Home / FAQs |
FAQs
General – Environment – Land Use – Health and Safety – Liability Protection
General
G1: Why is the project moving so quickly?
A1: In addition to private sector funds, the project is receiving federal funding as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This Act requires projects to move quickly to stimulate job creation and economic growth. FutureGen has been uncompromising in adhering to high safety and technical standards. With a power generation station and a site selected, more detailed design work can be completed and this will help the Alliance answer more of the community’s questions. The Department of Energy’s 18-month environmental review process and the Environmental Protection Agency’s permitting process will provide further opportunities for public involvement.
G2: Will Ameren be capturing carbon dioxide at a coal-fueled boiler at the Meredosia power plant or the oil-fueled boiler? Are current coal boilers being retrofitted?
A2: Ameren will replace an existing oil-fueled boiler with an oxy-combustion coal-fueled boiler. This type of upgrade is referred to as a repowering. The new boiler will send steam to an existing steam turbine generator that will produce electricity. The new oxy-combustion coal-fueled boiler will allow for carbon dioxide capture.
G3: What is the composition of the CO2 from the power plant in Meredosia that would be stored?
A3: The CO2 stream will be at least 97 percent (by weight) pure CO2. The other 3 percent (by weight) are safe inerts, such as argon and oxygen. Trace contaminants will be cleaned up to levels below safe drinking water standards.
G4: Will CO2 from sources other than the Meredosia power plant be stored at the site?
A4: The project’s primary focus is on Meredosia’s CO2. The legal agreement between the FutureGen Alliance and the U.S. Department of Energy is to store at least 1.3 million metric tons of CO2 per year for 30 years. Any future expansion would be contingent upon landowner agreement and additional, extensive permitting.
G5: Will the roads be improved?
A5: The storage site operations will not generate substantial traffic. The visitor, research, and training facilities will generate more vehicle traffic just like any new business does. The Alliance will work with local authorities to determine what, if any, road improvements need to be made to support construction and operation of the storage facility and other support facilities. This will be a specific topic addressed as part of environmental studies and there will be an opportunity for public comment.
G6: Is visitor center located on the site, in a local town, or elsewhere?
A6: The visitor center, research, and training facilities will be located in the same county as the storage site operations. The Alliance will work with county and local officials on how to best design these facilities for maximum benefit.
G7: How can we be assured that the Alliance won’t change the rules as you go and “run over the little guy”?
A7: There is a saying that “past performance is the best predictor of future behavior”. The Alliance has been working on FutureGen and in Illinois for many years. We’ve always kept our agreements with the local community, state, and contractors. We all live in a changing world. In the past when something changed—sometimes beyond our control–we’ve been honest about the reasons for the change. We have also been extremely sensitive to community and landowner concerns. We cannot address every concern immediately, but over time we work to address all we can. We suggest that you talk to community leaders in Mattoon (the prior host site) or government staff from the state of Illinois. They will tell you that the Alliance has always acted with integrity. This is not to say that we are perfect. If we make a mistake, we’ll admit it and correct it. As added assurance, the Environmental Protection Agency recently issued major new regulations governing CO2 storage that protect the community. Our goal is to advance clean coal technology, and we can’t accomplish that goal without being a good partner with the community.
G8: What is new about the FutureGen project?
A8: Each component of the FutureGen project (i.e., the power plant, the pipeline, and the storage site) has been demonstrated individually at various scales. What is new is the integration of these component pieces in a single project and learning how to efficiently operate the system, keeping clean power prices as low as possible.
Environment
E1: Project documents say the nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and mercury are removed at the power plant. Exactly where do they go? How much remains in the CO2?
A1: The new oxy-combustion process will take nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and mercury emissions to near-zero levels. Real-time monitoring of the CO2 stream before it exits the plant will automatically shut-down the pipeline if the CO2 composition does not stay within acceptable limits. Sulfur is converted to gypsum, which has beneficial agricultural use or may be utilized in wallboard manufacture. Particulate matter will be captured, stabilized and safely stored in a permitted landfill. Mercury is taken to a safe disposal facility.
E2: What about micro-fissures and leaching of the CO2 through those?
A2: The CO2 is stored more than three quarters of a mile below the surface with many layers of rock above it, including an impermeable caprock. Similar formations have held oil and gas in place for hundreds of millions of years with no upward migration. Further, the injection of CO2 will occur at a rate well below any pressure that would cause micro-fissures in the formation.
E3: How does the FutureGen Alliance intend to monitor stored CO2?
A3: Sophisticated modeling will combine our strong knowledge of geologic data with real-time CO2 monitoring at sample wells to continuously monitor and predict CO2 movement. If there is any deviation from our plan, the project will be required to make adjustments to the injection strategy or cease operations.
Land Use
L1: What property does the project want to use?
A1: The Alliance seeks to buy the very deep subsurface rights from individual landowners. The geologic formations of interest contain no minerals and no water that is suitable for drinking or irrigation. Also, these formations are not used for any other purpose. Landowners will be able to continue to farm or use their surface property. The Alliance will also buy small amounts of surface property or easements for wellheads, pipelines, and small support facilities.
L2: How will landowners be compensated?
A2: Specific amounts will be part of a contract with individual landowners. Overall, the Alliance has set aside more than $10 million for equitable landowner compensation. When the site is accepting CO2, surface rights owners within the storage site will receive royalty payments, which will increase property values directly.
L3: Is the federal government going to exercise eminent domain to take property?
A3: No.
L4: Would the state government use eminent domain to gain pipeline easements?
A4: Perhaps; however, it is the Alliance’s desire to negotiate easements for a fair market price. We will attempt to locate pipeline easements along existing utility corridors where possible in order to have minimum impact on landowners. Farming can continue right above the pipeline after construction. During construction, farmers would be paid full fair market price for any crops that cannot be grown on the easement. Thus, for less work, the farmer will generate the same revenue. Also, an additional payment will be made to landowners for the easement itself.
L5: In the future, could the pipeline be switched to other uses, such as natural gas.
A5: No, in the easement agreement we will restrict the use of the easement to a CO2 pipeline.
L6: How large are the monitoring wells and where will they be placed?
A6: There is flexibility in terms of where the monitoring wells are placed. The Alliance plans to work with the landowner to locate these wells where they will cause minimum impact to the landowner. During the drilling of the wells an area approximately 500 feet by 500 feet will be required. After drilling the footprint will be reduced to approximately 150 feet by 150 feet or less. Periodic access to the site will be needed to service the well. Arrangement will be made with landowners to assure minimum impact on farming or other activities around these wells.
Health and Safety
H1: Is CO2 hazardous or flammable?
A1: No. There are over 3,600 miles of CO2 pipelines in the U.S. that have operated safely for decades. The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that the CO2 is non-hazardous.
H2: Will security be increased at the storage site when it is accepting the CO2?
A2: The storage site will be a secure site whether it is accepting CO2 or not. Further, its operations are so quiet; most people will not even realize it is operating.
H3: What are the size and the operating pressure of the pipeline?
A3: The operating pressure of the pipeline will not exceed 2200 psig. The pipeline will be approximately 12 inches in diameter. Final engineering will determine the precise size.
H4: How close will the pipeline be to my house?
A4: The project has adopted a minimum distance of 150 feet, which is three times the legal requirement. Also, the pipeline is buried a minimum of four feet underground, which provides added safety. In farm areas, the pipeline will be buried at least five feet to allow surface farming to continue.
H5: In Weyburn, Canada, there are claims of a CO2 leak. How is FutureGen different than what is happening in Weyburn, Canada?
A5: The FutureGen and the Weyburn projects are substantially different from each other. Further, extensive scientific research has been conducted at the Weyburn site and no results have been found that would support the recent claims that CO2 injected as part of the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) project has migrated to the surface (Source: Petroleum Research Technology Center Response to Petro-Find Geochem Ltd , 2011). The phenomena, which was claimed to be a leak, can be explained by near surface processes including microbial generation of soil CO2 and methane (PTRC, 2011) or other factors. The Alliance will continue to watch the Weyburn project closely. If there are any lessons-learned from it that we should apply to FutureGen 2.0, we will.
FutureGen 2.0 carbon storage is very different. It will take place in the Mt. Simon Sandstone, a deep saline reservoir more than three quarters of a mile beneath the surface. This rock formation is more than 850 feet thick and is overlain by multiple layers of impermeable shale, which act as seals for the stored CO2. Very few wells have been drilled into the Mt. Simon Sandstone in Illinois due to the lack of fossil fuel resources in the formation. Oil and natural gas deposits in Illinois occur at much shallower depths in rocks that are hundreds of millions of years old. By contrast, the Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring & Storage Project is taking place in an active oil field using CO2 for EOR. At the Weyburn site, there are over 800 oil wells and about 200 injection wells (not including over 150 horizontal wells), which have reached the oil-producing beds.
Liability Protection
P1: If a problem occurs, are landholders responsible?
A1: No. The landowner and local community carry no financial responsibility or liability.
P2: How are the community and landowners protected from financial loss?
A2: The landowner and local community carry no financial responsibility or liability. The project is being designed with a safety-first approach implementing continuous risk mitigation processes. These practices ensure that potential problems are well-understood and reduced to a very low probability. If a problem should occur, several tiers of liability protection will be in place. The first is the project’s cash resources. The second is a major industrial insurance policy. The third tier is a project-funded trust fund.
P3: Would federal government statutes exempt the project from the financial responsibility for liability?
A3: No. We are aware of no law that would provide such exemptions. In fact, just the opposite, as part of the Alliance’s contractual agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy, the Alliance agreed to indemnify and hold harmless the U.S. Department of Energy.
P4: Given the current fiscal condition of the State of Illinois, how much support can the state really provide? Will they purchase the insurance policy mentioned?
A4: The State of Illinois has been a strong supporter of the project. However, the Alliance is not asking the state for financial support. The Alliance will purchase a major industrial insurance policy.
