Table 8.1 Environmental impacts of constructing 1000-MW(e)-equivalent electric power plants for non-nuclear alternative generating technologies

Table 8.1 Environmental impacts of constructing 1000-MW(e)-equivalent electric power plants for non-nuclear alternative generating technologies
	Resource
Alternative	Land use	Ecology	Aesthetics	Water quality	Air quality	Waste	Human health	Socioeconomic	Cultural
Wind	61,000 ha (150,000 acres) (Pimentel 1994)	Loss of thousands of acres of natural habitat (Pimentel 1994); some stream sedimentation; erosion	Substantial visual impact in any location (Pimentel 1994; SERI/TP-260-3674)	High potential for sedimenta-tion/erosion damage	Considerable vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving	Considerable amount of vegetation debris from land clearing	Some accident risks for workers (Grubb and Meyer 1993)	No known estimates but believed to be relatively small peak work force—little potential for adverse impacts	High potential for impacts because of large land area
Photovoltaic cells	14,000 ha (35,000 acres) (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991)	Loss of 14,000 ha (35,000 acres) of natural habitat, some farm land (Pimentel 1994); some stream sedimentation; erosion is a particular threat to arid areas, fragile soil, and plant communities	Substantial visual impact in any location (Hamrin and Rader 1993)	High potential for sedimenta-tion/erosion damage	Considerable vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving (Pace 1991)	Considerable amount of vegetation debris from land clearing	Some accident risks for workers	No known estimates but believed to be moderate size peak work force—little potential for adverse impacts	High potential for impacts because of large land area

 

Table 8.1 (continued)
	Resource
Alternative	Land use	Ecology	Aesthetics	Water quality	Air quality	Waste	Human health	Socioeconomic	Cultural
Solar thermal	5,700 ha (14,000 acres) (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991)	Loss of 5,700 ha (14,000 acres) (Pimentel 1994); some stream sedimentation; erosion is a particular threat to arid areas, fragile soil, and plant communities (Pace 1991)	Substantial visual impact to 5,700 ha (14,000 acres) affected (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991; Hamrin and Rader 1993)	High potential for sedimenta-tion/erosion damage	Considerable vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving (Pace 1991)	Considerable amount of vegetation debris from land clearing	Some accident risks for workers	No known estimates but believed to be moderate size peak work force—little potential for adverse impacts	High potential for impacts because of large land area
Hydroelectric	400,000 ha (1 million acres) (Pimentel 1994)	Loss of 400,000 ha (1 million acres) of natural habitat, farm land (Pimentel 1994); stream sedimentation, erosion	400,000 ha (1 million acres) visually impacted (Pimentel 1994; Hamrin and Rader 1993)	Considerable sedimentation/ erosion	Considerable vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving	Considerable amount of vegetation debris from land clearing	Some accident risks for workers; spread of diseases from reservoir filling (Moreira and Poole 1993)	Large work force, moderate potential for adverse community impacts; dislocation of residents (Hamrin and Rader 1993)	Almost unavoidable destruction of cultural sites, artifacts typically located on natural edges of water bodies
Geothermal	2800 ha (7000 acres) (DOE/EP-0093)	Loss of 2800 ha (7000 acres) of natural habitat (DOE-0093); some stream sedimentation, erosion	Visual impacts to 2800 ha (7000 acres) (DOE-0093)	High potential for sedimenta-tion/erosion damage	Considerable vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving	Considerable amount of vegetation, some construction debris	Some accident risks for workers	Moderate size work force; some potential adverse impacts	Moderate potential unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines

 

Table 8.1 (continued)
	Resource
Alternative	Land use	Ecology	Aesthetics	Water quality	Air quality	Waste	Human health	Socioeconomic	Cultural
Wood wastes	High variable and site specific, perhaps 160,000 to 320,000 ha (400,000 to 800,000 acres) for forest residue recovery. For plant, about 30 acres for each 20-MW facility	Considerable potential for loss of natural habitat and biodiversity; increased soil erosion and nutrient loss (ECO North-west et al.)	Substantial visual impacts from land clearing. Localized visual impacts with plant construction	High potential for sedimenta-tion/erosion damage. Small sedimentation/ erosion damage at plant site (ECO Northwest et al.)	Considerable vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust impacts from earth moving	Considerable amount of vegetation debris and some con-struction debris	Some accident risks for workers	Source of income and employment in rural areas. Moderate size work force at plant site	High potential for impacts because of large land area
Municipal solid waste (MSW)	For plant, about 12 ha (30 acres) for each 20 MW facility	Small impact— few acres affected and in urban area. Potentially positive impacts if landfills displaced (ECO North-west et al.)	Localized visual impacts with plant construction	Small sedimentation/ erosion damage at plant site (ECO Northwest et al.)	Considerable vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust impacts from earth moving	Moderate amount of vegetation and construction debris	Some accident risks for workers	Moderate size work force at plant site	Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines

 

Table 8.1 (continued)
	Resource
Alternative	Land use	Ecology	Aesthetics	Water quality	Air quality	Waste	Human health	Socioeconomic	Cultural
Energy crops	About 400,000 ha (1 million) acres for crop production. For plant, about 12 ha (30 acres) for each 20 MW facility	Impacts depend on prior land use; if conversion of cropland, then more environ-mentally benign and would improve biodiversity (OTA; Ranney and Mann)	Minor visual impacts with energy crop establishment. Localized visual impacts with plant construction	Energy crops lower sedimentation, soil erosion, and chemical use relative to agriculture (Ranney and Mann). Small sedimentation and erosion damage at plant site	Moderate vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust impacts from earth moving at plant site	Considerable amount of vegetation debris and some con-struction debris at plant site	Some accident risks for workers	Source of income and employment in rural areas. Moderate size work force at plant site	Relatively small impacts if cropland and pasture converted to energy crops
Coal	700 ha (1,700 acres) for plant site (DOE/EP- 0093)	Loss of 700 ha (1,700 acres) habitat; some erosion, stream sedimentation	Localized visual impacts from land clearing	Potential sedimentation/ erosion damage	Moderate vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving	Considerable construction debris	Accident risk for workers	1,200–2,500 peak work force (UDI-021-89)	Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines
Natural gas	45 ha (110 acres) for plant site (DOE/EP-0093)	Loss of 45 ha (110 acres) varied habitat; some erosion, stream sedimentation	Localized visual impacts from land clearing	Potential sedimentation/ erosion damage	Some vehicle exhaust, substantial dust from earth moving	Considerable construction debris	Accident risk for workers	1,200 peak work force (UDI-021-89)	Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines
Oil	50 ha (120 acres) for plant site (DOE/EP-0093)	Loss of 50 ha (120 acres) varied habitat; some erosion, stream sedimentation	Localized visual impacts from land clearing	Potential sedimentation/ erosion damage	Some vehicle exhaust, substantial dust from earth moving	Considerable construction debris	Accident risk for workers	1,700 peak work force (UDI-021-89)	Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines

 

Table 8.1 (continued)
	Resource
Alternative	Land use	Ecology	Aesthetics	Water quality	Air quality	Waste	Human health	Socioeconomic	Cultural
Advanced light-water reactor	200–400 ha (500–1,000 acres) for plant site plus exclusion area	Loss of 200–400 ha (500–1,000 acres) of habitat; some erosion, stream sedimentation	Localized visual impacts from land clearing	Potential sedimentation/ erosion damage	Moderate vehicle exhaust, dust from earth moving	Considerable construction debris	Accident risk for workers	2,000–5,500 peak work force (UDI-021-89)	Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines
Conservation	Unquantified land lost to resource extraction for conservation technologies	Adverse impacts from resource extraction	Minimal for resource recovery and processing	Minimal for resource recovery and processing	Minimal for resource recovery and processing	Minimal for resource recovery, processing	Some risks from resource recovery	Minor employment, tax revenues from conservation industry	Minimal
Imported power	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	If excess Canadian capacity is insufficient, impacts will be similar to U.S. coal or hydro plants	Same impacts as U.S. except northern Canada, where social conflict between tribes and government is substantial
Delayed retirement	Very few acres affected (DOE/EIS-0146)	Very few acres affected—no impact (DOE/EIS-0146)	Minimal changes	Incidental use	Small exhaust, fugitive dust (DOE/EIS-0146)	Moderate construction debris	Potential accidents to workers	Estimated one-half of normal construction work force	Minimal impact