414
L. Paj˛ ak et al.
In order to assess the possibility of avoiding the negative impact of discharges
of spent cooling water on the environmental objectives arising from the WFD, it
is necessary to evaluate the feasibility of implementing alternative solutions. The
analysis presented in this article concerned the operation of a single power plant
situated in the Upper Vistula River sub-basin. In terms of economic, energy and
environmental considerations, the existing system has been described as Option 0.
Two alternative options were analysed as well, and the results of the analysis clearly
indicated that with respect to the derogation under Article 4(7) WFD, all of the
following conditions are met [1]:
• Article 4(7)(a): “all practical steps have been taken to mitigate the adverse
impact on the condition of the body of water in terms of the temperature of the
spent cooling water discharged, and the non-deteriorated quality of the water
sourced from and discharged into, the Vistula River, since the power plant does
not change the quality of water sourced from the power plant canal, and the
temperature increase in the mixing zone of the receiving body of water does not
exceed approximately 6 °C” [1];
• Article 4(7)(b): plans have been verified, and explanations have been provided
for the modification of updated RBMP provisions;
• Article 4(7)(c): it has been demonstrated that the reasons for modifications or
alterations are of overriding public interest and the benefits to the environment and
to society of achieving environmental objectives are outweighed by the benefits of
the new modifications, since the investment project is in line with the constitutional
sustainable development principle. The power plant produces both electricity and
heat in a combined cycle, which is the most efficient solution. This enables fuel
savings of around 25–30% and reduces pollutant emissions;
• Article 4(7)(d): “the beneficial objectives served by those modifications or alterations of the water body cannot for reasons of technical feasibility or disproportionate cost be achieved by other means, which are a significantly better environmental option” [1], which was demonstrated by the assessment of other options
related to technical solutions involving the cooling system.
The result of the analysis was the inclusion in the Regulation of the Council of
Ministers of 18 October 2016 [16] of a derogation resulting from the lack of technical
feasibility of achieving the environmental objective.
Acknowledgements The work presented was financed by the AGH University of Science and
Technology, Krakow, Poland, grant 11.11.140.031.
L. Paj˛ ak et al.
In order to assess the possibility of avoiding the negative impact of discharges
of spent cooling water on the environmental objectives arising from the WFD, it
is necessary to evaluate the feasibility of implementing alternative solutions. The
analysis presented in this article concerned the operation of a single power plant
situated in the Upper Vistula River sub-basin. In terms of economic, energy and
environmental considerations, the existing system has been described as Option 0.
Two alternative options were analysed as well, and the results of the analysis clearly
indicated that with respect to the derogation under Article 4(7) WFD, all of the
following conditions are met [1]:
• Article 4(7)(a): “all practical steps have been taken to mitigate the adverse
impact on the condition of the body of water in terms of the temperature of the
spent cooling water discharged, and the non-deteriorated quality of the water
sourced from and discharged into, the Vistula River, since the power plant does
not change the quality of water sourced from the power plant canal, and the
temperature increase in the mixing zone of the receiving body of water does not
exceed approximately 6 °C” [1];
• Article 4(7)(b): plans have been verified, and explanations have been provided
for the modification of updated RBMP provisions;
• Article 4(7)(c): it has been demonstrated that the reasons for modifications or
alterations are of overriding public interest and the benefits to the environment and
to society of achieving environmental objectives are outweighed by the benefits of
the new modifications, since the investment project is in line with the constitutional
sustainable development principle. The power plant produces both electricity and
heat in a combined cycle, which is the most efficient solution. This enables fuel
savings of around 25–30% and reduces pollutant emissions;
• Article 4(7)(d): “the beneficial objectives served by those modifications or alterations of the water body cannot for reasons of technical feasibility or disproportionate cost be achieved by other means, which are a significantly better environmental option” [1], which was demonstrated by the assessment of other options
related to technical solutions involving the cooling system.
The result of the analysis was the inclusion in the Regulation of the Council of
Ministers of 18 October 2016 [16] of a derogation resulting from the lack of technical
feasibility of achieving the environmental objective.
Acknowledgements The work presented was financed by the AGH University of Science and
Technology, Krakow, Poland, grant 11.11.140.031.