
1,890

3,330

5,970

2,490

260
1,280
200
For
Production of
1015 Btu/yearb

2,900
12,900
58,500
36,300

34,200
11,600

3,600
5,000

14,500

26,100

27,700

630
3,100
500
bbl = barrel(s)
Btu = British thermal units
      (th = thermal; e « electric)
MMcfd = million cubic feet per day
MMtpy = million tons per year
MWe = megawatts-electric
tpd - tons per day
Source:  Carasso, M., et al.  The Energy Supply Planning Model.  San
Francisco, Calif.:  Bechtel Corporation, 1975.

alncludes both peak construction and operation employment requirements
(see Table 3-5).

 10" Btu's per year in the product.

°Assumes ore contains approximately 0.2 percent uranium oxide.
                                   75

-------
B.  Scheduling

     The construction schedule for the energy facilities within
a local area is an important technological factor which influences
the extent of population impact on the area.  When several facil-
ities are constructed at the same time, the rate of population
growth can be greater than that easily accommodated by a commu-
nity. 1  For example, simultaneous scheduling of technologies that
are labor intensive in their construction phase will cause the
workers for two or more projects to be located in the same area
at the same time.  Currently, no means exist to coordinate the
scheduling of several energy developments in an area, and such a
goal might only be met by limiting the rate of development of
western resources.  institutional inadequacies impede joint
public and private sector planning.  At the least, industry and
local government often fail to communicate with each other in
advance of development.  Also, both are affected by federal
policy and the associated uncertainties.

     Conversely, if construction is prolonged, so is the period
of population instability,  it may be easier for communities to
deal with temporary construction-related impacts if the period
of instability is minimized.2  if construction of successive pro-
jects involves large gaps of time with no construction,  commu-
nities may become dependent on construction projects to reduce
unemployment and add to local economic stability.-*  on the other
hand, service shortages may occur each time construction occurs
and unemployment when it does not.

C.  Capital Intensity

     A community benefits economically from energy development
primarily through:  increases in its tax base and revenues beyond
the expenditures needed to meet expanded facilities and services
requirements; and increases in personal incomes.  Given the tax
structure in most communities, an expanded property tax base and
increased revenues are the most important sources of benefit;


      Walton, Barry L.  "Population Growth Constrained Synthetic
Liquid Fuel Implementation Scenarios," Chapter 22 in Dickson,
Edward M., et al. Impacts of Synthetic Liquid Fuel Development;
Automotive Market, Vol. III.  Menlo Park, Calif.:   Stanford
Research institute, 1976.

      Planning for stability would require adequate information
from all energy developers in the area as well as an adequate
professional planning capability.

      Page,  Arizona is an example; see Josephy, Alvin M.
"Kaiparowits:  The ultimate Obscenity."  Audubon,  Vol.78 (March
1976), pp. 64-90.


                               76

-------
the extent of the community's benefit from both depends on the
capital intensity of energy facilities.  Large conversion facil-
ities, in particular, are large contributors to local revenues
and can produce substantial excess revenues in the long term.l

     In the short term, however, even capital-intensive facil-
ities cause problems because property taxes generally are not
available during construction when the demands on local govern-
ments are often greatest.  Further, the jurisdictional division
between municipalities and counties commonly results in munici-
palities experiencing most of the population impact and service
demands while the counties and school districts receive the tax-
ation benefits.  This is discussed further in Section 3.4.3.

     Local' merchants and local residents employed by energy
developers tend to gain most economically during the construction
phase.  However, the majority of construction workers usually
come from outside.  This, of course, reduces the benefits that
residents often anticipate before construction begins.  During
operation, a relatively larger number of workers tend to be local
residents, and new opportunities open up in local service indus-
tries.

3.4.3  variations in Existing Conditions

     The conditions that exist at an energy development site play
a large part in determining the actual type and degree of social,
economic, and political impacts.  For example, impacts will vary
depending upon such factors as community size and location, capa-
bilities of existing institutions, historical outmigration, char-
acteristics of the local labor force, local financial conditions,
and the culture and lifestyle of an area.

A.  Community Size and Location

     The most important existing condition that influences the
extent of population impact is the size of a community before
energy development begins.  Larger cities have more diversity and
capacity for growth in both the public and private sectors.  Our
research suggests that communities of less than 2,000 population
will almost always have inadequate services and planning capa-
bilities.2  Communities of up to 5,000 also may fall into this
category.  Conversely, cities of 10,000 or more (especially those


      For details on the local scenarios, see chapters 6 through
11.
     2
      Planning and growth management capabilities are largely
reflected in the existence of a full-time staff of professional
planners, good knowledge of existing facilities in the town, and
a plan of future developments in anticipation of growth.

                               77

-------
greater than 25,000) usually have a developed community service
system and planning professionals. Thus, in most larger communities,
lead-time problems are reduced because they generally have plans
for expansion, although acquiring funds for expansion may be a
problem regardless of city size.

     In addition to size, the number of communities in the vicin-
ity of an energy development will affect the relative impacts on
each town.  An isolated town that is the only possible place for
workers and their families to live will receive much greater
impacts than any one town in an area where the new population is
more widely distributed.1  Construction of a new town is a
partial solution to the inability of any single community to
absorb new population.  This solution has been suggested in the
Farmington. New Mexico and Kaiparowits, Utah areas (see chapters
6 and 7).  A similar solution is for an energy developer to
provide housing and community services by expanding an existing
village or town, as has occurred at Colstrip, Montana and Wright,
Wyoming (formerly just a crossroads south of Gillette).  However,
developers do not always provide community services,  leaving the
cost of streets, water, sewer, and other services to very small,
often unincorporated towns.  State and county laws and regula-
tions are not adequate in some cases to control growth in these
settlements.  Large cities, of 25,000 population or more, can
absorb considerable population growth much more easily, simply
because the growth represents a smaller proportion of their
initial size.

     Although the private sector often is  slow in responding to
increased demands for goods and services in rapid-growth situ-
ations, the reaction of local governments has tended to be even
slower, especially in smaller towns.   Availability of funds is
a major cause of this lag for all communities,  but the time span
is usually greater in small communities because of their lack of
planning capabilities.  Moreover, outside entities, rather than
local businesses, are more likely to meet service needs in
smaller communities, with the result that much of the economic
benefit can filter out of the local area.
      Gillette's isolation in northeastern Wyoming causes greater
impacts there than occur in the Rifle-Rangely-Meeker-Grand valley
area of western Colorado, where several towns share the impacts.
See Chapters 8  (Rifle)  and 9 (Gillette).
     2
      Breese, Gerald, et al.  The impact of Large installations
on Nearby Areas;  Accelerated urban Growth.  Beverly Hills,
Calif.:  sage, 1965, p. 589.


                               78

-------
B.  Capabilities of Existing Institutions

     As the site-specific analyses in Chapters 6-11 indicate,
growth leads to demands for housing and essential public facil-
ities and public services, for professional services,  and ulti-
mately for social and cultural opportunities.   Many western rural
communities are not accustomed to providing such a full range  of
services and, in any case, are severely strained by the rate  at
which these demands escalate.  Moreover, the manageability of
these problems is often reduced by inadequate tax bases and
planning capabilities. (See the discussion of community facil-
ities and services in Chapter 14.)

     Besides governmental service problems related to growth,
most small communities affected by energy development will more
than double in size, resulting in newcomers outnumbering natives
(including former residents who return because of the employment
opportunities energy developments offer).  Not only will commu-
nity leadership probably shift from the small businessmen and
ranchers who presently lead these communities, but the dominant
attitudes and values of the townspeople will probably change.
Thus, the new majorities and leaders may force communities to
make changes and undertake programs that they presently oppose.
For example, many of these communities have an antipathy to
planning and are reluctant to seek or accept assistance from
other levels of government.^  Yet, regardless of leadership or
values, most of these communities must develop a planning capa-
bility and accept intervention and assistance from state and
federal governments,  in fact, these communities may even play a
leading role in bringing pressure to bear on state and federal
governments to provide assistance.

     Increased strain in intergovernmental relations is another
impact of rapid population growth.  The sources of strain can be
found in almost every problem area that has been discussed in
this chapter, but particularly in the problems of:  the benefits
of public revenue increases accruing to jurisdictions other than
the ones which must provide expanded municipal services; the
pressure on the states and the federal government  to provide
assistance to impacted areas; and uncoordinated regulatory and
policy roles assumed by various levels of government.   (see the
discussion in Chapter 13.)

C.  Historical Out-Migration

     Some areas,  particularly in  the Northern  Great Plains,
have  seen their  populations decline  gradually for several


      See Christiansen, Bill, and Theodore H. Clack, Jr. "A Western
Perspective on Energy:  A Plea for Rational Energy Planning."
Science, vol. 194  (November  5, 1976), pp.  578-584.


                               79

-------
decades.1  In some ways, historical out-migration puts those
areas in a better position to accommodate rapid energy develop-
ment.  First, excess capacity in adequately maintained community
facilities, such as schools and water supply, could allow time
before new facilities must be constructed.  This is a luxury not
available in most parts of the west; medium-size cities which   ~
have experienced recent growth generally have no excess capacity.

     Another advantage of recent out-migration is that many of
the new energy related workers can be recruited from among those
young people who previously moved away from these areas.  These
workers' families will view the return of their children as a
benefit in itself, and, from a community point of view, less
social readjustment will be necessary than with a workforce com-
pletely unfamiliar to the area.

D.  Local Labor Force

     Another existing condition that influences the extent of
population impact concerns the size and composition of the local
labor force.  If local unemployed and underemployed persons are
afforded the opportunity of training programs, the number of non-
local workers required might be significantly lowered.  This is
more easily accomplished for operation than for construction
trades, which often require years of specialized experience.  Of
all construction occupations, those most likely to be filled by
local residents are laborers, cement finishers, and carpenters,
but even those occupations have involved 40- to 50-percent non-
local workers.  The proportion is up to 80 percent for some
skills.3

     Even where lease clauses require that Indians be given pre-
ference in hiring, the lack of training among Indians is a
barrier.  However, many Navajo workers have acquired training,
especially in coal mining operations.   Many have also joined labor
      For example, North Dakota has faced net declines in three
of the last four decades.
     2
      Mountain Plains Federal Regional Council.  Compilation of
Raw Data on Energy impacted Communities Including Characteristics,
Conditions, Resources and Structures.  Denver, Colo.:  Mountain
Plains Federal Regional council, 1976.

      Mountain West Research.  Construction Worker profile, Final
Report.  Washington, B.C.:  Old West Regional Commission, 1976.

                               80

-------
unions, at least in part because of the higher earnings asso-
ciated with union jobs.

     Unless lease terms or training programs benefit local resi-
dents, the largest category of new employment for local residents
tends to be in relatively low-paying service jobs, perhaps in
new businesses established by local entrepreneurs.2  Professional
and other, more specialized service jobs  (such as in medicine
and education) induced by population growth also commonly go to
outsiders.  Larger communities will experience more job switching
to new employment opportunities, but even in these towns special-
ized skills are unlikely to be available in great numbers.

E.  Local Financial Conditions

     Two major site-specific variables are the legal and finan-
cial capacities of local governments to respond in a timely
manner.  Some state governments have passed legislation enabling
communities to act decisively on their own and have established
programs to provide funding assistance specifically aimed at
impacted communities.

     The adequacy of new revenue for impacted communities will
depend primarily on timing and distribution; that is, funds for
the expansion of existing community facilities and services will
not always be available at the proper times or in the most appro-
priate jurisdictions.  Four of the states in the study area
(Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming) have taken special
actions to deal with the initial capital requirements of cities
and counties.  Their programs are described in the impact
analyses reported in Chapters 6 through 12.  Briefly, these pro-
grams provide impacted communities "front-end" money with which
to meet facilities and service requirements.  Utah permits the
pre-payment of taxes for state-related public improvements;
Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming have a statutory formula for
earmarking a portion of revenues from mineral leasing and sever-
ance taxes for payment directly to the impacted communities; and
Wyoming has established a community development authority to
issue bonds backed by future tax revenues.


     The United Mine Workers operate the Black Mesa Mines, and
the Operating Engineers man the Utah International Mine at Four
Corners.  Locals of both unions have approximately 70-percent
Navajo membership.  Robbins, Lynn A.  Navaio Participation in
T.abor Unions, Lake Powell Research Project Bulletin No. 15  Los
Angeles, Calif.:  University of California, Institute of Geo-
physics and Planetary Physics, 1975.

    2Gray, Irwin.  "Employment Effect of a New Industry in a
Rural Area."  Monthly Labor Review. Vol. 92  (June 1969), pp. 26-
30; Summers, Gene F., et al.  Industrial Invasion of Nonmetro-
pnlitan America.  New York, N.Y.:  Praeger, 1976.
                                             t

                               81

-------
     However, state programs resolve only part of the timing
problem associated with getting funds to local governments and
do even less to resolve completely the larger distribution prob-
lem.   For example, county governments, the principal recipient
of ad valorem property taxes, are often major beneficiaries of
new revenues produced by energy development, but as noted earlier,
cities and towns normally must provide most of the services and
facilities.  In such states as Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado,
special districts for water, sewers, schools, fire protection,
and other purposes can bridge the city/county jurisdictional
boundary and insure that new revenues are used at the impacted
locations.

     Based on the results of the regional impact analysis
reported in Section 12.4.4, energy-related revenues at most state
and local levels will probably exceed the new revenues required
to serve the expanded populations.  However, the types of legis-
lation discussed here (and conscientious administration of the
programs by the designated state boards)  will be necessary to
insure that the revenues are used when and where they are needed.
The present programs in some western states have the opposite
effect and, in fact, cause a lag between impacts being experi-
enced on the local level and revenues being required from the
state.

F.  Quality of Life, Lifestyle, and Culture

     "Quality of life" is largely  a  subjective  attribute  com-
prised of a variety of factors.  Usually, though, the availa-
bility of medical care,  professional services in general, and
adequate housing play an important role in residents' opinions
on the quality of their lives.  When public and private services
are unavailable, the local quality of life is generally con-
sidered to be low.1

     The capability  to  plan adequately for local population
impacts will largely determine the quality-of-life impacts in the
West.  Service infrastructure, such as utilities and streets, are
common concerns for local residents.  In the private sector,
housing shortages handled by mobile homes are not very satis-
factory either to those living in them or others in the commu-
nity.  For a variety of reasons, doctors tend not to locate in
small, isolated towns, making medical care a particular area of
concern for energy impacted communities.2  Industry response in


      Mountain west Research.  Construction Worker  profile,  Final
Report.  Washington, D.C.:  Old west Regional Commission, 1976.
     2
      Coleman, Sinclair.  Physician Distribution and Rural Access
to Medical Services, R-1887-HEW.  Santa Monica-, calif.:  Rand
Corporation, 1976.


                               82

-------
these service areas is variable, and cooperation with local
governments will doubtless be needed to maintain quality of life.

     Lifestyle and cultural differences influence the way in
which individuals perceive local attributes.  Long-time residents
in some isolated areas tend neither to expect nor to need the
same set of services as newcomers, although in some areas new-
comers and long-time residents have held similar opinions about
local conditions.1  Generally, opinions are affected by the con-
trasts in the lifestyles of ranchers and townspeople, energy
development workers and farmers, Mormons and non-Mormons, and,
perhaps most noticeably, Indians and non-Indians.  Although the
other differences are to some extent cultural, the clear-cut con-
trast between Indian and non-Indian values and societies are the
most noticeable examples of cultural differences.2

     Locations of archaeological or historical significance can
also create cultural problems if they are disturbed by energy
developments.  A development might be delayed by the archaeolog-
ical excavation of an ancient town, or the development might need
to be relocated to avoid an ancient burial ground.  Thus, the
location and value of such sites within the development areas
should be  determined  in  advance  of the  actual  energy  developments^

3.4.4  Summary of the Interactions between Technological and
       Locational Factors

     When a technology-related, impact-causing factor interacts
with certain site-related conditions, social, economic, and
political impacts can be magnified.  Potentially critical prob-
lems are listed in Table 3-19 together with the combination of
technology- and site-related factors that cause them.

     Coal synthetic fuels technologies  (and to a lesser extent
oil shale retorting and electric power generation) are labor
intensive; in addition, their peak construction labor require-
ments exceeds their operation labor requirements in varying
degrees.  High labor intensity and high peak construction to
operation labor ratios, in combination with small, isolated
communities where institutional planning capacity and financial


      See:  Mountain West Research.  Construction Worker profile;
Community Reports.  Washington, D.C.:  Old West Regional Commis-
sion, 1976; Mountain West Research.  Construction Worker Profile,
Final Report.  Washington, D.C.:  Old west Regional Commission,
1976, p. 126.

     2See:  U.S., Department of the interior, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Planning Support Group.  Draft Environmental impact
Statement;  Navajo-Exxon uranium Development.  Billings, Mont.:
Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1976.


                               83

-------
              TABLE 3-19:  SUMMARY OF SOCIAL,  ECONOMIC,  AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS
Social, Economic, and
Political Problems
Severely inadequate housing
and services, difficulties
for planning
Inadequate housing and
services
Benefits accrue to newcomers
rather than oldtimers
Financial discontinuities,
strained intergovernmental
relations
Combinations of Factors That Cause the Problem
Technolog ical
High labor intensity for
any one facility
Scheduling multiple labor
intensive facilities
simultaneously
High labor intensity for
any one facility
Labor intensity and
capital intensity
Locational
Small isolated communities ;
inadequate institutional
capacity and financial
capability
Larger communities, inade-
quate institutional
capacity and financial
capability
Size and character of the
local labor force
Jurisdictional arrangements
for income distribution,
state impact mitigation
programs
00

-------
capabilities are inadequate, cause social impacts to be magnified
into critical problems  (e.g., inadequate housing, schools, roads,
health care, etc.).

     A substantial number of the impacts on these communities can
be alleviated  (or even eliminated)  if the development choice is
to "strip and ship" the coal rather than to convert it to some
other energy form at the mine-mouth.  In fact, local communities
might escape most of the stresses and strains associated with
energy resource development if more of the raw sources were
exported from, rather than being converted within, the region.
However, although population impacts and certain physical envi-
ronmental impacts would be reduced, some fiscal disadvantages are
associated with the export option.  The most obvious disadvantage
is that taxes based on the assessed valuation of large-scale con-
version facilities and activities would accrue elsewhere; that
is, the tax base of the locality would not expand as much as it
otherwise would.1  If that tax gap is to be filled, the typical
fiscal alternative would be to develop an extraction tax that
falls either directly or indirectly on mining activity.  This
would tend to raise the price of energy delivered to the conver-
sion facility  (e.g., a power plant near Chicago), perhaps putting
the exporting state at a competitive disadvantage with states
that have lower severance taxes.  The extreme effect could be to
drive mining companies to other states.

     A final consideration is that if mining the resource to be
exported is relatively labor intensive (as underground coal
mining is), the negative economic impacts on state and local
governments may be magnified,  in such a case, the increased
population would have to be served, but,  as stated above, much of
the tax base would have been exported together with the coal.

     Scheduling multiple labor intensive technologies so that the
rate of increase in demand for services escalates rapidly causes
the same impact problems as those described above.  However, the
scheduling factor causes the problems to become critical for
larger communities as well as small, isolated ones.  Coordi-
nating the scheduling of several energy developments, especially
several conversion facilities,  in an area may only be possible
by limiting the rate of development of western resources.

     The extent to which the local labor force can be tapped by
the energy facility will largely determine the distribution of
income benefits between oldtimers and newcomers.  Because of the
specific skill mix and overall labor requirements, mining can
generally draw on the local labor force for ,a significant per-
centage of labor requirements.   On the other hand, the skills


      These disadvantages would be less pronounced in those
states which have supplanted local property taxes with state
severance taxes (e.g., North Dakota).

                               85

-------
required for conversion facilities  (especially during construc-
tion) are quite specialized and overall labor requirements are
high.  The percentage of newcomers required by them will be much
greater than those for mining.  Training programs aimed at the
local labor force can alleviate the problem to some degree.

     The combination of the capital intensity and labor intensity
of a technology determines the relationship between financial
benefits from development  (in the form of tax revenues and per-
sonal income increases) and financial costs  (in the form of
housing, schools, and other services).  While the financial bene-
fits which accrue from conversion facilities generally exceed
their finanical cost, the  jurisdiction  (e.g., municipality) which
must bear the cost does not always receive the benefit.  Juris-
dictional arrangements for distributing the financial benefits
vary by site.  In the states that do not have legislation which
enables communities to act on their own or do not have programs
to provide funding assistance aimed at impacted communities/ this
income distribution problem will be critical and lead to strained
intergovernmental relations.  Colorado and New Mexico do not have
such arrangements.  Arrangements in other states vary from
legislation which permits  the prepayment of taxes (Utah) to
payment of a portion of lease and severance taxes to impacted
communities (Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming).

     The labor requirement of each technology emerges from this
analysis as the major determinant of social, economic, and
political impacts.  Coal conversion technologies in particular
cause a large population influx, which impact small communities
most severely.  Construction of several facilities at once only
exacerbates the population-related impacts on local areas.  On
the other hand, the coal conversion facilities also contribute
most substantially to the  local tax base.

3.4.5  Data Limitations

     This section has relied on available information concerning
manpower and capital requirements of energy technologies.  All
involve uncertainty; this uncertainty is highest for future,
relatively untested technologies.  Other plausible estimates of
manpower needs  could result in different impacts,  in addition
to employment data shortcomings, the economic base/population
impact methodology remains very subjective in nature.  Basic/
nonbasic employment ratios used in this report were selected
after extensive review of other research, but the review only
reinforced the awareness that the range of multiplier estimates
is quite large and that selection within the range is subjective.
Further, employment multipliers and population multipliers are
largely based on past data, which may not be adequate for future
extrapolations.
                                86

-------
     Estimates of expenditure needs  and  anticipated revenues also
are based on incomplete  information.  When combined with the
population estimates discussed  above, the  potential for uncer-
tainty in the economic projections is even greater.

     In impact categories where numerical  data  are scarce (such
as social, cultural, and political impacts) ,  the lack of infor-
mation prevented a comprehensive  assessment in this study.  Qual-
ity-of-life data, especially those beyond  standard social indi-
cators, are extremely scarce for  local areas  in  the West.  Social
antagonisms and cultural conflicts are some of the items that
have resisted attempts at more  quantitative or precise discus-
sion.  Some limited recent  information  (largely  anecdotal) from
the west has been the basis for some treatments  of future prob-
lems in this report.  This may  be a  questionable basis for the
long-range time span of  concern,  but prediction  of social or
interpersonal behavior remains  among the least certain areas of
research.  Future research  attention could profitably focus on
social groups and "people"  impacts,  rather than  on methodologies
and quantitative data.

3 . 5  ECOLOGICAL

                         HIGHLIGHTS


     • CRITICAL FACTORS

       ' Foul. technological ^actofi&  can  significantly a^e.ct the.
         e.cologlcal Impact* ojj  e.ne.tigy de.ve2opme.nt:  land tie.qu.lfLe.-
         me.nt& , vaa.te.fi fLcqu.lfLe.me.nt*,  labotL  lnte,n*lty and altL
        * Foca. locatlonal  {actotL*  can also  significantly
         the.se. Impacts:   climate.,  topography,  soils,  and plant
         and animal  communities .

        LAND REQUIREMENTS
                land  use.  by  iuirface mining  can be 10 time.*
         Qfie.ate.fi tkan {,01 u.nde.igiouLnd mlne.4 and coal
         V
-------
   Land  use to  meet the need* o^ energy-related population.
   growth generally produces more significant ecological
   impacts than does land used directly by the. energy
   facilities .

   Land  use by  any single development generally disturbs
   only  a small percentage ojj a habitat type.; howe.ve.Ji,  even
   a  4ma££ d*.&tULHbanc.
   ofi a  fiafin. typo., a& aqmatic. habitat *.& in the. Atudy
 '  By  the. ye.ax. 2000,  LafiQQ,-&c.ale. de.ve.topme.nt c.ou.ld
   a significant percentage o<$ 4ome type.* o£ habitat and
   6nagme.nt habitat to the. point oft e.timinating 4ome mammal
   and bifid population*.

WATER REQUIREMENTS

 '  Withdrawal* o& local 4a^.jjac.e wate.fi by any single, con-
   ve.iAion facility ge.ne.tially will not have, a significant
   impact on aquatic habitat; we.ste.in Colorado is an e.x.~
   ce.ption.

 '  Withdrawals ojj local surface. wate.is £01 multiple, facil-
   ities  at the, same, location could eliminate, some sport
   fiish ^fiom stre.ams and alte.fi the. plant communitie.s sup-
   porting other fiish.

 LABOR INTENSITY

 '  Tne more labor intensive a technology, the more likely*
   ecological impacts are to be significant as a result oft
   land use, habitat fragmentation, water withdrawals, and
   recreation.  Population related impacts are usually
   larger than disturbances firom facilities.

 RECLAMATION

 *  The reclamation potential &or reestablishing vegetation
   is  greater in the Northern Great Plains than £or any
   other part o& the eight-state study area.

 PUBLIC LANDS

 *  Public lands, particularly those in a natural state, are
   likely to experience the greatest changes, primarily as
   a consequence o& population increases and easier access.
                         88

-------
       EMISSIONS AND EFFLUENTS
          In  Jioagk t
-------
                            TABLE  3-20:  LAND USE  BY TECHNOLOGY
Facility
Conversion Facilities
Power Plant (3000 MWe)

Lurgi Gas (250 MMcfd)
Synthane Gas (250 MMcfd)
Synthoil Oil (100,000 bbl/day)
Oil Shale Retort (100,000 bbl/day)
Mines
Underground Oil Shale (50 MMtpy)
Underground Coalb (12 MMtpy)
Surface Coal (12 MMtpy)
Typical Size
(acres/30-year
life of facility)

2,400

805
805
2,060
1,280
35,100
1,700
4,200-16,000
Equivalent Energy
(acres/1012 Btu
in product)

0.9
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
6
0.2
0.5-3.2
VD
O
        bbl  = barrels
        Btu  = British  thermal  units
        MMcfd =  million  cubic  feet per  day
MMtpy = million tons per year
MWe = megawatts-electric
          Includes  the  land  requirements  for  spent  shale  disposal.

          This  is the land that  is  permanently  occupied.

         cThe range of values is the range found in the six site-specific cases analyzed.

-------
     By eliminating vegetation, direct land use reduces the over-
all carrying capacity of an area, fragments habitat types, and
may increase erosion.  When carrying capacities are lowered,
animal populations, such as deer and elk, may also be reduced.
Fragmentation may further reduce animal populations that range
or migrate over large areas.  Increased erosion will speed
removal of nutrients from affected areas within ecosystems. Thus,
where nutrients already limit vegetation growth, increased ero-
sion will further reduce both growth and carrying capacity for
animals.

     Generally, the amount of land disturbed directly by any one
mine-plant combination is small in comparison to the land area
of entire counties or in comparison to the total amount of habi-
tat in a region.  Thus, the impacts resulting from direct land
use generally occur only locally; they have regional importance
only when the particular ecosystem type disturbed is rare or
supports endangered species.  For example, riparian ecosystem
types are rare in the west as compared to desert shrub commu-
nities.  Eliminating 5 percent of the riparian habitat in a loca-
tion has vastly greater impacts than eliminating 5 percent of a
desert shrub community.  Similarly, eliminating black-footed
ferret habitat  (an endangered species) has different implications
than eliminating mule deer habitat.

     At the aggregate level, as many facilities are sited in one
location, direct land use can eliminate or affect a large per-
centage of habitat types and result in significant reductions in
carrying capacity.  Entire populations of animal species such as
deer and elk could be eliminated in these locations, and their
overall range in the west will be reduced.

     Because surface mines disturb much greater amounts of land
than conversion facilities, reclamation of surface mined lands
has the potential of mitigating these ecological impacts; that
is, reclamation as a means to mitigate impacts becomes very
significant as energy development expands at any one location.
For example, development of one oil shale retorting facility in
the vicinity of Rifle, Colorado disturbs less than 1 percent of
the land area in Garfield and southern Rio Blanco Counties.
Construction of 40 such facilities (as in Stanford Research
Institute's Nominal Demand Case)  would disturb about 35 percent.
Ecological impacts tend to increase exponentially with such
expansion; for example, carrying capacity for deer would decrease
exponentially,  in this example,  carrying capacity would decrease
more than 35 percent and could cause some animal populations to
leave large areas.

B.  Labor intensiveness

     Variations in the labor intensities of technologies may be
a  more  important  technology-related  variable  in  terms of


                               91

-------
ecological impacts than is land use by the facilities or mines.
If reclamation attempts are successful and widespread, impacts
caused by people will likely be more severe than those caused by
facility-related land use.  In addition to the direct contribu-
tion of increased population to air and water pollution, land
requirements increase to meet their housing, transportation, and
service needs, and recreational activities increase.   Technolo-
gies differ in labor intensiveness during both the construction
and operation phases.2  Overall, conversion technologies are more
labor intensive than mining, and surface mining is the least
labor intensive energy technology deployed in our scenarios.
Underground mining tends to have low construction but high oper-
ating labor requirements; the reverse is the case for electric
power plants.

     The type of ecological impacts that result from population
increases are similar to those caused by land use for facility
siting.  More housing, roads, and service activity fragment
habitat into small parcels that are less usable by either resi-
dent or migratory species.  Easier access to recreational areas
often results in increased hunting, some of which is illegal.
Increased recreational use can also result in increased erosion,
damage to vegetation, degradation of aquatic habitat, and dis-
turbances to terrestrial wildlife.  Habitats which are most at
risk are high alpine ecosystems (particularly lakes), high and
middle-elevation stream systems, and riparian habitats in desert
environments,  where public land is accessible to urban popula-
tions associated with energy development, back-country recreation
in the form of camping,  hunting, fishing, and off-road vehicle
use will be extensive.  Extensive recreational activities such
as these can cause major ecological changes.

C.  Water Requirements and Aquifer interruption

     The most pervasive ecological changes resulting from energy
resource development will occur in those streams and rivers that
experience severe reductions in flow resulting from consumptive
water use, groundwater depletion,  runoff interception, and stream
impoundment.  The water requirements of different technologies
and opportunities to minimize water use can significantly affect
ecological impacts.

     As indicated in Section 3.3,  among the conversion technol-
ogies deployed in our scenarios, electric power generation is
the greatest consumer of water, and cooling represents the


      Personal communication with the Grand Junction Field
Office of the Colorado Division of Wildlife, 1976.
     o
      Data on the labor intensiveness of the technologies
deployed in our scenario is presented in Section 3.4.


                               92

-------
single larges4- water use.  Lurgi gasification requires less water
than any other conversion facility; surface mining water require-
ments  (including irrigation)  are an order of magnitude less than
those for conversion facilities.  At this stage in our analyses,
it appears that finding ways to minimize cooling water require-
ments can contribute to minimizing the threat to aquatic eco-
systems.

     The water savings that could result from the use of wet/dry
rather than wet cooling were discussed in Section 3.3.1  Total
consumptive water use by these technologies can be reduced up to
about 75 percent with the use of wet/dry cooling. Percentage reduc-
tions are potentially greatest for an electric power plant and
least for an oil shale facility,  water savings can total up to
17,940 acre-feet per year for a 3,000-megawatt-electric power
generating plant,  4,220 acre-feet per year for a 250-million
cubic feet per year coal gasification facility, 6,550 acre-feet
per year for a Synthoil liquefaction facility,  and 2,170 acre-
feet per year for a TOSCO II oil shale facility.  in several of
these cases, the savings for an individual facility are large
enough to affect aquatic ecosystem impacts at some sites in our
eight-state study area.  And when the potential for savings is
aggregated for facilities in the same watershed, the consequences
for aquatic ecosystem impacts could be significant.

     Our analysis of six sites suggests that impacts caused by
flow reductions vary seasonally.  Normal flows in spring will be
sufficient for fish migration and spawning; lower flows during
summer will reduce habitat and lower water quality, thereby
interfering with the growth and survival of some fishes; and low
flows in winter can cause ice-scouring, thereby reducing the
population of aquatic invertebrates that support fish in spring
and summer.  Flow reductions also narrow the margin of marshlike
habitat which parallels many streams.  This riparian habitat
supports large and diverse communities of waterfowl and shore-
birds,  since riparian habitat is particularly scarce in the
eight-state study area, any reduction constitutes a large per-
centage lost in its availability.

     Both coal and oil shale mines require dewatering as mining
progresses.  Dewatering represents withdrawal of groundwater and
affects aquifers as well as the surface streams fed by those
aquifers.  The marsh habitat along stream margins often repre-
sents the interface of groundwater with surface water.  To the
      Once-through cooling was not considered.  If used, it could
produce an ecological problem because of its thermal discharge.
Dry cooling was not considered either although it would have no
impact on aquatic ecosystems.  However, with dry cooling, plant
efficiency would be lowered.

                               93

-------
extent that aquifers are dewatered, that margin will be narrowed
or eliminated.

D.  Wastewater Effluents

     Wastewater for conversion facilities is generally controlled
by impounding it in on-site evaporation holding ponds.  Construc-
tion of impoundments for power plant and synthetic fuel effluents
are similar; impounding runoff from spent shale has also been
proposed.

     Both the quantity of effluent and content of the effluent
varies by technology.  Variations in quantity are discussed in
Section 3.3, which indicates that synthetic fuels facilities
produce less wet-solids than do electric power plants equipped
with scrubbers and that oil shale processing produces more than
coal gasification.

     Variations in the content of effluent streams have not been
analyzed in the first year of this study beyond  identifying
whether the wastes are organic/inorganic and soluble/insoluble.
In general, impounded effluents from a power plant consist mainly
of flue gas desulfurization sludge and ash, while effluents from
synthetic fuel facilities consist mainly of ash.  Effluents from
synthetic fuels facilities contain heavy metals such as nickel,
zinc, and lead as well as potentially cancer-producing aromatic
hydrocarbons.  If the berms around impoundments fail or erode,
the wastes could physically obliterate some stream communities,
rendering them unstable and reducing productivity for several
years.   Berm failure is improbable over the short-term but
uncertain over the long-term.  Additionally, some metals may
migrate through the liners in the impoundments even if they are
properly designed and maintained.  If the liner should leak,
groundwater and surface water could be contaminated.  Although
they migrate more slowly than most impounded chemicals, heavy
metals can become a problem.  Heavy metal contamination consti-
tutes an addition of minerals to the mineral cycles of the stream
ecosystems where they are cycled in and through the food webs.
In some cases, the waste elements are foreign to the system; in
others, their addition will result in abnormally large amounts or
concentrations.  Both aquatic plants and animals have low toler-
ance to heavy metals.  Also, where water is used for drinking
and/or fish taken from the streams are eaten by people, contam-
ination carries with it potential health hazards.  The extent to
which contamination and food web uptake is likely to occur is
largely a matter of speculation at this time.


      U.S., Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Manage-
ment .  Draft Environmental Impact Statement;  Proposed Develop-
ment of Oil Shale Resources by the Colony Development Operation
in Colorado.  Washington, D.C.:  Bureau of Land Management, 1975.

                               94

-------
E.  Air Emissions

     As described in Section 3.2, quantities of air emissions
vary by technology.  Of the criteria pollutants, sulfur dioxide
and oxides of nitrogen emissions can potentially cause ecological
impacts.  Emission of both are greatest from electric power
plants.  Our analysis also indicates that acid rainfall (either
in the form of sulfuric or nitric acid)  is unlikely to become a
region-wide problem even given the levels of emissions from power
plants, primarily because of the low humidity and limited rain-
fall in most of the study area.  Similarly, although dry depo-
sition of sulfates and nitrates will occur, soil acidification
increases will not be sufficient to affect vegetation or streams.

     Ground-level sulfur dioxide concentrations within the ranges
expected to develop under worst-case conditions are known to
cause both chronic and acute damage to sensitive native and crop
plants.1  However, the duration and frequency of these episodes
in most western locations are not expected to result in damage
to plant communities.  Exceptions occur in the case of emissions
from electric power plants in areas of rugged terrain  (as in
southern Utah) and in the case of sulfur emissions from oil shale
facilities in western Colorado where plume impaction and air
stagnation can subject vegetation to acute damage in areas of
from 1-2 square miles.  Chronic damage over larger areas is pos-
sible in the oil shale area.

     Mercury is contained in some stack gases from power plants
and coal synthetic fuels facilities,  while the amount of mercury
released probably varies considerably among .technologies,  data
are not sufficient to make those comparisons.  In some south-
western lakes, notably Lake Powell, mercury concentrations in
some predatory fish already exceed Food and Drug Administration
standards for safe human consumption.2  Additional mercury would
exacerbate this problem.  Projections based on Lake Powell
studies indicate that energy development might cause mercury



      See, for example:  Hertzendorf, M.D.  Air Pollution Control
Guidebook to U.S. Regulations.  Wisport, Conn.:  Technomic, 1973,
pp. 154-155; U.S. Department of Health, Education and welfare,
P»ublic  Health Service.  "Effects of Sulfur Dioxides in the Atmo-
sphere on Vegetation," in Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides.
Washington, D.C.:  Public Health Service, 1969, pp. 61-69? and
Benedict, H.M., C.J. Miller, and R.E. Olson.  Economic Impact of
Air Pollutants on Plants in the United States.  Menlo Park,
Calif.:Stanford Research Institute, 1971, pp. 40-46.

     2Standiford, D.R., L.D. Potter, and D.E. Kidd.  Mercury in
the Lake Powell Ecosystem, Lake Powell Research Project Bulletin
No. 1.  LOS Angeles, Calif.:  University of California, institute
of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 1973, p. 16.

                               95

-------
increases between 10-50 percent, depending on the number of
facilities and the composition of the coals being used.1

F.  Transportation Technologies

     A transportation system for exportation is associated with
each type of energy product.  These systems include;  unit trains;
slurry, gas, and oil pipelines; and extra-high voltage  (EHV)
transmission lines.  Each transportation system produces differ-
ent types of ecological impacts.  Our analysis suggests that unit
train transport of coal is likely to be more destructive to bio-
logical resources than other transportation options.   Rail lines
built for heavy unit train traffic pose a hazard to large animals
(e.g., antelope)  which move in herds over large areas during the
year.  Since some railroad right-of-way is likely to be fenced
on both sides to protect livestock, the migration of some herds
over their accustomed ranges will be restricted.  For example,
antelope do not jump over fences.  Passes or a fence with a
higher  low wire may have to be constructed  to  allow them to
pass.  If animals get in the right-of-way between the fences,
they are vulnerable to collisions with trains.3

     Alternative methods for transporting resources should be
less disruptive to wildlife.  Pipelines result in negligible
impacts.  EHV transmission lines alter habitat types but that
alteration may add beneficial ecological diversity to the region.
At present, there is inadequate information about electric fields
from EHV lines to assess impacts.

3.5.3  Variations by Existing Conditions

     The severity of impacts summarized in the previous section
is highly dependent on the ecological characteristics of the site
at which the technologies are deployed.  Important site-specific
variables are grouped into three categories in this discussion.
The first category includes the physical and biological char-
acteristics of a site that, together, determine ecosystem sta-
bility and resiliency; these include climate, soils, and plant
and animal communities.  The second category includes variables
associated with the character of present land use in a region;

      Standiford, D.R., L.D. Potter, and D.E. Kidd.  Mercury in
the Lake Powell Ecosystem, Lake Powell Research Project Bulletin
No. 1.  Los Angeles, Calif.:  University of California,Institute
of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 1973, p. 16.
     2
      Slurry pipelines require 77 acre-feet of water per million
tons of coal and can contribute to the water-impacts discussed above.

      See Sections 3.7 and 9.5 for a more extensive description
of levels of unit train traffic and the problem trains can pose
for animals.

                               96

-------
for example, the extent to which a region is pristine and the
extent of public land ownership.  The third category includes the
affects of instream flow on impacts on aquatic ecosystems in the
West.

     With regard to the first category, the reclamation potential
of a site and the response of an ecosystem to impacts such as
exposure to chronic air pollutants depend on the ecosystem's
stability and resiliency.  Stability measures the ability of a
system to remain unchanged under stressful conditions,  whereas
resiliency measures the ability of a system to recover following
a stress induced change.  The response of ecosystems in the west
to impacts such as fragmentation, the addition of mineral ele-
ments, nutrient losses, and chronic exposure to air pollutants is
largely a function of their stability.  Conversely, reclamation
potential is largely a function of resiliency.

     With regard to the second category, the extent and kind of
ecological impacts expected vary according to the overall char-
acter of the land being impacted,  impacts are different and are
perceived differently in wilderness and agricultural areas and
public and private lands.

     The third category, stream flow, includes impacts on aquatic
ecosystems  (streams, lakes, and impoundments).  Stream and river
low flows vary greatly in the west and affect dilution of pol-
luted runoff both in the stream and in downstream lakes and
impoundments.

A.  Ecosystem Stability and Resiliency

     Factors that vary by site and are important in determining
stability and resiliency are climate, soils, and plant and
animal communities.

1.  Climate

     in the west, rainfall including its seasonal distribution is
an important climatic variable.  Average rainfall data for three
areas within the eight-state study area are given in Table 3-21.
Both total amounts and the seasonal distribution are included.
The Southwest receives the least amount of rainfall overall,  in
the Rocky Mountain and Northern Great Plains, total rainfall is
similar, but rainfall during the summer growing season in the
Northern Great Plains is twice that of the Rocky Mountains.  The
amount of rainfall during the growing season is probably the
single most important factor affecting reclamation potential.
Reclamation will be more easily accomplished in the Northern
Great Plains and most difficult  (by some estimates, impossible)
in the Southwest.  Moreover, as indicated in Table 3-22, the
reclamation problem is compounded since, for a mine supplying a
conversion facility of the size deployed in our scenarios, the


                               97

-------
           TABLE 3-21:  RAINFALL AVERAGES IN THE WEST
Region
Northern Great Plains
Rocky Mountains
Southwest
Rainfall3
(inches)
Winter
<5
5-10
<5
Summer
10-20
5-10
<5
Annual
10-20
10-20
<10
        < = less than

       aEspenshade, Edward B., ed.  Goode's World Atlas,
       13th ed.  Chicago, 111.:  Rand McNally, 1971;
       winter corresponds to November I/April 30; summer
       corresponds to May I/October 31.
amount of land requiring reclamation is largest in the Southwest
(the Navajo/Farmington site on Table 3-22).

     Using present reclamation  techniques, areas averaging 10 or
more inches of rainfall per year can generally support plant
regrowth without supplemental irrigation.  In most of the semi-
arid Southwest, rainfall is regularly less than 10 inches and
varies widely from year to year.  Periodic dry periods lasting
      TABLE 3-22:  LAND USE FOR SURFACE COAL MINES BY SITE
Site
Nava jo/Farming ton
Gillette
Colstrip
Beulah
Typical Size Mine13
(acres over 30 years)
27,820
4,030
9,680
24,210
Energy Equivalent
(acres per 1012 Btu)
3.2
0.5
1.2
3
Btu = British thermal units.

 Seam thickness and heating values assumed;  Navajo/Farmington—
10.3 feet, 8,600 Btu per pound; Gillette—64 feet, 8,000 Btu per
pound; Colstrip--28 feet, 8,600 Btu per pound; Beulah—13 feet,
6,950 Btu per pound.

 in all cases, the mine size assumed supports a 3,000-megawatts-
electric power plant.
                               98

-------
up to several years further curtail successful revegetation.1
The seasonal distribution of rainfall is perhaps the most crit-
ical variable; for example, a lack of precipitation shortly after
planting can reduce seedling success, and a difference of only
1-2 inches over the entire growing season will have significant
consequences, depending on when this rain falls.  Because most
reclamation studies have been initiated since 1970, there has
been no opportunity to observe precisely how rainfall variations
affect long-term reclamation success.

2.  Soils

     Natural surface soils vary greatly within the eight-state
study area? even a single mine site may contain several soil
types differing in suitability for reclamation.  in the Northern
Great Plains, soils are generally well developed with adequate
nutrient and organic matter.  These soils have a high potential
for use in mine-spoil revegetation.  Topsoils may be 6-30 inches
in depth.  However, high sodium content is a problem in many
Northern Great Plains soils, particularly parts of North Dakota
and Montana.  Runoff from such soils is typically high, and they
tend to erode easily.  North Dakota has enacted strict regula-
tions on surface mining technologies that require several soil
zones to be removed and saved separately.  Each soil zone must
then be replaced in sequence following mining.

     Three major soil types are found in coal-producing regions
of the Central Rocky Mountains:  soils of dry sagebrush areas
which are generally loamy but poor in organic mattery rocky or
barren badlands soils which are less than 20 inches deep and
subject to water erosion; and loamy, easily tilled soils which
are rich in organic matter.  These latter soils are usually found
on western Colorado coal lands and are often farmed for dryland
crops.  All three types of soils will probably require irrigation
for successful reclamation.

     Soils in the arid areas where coal is formed in Arizona and
New Mexico are generally poorly developed, have an unsatisfactory


      National Academy of Sciences.  Rehabilitation Potential of
Western Coal Lands, a report to the Energy policy Project of the
Ford Foundation.  Cambridge, Mass.:  Ballinger, 1974;  Packer, P.E.
Rehabilitation Potentials  and Limitations of Surface-Mined Land
in the Northern Great Plains,  General Technical Report INT-14.
Ogden,  Utah:   U.S., Department of Agriculture,  Forest  Service,
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station,  1974.
     2
      Farmer, E.E., et al.  Revegetation Research on the Decker
goal Mine in Southeastern Montana, Research  Paper  INT-162.  Ogden,
^Jtah:U.S.,Department of Agriculture,  Forest Service,  Inter-
Mountain Forest and  Range  Experiment Station,  1974.


                               99

-------
     TABLE 3-23:  PLANT COMMUNITIES AND THEIR PRODUCTIVITY
     Reg ion
    Predominant
 Plant Communities
Primary production3
 (grams per square
 meter per year)*3
 Northern Great
 Plains
 Rocky Mountains
 Southwest
Short grass prairie
Mid grass prairie
Bottomland forest
Pine savanna

Desert shrub
Pinon-juniper woodland
Mountain shrub
Mountain meadows
Coniferous forests
Desert shrub
Desert grassland
Pinon-juniper woodland
      600-900
      600-1,100
    1,000-2,000
    1,000-2,000

      100-200
      500-1,000
      600-700
      700-1,100
      900-2,000

        0-200
      200-500
      500-1,000
 Ranges given are rounded estimates from Cooper, J.P., ed.  Photo-
synthesis and Productivity in Different Environments, interna-
tional Biological programme 3.  Cambridge, England:  Cambridge
University Press, 1975.

 In this context, primary production refers to the "net" pro-
duction of organic matter  (including root and shoot growth) by
the plant community- that is, it measures the rate at which solar
energy is converted to available organic matter.


moisture-holding capacity, and contain a high salt content.
Moreover, these soils are sandy and eroded through overgrazing.
Drifting and blowing soils in these areas can easily bury seed-
lings or reduce plant cover by abrasion.

3.  Plant and Animal Communities

     The dominant plant communities found in three areas of the
eight western states are given in Table 3-23.  For each area,
these communities are listed in increasing order of structural
complexity and productivity,  in the Rocky Mountains and South-
west, the increase generally corresponds to increases in eleva-
tion with consequent higher rainfall.  For example, in the South-
west, the desert shrub community is located at low elevations
where rainfall is often less than five inches, whereas the pinon-
juniper woodland is located at higher elevations where rainfall
if often greater than ten inches.
                              100

-------
     The structural complexity of a plant community contributes
to both its stability and resiliency,  in general, the more com-
plex a plant community is, the more stable but less resilient it
is.  A grassland is generally not as stable as a forest, and its
ability to remain unchanged in the face of stresses is not as
great as that of the forest.  An example of this effect is where
grasslands have been overgrazed and reverted to desert shrub
communities.  On the other hand, following a stress-induced
change such as surface mining, a grassland will reestablish
itself more readily than a forest.  Similarly, it is easier to
reestablish a desert shrub community than a grassland.

     The productivity of a plant community is a measure of the
rate at which the plants produce organic matter.  Several factors
may limit this rate.  Soil characteristics and the seasonal dis-
tribution of rainfall probably dominate as limiting factors in
the eight-state area.  The Southwest, where low summer rainfall
is small and soils are poorly developed, has the least capacity
to produce organic matter in any one year (Table 3-23).

     Irrigating reclaimed land represents an attempt to remove
rainfall as a limiting factor, thus allowing higher primary pro-
duction rates and faster revegetation.  However, this approach
is effective only to a degree.  As one limiting factor is removed,
another becomes limiting.  Thus, an irrigated reclamation site
may be limited by soil nutrients or by unusually high concentra-
tions of salts,  in the Southwest, rainfall is the dominant
limiting factor,  consequently, irrigation will speed reclamation
but only to a level where some other factor  (such as soil salt
concentrations) limit production.  In the Northern Great plains,
rainfall may not be the dominant limiting factor; soil and tem-
perature may also play important roles.

     Productivity is also a measure of the community's ability to
support animals,  carrying capacity for animals increases with
productivity, and some animals  (such as mule deer and elk) use
several plant community types during a year.  Based on the pro-
ductivity values given in Table 3-23, high-elevation communities
could support denser animal populations than those of the lower
desert shrub communities, and the Great Plains can generally
support denser animal populations than can the Southwest.

4.  Summary

     Climatic and soil variables and plant and animal types con-
tribute to an ecosystem's response to change induced by energy
development.  These variables are significantly different in
different parts of the eight-state area.  Low rainfall  (particu-
larly during the growing season), poor soils, and low primary
production rates will make reclamation difficult in the south-
west.  Adequate rainfall during the growing season, better soils,
and higher primary production rates will make the reestablishment


                               101

-------
of a plant community easier in the Northern Great Plains.  How-
ever, even there, reestablishment of the original plant commu-
nity  (short- to mid-grass prairie) will take longer to reestab-
lish than a simpler plant cover.  The success  of  reclamation depends
on the extent to which limiting factors can be identified and
removed by, for example, irrigation, fertilization, seeding, and
soil treatment.

     Revegetation attempts are required by all eight states.
Although the specific language in laws and regulations vary, most
of the state programs are aimed at returning surface mined land
to productive use.  North Dakota requires segregation, saving,
and replacement of topsoil and subsoil zones separately.  How-
ever, in no state is a criterion of success in terms of vegeta-
tive survival delineated.

B.  The character of Present Land use

     The degree to which an area is still in a natural state
before development occurs and the availability of public lands
affect both the actual and perceived ecological impacts.

     Changes in wilderness character occur rapidly when develop-
ment is initiated but are slowed as development expands.  For
example, people generally travel only limited distances away from
home for weekend  recreation. As  population  increases with expanded
development, recreational areas closer to the urban center are
likely to become more heavily used while areas at greater dis-
tances are less likely to be affected.  Similarly, the plant and
animal populations of a community change rapidly when development
is initiated and expands.

     People also perceive impacts in wilderness areas differ-
ently; impacts of the same magnitude often are more obvious and
seem greater,  in the arid Southwest, particularly southern Utah,
and in parts of western Colorado, both residents and visitors.
generally expect to encounter native plant communities, wildlife,
and scenic vistas.  On the other hand, the Northern Great Plains
is heavily oriented toward agriculture and is already more
developed than the arid Southwest.  Thus, who reacts and how they
react will depend on land uses before energy development begins.
The agri-business community of the Northern Great Plains will
react to impacts there, but that reaction will be different than
that of environmental interest groups to impacts in wilderness
areas.

     The actual amount of change will likely be greatest when it
occurs in wilderness areas, and the perception of that change
will be different depending on the nature of pre-development
conditions.  The availability of public land in the vicinity of
energy development also exerts an influence on ecological impacts.
The federal government owns 87 percent of the land in the area


                              102

-------
around Kaiparowits/Escalante, 70 percent around Rifle, 30 per-
cent around Navajo/Farmington  (an additional 60 percent of land
around Farmington is Indian-owned), 12.6 percent around Gillette,
and 5 percent around both Colstrip and Beulah.  However, this
pattern of public land ownership does not necessarily hold for
the area around every site in any one area.

     At present, public access to national forests is great, with
few restrictions and limited enforcement on the abuse of public
lands.  Where public land is accessible to urban populations
associated with energy development, back-country recreation in
the form of camping, hunting, fishing, and off-road vehicle use
will be extensive.  Given few regulations and limited enforce-
ment, this recreation can potentially cause major ecological
damage.  On the other hand, private land holders are likely to
restrict recreational use of their land.

     in addition to the fact that public lands  (such as national
forests, national parks, wildlife refugees, and designated wil-
derness areas) are accessible to the public, most high-quality
wildlife habitat occurs on public land.  To varying degrees,
these habitats have remained unchanged or natural.  Moreover,
management priorities and enforcement authority vary greatly
among the National Forest Service, Park Service, and Bureau of
Sport Fisheries and wildlife,  we can expect impacts on public
lands in close proximity to energy development to be significant.
However, the extent of those impacts depends on management and
enforcement practices.

C.  Stream Flow

     The greatest impacts on aquatic ecosystems will probably
occur in the San Juan Basin, in the Utah-Colorado oil shale area,
and, to a lesser extent, in the Yellowstone River Basin.  Growth
in large-scale agricultural irrigation combined with energy
developments will consume water and add significant amounts of
nutrient-, pesticide-, and silt-laden runoff to the San Juan.
Impacts caused by HhP addition of pollutants from runoff will be
exacerbated by flov* reductions and consequent reductions in the
dilution capacity o£ the river.  The San Juan flows directly into
Lake Powell, and thofee pollutants could affect biota in the
San Juan arm of the |ake.

     in the oil shale country of western Colorado, water demands
projected for the regional scenario would exceed typical minimum
daily flow in the, Whit^e River and other streams in the area.
Consequently, theae atVeams are not likely to be used as a water
source unless impoundments are constructed to maintain flows.
The Colorado, measured-, flear Rifle, commonly experiences minimum
daily flows that fal
-------
Service inhabit the Colorado and Green Rivers and reproduce in
the lower Green River.1  Flow depletion will decrease populations
of these species, which are already stressed by competition with
introduced sport fishes.

     The Yellowstone River Basin could experience withdrawals
from the river itself or its tributaries amounting to about 22
percent of typical low flows, depending on the use of reservoirs
to regulate discharge.  From Billings, Montana to the Missouri
confluence, the Yellowstone River is free-flowing; there is now
strong public sentiment in favor of keeping it free of dams.
Impoundments on tributaries to the Yellowstone are likely to
interfere with the spawning movements of several fish indigenous
to the Upper Missouri River Basin (e.g., the paddlefish, shovel-
nose sturgeon, and pallid sturgeon).

3.5.4  Summary of Technological and Locational Factors

     Ecological impacts can be magnified when certain technolog-
ical and locational factors interact.  Often the resulting prob-
lems can be mitigated by choosing a different technology for the
problem location, a different location for the problem technol-
ogy, or an entirely different technology-locational combination.

     This summary identifies technology-location combinations
that cause significant ecological problems and suggests combina-
tions that can mitigate the problems.  Table 3-24 lists these
ecological problems with the corresponding technological and
locational factors that cause each problem.

     Overall ecological degradation can be greatly increased
when the land used affects habitat that is not abundant (e.g.,
riparian habitat or unique habitat used by endangered species or
by wildlife during some part of their life cycle).  Land used by
surface coal mines producing the same amount of energy is highest
at the Farmington site (because of thin seams)  and BeuTah site
(because of low heating value coal)  and lowest at the Gillette
site (because of thick seams).  Mitigation calls for a careful
screening of potential mine sites.

     Land use by multiple surface coal mines and oil shale facil-
ities at a site can affect a large percentage of total habitat
at that site; the resulting habitat fragmentation can eliminate
wildlife from the site and locally eliminate endangered species.
Mitigation calls for choosing sites for multiple mines that have
high reclamation potential.  Reclamation potential in the more
arid areas in the West is uncertain.  Successful reclamation
depends on the ability and willingness to identify and overcome


      These are the Colorado squawfish, humpback sucker, hump-
back chub, and the Colorado cutthroat trout.


                               104

-------
                    TABLE 3-24:   SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
    Ecological  Problems
                                Combinations of Factors that Cause the Problem
     Technological
       Locational
Local ecological degra-
dation, species elimination
or extinction
High labor intensity
land use by any one sur-
face coal mine or by an
oil shale mining, and
processing facility
Unique or rare habitat,
and/or low heating value
coal
Loss of ecosystems and
associated wildlife through
habitat fragmentation
High labor intensity and
land use by multiple
surface mines at any
one site
Areas where reclamation
potential is poor or
where reclamation is
not attempted
Reduction in the original
habitat type and replacement
in a new form, and declines
in wildlife numbers and type
High labor intensity
of synthetic fuels
technologies and
extensive development
Wilderness areas,
proximity to public
lands
Reduction or elimination of
sport fish, aquatic habitat,
and strearnside ecosystems
Water intensiveness of
conversion facilities
Limited and seasonal
stream flow, limited
extent of riparian
habitat
Acute and chronic damage to
vegetation
Air emissions by con-
version facilities
especially electric
power plants
Rugged terrain
Interruption of migration,
increased accidental kills
Rain transport of coal
Migratory mammal routes

-------
the factor or factors (e.g., water, nutrients, seedling germina-
tion and survival) that limit the production of organic plant
material.  Limiting factors vary by site.  The potential to
reestablish a plant cover appears greatest in the Northern Great
Plains.

     Because they are labor intensive, synthetic fuels facilities
located in small communities surrounded by wilderness habitat or
in communities that are close to public lands increase the rate
and extent of ecological change.  Ecological change does not
occur at a constant rate as population increases, and the rate of
change is different in areas still in their natural state than it
is in developed areas.  Ecosystems in a developed area have
already made an initial adjustment to that development.  Expand-
ing development results in only incremental adjustments.  Con-
versely, ecosystems in areas still in their natural states go
through large initial adjustments to development.  Population
increases in wilderness areas compound this problem.  For exam-
ple,  legal hunting may be expected to increase proportionately
as population increases.^  But population increases and the
introduction of energy facilities also mean habitat fragmenta-
tion, potential reductions in the water in springs and seeps,
introduction of toxic compounds, illegal shooting of females,
outright reduction in food supply, and potential prey-predator
imbalances.  All these factors in combination accelerate declines
in animal populations.  Mitigation calls for locating labor-
intensive technologies in areas that are already developed or in
wilderness areas only when wilderness management and enforcement
authority are adequate.

     Water-intensive technologies  (all conversion facilities,
especially electric power generation) located where stream flows
are marginally adequate (the San Juan Basin, western Colorado,
and to a lesser extent the Yellowstone Basin) will reduce or
eliminate sport fish populations.  Synthetic fuel technologies
are both water and labor intensive.  Domestic wastewater dis-
charged into streams where withdrawal is heavy can cause stream
eutrophication, leading to changes in plant and animal popula-
tions.  To the extent that runoff from wastewater impoundments
around facilities reaches these, streams, further degradation to
stream and lake habitat will occur.  Mitigation calls for siting
water-intensive technologies only where stream flow is adequate,
the use of wet/dry cooling at sites where it is inadequate, and
strict regulations on energy facility wastewater impoundments and
on domestic wastewater treatment.
      If effectively controlled, e.g., through licensing, this
need not be the case.
                               106

-------
     Episodic ground-level sulfur dioxide concentrations from air
emissions by electric power plants and oil shale facilities can
occur frequently and be high enough to cause chronic and acute
damage to plant communities in areas where the terrain is rugged,
most notably in southern Utah and western Colorado.  Mitigation
calls for locating these facilities at other sites  (impractical
in the case of oil shale) or requiring stricter sulfur control
technologies at these sites than elsewhere.

     Railroads cause more ecological impacts than any other
transportation alternative.  Where rail transport crosses migra-
tory mammal routes, changed migration patterns will occur and
accidental kills will increase.  Mitigation calls for choosing a
different transportation technology or constructing passes for
animal crqssings.

3.5.5  Data and Research Limitations

     Data gaps are a problem in nearly all areas of the eight-
state region,  vegetation mapping on a uniform basis is only
beginning through the use of satellite sensing, and checks with
ground data lag far behind.  Documentation of animal ranges is
often quite dated and very difficult and expensive to maintain.
Basic understanding of the reclamation potential of arid lands
is inadequate,  streamflow and water quality data are not con-
sistently comprehensive throughout the West, but even greater
uncertainty exists in some cases concerning withdrawals for
energy, agricultural, and municipal use and that potentially
reserved for instream flow.  Flow requirements to maintain an
aquatic ecosystem in  streams  is uncertain.  A method for mea-
suring habitat fragmentation or determining how much fragmenta-
tion causes qualitative changes in an area's wildlife is not
available,  probably the most important area of uncertainty con-
cerns the future extent of irrigation and other agricultural
withdrawals of land and water from wildlife habitats.  A factor
of perhaps equal importance is the nature of future directions
in the use and management of public lands, which encompass large
quantities of wilderness habitat.

3.6  HEALTH EFFECTS

                         HIGHLIGHTS


     • CRITICAL FACTORS

       * Two technological ^actofi& can significantly a^e.ct the.
         health, e.^e.cts impacts o£ e.ne,igy de.ve.lopme.nt:  the. quan-
         tity and composition o& ain. emissions, and the. quantity
         and composition o
-------
        ' five  to catio nal fiactofi.*  can 0.1-6 o Aignifiicantly afifiect
         the*e impact* :  compo*ition ofi the. enefi.gy  fi.eAoun.ee,
         popul.at4.on chafi.actefi.i*tic* , topography.,  meteo n.o logical
         co nditio n* ,  and exiAting health cane de.lJ.ve.tLy  AyAtemA.

       PRIMARY STANDARDS1

        ' Syntke.tA.c. fiuel fiacilitieA do not cauAe  fiedefi.al primary
         ambient  Aulfiur dioxide,  particulate, Yi4,tfioae,n di.ox.-ide.,
         and c.an.bon monoxide. &tanda>id& to be. violated.
        ' The.  24-nou.fi, fie.de.ial ptLimasiy amb &iom conve.fi.Aion fiacilitie.4 will e.x.ace.ibate.
         tki&  problem.

        ' The.  fie.de.ial puimany ail  &tandan.d fiofi. kydn.ocan.bonA wilt
         be. violated by coal liquefaction, oil &hale.  fie.ton.tinQ
         fiacilitie.4, and natu.fi.al  gaA fiacilitie.& and by ufiban
         &ou.n.ce.&.   Conce.ntn.ation&  could be. a& much a& 325 time.&
         the.  &tandan.d.

        ' The.  fie.de.fi.al pn,iman.y ambient tulfiun. dioxide. &tandan.d
         would be, violated in &outken.n Utah and we&ten.n Colorado
         by electfi-ic powen. plant*  equipped with &cn.u.bben.& that
         n.emove only enough Aulfiufi. dioxide to meet fieden.al New
         Soufi.ce Pefi.fiofi.mance Standard* .

        POTENTIAL  HEALTH HAZARDS

        * Ox.idant&  produced in afi.eaA whefi.e the violation* ofi
         fiedefi.al ambient hydfi.ocafi.bon Atandafi.d& an.e gfi.eate&t can
         con&titute a health hazafi-d.
          Ifi  a  3-pefi.cent Aulfiufi. to  &ulfiate& conversion n.ate i&
          a&&umed,  &ulfiate level* attfi-ibutable to  enen,ay develop-
          ment  i*  not expected to exceed the concentration* known
          to  cau&e di*ea*e.  Howevefi.,  ifi a 5-pefi.cent convcn.*ion
          fiate  i*  a**umed, *ulfiate  level* at *ome  *ite* will be
          high  enough to aggravate  a*thmatic* .  A  convefi.*ion n,ate
          ofi  10 pefi-cent could fi.eAu.lt in chfi.onic and  acute fi.e*pi-
          fi.atofi.y diAeaAe.
      Primary standards are based on human health  criteria and
are indicators of health hazards.

                                108

-------
          Any pote.nt4.d£ health ka.za.nd ^a.&att-iyiQ &Jiom the.
          a £ tfiac.-
          &io HA  and (Ka.te.fi e^£u£Kuti dAe e.xpe.c£erf to be
          except faox. the. A.ele.a.ie 0(J me./ic.u.tiy
 3.6.1   introduction

     The effects  of energy development on humans depend on the
 technologies  deployed and the site-specific conditions under
 which development takes  place.   This section summarizes the
 technological factors that can  cause health hazards and the
 locational  factors that  can exacerbate or alleviate these haz-
 ards.

 3.6.2   variations by Technologies

     As described in Sections 3.2 and 3.3,  the energy resource
 development technologies deployed in our seven scenarios vary in
 terms of the  air  emissions and  water effluents they produce.
 These variations  determine the  potential health impacts of
 energy  development.   This section discusses the implications of
 sulfur  dioxide  (S02) ,  particulate,  and hydrocarbon (HC) emis-
 sions for human health.   Trace  and radioactive materials are
 also covered, but in less detail.   The S02/ particulate, and HC
 ambient air concentrations resulting from energy development are
 then related  to federal  primary ambient air standards, which are
 defined on the basis of  health  effects criteria and which,
 therefore, provide the best available index of the potential for
health  impacts.

A.  Sulfur Dioxide

     As indicated in Section 3.2,  the synthetic fuels technol-
ogies and power generation facilities in our six site-specific
 scenarios do  not  cause federal  primary SC>2  ambient air standards
to be violated.   However,  in the  case of power plants, this is
partly because of the level of  emission control assumed (flue
gas desulfurization  systems that  remove 80  percent of the S02 in
the coal) .  This  removal  efficiency is in excess of that required
to meet federal New  Source Performance standards.   If removal
efficiency is limited to  the  amount required to meet  these stan-
dards,  emissions  of  S02 will  be higher and,  in some cases,  will
result  in the violation of primary  standards.

     The removal  efficiencies required given the ambient SO2 con-
 centrations that we found are shown in Table 3-25.  The 24-hour pri-
mary S02 standard is violated for the power plant sited at Escalante^

     1The power plant  sited at Kaiparowits  in the  same scenario
     not violate  this  standard.   See  chapter 6.

                              109

-------
             TABLE  3-25:
AMBIENT SO2 AND  PARTICULATE  CONCENTRATIONS  WHICH RESULT FROM

POWER  PLANT EMISSIONS WITH THE AMOUNT OF EMISSION  CONTROL

REQUIRED  TO MEET FEDERAL NEW SOURCE  PERFORMANCE STANDARDS  (NSPS)
Category
Removal Efficiency Required
to Meet NSPS (X)
so2
Participates
Ambient Air Concentrations
(lig/m3)
Partlculates
Annual
24 hour
Annual
24 hour
Kalparoviti


0
98.6



2.3
26
22
253
Escalante


0
98.6



5.8
152
56
1.467
Farmlngton


20
NC



NC
NC
13
260
Rifle


0
97.3



1.2
80
12
775
Gillette


0
97.5



1
22
8
235
Colstrlp


48
NC



NC
NC
7
225
Beulah


48
NC



NC
NC
3.4
292
Federal Primary
Ambient Standards







75
260
80
365
I-1
o
       NC • not calculated

       S0» • sulfur dioxide

       pg/m' • mlcrograms per cubic meter


       *Pover plants produce 3,000 megawatt-electric (MWe) except at Rifle which produces 1,000 MWe.

-------
and Rifle.  In both cases, this is caused by plume impaction in
complex terrain.  Although these concentrations constitute a
potential health hazard, few persons are likely to be affected
since the cliff walls and peaks impacted by the plume are  not
likely  to be  populated.

     Sulfur dioxide, by itself, is generally regarded only as a
mild irritant.  However, when SC>2 and particulates are present
simultaneously  (as they normally are)  or when SO2 is oxidized in
the air to sulfates, SOn becomes a health hazard.  Every air
pollution incident that has resulted in significant human mor-
bidity and mortality has involved a mixture of S02 and particu-
lates.  Additionally, evidence is accumulating that the sulfates
into which SO? is transformed pose the greatest potential for
harmful health effects.  Conversion rates vary from 1 to 20 per-
cent per hour?1 however, rates of from 1 to 3 percent per hour
are commonly used for coal.  Table 3-26 gives the sulfate concen-
trations expected for the site-specific energy development hypo-
thesized  (Chapters 6-11) in our scenarios, assuming four dif-
ferent conversion rates.  For perspective, sulfate levels known
to cause disease are also included in the table.  Conversion
rates of less than 3 percent generally do not cause sulfate con-
centrations to be in excess of those which cause disease
(Table 3-26).  Conversion rates of 5 percent result in concentra-
tions at three sites which exceed those known to aggravate asthmatics,
and conversion rates  of 10 percent would clearly result in health
hazards.2

B.  particulates

     As indicated in Section 3.2, particulate emissions can vary
widely by technology? even with 99-percent particulate removal,
electric power plants emit more particulates than any other con-
version facility.  However, as Table 3-25 indicates, in no case
examined does a power plant alone cause primary  ambient air
standards for particulates to be violated.  This includes those
cases where the level of control is limited to that required to
meet New Source Performance Standards.

     However, certain conditions that cause potential health
hazards can and do arise in the West.  First, exposure to dust in


      U.S., Congress, House of Representatives,  Committee on
Science and Technology, Subcommittee on Environment and the
Atmosphere.  Review of Research Related to Sulfates in the Atmo-
sphere^ Committee Print.  Washington, D.C.:  Government Printing
Office, 1976.
     2
      Environmental Protection Agency's Community Health and
Environmental Surveillance System relates sulfate levels to the
epidemiology of respiratory disease.

                               Ill

-------
          TABLE 3-26:
SULFATE CONCENTRATIONS AND THEIR
HEALTH EFFECTS
Case
Scenario9
Kaiparowits/Escalante
Nava jo/Farming ton
Rifle
Gillette
Colstrip
Beulah
Health Effectsb
Aggravation of Asthma
Increased chronic
bronchitis
increased acute
respiratory disease
Sulfate Concentration
(yg/m3)
1%
2.2
0.8
1.5
0.5
0.9
1.1
3%
6.6
2.4
4.5
1.5
2.7
3.3
5%
11.0
8.0
7.5
2.5
4.5
5.5
10%
22.0
16.0
15.0
5.0
9.0
11.0
6-10
14
15-25°
            = micrograms per cubic meter

      aBased on highest peak concentration including
      existing ambient concentration  (See Chapters 6-11) .

       U.S., Environmental Protection Agency.  Position
      Paper on Regulation of Atmospheric Sulfates,
      EPA 450/2-75-007.  Research Triangle Park, N.C.:
      National Environmental Research Center, 1975.

      °Finklea, J.F., et al.  Health Effects of Increas-
      ing Sulfur Oxides Emissions, Draft.  Washington, D.C. :
      U.S., Environmental protection Agency, 1975.  Cited
      in U.S., Council on Environmental Quality.  Environ-
      mental Quality, Sixth Annual Report.  Washington, D.C.:
      Government Printing Office, 1975, p. 332.
underground mines can be a significant occupational health haz-
ard.  Conditions in underground mines in the West will be basi-
cally the same as those in the East, where particulates cause
lung disease among miners.

     Second, 24-hour particulate concentrations already exceed
the federal 24-hour primary standard on some days in the west,
primarily due to blowing dust.  Recorded 24-hour concentrations
are 543 micrograms per cubic meter  (yig/m3) at Kaiparowits,
                              112

-------
284 yg/m3 at Colstrip,  and 488 yg/m3 at Beulah.   The federal
primary 24-hour standard is 260 yg/m .   Blowing  soil from surface
mines,  coal dust from rail transport systems,  and the added par-
ticulates emitted from the stacks of conversion  facilities will
exacerbate this problem during periods  of high winds.  Although
annual average particulate levels are not expected to exceed  the
federal annual primary standard, the number of days when the  24-
hour primary standard is exceeded will  increase  due to energy
development.

     Third, the size and composition of the particulates emitted
by conversion facilities help to determine whether they constitute
a health hazard.  Size and compositional factors are not reflected
in simple measurements of total amount  emitted or in average  con-
centrations-.  With 99-percent particulate removal, particles  will
have a mean diameter of 1-3 microns. These particles can pene-
trate deeply into the respiratory tract, and about 30 percent of
those penetrating will be deposited in  the pulmonary alveoli
where they can have the greatest adverse effects.   In some cir-
cumstances, particulates may be aerosols of potentially toxic
organic or inorganic substances and may pose a hazard greater
than commonly encountered with dust or  ash.

C.  Hydrocarbons

     As indicated in Section 3.2 and summarized in Table 3-27,
the federal primary ambient air standard for hydrocarbon is
exceeded as a result of emissions from Synthoil liquefaction,
TOSCO II oil shale retorting processing, and natural gas pro-
duction facilities as well as from urban sources.  Hydrocarbon
emissions from conversion facilities exceed the primary standard
by 7 times  (natural gas) to 325 times  (TOSCO II).  Hydrocarbons
emissions from liquid processing facilities are difficult to
control because they are fugitive emissions coming primarily
from valves and fittings.  The energy development .hypothesized
at our six site-specific scenario locations (Chapters 6-11) will
result in population increases that will lead to  urban hydro-
carbon emissions exceeding the primary standard by 1980 at all
locations  (Table 3-27).

     Hydrocarbons by themselves do not produce a  direct health
hazard, but they do contribute to the formation of oxidants that
can damage vegetation  and cause irritation to the eyes and
throats of humans.  They are one of the  reactants in the  forma-
tion of photochemical  smog.
      Southern Research Institute.  A Survey of  Technical infor-
mation Related to Fine Particle Control.  Springfield, Va.:
National Technical information Service, 1975.  PB-242 383.

                               113

-------
    TABLE  3-27:
            AMBIENT HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS WHICH RESULT
            FROM URBAN EXPANSION AND ENERGY FACILITIES
         Source
                                     Peak Concentrations
                                 1980
1990
  Urban Expansion3
    Kaiparowits
    Farmington
    Rifle
    Gillette
    Colstrip
    Beulah
              at:
                                  NC
                                 750
                                 102
                                 660
                                 210
                                 120
481
871
571
780
270
180
                             When  Facilities Become Operational
  Synthoil  Liquefaction  at;
    Farmington
    Gillette
    Colstrip

  TOSCO  II  Oil  Shale
    at Rifle

  Natural Gas Production
    at Gillette

  Federal 3-hour  Primary
    HC Standard
                                       21,500
                                       25,100
                                       17,200


                                       52,100


                                        1,087


                                          160
HC  =  hydrocarbons
yg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
NC  =  not  calculated

aurban expansion represents that  expected  in  1980  and  1990
(except Beulah which  is 1995} as a result of the  energy develop-
ment  assumed at six  sites  (see Chapters 6-11).
D.
Trace Materials
     At  least  13 kinds of trace  elements are present  in  coal  in
 amounts  ranging from 0.06 to  200 parts per million  (see  Section
 12.6).   Of  these, beryllium and  mercury have been declared haz-
 ardous air  pollutants; cadmium is  on a proposed  list  of  haz-
 ardous air  pollutants; and selenium, vanadium, and  lead  are under
 study.   These  substances are  much  more toxic on  a by-weight basis
 than are criteria pollutants.  The quantities of trace elements
 that will be released by synthetic fuels facilities as air pollutants
 or as water pollutants is not known.  For power  plants with
                               114

-------
scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators, the percentages
released into the air can be expected to vary from about 1 per-
cent for beryllium, lead, and cadmium to 100 percent for mercury.

     Trace elements enter humans via food, drink,  and air.  Low-
level  exposure to lead  produces subtle nervous system pathol-
ogies, and mercury (as an organic mercury compound)  is known to
affect the central nervous system.  Fallout and runoff into lakes
will concentrate mercury in aquatic environments where it is con-
verted to the toxic organic form by micro-organisms and taken up
by fish.

     Trace organic compounds are found primarily in synthetic
fuels facilities, especially Synthoil and oil shale retorting.
Carcinogenic compounds occur in a number of production streams.
Direct exposure to these compounds in process streams is gener-
ally not expected, but incidental exposure is possible, depending
on water effluent control practices and control of fugitive air
emissions.   (The likelihood of this occurring is not known.)

E.  Radioactivity

     Coal generally contains radioactivity in amounts not too
different from other minerals.  Concentrations are highly vari-
able and range from 0.001 to 1.3 picocuries per gram  (see Chap-
ter 12).  Radium remains with the ash and therefore is concen-
trated  in it  (ranging from 2.1 to 5.0 picocuries per gram).

     Health  risks from radioactivity originate from exposure to
three sources:  radioactive particulates  in stack emissions,
water-borne  radioactivity, and radioactive materials  in uranium
mines and mill tailings.  Consumption of the beef and dairy pro-
ducts from cattle that have eaten vegetation exposed  to elevated
radioisotope  levels can  also be a source,  in the past under-
ground mining for uranium has resulted  in occupational exposures
resulting in six- to nine-fold increases  in lung cancer.2   How-
ever, controls initiated during the past  15 years have reduced
radon exposure 10- to 100-fold.3  Exposures from uranium  tailings
piles, which contain several thousand times as much radium  as
      These  include polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons,  amines,
heterocyclic compounds, and organo-metallic  compounds.
      2
      Schurgin, Arell S., and Thomas C. Hollocher.   "Radiation-
induced Lung Cancers Among uranium Miners,"  in  Union of Con-
cerned Scientists, ed.  The Nuclear Fuel Cycle;  A  Survey of
the  Public Health, Environmental, and  National Security Effects of
Nuclear Power,  rev. ed.  Cambridge, Mass.: MITPress",  1975, pp. 9-40.
                               115

-------
ordinary soils, can pose a health risk up to 1 kilometer from the
tailings.

     Health effects from radioactivity are usually associated
with air inhalation and can produce lung cancer.  Calculated
exposures to the general public from coal fly ash as a result of
energy development indicate that the risk of cancer is minimal
 (one or less additional cancer cases in one million people per
year).  Doses ranged from 0.2 microrems per year f rom Uranium-238
to 3.0 microrems per year from Thorium-228 (see Chapter 12).

3.6.3  Variations in Existing Conditions

     Several existing conditions are critical to the exposure
and response of populations to the pollutants described above.
These variables include composition of resources, population
characteristics, terrain and atmospheric conditions, and exist-
ing health care delivery systems.

A.  Composition of Resources

     Quantities of trace elements vary greatly over the eight-
state region and even within a given locality.  For example, coal
in the Gillette region contains mercury in amounts ranging from
0.06 to 0.28 parts per million  (ppm)(Chapter 9).  This is low
compared to other coals; Kaiparowits coal is the highest at 0.05-
1.2 ppm.  The high concentrations of mercury in Kaiparowits coal
are of particular concern since the contamination of some
species of fish by mercury in nearby Lake Powell already con-
stitutes a health hazard.  The lead content of Gillette coals
 (1.5-40 ppm)  is two to three times higher than that of the
northern Great Plains lignites.

     Estimates of radioactivity in coal are available for only
three states in the eight-state area.   Those are given in
Table 3-28.  Montana coal is particularly high in Radium-226.

B.  Population Characteristics

     Populations susceptible to health problems include the aged,
infants, women of childbearing age, and people suffering from
pulmonary or cardiovascular deficiencies.  Although some general
patterns have emerged with respect to older populations, these
variables have not been comprehensively reviewed during this
first-year assessment.  Generally, the Northern Great Plains has
the largest population of people over 65 (over 10.6 percent in



      Swift,  Jerry J., James M. Hardin, and Harry W. Galley.
Potential Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases and Direct
Gamma Radiation to Individuals Living  Near Inactive Uranium Mill
Tailings Piles.  Washington, B.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protec-
tion Agency,  Office of Radiation Programs,   1976.


                              116

-------
               TABLE 3-28:
RADIOACTIVITY IN COAL
(pci/g)
State
Utah
Wyoming
Montana
Radium-226
1.3
0
2.9
Radium-228
0.8
1.3
0.8
Thorium-220
1
1.6
0.8
Thorium-232
0
0
0.8
 pCi/g = picocuries per gram
North and South Dakota).   New Mexico and Utah have the youngest
populations with less than 7.5 percent of the population over 65.

C.  Terrain and Atmospheric Conditions

     Terrain, temperature, and humidity all contribute to con-
centrating air pollutants.  Rough terrain traps pollutants during
atmospheric inversions,  and the effects of the sulfur dioxide/
particulate mix appears to be most pronounced when prolonged
periods of moderately cold temperatures  (around 30°F) and high
relative humidities  (above 70 percent) occur simultaneously.  All
these conditions occur in the winter in western Colorado; thus,
this area is more likely than other areas to experience health
problems as a consequence of energy resource development.

D.  Existing Health Care Delivery Systems

     As indicated in Section 3.3, rural areas and communities
impacted by energy resource development frequently lack the
infrastructure to support health care facilities and attract
doctors.  These problems will be especially acute for energy
development in remote areas and in areas that experience.rapid
population growth.  Particular problems with health care delivery
exist in the rural Southwest such as southern Utah.  Some disease
problems may be increased unless community health standards are
improved.  For example, in New Mexico, plague is endemic  in rural
areas in the northwestern part of the state, and increased human
populations will contribute to this community health problem.

3.6.4  Summary of Interactions of Technological and Locational
       Factors

     Some combinations of technological  and locational  factors
can result in health problems.  This  summary identifies some of
these problems and the combinations of factors that  cause them.
These problems and factors are listed in Table 3-29.
                               117

-------
                       TABLE 3-29:   SUMMARY OF HEALTH EFFECTS  PROBLEMS
Health Effects Problems
Primary ambient air standard
for Sulfur Dioxide exceeded
Respiratory disease
Inadequate health care
delivery system
Mercury concentrations in
fish tissue exceed Food
and Drug Administration
standard
Combinations of Factors that Cause the Problem
Technological
Power plants which meet
the New Source Perfor-
mance Standards
Conversion facilities,
especially power plants
Labor intensity of
conversion facilities,
fuels facilities
Conversion facilities
Locational
Rough terrain in Southern
Utah and western Colorado
Population charecteristics
Rural areas, most notably
in the Southwest
Mercury content of coal,
proximity to aquatic
ecosystems supporting
sport fish
00

-------
     Primary ambient air standards are set on the basis of health
criteria; violating them poses potential health hazards.  Power
plants at two scenario sites with sufficient air emission control
technologies to meet New Source Performance Standards would vio-
late the 24-hour sulfur dioxide primary ambient air standard.
This violation occurs because of plume impaction on rough terrain
in southern Utah and western Colorado.  Mitigation of this impact
will require emissions removal at higher efficiencies.

     Respiratory disease in susceptible populations is a threat
as a result of the sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions from
conversion facilities, especially electric power plants.  Sulfate
concentrations approach those causing disease at a 3-to-5 percent
sulfur dioxide-to-sulfates conversion rate and can be expected
to increase the incidence of disease in the aged, infants, and
persons with pulmonary and cardiovascular deficiencies.

     Locating labor-intensive conversion facilities in rural
areas such as the Southwest will result in population increases
that exceed the capacity of health care delivery systems.

     Burning coal with a high mercury content in the vicinity of
aquatic ecosystems that support sport fish may increase the
mercury content of fish to levels that exceed those recommended
by the Food and Drug Administration for safe human consumption.
Mercury concentrations in some biota in Lake Powell in the vicin-
ity of energy development at Kaiparowits, Utah currently exceed
these standards.  And the incremental addition from the combus-
tion of coal in the area would aggravate this problem.

     In addition, occupational health hazards in western coal
mines, while similar in all underground coal mines regardless of
location, will likely be a significant problem.  Mortality as a
result of accidents and respiratory disorders as a result of
particulate inhalation can constitute significant health prob-
lems.  Adequate ventilation and roof support in'these mines can
alleviate the problem.

3.6.5  Data Limitations

     Our examination of health effects has been  limited both by
data and the current state of basic research.  More data are
needed on emission rates of potentially toxic materials from
each of the energy technologies examined.  Also, these emission
rates need to be traced along exposure pathways  using results
reported in existing health effects literature.  Knowledge is
limited in such areas as distribution of fine particulates, con-
version rates of sulfur dioxide to sulfates, and hydrocarbon
stream composition in synthetic fuel plants.  Also, effects of
exposure on the characteristic populations of western regions
under circumstances that occur there are highly  speculative.
                               119

-------
3 . 7  TRANSPORTATION


                         HIGHLIGHTS

     • CRITICAL FACTORS

       •  Two technological  factors  can a(J£ect transportation
         impacts:  capital  intensity and. water tLe.qu4.ie.me.nt A .

       •  Three to catio naJL factors  can a^jject these impacts:  the
         capacity oi existing  transportation systems, the. loca-
         tion o& existing systems  In natation to energy re-
         sources, and the avaj,la.by&te.mA in
                              demand4,  de^ive^i/ to nameiou-6
                       and t*ianpoit  of,  othe.1 commodities.

     • WATER REQUIREMENTS
                       770 ac^e-jfeet 0(5  watei ane.
         e,ac.h 1 mi££ion tons  o^  coa£ transported by &tu.n.fiy pipe-
         line.

       •  By the, ye,ai 2000, scenario  s£urrt/ pipelines originating
         in the Northern Great Plains wi££ require more than
         300 thousand acre-jjeet  per  ^ear or 23 percent orf the
         water required jjor  energy development in that area.

       EXISTING CAPACITY

       •  Existing gas pipelines  in the Four Corners area are
         expected to be adequate to  transport both natural and
         synthetic gas through the year  2000; existing oi£ pipe-
         lines are not.


                               120

-------
        Ex.-i&t>ing oil pti.ng ga&  p4.pe.line.-i>
            not.
      - Wew> tnan&M4.&t>4.on line.* Mill  be -teqiuAecf  &on  almost ait
        HC.MJ e.le,c.tnic, powei plant*  built  ^nom  the. pn.e,Ae.nt to the,
        ye.ai 2000.

3.7.1  introduction

     The work done in the first phase of this study  verifies
what has been found in a number of previous studies:   that large-
scale resource development in the  western U.S. will  require sub-
stantial new investments in transportation facilities.   As
reported in Chapter 12, capital costs for transportation may
total more than $40 billion by the end of the century,  equiva-
lent to more than 25 percent of the  total cost of the energy
facilities.  In addition to the impacts  this  investment will
have on the national economy, transportation  facilities can pro-
duce locally significant environmental impacts along their
rights-of-way.  These impacts include noise,  accidents, visual
intrusion, and barriers to human and animal mobility.  The fac-
tors that vary by technology and by  site and  that determine the
extent of such impacts are discussed in  this  section.

3.7.2  Variations Among Technologies

     The choices among transportation modes are  limited by the
choices among energy conversion technologies. The first choice
to be made is whether to convert the resource at or near the
mine site  (the "mine-mouth" option)  or ship it to the demand
center in raw form  (the "strip and ship" option).  If the mine-
mouth option is chosen, several final  fuel forms are available
 (liquids, gases, and electricity) , each  with  specific transpor-
tation modes available.  The present discussion  is organized
around the choice of mode, since each has certain characteristic
impacts .
      As part  of  the  study,  the center for Advanced Computation
at the University of  Illinois at urbana-campaign undertook a
"Route Specific Cost  Comparisons:  Unit Trains, Coal slurry
pipelines  and  Extra High Voltage Transmission" study under a
subcontract with  the  University of Oklahoma.  The final report
Of the study is appended to this report (see Appendix B).

                              121

-------
A.  Export of Solids:  Rail versus Slurry

     We have examined two types of solid fuels:  coal and ura-
nium.   Since substantially larger amounts of coal production are
anticipated  (in terms of weight), attention has been focused on
that resource.  The two leading prospects for coal transport are
rail and slurry pipeline.2

     More than 90 percent of the total cost of a slurry system is
capital-related, while operating costs form a higher proportion
for a rail system.   This large capital-operating cost imbalance
means that slurry pipelines are economical alternatives to rail
systems only when their capacities can be fully used,  conse-
quently, slurry pipeline operations need firm, long-term con-
tracts and throughput rates close to design specifications to
operate economically and efficiently.

     The water required by slurry lines (77 acre-feet per million
tons of coal ) will make additional demands on already short supplies
in some regions of the West.  Although closed-loop systems
(where the water is returned in another pipeline) and the use of
petroleum products^ instead of water have been proposed, neither
is considered an economically viable alternative at present.

     Rail systems are more flexible than slurry pipelines in
their ability to meet fluctuating demand levels and in their
potential to deliver to a variety of geographic locations.  More-
over, rail lines can carry other kinds of freight when not used
to capacity by unit coal trains.

     Slurry pipelines avoid a number of the environmental impacts
of rail systems.  Railroads are noisy, disrupt automobile traffic,
and can collide with automobiles in urban areas and with wild-
life in rural areas.  Also, some people object to the visual
intrusion of rail lines on scenic vistas.

      Although oil shale may be mined as a solid, export of the
shale before extracting the kerogen is not considered practical
because of the large volume of shale that would have to be trans-
ported.
     2
      Although western coal may eventually be transferred to
barges, water transport is generally not available west of the
Mississippi.

      The comparative economics of the two systems depend, to a
great extent, on the cost of restoring existing rail lines.  This
cost is discussed later in this section.

       The petroleum product would be burned,  along with  the
coal, in this alternative.   To the best of our knowledge,  no
one has seriously proposed a closed-loop system.

                              122

-------
     At the railroad usage levels anticipated in the regional
scenario,  noise impacts will be substantial for many people.
More than one million people live within 1 mile of one Montana -
to-Chicago route and, as calculated in Section 12.9, noise pro-
duced by a single unit train can be annoying up to 1 mile from
the track.  in the case of traffic disruption, the rail usage
anticipated in our Nominal Case calls for 43 round trips per day
to the Chicago area.  If 43 round trips per day are sent along a
rail line at 20 mph, the chance of a grade crossing being blocked
at any given time will be one in six.  One obvious solution to
the problem would be to build overpasses rather than grade-
crossings.  However, this solution would entail extra expense
(not estimated in this study) ,  and decisions would have to be
made about the sharing of those costs.

     Another solution to the crossing problem  (as well as the
noise problem) would be re-routing main lines away from popula-
tion centers.  Again, the uncertainties to be resolved are cost
and sharing of cost.  Interestingly, railroad officials recently
announced voluntary re-routing of unit trains away from the
cities of Colorado's Front Range.2

     Environmental impacts of slurry pipelines are different in
kind and are almost entirely related to their use of water.  The
water must be treated at the end of the line before being re-used
or discharged into a river.  Also, spills can occur as a result
of failures in joint welds, pipe sections, and pumping station
equipment.  With the exception of pumping stations, repairing
such leaks will normally require flushing a substantial portion
of the line and thus discharging a large amount of the coal and
water mixture.

     At the national level, western energy development has a
greater proportional impact on railroads and  railroad equipment
manufacturing than on any other  industry.3   In physical  terms,
by the year 2000, Nominal Case development would require more
than 500 unit trains containing more than 2 million tons of steel
and  costing   $2.1 billion.  This is in addition to the 11.8 million


      More than one hundred 100-car \znit trains leaving  the
powder River Basin daily by the year 2000.
     2
      Brown, Fred.   "Long Coal Trains Won't Bisect  Region."
       Post, October 30, 1976.
     o
      EPA's Strategic Environmental Assessment System  (SEAS) was
used to  investigate materials and equipment availability.  See
BOOZ, Allen and Hamilton, inc.  Strategic Environmental Assess-
m
-------
tons of steel in the new and upgraded track previously mentioned
 (with comparable quantities of wood, concrete, gravel, etc.).
Overall, railroad equipment manufacturing would have to grow
about 1 percent per year faster than it otherwise would, given
the added impulse of the Nominal Case level of energy resource
development in the western U.S.

B.  Export of Electricity:  AC versus DC

     Electrical transmission avoids many of the problems men-
tioned above and, in some ways, constitutes even less of.a barrier
to animals than do above-ground pipelines.  Like slurry pipe-
lines, electrical transmission costs are heavily weighted toward
initial capital investments, and the economics of such lines are
predicated on full-capacity utilization.  The concept of mine-
mouth electrical generation for export implies that there are
almost never any existing transmission facilities.

     The two major technological alternatives available for
electrical transmission are alternating current  (AC) and direct
current  (DC).  AC has relative advantages when smaller quantities
of power are sent over shorter distances  (as compared to DC
applications).  AC also allows more flexibility in terms of
delivering power to many destinations simultaneously.  These
differences arise mainly from the fact that DC terminal installa-
tions are more complex and expensive.  In other respects, DC
seems to have the advantage:  they can carry significantly higher
line loads, have lower transmission losses, result in less noise,
and require shorter supporting towers.  Still, the voltages
being contemplated for bulk energy transmission  (800 kilovolts)
produce unique phenomena  (e.g., some electrostatic effects) with
which little operating experience has yet been gained.

     Because of their height, transmission lines have more of an
aesthetic impact than do other transport modes.

C.  Gas and Liquid Pipelines

     Pipelines will be used when petroleum and natural gas are
exported from the region in raw form, or when coal is liquefied
or gasified within the region.  From both the economic and
environmental points of view, the operating characteristics of
these pipelines are more similar to slurry pipelines than to
railroads.
      Further details may be found in Section 12.7 of this report
and Section IV of "Route Specific Cost Comparisons:  unit Trains,
Coal Slurry Pipelines and Extra High voltage Transmission", in
Appendix B.

                              124

-------
3.7.3  Variat-'ons Among Existing Conditions

     Certain locational characteristics,  which vary in the West,
partly determine the impact of a technology on a site.  The key
questions are whether the capacity of existing transport links
is adequate and is in close proximity to  developable energy
deposits and, in the case of slurry pipelines, the extent to
which water is available.

A.  Existing Capacity of Transport Links

     Obviously, extraction  (and, to some  extent, processing)  must
be done wherever the minerals are found.   More often than not,
the deposits are located far from established populations centers
and their associated transportation networks.  The following
discussion summarizes present capacity by area for rail systems,
gas and oil pipelines, and electrical transmission lines.  At
present there is no excess slurry pipeline capacity.

1.  Rail Systems

     In the eight-state study area, rail facilities are espe-
cially sparse around the Four corners area.  In that region, the
distance from coal deposits to the nearest rail trunk line may
often exceed 150 road miles.  Due to denser populations and
greater agricultural production, rail links in the Great Plains
have been developed more extensively.

     The capacity and quality of rail lines presents the most
problematic issue in the study area's transportation system.
Comprehensive, systematic data are not available on how much coal
could be carried over the current rail lines or how capacity
varies by region.  Much of the nation's rail lines have not been
maintained to normal standards, and unit trains will require
t,etter-than-standard track for high-speed operation.  One esti-
mate of reconstruction costs is $3.3 billion.1

     However, even if all existing lines are upgraded for unit
trains, the volumes of coal in the regional scenario will neces-
sitate the building of new main lines.  There  is some disagree-
ment as to when existing rail line saturation would occur, but
assuming that 25 million tons of coal per year could be handled
on one set of double track, some 18,000 miles  of additional track
would be required by 2000,  at a cost of $5.5 billion.  However,
any excess carrying capacity of new and rebuilt rail  lines would
      U.S./ Federal Energy Administration.  Project independence
Blueprint, Final Task Force Report:  Analysis of Requirements
•^d constraints on the Transport of Energy Materials, Vol. 1.
Washington, D.C.:Government  printing Office, 1974.

                               125

-------
be  available  for  other commodity  shipments, which  is  an advantage
not shared by other  transport modes  considered here.

2.   Gas  and Oil Pipelines

      Existing gas pipeline capacity  from the Rocky Mountain area
 (also serving the Four Corners area)  is adequate for  the syn-
thetic gas and natural gas developments hypothesized  for the area
through  the year  2000.  Two major interstate gas pipeline com-
panies have pipelines that currently traverse, the Rocky Mountain
resource area; these have a total yearly capacity of  2,341 bil-
lion cubic feet  (bcf), exclusive  of  added compression and looping
which would increase the capacity (see Chapter 12),   Except for
short pipelines to tie in with these existing trunk .lines, no
new pipelines should be required  to  transport the projected gas
production in the Rocky Mountain  area.   In the Northerji Great
Plains,  gas pipeline capacity may be inadequate.  A nominal
demand scenario projects that 201 bcf of gas in 1990  and 3-,429bcf
in  2000  will  be produced in the Powder River Coal Region.  One
major gas pipeline with a capacity of 56 bcf per year currently
traverses the Powder River Region.

      Existing oil pipeline capacity  is adequate in the Northern
Great Plains  and  inadequate in the Rocky Mountains. Assuming the
Nominal  Case  level of development, 142 thousand barrels per day
(bbI/day) should be  produced in the  year 2000 in the Powder River
area  of  the northern Great Plains.   Existing capacity there is
620 thousand  bbl/day.  In the Rocky  Mountain area, 3.9 million
bbl/day  should be produced by 2000,  and existing capacity without
looping  is 260 thousand bbl/day.

      Assuming that existing oil and  gas pipeline capacities will
be  available  for a shift from natural gases and liquids to syn-
thetics, the  Nominal Case development projections2 will require
new gas  pipelines of 3.3 trillion cubic feet per year total
capacity by the year 2000 from the  orthern Great Plains at a
cost  of  $2.8  billion (1974 dollars).  The same case also requires
new oil  pipelines with a total capacity of 3.6 million bbl/day
from the Rocky Mountain area at a  cost of $684 million  (1974
dollars).

3.   Transmission Lines

      Generally speaking, each mine-mouth power plant  will need a
new transmission line to connect  it  with the distribution network
at  the load center.  Substantial  transmission capacity links the

      This assumes nominal demand; excess capacity would result
from  low demand and a shortage in  the case of our low nuclear
availability  scenario (see Chapter 12 for scenario details).
      2
      See Chapter 12 for scenario  details.

                              126

-------
Four corners area, Arizona, and Los Angeles;  other routes are
Less developed.^  Nominal Case development,  as estimated in this
Technology Assessment, would call for 13,000 new miles of 2,200-
megawatt-electric lines in the region by the year 2000.

B.  Water Availability for Slurry Pipelines

     The viability of a slurry pipeline depends on the avail-
ability of water at the shipping point.  In general, more water is
available from the Upper Missouri River Basin than from the upper
Colorado River Basin.  However, the amount of water available
from specific areas depends on technical, economic, and legal
factors.  For example, interstate compacts may restrict the
export of water (through the pipeline) out of a river basin.
Nevertheless, equivalent amounts of water may be consumed in
generating electricity for transmission out  of the area, because
this is not considered an export of water.

3.7.4  Summary of the Interactions Among Technological and Loca-
       tional Factors

     Certain combinations of technological and locational factors can
cause transportation impacts to be more or less severe.

     Water availability partially determines the viability of a
slurry pipeline.  Both because water is in short supply  (see
Section 3.3) and because of unresolved water rights and alloca-
tion questions, the upper Colorado River Basin is less likely to
be able to support slurry pipelines than is  the Upper Missouri
River Basin.  However, the Upper Missouri developments might
still need more slurry pipelines than the Upper Colorado develop-
ments because of greater demand for coal.

     Existing gas pipeline capacity is adequate for projected
development to the year 2000 in the Rocky Mountains but  inade-
quate in the Northern Great Plains.  Oil pipeline capacity is the
reverse case.  Efficient utilization could require synthetic gas
production expansion in the Rocky Mountains  at the expense of
synthetic oil production.  The reverse is true in the  northern
Great Plains.

3.7.5  Data Adequacy

     One of the most controversial issues in energy transporta-
tion is the choice between unit trains and slurry pipelines.


      Energy Resources Co.  Preliminary Assessment of the Eco-
nomic and Environmental impact of Alternative Demand/Supply"Sce-
narios for Electricity in the Southwest, Draft Final Report, for
U.S./ Environmental Protection Agency.  Cambridge, Mass.:  Energy
Resources Co., 1976.


                              127

-------
Analysis  of  this  issue would be greatly aided by resolution  of
certain questions:   (1)  What are the costs of building, upgrading,
and operating  these systems?  A key element of that evaluation
will be an  assessment of the capacity and state of repair  of
current rail lines.  (2)  What are the operating characteristics
of slurry pipelines (particularly their adaptability to  fluctu-
ating  demand) and  the consequences of accidental breaks?  Announced
projects  would ship five times as much coal four times as  far as
the largest  currently operating line (the Black Mesa line  in
Arizona and  Nevada) .  Also,  new problems may arise in the  process
of scaling up.   (3)  How much water is available for slurry lines?
This is connected with the entire water availability question in
the west.

     Similar questions may be asked in regard to AC versus DC
power  transmission,  in the high-voltage ranges being proposed,
little operating  experience is available for use in judging  the
technical, economic, and environmental merits of these lines.

     Finally,  the economic modeling of regional energy demand
has considered geographic factors only on a crude basis.   For
example,  the Stanford Research institute's model breaks  the
nation into  a  few regions,  and energy is hypothetically shipped
to their  "centroids".   Until such analyses are refined,  not  much
confidence can be placed in projections of energy flows, direc-
tions, and modes.

3.8  AESTHETICS AND NOISE


                          HIGHLIGHTS


     • AESTHETICS

       . '  Many  aa&tne.tJic. e and, the.fie.6otK>. ,
          vany  among -Lndf.v4.du.at A .
         Ae4.tfie.t-tc  -impact*  facm znnigy de.ve.lopme.nt A nuafi national
         pank& ,  ^on.e.&t&,  monument,  i.*olate.d ane.a& , and aie.at>  In
         a  natural.  &tate.  wJULt be. fie.JLat-ive.ty tatiae.1 than -in  mo&t
         otke.n atie.a& ,  and mote. pe.x.on& atie. ttkeJty to pe.ice-i.ve.
               m£ne.& ,  conve-tA-ton ptant& ,  ttian&m-i&txion t-ine.* ,  and
                      piodu.ce v/c4ua£ tmpactA ,  ie.du.c.t
-------
       NOISE
                            oc.c.u.1 W4.th4.Yi one,- hat &  m-ite.
               wk2.no. the. wo^e £eve£ uiitt be above 55
         PepencUng on the. loutt,  tkme, Impact*  could a
               numbe-t ofa people.
3.8.1  Introduction

     Most of the aesthetic impacts from energy development will
result from physical alterations and thus might be considered in
such impact categories as air, water, and quality of life.  How-
ever, individual reactions to such changes are primarily subjec-
tive and cannot be captured  merely  by describing the physical
changes caused by energy development .1  Personal values signifi-
cantly affect an individual's evaluation of aesthetic appeal and,
ultimately, what constitutes an aesthetic impact.

     Except for noise, aesthetic impacts have not received much
attention on a site-specific basis during the first year of this
study.  This is due to the limited availability of information
on aesthetic considerations pertaining to energy development
activities.  Thus, the following sections first identify some
potential aesthetic impacts of the different technologies and
the different site conditions in the West, then summarize impor-
tant technology and site interactions.  A fourth section dis-
cusses data and information gaps that limit aesthetic impact
analyses.

3.8.2  Variations by Technologies

     Long-time residents of the west hold certain non-material
attitudes about their scenically spectacular region.  These atti-
tudes often lead westerners to perceive strip mines, energy con-
version facilities, stacks, plumes, transmission lines, etc.,  in
a different manner than newcomers who are to be employed by the
technological activities.  While no data exist to compare the
aesthetic impacts of different energy development technologies,
several generalizations can be made.  For example, the most
prominent land-related impacts result from surface  mining,  which
can alter the vegetation, color, and topographic character of
the land.  Thus, the extent of land disturbed and the practices
used to reclaim it are critical from an aesthetic viewpoint.

     As discussed in chapters 6-12, energy conversion plant
stack plumes will be visible  at substantial distances and will,


      For a discussion of this point see White, Irvin L., et al.
First Year work Plan for a Technology Assessment of western
energy Resource Development.  Washington, B.C.:  U.S., Environ-
mental protection Agency, 1976, pp. 4-157 to 4-160.

                               129

-------
under certain meteorological and topological conditions, reduce
the average visibility by as much as 12 percent  (even more during
inversion episodes).  Also, pollutants could alter the natural
coloration of the sky in some areas, thus affecting the contrast
of natural features and formations against the skyline.1

     Finally, energy development in each of the scenarios will
increase levels of traffic  (highway and rail) and will introduce
new stationary sources of noise as well.  At low levels, noise
impacts are essentially aesthetic; at higher levels, noise can
also affect health.

     The amount of noise generated will depend on the particular
types of equipment being used.  Among transportation sources,
trucks and unit train engines produce noise levels about 95 dB
(decibels), resulting in an annoyance level  (55 dB) within one-
half mile of roads and railroad lines.  Equivalent noise levels
are generated by such stationary sources as coal car shakers,
rock drills, cooling towers, and pulverizers.  However, moving
sources will generally produce more extensive impacts than sta-
tionary sources because they reach more people.

3.8.3  variations by Existing Conditions

     Aesthetic land impacts will vary according to the existing
geographic and topographic conditions at the facility site.  In
addition, some of these impacts may be avoided or reduced,
depending on the regulatory and enforcement practices of the
state where the energy development occurs.  Most of the western
states require regrading to simulate the original contour of the
land which, in most cases, means shaping the spoils to form a
gently rolling surface.  This practice not only reduces the
aesthetic impacts of surface mining but has been used to improve
the aesthetics of an area by adding distinctive new relief char-
acteristics and allowing the development of "non-native" vegeta-
tion.  Of course, the areas most susceptible to aesthetic impacts
are those close to recreational or national sightseeing areas
valued by long-time residents for aesthetic appeal  (such as
southern Utah and western Colorado).

     Where new site access roads make wilderness areas more
accessible, the increase in off-road vehicle use could lead to
further destruction of plant life and encourage illegal activi-
ties such as poaching or indiscriminate killing of non-game
animals.  This is a potential problem at all energy development
sites in the west, but serious negative impacts are most likely


      U.S., Department of the interior, Bureau of Land Manage-
ment.  Final Environmental Statement;  proposed Kaiparowits
Project,  Chapters III-VII.  Salt Lake City, Utah:  Bureau of
Land Management, 1976.

                              130

-------
to occur at such places as:   Beulah,  North Dakota,  where  the
geologic fragility and high recreational potential  of the bad-
lands to the west of the area make them extremely vulnerable  to
overuse; Escalante, Utah, which is surrounded by national parks,
forests, and recreation areas, all within easy driving distances
from area population centers; and Rifle, Colorado,  which  is also
in close proximity to several national parks and forests  and
where certain heavily used areas are  already beginning to show
visible signs of deterioration.   Further, as discussed pre-
viously, activities related to energy extraction and production
can stress wildlife populations,  intentional or inadvertent
harassment can heighten the potential for the elimination or
reduction of species on a local basis.

     Noise impacts will depend primarily on the distances between
sources and populations.  Thus, those people living closest to
the energy facilities will experience the highest average sound
levels, but, as noted, railroads will affect the greatest numbers
of people.  For example, more than one million people live within
one mile of a railway main line from Montana to Chicago.  Topo-
graphy and foliage will modify noise impacts to a degree.  For
example, valleys tend to entrap noises generated within them,
and dense brush and forests absorb sound waves quickly.

3.8.4  Summary of Interactions of Technological and Locational
       Factors

     The blue skies and long-range visibility of the western
states are highly valued, both for their intrinsic appeal and
for their enhancement of the scenic beauty of parks, monuments,
and protected sites in the region.  Currently, many portions  of
the study area have average visibilities of 65-70 miles,  and
some places in southern Utah and northern Arizona allow clear
visibility up to 100 miles.  Thus, any reduction in long-range
visibility at particular sites will probably be considered a
significant negative aesthetic impact by both residents and
tourists.   However, a potentially much larger aesthetic impact
is the cumulative effect of all the postulated developments on
visibilities throughout the region.  This  impact cannot be
estimated at present, but it could become  a critical  aesthetic
consideration.

     Regardless of reconditioning efforts, the expected net
change in appearance of a mining area may  be  ascertained by some
as a negative aesthetic impact simply because it is different


      Todd, J.  "We're Losing  the wild  in  the Wilderness."
rolorado Outdoors, Vol.25  (March/April  1976), pp. 10-11,

      See Josephy, Alvin M.   "Kaiparowits:  The ultimate Obscen-
ity."  Audubon, Vol. 78  (March 1976), pp.  64-90.


                               131

-------
 from what existed  "naturally".  Problems in reclaiming mined
 land may reduce the variety of vegetation in some more arid areas
 of  the West  (particularly southern Utah, northwestern New Mexico,
 and western Colorado), thus contributing to the disappearance of
 certain wildlife species.  Similarly, the dewatering of aquifers
 and the infiltration  of aquifers, springs, and streams by waste
 pond leachates will produce impacts on both aquatic species and
 wildlife that depend  on these water sources.  These impacts could
 become major problems at some sites.  For example, in the Colstrip
 area in southeastern  Montana, portions of some major aquifers
 lie within or just below a coal seam and, depending on the com-
 position of the overburden, oxidation of the spoil material
 returned to a strip mine may result in the release of contami-
 nants to water recharging area aquifers.

     There is an obvious, direct link between the above ecolog-
 ical problems and  aesthetic impacts, especially in recreational .
 and "wilderness areas".  Most people highly value the diversity
 and well being of wildlife and vegetation in national parks and
 pristine places.  Thus, any reduction or loss of wildlife and
 vegetation in such areas caused by development-related pollution
 or  aquifer dewatering will have negative aesthetic impacts on
 area visitors.

     Other aesthetic  impacts will result from development-related
 population increases  in areas with low populations currently.
 These increases will  obviously increase the number of visitors
 to  primitive or otherwise pristine places, which can lead to
 deterioration of the  areas through acts of destruction, vandal-
 ism, and heavy use.   General overuse and congestion appear to be
 major sources of visitor dissatisfaction in primitive areas.
 For example, the Escalante, Utah and Gillette, Wyoming areas
 could experience population growths of well over 400 percent by
 the year 2000.  The eastern part of the Escalante area is vir-
 tually uninhabited at present and would be highly susceptible to
 such impacts.  At Gillette, both the pristine and the semi-
 pristine (the isolated rural or small town)  environments hold
 aesthetic values for  area residents.  The urbanization issue in
 Wyoming and much of the west is particularly contentious because
 of  residents' desires to keep their small town atmospheres.1


      See:   University of Montana, Institute for Social Science
 Research.  A Comparative Case Study of the Impact of Coal Devel-
 opment on the Way of Life of People in the coal Areas of Eastern
 Montana and Northeastern Wyoming.  Missoula, Mont.:  university
 of  Montana, institute for Social Science Research, 1974; and
 Northern Great Plains Resources Program, Socio-Economic and
 Cultural Aspects Work Group.  Socio-Economic and Cultural Aspects
 of  Potential Coal Development in the Northern Great Plains,
Discussion Draft.  Denver,  Colo.:  Northern Great Plains
Resources Program,  1974,  pp. 37-73.

                              132

-------
     As noted previously,  energy development-related noise
increases cause aesthetic  impacts in nearby communities.  To  some
long-time residents, both  the intermittent and continuous sounds
will be displeasing, annoying,  and possibly disturbing  to typical
patterns of  behavior  and  sleep.  In an area such as Rifle, Colo-
rado, where a larger than  normal fraction of the population  is
of retirement age, the noise created by an energy development
could be especially annoying.  The fact that retirement-age
people have moved into this area seems to indicate a desire to
get away from the disturbing effects of higher-paced life else-
where and spend their retirement years in relatively calm,  quiet
surroundings.  Significant increases in noise levels would be
especially undesirable under such circumstances.

3.8.5  Data and Research Limitations

     Since aesthetic impacts are largely subjective, they  are
both difficult to assess and open to considerable disagreement
among interested parties.   Some impacts are rather straight-
forward in relation to their aesthetic content; for example,  the
presence of untreated sewage or waste in a lake or stream.
Others, such as local attitudes about a newly constructed energy
facility's effect on the surrounding landscape, can only be
identified through actual  surveys of resident perceptions and
attitudes.  Only a minimum of reliable information exists for
impacts in the latter category, and thus information on aesthetic
preferences generally must be extrapolated from available survey
material for the western states.  However, such data usually have
not been structured to systematically include aesthetic attitudes
with regard to energy development, are not available for the
scenario sites included in this Technology Assessment, or are
related to a single aesthetic category such as transmission  line
rights-of-way.

3.9  SUMMARY

     This summary identifies those technological  and locational
factors that are particularly significant  in either choosing or
evaluating a technology-location combination.  It also summarizes
differences  in impacts that  can generally be expected given
different technologies, locations, or technology-location com-
binations.

3.9.1  Technological and Locational Factors that  Cause Impacts

     Table 3-30 lists the  impact-causing factors  identified  in
Sections 3.2-3.8  as being  significant within any  single impact
category.  Note that several factors are listed  in  several impact
categories.  In the technological factor column,  the labor
intensity of technologies  and the extent to which environmental
control technologies are employed determine the  nature and
severity of  a variety of kinds  of impacts.  Locational factors

                               133

-------
                                   TABLE  3-30:   IMPACT  CAUSING FACTORS
LO
               Impact Category
               Air
               water
               Socio/Economic/
                 Political
               Ecology
               Health
               Transportation
               Aesthetics
               and Noise
   Technological Factors
Quantities of emissions
The effect of control
  technolog ies
Labor intensity
Water requirements
  Effect of wet/dry cooling
  Effect of labor intensity
Water effluents
  From facilities
  From urban sources
Aquifer disruption
Labor intensity
Scheduling
Capital intensity
Land use. Labor intensity
Water requirements. Control
  of effluents, Air emis-
  sion, Transporation system
Sulfur Dioxide
Particulates, Hydrocarbons
Trace materials
Radioactivity
Rail vs. Slurry, oil and Gas
  Pipelines, Transmission:
  AC vs. DC
Visibility reduction. Land
  use. Noise intensity,
  frequency, and duration
         Locational Factors
Coal characteristics
Terrain and dispersion potential
Community size and location
Ambient air quality and sta.te air
  quality standards
Water availability
Coal characteristics
Ambient water quality
Aquifer characteristics
Community size and location
Capabilities of existing institution
Historical out migration
Characteristics of local labor force
Local financial conditions
Culture and lifestyle of an area
Ecosystem, stability and resiliency
  Climate, Soils, Plant and Animal
  communities
Character of existing land use
  patterns, stream flow
Coal characteristics, Population
  characteristics. Terrain, Existing
  health care delivery systems
Existing  transportation capacity
Water availability for slurry
  pipelines
 Local  attitudes, Topography
 Existing  regulatory and enforcement
  problems, Accessibility to wilder-
  ness areas

-------
that affect several categories of impacts are community size and
coal characteristics.

     The labor intensity of a technology affects:   air quality;
water user water quality; the ability of communities to provide
services; the extent of political disruptions caused by changes
in the newcomer-to-oldtimer relationships; the extent to which
plant communities and wildlife habitat will be used and abused;
and the ability of health care delivery systems to provide health
services  (and thus the overall health of the population at a
site) .

     Similarly, the extent to which environmental control tech-
nologies are employed greatly affects:  air quality  (in the case
of air emission controls); water use  (in the case of cooling
options); and water quality (in the case of wastewater control
technologies).  Air, water use, and water quality control tech-
nologies partially determine the changes expected in terrestrial
and aquatic ecosystems, the health of the population, and
aesthetic impacts such as visual impairments  (plumes and struc-
tures) .

     Community size affects changes in:  air quality  (when
development is initiated, air quality changes rapidly  in small
communities); water quality  (small communities often do not have
adequate sewage treatment plants nor  the resources  for expanding
them); the services available and the institutional  and finan-
cial capacity to expand these services; the extent  of political
disruptions caused by changes in the  newcomer-to-oldtimer ratio;
health care capacity; the proximity and extent of transportation
links; and the local attitudes toward aesthetic impacts.

     Coal characteristics, which vary widely  in the eight-state
area, affect:  air quality (as sulfur and ash content  vary);
water use  (as moisture and seam thickness vary); water quality
 (effluent streams vary in composition in  accordance to variations
in coal  composition); the extent to which plant communities  and
wildlife habitat is degraded and eliminated  (as seam thickness
and  thus  land use vary)- and health impacts  (as the trace ele-
ment composition,  sulfur, and ash content vary).

3.9.2  Export versus On-site Conversion

     'TWO  major choices are available  to policymakers:  mine  and
ship the  coal out  of the  region to be converted elsewhere  (this
choice is not available  in the case of  oil  shale  and is  the  rule
in the case  of uranium),  or mine and  convert  the  resource to
another  fuel  form  on-site, in which case  the  choice is among
conversion facilities.   This  section  very briefly  summarizes
                               135

-------
 some of the consequences,of those choices and how locational
 factors can affect them.

 A.  Coal Export

     Our analysis indicates that mining and exporting coal mini-
 mizes the negative air quality, water, ecological, social,
 political, and health impacts experienced at a site.  Air emis-
 sions from mining can be negligible, if proper dust suppression
 techniques are used; and emissions2 from urban sources associated
 with mining are much less  (because population increases are less)
 than is the case with conversion facilities.  Even when intensive
 irrigation is assumed, water use for reclamation is one-tenth
 that required by a conversion facility.  Degradation and elimina-
 tion of terrestrial plant and wildlife communities will result
 from surface mining, but the population induced ecological
 impacts caused by the increases associated with labor intensive
 synthetic fuels facilities are at least as great as those induced
 by surface mining.  Because the labor intensity of mining is low
 (especially for surface mining), social impacts resulting from
 inadequate services and facilities and political impacts caused
 by the influx of newcomers are less.  Since air and water quality
 remain virtually unchanged, health hazards except for occupa-
 tional health, are unlikely.  This is not to say that mining does
 not have negative impacts.  For example, aquifer systems can be
 altered and underground miners will be exposed to occupational
 hea1th hazards.

     Mining for export may also minimize positive impacts.  Tax
 revenues, employment potential, and income benefits associated
 with capital- and labor-intensive conversion facilities are
 exported along with the coal.

 B.  Mine-Mouth Conversion

     Synthetic fuels facilities have many impact-causing factors
 in common, and these factors are substantially different from
 those associated with electric power plants.

     Synthetic fuels facilities result in fewer air quality
 problems than electric power generation because emissions are
 considerably less (hydrocarbon emissions from coal liquefaction
 and oil shale retorting facilities are an exception).  The hypo-
 thetical coal synthetic fuels facilities at our sites do not
 cause federal ambient air standards or Class II Nonsignificant
 Deterioration increments to be exceeded.  Power plants in our


      The costs/risks/benefits of these options at various sites
 are now being quantified and compared.
     2
      Fugitive dust may be a problem and will be examined in
more detail,  including rail transportation of coal as a source.

                               136

-------
scenarios regularly violate Class II increments even when high
levels of pollutant removal by air emission control technologies
are assumed,  when control technologies are lower (at levels
which would meet New Source Performance Standards),  ambient stan-
dards are violated.

     Similarly, water use by electric power plants  is consider-
ably higher than that of synthetic fuels facilities (unless power
plants use wet/dry cooling, in which case they are  similar).
Lurgi gasification requires less water than any other conversion
technology.  In the central Rocky Mountains and Southwest, where
water is both scarce and water rights questions major,  water
consumption may very well be the determining variable in choosing
a conversion technology.  Since air quality is also more of a
problem in these areas  (due to the terrain, dispersion potential,
and, in the case of Colorado, state ambient air quality stan-
dards) , synthetic fuels facilities may be a more desirable choice
for the Southwest and central Rocky Mountains than  power plants.
If electric power plants are sited in these two areas,  air emis-
sion control technologies may have very high removal efficiencies
and wet/dry cooling may have to be employed.

     Although all conversion technologies are more  labor inten-
sive than mining, synthetic fuels facilities are substantially
more labor intensive than electric power plants.  This means  that
the social, economic, and political and ecological  impacts of
electric power plants are likely to be less than those of syn-
thetic fuels facilities.1  Moreover, electric power plants offer
the biggest increase in tax base for the least labor intensity.
Therefore, fewer increases in services and facilities will be
required and the social, economic, and political problems caused
by an influx of newcomers will be mitigated.  A lower labor
intensity also means less direct land use and less  degradation
of plant communities and wildlife habitat.

C.  The Effect of Locational considerations

     The effects of conditions at a specific site cut across all
the generalizations stated above either to worsen or mitigate
impacts.  Those conditions that affect air quality, water, and
ecological impacts generally vary according to three sub-areas
in the eight-state study area;  Northern Great Plains, Rocky
Mountains, and Southwest.  However, social, economic, and polit-
ical impacts are also caused by factors that range across these
regional boundaries; that is, impacts are sensitive to other
than physical factors.  Community size is probably the single


      As noted above, air emissions and water requirements are
greater for electric power plants.  These differences also have
to be taken into account in the analysis of tradeoffs among
technological alternatives.


                              137

-------
most important of such variables,  and small communities are
found throughout the eight-state study area.  Community size
affects the capacity of the public and private sectors to provide
services, the nature of the local labor force, and the extent to
which oldtimers are likely to be displaced by newcomers in the
political power structure,  state impact mitigation programs
also determine a community's ability to respond to rapidly esca-
lated demands for services and facilities, and such programs vary
from state to state.
                              138

-------
                           CHAPTER 4

                  POLICY PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
4.1  INTRODUCTION

     In Chapter 14 of this report, seven categories of problems
and issues are discussed:  water availability and quality, recla-
mation, air quality, growth management, housing, community facili-
ties and services, and  development of Indian-owned resources.
However, the identification and definition of these categories was
initially undertaken before the results of the impact analyses sum-
marized were available.  The problems and issues that were dis-
cussed were those that are widely perceived to be important.

     We have now had an opportunity to relate problems and
issues to the consequences of western energy resource develop-
ment.  As discussed in Chapter 2 of this report, the identifi-
cation of both real and anticipated impacts is the beginning
point of policy analysis because it raises questions about which
development policies might contribute to desirable impacts and
which might help mitigate or eliminate undesirable ones.  Addi-
tionally, the impact analysis increases our knowledge of the
significance of individual policy issues—e.g. the severity,
magnitude, timing, and interrelationships among policy issues.

     This chapter summarizes four categories of policy problems
and issues and explicly relates them to the impact analysis
results summarized in Chapter 3.  These categories are water,
air planning and growth management, and reclamation.  During
the remainder of the project, more attention will be paid to
identifying the parties-at-interest to these issues,  alternative
policies and associated costs, risks, and benefits, and imple-
mentation strategies.2


      Chapter 13 presents a preliminary overview of the energy
policy  system and identifies many of the parties-at-interest
likely  to be affected by western energy development.

     2For an elaboration of the tasks  associated with policy
analysis, see White, Irvin L., et al.  Work  Plan For Completing
A Technology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.
Norman, Okla.:  University of Oklahoma, Science  and Public
Policy  Program,  1977.


                              139

-------
 4.2  WATER

 4.2.1  Water  Shortages

     The  results  of our  impact  analyses  suggests that western
 energy development can potentially  create water shortages in
 some western  states and  give  rise to water rights conflicts
 among potential users by the  year 2000.1 Depending on assump-
 tions made  about  energy  demand  and  levels of development, our
 results suggest that by  the year 2000 energy development facil-
 ities will  require 30 to 67 percent of the surface water avail-
 able in the Upper Colorado River Basin.

     Since  most western  states  are  already water poor, the water
 requirements  of energy development  may substantially influence
 developmental decisions.  For example, as indicated in Chapter
 3, conversion technologies can  vary significantly in their water
 requirements:  electric  power generation requires more water
 than any  synthetic fuel  technology; and  among synthetic fuel
 technologies, Synthane may demand 2.6 times more water than
 Lurgi.  Imposing  requirements to minimize water consumption could
 significantly lesson water requirements  but could increase eco-
 nomic costs;  for  example, the use of wet/dry rather than wet
 cooling can reduce water requirements by as much as 72 percent.
 Similarly,  more labor intensive technologies such as synthetic
 fuels will  create substantially larger population-related water
 requirements  than other  technologies, even though such require-
 ments are much smaller than those required by the facilities
 themselves.   Finally, siting  alternatives can affect water con-
 sumption  in terms of the moisture content of coal.  For example,
 siting the  same coal conversion technologies in the arid south-
 west results  in the consumption of  more  water than would be
 consumed  in the Northern Great  Plains.

     Although the effects of  differences in technologies and
 site conditions will be  important to water supplies, western
 energy development raises the more  fundamental question of how
 competing uses and conflicts  will be resolved.  The current
 "system"  for  resolving potential water availability problems
 and  issues  is actually a complex series  of interstate compacts,
 court cases,  and  doctrines which attempt to establish the rights
 of individuals, local governments,  states, Indian tribes, and
 the  federal government.  However, this piecemeal approach to
 dealing with  water problems has produced considerable ambiguity.
 For  example,  federal and  Indian water rights remain unquantified
 and, because  these rights are potentially quite large, their
 quantification could seriously  affect states and present users.
 Existing  uncertainties and the  conflicts that may be created


      Reaction to the current drought suggests that water rights
conflicts might well arise before 2000.

                              140

-------
among industrial, agricultural,  municipal/  and other users by
energy development will probably necessitate establishing new
mechanisms for resolving disputes.   The primary mechanism at the
present time is the courts and they are probably inadequate, in
part because resolving these complex problems in the court is too
time consuming.  More fundamentally, the availability of water
for energy development is really a political problem and what is
needed by way of solution is an acceptable accommodation, not a
winner and a loser.

4.2.2  Water Quality

A.  Effluents From Energy Facilities

     The goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972  (FWPCA) are to have water clean enough for boating
and fishing by 1977, for swimming by 1983, and to achieve zero
discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by 1985.^-  The
FWPCA authorizes the regulation of both point sources, such as
energy facilities, and nonpoint sources, such as those resulting
from runoff and seepage.  Individual point sources are regulated
by EPA-approved state permitting systems.  These permitting
systems set effluent standards for toxic and non-toxic pollutants
and thermal discharges, both of which have the effect of requiring
discharges from energy resource facilities to be treated or
cooled.  This includes, for example, water used for processing
and flue gas desulfurization.  It should be noted that the  costs
of supplying water may make it more economical for the developer
to continue to treat and recycle the water as long as possible.
Whether because of economic costs or FWPCA requirements, the
decision to treat and recycle is often coupled with the decision
to treat and reuse water and discharge effluents into on-site
evaporative holding ponds rather than to discharge treated
effluents into navigable waters.  Moreover, because holding ponds
are not currently considered potential point sources, facilities
which use ponds instead of discharging treated effluents are not
required to obtain a permit for the use of ponds.  Hence, if this
procedure is followed, the Environmental Impact Statement process
can be avoided.

     Our impact analysis results suggest that the accumulation  of
toxic pollutants in these ponds can create potentially signifi-
cant surface and groundwater problems.  Quantities of pollutants
could be large—ranging from about 13 million to 100 million tons
of solids accumulated over 25 years depending upon the type of
facility.  If  accumulation of wet/solids containing heavy metals
and/or trace elements are released as a consequence of berm
failure, they  could produce acute effects  in local surface

       U.S.,  Environmental Protection  Agency.   Clean Water.
•Report to  Congress—1974.  Washington,  D.C.:   Environmental
protection Agency,  1974.

                               141

-------
 waters.   In addition to berm failures,  seepage from holding ponds
 can contaminate groundwater aquifers, which may in turn introduce
 pollutants into local streams.

      The significance of these findings is that the FWPCA require-
 ments aimed at promoting water  quality  may  contribute to the use
 of a technique that can lead to other potentially  serious water
 quality  problems.   In effect, holding ponds are a  potential
 nonpoint source of pollutants which  may increase the problems
 faced by state and local governments in controlling surface and
 groundwater pollution.

 B.  Salinity

      Salinity  is already  a  problem in many  western surface
 waters,  especially waters of the Colorado River Basin.   Salinity
 is increased by both salt loading  (adding salts to the  rivers)
 and salt concentrating  (consuming water from the river).   Nearly
 all salt loading can be attributed to nonpoint sources.1

      Future development in  the  western  states  will necessitate
 attention  to several mechanisms for  controlling salinity.   EPA,
 under the  authority of  the  FWPCA, has required the 7 states  in
 the Colorado River Basin  to establish salinity standards.   These
 states have agreed to maintain  the average  salinity in  the Lower
 Colorado River Basin at or  below 1972 levels.   In  1973,  the
 United States  and  Mexico  agreed to limit the salinity of the
 Colorado flowing into Mexico.   To deal  with the salinity prob-
 lems,  the  Colorado River  Salinity Control Act  of 1974 provides
 funding  for construction  of several  desalting  and  control pro-
 jects, limits  effluents from industrial discharges,  and  autho-
 rizes research projects on  future salinity  problems and  programs.
 Some problems  have already  emerged regarding these mechanisms
 for salinity control.   For  example,  although the 7 states of the
 Colorado River have set salinity standards  in  response  to EPA
 requirements,  these standards are not currently being imple-
 mented under the states'  permitting  systems.   The  states  of the
 basin appear to favor a flexible control system in which permits
 would be approved  or disapproved on  a case-by-case determination.
 EPA appears to favor uniform standards  which would facilitate
 enforcement.

      Apparently, energy resource development will  not pose as
 much of  a  salt loading  problem  as would other  uses,  particularly
 irrigated  farming.2 Nor  do  requirements for consumptive  water

      Refer to  Chapter 14.2 for an elaboration of  these findings.
      2
      See,  for  example, Holburt, M.B.,  and V.E. Valentine.
 "Present and Future Salinity of the  Colorado River."  Journal of
of  the Hydraulics Division,  Proceedings of  the American  Society
of Civil Engineers, Vol.  98  (March 1972, pp. 503-20.

                              142

-------
use for energy resources or related development appear to pose a
significant salt concentrating problem.  This comparative advan-
tage may be an important political consideration;  for example,
it would seem to be in California's and Arizona's  interest to
have any increase in water consumption in the Upper Colorado
River Basin be for energy or other nonagricultural uses since
less of a salinity problem would be created.

C.  Effluents From Populations

     The FWPCA also requires existing community public treatment
works to install secondary waste treatment by 1977 and "best
practicable" waste treatment technologies by 1983.  New public
treatment works are similarly required to install best practi-
cable techniques by 1983.  The impact analyses summarized in
Chapter 3 suggest that sewage treatment plants are likely to be
quickly overloaded by population increases associated with energy
development.  Although the quantities of effluents are much less
than those associated with energy facilities, several policy
problems and issues are likely to arise as a result of large
population increases in small western towns.  First, poorly
treated effluents become, in effect, a point source pollutant
which can cause degradation of surface waters.  Second/ many
communities will be unable to afford the costs of either upgrading
capacities to meet new demands or of installing secondary treat-
ment required by the FWPCA by 1977, a situation exacerbated by
energy development.  In cases in which the need for sewage treat-
ment is higher during the construction phase of a  facility than
during its operation, as it is for gasification and power plant
facilities, it may be impracticable to build sewage treatment
plants to serve short-term peak demands only to have  them under-
utilized later.  Third, insufficient sewer  systems may affect
other local problems and issues; for example, new  housing may be
delayed and community health standards may be violated.

4.3  AIR

4.3.1  Emission Control Technologies

     Development of western energy resources must  be  accomplished
within the requirements of several categories of  air  quality
regulations:   (1) Ambient Air Quality  Standards  (that limit the
atmospheric concentrations of six  "criteria" pollutants  regard-
*less of their  source);1  (2) New Source Performance Standards
 (that limit the amount of a given pollutant a  stationary source
may emit over  a given time);  (3) Non-Significant  Deterioration
requirements  (that  limit the concentrations of pollutants  that
can be added  to areas of relatively clean air);  (4) Hazardous


      The  six are:   carbon monoxide,  sulfur dioxide,  nitrogen
dioxide, hydrocarbons,  particulates,  and oxidants.

                               143

-------
Air Pollutant Standards (that set strict limits on the most
dangerous pollutants); and, (5)  Mobile Source Standards (that
limit emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide primarily
from automobiles).

     A recurring question about domestic energy resource pro-
duction  has been  how much  and what  kinds  of  emission  con-
trol  will be  required to  meet air  quality  regulations.
This question has become increasingly important in part because
of the high costs associated with some control technologies,
such as flue gas desulfurization equipment (scrubbers) as com-
pared to alternatives such as using tall stacks that disperse
pollutants over wide areas and thereby reduce pollutant concen-
trations. 1  Questions of control technologies have become
especially critical to western energy resource development
because western coal is usually considered to be clean enough
not to require scrubbers.2  our impact analysis results indicate
that this often will not be the case.3

     The impact analysis results reported in Chapters 6-11
indicate that power plants located at most western sites will
require scrubbers in order to meet all applicable federal and
state air quality standards.  Although power plants at some
sites can meet New Source Performance Standards without scrub-
bers, they can be expected to violate Ambient Air Standards and
Non-Significant Deterioration (NSD) Standards without them.
Because of Class II NSD requirements and strict state standards
in Colorado and North Dakota, scrubbers at some sites will have
to remove as much as 93 percent of the sulfur dioxide.  Moreover,
the probability that western coal-fired power plants will require
scrubbers has been increased by recent EPA guidelines which do
not allow tall stacks to be used in place of scrubbers.4

      Over a 15 year operation period, scrubbers are orders of
magnitude more expensive than tall stacks.  (Refer to Chapter
14.4) .  Tall stacks are usually used in combination with "intermit-
tent techniques" which utilize favorable meteorological conditions.
     2
      This  low sulfur content sometimes turns out to be less of a
benefit than commonly assumed because many western coals with low
sulfur values also have low heating values.  Hence, sulfur emissions
on a per million British thermal units ' basis are not necessarily low.

      We used coals with "typical"  characteristics for each
scenario area in our analyses.  While there are coals at each
site with a lower sulfur content,  it seems more likely that
coals with a range of sulfur contents will be blended, partic-
ularly over the lifetime of any development.

     441 Fed.  Reg. 7450-52 (February 18, 1976) .  This is because
tall stacks reduce concentrations but do not deal with the
formation of sulfates in the plume (Chapter 3.2).

                              144

-------
4.3.2  Non-Significant Deterioration

     In many respects Non-Significant Deterioration (NSD)
requirements are an unsettled issue.  That is, the costs and
benefits of protecting the nation's clean air appear to raise
critical questions about balancing energy development and envi-
ronmental protection.  These questions and conflicts between
environmentalists and energy developers have contributed to the
probability of Congressional intervention.  In 1976, both houses
of Congress considered bills and amendments that ranged from
making existing requirements more strict to declaring a mora-
torium on protecting clean air areas.

     As discussed above, current NSD requirements are likely to
substantially influence the use and level of efficiency of
scrubbers for coal-fired power plants at many western sites.
Our impact analyses also suggest that NSD could influence siting
considerations for many technologies because the requirements
could effectively establish buffer zones around clean air areas
such as national forests and parks within which new facilities
could be sited.1  By far, the largest buffer zones, ranging from
14 to 75 miles, would be required for power plants.  Much smaller
zones, ranging from 5 to 19 miles, would be required for Lurgi,
Synthane, and Synthoil conversion processes.  This finding
suggests that buffer zones could effectively prohibit the siting
of power plants in many parts of the West unless very efficient
emission control technologies are used.  Hence, buffer zones may
be an important consideration in the calculation of trade-offs
between onsite power generation and alternatives such as using
other conversion technologies or exporting coal to other parts
of the country.

4.3.3  Enforcement

     The Clean Air Act of 1970 (CAA) creates a dual system of
authority and responsibility for regulating air quality.  States
have substantial control and discretion in setting standards,
developing plans for regulating standards, and enforcement.
State control is most extensive with respect to ambient air
quality and NSD and least extensive for new source, hazardous
pollutants, and mobile source regulation.  The latter are
essentially left to direct EPA control.  However, EPA retains
ultimate authority to approve or disapprove state air quality
plans, to take over state plans if necessary, and to allocate
federal funds based on these plans.
      These buffer zones allow pollutants ample distance to
dilute by atmospheric mixing to the increments allowed.  See
Chapter 14.4 for an elaboration of this requirement.

                               145

-------
     The results of our impact analyses suggest at least one area
in which this dual system of control can create problems.  We
found that the ambient concentrations of hydrocarbons, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulates produced by energy-
related urban development can be as high or higher than those
produced by the energy facility itself.  This finding was espe-
cially critical for hydrocarbons; urban concentrations violated
the 3-hour federal standard in all six site-specific scenarios
(see Chapter 3).  These findings highlight a weakness in the
current system of pollution control in that state and local
governments have virtually no control over mobile sources, yet
they are responsible for meeting ambient air standards that can
be violated largely because of the effects of automobile pollu-
tion.  This finding also suggests that New Source Performance
Standards are likely to prohibit new facilities in some urban
areas because of existing hydrocarbons levels or because concen-
trations  of other  criteria  pollutants  are  approaching  the
standards.

4.4  PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT

4.4.1  Services and Facilities

     Most communities impacted by western energy development will
face planning and growth management problems that are directly
related to large and rapid population increases.  Although most
areas can expect to experience long-term economic benefits from
energy development, several factors will contribute to serious
shortages of public and private services in communities during
the first several years of development.  Our impact analysis
results suggest that the most seriously affected communities will
probably be those that are small (under 5,000 population), have
few planning or institutional capabilities for managing growth
and are close to:  (1)  high labor-intensive technologies such as
coal gasification, electric power generation, and oil shale
retorting which require large labor forces during construction;
and (2) developments which schedule multiple labor-intensive
facilities simultaneously.  The problems of these communities
will be increased by inherent uncertainties in the development
process.  Uncertainties include inadequate information about the
level of development and the plans of energy industries, sur-
rounding towns and states, and the federal government.^

     Of the public and private facilities and services for which
demands will increase,  housing and water and sewer systems may
be the most basic.  Mobile homes are a logical and often typical
response to housing needs, although they have the disadvantages
of contributing very little to local tax bases and often add to
difficulties of providing other services such as law enforcement


      See Chapter 14.5 for an elaboration of these problems.

                              146

-------
and fire protection.  Permanent housing options suffer primarily
from financial constraints, although state and federal housing
programs can enhance their feasibility.  As discussed in Section
4.2.3., many communities will be unable to provide adequate sewer
systems during the short term, resulting in probable violations
of the FWPCA and health standards as well as surface water pol-
lution.

     The demands for health,  street maintenance,  public safety,
and recreational services are also likely to exceed communities'
response capabilities.  The one exception to this trend is
probably school facilities, which usually will not need to expand
as much during construction as during operation.   Moreover,
school systems often have more favorable revenue prospects than
do other local government units and in some cases can expect to
enjoy substantial revenue surpluses almost immediately after
construction begins.1

4.4.2  Intergovernmental Relations

     Increased strain in intergovernmental relations is another
impact of rapid population growth.  As noted in Chapter 3, one of
the major sources of strain is that the benefits of public reve-
nue increases often accrue to counties or school districts while
cities are faced with expanded demands for services.  Many prob-
lems also arise between state and local units of government, such
as state limits on taxation rates and debts ceilings  (as  is the
case in North Dakota), prohibitions on the transfer of state
revenues to cities or counties  (as is the case in Utah),  and
fragmentation of authority and responsibility among cities,
counties, councils of governments, special districts,  and state
agencies.  Many western states have responded to some  of  these
problems through mechanisms such as community development agen-
cies,  training programs, and  earmarking tax funds for  impacted
communities.

     Federal assistance is also available  to communities  for most
service areas through general revenue  sharing and grants-in-aid.
However, few federal  grant or loan programs are explicitly
directed towards the  small, predominantly  rural towns  typically
hardest hit by energy development.  Because competition  is keen
for federal dollars and most  small communities lack  experience
in applying for assistance, little if  any  of these traditional
sources of revenue  are  likely to reach communities impacted by
western energy development.   Two recent  federal programs, the
in Lieu of Tax Payment Act of 1976 and the Federal Coal  Leasing
Act of 1975, appear better suited  to these communities.   These


       This can  largely be  attributed to  the fact  that school
districts often are  large  geographical areas which  incorporate
the energy facilities.


                               147

-------
 acts  increase  state and local revenues and establish priorities
 for applying these funds to areas impacted by resource develop-
 ment.

 4.5   RECLAMATION

      Several aspects of the natural environment may become impor-
 tant  policy issues as a result of western energy development/
 including  air  and water quality  (as discussed above), disturbance
 of ecosystems,  and aesthetic values of the land.  One of the more
 problematic of these issues is likely to be reclamation, in part
 because of the large amounts of  land that will be disturbed by
 increased  coal production.  The  impact analysis shows that
 existing conditions in many parts of the West will make success-
 ful revegetation difficult.  For example, reclamation will be
 most  difficult in the arid Southwest because of low and erratic
 average rainfall and poor soil quality.

      Because of the constraints posed by western ecosystems,
 water requirements and water management become a critical policy
 component  in the reclamation process.  Especially in the South-
 west, successful reclamation may be impossible without large-
 scale commitments to irrigation.  The basic issue therefore,
 concerns the trade-offs between using the water for irrigation
 and for other  areawide uses such as agriculture.  Furthermore,
 using water for reclamation may be an important factor in deci-
 sions about developing on-site coal conversion technologies
 (these require more water in the Southwest than they would in
 other parts of the eight state study area) or exporting the
 coal.  Alternatively, water problems may lead to questions about
 requirements for mined land to be returned to its original
 contour.   For  example, existing regulations in some states
 prohibit the reclamation process from shifting the layers of
 overburden to  allow more fertile soils to be placed on top.  In
 some parts of  the West, this means that land will be returned to
 an essentially  non-productive state and prevent alternatives such
 as using the land for residential developments or community
 facilities (in cases where mines are not in isolated locations)
 from being considered.1

     Reclamation also raises intergovernmental problems because
 it will take place in a legal, regulatory, and enforcement net-
work defined primarily by the states, but including federal and
 local input.   One problem that has surfaced in this respect is
that many western states have piecemeal approaches to formulating,


      For a discussion of potential recreational or residential
uses for surface mined land, see Carter, Ralph P.,  et al.  Sur-
face Mined Land in the Midwest;  A Regional Perspective for
Reclamation Planning, for the U.S. Department of the Interior.
Argonne,  111.:   Argonne National Laboratory, 1974,  pp. I-60-I-63.


                              148

-------
coordinating, and enforcing reclamation laws,  largely because
reclamation laws are a relatively recent phenomenon in the West.

     A more significant problem may be the conflict that has
already arisen regarding state control over reclamation on
federal lands.  Since substantial quantities of coal underlie
federal lands and no federal reclamation legislation has been
adopted, the extent of states' rights and authority over these
lands has become an important jurisdictional issue.  Although
recent regulations issued by the Department of Interior establish
federal pre-emptive control over state reclamation standards/
state laws generally apply to all mining activities within their
boundaries regardless of ownership, many states continue to
enforce their laws on federal lands, and specific disputes have
been introduced into the courts during the past year.1

4.6  CONCLUSION

     The significance of each of the problems and issues dis-
.cussed above will depend on factors such as national energy
demands, levels and rate of development of western energy resources,
and resolution of ambiguities in current regulation systems.
The results of the impact analyses also show that the interaction
of different technologies with various  existing conditions  (such
as community size, coal characteristics, and rainfall) will be
critical to the kind and severity of problems and issues which
emerge.  This finding is important because it suggests that
careful consideration of siting alternatives will be one method
for preventing or lessening the severity of many impacts.  How-
ever, our preliminary policy analysis suggests that few if any
decision-making mechanisms exist for bringing together parties-
at-interest from both the private and public sectors which would
allow for the consideration of siting alternatives.  Hence,
nearly every category of problems and issues is likely to be
affected by  this current  inadequacy of  the policymaking  system.

     We have identified and discussed selected problems and
issues in this chapter? policy analysis during the remainder of
the project will take a more comprehensive look at problems  and
issues likely to arise as consequence of western energy develop-
ment.  Policy analysis in the future will  also include several
steps designed to inform policymakers by:   (1) relating problems
and issues to EPA's environmental control programs;  (2) identi-
fying and describing relevant policy systems, including governmental


      while  there is still considerable ambiguity  concerning this
jurisdictional conflict, many western states feel  strongly  that
they have control over reclamation within  their borders.  Wyo-
ming's  recent lawsuit against Interior  suggests  that states are
being allowed substantial control.  This issue is  discussed  in
more detail  in Chapter 14.


                               149

-------
 and nongovernmental participants, institutional arrangements,
 and existing laws and regulations; (3) determining the signifi-
 cance of each problem, and (4) identifying, evaluating, and
 comparing policy alternatives and implementation strategies for
 dealing with the most significant problems and issues.1
      For an elaboration of future policy analysis see:  White,
Irvin L., et al.  Work Plan for Completing a Technology Assess-
ment of Western Energy Resource Development.  Norman, Okla.:
University of Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy Program, 1977.

                               150

-------
                            CHAPTER 5

                PLANS FOR COMPLETING THE PROJECT
5.1  INTRODUCTION

     Although a separate, detailed work plan has been prepared
and distributed, a brief, general description of plans for com-
pleting the technology assessment is presented below.

5.2  BACKGROUND AND SUPPORTING MATERIALS

     A number of background and supporting materials either have
been or are being prepared that are not being circulated with
this progress report.  Among these are six energy resource
development systems  (ERDS) that are described in the First Year
Work Plan.-*-  The primary purpose of the ERDS is to provide a
description of the technologies and the rules and regulations
that control their deployment and operation.  These are baseline
data that were required before impact analysis could be under-
taken.  Technologies descriptions for all six resources have been
completed, reviewed externally, and are now being revised.  The
required data on federal and state rules and regulations have
been collected and are to be sent out for review within the next
few months.  A final ERDS report integrating descriptions of the
technologies and the laws and regulations will be distributed in
the fall of 1977.

     Other background and supporting materials that will be made
available are subcontractor reports, a series of background
policy analysis papers, and a final impact analysis report.  Two
subcontractor reports have been completed:  Michael Rieber and
Shao Lee Soo, "Route Specific Cost Comparisons:  Unit Trains,
Coal Slurry Pipelines and Extra High Voltage Transmission"; and
Water Purification Associates, Water Requirements for Steam-
Electric Power Generation and Synthetic Fuel Plants in the
             Irvin L., e t al.  First Year Work Plan for a Tech-
nology Assessment of Western Energy Resource Development.
Washington, D.C.:  U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, 1976.

                               151

-------
Western United States.^  The Rieber and Soo report is included
as Appendix B to this report; the WPA report is being published
as a separate EPA publication.

     Under a subcontract with the University of Oklahoma, the
Federation of Rocky Mountain States is conducting a planning
study that emphasizes differences in planning for permanent and
temporary growth.  The Federation's final report will either be
issued as a separate report or appended to one of the other
reports described in this section.

     Each of the background policy analysis papers will focus on
a category of substantive problems and issues.  These papers
will:  (1) identify and define problems and issues within the
category; (2) relate these problems and issues to EPA's environ-
mental control programs; (3) identify and describe relevant
policy systems in terms of governmental and nongovernmental
participants, existing institutional arrangements, laws, regu-
lations,  policies and programs, established goals and objectives,
and existing and potential conflicts; (4) determine the signifi-
cance of these problems, issues, and policy systems to the future
of western energy resource development; (5) identify those
problems and issues that warrant an in-depth analysis of alter-
native policies and implementation strategies; and (6) identify,
evaluate, and compare policy alternatives and implementation
strategies for dealing with these problems and issues.  Each of
these papers will also consider inter- and intra-governmental
problems and issues and special concerns that arise because of
Indian and federal ownership.

     The final impact analysis report will be a revised version
of Chapters 3 and 6-12 of this report.  Although considerable
progress has been made in achieving our analytical objectives,
the impact analyses conducted to date must be extended and
refined.   The changes to be incorporated are:  lower levels of
development; the addition of four technological alternatives
(enhanced oil recovery, in situ oil shale, geothermal, and an
additional uranium mine and mill); sensitivity or parametric
analyses of critical factors; and a revision of the format for
reporting results to emphasize building blocks which relate
residuals and impacts to separate technological and locational
alternatives.
      Water Purification Associates.  Water Requirements for
Steam-Electric Power Generation and Synthetic Fuel Plants in the
Western United States, Final Report, for University of Oklahoma,
Science and Public Policy Program.  Washington, B.C.:  U.S.,
Environmental Protection Agency, forthcoming.

                               152

-------
5.3  THE FINAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORT

     In addition to the final technology assessment report
addressed to EPA, several summary reports designed to communicate
to specific audiences will be prepared, including reports for
local and state officials and agencies, federal agencies and the
Congress, the energy industry, and other private parties-at-
interest.  The basic report will synthesize the detailed results
reported in the background and supporting materials described
above, summarizing:  impacts; costs, risks, and benefits;
substantive policy problems and issues; and policy alternatives
and implementation strategies.
                               153

-------
                                  TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                           (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA-600/7-77-072a
                                                          3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOf*NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
  Energy from the West: A Progress Report of a
  Technology Assessment of Western Energy Resource
  Development Volume I Summary
            5. REPORT DATE
              June,  1977
            6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
  Irvin L.  White, et al
                                                          8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Science and Public          Radian Corporation
  Policy Program              P.O.  Box 9948
  University of Oklahoma      Austin,  Texas  78766
  Norman, Oklahoma  73019
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
              EHE 624C
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
               68-01-1916
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
  Office of Research and  Development
  Office of Energy, Minerals,  and Industry
  Washington, D.C.  20460
             13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
              Final,  July, 1975-March, 1977
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
  This project is part  of  the EPA-planned and coordinated  Federal Interagency
  Energy/Environment R&D Program
16. ABSTRACT
       This is a progress  report of a three year technology assessment of the
  development of six energy  resources (coal, geothermal,  natural gas, oil, oil shale,
  and uranium) in eight western states (Arizona, Colorado,  Montana,  New Mexico,
  North Dakota, South Dakota,  Utah, and Wyoming) during  the period from the present
  to the year 2000.  Volume  I  describes the purpose  and  conduct of the study,
  summarizes the results of  the analyses conducted during the first year, and outlines
  plans for the remainder  of the project.  In Volume II,  more detailed analytical
  results are presented.   Six chapters report on the analysis of the likely impacts
  of deploying typical energy resource development technologies at sites representative
  of the kinds of conditions likely to be encountered in the eight-state study area.
  A seventh chapter  focuses  on the impacts likely to occur if western energy resources
  are developed at three different levels from  the present to the year 2000.  The  two
  chapters in Volume  III describe the political and  institutional context of
  policymaking for western energy resource development and present a more detailed
  discussion of selected problems and issues.   The Fourth Volume presents two
  appendices, on air  quality modeling and energy transportation costs.
17.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                                                        c.  COSATI Field/Group
  Systems Analysis
  Electrical Power
  Fossil Fuels
  Ecology
  Government Policies
 Technology Assessment
 Western Energy
   Resource Development

 Secondary Impacts
O402
0503
0504
0511
0606
0701
0809
1001
1002
1202
1302
1401
2104
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
  Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport 1
 Unclassified
    182
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                               Unc las s i fied	
                                                                        22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                                      • U.S. OOVEBWSHT PRIHTIHC OFFICE I 1917 0-J41-OJ7/W

-------