Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor

PERFORMANCE, COST, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SALTWATER COOLING TOWERS

Prepared For:

California Energy Commission

Public Interest Energy Research Program

Prepared By:
John S. Maulbetsch, Consultant Michael N. DiFilippo, Consultant

January 2010 CEC-500-2008-043

PIER FINAL PROJECT REPORT

Prepared By: John S. Maulbetsch, Consultant Menlo Park, CA 94025 Michael N. DiFilippo, Consultant Berkeley, CA 94705 Commission Contract No. 500-02-014 Commission Work Authorization No: E2I-104 Prepared For:

Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program

California Energy Commission

Joe OHagan Contract Manager Linda Spiegel Program Area Lead Energy-Related Environmental Research Kennneth Koyama Office Manager Energy Generation Research

Thom Kelly, Ph.D. Deputy Director ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Melissa Jones Executive Director

DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report.

Acknowledgments
Theauthorswishespeciallytoacknowledgethetimespentandtheinformationprovidedbythe staffsofSt.JohnsRiverPowerPark,PlantLansingSmith,PlantCrist,PlantWatson,the PittsburgPowerPlant,thePaloVerdeNuclearPowerStationandGEAIntegratedCooling Technologies. Pleasecitethisreportasfollows: Maulbetsch,JohnS.,andMichaelN.DiFilippo.2008.Performance,Cost,andEnvironmentalEffects ofSaltwaterCoolingTowers.CaliforniaEnergyCommission,PIEREnergyRelatedEnvironmental ResearchProgram.CEC5002008043.

ii

Preface
TheCaliforniaEnergyCommissionsPublicInterestEnergyResearch(PIER)Programsupports publicinterestenergyresearchanddevelopmentthatwillhelpimprovethequalityoflifein Californiabybringingenvironmentallysafe,affordable,andreliableenergyservicesand productstothemarketplace. ThePIERProgramconductspublicinterestresearch,development,anddemonstration(RD&D) projectstobenefitCalifornia. ThePIERProgramstrivestoconductthemostpromisingpublicinterestenergyresearchby partneringwithRD&Dentities,includingindividuals,businesses,utilities,andpublicor privateresearchinstitutions. PIERfundingeffortsfocusonthefollowingRD&Dprogramareas:

BuildingsEndUseEnergyEfficiency EnergyInnovationsSmallGrants EnergyRelatedEnvironmentalResearch EnergySystemsIntegration EnvironmentallyPreferredAdvancedGeneration Industrial/Agricultural/WaterEndUseEnergyEfficiency RenewableEnergyTechnologies Transportation

Performance,Cost,andEnvironmentalEffectsofSaltwaterCoolingTowersisthefinalreportforthe AlternativeCoolingStrategiesandTechnologiesproject(contractnumberCEC5002008043, workauthorizationnumberE2I104)conductedbyJohnS.MaulbetschandMichaelN. DiFilippo.TheinformationfromthisprojectcontributestoPIERsEnergyRelated EnvironmentalResearchProgram. FormoreinformationaboutthePIERProgram,pleasevisittheEnergyCommissionswebsiteat www.energy.ca.gov/research/orcontacttheEnergyCommissionat9166544878.

iii

iv

Table of Contents
Preface ................................................................................................................................................iii Abstract...............................................................................................................................................ix ExecutiveSummary...........................................................................................................................1 1.0 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 2.0 2.1. 2.2. 1.0Introduction...................................................................................................................5 . Motivation.......................................................................................................................5 ObjectiveandScope.......................................................................................................5 ReportOrganization......................................................................................................6 CoolingSystemBasics........................................................................................................7 ClosedCycleWetCoolingSystems............................................................................7 . MassandHeatBalances................................................................................................8 EvaporationRate.......................................................................................................9 BlowdownRate.........................................................................................................9 EffectofWaterProperties........................................................................................10 VaporPressure..........................................................................................................10 SurfaceTension.........................................................................................................11 DynamicViscosity....................................................................................................11 ThermalConductivity..............................................................................................11 DensityandSpecificHeat........................................................................................11

2.2.1. 2.2.2. 2.2.3. 2.2.4. 2.2.5. 2.2.6. 2.2.7. 2.2.8. 3.0 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 4.0 4.1. 4.2. 4.3.

CoolingTowerPerformance..............................................................................................13 EffectofSalinityonCoolingTowerPerformance.....................................................13 SeawaterCorrectionFactor ..........................................................................................13 . RulesofThumb..............................................................................................................13 CalculatedCapabilitywithSalineWaterMakeup....................................................14 ExperiencewithSaltwaterTowers...................................................................................17 . HighSalinityOperation................................................................................................17 ExistingInstallations .....................................................................................................17 . EnvironmentalEffects...................................................................................................22 Blowdown..................................................................................................................22 Drift.............................................................................................................................23

4.3.1. 4.3.2. 4.4. 5.0 5.1.

OperatingExperience....................................................................................................27 SaltWaterCoolingSystemCosts......................................................................................29 Generalcostfactors........................................................................................................29

5.1.1. 5.1.2. 6.0 6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 7.0

Basecasecosts...........................................................................................................29 Adjustmentforsalinemakeup..............................................................................30

SummaryandConclusions................................................................................................35 EffectonThermalPerformance ...................................................................................35 . EffectonCoolingSystemCost.....................................................................................35 EnvironmentalImpacts.................................................................................................36 EffectonOperationandMaintenance........................................................................36 . References.............................................................................................................................39

AppendixA:PropertiesofSeawater AppendixB:DerivationofCoolingTowerPerformanceCharacteristics AppendixC:SiteVisitReports

List of Figures
Figure21.Closedcyclewetcoolingsystem.........................................................................................7 Figure22.Closedcyclecoolingsystemmassandheatbalance........................................................8 . Figure31.Saltwatercorrectionfactor.................................................................................................14 Figure32.Effectofsalinityoncorrectioncurve.................................................................................16 Figure41.Driftdropletsizespectrum.................................................................................................24 AppendixA FigureA3.Surfacetension(40to140F)..............................................................................................6 FigureA5.Thermalconductivity .........................................................................................................8 AppendixB FigureB1.Closedcyclecoolingsystemmassandheatbalance........................................................3 FigureB2.IncrementalHeatTransferAnalysis...................................................................................5 FigureB3.Coolingtoweroperatingcurves..........................................................................................6 FigureB4.Exampleperformancecurvesandfillcharacteristics(fromCTIToolkitforspecified rangeandwetbulbtemperature)....................................................................................................8 AppendixC FigureC.11.St.JohnsRiverPowerPark:Hyperbolicnaturaldrafttowers.....................................4 FigureC.12a.Repairactivitiesofshellconcreteandrebardamage..................................................7 vi

FigureC.12b.Removedspalledconcreteontowersupportcolumns..............................................8 . FigureC.13.Zincmeshscreenandleads..............................................................................................9 FigureC.14.Installationofnewfiberglassandzincontowercolumns.........................................10 FigureC.15.Heavilyfouledfillfromtower........................................................................................10 FigureC.16.Foulinganddebrisontopoffill.....................................................................................11 FigureC.17.Sedimentaccumulationintowerbasin.........................................................................12 FigureC.21.PlantLansingSmith.........................................................................................................15 FigureC.22.PlantSmithUnit#3coolingtower.................................................................................16 FigureC.23.PlantSmithUnit#3coolingtowersupports ................................................................17 . FigureC.24:PlantSmithUnit#3coolingtowerbottomoffill........................................................18 FigureC.25.PlantSmithUnit#3Coolingtowertopofdrifteliminators.......................................18 FigureC.26.PlantSmithUnit#3coolingtowerbasin.......................................................................19 FigureC.27.PlantSmithUnit#3driftrelatedcorrosion..................................................................20 . FigureC.28.PlantSmithUnit#3driftrelatedcorrosion..................................................................20 . FigureC.29.PlantSmithUnit#3driftrelatedcorrosion..................................................................21 . FigureC.31.PlantCristEntrance.........................................................................................................24 FigureC.32.PlantCristUnit6coolingtower.....................................................................................25 FigureC.33.PlantCristUnit7coolingtower.....................................................................................26 FigureC.34.Unit6Tower;cell1internalsupportstructure.............................................................27 FigureC.35.Unit6,4gullwingfill.....................................................................................................28 FigureC.36.Unit6drifteliminators....................................................................................................28 FigureC.37.Unit6airinletandlouvers.............................................................................................29 FigureC.38.Corrosiononriser.............................................................................................................29 FigureC.41.PlantWatson.....................................................................................................................32 FigureC.42.PlantWatsonUnit4coolingtower................................................................................33 FigureC.43.PlantWatsonUnit5coolingtower................................................................................33 FigureC.44.PlantWatsonUnit5s3celladdontower..................................................................34 FigureC.45.Unit4tower:Glueandscrewjointconstruction.....................................................35

vii

FigureC.46.GlueandscrewjointconstructionoftheUnit4tower...........................................36 FigureC.47.ConcretedamageinUnit5 .............................................................................................36 . FigureC.48.Fillcollapseresultingfromcorrosionofplasticcoatedsteelwire............................37 FigureC.56.PaloVerdeNuclearGeneratingStation........................................................................39

List of Tables
Table31.Basecase(freshwater)results...............................................................................................15 Table32.Comparativeperformancefreshvs.saltwatermakeup...............................................15 Table41.Saltwatertowerinstallations................................................................................................18 Table42.Examplecoolingtowerenvironmentalimpactassessments...........................................25 Table51:TowerDesignConfigurationsandBaseCosts.................................................................30 . Table52:Effectofsourcewaterqualityoncoolingtowerdesign..................................................32 Table53:CostImpactofThermalPerformanceReduction.............................................................32 Table54:TowerCostComparisons....................................................................................................33 Table55:CoolingSystemComponentCostComparisons(from(WGI,2001))............................34 AppendixA TableA1.CompositionofNormalSeawater....................................................................................3

viii

Abstract
Thisreportdiscussesthedesign,use,cost,operation,andenvironmentaleffectsofsaltwaterand brackishwatercoolingtowersincomparisontofreshwatertowersastheyareusedforpower plantcooling.Itcoversthefollowingtopics:

Alistingofglobalsaltwatertowerinstallations. Ananalysisoftheperformanceandcostdifferencesbetweenfreshandsaltwatertowers. Areviewofoperatingandmaintenanceexperienceonafewoperatingsaltwatertowers atU.S.powerplants. Areviewofenvironmentaleffectsatsiteswithoperatingsaltwatertowers.

Theuseofhighsalinitymakeupwatertypicallyimposesa4to8percentperformancepenalty anda35to50percentcostpenaltyincomparisontofreshwatertowersofcomparablecooling capability.Environmentaleffectsofparticularpertinencetosalt/brackishwatertowersare primarilyrelatedtodriftemissions,andtheyarelargelyconfinedtothenearfieldeffectson plantbuildingsandequipment. Keywords:Saltwatercoolingtowers,brackishwatercoolingtowers,recirculatingwetcooling, coolingtowerdrift,coolingtowerperformance,environmentaleffectsofcoolingtowers.

ix

Executive Summary
Introduction Thegrowingdemandforthestateslimitedfreshwatersupplieshascreatedpressuretoreduce waterusebythermalpowerplants,amajorsourceofelectricityinthestate.Amodern,highly efficientgasfiredpowerplantwithcoolingtowersmayuseasmuchwaterasacommunityof 12,000people.Themajorityofthiswaterisusedinthecoolingsystemtocapturewasteheatand thenroutedtothecoolingtowerswherethewasteheatisdissipatedtotheair.Thiscooling processdoesnotrequirehighqualitywater,andinfact,watersupplieswithhighsalinitylevels thatareunsuitableforagriculturalormunicipalusewithoutextensivetreatment,maybeused. Sourcesofhighsalinitywaterthatcouldbeusedincoolingtowersincludenaturallyoccurring brackishgroundwater,irrigationreturnflows,producedwater(groundwaterwhichisbrought upbyoilandgaspumping),andseawater. Anotherreasonforinterestintheuseofhighsalinitywaterincoolingtowersisthatthereare potentialstateandfederalregulationsthatmayrequiresomeofCaliforniascoastalplants, currentlyoperatingwithoncethroughcoolingtechnologytoconverttoclosedcyclecooling usingcoolingtowers,presumablywithseawaterasthewatersource.Oncethroughcooling requiresasignificantlygreateramountofwaterthanclosedcyclecoolingtobewithdrawnfrom awaterbody,passedoncethroughthepowerplanttocapturewasteheatandthendischarged backintoawaterbody.ThesepotentialregulatorydevelopmentsincludetheUnitedStates EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,whichisdevelopingregulationsunderSection316(b)ofthe CleanWaterActandtheCaliforniaStateWaterResourcesControlBoard,whichhasproposeda policythatwillrequiresomeofthesepowerplantstochangecoolingtechnologies. Purpose Thisstudyinvestigatespotentialissuesassociatedwiththechoiceofsalinecoolingtower makeupwater,includingeffectsontowerthermalperformanceandonthechoiceofmaterials ofconstruction,bothofwhichmayaffectthecostofthetower.Inaddition,operatingand maintenanceproblemsmayariseandenvironmentalproblemsmayresult,especiallyduetothe salinityofthedrift.Driftreferstowaterdropletsthatarecarriedoutofthecoolingtowerwith theexhaustairandhavethesameconcentrationofimpuritiesasthewaterenteringthetower. Becauseoftheseconcerns,thisstudyseeksabetterunderstandingoftheeffectsoncost, performance,operatingandmaintenancerequirements,andtheenvironmentimpactsthatmay beencounteredwiththeuseofsaltwatercoolingtowersforpowerplantcooling. ProjectObjectives Thisstudyprovidesinformationonthedesign,use,andoperationofsaltwatercoolingtowers. Thisinformationwillassistthepowerplantdevelopers,regulatoryagencies,includingthe EnergyCommission,andotherstakeholdersinevaluatingalternativecoolingsystemsfor powerprojectsinCalifornia.

Specifically,thestudyprovides:

AsurveyofsaltwatertowerinstallationsintheUnitedStatesandabroad. Ananalysisofperformanceandcostdifferencesbetweenfreshwaterandsaltwater coolingtowers. AreviewofoperatingandmaintenanceexperienceonafewsaltwatertowersatU.S. powerplants. Areviewofenvironmentaleffectsatsiteswithoperatingsaltwatertowers.

ProjectOutcomes Alistofsaltandbrackishwatercoolingtowerswascompiledfromsourcesincludingthemajor coolingtowervendors,industryandgovernmentreports,tradejournals,andpersonalcontacts. Towerperformanceinformationwasobtainedfromvendorinformationandopenliterature referencesandwasalsoestimatedindependently.Comparedtofreshwater,saltwaters propertiesarelessfavorableforevaporativecooling.Asaresult,towerperformanceisslightly degradedanddesignmodificationsmustbemade. Asaltwatertowercostmorethanafreshwatertowerforagivenheatrejectioncapacityfortwo reasons.First,theperformancedegradationrequiresthatthetowerbeslightlylargerand consumeslightlymorefanpowertoachievecomparableperformance.Second,thecorrosive natureofsaltwaterrequiresusingdifferentandmorecostlymaterialsfortowerandbasin construction. Operatingandmaintenanceissuesrelatedtousingofsaltwatermakeupwerediscussedduring plantvisitsandtelephoneinterviewswiththeoperatorsofsixplantsandonevendor. Informationwasobtainedonoldertowers,reflectingdesignandconstructionpracticesfromthe mid1970s,andonnewertowers,designedandbuiltwiththebenefitofexperiencefromthe olderunits. Theenvironmentaleffectsofsaltwatertoweroperationhavebeenstudiedforseveraldecades. Theauthorsreviewedthereportliteratureanddiscussedsometestprogramsconductedat plantsthatwerevisited. Conclusions Theexistinginstallationsusingsaltwaterincoolingtowersthatwereidentifiedrepresenta widerangeofsizes,applications,makeupwatersalinityandmaterialsofconstruction.They provideampleevidencethatutilitysizecoolingtowershavebeendesigned,built,andoperated successfullyusingsaltwater. Consistentinformationontheeffectontowerperformancefromcirculatingwatersalinityon emergedfromthevariousinformationsourcesandtheindependentanalyticalestimates.The reductionintowercapabilityvarieswithcirculatingwatersalinityandwiththeoperating liquidtogasratioofthecoolingwater.Theliquidtogasratioreferstotheproportionofliquid watertoevaporatedwater.Forsalinitiestypicalofseawatermakeuptotowerswherethe
2

operatingat1.5cyclesofconcentration(~50,000partspermillion)andatatypicalliquidtogas ratioof1to2,thecorrectionfactorisapproximately4to5percent.Cyclesofconcentration referstothenumberoftimesthesolidsinaparticularvolumeofwaterareconcentrateddueto evaporation.Therequirementtobuildthetowersomewhatlargerandtousemorecostly, corrosionresistantconstructionmaterialsincreasescostabout35to50percentcomparedto freshwatertowersofthesamecapability. Themajorconclusionsregardingoperationandmaintenanceare:

1.

Recentinstallationsofmechanicaldraftcoolingtowersoperatingwithhighsalinity makeupwaterusingcorrosionresistantmaterialhaveoperatedsatisfactorily,withno extraordinaryoperatingandmaintenanceproblems. Operatingresultshavebeenexcellent,howeverlongtermexperience(greaterthan15 years)islacking. Nearlyallplantswithhighsalinitycoolingtowers,bothnaturalandmechanicaldraft, haveencounteredacceleratedcorrosiononunprotectedmetalsurfacesonbuildingsand equipmentattheplantsitenearthetowers. Bothmechanicalandnaturaldrafttowerstructuresandbasinsconstructedofconcrete haveexperiencedvaryingdegreesofdeteriorationfromexposuretosaltwater.

2. 3.

4.

Anumberofenvironmentalstudieshavebeenconductedbycomparingdepositionrateson surroundinglandbeforeandaftertheinstallationandoperationofsaltorbrackishwater coolingtowers.Whereparticulatematteremissionsfromcoolingtowersareregulated,usingof highsalinitywaterincoolingtowerswillrequirepurchasingairqualityoffsetstomitigatethese effects. Allstudiesreachessentiallythesameconclusionthattherewerenosignificantincreases observedinsaltconcentrationsinsoilsorvegetationinthevicinityoftheplants,norany symptomsofenvironmentalinjury. Recommendations Itistobeexpectedthatanincreasingnumberofcoolingsystemsatnewandexistingplantsare goingtobedesigned,built,andoperatedonlowerqualitywaterthaninthepast.Itis recommendedthattheEnergyCommissionmaintainactivesurveillanceofthefieldoverthe nextfewyearstocontinuetoexpandthebodyofinformationcompiledinthisstudywiththe mostuptodateinformationasitbecomesavailable. BenefitstoCalifornia AsCaliforniacontinuestobalancethecompetingrequirementsformoreenergywith responsiblestewardshipofitswaterresources,theinformationfromthisstudywillassistthe EnergyCommissionandotherinterestedagenciestoevaluatingthetradeoffsofcost, performance,wateruse,andenvironmentaleffectsofsaltwatercoolingtowers.

 Note:Unlessotherwiseindicated,allpicturesandgraphsinthisreportaretheoutcomeofthe researchdescribedherein.

1.0 Introduction
1.1. Motivation
Thereisincreasinginterestinusinghighsalinitywaterforpowerplantcoolingtowersfortwo reasons.First,thegrowingdemandsforelectricityandwaterinthestatehavecreatedpressure toconsiderusingnonfreshwaterforpowerplantcoolingatnewandexistingplantsdesigned forclosedcyclecooling.Sourcesofhighsalinitywaterthatcouldbeusedincoolingtowers includenaturallyoccurringbrackishgroundwatersourcesandproducedwater(groundwater thatisproducedwithoilandgaspumping).Second,therearepotentialstateandfederal regulationsthatmayrequiresomecoastalplants,currentlyoperatingwithoncethrough coolingusingoceanwater,toconverttoclosedcyclecoolingusingcoolingtowers,presumably withoceanwaterasthewatersource.Thesepotentialregulatorydevelopmentsincludethe UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,whichisdevelopingregulationsunderSection 316(b)oftheCleanWaterActandtheCaliforniaStateWaterResourcesControlBoard,which hasproposedapolicythatwillrequiresomeofthesepowerplantstochangecooling technologies. Potentialissuesassociatedwiththechoiceofsalinemakeupincludeeffectsontowerthermal performanceandonthechoiceofmaterialsofconstruction,bothwhichmayaffectthecostof thetower.Inaddition,operatingandmaintenance(O&M)problemsmayariseand environmentalproblemsmaybeexacerbated,particularlyfromthesalinityofthedrift.Inlight oftheseconcerns,theEnergyCommissionwantsabetterunderstandingoftheeffectsoncost, performance,O&Mrequirements,andtheenvironmentthatmayoccurwithusingsaltwater coolingtowersforpowerplantcooling.

1.2.

Objective and Scope

Thisstudyprovidesinformationonthedesign,use,andoperationofsaltwatercoolingtowers andwillassisttheEnergyCommissioninevaluatingalternativecoolingsystemsforpower projectsinCalifornia. Thestudyconsistedoffivetasks:

AsurveyofsaltwatertowerinstallationsintheUnitedStatesandabroad. Ananalysisofperformanceandcostdifferencesbetweenfreshwaterandsaltwater towers. AreviewofO&MexperienceonafewsaltwatertowersatU.S.powerplants. Areviewofenvironmentaleffectsatsiteswithoperatingsaltwatertowers. Summaryofstudysresults.

1.3.

Report Organization

Section2providesabriefreviewofcoolingtowerdesign,operation,andnomenclaturefor convenientreference.Section3analyzesperformancedifferencesbetweencoolingtowersusing highsalinitymakeupwaterandthoseusingfreshwater.Somesimplerulesofthumbfromthe existingliteraturearepresentedandevaluated,andsomeexamplecalculationsarepresented forconditionsrelevanttoCalifornia.Section4providesalistofseawaterandbrackishwater coolingtowersinoperationintheUnitedStatesandabroadandsummarizestheexperiencethat somepowerplantshavehadwithsaltwatercoolingtowers,intermsofbothO&Mand environmentaleffects.Section5presentstheeffectofusinghighsalinitywaterincooling towersoncoolingsystemcost.Section6summarizesthestudysconclusions. Threeappendicescontainasummaryofseawaterproperties(AppendixA),aderivationofthe performancecharacteristicsforwetcoolingtowers(AppendixB),anddetailedreportsofonsite visitsandinterviewswithplantscurrentlyoperatingwithseawaterorbrackishwatercooling towers(AppendixC). .

2.0 Cooling System Basics

2.1. Closed-Cycle Wet Cooling Systems
Closedcycle,orrecirculated,wetcoolingsystemsareusuallythecoolingsystemofchoicefor modernthermalpowerplants.Thesystem,asshownschematicallyin Figure21,consistsoftwomajorcomponents:(1)thesteamcondenser,usuallyashellandtube surfacecondenser,and(2)awetcoolingtower,usuallyamechanicaldrafttower(recentlymore commonlyofthecounterflowtype,althoughtheschematicshowsacrossflowconfiguration).

Figure 2-1. Closed-cycle wet cooling system

Source: Mitchell 1989

Steamfromthelowpressureturbineexhaustflowsintothecondenser,whereitiscondensed ontheoutersurfaceoftubeswithcoolingwaterrunningthroughthem.Thecondensedliquidis returnedtotheboilertocompletethepowercycle. Thewarmedcoolingwaterleavingthecondenserissenttothecoolingtowerwhereitiscooled byheatrejectiontotheatmosphere,primarilybyevaporation,andthenrecirculatedtothe condenserinlet.Figure22identifiesthequantitiesinvolvedinthecoolingandwateruse processesanddefinestheimportantnomenclature.

Plu m e H ot w ater tem p T h (F) S team W st (lb m /h r) p b (in H g a ) T con d (F) W circ .(lb m /h r) C O N D ENSER C old w ater tem p T c (F) C on den sate retu rn M ak e-u p w m u (lb m /h r) W ET C O O L IN G TOW ER

w evap (lb m /h r) w d rift (lb m /h r)

In let air w air (lb m /h r) T w b (F )

B low d ow n w bd (lb m /h r)

Figure 2-2. Closed-cycle cooling system mass and heat balance

Thehotwaterfromthecondenserisintroducedatthetopofthetowerandflowsdownthrough afillsectionwhereitisbroughtintointimatecontactwithambientairflowingcountertothe directionofthefallingwaterflow.Bothsensibleandlatentheattransfertotheaircoolsthebulk ofthewater,whichisthencollectedinabasinandreturnedtothecondenser.Theairleavesthe tower,heatedandhumidifiedasanessentiallysaturatedexhaustplume. Thecoolingisachievedbytheevaporationofasmallfraction(1%to2%)oftherecirculating waterflow.Therefore,oncethesystemisfilled,theonlywaterwithdrawnfromthe environmentismakeupwaterinamountssufficienttoreplacethatlosttoevaporation, blowdown, 1anddrift. 2

2.2.

Mass and Heat Balances

TheelementsofcompletemassandheatbalancesareshowninFigure22.Thewaterbalanceon thecoolingtowerisgivenby

wmu = wevap + wbd + wd

where

(Eq. 2.1)

wmuisthemakeupwater;wevapiswaterlosttoevaporation,wbdisblowdownwater,andwdis waterlosttodrift.

1.Blowdowniswaterdischargedfromthecoolingsystemtocontrolthebuildupofdissolvedand suspendedmaterialsthatconcentrateinthesystemasaresultoftheevaporation. 2.Driftreferstoliquidwaterdropletsentrainedinthetowerexitplumeandreleasedtotheatmosphere. 8

Thedriftrate,wd,istypicallylessthan0.002%ofthecirculatingwaterrate(nowusually specifiedat0.0005%orless)ascomparedtotheevaporationrateof1%to2%andtheblowdown rateof0.1%to1%.Therefore,thedriftrateisneglectedinthefollowingcalculations.

2.2.1. Evaporation Rate

Therateofevaporationofwaterfromthetowerisrelatedtotheheatloadonthetower,Qtower, whichisequaltotheheatloadonthecondenser,Qcond,givenby

Qtower = Qcond = wcirc * cp * (Th Tc)

withtheevaporationrategivenby

(Eq. 2.2)

wevap = Qtower * flatent/hfg

where

(Eq. 2.3)

flatent=fractionoftotalheatrejectedbylatentheattransfer(0.9isusedhere,butitcanbelower dependingonambientconditionsanddesignchoice),andhfg=latentheatofvaporizationin Britishthermalunitsperpoundmass(Btu)/lbm);~1000Btu/lbm. Foranoldersteamplantsuchasmightbeconsideredforretrofittoclosedcyclecooling,typical plantefficiencymightbe35%.Ofthe65%wasteheat,perhaps15%wouldbedissipatedinthe stackgasesand50%inthecondensercoolingwater.Theheatdutyforthecoolingsystem wouldbeapproximately5,000,000Btu/hourpermegawatt(MW)ofelectricpowergenerated. Thevalueswoulddifferslightlyforthesteamportionofcombinedcycleplants,butthesewill beusedforillustrativepurposes.Therefore,thecoolingsystemwaterconsumptionperMWcan becalculatedas Qtower=5x106Btu/hrperMW (Eq.2.4)

wevap=5x106x0.9/1000=4,500lbm/hrperMWor(Eq.2.4a) wevap~10gallonsperminute(gpm)/MW(Eq.2.4b)

2.2.2. Blowdown Rate

Blowdownratesaresettocontrolscaling,fouling,andcorrosionbylimitingthebuildupof impuritiesinthecirculatingwater.Thiscriterionisnormallyexpressedintermsofmaximum allowablecyclesofconcentration(n),definedastheratiooftheconcentrationofconserved speciesinthecirculatingwater(Cicirc)tothatinthemakeupwater(Cimu): n=Cicirc/Cimu(Eq.2.5) Themassbalanceofspeciesiinthetowerrequiresthat

wmu Ci mu = wbd Ci circ wbd = (wevap + wbd) (Ci mu/Ci circ) = (wevap + wbd) x 1/n
Therefore,

(Eq. 2.6) (Eq. 2.7)

wbd = wevap / (n 1)

(Eq. 2.8)

Typicalallowablecyclesofconcentrationarefrom3to6(DiFilippo2003).Forn=5asatypical value,therequiredblowdownis

wbd = [1/(5 1)] wevap = 2.5 gpm/megawatt electrical (MWe)

andtherequiredmakeupis

(Eq. 2.9)

wmu = wevap + wbd = 12.5 gpm/MWe

Additionally,typical,consistentvaluesoftoweroperatingconditionsare Circulatingwaterflowrate,wcirc:~500gpm/MWe Condenserterminaltemperaturedifference(TTD),TcondTh:6Fto8F Towerrange,ThTc:20Fto24F Towerapproach,TcTamb.wetbulb:8Fto12F Therefore,theachievablesteamcondensingtemperatureisgivenby

(Eq. 2.10)

Tcond = Tamb. wet bulb + Approach + Range + TTD

(Eq. 2.11)

Foranambientwetbulbtemperatureof70F,valuesinthetypicalrangesofTTD=7F,Range= 22F,andApproach=10Fwouldprovideacondensingtemperatureof109F,correspondingto aturbinebackpressureof2.5inchesofmercury(in.Hga).Towerapproachtemperature dependsondesignambientconditions,aswellasmanyotherfactorsincludingtowertype,size, fillchoice,andairflow.Ingeneral,warmer,morehumidconditionsleadtolowerapproach temperatures,asinthesoutheasternUnitedStatesandcooler,drierclimatesleadtohigherones, asinthenorthernandwesternregions.

2.2.3. Effect of Water Properties

Thepropertiesofhighsalinitywaterdifferfromthoseoffreshwater,andthosedifferenceslead toslightlyalteredcoolingtowerperformance.Forpurposesofthisreport,highsalinitywater referstoseawater,concentratedseawater,andlowersalinityorbrackishwatersfoundinbays orestuariesorasgroundwater.Thechemicalcompositionofnormalseawaterisgivenin TableA1ofAppendixA.Othertablesintheappendixprovidevaluesofseveralthermo physicalpropertiesimportanttotheperformanceofcoolingtowersforseawaterofdoubled concentrationandoffreshwater(OfficeofSalineWater1959). ThederivationinAppendixBprovidesafundamentaldiscussiontohelpreadersunderstand theeffectofthesepropertydifferencesontowerperformance.Theeffectsofspecificproperties aresummarizedhere.

2.2.4. Vapor Pressure

Thepresenceofsaltsinwaterreducesthevaporpressureatanygiventemperature,asseenin FigureA2aandA2binAppendixA.Thisreducesthedrivingforceforevaporationand,in effect,lowerstheenthalpyofsaturatedairatthelocalwatertemperature,whichlowersthe drivingforce.Therefore,alargerfillvolumeorahigherperformancefillwillberequiredto transferthesameamountofheat.
10

2.2.5. Surface Tension

Thesurfacetensionforseawaterissomewhathigherthanforfreshwater(FigureA3;Appendix A).Thishighersurfacetensiontendstofacilitatethebreakupofthefilm,createsmaller droplets,andslightlyincreasetheinterfacialareaperunitoffillvolume,(a).Thistendency wouldslightlyenhancetheperformanceofseawatercomparedtofreshwater.Theperformance ofdrifteliminatorsisalsodependentonsurfacetensionIngeneral,anincreaseinsurface tensionwillslightlyimprovetheperformanceofdrifteliminators.

2.2.6. Dynamic Viscosity

Thedynamicviscosityofseawaterisslightlyhigherthanforfreshwater(FigureA4;Appendix A).Thishigherviscositymayresultinslightlythickerfilmsonthefillandaminorreductionin performancecomparedtofreshwater.

2.2.7. Thermal Conductivity

Thethermalconductivityofseawaterislowerthanthatoffreshwaterforthetemperaturerange relevanttocoolingtoweroperation(FigureA5,AppendixA).Thismayresultinaslightly highertemperaturedropacrosstheliquidfilms.Theresistancetoheattransferassociatedwith thetemperaturedropacrossthefilmisnormallyneglectedinsimplifiedanalysesand conventionalperformancecorrelations.Thedecreasedliquidthermalconductivitymayresult inaslightdecreaseinperformanceforsaltwaterincomparisontofreshwater.

2.2.8. Density and Specific Heat

Atagiventemperature,thedensityofseawaterisabout2%to3%greaterthanfreshwater, whilethespecificheatisabout4%less.(FiguresA6andA7;AppendixA).Therefore,agiven volumeofseawaterhasslightlylesscoolingcapacitythanfreshwater.Foragivenheatload, eitherthewaterflowortherangemustbeincreasedsomewhatforasaltwatertower.These effectsareallminorcomparedtotheeffectofvaporpressure. Section3willprovidetheresultsofsometests,analyses,andresultingrulesofthumbfor adjustingtheexpectedperformanceoffreshwatercoolingtowerstoaccountfortheuseofsalt waterasthecoolingmedium.

11

12

3.0 Cooling Tower Performance

3.1. Effect of Salinity on Cooling Tower Performance
Thethermalperformanceofcoolingtowersusingsaltorbrackishwaterwilldifferfromthatof anidenticaltowerunderidenticalconditionsusingfreshwaterforcooling.Aswasdiscussedin detailinSection2,thisdifferenceresultsfromvariationsinthethermodynamicandtransport propertiesofsaltwaterasafunctionofsalinity.Ofthese,themostimportantisvaporpressure. Thefollowingparagraphsreviewseveralapproachesthatcanbeusedtoaccountfortheeffect ofsalinityoncoolingtowerperformance.Theseincludeasimplecorrectionfactorandsome simplerulesofthumbforadjustingthedesignspecifications.

3.2.

Seawater Correction Factor

Athoroughdiscussionoftheeffectofsaltwateroncoolingtowerperformancewaspresentedin a1991Marleypublication(TingandSuptic1991).Therecommendedapproachistoratethe coolingtowerasifitwereusingfreshwaterandthenapplyacorrectionfactor.Figure6ofTing andSuptic(1991)isreproducedhereasFigure31(withanestimatedcurveforasalinityof 50,000partspermillion[ppm]added).Thecorrectionfactorisplottedagainsttheliquidtogas flowrateratio(L/G)forawatersalinityleveltwicethatofseawater.Thefactorvariesfrom7% atanL/G=1tojustunder2.5%atanL/G=5.5.Thereasonforthedecreaseintheeffectof salinitywithincreasingL/GcanbeseenbyreferencetoFigureB4inAppendixB.Towersfora givenrangeandwetbulbtemperaturedesignedforhighL/GratioshavemuchlowerKaV/L andoperateatmuchhigherapproachtemperatures.Themagnitudeofthedrivingforce,(h sat@Tw hair),iscorrespondinglylargerandtheeffectofagivendecreaseonthevaporpressureatthe watersurface,hsat@Tw,isalsocorrespondinglyless.

3.3.

Rules of Thumb

Somerulesofthumbhavebeenputforwardbytheindustrytoestimatethereductionincooling towercapability(oralternatively,theincreasedtowersizerequiredtomeetthesameheating load)incurredwithsaltwateroperation. Thesimplestofthese(Aull2005)suggestsa5%capabilityreductionforasalinityof50,000total dissolvedsolids(TDS).Similarestimates(Eftekharzadehetal.2003)suggestalossin performanceof5.4%atasalinityof50,000TDS.ReferenceismadeinthatpublicationtoaFluor (FluorR/DDivision1957)paperwhichrecommendsincreasingthedesignwetbulbby0.055C (~0.1F)foreach4,000ppmofdissolvedsolids.Forseawateroperatingat1.2to2cyclesof concentration,thiscorrespondstoanincreaseinthedesignwetbulbof0.55Cto1.1C(~1F to2F).

13

Salt Water Correction Factor (from Ting and Suptic)

2x Seawater 1.080 1.070 Correction Factor 1.060 1.050 1.040 1.030 1.020 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 L/G 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5

CF = 0.0016(L/G) - 0.021(L/G) + 1.0894

Figure 3-1. Salt water correction factor

Source: Ting and Suptic 1991

Figure31givestherecommendedcorrectionfora2xseawatersalinityorapproximately70,000 ppm.Assumingalinearcorrectionfactoradjustmentwithsalinity,thecorrespondinglinefor 50,000ppmwouldgiveacorrectionfactorbetween1.05and1.054atapproximatelyanL/G=1 whichseemsappropriatefortheconditionsofinteresttothestudy(Eftekharzadehetal.2003). Finally,usingtheruleofthumbsuggestedintheFluorreference(FluorR/DDivision1957)of increasingthewetbulbtemperatureby0.1Fforeach4000ppmofdissolvedsolids,assumea 1.25FincreaseforaTDSof50,000ppm.

3.4.

Calculated Capability with Saline Water Makeup

TheCTIWorkbook(CTI2005)wasusedtocalculatethecapabilitycorrectionimpliedbythe recommendationtoincreasethewetbulbtemperatureby0.1Fforeach4000ppmincreasein circulatingwatersalinity. Thecalculationproceedsasfollows.Forabase(freshwater)casewithdesignspecificationsof WetBulbTemperature:75F ColdWaterTemperature:90F HotWaterTemperature:120F

14

theCTIWorkbook,givesthefollowingKaV/Lvalueandcorrespondingfillcoefficient,C,fora rangeofL/G,asdisplayedinTable31.
Table 3-1. Base case (freshwater) results

L/G
0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2

KaV/L
1.005 1.079 1.168 1.500 2.233

C (n = -.7)
0.703 0.923 1.168 1.992 3.628

Thefillisassumedtohaveacharacteristicof KaV/L=C*(L/G)0.7(Eq.3.1) Thesamecomputationisthenperformedfor(1)anassumedwetbulbtemperatureof76.25F (increasedby1.25Fperrecommendation),and(2)thesamefillcharacteristics. TheL/Gatwhichthesamecoldwatertemperaturecanbeobtainedisdeterminedand comparedtothefreshwatervaluesinTable31.Theratioof{(L/G)salt/(L/G)fresh}isthe correspondingcapabilitycorrectionfactor.Thisapproachneglectstheminoraffectsofvariation inallthermophysicalpropertieswithsalinityandattemptstosimulatetheeffectofthereduced vaporpressurewithanincreasedwetbulbtemperature.TheresultsaretabulatedinTable32 andplottedonthesamecoordinatesasFigure31forcomparisontothepublishedcorrection factorandshowreasonableagreement.Thissuggeststhatfortheusualrangeofcirculating watersalinities,operatingtemperatureranges,anddesignpointsthecorrectioncurveandthe recommendedelevationofthewetbulbtemperatureareconsistent.
Table 3-2. Comparative performancefresh- vs. saltwater makeup L/G (Fresh) 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 C 0.671 0.88 1.11025 1.8725 3.32 L/G (Saline) 0.57 0.7625 0.955 1.442 1.936 Ratio L/G 1.053 1.049 1.047 1.040 1.033

15

Salt Water Correction Factor

2x Seawater 50,000 ppm CTI Calculations for 50,000 ppm

1.080 1.070 Correction Factor 1.060 1.050 1.040 1.030 1.020 1.010 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 L/G 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
Linear correction from 2x seawater curve

from Ting and Suptic

Figure 3-2. Effect of salinity on correction curve

Source: John S. Maulbetsch, Consultant, and Michael N. DiFilippo, Consultant.

Therefore,onthebasesofliteraturerecommendationsandasimplecomputationalcorrection,a capabilityreductionofapproximately5%appearstobereasonablefortypicalconditions.This additionalcapabilitycanbeprovidedinavarietyofways,includingthefollowing:

Increasedcellplanarea(widthorlength). Additionalcellorcells. Increasedairflow(fanpower).

Theeffectondesign,materialsselection,andcostwillbepresentedinSection5.

16

4.0 Experience with Saltwater Towers

4.1. High-Salinity Operation
Theuseofcoolingtowersonhighsalinitymakeupwaterisnotnew.Therearemanysuch installationsintheUnitedStatesandabroad,atbothpowerplantsandindustrialfacilities. Themakeupwatersrangefromseawaterwithanominalsalinityofaround35,000ppm (milligramsperkilogram[mg/kg];seeTableA1inAppendixA)tobrackishwaterswith salinitiesrangingfromafewhundred(orafewthousand)ppminthecaseofgroundwateror fromafewthousandppmtonearlyfullseawaterconcentrationinthecaseofbaysorestuaries. Herethesalinitycanvarysignificantlyonatimescalerangingfromseasonaltohourlyunder theinfluenceofrainfall,storms,andtides. Thesalinityofthecirculatingwaterinthecoolingsystemisthatofthemakeupwatertimesthe cyclesofconcentration,whichiscontrolledbytherateofblowdownfromthesystem(SeeEq.2 5).Typicallytowerswithhighsalinitymakeup(approachingseawatersaltcontent)are operatedatlowcyclesofconcentrationintherangeofx1.5tox2.Inthecaseofseawaterthis resultsinacirculatingwaterconcentrationof50,000to70,000ppm.Whiletherehavebeensome examplesofoperatingatowerat100,000ppm,thisisrare.Someinlandtowersoperatewith brackishgroundwaterorreclaimedwastewaterasmakeupwithsalinitiesashighas2,000to 5,000ppm.Insomecases,particularlyatplantswithzeroliquiddischargeconstraints,the towerswillrunat5to10cyclesofconcentrationtoreducethevolumeofblowdowninorderto reducethecostofthefinalevaporation/crystallizationstepspriortodisposalofthefinalsolid wasteproducts.

4.2.

Existing Installations

Table41onthefollowingpagesgivesexamplesofexistingtowersoperatingonsaltorbrackish water.Thelistisnotcompletebutisbasedoninformationfromtwomajortowervendors(GEA andSPXMarley),plusavarietyofothersourcesandpersonalcontacts. Thetableattemptstoprovideinformationontowersize,operatingpoint,construction materials,andsourcewater.Inmanyinstances,thisinformationwasnotavailableoreasily obtained.Theessentialmessagefromtheaccumulatedinformation,however,isthattowersofa widerangeofsize,application,constructionmaterials,andmakeupwaterqualityhavebeen designed,installed,andoperatedforseveraldecades.

17

Table 4-1. Saltwater tower installations Client Project/Location Circ. Water flow gpm 91,812 Hot Water Temp. F 88 Cold Water Temp. F 69 Wet Bulb Air Temp. F 55 Approach F 14 Range F 18 Film / trickle grid Film / trickle grid Film / trickle grid Low clog Concrete Wet, fan assisted Wet, natural draft Wet, fan assisted Mech. draft; counterflow; 10 cells 2005 Fill Type Tower Construction Tower Type Year

Koch / Siemens

Ribatejo/Portugal

Siemens

BASF

70,992

88

68

47

21

20

Concrete

2005

Koch / Siemens Plant (Lansing) Smith Unit #3 (575 MW; gas-fired combined-cycle Juball United Petrochem GB3 Endesa Petrobras Siemens Esso Singapore Endesa BASF Duke Fluor Daniel H. B. Zachary

Ribatejo/Portugal

183,628

88

69

55

14

18

Concrete

2002

Lynn Haven, FL

125,000

107

86

80

21

FRP

2002

Suadi Arabia Malasia Spain Brazil Seaband II/GB Singapore Spain BASF USA Calpine/USA

292,554 149,560 124,181 241,580 86,838 61,853 70,902 52,821 167,980 205,976 86 89 90 75 76 75 66 64 67 9 13 8 11 13 15 Film Film Trickle grid Wood Wood Wood Cells, wet Cells, wet Cells, wet 87 69 52 17 18 Trickle grid Wood Wet/dry (hybrid)

2002 2001 2001 2001 2000 2000 2000 1999 1999 1999

18

Table 4-1. Saltwater tower installations (cont.) Client Project/Location Circ. Water flow gpm Florida Power Corp. Kaitim Parna Industry Esso Singapore Bibb & Associates Bechtel Corporation Plant Watson Unit #4 E.G.A.T. Bechtel Corporation Dow Engineering Rotterdam GEM Methanol Ecoelectrica Ecoelectrica Amata Egco B Crystal River Indonesia Singapore LS Power / USA USA 295,295 74,670 17,956 83,990 287,963 105 104 81 89 66 80 15 9 24 15 Film Film Mixed: high performance + anti-fouling Wood Wood Wood and FRP Cells, wet Cells, wet Mech draft: couterflow; 10 cell helper tower Hot Water Temp. F Cold Water Temp. F Wet Bulb Air Temp. F Approach F Range F 1999 1999 1999 1998 1998 Fill Type Tower Construction Tower Type Year

Gulfport, MS Thailand Rocksavage/GB Elsta, Temeuzen/NL Trinidad Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Thailand

125,000 211,273 158,463 87 66 30 36 21

1998 1998

Film

Wood

Wet/dry (hybrid) Cells, wet

1997

67,787 54,962 9,593 155,525 53,446

76

62

48

15

14

Film

Wood

1997 1997 1997 1997 1996

19

Table 4-1. Saltwater tower installations (cont.) Client Project/Location Circ. Water flow gpm 2x 103,441 200,292 Hot Water Temp. F 81 114 Cold Water Temp. F 58 91 Wet Bulb Air Temp. F 31 78 Approach F 27 13 Rang e F 23 23 Splash Concret e Wet/dry (hybrid) 1995 1995 1995 5,000 375,073 312,298 39,893 10,001 31,996 25,874 71,508 17,000 39,994 19,427 63,689 685,210 205,879 202,796 247,700 687,857 241,352 117 114 119 110 90 90 87 94 79 80 77 82 11 10 10 12 27 24 32 15 orig--low fouling; now--high performance concrete Natural draft; counterflow 110 100 98 95 75 83 75 65 73 20 10 10 15 25 15 Splash Film 110 102 103 120 90 76 85 85 80 67 70 78 10 9 15 7 20 26 18 35 Film Splash Film Splash wood wood wood wood concrete wood wood cells, wet cells, wet cells, wet cells, wet natural draft; cells, wet cells, wet 85 72 62 10 13 Splash wood cells, wet 1994 1993 1993 1992 1992 1992 1992 1992 1991 1991 1991 1991 1990 1990 1989 1988 1987 1987 Fill Type Tower Constru ction Tower Type Year

Siemens Stanton Energy #2 E.G.A.T. Holly Sugar Powergen, Connah's Quay E.G.A.T. Monsanto Enviro-Chem Western Sugar Zurn Nepco ABB-Lumas Atlantic City Electric Co. (NJ) BE&K Parson-ARCO Delano Biomass BASF Florida Power Corp. CEGB, Killinghoime Delmarva Power & Light St. John's River Power Park Unit # 2 (624 MW; coal) Palo Verde III Houston Lighting & Power

Killinghoime/GB Florida Thailand /USA UK Thailand /USA /USA /USA /USA B.L. England /USA /USA California Belgium St. Petersburg UK Delaware Jacksonville (FL) Arizona Texas

20

Table 4-1. Saltwater tower installations (cont.) Client Project/Location Circ. Water flow gpm 247,700 587,857 200,292 587,857 35,139 145,387 10,203 50,180 103 125 95 98 88 92 7 6 8 27 Ceramic Film concrete concrete cells, wet cells, wet Hot Water Temp. F 114 119 114 119 Cold Water Temp. F 90 87 91 87 Wet Bulb Air Temp. F 80 77 78 77 Approach F 10 10 13 10 Rang e F 24 32 23 32 low fouling concrete Natural draft; counterflow 1986 1986 1986 1985 1985 1984 1983 1983 Fill Type Tower Constru ction Tower Type Year

St. John's River Power Park Unit # 2 (624 MW; coal) Palo Verde II Stanton Energy #1 Palo Verde I SIAPE Gujarat Electricity Board Al Nawasi Fluor Daniel

Jacksonville (FL) Arizona Florida Arizona Tunisia India Kuwait Oil Co/Kuwait Saudi Petrochem. Co. Jubail/SAR Sudai Petrochem. Co. Jubail/SAR Houston, Tx

DRAVO

35,989

121

98

92

23

Grids

concrete

cells, wet mechanical draft; round; cross-flow

1983

Parish Unit # 7 (615 MW; coal)

concrete

1982

21

4.3.

Environmental Effects

Allclosedcyclewetcoolingsystemswithcoolingtowershavesomeenvironmentaleffects. Thosenormallyconsideredareblowdown,drift,noise,andvisibleplumes. Ofthese,noiseandvisibleplumesfromsalt/brackishwatertowersarenodifferentfromthose fromfreshwatertowers.Assuch,theywillnotbediscussedfurtherinthisstudy. Theeffectsfromblowdownanddriftdifferfromthosefromfreshwatertowerstotheextentthat thesalinityofthecirculatingwaterishigher.

4.3.1. Blowdown
Theenvironmentalissuesrelatedtothedischargeortreatmentofblowdownfromsaltor brackishwatercoolingtowersappearstodifferlittlefromthoseforfreshwatertowers. However,itshouldbenotedthatdischargeoptionsarelimited.
1. 2.

Highsalinity(50,000to70,000ppm)cannotbedischargedtomunicipalwatertreatment facilities. Treatment,volumereduction,oronsitedisposaloftheblowdownsteamwouldbe prohibitivelyexpensive.Fortowersoperatingonseawatermakeupattwocyclesof concentration,theblowdownratesareveryhighontheorderof10gpmperMW,or 5000gpmfora500MWsteamplant.Thecostofevaporationponds,eveniftheplant werelocatedinanareawithahighnetannualevaporationrate,wouldbeextremely highontheorderofafewhundredmilliondollars.Thecostofevaporator/crystallizer systems,frequentlyusedonzerodischargeplantsbutatfarlowerinputrates,wouldbe equallyunacceptable. ForplantsdischargingtothenationswaterwaysunderaNationalPollutantDischarge EliminationSystem(NPDES)permit,thestringencyoftherulescanvaryfromstateto stateandfromsitetosite.Foroceandischarges,atleastundertheCaliforniaOceanPlan, theincreasedlevelsofdissolvedsolidsdonotappeartoberegulated,withtheexception ofthosespecifiedtoxicspeciesofarsenic,copper,mercury,silver,andzinc.Forpower plants(andotherhighvolumedischarges)limitationsonbotheffluentconcentrations andtotalmassdischargesareimposedaccordingtoproceduresandformulas documentedintheplan.

3.

Acomparisonwithoceandesalinationplantsmaybeilluminating.Typicalvaluesfor desalinationplantcapacityrangefrom20to112,000acrefeetperyearandrecovery(defined asgallonsoffreshwaterpergallonofseawater)from15%to50%,dependingonthetechnology used.Assumingaplantsizeof100,000acrefeetperyear(~90milliongallonsperday)anda recoveryrateof50%,thedesalinationplantwouldhaveadischargestreamwithasalt concentrationof70,000ppmandaflowrateofabout620,000gpm(CaliforniaCoastal Commission1993).Thiswouldberoughlyequivalenttotheblowdownfromseawatercooling towersoperatingattwocyclesofconcentrationattwelve500MWpowerplantsoperatingat twocyclesofconcentration.

22

4.3.2. Drift
Elevatedsalinityinthecirculatingwatercouldaffectdriftemissionsandtheirsubsequent environmentaleffectsintwoways. First,ifthemodifiedpropertiesofthewateraffectedtheperformanceofthedrifteliminators themselves,theamountofdriftemittedcouldchange.However,inquirieswithadrift eliminatormanufacturerrevealedthatthereshouldbenodifferenceintheefficiencyofdrift eliminators,sincethedriftcaptureefficiencyofadrifteliminatorsectionisafunctionofdroplet size,airvelocity,andworkmanshipofinstallationaslongasthesaltwaterconcentrationdoes notlowerthewaterssurfacetensionsignificantly(R.Aull2005).AppendixA5indicatesthat thesurfacetensionforsaltwaterisslightlyhigherthanitisforfreshwater,soforthesamedrift eliminatorsandthesamequalityofinstallationworkmanship,thedriftemissionsshouldbe unchanged. Second,thedriftdropletshaveahighersalinity,sothemassemissionofsaltincreaseswhilethe emissionofthedriftitselfremainsunchanged.Thisintroducestwoconcerns:(1)theamountof fineparticulatematter(PM 10andPM2.5) 3 releasedintotheatmosphereasthedriftdroplets evaporatewillincrease,and(2)themassdepositionofsaltonneighboringsoils,vegetation, buildings,vehicles,andequipmentwillbehigherthanforfreshwatertowers.Theeffectofnear fieldsaltdriftonequipmentattheplantsitewillbediscussedinthefollowingsection. PM10Emissions CoolingtowerdriftisoftendiscussedinthecontextofPM10emissions.Nationalambientair qualitystandards(NAAQS)limitPM10concentrationstoanannualarithmeticmeanof50 microgramspercubicmeter(g/m3),or150g/m3inany24hourperiod(U.S.Environmental ProtectionAgency2006).Tomaintaintheselevels,emissionslimitsareplacedonpointsources; inthiscase,100tonsperyear.Theagencyhasdefinedanemissionsfactorforcoolingtower driftemissionsof1.7lb/103gallonsofrecirculatingwaterflow.Thisdefinitionisbasedonthe assumptionthatcoolingtowerdrifteliminatorslimitdriftto0.02%oftherecirculatingwater flowrate.Itisfurtherassumedthatallofthedriftevaporatesintheatmosphereandthatallthe dissolvedandsuspendedmatterinthedriftisreleasedasPM10. Thesimpleapplicationofthisfactorandthatassumptiontoawetcoolingtowerwithseawater makeupoperatingat1.5cyclesofconcentration(driftsalinityof52,500ppm)andacirculating waterflowof250,000gpm(typicalfora500MWsteamplant)givesanemissionrateforPM10of approximately4700tonsperyearforan80%capacityfactor. Bycontrast,atowerwithfreshwatermakeupwithanassumeddissolvedsolidsconcentration of500ppmoperatingat10cyclesofconcentrationwouldhaveadriftsalinityof5,000ppmor lessthan1/10ththatofatowerwithseawatermakeup.

3.Particleswithameanaerodynamicdiameterlessthanorequalto10(or2.5)microns 23

However,theseassumptionshavebeenchallengedasunrealisticallyconservativeinseveral analyses(Micheletti2006;ReismanandFrisbie2002).EventheU.S.EnvironmentalProtection Agency(U.S.EPA)hascharacterizedthemasconservativelyhigh(U.S.Environmental ProtectionAgency1995).Specifically, 1. Moderndrifteliminatorshavedriftratesof0.002%to0.0005%,afactorofx10tox40 lowerthanthe0.002%assumedintheagencysemissionfactor; 2. Calculationsbasedonaccepteddriftdropsizespectrumdata(asthose,forexample,in Figure41)andplausibleassumptionsaboutthedensityandshapeoftheparticles remainingfollowingevaporationofthedriftdropletssuggestthatonlyasmallfraction (lessthan15%)oftheresidualparticleswillhaveanaerodynamicdiameteroflessthan 10(Micheletti2006).

Figure 4-1. Drift droplet size spectrum

Source: Micheletti 2006

Usingavalueof0.002%anda15%PM10fraction,thecalculatedPM10emissionrateforthe 250,000gpmseawatertowerisreducedto70tonsperyear.Itshouldberecognizedthatthese assumptionsandresultingcalculationsareuncertain.Driftratesareafunctionofthequalityof installationandstateofrepairofdrifteliminatorsandcanbehigherinpracticethantheyare underidealconditions.Inaddition,thedropsizespectrumcanchangewithdifferentdrift eliminatordesignsandwithageandcondition.Additionally,somefractionofthedriftwill inevitablyhitthegroundorsurroundingstructuresandthedissolvedmaterialinthosedrops

24

willnotbereleasedintotheatmosphere.Onlycarefulonsitemeasurementscangiveacredible estimateofthePM10emissionratesfromanycoolingtower. UndersomeregulatoryconditionsitmaybenecessarytopurchaseoffsetsforPM10emissions inordertoobtainpermissiontooperate.Itsomeareastheremaybenooffsetsavailable.Even ifthereare,thecost,althoughvariable,canbequitehigh.CostsreportedinminutesofaSouth CoastAirQualityManagementDistrictBoardMeeting(SCAQMD,2005)showanincreasefrom ~$4,000/lb/daytoover$25,000/lb/dayin2004.ForthesituationdescribedabovewithPM10 emissionsof4,700tons/year(equaltoapproximately26,000lb/day),thiscostrangewould correspondtooffsetcostsoffrom$103millionto$650million.EvenatthelowerPM10 emissionrateof70tonsperyear,thecostrangeis$1.5tonearly$10million. SaltDeposition Theassessmentoftheimpactofemissionsfromevaporativecoolingsystemsmustbedonewith anunderstandingofthebackgroundconditionsthatexistatthesite.Forinstance,inthecaseof acoastalpowerplant,whilecoolingtowerdriftemissionswillcontributetotheambientsalt levels(i.e.,depositionandconcentration),thereisalreadynaturalsaltintheatmosphere.Itis alsolikelythatnativevegetationhasadaptedtothisenvironmentandismoresalttolerantthan naturalspecieswhicharefurtherinland.Further,thepresenceofseasaltintheairmayalready behavingsomelocaleffectsonthesurroundingcommunity,intheformofgeneralized corrosionorothereffects. Studiesofambientorbaselineconditionsassociatedwithprospectivecoolingsystemoperation andimpactshavebeenconductedinanumberofsituations.SomeofthesearecitedinTable4 2.
Table 4-2. Example cooling tower environmental impact assessments Utility AtlanticCityElectric GeneralPublicUtilities PotomacElectric PacificGas&Electric OakRidgeNational Laboratories PacificGas&Electric FloridaPowerCorp. Site B.L.EnglandCoal Fired,NJ(Wilber1975) ForkedRiverNuclear,NJ (Shofneretal.1973) ChalkPointCoalFired, MD(Davis1979) GeysersGeothermal,CA PG&E1979) K25GaseousDiffusion Plant,TN PittsburgOilFired,CA TurkeyPointNuclear, FL ProposedCoolingSystem NaturalDraftBrackishWater NaturalDraftBrackishWater NaturalDraftBrackishWater MechanicalDraftBoronand Salts MechanicalDraftChromates MechanicalDraftBrackish Water SpraySystems,MechanicalDraft Seawater

Source: John S. Maulbetsch, Consultant, and Michael N. DiFilippo, Consultant

25

Beyondspecificcoolingsystemstudies,anumberofatmosphericorbackgroundassessments havebeenconductedforthepurposeofbetterunderstandingissuessuchasformationandrole ofcondensationnuclei,impactsonvisibility,assessmentofcorrosionissues,andothers(Porter etal.2000;Wilber1974;Woodcock1952;Woodcock1953;Boyce1954;Rossnechtetal.1973). Many,butnotallofthestudieshavefocusedoncoastalenvironments,wherenaturally occurringsaltisproducedfromwindandwaveaction. CoolingTowerEmissionsImpacts Giventheselevelsofnaturallyoccurringsaltsincoastalenvironments,itisimportantto document,onasitespecificbasis,thesebackgroundlevelsandcontrastthemagainstexpected contributionsfromcoolingsystems.Backgroundcharacterizationwouldincludethefollowing:

Ambientconcentrationanddepositionofsaltsthatareexpectedinthecoolingtower circulatingwaters. Concurrentwindspeed,winddirection,andhumidityhistory.(Notethathumidityis importantrelativetothesizeandfateofhydroscopicaerosolslikeseasaltsandresultant condensationnuclei.)

Coolingtoweroperatingprofiles(continuous,intermittent,etc.)andcoolingtoweremissions (dropletsize,driftemissionsrate,etc.)determinedfromsourcetermmeasurementscanbe made. Publishedstudiesindicatethatbackgroundsaltconcentrationsvaryconsiderablyfrom,for example,100g/m3,withhorizontalmassfluxesrangingfrom5001000microgramspersquare meterpersecond(gm2sec1)intheHawaiianIslands(Porteretal.2000)toambientsalt concentrationinnearcoastalenvironmentsinthesoutheasternUnitedStatesof250g/m3 (Wilberetal.1983).Thosemeasurementswereconductedunderlighterwinds(24metersper second[m/s])andshorterfetchesthantypicallyoccuraroundtheHawaiianIslands. Thesevaluesarecontrastedagainstverticalfluxes(i.e.,depositionrates)ofsaltsmodeledfrom mechanicaldraftcoolingtowersof50500gm2sec1within100metersofthesource(Wilber andWebb1983).Therefore,driftfromcoolingsystemscanbemoreorlesssignificant, dependingonbackgroundcircumstances. EnvironmentalEffects Anumberofenvironmentaleffectsstudieshavebeenconductedbycomparingdepositionrates onsurroundinglandbeforeandaftertheinstallationandoperationofsaltorbrackishwater coolingtowers. AppendixC1,whichdocumentsthesitevisittoSt.JohnsRiverPowerPark,containsabrief descriptionoftheresultsofpreandpostoperationfieldmonitoringofdepositionanduptake atplotsinthevicinityofthetowers.Theconclusions,summarizedthere,arerepeatedhere. Theconclusions,documentedindetailinpermittingreportsaresummarizedasfollows:

26

SomeincreasedNaClconcentrationwasfoundindepositionsamplesafterUnit#2 beganoperation. Nosignificantincreaseswereseeninsoilorvegetationsamples. Vegetationatthesitewithhighestdepositionwasapparentlyunaffected. NoinjurysymptomsrelatedtoNaClwereobservedonpasturegrassorother vegetationonorinthevicinityofthePowerPark.

Theseresultsareconsistentwiththosereportedelsewhereinnumerousstudies.Themost extensivestudywastheChalkPointCoolingTowerProjectconductedinthelate1070sbythe MarylandPowerPlantResearchProgram(Davis1979).Theresults,summarizedinbothU.S. EPA(2000)andEftekharzadehetal.(2003),foundnomeasurableincreaseinsoilsalts concentrationinthetobaccofieldsnearthefacilityandnoinstances[includingChalkPoint] wherecoolingtoweroperationhasresultedinmeasurableproductivitylossesinagricultural cropsormeasurabledamagetoornamentalvegetation.

4.4.

Operating Experience

InformationonperformanceandO&Mexperiencewassolicitedthroughvisitsandtelephone interviewswiththestaffofplantsequippedwithseawaterorbrackishwatertowers.These included: Plantsvisited

St.JohnsRiverPowerPark,Jacksonville,Florida PlantSmith,LynnHaven,Florida PlantCrist,Pensacola,Florida PlantWatson,Gulfport,Mississippi

Telephoneinterviews

PittsburgPowerPlant,Pittsburg,California PaloVerdeNuclearGeneratingStation,PaloVerde,Arizona GEAIntegratedCoolingTechnologies,Lakewood,Colorado

CompletevisitandinterviewreportsarefoundinAppendixC.Themajorconclusionsare summarizedbelow.
1.

Recentinstallationsofmechanicalcoolingtowershaveusedfiberglassreinforcedplastic (FRP)structure,PVCfillandcorrosionresistantfittings(highgradestainlesssteel, siliconbronze(coated),titanium).Operatingresultshavebeenexcellent,butlongterm experience(>15years)islacking.

27

2.

Nearlyallplantswithhighsalinitycoolingtowers,bothnaturalandmechanicaldraft, haveencounteredacceleratedcorrosiononunprotectedmetalsurfacesonbuildingsand equipmentattheplantsitenearthetowers. Bothmechanicalandnaturaldrafttowerstructuresandbasinsconstructedofconcrete haveexperiencedvaryingdegreesofdeteriorationfromexposuretosaltwater.Insome cases,veryextensiverepairshavebeenrequired.Chlorideresistantconcreteandrebaris recommendedforhighsalinityapplications. Insomecases,thehighsalinitywaterwasalsohighinsuspendedsolidsatcertaintimes. Thisoftenledtopluggingofhighefficiencyfillanddeterioratedperformance.This effectisunrelatedtothesalinitylevels. ItmustberecognizedthatsomehighTDSwatersmayresultfromoperationwith moderateTDSmakeupandhighcyclesofconcentration.Thisusuallyresultsinwater chemistrythatisverydifferentfromseaorbrackishwaters,andmaybehighinscaling constituents.Inthesecases,moreelaboratewatertreatments,suchasscaleinhibitionor softening,mayberequired.

3.

4.

5.

28

5.0 Salt Water Cooling System Costs

Incomparisontocoolingsystemsdesignedtooperateonfreshwater,saltorbrackishwater systemsaremoreexpensive.Thisistheresultofseveralfactors. Thepropertiesofseawaterleadtoreducedthermalcapabilityforagiventower. Thehigherlevelsofdissolvedandsuspendedsolidsinsaltorbrackishwatersources mayrequiretheuseoflowerefficiency,lowclogfill. Theaggressivenatureofthehighersalinitywaternormallyrequirestheuseofmore corrosionresistant,andmoreexpensive,materialsforcoolingsystemcomponentsand hardware. Undersomecircumstances,deteriorationoftowerorbasinmaterialsmayoccur resultingincostlymaintenanceorrepair. Theeffectsofsaltdriftdepositionmayresultinhighercostsforcleaning,protectionor repairofequipment,structuresandsurfacesinthevicinityofthetower.

Manyofthesecostsarehighlyvariable,sitespecificandhencedifficulttogeneralize.The followingsectionswillbrieflyreviewsomeavailableinformationontherelativecostoffreshvs. salinewatercoolingsystems.

5.1.

General cost factors

Thecomparativecostanalysiswasapproachedintwosteps.First,basecasecostswere estimatedforfreshwatercooingtowers.Second,costfactorsorratiosweredevelopedtoscale frombasecasecoststoanestimatedofsaltwatertowercosts.

5.1.1. Base case costs

Thebasecasecostsforfreshwatertowerswerebasedonrecent(2008)informationobtained frommajorcooingtowervendorsforasinglesetofdesignspecifications;specifically, Waterflowrate,L: 263,000gpm

Hotwatertemperature,Th: 97F Coldwatertemperature,Tc: 78F Wetbulbtemperature,Twb: 70F

Thiscorrespondsapproximatelytotheheatloadofa500MWsteamplant.Thepowercost factorusedinthedeterminationoftheevaluatedcostcasewasassumedtobe$3,200/HP.The basedesignsandcostsaredisplayedinTable51.

29

Table 5-1: Tower Design Configurations and Base Costs

Fresh Water Tower FRP, galvanized hardware Low First Cost Design Evaluated Cost Design
No. of Cells Cell Width Cell Length # 18 15 ft. 45 67 ft. 49 60 Fan HP HP 247 131 Fan Dia ft. 28 32.8 Base Cost $ (000's) 5,636 7,062

5.1.2. Adjustment for saline make-up

Theadjustmentofthecostsfromfreshwatertosaltwatertowersisbasedontwoseparate sourcesofinformation.ThefirstisastudyconductedbyWashingtonGroupInternationalin late2001(WGI,2001) toestimatethecostofretrofittingplantswithoncethroughcoolingtoclosedcyclecoolingwith mechanicaldraftcoolingtowers.Bothfreshandsalinewaterinstallationswereconsidered. Thecostestimatesdevelopedinthisstudyincludedtheentirecoolingsystemwiththe exceptionofthecondenserwhichwasassumedtoberetainedintheretrofit.Thesystem componentsforwhichacostdifferentialwasidentifiedwere Coolingtower Circulatingwaterpumps Makeupwaterpump Makeupsystem

Asnotedabove,theuseofsalinemakeupresultsinalargertower,mademoresobytheuseof lowclogfill,whichisalsoconstructedofmorecostlymaterials.IntheWGIstudy,theprecise compositionofthesalinemakeupwaterwasnotspecified.However,itwasstatedthatthe salinewatertowerswereoperatedat2cyclesofconcentration(asopposedto5cyclesof concentrationforthefreshwatertowers).Assumingstandardseawaterasmakeup,thisgives acirculatingwatersalinityofapproximately70,000mgl. TheanalysisbeganbysettingthefreshwatertowerconditionsatWBT=80,a1Frecirculation allowancegivinganinletwetbulbof81F,anapproachof7F,arangeof12Fandacondenser terminaltemperaturedifferenceof8F.Thiscorrespondstoacondensingtemperatureof108F andaturbineexhaustpressureof2.5inHga.Itwasnotspecifiedhowthesizeandcostofthe baselinefreshwatertowerdesignedtomeetthisperformancewasdeterminedotherthantosay that structurecostsassumeafiberglassmechanicaldrafttowerwithstandardnoiseand driftabatementandnoplumeabatementand costswereestimatedbyscalingcoolingtowercostsprovidedbycoolingtowervendors forfreshwatermakeupcoolingtowers.

30

Itwasnotstatedwhetherthebaselinecostswereconsistentwithlowfirstcostdesignsor totalevaluatedcostdesigns.However,aswillbeseeninacasestudydiscussedbelowthe costratioisessentiallyidenticalforbothassumptions. Thesaltwatertowercostswereadjustedintwoways:first,byadjustingthesizeofthetowerto accountfortheperformancereductioncausedbythecirculatingwaterpropertiesusingthe saltwatercorrectionfactordiscussedinSection3(Figure3.1);second,byincreasingthecostof thetowertoaccountforthemorecostlymaterialsofconstruction Theadjustmentintowersizewassetat1.07which,forseawaterat2cyclesofconcentration,is consistentwiththe2xseawatercurveinFigure32foranL/G=1.AlthoughWGIdidnot specifytheL/G,thiswouldbeinareasonabledesignrangeasdiscussedinChapter2. Theadjustmentintowermaterialscostwassetatx1.4.Thisgivesanoverallcostratiobetween salineandfreshwatertowersofx1.5(~1.07x1.4).(NB:Itshouldbenotedthatwhilethis procedureandthevaluesusedwereclearlydescribedinthetextof(WGI,2001),therewasan apparenterrorinthereporttableswhichcausedthereportedcoststodifferinsomecasesfrom thosethatthisprocedurewouldyield.) Thesecondsourceofinformationwasaestimateprovidedbyformerandcurrent representativesofacoolingtowervendor(Wilber,K.,2004)foragivensetofdesign specifications. Thesewere: Waterflowrate,L: 100,000gpm

Hotwatertemperature,T h: 120F Coldwatertemperature,Tc: 90F Wetbulbtemperature,Twb: 75F Thiscorrespondsapproximatelytotheheatloadofa300MWsteamplant. Acomparisonwasprovidedbetweenafreshwatertowerandatoweroperatingwithseawater asmakeupandat1.5cyclesofconcentration,resultinginacirculatingwatersalinityof54,000 ppm.Thetwocasesconsideredwerealowfirstcosttowerandanevaluatedtower.The evaluatedtowerislargerwithahighercapitalcostbutuseslesspumpandfanpower.The capitalcostsandtheoperatingcostsarebalancedtoarriveatanoptimizedlifetimecost.Inthis example,thecurrentvalueofpowerwassetat$100/HPforthepumpandfanpower.Table52 showsthedesignconfigurationfortowersofbothlowfirstcostandevaluatedcostdesigns sizedtoaccountfortheperformancedifferencebetweenfreshandbrackishwaterat54,000 ppm.

31

Table 5-2: Effect of source water quality on cooling tower design

Low Cost Design
Fresh Water Tower Douglas fir, galvanized hardware Brackish Water Tower, 54000 ppm No. of Cells Cell Width Cell Length Fill Depth Inlet Air Height # ft. ft. ft. ft. 8 8 36 42 42 42 5 4 12 13 Fan HP HP 200 200 Fan Dia ft. 28 28

Evaluated Cost Design

Fresh Water Tower Douglas fir, galvanized hardware Brackish Water Tower, 54000 ppm

No. of Cells Cell Width Cell Length Fill Depth Inlet Air Height # ft. ft. ft. ft. 8 9 42 42 54 54 5.5 4 9 13

Fan HP HP 100 200

Fan Dia ft. 28 30

Again,thecostincreaseconsistedoftwopartsanadjustmenttoaccountforthereduced thermalperformanceandanotherforthemorecostlymaterialsofconstruction.Table53 showsthecostdifferentialsattributabletothereducedperformance.

Table 5-3: Cost Impact of Thermal Performance Reduction

MakeupWater Freshwater Brackish ppm) (54,000

LowFirstCost Cost($1,000) 1,100 1,149.5 Impact(%) Base 4.5%

EvaluatedCost Cost($1,000) 1,400 1,498 Impact(%) Base 7.0%

Thesefreshwatercostsareconsistentwithcostswhichwerecurrentin2003andarenotdirectly comparablewiththemorerecent(2008)costsdisplayedinTable51.Theratiosbetweenthe LowFirstCostandMinimumEvaluatedCostareessentiallythesame(~1.25)inbothcases. ReferencetoFigure32indicatesthatacorrectionfactorof1.045wouldbeconsistentwiththe MarleyestimatesforL/Gsintherangeof1.to1.5.Thehighercorrectionfactorforthe evaluatedcosttowersuggeststhatlargerplanareapercellandanadditionalcell(inthecaseof theevaluatedcost,brackishwatertower)resultedinahigherairflowandhencealowerL/Gin spiteofthepresumablylowerfan/pumppowerfortheevaluatedcostdesign.Whilethiscannot beconfirmedwiththeinformationprovided,acorrectionfactorof1.07isconsistentwithanL/G of0.5orless. Theadditionalcostforthemorecostlymaterialstoprovidethecorrosionresistancerequiredfor saltwateroperationisshowninTable54.Thecomparisonisbetweenaconventionalfresh watertowerconstructedofDouglasfirwithgalvanizedfittingsandanFRPtowerwithsilicon bronzehardwareandepoxycoating.

32

Table 5-4: Tower Cost Comparisons

Item BaseTower Increase salinity for

LowFirstCost DouglasFir 1,100 1,100 FRP 1,287 58 112 28 1,485 35%

EvaluatedCost DouglasFir 1,400 FRP 1638 115 120 30 1,903 36%

Silicon Bronze fittings Epoxycoatings Total %increase

Severalpointsarenoteworthy. 1. Thereisgoodconsistencyamongtheseveralsourcesofinformation. a. Thecasestudy(Wilber,K.,2004)andthegeneralizedcostfactoranalysis(WGI, 2001),areroughlyconsistentandsuggestarangeof35%to50%increaseincost forsaltorbrackishwatertowerscomparedtofreshwatertowers. b. Thedifferenceinthetwoestimatesisprimarilyinthedifferentialcostsof materialsratherthanthecostdifferencesattributabletoperformancereduction. Thismaybedue,inpart,tothefactthatthetwoestimatesweredoneatdifferent times;2001,inthecaseoftheWGIreportand2004forthecasestudy.Significant variationsinthecostsoflumber,plastics,andhighgrademetalpartshave occurredoverthepastfewyearswhichmayhavealteredthecostratios.Inany case,thedeterminationofa35%to50%rangeisconsideredadequatefora generalsurveyofthistype. c. TheratiobetweentheLowFirstCostestimateandtheMinimumEvaluated Costestimateisconsistentbetweenthe2003andthe2008estimates. 2. Caremustbetakeninapplyingthecorrectionfactorsfromthetwoearliersourcestothe morerecentbasecosts.Intheearlierstudies,thebase,freshwatercasewastakentobea woodtowerusingDouglasFir.Partofthecostincreaseingongtosaltwatertowerswas duetothefactthatthesaltwatertowerswereassumedtobeFRPconstruction.Inthe 2008costs,thebasecaseisalreadyFROPconstruction,sothatportionofthecost increasecannotbeappliedtothebasefigure. 3. Therefore,areasonableestimateoftheincreaseincooingtowercostsisincludesthe factorof1.045to1.07duetoperformancefactorsandareducedportionofthematerials factorresultinginanincreaseofapproximately15%.
33

4. Thecostanalysesdiscussedaboveincludedonlythecoolingtoweritself.Other componentsofwetrecirculatingsystemsarealsoaffectedbymakeupwatersalinityas notedinSection5.1.Table55liststhecostratiosforothermajorcomponentsusedin theWGIstudy.Whilethecoolingtoweristypicallythelargestcostcomponentofthe system,thesedifferencescanbesizableforlargeinstallations.Again,theabsolutecost valuesareconsistentwith2001costsandhavenotbeenscaledto2008costs,butthecost ratiosareassumedtobeappropriate.

Table 5-5: Cooling System Component Cost Comparisons (from (WGI, 2001))

Item Cooling tower Circ. water pump Make-up water pump Make-up system

Fresh water $24/TU $130 - $260/BHP $337/BHP $150/gpm

Salt water $33.6/TU $210 - $416/BHP $539/BHP $200/gpm

Cost ratio 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.3

34

6.0 Summary and Conclusions

Theuseofseawater,brackishestuarineorgroundwater,orhighsalinityreclaimedwaterfor coolingtowermakeupisanattractivealternativetotheuseoffreshwaterinsomelocations. Table21listsover50seawaterorbrackishwatertowerscurrentlyinstalledintheUnitedStates, andover90worldwide.Thissectionreviewstheeffectofusingnonfreshwaterascoolingtower makeuponthermalperformance,cost,environmentalimpactandoperationandmaintenance.

6.1.

Effect on Thermal Performance

Severalofthethermophysicalpropertiesofhighsalinitywaterdifferfromthoseoffreshwater. Theseincludethefollowing:

Density Specificheat Surfacetension Thermalconductivity Vaporpressure Viscosity

Ofthese,themostimportantinitseffectoncoolingtowerperformanceisvaporpressure.The volumetricheatcapacity(theproductofdensitymultipliedbyspecificheat)canaffectthe optimumdesignandoperatingpoint.Thermalconductivity,viscosity,andsurfacetensionplay minorrolesinthethermalperformanceofcoolingtowers;surfacetensioncanaffectthe effectivenessofdrifteliminators. Thepresenceofsaltsinwaterreducesthevaporpressureatanygiventemperature,asseenin FigureA.2inAppendixA.Thisreducesthedrivingforceforevaporationandthe accompanyinglatentheattransport.Therefore,ahigherfillvolumeorfilltransfercoefficient willberequiredtotransferthesameamountofheat,requiringalargerandmorecostlycooling tower.Alternatively,atowerofthesamesizeandfillconfigurationwillcoollesswatertothe desiredcoldwatertemperatureordeliverahighercoldwatertemperature. Forcirculatingwatersalinities,givenbythesalinityofthemakeupwatermultipliedbythe towercyclesofconcentration,ofx1.5tox2thatofseawater(~50,000to70,000ppm),the thermalcapabilityofahighsalinitytowerwillbereducedby4%to8%belowthatofa freshwatertoweratthesameoperatingconditions.Arecommendedruleofthumbfor specifyingtowersistoincreasethedesignambientwetbulbtemperatureby0.055C(0.1F)for each4000ppmofcirculatingwatersalinity.

6.2.

Effect on Cooling System Cost

Incomparisontocoolingsystemsdesignedtooperateonfreshwater,saltorbrackishwater systemsaremoreexpensive.Thisistheresultofseveralfactors.

35

Thepropertiesofseawaterleadtoreducedthermalcapability,requiringalargerand moreexpensivetower. Thehigherlevelsofdissolvedandsuspendedsolidsinsaltorbrackishwatersources mayrequiretheuseoflowerefficiency,lowclogfill,againrequiringalargertower. Theaggressivenatureofthehighersalinitywaternormallyrequirestheuseofmore corrosionresistant,moreexpensivematerialsforcoolingsystemcomponentsand hardware. Undersomecircumstances,deteriorationoftowerorbasinmaterialsmayoccur, resultingincostlymaintenanceorrepair. Theeffectsofsaltdriftdepositionmayresultinhighercostsforcleaning,protection,or repairofequipment,structures,andsurfacesinthevicinityofthetower.

Costestimateswereobtainedfromastudybyanexperiencedarchitectureandengineeringfirm usinggeneralizedcostadjustmentfactors,andfromacasestudyforaparticularsetofdesign specifications.

1.

Thecasestudyandthegeneralizedcostfactoranalysisareroughlyconsistentand suggesta35%to50%increaseincostforsaltorbrackishwatertowerscomparedto freshwatertowers. Thedifferenceinthetwoestimatesisprimarilyinthedifferentialcostsofmaterials ratherthanthecostdifferencesattributabletoperformancereduction.Thismaybedue, inpart,tothefactthatthetwoestimatesweredoneatdifferenttimes,nearlythreeyears apart. Thedifferentialcostestimatesapplyonlytothecoolingtoweritself.Othercomponents ofwetrecirculatingsystemsalsoareaffectedbymakeupwatersalinity.

2.

3.

6.3.

Environmental Impacts

Anumberofenvironmentaleffectsstudieshavebeenconductedbycomparingdepositionrates onsurroundinglandbeforeandaftertheinstallationandoperationofsaltorbrackishwater coolingtowers. Allstudiesreachessentiallysimilarconclusions:thatnosignificantincreaseinsalt concentrationsinsoilsorvegetation,noranysymptomsofenvironmentalinjury,wereobserved inthevicinityoftheplants.

6.4.

Effect on Operation and Maintenance

Plantvisitsweremadetofourplants,andtelephoneinterviewswereheldwithtwoadditional plantsandonecoolingtowervendor. Themajorconclusionsobtainedfromthesevisitsandinterviewsareasfollows: 1. Recentinstallationsofmechanicaldraftcoolingtowersoperatingonhighsalinity makeupwaterusingfiberglassreinforcedplastic(FRP)structure,polyvinylchloride

36

(PVC)fillandcorrosionresistantfittings(highgradestainlesssteel,siliconbronze [coated],titanium)haveoperatedsatisfactorily,withnoextraordinaryO&Mproblems. 2. Operatingresultshavebeenexcellentbutlongtermexperience(>15years)islacking. 3. Nearlyallplantswithhighsalinitycoolingtowers,bothnaturalandmechanicaldraft, haveencounteredacceleratedcorrosiononunprotectedmetalsurfacesonbuildingsand equipmentattheplantsitenearthetowers. 4. Bothmechanicalandnaturaldrafttowerstructuresandbasinsconstructedofconcrete haveexperiencedvaryingdegreesofdeteriorationfromexposuretosaltwater.

37

38

7.0 References
Aull,R.2005.PersonalCommunication. Boyce,S.G.1954.TheSaltSprayCommunity. CaliforniaCoastalCommission.1993.SeawaterDesalinationinCaliforniaKeyDesalination Facts. ConcreteConstructionmagazine,RepairAgentStabilizesConcreteStructures,November1, 2006.http://www.concreteconstruction.net/industrynews.asp?sectionID=707&articleID=388249. CTI.2005.CTIToolKit,Version3.0b.CoolingTechnologyInstitute. Davis,E.A.1979.EnvironmentalAssessmentofChalkPointCoolingTowerDriftandVapor Emissions.JohnsHopkinsUniversity,PPSPCCCTP28. DiFilippo,M.2003.UseofDegradedWaterSourcesasCoolingWaterinPowerPlants.EPRIand CaliforniaEnergyCommission.1005359. Eftekharzadeh,S.,M.Baasiri,andP.Lindahl.2003.FeasibilityofSeawaterCoolingTowersfor LargeScalePetrochemicalDevelopment.CoolingTechnologyInstitute.TP0317. FluorR/DDivision.1957.ImpactofSalinityonCorrosion.FluorCorporation. Merkel,F.,Verduftungkuhlung,ForschungarbeitenNo.275,1925. Micheletti,Wayne.2006.AtmosphericEmissionsfromPowerPlantCoolingTowers. PowerplantChemistry8(3):141153. Mitchell,RobertD.1989.SurveyofWaterConservingHeatRejectionSystems.EPRI.EPRIGS 6252. OfficeofSalineWater1959.NormalSeawaterChemistry.U.S.DepartmentoftheInterior. Perry,R.H.,D.W.Green,PerrysChemicalEngineersHandbook,7thEdition,1997 PG&E.1979.AssessmentofVegetationStressandDamageNeartheGeysersGeothermalPower PlantUnits.PacificGas&ElectricCo. Porteretal.2000.VerticalandHorizontalAerosolScatteringFieldsoverBellowsBeach,Oahu DuringSEASExperiment.SchoolofOceanandEarthScience,UniversityofHawaii. Reisman,J.,andG.Frisbie.2002.CalculatingRealisticPM10EmissionsfromCoolingTowers. Rossnecht,G.F.,W.P.Elliott,andF.L.Ramsey.1973.TheSizeDistributionandInland PenetrationofSeaSaltParticles.JournalofAppliedMeteorology12(5):825830. SalineWaterConversionEngineeringDataBook,2ndEdition,DepartmentofInterior,Officeof SalineWater,November1971(AuthorwasM.W.KelloggCompany) Shofner,F.M.,etal.1973.AmbientSeaSaltMeasurementsintheForkedRiver,NJEnvirons.

39

SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict(SCAQMD),MinutesofBoardMeeting,June3, 2005(Availableatwww.aqmd.gov/hb/2005/050617a.html) Ting,BingYuan,andD.M.Suptic.1991.TheUseofCoolingTowersforSaltWaterHeat Rejection.TheMarleyCoolingTowerCompany. U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.1995.CompilationofAirPollutantEmissionFactors (AP42;Section13.4WetCoolingTowers).EnvironmentalProtectionAgency. U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.2000.316(b)PhaseIITechnicalDevelopmentDocument, Chapter6,EnvironmentalProtectionAgency. U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.2006.NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards (NAAQS). WGI.2001.EstimatedCostofCompliancewithEPAProposedRule316(b).WashingtonGroup International.Project25258. Wilber,K.R.1974.AnExperimentalApproachtotheEvaluationoftheCollectionEfficienciesof MeshesUsingtheMechanismofInertialImpaction.UniversityofTennessee. Wilber,K.R.1975.AmbientsaltconcentrationstudyforAtlanticCityElectricCompany,B.L. EnglandStation. Wilber,K.R.,andR.O.Webb.1983.EnvironmentalEffectsofCoolingTowers.Atomic IndustrialForum. Wilber,K.2004.PersonalCommunication. Woodcock,A.H.AtmosphericSaltParticlesandRaindrops.1952. Woodcock,A.H.1953.SaltNucleiintheMarineAirasaFunctionofAltitudeandWindForce.

40

Appendix A Properties of Seawater

A-1: A-2: A-3: A-4: A-5: A-6: A-7:

Composition Vapor Pressure Density Specific Heat Surface Tension Viscosity Thermal Conductivity

APA1

Seawater Composition
(Information in Appendix A obtained from Perry (1997) and Saline WaterConversionEngineeringDataBook(1971)
Table A-1. Composition of Normal Seawater

"Normal" Seawater Chemistry (1)

US Department of Interior, Office of Saline Water, July 1959 Na K Ca Mg HCO3 Cl Br SO4 SiO2 Other Total 10,556 380 400 1,272 140 18,980 65 2,649 <10 31 34,483 mg/kg (2) mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg

Notes..... 1. Only major ions shown. 2. These are true "ppm" units and are approximately the same as mg/l.

APA3

Vapor Pressure
Correlating Equations for Vapor Pressure Freshwater p=8.0439E09T46.5750E07T3+8.5848E05T21.0248E03T +4.6622E02 Seawater(TDS~35,000) p=1.0511E08T41.7569E06T3+2.3539E04T29.1406E03T +1.9585E01 2xSeawater(TDS~70,000) p=3.9773E09T42.1465E08T3+6.6345E05T22.1540E03T +8.8876E02

Vapor Pressure Comparison - 80F to 100F

0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 Vapor Pressure, psi 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 80 90 Temperature, deg F 100 Fresh water Seawater 2x Seawater

FigureA2a.Vaporpressure(80to100F)

APA4

Vapor Pressure Comparison - 100F to 140F

3 2.8 2.6 2.4 Vapor Pressure, psi 2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 100 Fresh Water Seawater 2x Seawater

110

120 Temperature, deg F

130

140

FigureA2b.Vaporpressure(100to140F)

APA5

Surface Tension
Correlating Equations for Surface Tension Freshwater =6.2500E05T27.7607E02T+7.8297E+01 Seawater(TDS~35,000) =8.0357E05T27.4107E02T+7.8914E+01 2xSeawater(TDS~70,000) =4.4643E05T28.0679E02T+7.9991E+01
Surface Tension - 40F to 140F
78.00 76.00 m c 74.00 / s e n y 72.00 d , n o i 70.00 s n e T 68.00 e c a f r 66.00 u S 64.00 20 40 60 80 100 120 Temperature, F 140 160

Pure Water 1x Seawater 2x Seawater

Figure A-3. Surface tension (40 to 140F)

APA6

Viscosity
Correlating Equations for Viscosity Freshwater =1.3063E04T24.4363E02T+4.7808 Seawater(TDS~35,000) =1.3688E04T24.6918E02T+5.1116 2xSeawater(TDS~70,000) =1.4313E04T24.9283E02T+5.4285

Viscosity - 40F to 140F

4.00

3.50

Viscosity, lb/ft-hr

3.00

2.50

Pure Water 1X Seaw ater 2X Seaw ater

2.00

1.50

1.00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Temperature, F

FigureA4.Dynamicviscosity(40to140F)

APA7

Thermal Conductivity

Figure A-5. Thermal conductivity (Source: M.W. Kellogg Company,

Saline Water Conversion Engineering Data Book, 2nd Edition, Department of Interior, Office of Saline Water, November 1971)

APA8

Density
Correlating Equations for Density Freshwater =2.1661E08T37.7583E06T2+6.7946E04T+8.3283 Seawater(TDS~35,000) =4.4870E08T3+1.1936E06T24.8336E04T+8.5780 2xSeawater(TDS~70,000) =4.6417E08T3+3.9388E06T21.1106E03T+8.8145

Density - 40F to 140F

8.90 8.80 8.70 Density, #/gal 8.60 8.50 8.40 8.30 8.20 8.10 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Temperature, F
Pure Water 1x Seawater 2x Seawater

FigureA6.Density(40to140F)

APA9

Specific Heat
Correlating Equations for Specific Heat Freshwater cp=1.6927E10T47.2627E08T3+1.2276E05T29.5425E04T+ 1.0269 Seawater(TDS~35,000) cp=1.3021E11T44.5718E09T3+6.5104E07T2+1.5847E05T+ 9.5287E01 2xSeawater(TDS~70,000) cp=3.7037E09T31.4196E06T2+2.7834E04T+9.0270E01

Heat Capacity - 40F to 140F

1.02

1.00 Heat Capacity, BTU/#-F

Pure Water

0.98

1x Seaw ater 2x Seaw ater

0.96

0.94

0.92

0.90 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Temperature, F

Figure A-7. Comparison of specific heat (from Perry's Chemical Engineer's Handbook, 7th edition, 1997)

APA10

Appendix B Derivation of Cooling Tower Performance Characteristics

APB1

Tower Performance Characteristics

Thecoolingofthewaterisachievedthroughthecombinedprocessesofheatandmasstransfer fromthehotwatertotheairastheypassthroughthetowerfill.Abriefdescriptionofthe processwillassistinunderstandinghowthepropertiesofthewater,and,inparticular,howthe differencesbetweenthethermophysicalpropertiesofsaltorbrackishwaterandthoseof freshwateraffectcoolingtowerperformance. AsindicatedinFigureB1,thehotwaterentersthetoweratthetopandfallsundergravity downthroughthetowerfillandintothecoldwaterbasin.Theairisdrawnintothetoweratthe bottomandflowsupward,countertothedownflowofthewater,andexitsthroughthefanto theatmosphere.

Plu m e H ot w ater tem p T h (F) S team W st (lb m /h r) p b (in H g a ) T con d (F) W circ . (lb m /h r) C O ND EN SER C old w ater tem p T c (F) C on d en sate retu rn M ak e-u p w m u (lb m /h r) W ET C O O L IN G TOW ER

w evap (lb m /h r) w d rift (lb m /h r)

In let air w air (lb m /h r) T w b (F)

B low d ow n w bd (lb m /h r)

Figure B-1. Closed-cycle cooling system mass and heat balance

Thepurposeofthefillisbothtoslowthewaterasitdescendsthroughthefillandtocreatea largeinterfacialareabetweenthewaterandtheair,providingmoretimeandalargerareafor thetransferprocessestotakeplace.Fillsareoftwogeneraltypes:filmfillandsplashfill.The filmfillscausethewatertoflowinnarrowfilmsonthefillsurfaces.Thefillgeometryis designedtoandbygeometricdisruptandmixthefilmsbycausingthemtoturnorreformas theyflowdownwards.Splashfillscreatesmalldropletsasthefallingwaterimpactsthefill surfaces,creatingfreshsurfaceforheatandmasstransfer. Determinationofthetowerperformancecharacteristicsrequiredforagivencoolingload proceedsasfollows:

APB3

Theheatloadwhichmustberejectedbythecoolingtowertocoolagivenwaterflow,L,from thehotwatertemperature,Th,tothedesiredcoldwatertemperature,Tc,isgivenby Qw=L*cp*(ThTc)(Eq.B1) Theheattransferredtotheairequalsthatfromthewaterandisgivenby Qa=G*(hairexhairamb)(Eq.B2) where G=airflowrate(lb/hr) h=enthalpyofairstreamperlbofdryair(Btu/lb) Thetransferofheatfromthewatertotheairstreamateachpointontheairwaterinterface withinthetowerismadeupof Asensibleheatcomponent,drivenbythedifferencebetweenthelocalwatersurface temperatureandthelocalfreestreamairtemperature. Alatentheatcomponent,carriedbyamasstransferofevaporatingwaterdrivenbythe differencebetweenthevaporpressureofwateratthelocalwatertemperatureandthe vaporpressureofthewatervaporintheairstream.

Severalcriticalassumptionssimplifytheanalysis: 1. Thewaterfilmiswellmixedsothewatersurfacetemperatureisthesameasthebulk watertemperature. 2. Theairatthesurfaceofthefilmissaturatedatthewatertemperature. 3. Thephysicsoftheheatandmassdiffusionprocessesareessentiallythesame;i.e.,the Lewisnumberisequalto1. Withtheseassumptions,thetotalheattransferperunitinterfacialareacanbeaccurately representedwithacombinedtransfercoefficient,K,andthedifferencebetweentheenthalpyof airsaturatedatthelocalwatertemperatureandtheenthalpyofthebulkairstream.

APB4

Tw

hair + dhair

dQ L G dV

Tw - dTw

hair

Figure B-2. Incremental Heat Transfer Analysis

FromEq.(B1)andFigureB2, KadV(hsat@Twhair)=LdTw(Eq.B3) Integratingacrossthefillvolumefrom0toV,yields KaV/L=

Th

Tc

dTw (Eq.B4) hsat @ Tw hair

TheintegrationcanbeunderstoodgraphicallyinFigureB3.

APB5

E n t h a l p y

Temperature
Figure B-3. Cooling tower operating curves

ThedrivingforceforthecombinedheattransferisthedistancefromthelineABwhich representsthewateroperatinglinebetweenThandTcandalsotheenthalpyofsaturatedmoist air.ThelineCDrepresentstheairoperatinglinerunningfromaninletenthalpyconsistent withtheambientwetbulbtemperatureandincreasinglinearlywithaslopeofL/Gtoanexit enthalpyconsistentwiththeoverallheatbalance. Sincetheenthalpyofmoistairisessentiallyafunctiononlyofthewetbulbtemperature independentofrelativehumidity,itisnotpossiblefromtheforegoinganalysistodeterminethe exitstateoftheair.AfurtherassumptionbyMerkel(1925)statesthattheexitairissaturatedat theprescribedexitenthalpyandcorrespondstosometemperatureintermediatebetweenthe waterhotandcoldtemperatures:

hex = hamb + L/G * (Th Tc)

(Eq. B-5)

Thissufficestospecifythecompletestateoftheexitairandtodeterminetheevaporationrate fromthecoolingtowerfrom

wevap = G * (Wex Wamb)

(Eq. B-6)

APB6

where W=specifichumidityinlbmoisture/lbofdryair Basedontheforegoinganalysis,knowingtheambientwetbulbandtheinletandoutletwater temperatureissufficienttodeterminetherequiredtowercharacteristic(KaV/L).Thisvalueis readilygeneratedbyprogramssuchastheCTIToolkit.Asamplesetofcurvesforagivenwet bulbandagivenrangeisshowninFigureB4foranumberofapproachtemperaturesasKaV/L vs.L/G. Theperformancecharacteristicsofmanyfillscanbeapproximatedbyapolynomialexpression oftheform KaV/L=C*(L/G)n(Eq.B7)

FigureB4showssuchafillcharacteristicwithnominalvaluesofn=0.7andC=1.5 superimposedontheperformancecurvesofatowerwitha32.4Frangeatan80Fwetbulb. Theintersectionsofthecharacteristiclinewiththeperformancecurvesgivestheapproach temperaturewhichcanbeobtainedforthegivenrangeandwetbulbtemperatureforanyL/G.

APB7

Figure B-4. Example performance curves and fill characteristics (from CTI Toolkit for specified range and wet bulb temperature)

APB8

Appendix C Site Visit and Telephone Interview Reports

Site Visits C-1: St. Johns River C-2: Plant Smith C-3: Plant Crist C-4: Plant Watson

Telephone Interviews C-5: Pittsburg Power Plant C-6: Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station C-7: GEA Integrated Cooling Technologies

APC1

C.1 St. Johns River Power Park

TheplantwasvisitedonMarch27,2006.

Plant Location and Contacts

St.JohnsRiverPowerPark 11201NewBerlinRoad Jacksonville,FL32226

PaulM.Smith Plant Manager, StJRPP Tel: 9046658726 Fax:9046658957 Cell:2285918725 Email:smitpm@jea.com

JohnE.Reid Superintendent Logistics, Proj/Contr & Bus. Admin. PowerGeneration Tel:9046658952 Fax:9046658800 Cell:9045914242 Email:reidje@jea.com

BruceKofler EnvironmentalManager Tel:9046657886 Fax:9046658719 Cell:9045914242 Email:koflbw@jea.com

Plant Description
Theplant,jointlyownedbyJEAandFloridaPowerandLight,consistsoftwoidentical units.Eachisratedat624MWandisfossilfueled(2/3Columbiancoal/1/3petroleumcoke). Unit#1begancommercialoperationin1987;Unit#2,in1988.

Cooling Towers
EachunitisequippedwithaCustodisCottrellhyperbolic,naturaldraft,counterflowcooling towerasshowninFigureB.11.Thetowersare462feethighwithabasindiameterof338feet.

APC3

Figure C.1-1. St. Johns River Power Park: Hyperbolic natural-draft towers

Thedesignforeachtoweris:

Circulatingwaterflow: Hotwatertemperature: Coldwatertemperature: Designwetbulb:

247,700gpm 114.5F 90F 80F(@58%rh)

Source Water
ThesourceofmakeupwaterforthetowersisonabackchanneloftheSt.JohnsRiver immediatelyadjacenttothedischargecanaloftheNorthsideGenerationStation.Theintake pumpssupplymakeupwaterthrougha1.5milepipelinetothetowers.Thedischarge temperaturefromtheNorthsidecondensersvariesfromabout91Finthesummerto86.5in thewinter. Thewaterqualityvariesseasonallyandisaffectedbyrainfall,stormsanddredgingactivityas wellasrivertraffic.Theconductivityvariesfrom7,895(minimum)to50,464 (maximum)withanaveragevalueof33,862overtheperiodfrom2001to2005.

Water Treatment
Thetowersareoperatedat<1.5cyclesofconcentrationwithcontinuousmakeupand blowdown.TheblowdownisdischargedtotheNorthsideGeneratingStationscoolingwater dischargewithnoadditionaltreatment. Noscalingorcorrosioncontrolisused.Biofoulingiscontrolledwithcontinuouschlorinationto maintain<0.02TRO(totalresidualoxidant)inthedischarge.

Materials of Construction
Structure:Portlandcement,TypeII@4,000psi Columns:Portlandcement,TypeII@5,000psi
APC4

Fill:PVCmoduleSNCS20PVC Hangersandfittings:fiberglass(hangers,rods,andnuts) Distributionpiping/nozzles:PVC Drifteliminators:PVCTypeD15 Thetowersshell(veil)wasconstructedviatheslipformmethodofmaterialplacementduring originalconstruction.

7.1.1. Cooling Tower Fill

Bothtowerswereoriginallyequippedwithalowfoulingfilmfill.Thetowersmettheir performanceguaranteesandthenoperatedsatisfactorilyforabout12yearsbeforeoperating problemswerenoted. Unit#1wasrepackedwithoriginalequipmentmanufacture(OEM)fillin2001,followedbythe installationofnewsaltdrifteliminatorsin2003,andoperationcontinuesatasatisfactorylevel ofperformance. Unit#2wasrepackedin2002withahighefficiencyfillandnewdrifteliminatorsandnozzles. Fillpluggingandsolidsbuildupinthefillwasnotedduringlate2005.Newdryfilmpacks weighapproximately40lb(dependingonsize).Duringashortnoticeoutage,severalpacks wereremovedforfoulingevaluationandtheremovedpacksweighedover 200lb.Althoughchlorinationwassupposedtopreventfoulingandbuildupofattached material,dischargeconstraintshaveimpactedallowablechlorinationlevelswhichcontributedto thefoulingandplugging.

Drift
Thetowerswerefittedwithdrifteliminatorsdesignedforamaximumdriftlossof0.002%ofthe circulatingwaterflowrate(correspondingtoapproximately5gpmperunit)includingblow through(fromtherainzoneabovethebasinunderneaththefill)with45mphwinds. Performanceofthedrifteliminatorshasbeensatisfactory.Theyhavebeenreplacedonceduring thelifeofeachunit. Environmental effects Apre/postoperationalstudywasconductedtoevaluatetheeffectofdriftonsalt concentrationsindeposition,soilconcentration,andvegetationuptakeonandnearthesite. Fourtestplotsweresetupandmonitoredincludingacontrolsiteapproximately1.5miles NNWofthecoolingtowers.Measurementsweremadeoverthreetimeperiods,specifically:
1. 2. 3.

Priortooperation: Unit#1operating:

2/86to12/86 1/87to3/88

Bothunitsoperating: 4/88to9/89

APC5

Theconclusions,documentedindetailinpermittingreports,aresummarizedasfollows:

SomeincreasedNaClconcentrationwasfoundindepositionsamplesafterUnit#2began operation. Nosignificantincreaseswereseeninsoilorvegetationsamples. Vegetationatthesitewiththehighestdepositionwasapparentlyunaffected. NoinjurysymptomsrelatedtoNaClwereobservedonpasturegrassorothervegetation onorinthevicinityofthePowerPark.

Maintenance effects Theprimaryeffectsofdriftarefoundonsiteintheformofextensivecorrosionofmetalroofs andunprotectedmetalsurfaces(handrails,stairways,piping,gratings,etc.)throughoutthe plant.Surfaceshavebeencleaned,scrapedandpaintedwithcorrosionresistantpaint (NOXYDEahighlyimpermeableEuropeanpaintproduct)toresistthecorrosiveeffectsofthe saltdrift.Thisappearstohavebeensuccessfulwhereimplemented. Saltdepositsonswitchyardinsulatorshaveleadtoarcingproblems.Theseareminimized throughtheuseoflargerinsulatorsandinsulatorsmadeofpolymerbasedmaterialorsilicone coatedporcelain.

Concrete Deterioration
Themostseriousproblemsfromthesaltenvironmenthaverelatedtotheconcretestructureof thecoolingtowersthemselves.Significantconcretespallingandembeddedsteel(rebar) corrosionhasbeenevidentsincetheearly1990s.Examplesonthetowershellandthesupport columnsareshowninFiguresB.12aand2b. Variousapproachestohaltthedeteriorationincludingcoatings,epoxies,flamesprayedzinc, andothershavebeentried.Allprovidedsometemporarybenefitbutnonelasted.Amore elaborateapproachisnowbeingtaken. Fortheflatshellsurface,spalledconcreteisremovedasrequired(sometimestothesecondlayer ofreinforcingrebar6inchesindepth).Wireleadsareplacedatspecificintervalsonselected rebarineachareaandnewconcreteisshottothesurface.Azincmeshscreenisplacedover thefreshlyfilledconcreteareaandtheleads(fromtherebar)areattachedtothemesh.Themesh iscoveredwithafinallayerofconcrete(~1inchthick). Forcolumnsandthelintel,spalledconcreteisremovedaswellandleadsareinstalledonthe rebar.AprefabricatedFiberglassformcontainingasheetofzincmesh(suspendedmidway betweentheFiberglassshellandthecolumnsurfacebytakeaways)isplacedoverthecolumn. Thereisaspecificformforthelintelaswell.Theleadsareattachedtothezincmeshbeforethe formisclosed.Concreteispumpedintotheformsbywayofportsalongitslength.Afterfilling, theportsarecapped. Anaturalelectricalcurrentwillbeformedbetweenthezincandrebariron(electronswillflow fromthezinctotheiron).Thezincwillsacrifice,thuspreservingtheironrebar(initspresent
APC6

state).Currentwillbemonitoredatanumberofpointsaroundthetower.Thissystemis currentlyusedforfreewayoverpasscolumnsthatareexperiencingsimilarfailures.Lastly, sacrificialzincanodebarswereinstalledatthebaseofeachcolumn(boltedtothesurface)asan additionalmeasureofprotection. SimilarproblemswereencounteredatProgressEnergysAnclotePlantinTarponSprings, Florida.TheyareapplyinganewproductcalledPermaTreat,formulatedfromreactivesilicates, whichpenetratesdeterioratingconcrete,haltsthecorrosionoftherebar,andallegedlyimproves thestrengthandductilityoftheconcrete.TheeffectivenessofthetreatmentatAnclotehas showninitialpromisebutremainstobedeterminedoverthelongerterm.Adescriptionofthe projectatAncloteisgiveninConcreteConstructionmagazine(2006). Othercorrosionrelatedproblemshaveoccurredinthecondenserwaterboxesandthecrossover piping.Ontheinternalcomponentsofthetowers,materialssubstitutionshaveincludedtheuse oftitaniumstrapstosecurenozzles,317Lstainlessforfillhangers,andstainlessthreadedrods tosecuredistributionpipingcoolingtowernozzles,nozzlestraps,andfillhangers.

Figure C.1-2a. Repair activities of shell concrete and rebar damage

APC7

Figure C.1-2b. Removed spalled concrete on tower support columns

APC8

Figure C.1-3. Zinc mesh screen and leads

APC9

Figure C.1-4. Installation of new fiberglass and zinc on tower columns

Figure C.1-5. Heavily fouled fill from tower

APC10

Additional Issues
Fill fouling and plugging TherepackingofUnit#2withhighperformancefillresultedinseriousfoulingandplugging. Theaccumulationprocessisinitiatedbytheformationofbiofilmstowhichsuspendedsolids adhereandaccumulate.Therefore,adequatechlorinationtocontrolbiofoulingisrequired. Gaseouschlorineiscurrentlyinjectedintothetowermakeupatarateofabout1,000lbper24 hourstomaintaina0.02mglTROatdischarge. Amodifieddesignforchlorineinjectionintothedistributionflumeswouldallowintermittent highlevelchlorinationonanareabyareabasiswiththepotentialforbiofilmpreventionor destruction.

Figure C.1-6. Fouling and debris on top of fill

APC11

Sediment accumulation Sedimentaccumulatesinthetowerbasins,flumes,andheaders,inadditiontothetowersfill packs. Anumberofdesignrecommendationshaveevolvedfromplantexperience:

Highperformancefillisnotrecommendedtosalt/brackishwatertowers. Physicalfeaturesofthetowershouldbechosensuchthatsedimentremovalandaccess forcleaningissimplified,specifically: o o o Betterrampaccessforequipmenttraffic. Adequateaccesstoflumes,headers,andnozzlesforcleaningandmaintenance. Freshwateravailabilityattowersforwashdownandcleaningduringoutages. Chlorideresistantconcretewithadditivesforhigherdensity. Cathodicprotectiontobeinstalledduringoriginalconstruction. Corrosionresistanthangers,fittings,etc.

Useofappropriateoriginalinstallationmaterialsincluding: o o o

Figure C.1-7. Sediment accumulation in tower basin

APC12

Circulating water system Theoriginalcirculatingwaterpumpswerefittedwithbronzeimpellerswhichsufferedsevere erosioninthefirstsixmonthsofoperation.Replacementimpellersofstainlesssteelhave operatedsatisfactorily.Condenserwaterboxandtubesheetcoatingshaveonlybeenfully replacedonceduringthelifeoftheplant.Animpressedcurrentcathodicprotectionsystemisin placeandmonitoredcloselytoensurethatdamageisnotoccurringtothetitaniumcondenser tubes.

APC13

APC14

C.2 Smith Electric Generating Plant

TheplantwasvisitedonthemorningofMarch28,2006.

Plant Location and Contacts

PlantLansingSmith GulfPower,ASouthernCompany LynnHaven,Florida,324441210 GeorgeD.Fontaine,P.E.Engineer,Senior SmithElectricGeneratingPlant P.O.Box1210 LynnHaven,FL324441210 Tel:8505223479 Fax:8502711697 Email:gdfontai@soutnernco.com

Plant Description
Theplant(FigureC.21),ownedbySouthernCompanysGulfPower,consistsofthreeunits:

Unit#1:175MW;coalfired;oncethroughcooling;onlinemid1960s Unit#2:205MW;coalfired;oncethroughcooling;onlinemid1960s Unit#3:575MW;2x1gasfiredcombinedcycle;online2002 Gasturbines:GEFrame7;GEsteamturbine

Figure C.2-1. Plant Lansing Smith APC15

Cooling Tower
TheUnit#3coolingtowerisaMarley10cell,backtoback,mechanicaldraftcounterflowtower with200hp,10meterdiameterfans.ApartialpictureofthetowerisshowninFigureC.22.

Figure C.2-2. Plant Smith Unit #3 cooling tower

ThedesignpointfortheUnit#3toweris

Circulatingwaterflow: Hotwatertemperature: Coldwatertemperature: Designwetbulb:

125,000gpm 107F 86F 80F

Materials of Construction
ThetowerisofFRPconstructionwith316stainlesssteelhardware.ThefillisPVClowclogfill, whichhasperformedsatisfactorily.

Source Water and Water Treatment

TowermakeupistakenfromthedischargecanaloftheoncethroughcooledUnits1and2.The waterwasdrawnoriginallyfromtheGulfofMexicoatfullseawatersalinity.Thetoweris operatedatlessthan2cyclesofconcentration.ChlorineintheformofNaOClisaddeddailyfor

APC16

1to2hoursforbiofoulingcontrol.Anantifoamingagentisaddedcontinuouslyatlowdose. NootherchemicalssuchasacidforpHcontrol,dispersants,orscaleinhibitorsareused.

Maintenance
Thetowerisinexcellentcleanconditionwithnosignsofbiofouling,scaling,orpluggingas evidencedinFiguresC.23throughC.25.

Figure C.2-3. Plant Smith Unit #3 cooling tower supports

APC17

Figure C.2-4: Plant Smith Unit #3 cooling tower bottom of fill

Figure C.2-5. Plant Smith Unit #3 Cooling tower top of drift eliminators

APC18

Theconcretebasinhassomecrackingandshowsearlysignsofrebarcorrosion(Figure C.26).

Figure C.2-6. Plant Smith Unit #3 cooling tower basin

Drift
Themajorproblemwithtoweroperationattheplantiscorrosionofnearbysurfacescausedby saltdriftdeposition.Thedrifteliminatorsappeartobeingoodcondition.Althoughwewere unabletodeterminewhatthespecifieddriftratehadbeen,itispresumablyintherangeof 0.0005to0.001%ofcirculatingflowratewhichwouldbetypicalforthatagetower.Thiswould correspondtodriftratesof0.625to1.25gpm. TheprimarywinddirectionistowardtheSouthwest(awayfromtheplant)duringthedaybut towardtheplantatnight.TheextensivecorrosionisseeninFiguresC.27through29. Protectivepaintinghasbeenusedbutithasprovendifficulttostayaheadoftheproblem.More elaboratealternativesincludingmovingthetower,desaltingthemakeupwaterorconvertingto afreshwatermakeupsourcehavebeenconsideredbutnotimplemented.

APC19

Figure C.2-7. Plant Smith Unit #3 drift-related corrosion

Figure C.2-8. Plant Smith Unit #3 drift-related corrosion APC20

Figure C.2-9. Plant Smith Unit #3 drift-related corrosion

APC21

APC22

C.3 Crist Generating Plant

TheplantwasvisitedontheafternoonofMarch28,2006.

Plant Location and Contacts

CristGeneratingPlant GulfPower,ASouthernCompany OneEnergyPlace Pensacola,FL325200340 MelvinA.(Mel)Young,III Engineer,Senior Tel:8504292214 Fax:8504292246 Email:mayoung@southernco.com ArthurL.OMary TeamLeaderLaboratoryC&RDepartment Tel:8504292245 Fax:8504292313 Email:alomary@southernco.com

Plant Description
Theplant,ownedbySouthernCompanysGulfPower,consistsof6operatingunitsandone retiredunit.

Unit128MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;retired2003. Unit228MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;toberetired2006. Unit337MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;toberetired2006. Unit480MW;coalfired;oncethroughcooling. Unit580MW;coalfired;oncethroughcooling. Unit6320MW;coalfired;mechanicaldraftcoolingtower. (Unit6wasputonlineasaoncethroughcooledplantin1970;convertedtoclosedcycle coolingin1973.) Unit7500MW;coalfired;mechanicaldraftcoolingtower;onlinein1973.

APC23

Figure C.3-1. Plant Crist Entrance

Unit 6 Cooling Tower

ThecurrentUnit6towerwasbuiltin2005followingdamagetotheoriginaltowerfrom HurricaneIvanin2004.Unit6wasretrofitwithMidwest8cell,inline,crossflowtower(Figure C.32).Thefansare10meter,200hpwith8bladesat136rpm. ThedesignpointfortheUnit#6toweris:

Circulatingwaterflow Hotwatertemperature Coldwatertemperature Designwetbulb

150,960gpm 115F 93F 79F

Unit 6 Construction Materials

StructurewoodandFRP(fiberreinforcedpolymer) FillPVC(4inchgullwing) Hangersandfittings316stainlesssteel FanbladesandstacksFRP DrifteliminatorsPVC

APC24

Figure C.3-2. Plant Crist Unit 6 cooling tower

Unit 7 Cooling Tower

TheUnit#7coolingtower(FigureC.33)wasoriginallyinstalledin1973andrebuiltin2005after HurricaneIvan.ItisaMarley6615,12cell,inlinecrossflowtowerwithMarleyalphabarfill. The2005rebuildretrofittedthefandeck,installednewfansandfanstacksandcolumnstothe firstlift.Thefansare10meter,250hp,with9bladesrunningat136rpm. ThedesignfortheUnit#7toweris:

Circulatingwaterflow Hotwatertemperature Coldwatertemperature Designwetbulb

165,000gpm 121.7F 91F 79F

APC25

Figure C.3-3. Plant Crist Unit 7 cooling tower

Materials of Construction

StructurewoodandFRP FillPVC Hangersandfittings316stainlesssteel FanbladesandstacksFRP DrifteliminatorsPVC

Water Source and Treatment

Makeupwatertobothtowers,drawnfromthedischargecanalsoftheoncethroughunits, rangesfromfreshtobrackish(40to9,000mgl)withastronginfluenceofrainfall.Thetowersare operatedat1.5to2.5cyclesofconcentrationatalltimes(lowerendofrangeinthesummer wintermonthswhentheTDSishigh). Thetowersarechlorinatedwith12%NaOClfor1to2hoursperdayforbiofoulingcontrol. Blowdownistotheashpondwithalongretentiontime.Chlorinationisdiscontinuedwhenthe totalchlorineresidualreaches0.5ppm.Overchlorinationisavoidedtopreventcorrosioninthe Unit690/10CuNicondenser.

APC26

Anantifoamingagentisaddedcontinuouslyatlowdosageandadispersant/surfactantis added.NootherchemicalssuchasacidforpHcontrolorscaleinhibitorsareused.Corrosion ratemonitors(Corrator)andMIC(microbiallyinducedcorrosion)monitors(BioGeorge)are used.

Maintenance
BothtowersappeartobecleanandinexcellentconditionasillustratedinFiguresC.34through C.37.Thebasinswereingoodconditionwithnoevidenceofdeteriorationorembedded corrosion.

Figure C.3-4. Unit 6 Tower; cell 1 internal support structure

APC27

Figure C.3-5. Unit 6, 4 gull wing fill

Figure C.3-6. Unit 6 drift eliminators APC28

Figure C.3-7. Unit 6 air inlet and louvers

Drift
Therewasrelativelylittleproblemwithdriftfromthetowers.Somecorrosionwasevidenton thesurfacesrightatthetowerasseen,forexample,ontheriserpicturedinFigureC.38. However,therewerenoreportsofsignificantcorrosiondamageonotherplantsurfaces. Therewassomeswitchyardarcingpresumablyduetosaltdeposition,whichwascontrolledby occasionalcleaningwithfreshwatersprays.

Figure C.3-8. Corrosion on riser APC29

APC30

C.4 Watson Electric Generating Plant

TheplantwasvisitedontheafternoonofMarch28,2006.

Plant Location and Contacts

WatsonElectricGeneratingPlant MississippiPower,ASouthernCompany 10406LorraineRoad P.O.Box4079 Gulfport,MS395024079

RichardA.Fairchild,P.E. ProjectManager,EnvironmentalProjects Tel:2288976344 Fax:2288976144 Cell:2285180487 Email:rafairch@southernco.com PatrickF.Heiter,P.E.SeniorEngineer Tel:2288976109 Fax:2288976302 Cell:2285180487 Email:pfheiter@southernco.com

Plant Description
Theplant,ownedbySouthernCompanysMississippiPowerconsistsoffiveoperatingunits:

Unit1:75MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;online1957. Unit2:75MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;online1960. Unit3:112MW;gasfired;oncethroughcooling;online1962. Unit4:250MW;coalfired;oncethroughwithhelpertower;online1968 (helpertoweraddedin1998). Unit5:500MW;coalfired;coolingtower;online1973.

APC31

Figure C.4-1. Plant Watson

Cooling Towers
Unit 4 tower TheUnit4tower(FigureC.42)isahelpertowerusedtocoolthecondenserdischargeand returnthecoldwatertothedischargecanal.Thereisnorecycleofthecoolingwaterandnocold waterbasin.Thetowerisaceramicinline,10cell,counterflowtowerbuiltin1998.Itcoolsa flowof125,000gpmthrougha20Frange.Thedesignpointinformation(hotwater temperature,wetbulbtemperature)wasnotavailable. IthasrecentlybeenrepairedfollowingstructuraldamagefromHurricaneKatrina.Priortothe installationofthetower,spraymodulesinthecoolingwatercanalswereused(theabandoned unitsarealsovisibleinFigureC.42). Thetowerfillwasoriginallyhighperformancefillonthetop6incheswithremainderofthe packanantifoulingfill.

APC32

Figure C.4-2. Plant Watson Unit 4 cooling tower

Unit 5 tower TheUnit5coolingtower(FigureC.43)isaMarleyconcrete,crossflow,roundtower(perhaps thefirsttobebuilt).Itwasoriginallyequippedwith13fanstowhichthreewerelateradded.In addition,asmall3cellinline,crossflowconcretetowerwasaddedatsomelaterdatetofurther augmentthecoolingcapability(seeFigureC.44).Thecurrentcapabilityofthesystemisthe coolingof172,000gpmthrougha30Frange.Designpointinformationwasnotavailable.

Figure C.4-3. Plant Watson Unit 5 cooling tower

APC33

Figure C.4-4. Plant Watson Unit 5s 3-cell add-on tower

Materials of Construction
Unit4isanFRPtowerwithPVCfillanddrifteliminatorsandstainlesssteelfitting,hangers,and otherhardware. Unit5isaconcretestructurewithamixofPVC,plasticcoatedfillgridand316stainlesssteel hardware.Therearemanytypesoffillcurrentlyindifferentsectionsofthetower.

Water Source and Treatment

ThewaterisdrawnformalakeformedbytheconfluenceoftheBiloxiandtheTchoutacabouffa Rivers.Theinletwaterqualityrangesfromfreshtobrackish(70to12,000mgl)withthe influenceofrainfall. ThecyclesofconcentrationinUnit5arecontrolledtoanLSI(LangelierSaturationIndex)of0.to 0.5.Unit4isaoncethroughtowerwithnorecycle. InUnit5,chlorineisaddedas12%NaOClonetothreedaysperweekforbiofoulingcontrol. Duringchlorination,theblowdownisshutoffuntilazeroresidualisreached.Anantifoaming agentisaddedcontinuouslyatlowdosage.NootherchemicalssuchasacidforpHcontrol, dispersants,orscaleinhibitorsareused.

APC34

Maintenance
StructuraldamageonUnit4hasbeenrepaired.Anumberofcolumn/beamjointswhichhad beenoftheglueandscrewtypehavebeenreplacedwithboltedjoints(FiguresC.45and46). NochemicalsareaddedtoUnit4,notevenchlorine,sincetheentireflowgoesdirectlyto discharge.Asaresult,pluggingofthefilloccurs.Theapproachtocontrollingtheplugginghas beentobypassthetower,allowthefillandthepluggingmaterialtodryout,andthentoflushit offwiththerestartedwaterflow.Twosectionsofthefillareequippedwithloadcellstomonitor thebuildupofexcessmaterial.

Figure C.4-5. Unit 4 tower: Glue and screw joint construction

APC35

Figure C.4-6. Glue and screw joint construction of the Unit 4 tower

Unit5hashadsignificantconcretedamageoveritslifetimeincludingrebarcorrosion(see FigureC.47).Structuralbracinghasbeenperformedalongwithconcretepatching.

Figure C.4-7. Concrete damage in Unit 5

APC36

Thefillsupportwiregridisprimarilymadeofplasticcoatedsteelwirewhichcorrodesand breaksifthecoatingisdamaged.TheresultisfillcollapseasseeninFigureC.48.

Figure C.4-8. Fill collapse resulting from corrosion of plastic-coated steel wire

Drift
DrifteliminatorsinUnit4arerelativelynewandthoseinUnit5havebeenrecentlyreplaced.As aresultthereisnoapparentdriftrelatedcorrosionattheplant.

APC37

C.5 Pittsburg Power Plant

NotesfromFebruary1,2005,phonecallwithRonKosage(2092962528),formerplantsupervising chemist. ThePittsburgplantconsistsofthreeactiveunits5,6and7withageneratingcapacityof 1,300MW.Theunitswereoriginallydesignedforoncethroughcooling.Atowerwasbuiltalong thecoolingcanaltocoolaportionofthereturnwatermeetNPDESeffluentthermal requirements. TheplantislocatedattheconfluenceoftheSacramentoRiverandtheSanJoaquinRiverin SuisunBay.Bothriversprovidedrainageforrainfall(andsnowmelt)aswellasagricultural runofftoSanFranciscoBaythroughSuisunBay.SanFranciscoBayalsoopenstothePacific Ocean. Totaldissolvedsolids(TDS)inthesummercanriseto17,000mg/landwillvaryhourly dependingonoceantides.Totalhardness(calciumandmagnesium)canbeveryhigh1,500to 1,700mg/lCaCO3withmagnesiumcomprising1,000mg/lCaCO3.Colloidalorganicsarealsohigh. Thecoolingtowerisoperatedat1.3to1.4cyclesofconcentration(allyear). Inthewinter,whentheriverflowishigh,TDScanrangefrom100to200mg/l(freshwater quality)andtotalsuspendedsolids(TSS)canbeashighas200mg/l.Totalhardnessis30to 40mg/lCaCO3. Thecoolingtowerstructureiswood.Thetowerhasplastic,highefficiencyfill,makingTSS problematic.Nobiologicalcontrolispracticedinthecoolingtower.This,incombinationwith highTSS,canacceleratecloggingofhighefficiencyfill.Ithasbeenobservedthatsomecellsare notcooling,i.e.,hotwaterisbypassinglargesareasoffill(presumablybecauseofbiofouling andhighTSSloading)andfallingdirectlytothebasin.NopHcontrolorscale/corrosioncontrol ispracticed. Ronwasnotsureofcoolingtowerhardwaremetallurgy.Hedidnotethatnoeffortwasmadeto replacefailedhardware(e.g.,nuts,bolts,hangers,etc.)withlikematerials. Somecondenserswereretubedfromcoppernickeltotitanium,becauseofunderdeposit corrosionandpitting(again,presumablyfromhighTSSinbaywater).

APC38

C.6 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station

Figure C.5-6. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station

01/24/05,phonecall,JohnTaylor(5058556258),PublicServiceNewMexico(partownerofPVNGC) 02/02/05,Emailcorrespondence,GregLehner(6233932566),ArizonaPublicService(operatorand partownerofPVNGC) 02/02/05,phonecall,JerChinShih(6233935158),ArizonaPublicService PVNGCconsistsofthree1,300MWunits,whichwerecommissionedin1985,1986,and1987. Eachunithasacircular,crossflowcoolingtower. Theplantreceives64,000acrefeet1peryearofsecondarytreatedmunicipaleffluentfromthe CityofPhoenixforcoolingtowermakeup(aswellasothercoolingneeds).Wateristransported toPVNGCbywayofa34.5milepipeline.ThewaterfromPhoenixisnotfilteredorchlorinated enroute.Otherwaterusesintheplant,e.g.,domesticandboilerfeedwater,areprovidedbyon sitewaterwells. EffluentistreatedatPVNGCwithtricklingfiltration,limesoftening,sodaashsoftening,and finalfiltration.Tricklingfiltrationusesmicrobiologicalfilmstoreducetheconcentrationof organicconstituentsandammoniaaswellastoremovesuspendedmatter.2 Thetreatedeffluentgenerallycontainslessthan2mg/lofammonia(<0.1mg/lafterthetrickling filters)and<2mg/lofBOD(BiologicalOxygenDemand).Limesodasofteningandsodaash softening(twoprecipitationsoftenersinseries)removescalingconstituentsi.e.,hardness, alkalinity,orthophosphate,3andsilica.

39

Thecoolingtowersareoperated(onaverage)at24cyclesofconcentrationattimes,ashighas 30cycles.AveragefeedwaterTDSisapproximately1,000mg/l.Therefore,circulatingwaterTDS isapproximately24,000mg/l,about70percentofnormalseawater.4Sulfuricacidisusedto controlcoolingsystempHto6.9to7.4.TheonlyscalingconstituentofconcernisCaSO4which iscontrolledwithacommoncommercialscaleinhibitor.TSSvariesfrom10to50mg/linthe circulatingwater.Towerbasinsaregenerallycleanedduringeachrefuelingcycle(18months). Sodiumhypochloriteisgeneratedonsite(8percentNaOCl)usingelectrolyticcells.5.NaClisfed tothecellsandchlorinegas(Cl2)isgenerated.AfteritisgenerateditisbubbledintoNaOHto formNaOCl.Thecoolingsystemischlorinatedcontinuouslytomaintainafreeresidualof0.2to 0.5mg/lCl2.ThecoolingsystemisshockfedNaOCloncepermonthtomaintainafreeresidual of5mg/lCl2fortwohours.DuringshockfeedingofNaOH,anonoxidizingbiocideisalsofed ataconcentrationof12mg/l.Thisplanhaseliminatedtheneedtomechanicallycleansurfaces ofbiologicalslime. Thecoolingtowerstructuresarereinforcedconcretewithcarbonsteel(CS)rebar.Thereisno timberinthecoolingsystematall.Chlorideintrusionintotheconcrete(bywayofminute cracks)hascausedrebarcorrosionwhichcreateslargecracksandacceleratescorrosionby exposingCSrebartocirculatingwatersaltsandoxygen.Thefandecksofthecoolingtowersare systematicallybeingreplacedwithepoxycoatedCSrebarandconcrete. Coolingtowersplashfill(invertedVtype)isheldinplacewithfiberglasshanginggrids.Thefill anddrifteliminatorsareplastic.Theonlymetalinthecoolingsystemisthemotorgearboxfan assembliesatopeachcoolingtowercell.TheCSbasesthatholdthemotorgearboxfan assemblieshavecorrodedandarebeingground/sandedcleanandepoxycoatedtoextendtheir life(asthefandecksarebeingrebuilt).Othermetalintheassemblyis304stainlesssteel(304SS) anditiscorrodingslowlyandbeingreplacedwithhighergradessuchas316SS.Theplanthas madeanefforttoreplacesmallboltswithhighstrengthplasticorhighgradesofSS. Thecirculatingwaterpumpshave9010coppernickelimpellorsandthecondensertubesare titanium.
______________________
1

64,000 acre-feet per year is equivalent to 39,700 gpm. The municipal plant now nitrifies and denitrifies wastewater so ammonia levels are very low in the delivered water. 3 Ortho-phosphate, which can form tenacious scales in cooling systems, is at relatively high levels in the treated effluent. Its concentration is significantly reduced in the lime softening step. 4 Normal seawater, as found in the open ocean, has a TDS of 34,800 mg/l.
2

On-site generation of NaOCl saves PVNGS 70 percent over purchasing it outright.

40

C.7 GEA Integrated Cooling Technologies

02/05/05,phonecall,BryanParkin(3039876521) Bryanwouldgenerallyrecommendthefollowingforseawatercoolingtowers:

Fiberglassstructurehewouldnotusetimber.Fiberglassintuitivelyhasbetter properties,butisnottimetested.Fiberglasshasonlybeenusedincoolingtowersfor15 years. ForlowTSSseawatersources,hewouldusehighefficiencyfill.Forsourcessubjectto highTSS,hewouldusesplashfill(invertedV,perforatedpolypropylenecomponents). Forlargemetalhardware,hewoulduseepoxycoatedcarbonsteel.Fornutsandboltshe wouldusesiliconbronzewithplasticcaps.6Theplasticprotectstherelativelysoft materialfromerosiondamage.GEAhasquotedduplexsteel(316SSwith5%6% molybdenum).Ithasexcellentresistancetochloridecorrosion,butisverycostly.Noone hasusedityetbecauseofcost.

____________________
6

There are some products that can be sprayed onto surfaces requiring erosion protection.

41