Recently we have observed discussions taking place between the European Commission, precisely its Directoriate-General for Environment, and particular member states as to interpretation of the term source in the context of the LPC Directive. Just to remind – the directive imposes very severe restrictions on emissions from large combustion plants.

What are discrepancies?

Pursuant to the directive itself, the term source means a place where fuel is oxidised – from a technical point of view it is unquestionably a boiler. Such a definition was also adopted in the Polish law for sources constructed before 1987. The European Commission, however, interprets this term in a little different way and according to the Commission source should be construed as a chimney. In the Polish law such an approach is used but only for plants constructed after 1987. However, now the Directoriate-General for Environment wants to broaden such interpretation of source to all older plants.

Why is it a problem?

Provisions of the LCP Directive apply to all the sources of thermal power input above 50 MWt. For such sources it is necessary to either construct highly expensive systems for combustion gas treatment or disable them after 20 000 hours of operation as of 1 January 2008. According to the definition from the directive – three small boilers of capacity for example 20 MW each, if connected to one common chimney, are three separate sources and the provisions of the directive should not be applicable to them. According to interpretation in spirit used by the Directoriate-General for Environment, such boilers are one large source and new regulations apply to it. In addition, it means that even taking a decision to disable them, the remaining 20 000 hours of operation concern all the three boilers together, even if only one of them operates.

Who can be affected by another interpretation?

In Poland such a new interpretation of the term source could apply to coal-fired 470 boilers generating electrical energy and heat, among which 324 are small heating units operating in local heating systems, often only in winter time. High costs which would be connected with that, undoubtedly would have to be covered by local communities and would result in significant rise in prices of heat in local markets. It is completely unjustified economically and technically, and could seriously threaten joint development of electrical energy and heat production. To compare, in Finland or United Kingdom another interpretation means that new regulations, that incur high costs, will apply to several dozen boilers. In France there are only three such cases but as these plants produce electrical energy in peak time, they become the key ones to guarantee security of the power system in such periods.

Actions taken

Since a solution to the problem is not obvious and there is considerable divergence between the Directoriate-General for Environment and particular member states, the European Commission has scheduled a meeting with particular states of the European Union for the end of November. For this occasion Eurelectric has prepared a stance worked out together with power industry sectors of all the Union states in which it vehemently objects to proposals for changing interpretation of the definition. The stance emphasises literal reading of the provisions in the valid directive, it indicates modest effects for reduction of environmental pollution in comparison to necessary considerable expenditure as well as it explains that the reason for adopting a definition source = chimney for new sources was to avoid a situation where an investor erects several small boilers instead of one large to avoid expenses to be spent on expensive systems for combustion gas treatment. It also points to technical and economic aspects of constructing systems for combustion gas treatment and stresses that there is sense in making use of them only for large boilers.

STANISŁAW TOKARSKI
JERZY JANIKOWSKI