Bøger af National Energy Technology Laboratory

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) in a cooperative agreement with the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) as part of the Smart Grid Demonstrations Program. If PNM received the funding, the company would install a 2- to 4-megawatt-hour advanced absorbed valve-regulated lead acid battery, an access road, a parking lot, and a 3,000-foot underground electrical tie-in to the existing power distribution system (the proposed project). PNM would also install separately a collocated utility-scale solar photovoltaic array with an output of about 500 kilowatts at its own expense. The goal would be to use the battery, along with a sophisticated control system, to turn solar energy into reliable dispatchable generation resource. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. DOE's proposed action is to provide about $1.8 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to PNM. The cost of the proposed project would be about $5.9 million. In this EA, DOE evaluates the impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics, soils, geology, water resources, biological resources, and cultural resources from DOE's proposed action and PNM's proposed project.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (Air Products). If Air Products received the funding, the company would demonstrate the capture of carbon dioxide (CO2) from steam methane reformers at Air Products facilities in Port Arthur, Texas; transporting the CO2 via pipeline; and conducting monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) related to enhanced oil recovery (EOR) at the West Hastings Field. The CO2 would be sequestered in the Frio formation as part of the EOR activities. Air Products would capture approximately one million short tons of CO2 per year using vacuum swing adsorption. The compressed CO2 would be piped approximately 12.8 miles to the existing Green Pipeline, which would in turn convey the CO2 to the West Hastings Field south of Houston, Texas. Denbury Onshore, LLC. is a subcontractor to Air Products for the use of the Green Pipeline and will share responsibility for conducting the MVA activities. DOE's proposed action would provide approximately $284 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to Air Products. The cost of the proposed project would be approximately $431 million. This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EAs and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed project could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency, through capture of CO2 at existing Air Products facilities within the Valero Port Arthur Refinery, and to the local economy; increase domestic oil production; and could contribute to a minor reduction of greenhouse gases.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to ArcelorMittal USA, Inc. (ArcelorMittal) to construct and operate a boiler to capture blast furnace waste gas and convert it into electricity. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $31.5 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, ArcelorMittal. The total cost of the proposed project would be about $63.2 million. ArcelorMittal's project involves construction and operation of a blast furnace gas recovery boiler to capture and use 46 billion cubic feet of blast furnace gas per year. ArcelorMittal would use the gas, which it currently burns and releases to the atmosphere, to generate electricity for use at the plant. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The project could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency and the local economy. In addition to adding and retaining jobs in the East Chicago area, the project would use waste energy in blast furnace gas to generate electricity. The electricity would replace the same amount of electricity ArcelorMittal purchases from utilities that use conventional power-generating sources such as coal-fired power plants.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat.115) financial assistance grant to Brea Power II, LLC (Brea Power; formerly Ridgewood Renewable Power, LLC). The grant would facilitate expansion of an existing landfill gas collection system, and construction and operation of a combined cycle power generation facility at the Olinda Alpha Landfill in Brea, California. DOE's proposed action is to provide $10 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Brea Power. The cost of the project is estimated to be about $84 million. The primary objective of Brea Power's proposed project is to maximize the productive use of substantial quantities of waste landfill gas generated and collected at the Olinda Alpha Landfill in Brea, California. The project proponent determined that utilization of the waste gas for power generation in a combustion turbine combined cycle facility was the best use for the gas. The electricity generated from the proposed project, a net output of approximately 280 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually, would be distributed to the local power grid via a new electric transmission line to be installed by the local utility company. Brea Power would expand the existing gas collection system at the landfill and build the new gas-to-energy facility across the street from the existing gas-to-energy facility. Once the new facility is operational, the existing facility would be used only as a contingency. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and, after proposed mitigation measures, identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency and local economy could be recognized. The project would generate 280 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually, and save an estimated 2,216 trillion British thermal units per year annually from the landfill gas that would otherwise be flared. In addition, by using nearly 50,000 tons per year of methane from the landfill gas, the project would provide carbon dioxide equivalent reductions of greater than 1 million tons annually and enable the avoidance of over 120,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year from not using fossil fuels for generating a similar amount of electricity.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) financial assistance grant to Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (Air Products) to facilitate construction and operation of a plant to recover waste energy at the AK Steel Corporation (AK Steel) Middletown Works in Middletown, Ohio. DOE's Proposed Action would provide $30 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Air Products. The total cost of the proposed project would be about $315 million. Air Products' proposed project would construct and operate a combined-cycle power generation plant that would capture and process blast furnace gas to produce electricity and process steam. Air Products would build the plant on AK Steel's existing Middletown Works site, which manufactures cold-rolled steel products. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed project could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency and the local economy and air quality. In addition to adding and retaining jobs in the Middletown area, the project would convert waste energy from blast furnace gas, half of which is currently burned and released to the atmosphere, to generate electricity and process steam. The generated electricity could replace the same amount of electricity AK Steel purchases from conventional power generating sources such as coal-fired power plants.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential impacts of providing financial assistance to Viresco Energy, LLC, (Viresco) for its construction and operation of a Coal and Biomass Fueled Pilot Plant, that would be located in Kanab, Utah. The plant would be located on land leased to Viresco by the Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration. The Pilot Plant would occupy approximately 1.5 acres of a 10-acre site located approximately 2.5 miles south of the downtown area of Kanab, Utah. The Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations Act for Energy & Water Development and Related Agencies (Public Law 111-85) included a $2,500,000 earmark sponsored by then Senator Bennett of Utah for the "Utah Coal and Biomass Fueled Pilot Plant." In accordance with the earmark, DOE would provide financial assistance to Viresco to support its design, construction, and testing of a pilot-scale steam hydrogasification facility. Under a cost sharing agreement, DOE would provide $2,404,000 (approximately 80 percent of the total cost of the research and development project) and Viresco would contribute the remaining $601,000. The Pilot Plant would be constructed, owned, and operated by Viresco. Viresco is responsible for obtaining the permits and other authorizations needed for the project; DOE would have no regulatory authority over the project or its operation. Under the cooperative agreement, Viresco would operate the Pilot Plant and collect data for a series of test runs totaling 30 days of operation over a period of months; after DOE's financial assistance ends, Viresco plans to seek additional funding for continued operations. The objective of Viresco's proposed project is to conduct a pilot-scale evaluation of the Steam Hydrogasification Reaction (SHR) process. The Pilot Plant would be a small-scale facility designed to evaluate the technical feasibility of using steam hydrogasification to convert coal and biomass (such as agricultural or wood processing waste) into synthesis gas (syngas), and ultimately into clean fuels such as substitute natural gas, sulfur-free Fischer-Tropsch diesel, jet fuel, dimethyl ether, and methane. The successful operation of this SHR gasification technology at a pilot scale would provide engineering information needed to develop a commercialization pathway for this process. This project supports DOE's goal of developing and using domestic coal and renewable resources in an efficient and environmentally acceptable manner. This technology uses an advanced gasification process and produces clean fuels. The addition of biomass to the coal feedstock also reduces net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The EA found that the most notable potential changes from Viresco's proposed project would occur in the following areas: land use, aesthetics, air quality, solid and hazardous wastes, utilities, and socioeconomics. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing these potential changes.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) grant to Compact Power, Inc. to construct and operate a high-volume manufacturing plant to build advanced lithium-ion cells and batteries. The cells and batteries would be for use in automotive applications including but not limited to hybrid electric, plug-in hybrid electric, pure electric vehicles for commercial purposes, and military hybrid vehicles, as well as for aviation, smart grid support, broadband backup power, and energy storage for renewable energy. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $151 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Compact Power, Inc. The total cost of the project is estimated at $303 million. Compact Power, Inc.'s proposed project would expand its domestic capacity to produce advanced lead-acid batteries for use in the transportation industry. Compact's 850,000-square-foot facility would be built on vacant land located mostly in the City of Holland, Allegan County, Michigan, with a small portion of the proposed site located in the adjacent Fillmore Township. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse impacts for the proposed project after consideration of the mitigation of impacts to wetlands. Beneficial impacts to the nation's air quality and transportation could be realized from implementation of the proposed project. In addition, beneficial socioeconomic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the affected local economies.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of its Proposed Action to provide cost-shared funding to RTI International (RTI) for its proposed project to demonstrate the pre-commercial scale-up of RTI's high-temperature syngas cleanup and carbon capture and sequestration technologies. Approximately $168.8 million of DOE's total $171.8 million funding for the proposed project would be provided from funds authorized in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115). RTI's proposed project would advance the commercial deployment of cost-effective, environmentally sound technology options that reduce the constraints associated with using domestic coal energy resources and may ultimately assist in reducing greenhouse gas intensity. RTI's proposed project would be located at Tampa Electric Company's existing Polk Power Station in Polk County, Florida. The proposed project would treat a slipstream, equivalent to up to 66 megawatts of electricity generation, of coal-derived syngas from the existing Polk Unit 1 integrated gasification combined-cycle power plant to remove 99.9 percent of the sulfur, reduce trace contaminant (arsenic, selenium, and mercury) concentrations, and convert the removed sulfur compounds to commercial-grade elemental sulfur. Also, up to 300,000 tons per year, or 90 percent, of the carbon dioxide (CO2) in the cleaned syngas would be captured and sequestered in a deep geologic formation and not released to the atmosphere. This EA evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project in 13 environmental resource areas. Based on initial impact screening evaluations, DOE determined that no or negligible impacts would occur in six of these resource areas. Additional impact evaluations for air quality, geology and soils, water resources, socioeconomics, transportation, waste management, and human health and safety identify negligible or minimal impacts due to the proposed project's construction and operation. In this EA, potential cumulative impacts of the proposed project with other past, present, or future actions are also evaluated, and no adverse cumulative impacts are identified.

In support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Research Program, conceptual systems and cost analyses were developed by the Parsons Corporation for coal processing plants to produce hydrogen while recovering carbon dioxide (CO2) for offsite processing or sequestration. These plants had been referred to as "decarbonized fuel plants," but are now called "hydrogen fuel plants." The scope of work for this analysis entailed the following: Identifying alternative processes and technologies utilized for production of hydrogen from coal; Reviewing the technical and economic characteristics of developmental materials and technologies for separating hydrogen and oxygen from gas mixtures; Conceptualizing process plant designs that utilize developing technologies and materials, resulting in costs of product and CO2 sequestration significantly lower than with conventional approaches; Comparing the costs of a hydrogen fuel plant with plants designed to produce hydrogen from coal utilizing conventional technology; Performing sensitivity analyses on the baseline conceptual hydrogen fuel plants to determine the effect of modifying plant design on cost of product; Presenting data and results on this study at periodic conferences and workshops. An alternative plant was conceived for producing hydrogen from coal utilizing a hydrogen separation device (HSD) being developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The HSD is based on a high-temperature membrane separation concept that can be designed to selectively separate hydrogen from other gases. By utilizing the HSD, it should be possible to separate hydrogen from CO2 passively and economically. This report is a compilation of a series of letter reports issued between 1999 and 2001 to document the activity and results from this investigation. It includes the following: An establishment of a baseline plant design for hydrogen production based on the ORNL membrane concept, A comparison of this design to the conventional methods of producing hydrogen from natural gas and coal, and An evaluation of the HSD based on gasifying a mixture of Wyodak coal and biomass.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing $1.6 million in financial assistance pursuant to a Congressional earmark to Boston Architectural College (BAC) for its Urban Sustainability Initiative for the Renovation of Public Alley #444. The financial assistance would be in the form of cost-shared funding. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the grant funding and the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project on air quality, geology and soils, biological resources - sensitive species, water resources, cultural/historic resources, traffic, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, and socioeconomic resources. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with all federal and state regulations, would reduce storm water runoff into the Charles River Basin and would become an ongoing tool for the BAC curriculum and community public education. The project would include the installation of 13 to 15 open loop geothermal wells to provide heating and cooling energy to BAC's facilities; the installation of a green screen trellis system, planting soils, concrete pavement, pavers, landscaping; and mechanical upgrades (plumbing and electrical) to accommodate the geothermal solution into the facilities. Operation of the geothermal wells would not result in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of Boston's Historic Back Bay District community would be enhanced with the addition of the green screen trellis system, planting soils, concrete pavement, and pavers. After consulting with Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) DOE has determinated that this project would not have an adverse effect on the historical Back Bay District. As part of the Green Alley Phase II, the green screen trellis system is a vine covered vegetated screen intended to provide an attractive visual amenity that benefits both the public and the institution by softening the appearance of two faces of an existing masonry block stair tower. Developing the geothermal wells on the BAC site would not significantly impact any population of plant or animal species. The project site is relatively small (less than 1.0 acre) and isolated from larger tracts of undisturbed land; nor does the area provide any unique habitats for special species. The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist), an endangered species, is known to reside in Suffolk and Middlesex counties and in various locations throughout Massachusetts. However, given the localized construction area in the alley and the species' tendency to not stray from its wooded habitat, it is highly unlikely that the proposed action would have any negative impacts on the endangered Indiana bat species.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance in a cooperative agreement with Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB). If SECARB received the funding, they would demonstrate the injection of 125,000 tons/year of carbon dioxide (CO2) from a power plant into a deep saline aquifer for enhanced oil recovery and geologic sequestration. This funding would be used for drilling up to two injection wells, reconditioning of four existing wells for monitoring, and two new shallow water wells. Connected actions include the CO2 source at the CO2 capture unit at Plant Barry, the 12.3-mile long, 4.5-inch outside diameter pipeline to transport the CO2 to the oilfield, and the two electric service lines for a total of 3,275 feet. No connected actions are receiving federal money. DOE's proposed action would provide approximately $30.0 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to SECARB. The cost of the proposed project would be approximately $39.3 million. This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EA's and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed project could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy efficiency and the local economy, and could contribute to a minor reduction of greenhouse gases.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action -- providing financial assistance to Novolyte under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. DOE's program will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for the expansion of Novolyte's current operations in Zachary, Louisiana, to increase capacity and utilization of its existing electrolytes manufacturing facility (referred to as the "Proposed Project" within this EA). The Proposed Project would help to meet the growing North American demand for electrolytes as the EDV and HEV markets develop. The expansion would include increasing capacity and utilization of the existing electrolytes facility, and would include constructing a new production building, moving existing equipment into the new facility, and adding additional capabilities to meet the forecasted demand. Additionally, the Proposed Project would create 18 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Novolyte's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, surface water and groundwater, vegetation and wildlife, solid and hazardous wastes, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment associated with its Proposed Action -- providing financial assistance to Honeywell under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems through building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for Honeywell to construct a manufacturing plant to produce a critical battery material LiPF6. The project would produce up to 1500 metric tons of LiPF6 on an annual basis for high-quality Li-ion batteries. Additionally, the project would create approximately 34 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Honeywell's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, surface water and groundwater, vegetation and wildlife, wetlands, solid and hazardous wastes, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

The United States Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of providing funding for the proposed Battleground Energy Recovery Project in Deer Park, Harris County, Texas. The proposed action is for DOE to provide $1.94 million in cost-shared funding to the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) for the Battleground Energy Recovery Project. The proposed project was selected by the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) to advance research and demonstration of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. The proposed project would produce 8 megawatts (MWs) of electricity from high pressure steam generated by capturing heat that is currently lost at the Clean Harbors Deer Park (CHDP) facility. The proposed project is consistent with DOE's goal of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energy generation projects. The proposed project involves installation of a specifically designed waste heat recovery boiler on the existing kiln afterburner of an incineration unit at the CHDP facility. This boiler would use heat from the incinerator flue gases to generate high-pressure superheated steam. The adjacent Dow Chemical plant would periodically consume part of the steam for process needs, replacing natural gas firing of existing boilers. The majority of the steam, however, would be piped to a new turbine generator (TG). The TG would be installed in a new building adjacent to the existing CHDP facility. Additional waste heat steam from the neighboring Dow Chemical plant would be routed to the TG when available. A cooling tower would be installed adjacent to the new building in the northwest corner of the facility. The 8 MWs of electricity generated by the TG would be used by the CHDP facility to offset purchased power; any excess power generated would be transmitted to the electric grid. Construction and installation activities associated with the proposed project would occur entirely within private industrial property. The project would require a construction permit and a minor amendment to the facility's air emissions operating permit. Additionally, modification to the facility's hazardous waste processing and disposal permit would be necessary. However, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated to result from implementation of this proposed project.

The transportation sector accounts for a large and growing share of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Worldwide, motor vehicles emit well over 900 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) each year, accounting for more than 15 percent of global fossil fuel-derived CO2 emissions. In the industrialized world alone, 20-25 percent of GHG emissions come from the transportation sector. The share of transport-related emissions is growing rapidly due to the continued increase in transportation activity. In 1950, there were only 70 million cars, trucks, and buses on the world's roads. By 1994, there were about nine times that number, or 630 million vehicles. Since the early 1970s, the global fleet has been growing at a rate of 16 million vehicles per year. This expansion has been accompanied by a similar growth in fuel consumption. If this kind of linear growth continues, by the year 2025 there will be well over one billion vehicles on the world's roads. In a response to the significant growth in transportation-related GHG emissions, governments and policy makers worldwide are considering methods to reverse this trend. However, due to the particular make-up of the transportation sector, regulating and reducing emissions from this sector poses a significant challenge. Unlike stationary fuel combustion, transportation-related emissions come from dispersed sources. Only a few point-source emitters, such as oil/natural gas wells, refineries, or compressor stations, contribute to emissions from the transportation sector. The majority of transport-related emissions come from the millions of vehicles traveling the world's roads. As a result, successful GHG mitigation policies must find ways to target all of these small, non-point source emitters, either through regulatory means or through various incentive programs. To increase their effectiveness, policies to control emissions from the transportation sector often utilize indirect means to reduce emissions, such as requiring specific technology improvements or an increase in fuel efficiency. Site-specific project activities can also be undertaken to help decrease GHG emissions, although the use of such measures is less common. Sample activities include switching to less GHG-intensive vehicle options, such as electric vehicles (EVs) or hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). As emissions from transportation activities continue to rise, it will be necessary to promote both types of abatement activities in order to reverse the current emissions path. This Resource Guide focuses on site- and project-specific transportation activities. This National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) publication, "Battery-Powered Electric and Hybrid Electric Vehicles to Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions: A Resource Guide for Project Development" provides national and international project developers with a guide on how to estimate and document the GHG emission reduction benefits and/or penalties of battery-powered and hybrid-electric vehicle projects. This primer also provides a resource for the creation of GHG emission reduction projects for the Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ) Pilot Phase and in anticipation of other market-based project mechanisms proposed under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Though it will be necessary for project developers and other entities to evaluate the emission benefits of each project on a case-by-case basis, this primer will provide a guide for determining which data and information to include during the process of developing the project proposal.

Without question, the first quarter of the 21st century is an exciting time in the world of energy. The nation's push to develop sound energy policy is strong. The need to curb CO2 emissions is urgent. The call for clean, affordable power is clear. This is also an exciting time for energy researchers. The challenges we strive to overcome require far-reaching solutions: designing and building next-generation, near-zero-emission power plants; capturing, utilizing, and storing manmade carbon emissions; maximizing efficiencies; and getting the most from our energy resources with the least impact on our air, land, and waterways. At the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), we are confident in our ability to help America meet 21st-century challenges linked to fossil fuel recovery and use. After all, we have been meeting such challenges for generations. From mine safety to synthetic fuels, acid rain to mercury control, enhanced oil production to unconventional natural gas recovery, the legacy of public benefits realized by our programs stands as a testimony to the importance of our research and the careful means by which we steward federal investment in those programs. Today, we continue to address complex energy issues-reducing the environmental impact of shale gas recovery, mitigating carbon emissions, utilizing CO2 to enhance our nation's oil and natural gas resources, and more. Our research is making a fundamental difference to the welfare of our nation. It also gives NETL and our stakeholders an opportunity to enhance our citizens' quality of life for generations to come. In 2011, NETL realized a host of technical accomplishments and received recognition for our contributions to the energy arena. A full review of those achievements is available in the 2011 NETL Accomplishments, which contains the realized and estimated benefits provided by the programs implemented by our lab through the Office of Fossil Energy.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to review the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to EnerG2 under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. DOE's program will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of this cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 75 percent of the funding for EnerG2 to establish a commercial-size manufacturing plant for fine-grained carbon powder (also known as electrode carbon) having a high degree of purity, a high surface area per unit mass, and an improved pore structure. The plant would be setup inside an existing warehouse currently owned by Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc. and located in Albany, Oregon. If successful, the plant would help meet the growing needs of domestic and global producers of EDVs and HEVs. The production capacity would be enough to support building at least 60,000 EDVs per year. Additionally, the project would create approximately 50 temporary construction jobs and approximately 35 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from EnerG2's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, vegetation and wildlife, solid and hazardous wastes, utilities, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) grant to Exide Technologies for expansion of its operations to manufacture advanced lead-acid batteries. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $34.3 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Exide Technologies. The total cost of the project is estimated at $70 million. Exide Technologies' proposed project would expand its domestic capacity to produce advanced lead-acid batteries for use in the transportation industry. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse impacts for the proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's air quality and transportation industry could be realized from implementation of this proposed project. In addition, beneficial socioeconomic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the affected local economies.

DOE prepared this EA to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its proposed action to provide financial assistance to Chemetall under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the Electric Drive Vehicles (EDV) industry in an effort to reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE is to provide approximately 45 percent of the funding for Chemetall to establish a new 5,000 metric tons per year lithium hydroxide plant at an existing Chemetall facility in Kings Mountain, North Carolina and to upgrade and expand an existing lithium brine production facility and an existing lithium carbonate plant in Silver Peak, Nevada. The Kings Mountain site is located in an industrial area directly south of Kings Mountain, in Cleveland County, North Carolina, and serves as the headquarters for Chemetall. The site is located on 720 acres, with the operations concentrated within an approximately 20-acre developed area that is centrally located within the property. Production currently includes a specialty lithium manufacturing plant, which produces various lithium salt products by reacting lithium carbonate with different materials to produce lithium bromide, lithium chloride, and lithium aluminate. The proposed project would expand operations at the facility by adding a lithium hydroxide plant. The project at Kings Mountain would create approximately 19 permanent jobs. The Silver Peak site is approximately 15,000 acres. Chemetall uses the Silver Peak site for the production of lithium carbonate, and to a lesser degree, lithium hydroxide from lithium-bearing brines that are pumped from a well field. Silver Peak is the only major source of lithium carbonate in the United States. The proposed project would rework the existing brine field's production system, rework and expand the capacity of the existing brine evaporation pond system, and refurbish the existing lithium carbonate plant. All the improvements would occur within Chemetall's patented mining claims. The project at Silver Peak would create approximately 14 permanent jobs. Chemetall may also construct a geothermal power plant in the western portion of its Silver Peak unpatented mining claims. However, that action would be evaluated separate EAs prepared by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and is not part of this EA. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Chemetall's proposed project would occur in the following areas: air quality, solid and hazardous wastes, and human health and safety for both Kings Mountain and Silver Peak, with the exception of solid and hazardous waste for Silver Peak, which was negligible. Additionally for Silver Peak, minor impacts would occur to groundwater, transportation and traffic. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

Cephas Industries (Cephas) is proposing to construct an open-loop biomass manufacturing facility in Richmond, Virginia. The demand for recycling construction and demolition (C&D) debris has rapidly increased in recent years prompting the construction of approximately 200 biomass manufacturing facilities nationwide, with more expected to be developed. Of particular value is the recycling of wood and woody material into biomass commodities that can be sold to end-users as an alternative fuel source. Studies have shown that the recycling of C&D debris serves to: produce energy, conserve landfill space, reduce the environmental impact of producing new materials, and reduce overall construction project expenses by lessening disposal costs. The Cephas Open Loop Biomass Manufacturing Facility is a shovel-ready biomass project that would support the C&D and recycling industries in metropolitan Richmond. The proposed facility would be located on approximately 5.2 acres within the Broad Rock Industrial Park, which is located within the Richmond City limits south of the James River (Appendix 1). Development of the facility would include constructing an approximately 33,000 square foot metal building from recycled materials that would house the operational equipment (Appendix 2). The facility would have the capacity to accept and process 250-500 tons of C&D debris on a weekly basis, of which approximately 35% is expected to be biomass fuel. Cephas applied for funding assistance from Virginia's State Energy Program (SEP) through the Virginia Department of Mines Minerals and Energy (DMME). DMME selected this project to receive a grant from the SEP. States can apply their SEP funds to a variety of activities related to energy efficiency and renewable energy. Recently, much of states' SEP funding came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) of 2009 (Public Law 111-5, 123 Stature 115; Recovery Act), in which Congress appropriated $3.1 billion to the Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) for SEP grants and from which Virginia received $70 million pursuant to a statutory formula for financial distribution. Virginia recently informed the Department that it proposes to use $500,000 of its SEP funds as a grant to the Cephas project. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) DOE must complete a review of potential environmental impacts of projects funded under the SEP before deciding whether to allow states to use their funds for the projects they select. DOE prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed biomass project and the no action alternative. This EA analyzes the following areas of potential environmental impacts: water resources, geology, topography, soils, vegetation, wildlife, air quality, noise, visual resources, archeological and historic resources, land use, environmental justice, and infrastructure.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) grant to Saft America, Inc., Jacksonville Plant to construct and operate a high-volume manufacturing plant to build advanced lithium-ion cells and batteries for military hybrid vehicles, aviation, smart grid support, broadband backup power, and energy storage for renewable energy. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $95.5 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Saft America Inc., Jacksonville Plant. The total cost of the proposed project is estimated at $191 million. Saft America's facility would be built at the Cecil Commerce Center, Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse impacts for the proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's air quality and transportation could be realized from implementation of the proposed project. In addition, minor beneficial socioeconomic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the local economy.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of providing two types of financial assistance to Dow Kokam MI, LLC to construct and operate the Midland Battery Park for manufacturing of advanced lithium polymer batteries for hybrid and electric vehicles: (1) a grant under Funding Opportunity Announcement DE-FOA 0000026, Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative and (2) a loan pursuant to Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 as an automotive component supplier promoting improved fuel economy in light-duty vehicles. As the name of the grant Funding Opportunity Announcement indicates, the grant would be made from funds appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115). This EA analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed construction and operation of the battery manufacturing facility by Dow Kokam MI, LLC, the two proposed federal actions (a grant and a loan), and the alternatives to the proposed project. The Midland Battery Park would be constructed on a 50-acre vacant site in Midland, Michigan, that is zoned industrial and surrounded by other industrial and commercial facilities. The new battery manufacturing facility would be about 770,000 square feet in size and would require a new 1- to 2-mile-long electric transmission line. DOE evaluated 15 resource areas in this EA and identified no significant adverse impacts for DOE's proposed actions, which would facilitate construction of the Midland Battery Park. With the following exceptions, impacts to the resource areas and issues examined would not occur or would be negligible. The proposed project site would be located in an area where soils were previously contaminated with dioxin and near areas with shallow groundwater contaminated with vinyl chloride and Freon 11. Concentrations of dioxin at the site are within acceptable limits for industrial uses and due care requirements would be implemented during construction to minimize risks of exposure. Discharge permit requirements for the safe handling and treatment of contaminated groundwater would be implemented during temporary dewatering to excavate and install detention basins and underground utilities. Over nine acres of isolated non-jurisdictional wetlands would be filled to construct the facility. The state of Michigan determined that these wetlands are not regulated under Federal or State laws. Detention basins would be created to temporarily store on-site storm water runoff and replace the main function of these low value wetlands. DOE determined that grading and filling these wetlands would not cause significant adverse impacts. A new transmission line could be a risk to migratory birds and could impact nearby wetlands and sensitive species. However, the transmission line should be designed to avoid these wetlands and protected species and common design standards should be implemented to minimize risks to migratory birds. Beneficial economic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the local economy. The use of batteries produced at this facility would increase the use of electric and hybrid vehicles, which would help reduce emissions of greenhouse gases from vehicles and reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to Celgard under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the electric drive vehicles (EDV) industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for Celgard to construct a small industrial facility (approximately 135,000 square feet) on approximately 20.6 acres of land for the manufacturing of separator materials for commercial HEV batteries. The proposed project would involve the installation of a manufacturing plant with sufficient capacity to manufacture at least 1,000,000 square meters of separator material to support the assembly of at least 20,000 plug-in HEV batteries, or equivalent, per year in accordance with the requirements of DOE's Funding Opportunity Announcement. Additionally, the project would create approximately 273 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Celgard's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, groundwater, vegetation and wildlife, socioeconomic, utilities and energy use, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of providing three types of financial assistance to EnerDel, Inc. (EnerDel) to expand its domestic manufacturing of lithium-ion batteries: (1) a grant under Funding Opportunity Announcement DE-FOA 0000026, Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative; (2) a loan under Funding Opportunity Announcement DE-FOA 0000052, State Energy Program Formula Grants - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA); and (3) a loan pursuant to Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Energy Act) as an automotive component supplier promoting improved fuel economy in light-duty vehicles. As the names of the Funding Opportunity Announcements indicate, these two methods of assistance would derive from funds appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115). Alternatively, the loan under the State Energy Program funding opportunity would be provided by the State of Indiana from the formula grant it received from DOE under that funding opportunity. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of EnerDel's proposed project to expand its manufacture of lithium-ion batteries, the three proposed federal actions (two loans and one grant), and the alternatives to each of these proposed actions. EnerDel, an Indiana-based company, currently provides system integration from cell to battery in a mass production-scale operation. It operates two facilities in central Indiana: one in the northeast section of Indianapolis and one in the southern part of Noblesville, which is about 20 miles northeast of the center of Indianapolis. Under its proposed project, EnerDel would add cell manufacturing and pack assembly capacity by obtaining and outfitting a new third facility located near Greenfield, Indiana. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse impacts from EnerDel's proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's air quality and transportation could be realized from implementation of the proposed project, as it could lead to increased use of electric vehicles. In addition, minor beneficial socioeconomic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the local economy.

The Department of Energy's (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) manages the research and development portfolio of the Vehicle Technologies (VT) Program for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). A key objective of the VT program is accelerating the development and production of electric drive vehicle systems in order to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum. Another of its goals is the development of production-ready batteries, power electronics, and electric machines that can be produced in volume economically so as to increase the use of electric drive vehicles (EDVs). Congress appropriated significant funding for the VT program in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 111-5 (Recovery Act) in order to stimulate the economy and reduce unemployment in addition to furthering the existing objectives of the VT program. DOE solicited applications for this funding by issuing a competitive Funding Opportunity Announcement (DE-FOA-0000026), Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative, on March 19, 2009. This project, Next-Generation Lithium Ion (Li Ion) Battery Recycling Facility, was one of the 30 DOE selected for funding. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $9,552,653.00 in financial assistance in a cost sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Toxco Incorporated (Toxco). The total cost of the project was estimated at $19,107,705.00. The overall purpose and need for DOE action pursuant to the VT program and the funding opportunity under the Recovery Act is to accelerate the development and production of various electric drive vehicle systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. DOE intends to further this purpose and satisfy this need by providing financial assistance under cost-sharing arrangements to this and the other 29 projects selected under this funding opportunity announcement. This and the other selected projects are needed to reduce the United States' petroleum consumption by investing in alternative vehicle technologies. Successful commercialization of EDVs would support DOE's Energy Strategic Goal of "protect[ing] our national and economic security by promoting a diverse supply and delivery of reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound energy." This project will also meaningfully assist in the nation's economic recovery by creating manufacturing jobs in the United States in accordance with the objectives of the Recovery Act.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Center for Commercialization of Electric Technology (CCET) to demonstrate battery technology integration with wind generated electricity by deploying and evaluating utility-scale lithium battery technology to improve grid performance and thereby aid in the integration of wind generation into the local electricity supply. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental consequences from a portion of the overall project that would involve land disturbance. Other portions are described as major elements of the project, but because they involve only installation of equipment in existing facilities, they do not involve potential for significant environmental impact and are not evaluated further. With regard to the land disturbing actions considered in this EA, DOE evaluated impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, surface water resources, biological resources, and areas of environmental concern. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to some aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would be negligible. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with federal and state air quality regulations, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and would have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. New construction would involve: (1) above ground and underground 12.5 kV distribution lines, (2) 1.5 MW storage battery facility and foundation, (3) an access road, and (4) site clearing. Two wind turbines and foundations would also be constructed as part of the proposed action. Although DOE is not funding the wind turbines, the effects will be assessed as a connected action, as it is part of the overall action. Operation of the proposed project would not result in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of the RTC and along the easements would change with the addition of the above ground distribution lines, which would be along 5.5 miles of right-of-way utility easements, storage battery facility, access road, and wind turbines. There are two alternatives for the aboveground distribution lines; Option A extends through agricultural fields and Option B along county roads. The storage battery facility is proposed to be 20 by 40 feet with a 20 foot wide by 600 foot long access road. The wind turbines will not adversely affect the aesthetics as the location since it is in an open field with limited development in the area, and there is an existing wind turbine already on-site at the RTC along with several transmission and meteorological towers near the proposed location. Clearing of 3 acres for the proposed project on the RTC site would not significantly impact any plant or animal species population because: (1) the project site has previously been disturbed; (2) the project site is currently vacant land that is isolated from larger tracts of undisturbed land; and (3) because plant and animal species found there are expected to be widespread in the region or, for sensitive species, the area is not unique habitat. The whooping crane, which is an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act, occurs in Lubbock County. However, the habitat needed for the whooping crane is not located within the vicinity of the project.

Aspen Plus(R) (version 10.2) simulation models and the Cost of Electricity (COE) have been developed for advanced fossil power generation systems both with and without carbon dioxide (CO2) capture. The intent was to compare the cycles based on using common assumptions and analytic standards with respect to realizable performance, cost, emissions and footprint. Additionally, commercially available (or near term) reference plants were included for comparison. The advanced fossil power systems considered were: (both natural gas and coal fueled) Hydraulic Air Compression Cycle (HAC); Rocket Engine Gas Generator Cycle; Hydrogen Turbine (air) Cycle; Hybrid Cycle (Turbine / Solid-Oxide Fuel Cell); Humid Air Turbine Cycle (HAT) [(CO2) capture - not considered]. Reference Plants developed based on previous NETL/EG&G studies included: Pulverized Coal (PC) Boiler; Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC); Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC). Capital cost estimates were developed for the above cases using data from the EG&G Cost Estimating Notebook (version 1.11) and several contractor reports. The format follows the guidelines set by EPRI TAG methods. Individual equipment sections were based on capacity factored techniques. The costs are reported in first quarter 2002 dollars. The total capital requirement includes equipment, labor, engineering fees, contingencies, interest during construction, startup costs, working capital and land. Other assumptions are provided in summary tables in Appendix B which contains the COE spreadsheets developed for all cases. Results are compared in Table 1 (Natural Gas Cycles) and in Table 2 (Coal Cycles). These results demonstrate the following key observations: For all systems, (CO2) capture entails major cost & efficiency penalties; Only Hybrids perform at or near the Vision 21 efficiency goals summarized in Appendix D; Rocket Engine cycles have lower efficiency and higher cost than other options requiring far less development; HAC cycles based on a closed-loop water system are unattractive. An open-loop water system (dam site) may be attractive as a niche market; Hydrogen Turbine (air) and HAT cycles are also unattractive.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action -- providing financial assistance to Phycal under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of innovative concepts for beneficial CO2 use, which include, but are not limited to, CO2 mineralization to carbonates directly through conversion of CO2 in flue gas; use of CO2 from power plants or industrial applications to grow algae or biomass. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 80 percent of the funding for the development of a pilot algae farm and processing facility in Wahiawa and Kalaeloa, Hawaii, to demonstrate the beneficial use of CO2 for the growing of algae and production of algal oil (referred to as the "proposed project" within this EA). The proposed project would develop algae technology that demonstrates the future potential of algae oil for biofuels at a level that results in technical, economic, and environmental advantages. This advanced technology would not only help to enhance U.S. energy supplies through the responsible development of domestic renewable energy but would also help to reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. The proposed project would include developing an algae farm and processing facility, which would include constructing shallow ponds, greenhouses, lab/offices, a process building, and an outdoor area with various processing equipment facilities. The proposed project would be split into two phases or Modules. Module 1 would provide a baseline assessment of core processes and initial optimization. Module 2 would include the scaling and integration of supporting processes. The overall objective of proposed project would be to confirm the process economics prior to commencing to a commercial scale, development of which is not funded under this award. The proposed project would create approximately 20 jobs in Module 1, and another 20 jobs in Module 2, for the total duration of the approximately three-year pilot. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable, although minor, changes to result from the proposed project would occur in the following areas: utilities and energy use, air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, vegetation and wildlife, solid and hazardous wastes, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Center for Commercialization of Electric Technology (CCET) to facilitate the development and demonstration of a multi-faceted, synergistic approach to managing fluctuations in wind power within the Electric Reliability Council of Texas transmission grid. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental consequences from a portion of the overall project that would involve land disturbance. Other portions are described as significant elements of the project, but because they involve only installation of equipment in existing facilities, they do not involve potential for significant environmental impact and are not evaluated further. With regard to the land disturbing actions considered in this EA, DOE evaluated impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, surface water resources, and biological resources. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to some aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would be negligible. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with federal and state air quality regulations, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and would have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. New construction would involve a 500-kilowatt solar farm with an array of solar panels, a storage battery with capacity to hold at least 250 kilowatts, and other green technologies. Operation of the solar farm would not result in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of the Discovery at Spring Trails community would change with the addition of the solar photovoltaic panels, which would be housed on rows of metal framework designed to allow the panels to be sloped toward the south for optimal exposure to the sun. The top edge of the modules would be 10 to 11 feet above the ground and the bottom edge would be about 2 feet above the ground. Developing 4 acres for the solar farm on the Discovery at Spring Trails site would not significantly impact any population of plant or animal species because the project site is small and isolated from larger tracts of undisturbed land, and because plant and animal species found there are expected to be widespread in the region or, for sensitive species, the area is not unique habitat. The red-cockaded woodpecker, which is an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act, occurs in Montgomery County. However, forest habitat in the project vicinity is second growth due to past development of the area, and it is unlikely that this species would occur there.

The peaking of world oil production presents the U.S. and the world with an unprecedented risk management problem. As peaking is approached, liquid fuel prices and price volatility will increase dramatically, and, without timely mitigation, the economic, social, and political costs will be unprecedented. Viable mitigation options exist on both the supply and demand sides, but to have substantial impact, they must be initiated more than a decade in advance of peaking. In 2003, the world consumed just under 80 million barrels per day (MM bpd) of oil. U.S. consumption was almost 20 MM bpd, two-thirds of which was in the transportation sector. The U.S. has a fleet of about 210 million automobiles and light trucks (vans, pick-ups, and SUVs). The average age of U.S. automobiles is nine years. Under normal conditions, replacement of only half the automobile fleet will require 10-15 years. The average age of light trucks is seven years. Under normal conditions, replacement of one-half of the stock of light trucks will require 9-14 years. While significant improvements in fuel efficiency are possible in automobiles and light trucks, any affordable approach to upgrading will be inherently time-consuming, requiring more than a decade to achieve significant overall fuel efficiency improvement. Besides further oil exploration, there are commercial options for increasing world oil supply and for the production of substitute liquid fuels: 1) Improved Oil Recovery (IOR) can marginally increase production from existing reservoirs; one of the largest of the IOR opportunities is Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), which can help moderate oil production declines from reservoirs that are past their peak production: 2) Heavy oil / oil sands represents a large resource of lower grade oils, now primarily produced in Canada and Venezuela; those resources are capable of significant production increases;. 3) Coal liquefaction is a well-established technique for producing clean substitute fuels from the world's abundant coal reserves; and finally, 4) Clean substitute fuels can be produced from remotely located natural gas, but exploitation must compete with the world's growing demand for liquefied natural gas. However, world-scale contributions from these options will require 10-20 years of accelerated effort. Dealing with world oil production peaking will be extremely complex, involve literally trillions of dollars and require many years of intense effort. To explore these complexities, three alternative mitigation scenarios were analyzed: Scenario I assumed that action is not initiated until peaking occurs. Scenario II assumed that action is initiated 10 years before peaking. Scenario III assumed action is initiated 20 years before peaking. For this analysis estimates of the possible contributions of each mitigation option were developed, based on an assumed crash program rate of implementation. Our approach was simplified in order to provide transparency and promote understanding. Our estimates are approximate, but the mitigation envelope that results is believed to be directionally indicative of the realities of such an enormous undertaking. The inescapable conclusion is that more than a decade will be required for the collective contributions to produce results that significantly impact world supply and demand for liquid fuels.