Cooling towers not best option for Oyster Creek

The April 16 Brick Bulletin article by Patricia Miller on the relicensing of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station mentions the continuing push by several anti-nuclear groups to get the state to require that Oyster Creek install cooling towers. This is not the best option for the power plant, not just because of the cost, but also because of damage to the environment.

The proposed cooling towers can cause more damage to the environment than the discharge of somewhat heated water to the bay region. This is because the life cycle analysis of what has to be done to build the towers must be considered and the fact that this power plant has already operated 40 years with an environment that has adapted to its operation.

In building cooling towers, thousands of tons of steel and concrete are used. The steel comes from mining and requires large amounts of coal to produce and then transport. Concrete also requires mining and intense energy use for production and transportation. This has an ecological impact in the areas where mining occurs and also the carbon that is released to the atmosphere in the process of making the steel and concrete.

Since the power plant has already operated 40 years, putting cooling towers in now would not only create ecological damage, but the funds required to build them could be put to better use in upgrading the transmission structure of the New Jersey grid and to aid renewable projects in that state.
Christopher W. Lapp, Ph.D.
Energy and Environmental
Scientist
Alexandria, Va.