The feasibility of a polygeneration plant at Kennedy Space Center was studied. Liquid hydrogen and gaseous nitrogen are the two principal products in consideration. Environmental parameters (air quality, water quality, biological diversity and hazardous waste disposal) necessary for the feasibility study were investigated. A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) project flow sheet was to be formulated for the environmental impact statement. Water quality criteria for Florida waters were to be established

Barnes, G. D.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

1982
NASA/ASEE SUMMER FACULTY RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER
THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA
A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PARAMETERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FEASIBILITY OF A
POLYGENERATION PLANT AT KENNEDY SPACE CENTER
Prepared By:
Academic Rank:
University and Department:
NASA/KSC:
(Directorate)
(Branch)
KSC Counterpart:
Date:
Contract No.:
Grover D. Barnes, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Jackson State University
Department of General Science
Design Engineering
Project Engineering Office
Gary Gutkowski
August lO, 1982
NGT-OI-O02-099
(University of Alabama)
VI-l
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19830009094 2020-03-22T00:15:41+00:00Z
A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE FEASIBILITY OF A
POLYGENERATION PLANT AT KENNEDY SPACE CENTER
By
Grover D. Barnes, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of General Science
Jackson State University
Jackson, MS 39217
ABSTRACT
A study is under way to determine the feasibility of a polygeneration
plant at Kennedy Space Center. Liquid hydrogen and gaseous nitrogen are
the two principal products in consideration.
Environmental parameters (air quality, water quality, biological
diversity and hazardous waste disposal) necessary for the feasibility
study are being investigated. A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
project flow sheet will be formulated for the environmental impact state-
ment. Water quality criteria for Florida waters will be established.
VI-2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Special thanks is given to Mr. Gary Gutkowski, my counterpart
at KSC, for the fine support given to this participant and to the
Polygeneration Team (Walt Feitshans, Frank Howard, Julian King and
Larry Manfredi) for their help. I appreciate Mr. Peter Minderman,
Director of Design Engineering, asking me to work on the Polygenera-
tion Project.
VI-3
LIST OF FIGURES
Fi9ure No.
1
Ti tle
A Time Flow Chart for the Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) in a Feasibility
Study of a Cogeneration Plant at Kennedy
Space Center
Page
VI-8
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title
The Criteria of Florida Surface Water
Quality in Classified Waters
Page
VI-9
VI-4
INTRODUCTION
A feasibility study is being done on a polygeneration facility
(PF) on the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Brevard County, Florida.
KSC borders the Indian and Banana Rivers, important estuarine eco-
systems.
Extensive surveys for the proposed PF were conducted. Three
potential sites have been selected.
The design of the PF facility will utilize a combined cycle coal
gasification system to produce 12 tons of liquid hydrogen/day. Best
available control technology will be utilized to limit environmental
pollution.
The source of make-up matter is groundwater from the Florida
aquifer or a mixture of groundwater and treated sewage effluent from
KSC. If any available technology (Luthy, 1981) is economically feasible,
no discharge to surface waters will occur. If wastewater is eliminated,
the effluent will be discharged into a turn basin barge canal which
empties into the Banana River, a Class Ill Outstanding Florida Water
Stream. Available technology within economic restraints will be
utilized to control air pollutant emissions including the removal of
sulfur, nitrogen, and particulates.
VI-5
le
II.
Ill.
IV.
V.
VI.
Dr. Grover D. Barnes
Outline of the 1982 DOE/ASEE Summer Fellowship Program Objectives
Examine the proposed site for the polygeneration plant
A. Order aerial photographs of the proposed area
B. Visually examine the site for environmental features: aquatic
and terrestrial - especially note endangered and protected
species of plants and animals
Attend the short course on ASPEN
Meet key personnel who will be involved in various phases of
impl ementat ion
Formulate project environmental flow sheet
Run computer searches for data on air and water pollution produced
by polygeneration plants in the following sources: Aquatic Sciences
& Fisheries Abstracts, Aqualine, APTIC, CHEM SEARCH, DOE Energy
Environmental Biblio, Pollution Abstracts, Water Resources Abstracts,
CHEM Industry Notes, and BIOSIS Reviews
Initiate a draft of the Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement to include:
A. Agency
D. Action
C. Summary
I. What the proposed action consists of
2. Alternatives under consideration
3. List of significant environmental issues to be analyzed in
depth
4. Description of the scoping process
5. List of any environmental review and consultation requirements
6. Expected release date of draft EIS
7. Discussion of any letter of agreement regarding lead and
cooperating agencies
VI-6
BODY OF REPORT
Essentially all of the objectives of the 1982 DOE/ASEE Summer
Fellowship Program were done. Aerial photographs were ordered and
received.
On two different occasions (22 June and 28 July, 1982), the
proposed polygeneration site was observed for endangered and threatened
species of plants and animals. Only one threatened species on the
Florida State list, the Florida Scrub Jay, was observed. Two jays
were seen on the first trip and one on the second trip.
The ASPEN course was conducted from 8 June 1982 to II June 1982.
This participant attended this course and completed the required
assignments.
Various meetings were held to meet individuals involved in
various phases of implementation of the polygeneration plan. The
following individuals were contacted: Dr. Jim Kanipe, Peggy Hallisey,
David Breininger, Dr. Clair Bemiss, David Dunsmoor, Bill Brannan,
Dr. A1 Koller, Bill Knott, Paul Toft, Pablo Auffant and Terry L.
Krzywicki.
The polygeneration environmental flow sheet is shown in Figure I.
Computer searches for air and water pollution produced by polygeneration
plants were run in the following sources: Water Resources abstracts, DOE
Energy, NASA files and Chem Industry Notes. The other sources were not
utilized due to cost factors. The criteria of Florida surface water
quality is shown in Table I. These criteria are necessary for evaluation
of environmental licensing.
Vl-7
-/
i'
/
Z.
;'."
w
..J
,.,n
I--
..2 ..2 -.J --I-.J _2 ..J
Or.) (._Ot-)Ot.)
t/)
0
c_
o
o
o_c-
_I
0
c_
I.. _- o
f_) f._) _11 _
u')
-o
°r--
o
_--
o _" $-
_.) _._
Vl-9
o
e--,..
c
f.....
(,,-}
0
0 o
o
ur_ 0
,- ,5
o 0
°_
o
4.) -m
0
in
in
I.
(D
f--
°_-
0
O4O
i r",, r,, e-
I,,-,.,I
tO
E X
ILl
:3
Z
I--
Z
0
I--'4
I..;J
._1
,,.,m
I--
I.,-I
°_,.
_o 0_
o_ ,
o
_4
o
x x
il = o ,-- _ ,-,-"" 0,"'- .,_ .I...._c"O 0
Iz_ r-"
0
_J
0 0 _ f--
_-_ S- "_
I_ .I.-)0 (.;4-,)
,-- O0 (" _
r"
f'} (/1..'-'-.
_IEOO _ u
•,---l_o_I _ ,._.,- _J l:z
ol_ o _ =8 gN
°,_ I',D
EL EI_-_ v v _ (._U
VI-lO
u'} (]_
(- (j
(.-
•'13 u ,I-}
•:_:._- ul
x r_
o o -_
:'_ I---_
Q; r--
_I_E)b
.c: e- _
0.,-- U u_
•_-- r--. _ .P-
C:3 :::3U_ (._
0
0
... v .I-}
m_ U',--
Oc_
O
IK
L
(.-
',:::t"
_c,d
_C_ _O
$.- • G; •
G; ,:::I-_ ('}
:_ (].,}
,::: z'V
O
,.A
O
O
O
c5
O
c5 O
O
,5
I
c;
O
e.-.-'
'3"
r--.
O
O I",-
O
O
O
&It)
O
O
O
O
O
c_
l.n
,-. o
o o
S 6
I.i.I
Z
I--
Z
C)
l.,-.i
..--I
I'--
or)
0
(S
0
,A
0 0
OJ
0
0
0
r--
O,J 0 0 0
C) C) C)
C_ _ _
0
,-. c_
0
0
0
O,J
0
c_
I
O0
0
0
0
,-- 0
0 0
6 _
P'- 0
0 0
_ •
0
c'-
N
c;
VI-II
Z
00
o
O_
0
CD r--
S o c;
D
Z
I--
Z
0
i--i
_,1
Ca
I--
0
c_
0
r-- _ 0
0 OJ 0
0 _- 0 0
@
0 (D 0 0
0 0,.I
0 ,--" 0 0
0
0,,I 0
0 ,.-- 0
0 0 0 0
c_ c_ c_ c_
0
0
0
0
r-- 0
6 S
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
c;
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r_
0
0
0 ,.-- 0
0 ,-- 0 0 CD
c_ _ c_ c_ c_
.r,-
0
_ qJI "_
,.-- (-- .1__I
_ ::::_ _0 I
>.-._/ B
_ I_ r" / .r-
_ -r" Z
Z
%
0 _
I--- -t-
O _
Z _
t- OJ OJ
0 _- _-_
E "_- rO
•_- E E
_-) 0 0
VI-12
,,--
@) O,---
E ,-- >_
,.-- U
0 "_"
I__ _r',
tO
r--.
c- 0
_-_ _.
_" 0
NASA
NOTICE (7 August 1982)
Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administrative
ACTION: NOTICE OF INTENT TO PREPARE A DRAFT EIS
SUMMARY:
I. PROPOSED ACTION: A Polygeneration Facility (PF) at Kennedy Space
Center (KSC) for producing 12 tons of liquid hydrogen/days and ancillary
gaseous nitrogen.
2. ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION:
A. No Action.
With the launch of each shuttle, forty-four trucks are necessary
to transport hydrogen from New Orleans, LA, to KSC. Significant increases
are expected in transportation costs. The anticipated goal of twenty-four
launches will mean that approximately one thousand and fifty-six trucks
will be on the road annually with highly explosive materials. This increase
in transportation movement increases the statistical chance of accident
and public impairment.
With the advent of a petroleum embargo, the possibility exists
that no fuel will be available for the hydrogen transportation system.
This would preclude shuttle launches and impair national security.
Hydrogen is not the sole product designed by KSC. Nitrogen and
electrical generation are additional ancillary products which could be
utilized. On-site or near-site generation of hydrogen and other desirable
by-products would greatly enhance the feasibility.
B. ACTION
The PF is proposed to be located on/near KSC in Brevard County,
FL. The site borders the Indian and Banana Rivers.
Extensive surveys for the proposed PF were conducted. Three
potential sites have been selected.
The design of the PF willutilize a combined cycle coal gasifica-
tion system to produce 12 tons of liquid hydrogen/day. Best available
control technology will be used to limit environmental pollution.
VI-13
The source of the make-up matter is groundwater from the Florida
aquifer or a mixture of groundwater and treated sewage effluent from KSC.
If any available technology is economically feasible, no discharge into
surface waters will occur. If wastewater is eliminated into surface waters,
the effluent will be discharged into a turn basin canal which empties into
the Banana River, a Class Ill (outstanding Florida waters) stream. Avail-
able technology within economic restraints will be utilized to control air
pollutant emissions including the removal of sulfur, nitrogen and particu-
lates.
3. List of Significant Environmental Issues to be Analyzed in Depth in
the Draft EIS.
a. Air quality;
b. Water quality;
c. Waste generation, treatment, transportation disposal and
storage;
d. Noise;
e. Toxic substances
f. Biotic resources;
g. Endangered species;
h. Historical, archaelogical and recreational factors;
i. Wetlands and flood plains;
j. Economic, population and employment factors, provided they
are interrelated with natural or physical environmental factors.
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE SCOPING PROCESS
The proposed schedule for the Polygeneration Faci:lity is as_
follows:
ACTIVITY DATE
State/Federal Scoping Meetings
Submission of Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS)
Final EIS
Commence Construction
Operation
Dec., 1982
Sept., 1983
June, 1984
May, 1985
Aug., 1987
VI-14
5. LIST OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS
a. Air monitoring to include ambient air criteria for one year
(specific pollutants: sulfur dioxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon
monoxide, particulates and hydrocarbons). This includes quality assurance
monitoring to assess critical environmental parameters for one year near
the proposed sites.
b. Phytoplankton and zooplankton sampling for two years to
determine ecosystem species diversity and stability of aquatic ecosystems.
Bioassays should be conducted to assess possible toxicity of blowdowns
at major discharge points in the PF.
c. Hazardous waste disposal and siting must be investigated.
d. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling surveys should be conducted.
Previous data exists which could be utilized in this area.
e. Terrestial surveys should be correlated with previous studies.
f. Legal assessment and consultation must parallel all environ-
mental work. If legal assitance at local, county, regional and state
levels in the environmental areas necessary for the PF is not available or
accessible from NASA, then outside legal assistance must be obtained to
facilitate legality.
Steps (a), (b) and (d) should be statistically valid.
6. EXPECTED RELEASE DATE OF DRAFT EIS
6 September 1983
7. DISCUSSION OF ANY LETTER OF AGREEMENT REGARDING LEAD AND COOPERA-
TING AGENCIES.
NASA is the initiating agency and there are no cooperating agencies.
8. LOCATION: Kennedy Space Center, Brevard Co., FL 32899
DATE: 7 August 1982
For further information:
Mr. Gary Gutkowski
Polygeneration Project Engineer
DF-PEO
Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899
VI-15
RESPONSIBLEHEADQUARTERSOFFICIAL:
NASAHeadquarters
Attn: NX-2/Gen. Billie J. McGarvey
Washington, D.C. 20546
SIGNATURE:
Robert F. Allnutt (Acting)
Associate Administrator for External
Affairs
VI-16
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The polygeneration plan appears to be an excellent method for
generating liquid hydrogen if environmental control is implemented.
Figure 1 should be followed for the development of an environmental
impact statement.
Recommendations for the environmental aspects of the EIS include:
a. Air monitoring to include ambient air criteria for one year
(specific pollutants: sulfur dioxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon
monoxide, particulates and hydrocarbons)_ Quality assurance monitor-
ing to assess critical environmental parameters for one year near the
proposed sites.
b. Phytoplankton and zooplankton sampling for two years to
determine ecosystem species diversity and stability of aquatic eco-
systems. Bioassays should be conducted to assess possible toxicity
of blowdowns at major discharge points in the PF.
c. Hazardous waste disposal and siting must be investigated.
d. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling surveys should be conducted.
Previous data exists which could be utilized in this area.
e. Terrestrial surveys should be correlated with previous studies.
f. Legal assessment and consultation must parallel all environ-
mental work. If legal assistance at local, county, regional and
state levels in the environmental areas necessary for the PF is not
available or accessible from NASA then outside legal assistance must
be obtained to facilitate legality.
Steps (a), (b), and (d) should be statistically valid.
Vl-17
REFERENCES
•
Luthy, R. G., "Treatment of Coal Coking and Coal Gasification
Wastewaters", Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,
53, 3, 325-339.
VI-18


A preliminary study of environmental parameters associated with the feasibility of a polygeneration plant at Kennedy Space Center

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server