Table 8.2 Environmental impacts of operating 1000-MW(e)-equivalent electric power plants for non-nuclear alternative generating
Table 8.2 Environmental impacts of operating 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) of which 3,000 acres occupied by turbines, rest available for agriculture (Pimentel 1994) | Bird collisions, loss of much of thousands of acres of habitat (Pimentel 1994); interference with animal migration routes (Pace 1991) | Substantial visual and some noise impact in any location (Pace 1991; SERI/TP-260-3674; Rader 1989) | Negligible (Pace 1991) | Negligible (Pace 1991) | Very minor amounts from maintenance of equipment, vegetation | Very minor risks from accidents, noise | Relatively low work force, assessed plant value—fewer potential long-term community benefits than large baseload plants | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Photovoltaic cells | 14,000 ha (35,000 acres); no other compatible uses (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991) | Loss of 14,000 ha (35,000 acres) of natural habitat and some agricultural land (Pimentel 1994) | Substantial visual impact in any location (Hamrin and Rader 1993) | Small runoff from panels could cause sedimentation | Negligible | Very minor amounts from maintenance of equipment, vegetation; some toxics | Some risk to maintenance workers | Relatively small work force, assessed plant value—fewer long-term community benefits than large baseload plants | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Solar thermal | 5,700 ha (14,000 acres); no other uses (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991) | 5,700 ha (14,000 acres) of natural habitat lost and some agricultural land (Pimentel 1994) | Substantial visual impact; reflected sunlight (Pimentel 1994; Pace 1991; Hamrin and Rader 1993) | Minor amounts used except where water is cooling agent (Rader 1989); possible contamination from cleaning agents (Rader 1989); some runoff potential | Minor emissions of pollutants during normal operations, greater risks with accidents (Pimentel 1994) | Very minor amounts from maintenance of equipment, vegetation | Possible eye damage from reflected sunlight; occupational hazards from exposure to heat transfer fluids (Pace 1991); some risk to maintenance workers | Relatively small work force, assessed plant value—fewer long-term community benefits than large baseload plants | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Table 8.2 (continued) | |||||||||
Resource | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alternative | Land use | Ecology | Aesthetics | Water quality | Air quality | Waste | Human health | Socioeconomic | Cultural |
Hydroelectric | 400,000 ha (1 million acres); no other uses (Pimentel 1994) | 400,000 ha (1 million acres) of natural habitat and agricultural lands lost; disruption of spawning, migration routes (Rader 1989); killing of fish thru eutro-phication, passage through dam, water temperature change (Moreira and Poole 1993); altered flora, fauna populations | 1 million acres visually impacted (Pimentel 1994; Hamrin and Rader 1993) | Increased sedimentation (Moreira and Poole 1993); temperature changes, competition for water and arid regions (Rader 1989) | Negligible | Minor amounts from equipment replacement, reservoir clearing | Some risks for recreational boating, swimming deaths; risk of dam failure; some risk to maintenance workers | Small work force, high assessed value—some potential long-term economic/ community impacts, changes in recreation (free-flowing stream to lake) | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Table 8.2 (continued) | |||||||||
Resource | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alternative | Land use | Ecology | Aesthetics | Water quality | Air quality | Waste | Human health | Socioeconomic | Cultural |
Geothermal | 2800 ha (7000 acres)— possible subsidence; potential for other uses on unused land (DOE/EP-0093; OECD 1987) | Loss of much of 2800 ha (7000 acres) of natural habitat and some agri-cultural land (DOE/EP-0093) | Visual impacts to portions of affected areas (Rader) | Potential contamination of surface and groundwater from disposal of geothermal fluid (OECD 1987) | Potential release of various toxic gases to atmosphere, especially H2S; CO2 is greatest emission (Pace 1991, Brower 1992) | Minor amounts from equipment replacement, vegetation maintenance, heavy metals sludge (Brower 1992) | Very minor risks from toxic gas released, accidents to workers; noise (Brower 1992) | Relatively small work force, assessed plant value—fewer long-term community benefits than large baseload plants | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Wood wastes | About 160,000 to 320,000 ha (400,000 to 800,000 acres) for forest residue recovery. About 12 ha (30 acres) per 20 MW of facility operated (OTA 1993) | Considerable potential for loss of natural habitat and biodiversity; increased soil erosion and nutrient loss (OTA 1993) | Some visual impacts from residue recovery. Limited visual impacts from plant structure | Approximately same water requirements as coal | Not significant with residue recovery. Emission of regulated pollutants, can be effectively controlled | Considerable fly ash, can be used as fertilizer and soil conditioner | Occupational risks high, same as for agriculture. Particulates important, but can be controlled | Source of income and employment in rural areas. Moderate size work force at plant site | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by residue recovery area, plant or transmission lines |
Municipal solid waste | About 12 ha (30 acres) per 20 MW of facility operated | Potentially positive impacts if landfills are displaced | Limited visual impacts from plant structure. Potential odors | Approximately same water requirements as coal | Emissions of regulated pollutants more significant than other technologies | Considerable fly ash, must meet regulations | Risks from toxics and particulates, safety of municipal solid waste handlers | Moderate size work force at plant sites | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Table 8.2 (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. About 12 ha (30 acres) per 20 MW of facility operated | Impacts depend on prior land use, may either enhance or reduce biodiversity, habitat (Wright 1994; Ranney and Mann 1994) | Some visual impacts from harvesting. Limited visual impacts from plant structure | Irrigation not used for growing. Approximately same water requirements as coal | Not significant with production of energy crops. Emissions of regulated pollutants, can be effectively controlled (Wright 1994) | Considerable fly ash, can be used as fertilizer and soil conditioner | Occupational risks high, same as for agriculture. Particulate important, but can be controlled (Rader 1989) | Source of income and employment in rural areas. Moderate size work force at plant site | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by cropping area, plant or transmission lines |
Coal | 700 ha (1,700 acres) for plant site (DOE/EP-0093) and 9070 ha (22,400 acres) for entire fuel cycle (WASH-1224) | Habitat loss (including nationally from acid precipita-tion; DOE/ EIS-0146); impingement, entrainment; waste heat to receiving water body; cooling tower drift, fogging; bird collisions | Limited visual impacts from plant structure, additional from plume | 860,000 m3 (700 acre-ft) per quad (1012 Btu) energy produced (based on thermal efficiency relative to nuclear) | Emission of CO2, regulated pollutants, more than other technologies (Loftness 1984); also radionuclides | Large amounts of fly ash, scrubber sludge, other solid waste— must meet regulations (DOE/EP-0093) | Public risks (cancer, emphysema) from inhalation of toxics and particulates; safety risk to workers | 250 workers— moderate long-term economic community benefits (UDI-021-89) | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Table 8.2 (continued) | |||||||||
Resource | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alternative | Land use | Ecology | Aesthetics | Water quality | Air quality | Waste | Human health | Socioeconomic | Cultural |
Natural gas | 45 ha (110 acres) for plant site (DOE-EP-0093) and 1500 ha (3,600 acres) for entire fuel cycle (WASH-1224) | Habitat loss, impingement, entrainment; waste heat to receiving water body; cooling tower drift, fogging; bird collisions | Limited visual impacts from plant structure, some from plume | 817,000 m3 (662 acre-ft) water used per quad (1012 Btu) energy produced (based on thermal efficiency relative to nuclear) | Emissions of CO2 and NOx regulated pollutants, radionuclides less than coal, no SO2 (Loftness 1984) | Some solid waste produced— must meet regulations (DOE/EP-0093) | Some public risks (cancer, emphysema) from inhalation of toxics and particulates; safety risk to workers | 150 workers— moderate long-term economic, community benefits (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) and 650 ha (1,600 acres) for entire fuel cycle (WASH-1224) | Habitat loss (including nationally from acid precipita-tion; DOE/EIS-0146); impingement, entrainment; waste heat to receiving water body; cooling tower drift, fogging; bird collisions | Limited visual impacts from plant structure, some from plume | 860,000 m3 (700 acre-ft) water per quad (1012 Btu) energy produced (based on thermal efficiency relative to nuclear) | Emissions of CO2, SO2, and NOx, regulated pollutants, radionuclides less than coal (Loftness) | Moderate (<coal) amounts of scrubber sludge, particulates— must meet regulations (DOE/EP-0093) | Some public risks (cancer, emphysema) from inhalation of toxics and particulates; safety risks to workers | 200 workers— moderate long-term economic community benefits (UDI-021-89) | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Table 8.2 (continued) | |||||||||
Resource | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alternative | Land use | Ecology | Aesthetics | Water quality | Air quality | Waste | Human health | Socioeconomic | Cultural |
Advanced light-water reactor | 80–200 ha (500–1000 acres) for plant site, plus exclusion acres and 400 ha (1500–2000 acres) for entire fuel cycle | Habitat loss, impingement, entrainment; waste heat to receiving water bodies; cooling tower drift and fogging; bird collisions | Limited visual impacts from plant structure, some from plume | 910,000 m3 (740 acre-ft) water per quad (1012 Btu) energy produced (based on thermal efficiency relative to nuclear) | Very little CO2 or regulated pollutants— from vehicles not facility | Some spent fuel, slightly more mixed waste and low-level waste than license renewal | <1% of natural radiation sources; safety risks to workers | 700 workers— substantial long-term economic, community benefits (UDI-021-89) | Relatively small unless important site-specific resource affected by plant or transmission lines |
Conservation | Minimal | Minimal | Minimal | Minimal | Minimal | Minimal | Minor impacts regarding radon, perhaps other contaminants (Pace 1991) | Increased jobs in conservation technologies | Minimal |
Imported power | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Operating impacts of hydro and coal plants similar to those in U.S. | Cultural impacts to tribes in northern Canada could produce more social conflict than in United States |
Table 8.2 (continued) | |||||||||
Resource | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alternative | Land use | Ecology | Aesthetics | Water quality | Air quality | Waste | Human health | Socioeconomic | Cultural |
Delayed retirement | Very few acres affected (DOE/EIS-0146) | Very few acres affected—no impact | Minimal changes unless cooling tower installed | Substantial improvement if closed-cycle system replaces once-through (Bretz 1994), otherwise little change. Improvement to distant water bodies adversely affected by acid precipitation (DOE/EIS-0146) | > 90% SO2 and NOx emissions of conventional coal plant removed (DOE/EIS-0146, Bretz 1994) | For integrated gasification combined cycle: 40% waste of pulverized coal plant; for atmospheric fluidized bed: possibly double the amount from pulverized coal plant (DOE/EIS-0146) | Substantial public health improvement compared with conventional, pulverized coal plant; safety risks to workers | Moderate employment and tax revenue from first coal plant extended for longer period | No change |
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, June 10, 2020
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, June 10, 2020