It appears they are not given license extension:

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100404/NEWS/4040341

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

So is no one concerned about the air pollution from cooling towers?  They put tons of very fine particulate into the air.

From a business standpoint I like closed systems.  The water is usually more corrosive because impurities become concentrated.  This is good for the corrosion resistant tubing business.

There are a number of plants around with cooling towers to cool the discharge water.  wonder if they have looked at this option.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

Quote:

From a business standpoint I like closed systems.  The water is usually more corrosive because impurities become concentrated.  This is good for the corrosion resistant tubing business.

I'd have thought the opposite.  In closed systems you can add chemicals to control the chemistry.  For open loop using water from a natural body, you are very limited in what you can add (because you end up discharging it).    And there is variability of what comes in.  And biological possibilities like clams, mussels..  We certainly seem to have more problems in our open systems than our closed cooling systems.
 

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

So is no one concerned about the air pollution from cooling towers?  They put tons of very fine particulate into the air.

---...---

???  

Are we missing a /sarchasm tag?   Sarchasm being that gaping whole between a liberal and reality. 8<)

What's "discharged" from a cooling tower is water vapor.

Yes, they "could" build a cooling tower.  But why?  The delays (1-2 years), the cost, the wasted material, the wasted manpower, the energy used in construction and concrete and steel production and shipping, the lost electric production time are WASTED.   

After the past long years of operation, the local environment has "learned" the new constant heat loads, and like the manatees in Florida's cooling inlets, has moved and begun growing in places to fit the newer, more productive, more comfortable, consistently warm waters.   

Abruptly STOPPING that flow of warm water is (now) destructive to the environment - which, as usual, is opposite of what the extremists proclaim.

If you evaporate 1% of your flow, and that flow is 500,000 gpm, and the water is 1% solids (10,000 ppm TDS)how may tons per day of minerals are in your water vapor?  I know a lot of it stays in the tower and concentrates, but a lot is discharged.  10-50 tons per day.
Don't park a car that you like down wind from a large cooling tower.  The paint won't survive having scale deposited on it.

Pete, At first the chemical treatment in a tower makes it less corrosive.  Over time though the drive is for higher TDS levels.  I have seen towers that use potable water for make up pushing chloride levels beyond seawater in the cooling loop.  Anything to minimize make up and blow down.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

Let's define terms.

Pete, for some of us, open cooling systems connotes both cooling towers and lakes, rivers, etc.  Closed systems to us mean something like having an intermediate Hx between the heat sink and the condenser such as a S&T or P&F so that the condenser side is never exposed to the atmosphere or an air cooler type heat rejection system.

Ed,

I am laughing my a$$ off.  I was already thinking about the parking under a cooling tower angle before I read your post.  One of my jobs as a college boy working in the campus power plant was to wash the deposits on the outside of the inlet vanes of the CT back into the CT with a water hose.  The deposits that I was washing 'back' into the CT were deposited there from carryover brought back by recycle.


rmw

It was only a matter of time ... from the Mid Hudson News (http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2010/May/06/IP_permit_busn-06May10.html)

Business, labor leaders urge state DEC to reassess IP permit denial
 
NEW YORK – A group of 14 business and labor leaders Wednesday urged the state Department of Environmental Conservation to revisit a draft policy that denied an Indian Point power plant permit that is crucial to receiving Nuclear Regulatory Commission license renewals.

The DEC proposal aims to reduce the mortality impact that nuclear power plants have on fish eggs and larvae in the Hudson River.

Those who spoke out are all members of New York AREA, a pro Indian Point group, whose chairman is Arthur "Jerry" Kremer, who said if it stands, the DEC position would impact other power plants and some large industrial facilities.

"As a result of being located on the water, the DEC policy now is they want anybody who applies for a permit to rehabilitate a building, get a new license in the future, they want them to build cooling towers as a way to discharge this hearted water and the net result of it is anywhere from Montauk Point to Buffalo, utility customers are going to be asked to pay these phenomenal costs for cooling towers that are just not necessary," he said.

Indian Point owner Entergy, meanwhile, says it is appealing the decision, saying that its technology is sufficient to mitigate any problems.
 
 

Patricia Lougheed

******

Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

However, after thirty years of operation, the "livestock" and biota in the nearby water is ALREADY changed and gotten used to the higher temperatures.

Shutting down the plant will only stress it more!