Section 1: Introduction

This document is Environment Canada's response to formal comments from stakeholders on revision of "Thermal Power Generation Emissions - National Guidelines for New Stationary Sources", issued under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, May 1993. To assist the reader, the comments have been summarized and then organized by topic. However, as many comments are relevant to more than one topic, there is unavoidably some overlap in the various comments and responses.

The proposed Guidelines are consistent with the approach endorsed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), in their June 2000 agreement on Canada-wide Standards for Particulate Matter (PM) and Ozone (CWSs for PM and Ozone). (Note: Throughout this report, references to Ministers and the CCME in relation to the CWSs for PM and Ozone does not include Quebec. Although Quebec did not sign the CWSs in 2000, it is taking action within its area of competence in a manner consistent with the CWSs.) Recognizing that recent scientific evidence indicates that there is no apparent lower threshold for adverse human health effects related to PM and ozone, the CWS provides the following guidance:

Consistent with the approach set out in the CWSs for PM and Ozone, the emission limits set out in the proposed Canadian Environmental Protection Act, (CEPA 1999) Guidelines are based on the performance of best available technology (BAT) that is economically feasible. The achievability and economic feasibility of the proposed emission limits are demonstrated by the fact that recently constructed coal-fired electric power plants in the United States are meeting these performance standards. In addition, recently permitted plants are, in some cases, expected to meet even more stringent standards.

The Guidelines are just one of many initiatives aimed at reducing air emissions from the electric power generation sector. For example, provincial plans to implement the Canada-wide Standards for PM and Ozone are expected to include emission reductions for the sector; a CCME Canada-wide Standard will address mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants; and the draft CEPA 1999 Guideline on Renewable Low-Impact Electricity encourages cleaner power production. In short, the Guidelines should not be viewed as the sole mechanism for addressing emissions from this sector.

It has been suggested by many parties that the performance objective for all fossil fuel-fired power plants should be emissions that are consistent with those of an efficient natural gas-fired combined cycle (NGCC) unit. Environment Canada believes that such "clean as gas" performance is an appropriate long-term objective for fossil fuel-fired power plants, and would like to engage Canadians in a discussion on this. These Guidelines are a step in that direction.

The Guidelines set out Environment Canada's expectations for emissions performance standards for new thermal power plants. The federal Minister of the Environment recommends that these Guidelines be adopted in the regulatory programs of jurisdictions and agencies.

The responses to comments can be more easily understood if viewed in the context of a set of guiding principles or themes that were the basis for formulating the revisions to the Guidelines. These are summarized here and appear recurrently in the responses to comments.

1. Emissions performance must be continuously updated to: achieve the clean air on which the health of Canadians depends; promote sustainable development; reflect evolving technology; and address the most recent findings regarding air issues.
2. Local conditions may require that more stringent standards be implemented.
3. The intent is to specify performance, not technology. New facilities should be built clean. A clean facility is one from which emissions are consistent with Best Available Technology (BAT) that is economically feasible, as per the keeping clean areas clean commitment of CCME CWSs for PM and Ozone.
4. A pragmatic approach is needed for determining the economic feasibility of BAT. Economically feasible refers to emissions performance that has been selected in U.S. Best Available Control Technology (BACT) determinations, which consider economic factors, and has been demonstrated to be achievable in commercial operation across a range of regions and fuel types.
5. Pollution prevention is the preferred option for managing emissions. Increased efficiency is a key mechanism for pollution prevention and should be encouraged where possible.