Georgie Grieb

Professor Dan Moscovici

Environmental Issues
26 September 2018

The government, the public, and the environment benefit from closed-cycle power plant cooling
systems more than the other types of cooling systems because it protects the surrounding aquatic
environments, reuses water, and produces the greatest net benefits. There are three different types of
cooling systems; once-through, closed-cycle, and dry cooling. James Mallon is the Early Site Permit
Manager Nuclear Development for PSEG Power LLC. According to his presentation, New Jersey has
three nuclear power plants. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is in Lacey Township, NJ. Hope
Creek Generating Station and Salem Nuclear Power Plant are in Lower Alloways Creek, NJ. Hope Creeks
cooling tower is 512 feet tall and the plant uses boiling water reactors. The two reactors located in Lower
Alloways Creek, NJ produce a capacity of 2,307MW. Oyster Creek and Salem use once-through cooling
systems that intake about 3,024 million gallons per day from the Delaware Bay (Buckley & Rempel,
2015). Power plants can be more environmentally friendly and conserve more water if the plant switched
to closed-cycle cooling systems. Closed-cycle cooling reduces water use and fish kills by 95 percent
(NRDC, 2014). Closed-cycle systems are more efficient technologically, ecologically, and economically.
Power plants need to boil water which then produces steam which spins the turbines to generate
electricity. Water is withdrawn from surrounding bodies of water to cool the steam back to water. Closed-
cycle cooling systems reuse water and the heat is removed from the plant by evaporation from a cooling
tower. Once-through cooling systems intake water and after running through the power plant the water is
discharged back into its original body of water. The waters higher temperature can affect the surrounding
aquatic ecosystems. The third type is dry-air cooling which uses no water for the cooling process (NRDC,
2014). The once-through cooling system kills billions of fish every year. Compared to once-through
cooling, closed-cycle cooling systems decrease negative impacts on the surrounding aquatic ecosystems.
Based on NJDEPs report in 1990, Salems once-through cooling water intake could cause long-
term population declines in five fish species and proposed an immediate shutdown of the plant until
Salem reconstructs into a closed-cycle cooling system. Salem withdraws cooling water from the estuary at
the rate of approximately 5.5 million m3/min which could cause environmental harm. The three options
for PSEG about Salem was to reconstruct Salem with cooling towers with NJDEP standards, oppose the
permit and enter into extended litigation with NJDEP, or develop a program that would inform the risks
of certain fish populations. PSEG picked the third option and following that decision was the
development of the Estuary Enhancement Program (EEP). The Estuary Enhancement Program was
developed to reduce losses at Salem and increase aquatic production. Technological and ecological
solutions were addressed for Salem. Fish protection technology was upgraded, underwater sound
generation was studied to deter fish from the intake area, and 4000 hectares (ha) of degraded salt
marsh/upland buffers was restored. Diked salt hay farms and wetlands dominated by Phragmites were the
two types of restoration sites. Studies showed that the fish were using the restored marshes. In 1995-1996,
two units were monitored to determine the increased survival of fish by a side to side comparison. These
monitoring results found the fish population increased. EEPs findings at Salem evaluated that they were
effective in keeping Delaware River fish from entering the cooling water intake area (Balletto et al.,
2005).
The closed-cycle cooling systems has economical benefits. Since producing more water means
producing more electricity, reusing water would increase electricity rates. According to an EPA case
study, a baseline scenario was if Salem stayed with the once-through cooling system and a project
scenario was if Salem changed in 2016 to a closed-cycle cooling system. According to the project
scenario, 12 billion fish would be saved if changed to a closed-cycle cooling system. Annual values for
the benefits of reduced young and adult species loss at Salem were estimated as being between $18 and
$38 million. The net present value of the 20 year stream of benefits estimated about a $172 million and
$468 million increase (Buckley & Rempel, 2015, p.12). Although the EPA published the
aforementioned data, PSEG failed to represent and capture the data of the total economic value of benefits
for the project scenario. Based on the firms annual revenues, it would take just over a day of operations
to cover the annual loan associated with the Project Scenario (the loan would cost $67.9 million a year,
while the firms make roughly $62.5 million a day (Buckley & Rempel, 2014, p. 24). The annual cost of
the project scenario would be 1.4 percent of PSEG and Exelons collective yearly cash flows (Buckley &
Rempel, 2014, p. 25).
According to several different studies, Salem would benefit from having a closed-cycle cooling
system. For Oyster Creek, the DEP determined switching to a closed-cycle cooling would be too time
consuming for construction and will shutdown in December 2019. The EPA has made improvements on
power plant standards. PSEG has the funds to switch to closed-cycle cooling however converting old
plants into that system is more complicated than producing new plants with closed-cycle cooling. In
conclusion, closed-cycle cooling systems have the most benefits however changing an old plants cooling
system would be complicated.
`
References:

Balletto, J.H., Heimbuch, M.V., and Mahoney, H.J. (2005). Delaware bay salt marsh restoration:
 mitigation for a power plant cooling water system in new jersey, USA. Ecological Engineering,
25: 204213. doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2005.04.005

Buckley, M., and Rempel, A. (2015). Economic benefits of installing a closed-cycle cooling system at
salem nuclear generating station. ECONorthwest, 1-27. Retrieved from
http://www.delawareriverkeeper.org/sites/default/files/DRN%20Expert%20EcoNW%20Final%2
0
Report%20re%20Salem%20NGS%2009%2017%2015.pdf

Natural Resources Defence Council. (2014). Power plant cooling and associated impacts: the need to
modernize U.S. power plants and protect our water resources and aquatic ecosystems, 1-11.
Retrieved from https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/power-plant-cooling-IB.pdf