“Hof Water"
As of September 1970, one nuclear and 23 fossil—fuel power plants were oper—
ating at Lake Michigan. Five additional nuclear plants and one using fossil
fuel were under construction and scheduled for operation by 1974; an addi—
tional nuclear plant has been proposed. The growth of industrial and munici—
pal power needs, coupled With the inviting cooling waters of Lake Michigan,
made it clear that sites for other new plants would be requested.
The installed generation capacity in 1968 on Lake Michigan was 7600
megawatts; the projected estimate for the year 2000 is 73,500 megawatts, of
which 43,934 would be in nuclear plants. This estimate was made at the lake
conferences by Yates M. Barber, Staif Assistant of the U. S. Bureau of Sport
Fisheries and Wildlife, on the basis of projections developed in a Canadian
study [7] and by the US. Federal Power Commission. Barber added that the
output of waste heat at full capacity would be 414.67 billion BTUS per hour in
the year 2000, nearly 14 times the BTU output in 1968. Furthermore, the total
volume of water discharged from the plants in 2000 would be equal to a
stream heated 20°F above the existing lake temperature and owing into the
lake at a rate of 91,000 cubic feet per second. This ow, over a year’s time,
would be equivalent to a sheet of hot water 4.6 feet deep covering the entire
14.3 million acres of the lake surface.
The effect of this heat on Lake Michigan was estimated by an interstate
committee on thermal waste established during the Lake Michigan confer—
ences. Allowing for loss of heat from the discharges to the atmosphere due to
evaporation, convection, and radiation, the committee estimated that by
2023 generating power capacity would have increased enough to raise the
annual average temperature of the entire volume of the lake 2°F
,
or from the
1969 average of 50° to an average of 52°. The magnitude of that increase
(termed a conservative estimate by the committee) is clear if one compares
it
with natural temperature change in the lake. During the past 50 to 80 years,
the temperature of the lake actually has declined by 2°, apparently from natural causes. The committee’s projection means that, in about the same length
of time, human activities could nullify the natural change by raising the aver—
age temperature 2°.
This prediction assumes that the heat from the discharges would be mixed
evenly throughout the entire volume of Lake Michigan. Although theoretically possible, this would not happen under present circumstances since
the heat discharge is limited generally to nearshore areas. The point is that
man’s activities now have the theoretical capacity to alter natural conditiorîs
in water on a scale previously reserved for nature.
Furthermore, the theoretical change predicted by the committee was par—
ticularly conservative since only heat input from power plants was consid—
ered. Large amounts of heat also are injected into Lake Michigan from indus—
trial and municipal activities. Representatives of state and federal sh and
wildlife services estimated at the conferences that about 25 percent of the to—
tal heat added to the lake by human activities was discharged from steel
”Hot Water"
" '|
As of September 1970, one nuclear and 23 fossil—fuel power plants were oper—
ating at Lake Michigan. Five additional nuclear plants and one using fossil
fuel were under construction and scheduled for operation by 1974; an addi—
tional nuclear plant has been proposed. The growth of industrial and munici—
pal power needs, coupled With the inviting cooling waters of Lake Michigan,
made it clear that sites for other new plants would be requested.
The installed generation capacity in 1968 on Lake Michigan was 7600
megawatts; the projected estimate for the year 2000 is 73,500 megawatts, of
which 43,934 would be in nuclear plants. This estimate was made at the lake
conferences by Yates M. Barber, Staif Assistant of the U. S. Bureau of Sport
Fisheries and Wildlife, on the basis of projections developed in a Canadian
study [7] and by the US. Federal Power Commission. Barber added that the
output of waste heat at full capacity would be 414.67 billion BTUS per hour in
the year 2000, nearly 14 times the BTU output in 1968. Furthermore, the total
volume of water discharged from the plants in 2000 would be equal to a
stream heated 20°F above the existing lake temperature and owing into the
lake at a rate of 91,000 cubic feet per second. This ow, over a year’s time,
would be equivalent to a sheet of hot water 4.6 feet deep covering the entire
14.3 million acres of the lake surface.
The effect of this heat on Lake Michigan was estimated by an interstate
committee on thermal waste established during the Lake Michigan confer—
ences. Allowing for loss of heat from the discharges to the atmosphere due to
evaporation, convection, and radiation, the committee estimated that by
2023 generating power capacity would have increased enough to raise the
annual average temperature of the entire volume of the lake 2°F
,
or from the
1969 average of 50° to an average of 52°. The magnitude of that increase
(termed a conservative estimate by the committee) is clear if one compares
it
with natural temperature change in the lake. During the past 50 to 80 years,
the temperature of the lake actually has declined by 2°, apparently from natural causes. The committee’s projection means that, in about the same length
of time, human activities could nullify the natural change by raising the aver—
age temperature 2°.
This prediction assumes that the heat from the discharges would be mixed
evenly throughout the entire volume of Lake Michigan. Although theoretically possible, this would not happen under present circumstances since
the heat discharge is limited generally to nearshore areas. The point is that
man’s activities now have the theoretical capacity to alter natural conditiorîs
in water on a scale previously reserved for nature.
Furthermore, the theoretical change predicted by the committee was par—
ticularly conservative since only heat input from power plants was consid—
ered. Large amounts of heat also are injected into Lake Michigan from indus—
trial and municipal activities. Representatives of state and federal sh and
wildlife services estimated at the conferences that about 25 percent of the to—
tal heat added to the lake by human activities was discharged from steel
”Hot Water"
" '|