Boiler MACT update

In recent news, Republican Senator James Inhofe (from Oklahoma, wouldn’t you know it) is leading a charge against the EPA’s Boiler MACT rule.  As some may remember from previous blogs of mine, the American Boiler Manufactures Association (which includes E-Tech) has supported this rule for many years.  Many ABMA members (including me) wrote letters to our Congressman.  Yesterday I received a reply from Senator Tom Coburn, Oklahoma’s other US Senator in response to a letter I sent on February 8.  The essence of my letter was to say that ten years was enough time to evaluate the proposal; that our industry was entirely capable of implementing the rules with current technologies and at low cost; that the manufacturing base in Tulsa was particularly geared towards this particular industry and our opportunities due to passage of the bill would be great for business.  At that time, the Republicans were trying to attach this bill to the Payroll Tax Holiday Extension, something I found particularly odious.  Left unsaid, but certainly implied, was the EPA Boiler MACT rule was designed around making our products less polluting and consequently better for the collective health of the country. 

As Senator Coburn was the only Senator (none of Oklahoma’s Congressmen replied, nor did Senator Inhofe) to answer my letter, I can easily gloss over the four month delay in getting back to me.  Furthermore, it is not surprising that I heard tired old bromides such as these: 

• “.. the EPA has proposed a litany of cumbersome federal mandates without assessing if they achieve both economic and environmental progress.” 
• “..by imposing burdensome regulations on states, the EPA will sacrifice effectiveness while increasing costs..”
• “Instead of further taxing and regulating opportunity the EPA should…”

Well as John Steward says, I must call “bullshit” on this.

The upshot ofthe nonsense, including Senator Inhofe’s obstructive blockade, is a veto promise from the White House.  See here for the story on that. White House threatens veto

Further to this, a recent article written by Sue Tierny, a former USDOE official, lends learned credence to proceeding, noting the Republican theatrics lunacy.  Read here. Tierny article

Although, this blog will not be posted until June 30, it is being written on June 20, the first day of summer.  So my “wise” words today are:

“Then followed that beautiful season...Summer....

Filled was the air with a dreamy and magical light; and the landscape

Lay as if new created in all the freshness of childhood.”

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1807-1882)

 

White Paper Delirium

On June 12, I had one of those phone calls that warm the heart – someone had read our white paper on condensing economizers and had a follow-up question!  Now you might ask, “Bob how cold is your heart that it takes so little to warm it”?  This is a sensible question but easily answered as my joy comes from the fact that someone has read this document.  (All white papers are available on the E-Tech web site here: http://www.e-techinc.com/Resources_e-tech_heat_recovery_systems-white_papers.aspx)   

The question was, how can I determine that I have enough of a heat sink to make a condensing economizer feasible.  For those who know me, I never can answer a question simply even though the asker put it to me in such a condensed version.  The easy answer is that if you have approximately 60% or more of makeup, there’s enough heat recoverable to justify a condensing economizer.  The longer answer – and this is where I come in – is there are other variables: the colder the makeup water, the lower the percentage needed; smaller boilers (600 HP or less) usually are poor candidates for secondary heat recovery; there may be other sources of cold water – say from a process stream – that make the condensing unit’s installation more viable. 

The easiest way to come up with the answer is to ask us.  If a condensing system isn’t in the cards, perhaps a ThermoCharger offers an alternative solution.  And, of course, there’s a white paper on that as well.  Either way, E-Tech will be able to recommend the best solution to your heat recovery needs. 

After getting off the phone with the caller, I had another call later that afternoon, this one having the opposite effect.  The caller, a long-term friend and representative of E-Tech said that it was difficult selling energy recovery equipment due to the low price of natural gas (NG).  His question to me was “what do you see for NG pricing down the road”?  As you might imagine, E-Tech’s business, along with many representatives and customers, depends upon a decent ROI for its equipment.  With NG prices hovering a bit over $3.00 per million Btu, paybacks have tripled over the past few years.  My answer to Tim, couched in my usual pragmatism, was not heartening.  Most of the articles I’ve read recently have run out of adjectives to describe the amount of NG available in the country.  Words such as “colossal”, “stupendous” and “enormous” don’t seem to announce adquately the size of our reserves. 

There are, however, a couple of thin reeds to hang our hopes on.  First, there are environmental issues to be considered.  Does fracking cause earthquakes (don’t laugh)?  Fracking requires huge amounts of water, water that as of now cannot be recycled to use on crops.  Finally, what is the environmental impact of this water? 

Second, and I wrote about this in my blog in mid-April, many areas in the world (Japan for instance) pay upwards of $15 for liquefied natural gas (LNG).  There have been thoughts about exporting LNG to areas around the globe, something that sounds good on the surface but still have the ecological considerations mentioned above.   

My conclusion?  Low gas prices for the next several years. 

Finally, I am aware that my blog is not on the top one million viewed list.  This isn’t hurtful to me because I’m sure there are better ways to advertise the blog than whatever I’ve been able to do.  So for those of you who do read it, thank you.  Perhaps there is something helpful in here, a morsel that approaches wisdom.

“Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the lifelong attempt to acquire it”.  Albert Einstein (1879-1955).