WSP07510 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!"~l1t . TABLE G.-Comparison of four cooling technologies assuming mining of 12.5 million tons (11.3 milliorl t) 0/ coal per year [Modified from Hiraeh, James, and Schefter, 1978] Once- Wet Dry Pond through tower tower Water withdrawn 2,150,000 45,700 44,400 o (acre-feet per year), Water evaporated 27,800 41,500 44,400 o (acre-feet per year), Electric energy produced 32,6 x 109 32,6 x 109 32,4 x 109 30.3 x 109 (kilowatt-hours per year), Dissolved-solids load in the 218,800 218,800 210,400 218,800 Yampa River (tons per year), Discharge-weighted dissolved- 143 144 140 140 solids concentration in the Yampa River near Maybell (stat ion 09251000) (mill 1- grams per liter), Average annual flow of the 1,087,000 1,074,000 1,071,000 1,115,000 Yampa River at Maybell (acre-feet per year), Yampa River near Maybell, Colo. (fig. 2). In the evaporation process, the dissolved solids in the rivet would remain in the water and, thus, their concentration would increase. Based on an existing discharge-weighted mean annual dissolved-solids concentration of 140 mg!L for the Yampa River near Maybell, Colo. (lorns and others, 1965), the average dissolved-solids concentration would increase by an estimated 3 mg!L to 143 mg!L (table 6). The water-withdrawal rates for once-through cooling are so great as to render this cooling method technically infeasible for a 4,OOO.MW powerplant in the Yampa River basin, according to an analysis by Maddock and Matalas (1980). However, it is worthy of mention, because it would be feasible on 22