OHIO RIVER COOLING WATER STUDY
by
Brian P. Butz, Donald R. Schregardus
Barbara-Ann Lewis, Anthony J. Policastro,
and James J. Reisa, Jr.
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
In fulfillment of
Interagency Agreements
with the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Regions IV and V
Report Number: EPA-905/9-74-004
EPA Project Officers: Gary Mil burn, Region V
Charles Kaplan, Region IV
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Enforcement Divisions,
Regions IV and V, Environmental Protection Agency and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views of the Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorcement or recommendation for use.
ENVIRONMENTAL PEOTZCTION AGSITCZ
-------
ABSTRACT
This study presents a review and critique of existing technical
information relevant to the environmental effects of the use of the Ohio
River main stem for cooling. In order to evaluate the effect of heat
discharges on the indigenous aquatic life of the Ohio River, an extensive
review and critique of past and existing studies dealing with the biological
aspects of cooling water was undertaken. In order to judge the effect of
heat discharges on the thermal regime of the river, three one-dimensional
river temperature prediction models — COLHEAT, STREAM and Edinger-Geyer
were evaluated, and the most appropriate model was selected to analyze
changes in temperature distribution along the river. The effects of heat
discharges on the thermal regime of the river near the points of discharge
were evaluated by analyzing and critiquing available thermal plume study
results.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT 2
PREFACE " 16
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 18
1. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 20
1.1 Thermal Models 20
1.2 Biological Effects 22
1.3 Thermal Plume Analysis 25
2. INTRODUCTION 26
3. THE OHIO RIVER REGION 28
3.1 Description of the Ohio River Basin 28
3.2 Ohio River Cooling Water Use 34
3.3 Water Quality -- History and Present Status 40
3.4 Biota -- History and Present Status 41
3.5 Electric Power Generation on the Ohio River 50
Section 3 References 56
4. BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF COOLING WATER USE 58
4.1 Thermal Effects 58
4.1.1 General Review 58
4.1.2 Ohio River Studies 69
4.2 Entrainment and Condenser Passage Effects 84
4.2.1 General Review 84
4.4.2 Ohio River Studies 105
4.3 Chemical Discharge Effects 108
4.3.1 General Review 108
4.3.2 Ohio River Studies 115
Section 4 References 130
5. RIVER TEMPERATURE MODELS 146
5.1 The Heat Budget 146
5.2 River Temperature Prediction Models 154
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Page
5.2.1 The COLHEAT River Simulation Model 154
5.2.2 Edinger-Geyer One -Dimensional River Model .... 166
5.2.3 The STREAM River Simulation Package 177
Section 5 References 182
6. MODEL EVALUATION 184
6.1 Evaluation Design 184
6.2 Evaluation Results 195
6.2.1 Computer Temperature - Observed Temperature
Correlation 197
6.2.2 Criteria 2 - Ease of Use 227
6.2.3 Criteria 3 - Input Data Acquisition 227
6.2.4 Criteria 4 - Theoretical Completeness 228
6.2.5 Model Selection 234
Section 6 References 236
7. OHIO RIVER TEMPERATURE PREDICTION STUDY 238
7.1 Water Temperature Standards 238
7.2 Ohio River Temperature Simulations 242
7.2.1 Data 242
7.2.2 Results 243
Section 7 References 270
8. THERMAL PLUMES IN RIVERS WITH EMPHASIS ON THE OHIO RIVER ... 272
8.1 Thermal Plumes in. Rivers 273
8.1.1 Plume Physics 274
8.1.2 Some General River Plume Characteristics 281
8.1.3 Time-Temperature History in a Thermal Plume ... 296
8.1.4 Dynamic Nature of Thermal Plumes 298
8.1.5 Effect of Channel Curvature on Dispersion
of Plumes 300
8.1.6 Near and Farshore Boundary Effects and the
Fully-Mixed Condition 303
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cant.)
8.2 Thermal Plumes on the Ohio River 306
8.2.1 Boat Measurements Taken for Temperature
Standards Compliance 307
8.2.2 Comprehensive Surveys by Boat at the
Philip Sporn Plant 319
8.2.3 Scoping Studies by Aerial Infra-red Mappings . . 329
8.3 The J. M. Stuart Power Station Controversy 356
Section 8 References 374
Appendix A - Statistical Analysis 378
Appendix B - Fish Names 384
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title Page
3.1 The Ohio River 29
3.2 Steam-Electric Power Station Cooling System 36
3.3 Total Steam-Electric Generating Capacity on the Ohio River 54
4.1 Diversity, Density, and Biomass of Fish in Three Thermal Zones
of the Wabash Segment as Determined by D. C. Electrofishing 80
4.2 Hypothetical Time-Course of Acute Thermal Shock to Organisms
Entrained in Condenser Cooling Water and Discharged by Diffuser
or Via a Discharge Canal 85
4.3 Thermal Tolerance of a Hypothetical Fish in Relation to Thermal
Acclimation 88
4.4 Median Resistance Times to High Temperatures by a Hypothetical
Organism 90
4.5 Neomysis Survival in Relation to Maximum Temperature 98
4.6 Annual Cycle of the Variation of NH. + - N (mg/1) in the Ohio
River near M 405.7 7 H7
5.1 Mechanisms of Heat Transfer Across a Water Surface 147
5.2 Heat Dissipation from Water Surface by Evaporation, Radiation,
Conduction and Advection During January and June 148
5.3 Theoretical Velocity Contours 160
5.4 Coded River Configuration 161
5.5 Water Transport in Idealized Trough 163
5.6 Block Diagram of COLHEAT Computational Procedure During a Given
Time Step 165
5.7 Clear Sky Solar Radiation 168
5.8 Brunt C Coefficient from Air Temperature, T , and Ratio Measured
Solar Radiation to Clear Sky Radiation ? 169
5.9 Saturation Vapor Pressure Vs Water Temperature (or Dew Point
Temperature)
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cant.)
No. Title Page
6. 1 The Ohio River from Pittsburgh to Huntington .....................
6.2 Measured Temperatures at South Heights and Computed Tempera-
tures at Pittsburgh ..............................................
6,3 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Stratton, Ohio STREAM
Model [[[ 198
6.4 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Stratton, Ohio COLHEAT
Model [[[ 199
(
6.5 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Stratton, Ohio - Edinger-
Geyer Model [[[
6.6 Measured -Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Stratton,
Ohio - STREAM Model .............................................. 201
6.7 Measured- Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Stratton,
Ohio - COLHEAT Model ............................................. 202
6.8 Measured- Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Stratton,
Ohio — Edinger-Geyer Model ....................................... 203
6.9 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Wheeling, West Virginia —
STREAM Model [[[ 204
6.10 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Wheeling, West Virginia —
COLHEAT Model [[[ 205
6.11 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Wheeling, West Virginia —
Edinger-Geyer Model .............................................. 206
6.12 Measured- Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Wheeling, West
Virginia - STREAM Model .......................................... 207
6.13 Measured- Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Wheeling, West
Virginia - COLHEAT Model ......................................... 208
6.14 Measured- Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Wheeling, West
Virginia — Edinger-Geyer Model ................................... 209
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
No. Title Page
6.17 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Parkersburg, West
Virginia — Edinger-Geyer Model 212
6.18 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Parkersburg,
West Virginia - STREAM Model 213
6.19 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Parkersburg,
West Virginia - COLHEAT Model 214
6.20 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Parkersburg,
West Virginia — Edinger-Geyer Model 215
6.21 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Huntington, West Virginia —
STREAM Model 216
6.22 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Huntington, West Virginia —
COLHEAT Model 217
6.23 Computed and Measured Temperatures at Huntington, West Virginia —
Edinger-Geyer Model 218
6.24 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Huntington,
West Virginia - STREAM Model 219
6.25 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Huntington,
West Virginia - COLHEAT Model 22°
6.26 Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for Huntington,
West Virginia — Edinger-Geyer Model 221
6.27 Temperature Profile September 15, 1964, STREAM Model 230
7.1 The Ohio River 244
7.2 Ohio River Temperature Profile, July 25 - Part 1 247
7.3 Temperature Rise, °C Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
July 25 - Part 1 248
7.4 Ohio River Temperature Profile, July 25 - Part 2 249
7.5 Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
July 25 - Part 2 250
7.6 Ohio River Temperature Profile, August 18 - Part 1 252
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cant.)
No. Title
7.7 Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
August 18 - Part 1 253
7.8 Ohio River Temperature Profile, August 18 - Part 2 254
7.9 Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
August 18 - Part 2 255
7.10 Ohio River Temperature Profile, September 11 - Part 1 256
7.11 Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
September 11 - Part 1 257
7.12 Ohio River Temperature Profile, September 11 - Part 2 258
7.13 Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge,
September 11 - Part 2 259
7.14 Temperature Profile for Strategy 1 - July 25 260
7.15 Temperature Profile for Strategy 1 - August 18 261
7.16 Temperature Profile for Strategy 1 - September 11 262
7.17 Temperature Profile for Strategy 2 - July 25 263
7.18 Temperature Profile for Strategy 2 - August 18 264
7.19 Temperature Profile for Strategy 2 - September 11 265
7.20 Temperature Profile for Strategy 3 - July 25 267
7.21 Temperature Profile for Strategy 3 - August 18 268
7.22 Temperature Profile for Strategy 3 - September 11 269
8.1 Plume Dispersion Process -276
8.2 Entrainment of a Jet in a River Crossflow 277
8.3 Schematic View of Entrainment Process with the Effects of
Buoyancy and Bottom 279
8.4 Water Temperature Stratification in Lake St. Crotx near Cooling
Water Outfall of the A. S. King Plant on September 4, 1970.
Vertical Section along Axis of Discharge Channel. Temperatures
in °F 283
-------
10
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
8.5 Isotherms at 3 inch depth in Lake St. Croix near
Cooling Water Outfall of the A. S. King Plant on
June 12, 1970. Wind from S.E. 14 mph .................... 283
8.6 Water Temperature Distribution in Mississippi River
downstream of Monticello on July 1, 1971. River cross
sections at different distances X from the outfall ....... 287
8.7 Isotherms at Surface of Mississippi River downstream
of Monticello on July 1, 1971 ............................ 287
8.8 Relative Surface Temperature Increment versus Surface
Area- Velocity-Discharge Parameter, Downstream of
Monticello ............................................... 289
8.9 Reduced Relative Surface Temperature Increment versus
Surface Area- Velocity Discharge Parameter, Downstream
of Monticello ............................................ 289
8.10 Location of Sampling Stations for Temperature
Measurements ............................................. 292
8 . lla Temperature Contours ..................................... 294
8 . lib Temperature Profiles ..................................... 295
8.12 Fraction of Mississippi River Cross -Sectional Area
Encompassed by Indicated Relative Water Temperature Incre-
ments Downstream of Monticello on November 9, 1971,
= 0.011 (top) and on September 20, 1971,
= 0. 521 (bottom) ................................... 297
8.13 Temperature-Area-Time Diagram for Monticello,
September 20, 1971 ....................................... 299
8.14 Maximum Water Temperatures Encountered by Plankton in
Mississippi River Moving past the Cooling Water Outfall
of the Monticello Plant on Three Different Dates ......... 299
8.15 Sketch of Edwards Plant Site on Illinois River Showing
Effect of Channel Curvature .............................. 302
8.16 Comparison of Fully Mixed Excess Temperatures and
Computed Plant Loading per unit River Flow for Three
Plants [[[ 305
8.17 Sketch of Culley Station and ALCOA Plant Thermal Plumes
-------
11
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
8.18 Sketch of the Ohio River Station Thermal Plume,
August 10, 1973 (Ref. '10) 312
8.19 Sketch of the Gallagher Station Thermal Plume,
August 20, 1973 (Ref. 11) 314
8.20 Sketch of the Tanner's Creek Station Thermal Plume,
August 21, 1973 (Ref. 12) 316
8.21 Sketch of the Clifty Creek Station Thermal Plume,
August 21, 1973 (Ref. 13) 318
8.22 Philip Sporn Power Plant on Ohio River with
Field Data Locations 321
8.23 Isotherms from Field Data, at the Philip Sporn Plant for
August 23, 1967 at positions C, D, and E at 1000, 3000,
and 4400 ft, respectively, from the discharge 328
8.24 Location of Plumes Measured on the August 25, 1972
Aerial Infra-red Survey 330
8.25 Sketches of Thermal Plumes 1-4, 28 on the Monongahela
River drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25,
1972-(Ref. 18) 333
8.26 Sketches of Thermal Plumes 5-8, 22, 29 on the Monongahela
River drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25,
1972 (Ref. 18) 334
8.27 Sketch of Thermal Plume 10 on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plume 10:
F. Phillips Plant, Duquesne Power and Light) 335
8.28 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 11-14 on the Ohio River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plumes
11-14: Jones and Laughlin Steel Co.) 336
8.29 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 15, 16 on the Ohio River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plume 15:
St. Joseph Lead Company, Plume 16: Kbppers Corporation). 337
8.30 Sketch of Thermal Plume 17 on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plume 17:
Crucible Steel Company) 338
-------
12
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
Page
8.31 Sketch of Thermal Plume 18 on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plume 18:
Shippingport Power Plant, Duquesne Power and Light) 339
8.32 Sketch of Thermal Plume 19 on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Plume 19:
Colonial Steel Corporation) , 340
8.33 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 20, 21 on the Allegheny River
drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972
(Ref. 18) 341
8.34 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 23-26, 30 on the Manongahela
River drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25,
1972 (Ref. 18) 342
8.35 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 31, 33 on the Nbnongahela River
drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972
(Ref. 18) 343
8.36 Sketch of Thermal Plumes 32, 34 on the Manongahela
River drawn from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972
(Ref. 18) 344
8.37 Sketch of Thermal Plume 35 on the Mmongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)... 345
8.38 Sketch of Thermal Plume 36 on the Msnongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)... 346
8.39 Sketch of Thermal Plume from Sammis Power Plant from
Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch - 1000 ft 349
8.40 Sketch of Thermal Plume from Cardinal-Tidd Power Plants
from Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch = 1000 ft 350
8.41 Sketch of Thermal Plume from J. M. Stuart Power Plant
from Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch = 1000 ft 351
8.42 Sketch of Thermal Plume from the Beckjord Power Plant
from Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch = 2080 ft 352
-------
13
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
8.43 Sketch of Thermal Plume from the Miami Fort Power Plant
from Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch = 1000 ft 353
8.44 Sketch of Thermal Plume from the Tanners Creek Power Plant
from Infra-red Photographs of October 3, 1972 (Ref. 19).
Scale: 1 inch = 1000 ft 354
8.45 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 9 (3 units non-stratified ambient, critical river
flow) 361
8.46 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 10 (3 units, stratified ambient, critical river flow). 362
8.47 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 11 (3 units, non-stratified ambient, normal river
flow) 363
8.48 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart
Plant, Case 12 (3 units, stratified ambient, normal
river flow) 364
8.49 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart
Plant, Case 13 (2 units, non-stratified ambient, critical
river flow) 365
8.50 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 14 (2 units, stratified ambient, critical river flow). 366
8.51 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 15 (2 units, non-stratified ambient, normal river
flow) 367
8.52 WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to J. M. Stuart Plant,
Case 16 (2 units stratified ambient, normal river flow).... 368
-------
14
LIST OF TABLES
No. Title page
3.1 Average Monthly Air Temperatures and Precipitation Amounts
for Selected Stations on the Ohio River .......................... 33
3. 2 Electric Power Industry Cooling Water Use - 1969 ................. 38
3.3 ORSANCO Water Quality Monitor Stations ........................... 42
3.4 Fish Species Collected in the Ohio River and Tributaries,
April - August, 1971 ............................................. 49
3.5 Ohio River Steam-Electric Power Generating Plants 1963-1971 ...... 52
3.6 Ohio River Steam-Electric Power Generating Plants 1975-1983 ...... 53
4.1 Ambient Versus Discharge Fish Species at Each Power Plant ........ 77
4.2 Ranges of Temperature which Probably Include the Final Tem-
perature Preferenda of Common Species in the Wabash River ........ 79
4.3 Residual Chlorine Criteria for Freshwater Aquatic Life ........... 113
4.4 Residual Chlorine at Ohio River Power Plants ..................... 119
5.1 Summary of Calculations without Tributaries ...................... 163
6.1 1964 Average Monthly and Normal Average Monthly Air Temperatures,
Precipitation Amounts , and Wind Speeds for Huntington, West
Virginia [[[ 188
6. 2 Flow Measurement Stations ........................................ 190
6 . 3 Ohio River Temperature Data. ..................................... 191
6.4 Power Plants Included in Model Evaluation. ....................... 192
6,5 Industrial Advected Heat Sources Used in Model Evaluation. ....... 193
7.1 Monthly Maximum Allowable Temperature Along the Ohio River ....... 239
7.2 Thirty Day Average, Once in Ten Years Low Flows and the Mile Point
Where These Flows Enter the Simulation. .......................... 243
7.3 Factors Used to Determine Daily Advected Heat Input Due to Each
-------
15
LIST OF TABLES (Cont.)
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6a
8.6b
8.7
8.8
8.9
8.10
8.11
8.12
8.13
8.14
8.15
8.16
8.17
8.18
8.19
Plant Discharge, River, and Weather Conditions for
Allen S. King Power Station
Plant Discharge, River, and Weather Characteristics for
Monticello Site ..
Operational Data for Baxter Wilson Steam Electric
Generating Station
Mississippi River Data Near Vicksburg, Mississippi
For Survey Dates (Including Air Temperatures)
Summary of Observed Temperatures
Survey of Culley Generating Station, Southern Indiana Gas
and Electric Company
Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) Station
Survey of Ohio River Station, Southern Indiana Gas and
Electric Company
Survey of Gallagher Station, Public Service Company
of Indiana
Survey of Tanner's Creek Power Station, Indiana- Michigan
Electric Company
Survey of Clifty Creek Power Station, Indiana-Kentucky
Electric Corporation
Additional Plume Surveys for Temperature Standards
Verification
Atmospheric and River Conditions for August 23, 1967, and
Maximum Discharge Situation for Philip Sporn Plant
Philip Sporn Data for August 23, 1967
Index of Thermal Plumes Measured by the Aerial Infra-red
Survey of August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)
Index of Thermal Plumes Measured by the Aerial Infra-red
Survey of August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)
River and Plant Data Required for Modeling the Stuart
Discharge
Analyses of Maximum Mixed Temperature Rise
Solution of Hirst Model ,
Percentage of River Cross -Sectional Area Occupied by the 5°F
Isotherm for the Dif fuser Proposed by WAPORA
285
288
293
293
293
308
309
311
313
315
317
320
323
324
332
348
358
359
360
369
-------
16
PREFACE
This report represents the results of a six month study under-
taken by staff members of the Energy and Environmental Systems Division
and the Environmental Statement Project of the Argonne National Laboratory.
Dr. Barbara-Ann Lewis conducted the review of previous and exist-
ing biological studies which are pertinent to the determination of the
biological aspects of Ohio River cooling water use, and is the author of
all the biological portions of the report with the exception of Section
4.2. That section, which deals with entrainment and condenser passage
effects, was written by Dr. James J. Reisa, formerly of Argonne and now
a staff member of the President's Council for Environmental Quality.
Mr. Donald R. Schregardus was responsible for the implementation
of the study models on the Argonne computer as well as their operation
throughout the study. He was responsible for assembling the Ohio River
data base that was used throughout the project and assisted in interpre-
tation of the simulation results.
A brief survey of the thermal plume studies that have taken
place on the Ohio River was performed by Dr. Anthony J. Policastro. The
results of the survey are reported by Dr. Policastro in Section 8 and in
Section 1 where he makes conclusions and recommendations.
Dr. Brian P. Butz was the director of the Ohio River Cooling
Water Study, was responsible for project co-ordination, and is the author
of the remaining sections of the report.
The three computer models described in this report are available
from either the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region V or
the Argonne National Laboratory.
-------
17
-------
18
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of this report gratefully acknowledge the many indi-
viduals who represented various federal agencies, state agencies and pri-
vate industries and without whose support this report would not have been
possible.
We deeply appreciate the efforts throughout this project of many
members of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. In particular,
we thank: Gary Milburn and Howard Zar of Region V for their guidance,
especially during the temperature prediction portion of the study; Anthony G.
Kizlauskas of Region V for implementing the EPA version of the Edinger-Geyer
model on the Argonne computer in a remarkably short time; Charles Kaplan of
Region IV for his interest and encouragement; and Richard L. Reising of
Region V, Indiana District Office; Larry A. Parker and Ron Preston of the
Region III Wheeling Field Office, and Bruce Tichenor of the EPA Pacific
Northwest Environmental Laboratory—all of whom reviewed the report.
Special thanks are given Dennis E. Peterson of the Hanford Engi-
neering Development Laboratory for providing us with data previously
collected on the Ohio River.
We thank those power companies who assisted us in this study: The
Ohio Edison Company, The Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company, The Owensboro
Municipal Utilities, The Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corporation and Electric
Energy, Inc. We acknowledge the special efforts of Mr. James H. Carson of
Ohio Edison and Mr. Edward E. Galloway of Cincinnati Gas and Electric, both
of whom helped us acquire additional information about the power industry
along the Ohio River. The efforts of Ronald Yates of the United States
Corps of Engineers, David Galloway of the National Weather Record Center,
William L. Klein and David A. Dunsmore of the Ohio River Valley Water
-------
19
Sanitation Commission, and H. W. Defibaugh of the City of Wheeling are
acknowledged.
Also, we sincerely appreciate the assistance rendered by fellow
members of Argonne National- Laboratory: Ernest Levinson for assistance in
the preparation of Section 8, Robert Neisius and Walter Clapper for the
report's graphics, Allen Kennedy and Donald McGregor for reviewing the drafl
and finally Jane Carey and Maria Pacholok for their patience and for their
splendid job of editing and typing this report.
-------
20
1. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1.1 Thermal Models
Three far-field one-dimensional river temperature prediction
models were chosen by the United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Region V, for evaluation. The models-COLHEAT, STREAM, and Edinger-Geyer-
were evaluated on a 300 mile reach of the Ohio River from Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, to Huntington, West Virginia. The year 1964 was used as the
data base year, and daily temperatures predicted by the model were compared
with daily measured temperatures taken at four temperature measurement
stations. The model most appropriate for use on the Ohio River for tem-
perature prediction purposes was chosen by comparing the correlation be-
tween computed and measured temperatures as well as considering its
theoretical completeness, data needs, and ease of use. Based on these
evaluations (described extensively in Section 6), we conclude:
1. The COLHEAT Model is the most appropriate model of the three
evaluated to use for river temperature prediction on the Ohio River at the
present time.
2. The STREAM Model regularly predicts temperatures that are below
measured temperatures.
3. The Edinger-Geyer Model tends to underpredict at the lower
river temperatures and overpredict at the higher river temperatures.
4. The verification program used by the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission may have used temperature measurements too far from
points of heat discharge to properly evaluate their exponential decay term.
-------
21
We also conclude that:
5. Since three models evaluated in this study assume complete
thermal mixing within the river at any given milepoint, it is improper to
apply any of these models to river reaches which possess thermal stratifica-
tion characteristics.
6. The STREAM model does not automatically add tributary flows to
the Ohio River mainstreams.
7. The available river water temperature data is insufficient to
allow model evaluation with a high confidence level.
8. The available river water temperature data is insufficient
to allow proper model validation.
We recommend that efforts be undertaken to secure a significant
Ohio River temperature data base such that models can be validated and
evaluated on the Ohio River with a high degree of confidence. Special
emphasis should be placed on measuring temperature close enough to heat
sources and at such intervals so that the exponential decay of the river
temperature is observed. We also recommend that thermal plume models be
evaluated and used to determine any mixing zone violations by heat dis-
charges.
Strategies, using the COLHEAT Model, were applied to the Ohio
River and the resulting temperature distributions were analyzed. Con-
clusions drawn from these analyses are:
1. The natural temperature of the Ohio River can be determined
by using COLHEAT.
2. There are both allowable maximum monthly temperature
violations and temperature increment (AT) violations in the first two
hundred miles of the Ohio River under low flow conditions.
-------
22
3. The COLHEAT model predicts that advected heat discharged
from large power plants under low flow conditions raises the river tem-
perature. The new river temperature decays slowly in the downstream
direction forming an ambient temperature which differs from the natural
river temperature for distances of twenty miles or more.
4. The COLHEAT Model is amenable to strategy application on
the Ohio River.
1.2 Biological Effects
Water quality and aquatic life of the Ohio River mainstream and
major tributaries have been considerably degraded by the construction of
navigational pools, heavy siltation, effluent from coal mines, and the
discharge of industrial and municipal wastes. Efforts by federal and
state agencies to prevent further deterioration of the river have stimu-
lated research into the effects of cooling water use on the biota of this
river. Results of these studies may be summarized as follows:
1. Phytoplankton abundance in the Ohio River varies markedly
with flow rate, season, and river mile, usually reaching population peaks
in the late summer or early fall. Diatoms generally predominate in the
spring and fall, although green algae are always present and sometimes
predominate at certain locations. Occasionally, blue-green algal blooms
occur. The studies to date are inconclusive and generally inadequate to
determine the effects of heated discharges on phytoplankton abundances.
2. The zooplankton community consists primarily of rotifers.
Species of cladocerans and copepods are also present, the former group
predominating where water quality is poorer. Zooplankton mortality as a
result of passage through the condensers of power plants was observed
under certain conditions.
-------
23
3. Benthic macro invertebrates are scarce in the river due mainly
to poor substrate conditions. Midges, caddisfly, mayfly, and damselfly
larvae are ubiquitous. Oligochaetes and bloodworms are dominant at certain
locations and in certain years. Thermal discharges appear to increase the
abundance of caH-Iisfly larvae.
4. About 50 species of fish are known to be present in the river
and tributaries. Carp, gizzard shad, some shiners, channel catfish and
buffalofish, which are more tolerant of turbidity and high temperatures,
frequent the main stem. Species such as walleye, sauger, crappie, and
sunfishes apparently prefer the cooler waters of the smaller streams and
creeks. Little successful spawning has been observed in the main stem,
and it is likely that spawning and nursery habitats occur in the cooler
streams and quiet backwaters. Few incidents of thermal death have been
reported but avoidance of heated discharges has reduced the fish species
diversity at certain locations.
Studies on the biological effects of cooling water use on the
Ohio River have provided good insight into some aspects of the problem,
but suffer from one or more deficiencies, including:
1. Neglect of other factors besides discharge of heated water,
such as the intake, condenser passage, and presence of chemicals in the
discharge.
Lack of systematic, frequent, or extensive plume temperature
measurements with which to relate responses of river biota.
3. Lack of statistical treatment of phytoplankton and zooplankton
data to determine significance of observed effects.
4. Lack of water quality considerations in plume effects.
-------
24
5. Little characterization and measurement of natural seasonal
variations in populations of river biota.
6. Little information on migration habits, movements, and spawn-
ing of river fish.
Despite difficulties inherent in the study of complex life systems
such as the Ohio River and its biota, several effects of cooling water use
have been well established. It is thus no longer excusable to cite the lack
of information as a basis for inaction. Measures that can be taken to
prevent or minimize adverse effects of cooling water use include:
1. Siting and design of intake structures primarily on the
basis of biological effects, and only secondarily on economic factors.
2. Minimization of entrainment effects by shortening exposure
times to elevated temperatures and reducing intake volumes.
3. Design of discharge structures such that fish do not have
access to the discharge canals and cannot be trapped in small bays.
4. Avoidance of spawning and nursery areas in siting intakes
and discharges.
5. Providing a zone of passage that takes into consideration
the habits of the fish.
6. Careful control of chlorination, if such is used to control
condenser sliming. A total residual chlorine concentration of 0.2 mg/1
(not to exceed 2 hours/day) as measured in the effluent before discharge
to the river would protect Ohio River fish.
7. Design and location of intake and discharge structures that
avoid the necessity of extensive and repeated dredging.
-------
25
1.3 Thermal Plume Analysis^
All available nonproprietary data on Ohio River thermal plumes
-i
either from infrared surveys or boat measurements are of a quality too
poor to permit meaningful quantitative evaluations of plume characteristics.
Only the general size of the plumes could be determined from the two aerial
infrared surveys. Moreover, the temperatures measured were not of suffi-
cient detail to be useful for mixing zone analyses, much less model verifi-
cations. Finally, water temperature measurements taken from a boat were
not sufficient to provide any kind of plume detail.
We conclude that more detailed temperature measurements should
be made along the river so that accurate plume characteristics may be
delineated. The data required consist of temperature measurements
sufficient to yield a three dimensional temperature map of the plume as
well as velocity measurements sufficient to yield a velocity profile at
a short distance upstream of the plant discharge. We feel that these
measurements will serve to verify and improve existing and future thermal
models as well as assisting EPA enforcement personnel in determining
plant violations.
-------
26
2. INTRODUCTION
The thermal capacity of the Ohio River has been a subject of much
discussion and considerable controversy during the past several years.
Presently, about thirty-five electric generating stations use the Ohio River
for cooling purposes and the majority of these stations use once-through
cooling. In addition, several other major industries such as steel mills,
chemical companies, smelters, etc., discharge heat into the river. What is
the effect of this heat on the indigenous aquatic life of the Ohio River?
What is the effect of this heat on the natural thermal regime of the river?
Several studies have been made to determine the effect of this heat on the
indigenous aquatic life of the Ohio River, but the results have varied sub-
stantially. At least three agencies, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Ohio
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, and the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency have modeled the impact of heat discharges on the thermal
regime of the river. Again, the results of the studies have varied sub-
stantially. This study originated because of the conflicting results of
previous inquiries.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to review and critique existing
technical information relevant to the environmental effects of the use
of the Ohio River main stem for cooling. In order to evaluate the
effect of heat discharges on the indigenous aquatic life of the Ohio River,
an extensive review and critique of past and existing studies dealing with
the biological aspects of cooling water was undertaken. In order to judge
the effect of heat discharges on the thermal regime of the river, three one-
dimensional river temperature prediction models - COLHEAT, STREAM and
Edinger-Geyer were evaluated and the most appropriate model was selected
-------
27
to analyze changes in temperature distribution along the river. The effects
of heat discharges on the thermal regime of the river near the points of
discharge were evaluated by analyzing and critiquing available thermal plume
study results.
Organization of the Report
Section 3 is an introduction to the Ohio River and the Ohio River
basin area. A brief description of the river, its use, its quality and its
biota is given, together with a description of power industry growth along
the river.
The biological aspects of water cooling use are discussed in
Section 4. Nationwide studies as well as those particular to the Ohio
River are evaluated and critiqued. Recommendations for the Ohio River
conclude this section.
Sections 5 and 6 deal with the three river temperature prediction
models analyzed in this study. The theoretical foundations of the models -
COLHEAT, STREAM, and Edinger-Geyer - are presented in Section 5, while
each model is evaluted in Section 6. Section 7 uses the model selected in
Section 6 to predict river temperature distributions under various condi-
tions.
Thermal plume studies which have been performed on the Ohio River
are examined and discussed in Section 8.
-------
28
3. THE OHIO RIVER REGION
Section 3 presents a brief overview of the Ohio River region.
The description of the Ohio River basin contained in Section 3.1 includes
a discussion of the area's notable physical features as well as a climato-
logical profile. The use of Ohio River water for cooling purposes, espe-
cially by the power industry, is the theme of Section 3.2. Past, present
and future uses of cooling water are discussed.
A biologist's view of the Ohio River region is given in Sections
3.3 and 3.4. Section 3.3 describes the history and present status of the
water quality in the region, while Section 3.4 is concerned with the effect
of water quality change on the region's biota.
Section 3.5 concludes Section 3 with a discussion of past, present
and future electric power generating capacity on the Ohio River.
3.1 Description of the Ohio River Basin
The Ohio River basin, an area of 203,910 square miles, lies in
the middle eastern portion of the United States. The Ohio River is formed
by the confluence of the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, the point usually designated as river mile zero on Ohio River
mainstream navigation charts. From Pittsburgh (see Fig. 3.1) the river
flows in a northwesterly direction for about 25 miles and then turns west-
ward where it becomes the Ohio-West Virginia boundary. From this point
the river continues in a southwesterly direction progressively forming the
northern boundaries of Kentucky-West Virginia and the southern boundaries
of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. The Ohio River joins the Mississippi
River at Cairo, Illinois, 981 miles downstream from its origin at
Pittsburgh.
-------
MISSOURI
CD
O CD
r
-S
Ls
6Z
-------
30
The Ohio River is the eleventh largest river (by length) in the
United States and it supplies the largest volume of flow of the six
Mississippi natural tributary drainage patterns, and, of these, the Ohio
basin is exceeded in land area only by the Missouri River basin.
Physical Features
The area comprising the Ohio River basin includes several dis-
tinctive physiographic regions. The eastern portion of the basin lies
mainly within the Appalachian Plateau, although portions of the drainage
areas of the Monongahela and Kanawha Rivers are in the Blue Ridge provinces.
The western portion of the basin is located within the interior low plateau
and Central Lowland provinces, except for a small area at the mouth of the
Ohio River where it drains into the lower Mississippi River at the northern
tip of the Gulf Coastal Plain.
Ancient buried river valleys that are deeply entrenched in the
bedrock and subsequently have been filed with glacial debris are wide-
spread subsurface formations of the basin in Indiana, Ohio, northwestern
Pennsylvania and New York. The material filling many of the valleys is of
a highly permeable composition and because of its present and future use,
may be considered one of the water assets of the basin. Throughout the
basin, the bedrock is principally of sedimentary origin and varies from
dense impermeable siltstones and shales to open textured limestone and
sandstone. The degree to which the bedrock is water bearing and forms,
or might form, a significant source of ground water varies with location.
The Appalachian coal fields are found beneath the basin in eastern
Ohio, western Pennsylvania, southeastern West Virginia, and eastern Kentucky,
-------
31
while in the western part of the basin, parts of the mid-continental fields
are found in western Kentucky and southern Illinois and Indiana. Generally,
petroleum deposits can be found associated with the coal fields as fringe
areas along the basin interior. Extraction of these materials is an impor-
tant industrial activity in the locations of occurrence, and the coal re-
serves seem sufficient to sustain the area's coal industry for quite some
time. However, the extraction and subsequent processing of coal has given
rise to acid mine and silt contamination of the local surface drainage
while the oil wells have frequently been a source of brine discharge to
local surface streams and underground aquifiers.
The Ohio River drainage system is almost completely devoid of
natural lakes and swamps. The existing natural lake areas are found only
in the upper headwaters of the Wabash River drainage and these are so
limited in extent as to be of only local concern in respect to water supply
sources and water disposal. Notable swamp areas had appeared contiguous
to the Wabash lake area region, but the development of dikes, dredged
ditches, and tilling systems have brought the lands to a well-drained
condition. Water conservation reservoirs, which range in size from farm
ponds to large government developments, and navigation dams, creating flow
through impoundments and whose pools range in depth from 6 to 45 feet, are
found throughout the basin. Many of the dams serve as diversion and tempo-
rary wrter storage facilities for community and industrial use and all of
them modify the natural assimilative capacities of the impounded streams.
Climate1'2
The Ohio River basin's climate is temperate with marked seasons.
The eastward passage of cyclonic storms cause changes in the weather, con-
siderable rainfall, snowfall, humidity as well as moderate cloudiness and
-------
32
windiness. Several tornadoes occur each year within the basin, and hurri-
canes sometimes encroach on the southern and eastern portions of the basin
before their energy is spent.
The average annual air temperature along the Ohio River varies from
about 58°F near its end at Cairo, Illinois, to about 50°F at its origin at
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The average annual temperature is, in general,
uniformly distributed from southwest to northeast between the aforementioned
limits. Average January temperatures in the basin range from 25°F to 35°F,
while those in July are from 70°F to 80°F. Summer maxiraums of 100°F to
111°F have been recorded throughout the basin, while winter temperature
extremes are well below freezing and often of sufficient length to cause
ice to form on the surface streams.
The average annual precipation varies from about 36 inches in
the northern part of the basin to about 52 inches in the southern part and,
except for local departures over the Highlands, is generally uniformly dis-
tributed from north to south. Usually the average precipitation is uniformly
distributed throughout the year, but wide departures from the average have
occurred. In severe drought years as little as 50 percent of the annual
average occurred in various parts of the basin, and there have been instances
when drought conditions have continued over several consecutive years. The
effects of drought periods on streamflow and subsequent water availability
are of particular interest. For example, the years 1930 and 1934 witnessed
a severe drought throughout the western-central portion of the basin. With
an average annual runoff of 10.85 inches, the Little Wabash fell to 2.36
inches in 1930 and fell to 2.40 inches in 1934.
The average monthly air temperature and average monthly precipita-
tion figures for various stations along the Ohio River are given in Table 3.1
below.
-------
33
Table 3.1
Average Monthly Air Temperatures and Precipitation
Amounts for Selected Stations on the Ohio River*
Pittsburgh, Pa. Cincinnati, Ohio Louisville, Ky.
MONTH Air^^Precip. ^-^ro-n^ Precip. Airf0 , Precip.
(in.) Ternf) hj (in.) Temp FJ (in.)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
28.9
29.2
36.8
49.0
59.8
68.4
72.1
70.8
64.2
53.1
40.8
30.7
2.97
2.19
3.32
3.08
3.91
3.78
3.88
3.31
2.54
2.52
2.24
2.40
33.7
35.1
42.7
54.2
64.2
73.4
76.9
' 75.7
69.0
57.9
44.6
35.3
3.67
2.80
3.89
3.63
3.80
4.18
3.59
3.28
2.71
2.24
2.95
2.77
35.0
35.8
43.3
54.8
64.4
73.4
77.6
76.2
69.5
57.9
44.7
36.3
4.10
3.29
4.59
3.82
3.90
3.99
3.36
2.97
2.63
2.25
3.20
3.22
*A11 data based on standard 30-year period 1931 to 1960.
-------
34
3.2 Ohio River Cooling Water Use
The earliest known use of water in the Ohio River basin was primar-
ily for domestic purposes. Water needs were quite simple by today's stan-
dards and were served by withdrawals of a few gallons per day per person
or per household. The water itself was carried in buckets or by some other
2
simple means from the source of supply to the point of use. However, as
the elements of society became more interdependent resulting in an indus-
trialized economy, water use rapidly increased. For example, by 1963 there
were 1,908 municipal water supply systems in the Ohio River basin, and 1,595
of these had water treatment facilities furnishing water to approximately 13
2
million people.
Industrialization created a large demand for water as a cooling
agent. In both the Ohio River basin and the Ohio River the electric power
industry asserts the largest demand on the available water resources
and nearly all of the water used by the power industry is for cooling and
condensing the steam used to produce electric energy. In 1965 an estimated
31 billion gallons per day were drawn from the Ohio River basin for man's
use, and about one billion gallons of this total were used consumptively.
The electric power industry withdrew 19 billion gallons per day (61% of
the total water withdrawn) for cooling purposes. About 8.5 billion gallons
per day of the power industry's 19 billion gallons per day withdrawal were
taken from the Ohio River and the lower reaches of its principal tributaries.
The fact that the electric power industry uses much more water for
cooling purposes than other industries is not unique to the Ohio River basin.
In 1964 the cooling water-use distribution on a nationwide basis was3
-------
35
Electric power 81.3%
Primary metals 6.8%
Chemical and allied products 6.2%
Petroleum and coal products 2.4%
Paper and allied products 1.2%
Food and allied products 0.8%
Machinery 0.3%
Rubber and plastics 0.3%
Transportation equipment 0.2%
Other 0.5%
As stated earlier, the electric industry requires cooling water in
order to efficiently generate electricity. The water withdrawn by a power
company circulates through the power plant condensers and absorbs most of
the heat retained by the steam after it leaves the turbine and before the
condensate is returned to the feedwater heaters and boilers (see Fig. 3.2).
The quantity of water required for this purpose varies depending upon plant
size, plant heat rate, and the acceptable temperature rise of the cooling
water. Returning the now-heated water directly to the stream from which
it was withdrawn may contribute to stream pollution by reducing the water's
capacity to hold dissolved oxygen. A reduction in stream dissolved oxygen
content adversely affects aquatic life, waste elimination, and the use of
the water for other purposes.
Historically, the cooling water needed by power plants was with-
drawn from nearby lakes or rivers, circulated through the plant, and dis-
charged into the same water body. This process, called once-through cooling,
enabled the power industry to produce electricity efficiently with relatively
low capital and operating costs for the cooling system. However, the increas-
ing capacity of the newer power plants along with the increasing number of
power plants have created thermal problems on many waterways. Increased
social awareness of the environment in which we live and of the
-------
BOILER
PRE HEATER
TURBINE
GENERATOR
\ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ v \
V \ \ \ \
\ \ ^ ^ \
\ \ V
\ \ \
\ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \
i
i
I
i
I
Cooling Cooling
Water Water
Intake Discharge
STREAM
• FLCW
1*^.
Electrical
Power
Condenser
Os
Figure 3.2
Steam-Electric Power Station Cooling System
-------
37
need for its preservation have resulted in statutes which require the
electric power industry to turn to alternative cooling techniques such as
cooling ponds and towers.
Present Cooling^ Water Usage
In 1969 the total water withdrawal from the Ohio River for cooling
purposes by the electric power industry amounted to over 13 billion gallons
per day, an increase of over 60% of the water withdrawn in 1964. A detailed
breakdown of cooling water use by individual plants with a capacity greater
than 50MW is given in Table 3.2. The amount of water used for cooling by
other industries can be estimated to be between 10-201 of the power
industry total.
Future Cooling Water Usage
Predictions of the cooling water requirements for steam electric
generation 10 to 15 years hence is difficult and uncertain, and the figures
generated may prove to be inadequate in most cases. This difficulty is
compounded by the unknown effect that the present "energy crisis" will
exert on the demand curve facing the power industry. Although confronted
with the problems mentioned above, some statements about future cooling
water use can and should be made.
Peterson and Jaske and then later Peterson, et al., have esti-
mated the total potential low flow direct cooling capacity of the Ohio River
-------
38
Table 3.2
Electric Power Industry Cooling Water Use - 1969
River
Mile Point
2.3
15.6
33.8
55.0
59.1
74.5
75.0
79.5
102.5
101.9
111.1
160.5
241.0
260.2
405.7
453.3
471.4
490.3
494.5
558.5
604.0
607.0
616.6
618.0
728.2
752.8
755.3
773.0
773.0
773.8
793.5
803.6
946
958
Station
J. H. Reed
F. Phillips
Shippingport
W. H. Sammis
Toronto
Tidd
Cardinal
Windsor
R. E. Burger
Mitchell
Kammer
Willow Island
Philip Sporn
Kyger Creek
J. M. Stuart
W. C. Beckjord
West End
Miami Fort
Tanners Creek
Clifty Creek
Paddy's Run
Canal
Cane Run
Gal lager
Coleman
Owensboro Municipal #1
Elmer Smith
Warrick 1,2,3
Warrick 4
Culley
Ohio River
Henderson
Shawnee
Joppa
Water Withdrawn
(MGD)
315.6
399.9
128.6
1054.4
181.2
259.0
1151.2
662.2
370.3
*
646.0
145.4
969.0
1124.0
N.A.
475.5
211.2
295.9
917.3
1376.0
91.6
0.6
575.5
453.9
151.2
61.2
105.2
N.A.
N.A.
135.8
129.2
40.0
129.2
566.5
13,122.7
N.A. - Data not available
A
Cooling tower
-------
39
and have concluded:
"Under the maximum condition of development and
with some partial supplementary cooling, the
entire needs of the (Ohio River basin) area
could be accommodated through the foreseeable
future. Without supplementary cooling, the
available siting opportunities would be totally
committed by 1984."
Care should be taken when interpreting the results of the Peterson-Jaske
report. Too often that report is interpreted to mean that there is an
enormous untapped capability for once-through cooling remaining in the
Ohio River basin. Peterson, e_t a^., point out:
"As natural river temperatures approach the maxi-
mum allowable under state standards, the capacity
calculations based on incremental temperature rise
may not be indicative of the river's actual capacity,
since the capacity could be reduced occasionally by the
maximum temperature constraint."5
Also, neither report mentioned above takes into consideration state statutes
regarding mixing zones which may further reduce the total low flow direct
cooling capacity of the river in question.
The preceding discussion should not be construed to indicate that
the Ohio River does not have the cooling capacity necessary to accommodate
additional once-through cooling power plants. The question, which is yet
unresolved, is just how many once-through cooling power plants can be
sited at which locations on the Ohio River without violating state
standards.
-------
40
In 1969 the Power Industry Advisory Committee to the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) reported that all future power
plants would be closed cycle. Since the power plants planned
for the Ohio River in the 1975-1981 time span are all closed cycle, cool-
ing water use by the power industry during this period should remain
constant or rise slightly.
3.3 Water Quality -- History and Present Status
Before the 19th Century, little was known about the water
quality of the Ohio River, but there is information which indicates that
the river at that time was clear throughout most of its length; the bottom
was gravelly, rocky, or sandy, and aquatic plants abounded. The shading
effect of trees along the banks may have helped keep the water cooler in
the summer than it is now. In the early 1800's steamboats began to use
the Ohio, coalpits appeared around Pittsburgh, and the Ohio River Valley
became an industrial center. In 1824, the U. S. Army began its modifica-
tion of the river starting with the removal of rocks and the construction
of dikes. Eventually, a system of 46 locks and dams changed the free-
flowing Ohio to a series of slow-moving impoundments. Today, the lock
and dam system is being replaced by a new system of 19 high level dams
to improve navigation, reduce the number of lockages, and accommodate
the increased sizes of tow boats. As with many of man's well-intentioned
but shortsighted endeavors, little consideration was likely given to the
ramifications of these actions, particularly to the effects on the river's
biotic community.
-------
41
Concurrent with the river modification; removal of forests,
agriculture, and construction throughout the river valley have caused
tremendous silt loads to build up in the river, so that a once transparent
river has become a turbid one. The gravelly or sandy bottom, so essential
as spawning substrate for many fish species, is now covered in many places
with layers of silt and finer sediments.
In 1948 the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO)
was established to conduct a regional program of water pollution control.
From 1959 to 1970, some improvement in dissolved oxygen levels, pH, dis-
solved solids, and chlorides were observed at some monitoring sites.
ORSANCO maintains water quality monitoring stations as indicated in
Table 3.3.
In addition to silt carried into the river by runoff, about 1648
industries and 130 sewage treatment plants are discharging organic com-
pounds, heavy metals, high BOD wastes, and fecal organisms into the main
stem and tributaries, leading to unsightly oil and scum on the water sur-
face, toxic levels of certain compounds such as cyanide and lead, low
dissolved oxygen concentrations, occasions for dead or unpalatable fish,
and unsanitary water conditions due to the presence of fecal bacteria
Q
including, in some areas, salmonella species.
3.4 Biota - History and Present Status^
Before the impoundment of the Ohio River into a series of pools,
it is likely that there was little true plankton in the river except as was
-------
42
Table 3.3
ORSAXCO Water Quality Monitor Stations3
"Ohio River Stations
Mile Point Type*
Pittsburgh (Reed) Pa. ..
South Heights, Pa
Stratton, Ohio
Toronto , Ohio
Weirton, W. Va
Steubcnville, Ohio
Power, W. Va ,
Yorkville, Ohio
Wheel in», W. Va.
Moundsville, W. Va
Natrium, W. Va
Willow ]
B
A,
Mile Point
South Point, Ohio
Portsmouth, Ohio
Mcldalil 1)m;i
New RichuonJ (Reckiord) Ohio ••••
Cincinnati (Waterworks) Ohio ••••
Cincinnati (West End) Ohio
Cincinnati (Anderson Ferry) Ohio
North Bend (Miami Fort) Ohio
Aurora, Ind.
Markloiid HTJII
Madison (Clifty Creek) Ind
Louisville (Waterworks) Ky.
318.0
350.7
436.2
452.8
462.8
471.3
479.1
490.0
496.7
531.5
559.5
600.6
Louisville (Cane Run) Ky 616.5
I'.vansville, Ind.
791.5
Dam 53 962.7
Type*
B
B
A, C
A
A, B
A
A
A, B
A
A, C
A, B
A, B
A, C
A, B
C
Tributary' Stations
Mile at which
tributary enters
Ohio River
Miles from sampling station
to confluence of tributary
with Ohio River Type
Alle°]ieny River near Kin-ua Pa
Great Ma ami River near Clcves . Ohio
, 00
0 o
00
... 00
, 00
oo ...
25 4
172 7
172 2 ...
265 7
26b 7
, 31 7 1 ...
. . . 463 5 .
, 470 3
491.1
Wabash River near Ilutsonville, 111.
198.0
13.3
8.9
90.8
42.6
4.5
5.3
66.8
28.0
193.9
74.3
31.1
20.3
3.4
4.5
5.5
848.0 174.0
C
A, B, C
B
C
A, B
B, C
A, B
B
A, B, C
B
B
A, C
A, B
A
A
A
A, C
* A -- Electronic Monitors
B -- Water Users Committee Stations
C -- U.S. Geological Survey Stations
ORSAVQ
0, Twenty-third \curbock, 19/J.
-------
43
supplied from slow-flowing tributaries, quiet backwaters, and detached
benthos. Construction of the navigation pools essentially changed a
lotic environment into lake-like ecosystems where plankton are able to
accumulate.
A study of the distribution of stream plankton in the Ohio River
10
main stem and tributaries was made in 1939 and 1940. Although sampling
was not very systematic (e.g., tributaries were not all sampled in the
same year or in the same month; at some locations, samples were collected
for a large part of the year, while at other locations less frequently;
more samples were taken during the summer than during other months of the
year), the results from over 1400 samples gave some idea of the general
plankton populations of the river system at that time. It was concluded
that, in general, the numbers of individuals and species in the tribu-
taries increased with the onset of warm weather, reaching a peak in August
and September although there was no marked seasonal variation for most of
the plankton. In the Ohio River main stem, the reverse change occurred,
i.e., numbers and species decreased during the warm months. This was
attributed to change in stream size and to water quality factors. Diatoms
were the predominant group of phytoplankton in the main stem, occurring in
larger number than in the tributaries.
-------
44
In 1960-1961, a study on the upper Ohio River indicated that the
phytoplankton community in January through May was dominated by diatoms,
mainly the genera Synedra, Navicula, Asterionella, Cyclotella, Stephano-
discus, Fragillaria, Meridion, and Melosira. From June through December,
green algae predominated, mainly Chlamydomonas, Ankistrodesmus, Scenedesmus,
Pediastrum, Micratinium, Crucigenenia, and Dictyosphaerium. Euglenoids,
chiefly Trachelompnas, occurred during the spring and fall but were scarce
in the summer. Blue-green algae were present in February and September,
mainly Oscillatoria. Numbers of individuals collected appeared to be
influenced by the flow rate, and it has been suggested that plankton
population studies in rivers may be more meaningful during periods of low
12
flow when populations can develop without the influence of high velocity.
There are periods in the year when water in the pools can reach flood
stage in the Ohio River, and coupled with the opening and closing of the
locks makes flow rates in the river extremely variable, even on a day-to-day
basis. These factors should be considered in the evaluation of plankton
populations in the main stem of the river.
A study in the Louisville area (on the middle portion of the river)
indicated that the diatoms Asterionella, Melosira, and Synedra were abundant
in the fall. About 28 species of green algae of the order Chlorococcales
were also present. In October 1959, a heavy algal bloom of Anacystis (a
blue-green alga) occurred, and probably contributed to the taste of the
water during that period.
-------
45
Other studies on phytoplankton distribution in the Ohio River * '
substantiate some present conclusions concerning the phytoplankton in the main
stem of the river, i.e., abundance varies markedly with flow rate, season, and
river mile (location); diatoms usually predominate in the spring and fall,
although green algae are always present and sometimes predominate at certain
locations; occasionally, blue-green algal blooms occur, as well as blooms
of the "sewage fungus" Sphaerotilus natans in some areas close to sewage dis-
charges .
Zooplankton
A survey of zooplankton in seven selected regions along the length
7
of the Ohio River was made in 1959. The dominant members of this community
were rotifers, mainly Keratella and Brachionus. The cladocerans, Bosmina
and Chydoras, and the copepod, Cyclops, also occurred in nearly all the
samples taken.
In 1970 and 1971, rotifers were dominant at three sampling loca-
tions on the river; i.e., River Mile (KM) 54.4, 260, and 452. At RM 616.7,
where water quality was poorer, than at the abovementioned stations due to
heavy use by industry and municipalities, cladocerans were dominant. At
all four stations, populations were near zero during the winter until late
March, became evident in April, and reached population peaks coincident
with phytoplankton peaks in the summer.
Macroinvertebrates
Bottom-dwelling macroinvertebrates of the Ohio River and tribu-
taries were sampled over a five-year period (1963 to 1967). Taxa found to
be ubiquitous in the Ohio River and tributaries were midges, Dicrotendipes,
-------
46
Procladium, Coelotanypus, Cricotopus; the caddisfly Cyrnellus fraternus;
the damselfly Argia; the mayfly Stenonema; and the coelenterate Cordy-
lophpra lacustris. The midges Glyptotendipes and Chironomus attenuatus
were common in organically enriched water; Chironomus riparius, Cricotopus,
and Procladius were commonly found in water receiving toxic pollutants and
low pH. Populations downstream from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, principally
bloodworms and oligochaetes, were limited by pollution from the lower
Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers. A marked change in macroinvertebrate
populations occurred in the Wabash River at New Harmony, Indiana, during
the five-year study period. The large and diverse fauna, consisting of
midges, caddisflies, odonates, and mollusks, existing in 1963 and 1965,
were markedly reduced in 1966 when bloodworms were predominant.
This change occurred during a period of low flow in the summer. In 1967,
the fauna returned to its former composition. Other taxa of the river
basin found during the five-year study were:
"The midge Chironomus riparius (upper Ohio River)
C. attenuatus and Xenochironomus xenolabis (middle
Ohio River) and Tanypus (lower Ohio River); the cray-
fish Orconectes cfoscurus (Allegheny River and upper
Ohio), 0. rusticus (Wabash River and middle Ohio);
the cadcTisflies Pptamyia flava and Hydropsyche orris,
stoneflies Isoperla bilineata and Acroneuria spp.,
mayflies Hexagenia and Caenidae and the dragonfly
Neurocordulia sp. (middle and lower Ohio River).
The asiatic clam Corbicula was found from Marietta to
Cairo. The stoneflies Acroneuria occurred in the
spring and summer and Taeniopteryx nivalis was
collected in the late fall. Peak periods of hydro-
psychid caddisflies were observed from mid-August
to late September in the middle and lower Ohio
River basin."8
In 1972, results from benthic sampling using the Ponar dredge at
RM 54.4, 260, 452.9, and 494 indicated very low numbers of benthos at all
-------
47
areas. Oligochaeta were the most abundant group. The asiatic clam Corbicula
manilensis was also found at all sampling sites.8
The paucity of benthos in the Ohio River is very likely the result
of poor substrate conditions, low dissolved oxygen levels at lower depths,
and possibly toxic materials adsorbed onto sediment particles. Since
benthic organisms serve as food for many species of fish, including
game and sport fish, the adverse effects of the loads of silt and indus-
trial pollutants are eventually manifested by the populations of fish in
the river.
Fish
A collection of historical notes on the species and abundance of
fish in the Ohio River and tributaries indicates that before 1900, fish
in the Ohio River included muskellunge, blue sucker, buffalo fishes, cat-
fish, blue catfish, brown bullhead, channel catfish, flathead catfish,
lake sturgeon, gar pike, spoon-bill cat, freshwater drum, walleye, mud-
puppy, sauger, mooneye, and crappie (see Appendix B for the Latin names
of species mentioned in this report).
After 1900, as silting of the river increased, fish which could
tolerate muddy bottoms and turbid water increased in numbers. Such
species were the black bullheads, goldeye, skipjack herring, gizzard shad,
and spotted bass. A 1956 history of the fish populations in the Upper Ohio
18
River Lasin describes the changes that have occurred in these populations,
e.g., the extinction of certain species and the survival of more tolerant
and hardy species, due largely to the work of man.
By 1968, many of the species mentioned as present around 1900 had
disappeared or declined greatly in numbers. A study on the Ohio River main
-------
48
stem19 indicated that carp (an introduced species) and bullheads were pre-
dominant in the middle and lower portions of the river. About 20 other
species were also found, including channel catfish, sunfishes, freshwater
drum (mostly in the middle and lower portions of the river), and shiners
(mostly in the upper and middle portions). Walleye were scattered through-
out the river, and a significant number of sauger were found in the Kentucky
area above Cincinnati. The species composition of the commercial catch
20
for selected years from 1894 to 1963 is listed, and indicates that species
such as black bass, mooneye, walleye, and drum have disappeared from the
commercial catch or declined in numbers, while the proportions of carp
and buffalofish in the commercial catch have increased.
Fish collections made at four areas on the river main stem and at
several tributary creeks during April to August, 1971, indicated that at
least 47 species were present. These are listed in Table 3.4.
The existence and accessibility of suitable spawning habitats for
fish is obviously essential to maintaining populations. Due largely to
construction of the dams, spawning sites for many of the species in the
Ohio River main stem have been eliminated. For example, migratory fish
such as the paddlefish and walleye are prevented by the dams from reaching
their spawning streams; reduction of the floodplain areas eliminated many
backbays and sloughs which provided spawning habitat for nest-building
species such as the blackbass and various sunfishes; natural cycles of
high and low flow which are essential to the spawning success of many
species have been altered. It is likely that many species move into
quiet, relatively clean creeks to spawn. During April and May of 1971,
-------
49
Table 3.4
Fish Species Collected in the Ohio River and Tributaries,
April - August, 1971a
SPECIES
(Common Name)
Carp
Brown Bullhead
Bluegill
Black Bullhead
Yellow Bullhead
Silver Chub
American Eel
Quillback Carpsucker
Sauger
Mooneye
Golden Redhorse
Channel Catfish
Longnose Gar
White Crappie
White Bass
Gizzard Shad
Yarmouth
Rockbass
Spotted Sucker
Largemouth Bass
Spotted Bass
Smallmouth Buffalofish
Drum
Emerald Shiner
Bluntnose Minnow
Striped Shiner
Sand Shiner
Carpsucker
Smallraouth Bass
Spotfin Shiner
Ghost Shiner
White Sucker
Rainbow Darter
Blacknose Dace
Mottled Sculpin
Longnose Dace
Fantail Darter
Silverjaw Minnow
Creek Chub
Stoneioiler
Yellow Perch
Trout Perch
Goldfish
White Catfish
Redcar Sunfish
Orangespotted Sunfish
Golden Shiner
SPECIES
(Scientific Mame)
Cyprinus carpio
Ictalurus ncbulosus
Lepomis macrochirus
Ictalurus melas
Ictalurus natal is
Hybopsis storeriana
Anguilla rostrata
Carpiodes cyprinus
Stizostedion canadense
Hiodon tergisus
Moxostoma erythrurum
Ictalurus punctatus
Lepisosteus osseus
Pomoxis annularis
Roccus chrysops
Dorosoma cepedianum
Chaenobryttus gulosus
Ambloplites rupestris
Minytrema melanops
Micropterus salmoides
Micropterus punctulatus
Ictiobus bubalus
Aplodinotus grunniens
Notropis atherinoides
Pimephales notatus
Notropis chrysocephalus
Notropis stramineus
Carpiodes carpio
Micropterus dolomieui
Notropis spilopterus
NotTopis buchanani
Catostomus commersoni
Etheostoma caeruleum
Rhinichthyes atratulus
Cottus bairdi
Rhinichthyes cataractae
Etheostoma flabellare
Ericymba buccata
Semotilus atromaculatus
Campostoma anomalum
Perca flavcsccns
j'ercopsis omiscomaycus
Carassius auratus
Ictalurus catus
Lepomis microlopjius_
Leponiis hurailis
Notemigonus crysoleucas
W,\POR/\, Inc. Tlie effect of temperature on aquatic life in the Oluo River-
Final Report. July IDVD-Scpti'mlicr, 1971.
-------
50
investigations into the spawning habits of fish in the Ohio River were
undertaken in the vicinities of four power plants situated at RM 54.4,
260 452 and 616 respectively. No successful spawning was observed
in the river's main stem within several miles of the stations. It was
suggested that sauger and walleye, which deposit their eggs at random
in shallow water and therefore expected to spawn successfully in the
Ohio, were prevented from spawning, or delayed in their spawning, by low
water levels. Numerous spawning populations of emerald shiners, blunt -
nose minnows, and sand shiners were observed in Island Creek below the
Sammis Station (RM 54.4). Gravid white crappie were also observed at the
mouth of Campaign Creek, two miles downstream from the Kyger Creek power
plant (RM 260). 16
The observations of fish spawning habits, which included those
mentioned above, were limited but serve to point out the need for investi-
gations into this major aspect of fish survival in the Ohio River. If it
is found that spawning does not occur to any large extent in the river's
main stem due to conditions brought about by the dams, siting of thermal
and chemical discharges in tributary creeks or streams tributary to the
Ohio River, may very well decimate present fish populations since it is
likely that it is in these streams that much of the successful spawning
occurs .
3.5 Electric Power Generation on the Ohio
Low cost electric energy as a result of the abundance of coal in
the region has been a major factor in industrial development throughout
the Ohio River basin area. In the recent past, the demand for electric
energy within the region has nearly doubled each decade.
-------
51
Trends indicate that nuclear power plants will furnish increas-
ing shares of electrical energy in the future. Because of the lower
efficiency inherent in nuclear power plants and the tendency to build
larger plants than were built in the past, serious waste heat pollution
problems are a potential threat to the Ohio River. However, if the power
companies continue to build closed-cycle plants, the potential thermal
load may be reduced somewhat as older "once through" plants are retired.
Table 3.5 shows the installed generating capacity of each steam
electric power plant, greater than 50 megawatts, on the Ohio River in the
years 1963, 1964, 1969, 1970, and 1971. Between 1963 and 1971, the in-
stalled generating capacity increased from over 13,500 MW to about 22,100 MW
or 63 percent. Table 3.6 shows the planned generating capacity, by plant,
for the years 1975, 1977, and 1983. Figure 3.3 gives a graphical portrayal
of the total electrical generating capacity on the Ohio for the years tabu-
lated in the two tables.
-------
52
Table 3.S
Ohio River Steam-Electric Fewer Generating Plants
1963 - 1971
Mile Point
2.3
15.6
33.8
55.0
59.1
74.5
75.0
79.5
101.9
102.5
160.5
241.0
260.2
405.7
453.3
471.4
490.3
494.5
558. S
604.0
607.0
616.6
618.0
728.0
752.8
755.3
773.0
773.0
773.8
793.5
803.6
946.0
958.0
Station
J. H. REED
F. PHILLIPS
SHIPPINGPORT
W. H. SAMMIS
TORONTO
TIDD
CARDINAL
WINDSOR
MITCHELL
R. E. BURGER
WILLOW ISLAND
PHILIP SPORN
KYGER CREEK
J. M. STUART
W. C. BECKJORD
WEST END
MIAMI FORT
TANNER CREEK
CLIFTY CREEK
PADDY'S RUN
CANAL
CANE RUN
GALLAGER
COLEMAN
OWENSBORO MJN #1
ELMER SMITH
WARRICK #1,2,3
WARRICK #4
CULLEY
OHIO RIVER
HENDERSON
SHAWNEE
JOPPA
Installed Generating Capacity (MW)
1963 1964 1969 1970 1971 Notes
180
315
100
740
315.8
222.2
-
300
-
544
215
1060
1086.3
-
760.5
224.3
539.2
518.0
1304
337.5
50
535.3
660
-
52.5
-
125
-
50
121.5
24.0
1500
1100.3
180
387.8
100
740
315.8
222.2
—
300
—
544
215
1060
1086.3
—
760.5
219.3
519.2
1098
1303.6
337.5
SO
535.3
600
-
52.5
-
432
-
40
112. S
24.0
1500
1100.3
180
417
90
1680
316
222
1180
300
—
544
215
1060
1086.3
—
1221
219
519
1098
1304
338
50
1017
600
—
52.5
150
432
380
136
112
24.0
1750
1100
180
417
90
1680
316
222
1180
300
—
544
215
1060
1086.3
-
1221
219
519
1098
1304
338
50
1017
600
340
52.5
150
432
380
136
112
50.6
1750
1100
180
411.2
100
2303.5
175.8
226.3
1230.5
300
1632.6
544
215
1105.5
1086.3
1220.4
1220.3
219.3
393.2
1100.3
1303.6
337.5
50
1016.7
637
340
52.5
150
432
300
149.7
121.5
50.6
1750
1100.3
Standby 1973
Retired Oct 73
Standby 1972
Sources of Data:
1971 figures: National Coal Association, Steam-Electric
Plant Factors - 1972 Edition, December 197T.
1964, 1969, 1970 figures: Federal Power Conmission
1963 figures: Ohio River Basin Survey Coordinating
Committee, Ohio Rivor Basin Comprehensive Survey,
Volume X, Appendix 1, Electric Power, December!968.
-------
53
Table 3.6
Ohio River Steam-Electric Power Generating Plants
1975 - 1983
Mile Point
2.3
15.6
33.5
33.8
34.5
55.0
59.1
74.5
75.0
101.9
102.5
111.1
160.3
160.5
241
258
260.2
405.7
414
451
453.3
471.4
490.3
494.5
536
558.5
600.6
604.0
616.6
618
728
752.8
755.3
773.0
773.0
773.8
793.5
803.6
946.0
958.0
Station
J. H. REED
F. PHILLIPS
BRUCE MANSFIELD
SHIPPINGPORT
BEAVER VALLEY
W. H. SANMIS
TORONTO
TIDD
CARDINAL
MITCHELL
R. E. BURGER
KAMMER
PLEASANTS
WILLOW ISLAND
PHILIP SPORN
GAVIN
KYGER CREEK
J. M. STUART
CHARLESTON BOTTOMS
ZIMMER
W. C. BECKJORD
WEST END
MIAMI FORT
TANNER CREEK
GHENT
CLIFTY CREEK
MILL CREEK
PADDY'S RUN
CANE RUN
GALLAGER
COLEMAN
OWENSBOR' MUN #1
ELMER SMITH
WARRICK #1,2,3
WARRICK #4
CULLEY
OHIO RIVER
HENDERSON
SHAWNEE
JOPPA
Installed Generating Capacity (MW)
1975
180
411.2
825
100
856
2303.5
175.8
226.3
1230.5
1632.6
544
712.5
-
215
1105.5
1300
1086.3
2400
-
-
1220.3
219.3
893.3
1100.3
559.9
1303.6
321.1
337.5
1016.7
637
340
52.5
415
432
300
149.7
121.5
225. 2
1750
1100.3
1977
180
411.2
1650
100
856
2303.5
175.8
226.3
1845.5
1632.6
544
712. S
825
215
1105.5
2600
1086.3
2400
300
-
1220.3
219.3
1393.3
1100.3
1113.8
1303.6
746.1
337.5
1016.7
637
340
52.5
415
432
300
149.7
121.5
225.2
1750
1100.3
1983
180
411.2
1650
100
1712
2303.5
175.8
0
1845.5
1632.6
544
712.5
1650
515
1105.5
2600
1086.3
2400
300
2028
1220.3
219.3
1393.3
1100.3
1113.8
1303.6
1171.1
337.5
1016.7
. 637
340
52.5
415
432
300
149.7
121.5
225.2
1750
1100.3
Source: Federal Power Comnission
-------
GENERATING CAPACITY (MW)
S3
rh
CO
rt
CD
tn
i—1
CD
n
r*
i-i
H-
O
cn
s
CD
TO
(M
P
O
X
o
CD
O
CD
-------
55
-------
56
Section 3 References
1. Ohio River Basin Survey Coordinating Committee, Ohio River Basin
Comprehensive Survey, Volume V, Appendix D - Water Supply and Water
Pollution Control, June 1967.
2 Ohio River Basin Survey Coordinating Committee, Ohio River Basin
Comprehensive Survey, Volume I - Main Report, August 1969.
,; D. E. Peterson and R. T. Jaske, Potential Thermal Effects of an
Expanding Power Industry: Ohio River Basin I, Battelle Northwest
Laboratory Report BNWL - 1299, February 1970.
4 Ohio River Basin Survey Coordinating Committee, Ohio River Basin
Comprehensive Survey, Volume X, Appendix 1 - Electric Power,
December 1966.
5 D. E. Peterson, elt al., Thermal Effects of Projected Power Growth:
The National OutlooFj' Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory,
Report No. HEDL-TME 73-45, July 1973.
6 Power Industry Advisory Committee to the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission. Resolution 6-69. September 11, 1969.
7 Aquatic Life Resources of the Ohio River. Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission, (1962).
8 WAPORA, Inc. Continued Surveillance of Thermal Effects of Power
Plants along the Ohio River. 1972. (1973).
9> Conference Proceedings in the Matter of Pollution of the Inter-
state Waters of the Ohio River and Its Tributaries in the Wheeling,
West Virginia Area (Ohio-West Virginia). U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (1971).
10. Brinley, F. J. and Katzin, L. J., Distribution of Stream Plankton
in the Ohio River System. Amer. Midi. Nat. 27:177-190 (1942).
•Q Hartman, R. T., Composition and Distribution of Phytoplankton
Communities in the Upper Ohio River.Special PublV No. 3,
Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology, Univ. of Pittsburgh (1965).
TO Williams, L. G., Possible Relationships between Plankton-Diatom
Species Numbers and Water-Quality Estimates. Ecology 45:809-823
(1964).
-------
57
13. Conference Proceedings in the Matter of Pollution of the Inter-
state Waters of the Ohio River and Its Tributaries in the Wheeling,
West Virginia Area (Ohio-West Virginia). U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (1971).
14. A Report on Pollution of the Ohio River in the Reach from Huntington,
West Virginia, to Portsmouth, Ohio. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (December, 1972).
15. Ballentine, R. K. and Thomas, N. A., Water Quality of the Ohio River,
Louisville, Kentucky - Evansville, Indiana.Federal Water Quality
Administration (September, 1970).~
16. WAPORA, Inc. The Effect of Temperature on Aquatic Life in the Ohio
River-Final Report. July 1970-September 1971.
17. Mason, W. T., Lewis, P. A., and Anderson, J. B., Macro invertebrate
Collections and Water Quality Monitoring in the OEio River Basin,
1965-1967.Water Quality Office, U.S. EPA (March, 1971).
18. Lachner, E. A., The Changing Fish Fauna of the Upper Ohio Basin.
Man and the Waters of the Upper Ohio Basin.Special Publ. 1,
Pymatuning Laboratory of Field Biology (1956).
19. Preston, H. R., Fishery Composition Studies - Ohio River Basin.
FWPCA Presentations September 10, 1969.FWPCA, U.S. Dept. of the
Interior.
20- Ohio River Basin Comprehensive Survey, Vol. VIII, Appendix G.
Fish and Wildlife Resources. U.S. Army Engineer Division,
Cincinnati, Ohio (1964).
-------
58
4. BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF COOLING WATER USE
4.1 Thermal Effects
4.1.1 General Review
The effects of a thermal discharge on the biota of a receiving body
of water will depend on the temperature of the receiving water, the tem-
perature difference (At) between the receiving water and the discharge,
and the particular organism and stage of its life cycle, among other physi-
cal, chemical, and biological factors. The effects can be directly lethal
or sublethal. These are discussed briefly below.
a. Directly Lethal Effects
The lethal effects of excess heat and sudden changes in water tempera-
ture are gross effects which can often be readily observed. Such effects,
when they occur, are normally confined to a relatively small volume of the
receiving water, i.e., immediately adjacent to the outfall. The magnitude
of the effect will depend on the particular group of organisms under con-
sideration.
(i). Phytoplankton
It is not likely that phytoplankton carried through a thermal plume
will be killed, unless temperatures exceed about 36°C (97°F). Temperatures
found to be lethal to algae were 37-38°C (98-100°F) for large diatoms and
about 44°C (111°F) for green algae. Freshwater algae are often able to
endure temperatures which are adverse for growth by forming resting stages.
After temperatures return to normal, the algae recover.
-------
59
(ii). Zooplankton
Passage of zooplankton through a thermal plume at temperatures greater
than about 5°F above ambient may be lethal, particularly if the ambient
temperature is high. (Upper temperature tolerance limits for several spediee
of cyclops are 30-38.5°C (86-101°F), 31.5-40°C (89-104°F) for certain protozoans,
118
and 30 C (86°F) for Daphnia pulex. Temperature tolerance limits seem to
depend, in large part, on the acclimation temperature of the organism, exeespt
in cases where the ambient temperature is close to the upper temperature
74
tolerance limit. ) For certain species that reproduce throughout the years
populations are expected to recover downstream. Amphipods and euphausiids
which have long generation times and reproduce only one season a yeSr» iMy
2
have limited capacity for population recovery.
(iii). Benthos
Most benthic organisms, being relatively immobile, cannot avoid lethal
temperatures. Certain species, however, appear to tolerate relatively high
temperatures. For example, in an Alabama river where bottom temperatures
can reach 90°F (about 32°C), there was a diverse fauna which included mos-
quito larvae, midge larvae, mayfly, dragonfly, and damselfly nymphs, finger-
3
nail clams, snails, water striders, water bugs, and water scorpions. Dur-
ing the winter, an increase in numbers of caddisfly larvae in the heated
zone of a thermal effluent was reported. Above 90°F in the Delaware River,
however, an extensive loss in numbers, diversity, and biomass of benthos
occurred in a heated area below a power plant discharge.
The benthos-poor conditions sometimes associated with heated waters
are in large part due to the high BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) and low
dissolved oxygen characteristics of the water into which thermal discharges
-------
60
are made. For example, the elimination of fingernail clams and other shell-
fish from the Illinois River, a warmwater stream, has been attributed to the
high BOD waste discharges from the Chicago metropolitan area.
With the exception of a sinking plume which may occur under winter
conditions in a large lake, heated water usually floats. This will tend
to decrease the number of benthos subjected to lethal temperatures. Of
more significance, is the scouring action of the discharge, particularly
a high-velocity jet close to the bottom. For example, the abundance of
benthic invertebrates around four power plants on Lake Michigan was found
to be slightly decreased close to the discharge structures. It was con-
cluded that this was due to current scour rather than a purely thermal
effect.
(iv). Fish
The temperature extremes that will be directly lethal to a. fish will
depend, in general, on the species of the fish, its acclimation tempera-
ture, the stage of its life cycle, and time of exposure.
Fish, being mobile organisms, ordinarily avoid lethal temperatures.
Adults can apparently sense a thermal gradient and if free to move, will
seek preferred temperatures. Thermal death at heated discharges has been
8 9
known to occur when the fish were trapped in the effluent canals ' or
subjected to a sudden release of hot water. Juveniles of some species,
however, may not avoid lethal temperatures. For example, a non-avoidance
response was exhibited by young white perch and striped bass. Mortality
of young fish in the outfall area of the heated discharge may therefore
occur if water currents do not carry them away. Breakdown of the avoidance
-------
61
respoitse in adults can also occur. For example, summer water temperatures
above 30.5°C (87°F) were actively avoided by 11 species of estuarine fishes.
Short exposures to water at 34.4°C (94°F) resulted in breakdown of the
12
avoidance response. This phenomenon will ultimately result in death of
the fish.
A thermal discharge into a spawning area may be directly lethal to
most eggs and developing embryos if they are immersed in water at tempera-
tures a few degrees greater than normal ambient fluctuations, and to adults
13
entering the area to spawn despite elevated temperatures.
A phenomenon sometimes observed is the apparent attraction of fish to
heated discharges, particularly in the winter. This may be due to a pre-
ference for warmer water and/or to a better food supply (e.g., periphyton
and caddisfly larvae) in the effluent area than in the colder ambient
river.
In winter, decreases in temperature at the outfall of 8 to 16°C
(15 to 30°F) in a matter of hours following shutdown will not be unconnon
for a once-through cooling system on any body of water. Fish subjected to
this cold shock would be severely stressed and death will very likely
follow. Large fish kills in winter at the Oyster Creek power station,
14
for example, have been reported following shutdown. In late January,
1971, a kill of about 7,500 fish, primarily gizzard shad, occurred in Little
Three Mile Creek, a tributary of the Ohio River. Mortality was attributed to
a drop in water temperature within a 13 1/2-hour period, due to shutdown of
the Stuart Plant.
The travel time of the circulating water in a cooling tower is on the
order of half an hour to an hour. This is insufficient time for gradual
cooling of the blowdown, but because of the usually small volume of effluent
-------
62
involved, mixing zones are relatively small compared to a once-through
system, and the adverse effects of cold shock are correspondingly reduced.
Travel time of the circulating water in a cooling lake can be on the order
of days before discharge to the receiving water, and cold shock in such a
case should be virtually non-existent.
b. Sublethal Effects
Sublethal temperature increases brought about by a general warming of
a large area and volume of the body of water can have a greater overall
environmental impact than lethal temperatures. The effects of sublethal
increases in temperature are often difficult, if not impossible, to detect.
Such changes are related to the effect of temperature on metabolic and
physiological processes of aquatic organisms.
(i). Phytoplankton and Periphyton
A common concern related to thermal discharges into natural bodies
of water is that shifts in algal species from the more desirable diatoms
to the less desirable blue green algae may occur. In oligotrophic waters,
diatoms usually predominate the phytoplankton community at water tempera-
tures below 30°C (86°F), green algae predominate between 30-35°C (86-94°F),
and blue green algae above 35°C (95°F). The latter are considered un-
desirable because they are not generally utilized by herbivores, certain
species have a capacity to fix nitrogen and thus accelerate the eutrophica-
tion of a water body, and blooms can result in taste and odor problems of
the water. Experience at power plant thermal discharges has indicated that
these shifts can occur in the periphyton growing in the discharge area, '
9
but that they do not always occur. Water quality appears to be a major
factor in the occurrence of algal shifts in heated waters.
-------
63
(ii). Zooplankton and Benthos
Most freshwater zooplankton and macroinvertebrates do not appear to be
adversely affected by waters warmed to less than 3°F above ambient, unless
the ambient temperature is at or close to the upper temperature tolerance
limit of the organism. One area of possible concern is insect pre-emergence
during the cold months. The rate of growth of aquatic insects is related to
their ambient temperature. For example, it has been reported that a temperature
increase of only 1°C (1.8°F) caused hydropsychid caddis flies to emerge 2 weeks
earlier on the Columbia River downstream from the Hanford reactor than up-
stream. In a laboratory study, 10 species of aquatic insects exhibited pre-
mature emergence when subjected to unseasonably high winter water tempera-
tures. The same experiments also indicated that the time between emergence
of males and females of some species was increased by increased water tem-
peratures. In northern latitudes, where air temperatures are near or below
freezing for several months, adult insects which emerge earlier than normal
may freeze to death or be inactivated such that mating is prevented. Mating
would also be prevented if the emergence of one sex occurred much earlier
than the emergence of the other. In areas where air temperatures remain
fairly high throughout the year, insect pre-emergence may be unimportant.
(iii). Fish
Distribution Water temperature is a major factor in the geographi-
cal distribution of fish. Likewise, changes in water temperatures within
a giver body of water can lead to a redistribution of fish in localized areas.
For example, in the Wabash River in Indiana, the effluent zone of a power
plant harbored only about 50% of the species collected either above the plant
or farther downstream. Most species which were absent during the summer
18
returned in the fall when temperatures were lower. In a body of water
-------
64
in which the collective effects of a number of thermal discharges is suffi-
cient to raise the ambient temperature of the entire water by several degrees,
some species will eventually be eliminated from such waters, and high-temperature
tolerant species will ultimately predominate. Sensitive areas are those waters
in which particular fishes are at the southern fringes of their ranges. It is
doubtful that any natural body of water will become devoid of fish as a result
of power plant thermal discharges alone. However, some °f tne fish species
considered desirable by western man prefer cooler water.
Migration Movements to and from the sea and fresh water are an
essential part of the life cycles of anadromous and catadromous fish species,
and temperature is apparently involved in the stimulation and direction of
migration.
Temperate stream fishes also migrate up and downstream. In New Hope
Creek, North Carolina, such movement was studied in 1968-70. Most of 27
species had a consistent pattern of larger fish moving upstream and smaller
fish moving downstream. Both upstream and downstream movements were greatest
19
in the spring. The necessity for restriction of a thermal plume to a minor
width, area, and volume of a waterway is obvious. The extent of such restric-
tion should depend on the specific site chosen, and on the habits of the fish
using the particular waterway.
In the Ohio River, the greatest barriers to fish migrations are the dams;
fish migration likely occurs into streams and creeks for spawning.
Reproduction Gonad development and spawning are highly temperature-
12
dependent, but because this dependence is species specific, it is diffi-
cult to make a definitive statement of an "adverse" temperature. For
2f)
example, walleye require temperatures below 10°C (50°F) to spawn. Carp
and largemouth bass spawn at 15-25°C (59-77°F) , smallmouth bass at 12-16°C
9f>
(53-61°F), yellow perch at 10-15°C (50-59°F).
-------
65
Premature spawning of any fish species as a result of heated water dis-
charges may put the larval development out of phase with the development
of the normal food supply. The percent survival of the young may thus be
decreased due to lack of proper food if an adequate variety of other food
is not available. By this mechanism, water temperatures even slightly
warmer than ambient in a spawning area may eventually lead to elimination
of a species. Often, more than one species may use the same nesting site.
For example, spring spawning suckers may use the same sites as fall-spawn-
21
ing brook trout. This aspect of a thermal discharge could be thus of
greater concern than the temperature of the hottest part of the discharge
plume.
Fish metabolism, growth, and physiology Within limits, the feeding
rates of fishes, food transport, absorption, and digestion apparently in-
crease with increases in temperature. *-* j^ can fce suggested, therefore,
that when food is not limiting, increased water temperatures could result
in an increased growth of fish. This increase in growth rate, however,
may not always be beneficial. For example, Cyprinodon, a eury-thermal
fish, showed a better initial growth rate at higher temperatures (to 30°C
or 86°F), but the rates were not maintained later in life. The slower-
growing fishes at lower temperatures grew larger and lived longer. *2 £t
a power plant on the Connecticut River, brown bullhead and white catfish
resident in the thermal plume in winter, showed a decline in weight-length
ratios (condition) despite an abundance of benthic invertebrates. (It was
not established, however, that these organisms were desired as food by the
fish). Channel catfish in the same study showed no decline in condition.
-------
66
Vulnerability of fish fry to predation -— Laboratory studies with
rainbow trout and chinook salmon indicated that thermally shocked juveniles
were selectively preyed upon by larger fishes. The relative vulnerability
to predation increased with duration of sublethal exposure to lethal tem-
2"}
peratures. Similar results were obtained in laboratory studies of
yearling coho salmon predation rates on sockeye salmon fry; predation rates
increased with increasing acclimation temperature.
Although laboratory studies may have limited application to field con-
ditions, the potential for decreased survival of migrating or resident fry
encountering a warm plume can not be discounted. It is thus necessary to
stress the importance of maintaining a major portion of a river or estuary
free of temperature increases above normal variations.
22 12
Incidence of fish diseases Reports have been cited ' that
implicate elevated water temperatures in increased rates of infestation
by fish diseases and parasites. For example, near obliteration of a run
of sockeye salmon in the Columbia River in 1941 was attributed to the com-
bined effects of high temperature and bacterial infection. Columnaris
disease has increased in the same river, reportedly due to river warming.
Higher water temperatures also apparently increased the effect of kidney
disease, vibrio disease and columnaris in young hatchery-reared salmonids.
No relation has been found, however, between the occurrence of columnaris
disease and power plant thermal effluents, as far as is known.
c. Other Temperature-Related Effects
In addition to the physiological effects discussed above, there are
other temperature-related conditions that indirectly affect fish, including
several discussed below.
-------
67
(i). Gas Bubble "Disease" of Fish
The formation of gas bubbles in the blood of fish can occur when water
becomes supersaturated with gases, usually nitrogen. This super saturation
sometimes occurs when water that is close to air saturation is heated or when
water cascades over a dam. If the degree of supersaturation is great enough,
the fish may show external symptoms such as "pop-eye," caused by bubbles in
the tissues in or behind the eye. Incidence of this "disease" in about a
dozen species of warmwater fish in the heated effluent of a steam generat-
25
ing station has been reported. This potential effect can be largely
avoided by preventing fish access to the discharge.
(ii). Chemical Toxicity Synergism
Many chemicals, including pesticides, appear to affect aquatic life
22 26 27
more acutely at higher temperatures, "»^D»*' either by increasing uptake,
by lowering resistance to toxins, or by lowering tolerance to low oxygen
levels in the water. These effects may become evident when the water re-
ceives run-off from agricultural areas or discharges from industries.
Limitations on the use of pesticides and on the discharges of chemicals,
can help to prevent these adverse effects.
(±ii). Dissolved Oxygen
Depletion of the oxygen content of a receiving water to levels ad-
verse for aquatic life is not expected to occur as a result of a thermal
discharge alone. In some cases, the aerating action of cooling towers or
sprays can, in fact, increase the dissolved oxygen concentrations in the
-------
6b
discharge compared with the intake concentrations. Loss of dissolved
oxygen occurs if water that is saturated or supersaturated with oxygen is
heated. Even at a temperature of 40°C (104°F) the solubility of oxygen
in water is about 6.5 mg/liter, ° which should pose no threat to aquatic
life. However, in a river that receives high BOD waste from other sources,
or in impoundments with large algal blooms, low dissolved oxygen levels
(less than 3 mg/liter) may occur, particularly at night due to phytoplankton
respiration and the absence of photosynthesis. In these cases, elevated
temperatures, which may increase a fish's metabolic rates and hence its
oxygen requirement, can aggravate the stressed condition brought about by
the low ambient dissolved oxygen.
-------
69
4.1.2. Ohio River Studies
To date, there are few studies on the effects of thermal discharges
on the biota of the Ohio River main stem. ORSANCO maintains temperature-
monitoring stations along the river, but correlations with distribution
and behavior of the aquatic organisms have not been undertaken on a river-
wide basis. Isolated studies at individual power plants and miscellaneous
studies by academic institutions have been carried out. These are sum-
marized and discussed below.
a. Plankton
On the Ohio River near the Beckjord power plant (RM 451.0-452.0)
studies were carried out in 1971 and 1972 to determine effects of the
29 30
heated discharge on algae and zooplankton. ' The plant uses a once-
through cooling system, and weekly temperature measurements from June to
August, 1971, indicated discharge temperatures of 84-91.5°F (At = 7 to 11.5°F),
and in July to August, 1972, temperatures of 84-101°F (At = 9-23°F). The
1971 study concluded that there was no effect of the heated discharge on
dissolved oxygen or phytoplankton in the river. In the 1972 study, de-
creases in zooplankton numbers, and phytoplankton populations and photo-
synthetic rates in the discharge area were observed. Neither of the re-
ports indicated whether samplings were replicated or what measure of
significance had been applied to the data. Plankton numbers can vary
considerably under the conditions of variable flows that can occur in
the river due to the lock and dam system. It was also not clear from the
reports whether distinctions could be made between organisms affected in
the river and those that had passed through the plant's condensers.
-------
70
34
A rather extensive study was carried out by WAPORA in 1970 and 1971
at four power plants on the Ohio River, namely, W. H. Sammis (RM 54.4),
Kyger Creek (RM 260.0), W. C. Beckjord (RM 452.9), and Cane Run (RM 616.7).
All plants have once-through cooling systems. The Sammis and Beckjord
plants discharge at the river bottom, while Kyger Creek and Cane Run have
surface discharges. The investigators concluded that the heat added to
the river by the four power plants had no measureable effect on phyto-
plankton populations or their composition (diatoms vs. green algae).
Variations in phytoplankton populations were within the range of experi-
mental error. It was observed that the normal dominance of diatoms was
reversed (green algae became dominant) in the late summer of 1970 and
1971 at the Sammis station, but since the reversal occurred above the
plant as well as below, it was attributed to some factor other than the
thermal discharge. The numbers of diatoms remained relatively constant,
but there was an upsurge in green algal numbers.
In 1972, the studies were essentially repeated, except that the
Tanners Creek Station (RM 494) was added and the Cane Run station de-
leted from the study. The Tanners Creek plant has a once-through cooling
system, with discharge close to the river bottom. Plankton populations
were similar to those found in the 1970-71 study; additionally, two
shifts in dominance from diatoms to green algae occurred at the Sammis
station, and from greens to diatoms to greens at the Beckjord station.
It was not possible to relate these shifts to power plant operation due
35
to the variability and "patchiness" of phytoplankton populations.
Zooplankton populations (rotifers, copepods, cladocerans, and
nauplii) did not appear to be affected by the thermal discharges in these
-------
71
studies. Differences in total counts above and below the discharges
appeared to be due to random fluctuations. The largest differences in
population numbers occurred between seasons, i.e., numbers were lower in
spring and fall than in summer.
b. Macroinvertebrates
In the WAPORA study mentioned above, sampling the benthic community
at the power stations was carried out in 1970 and 1971 using a Ponar
dredge. This method was later (1971-72) supplanted by the use of arti-
ficial substrates (fibrous plastic mats) anchored near the river bottom.
Results indicated that other than oligochaete worms, there was little
bottom fauna in the Ohio River at the sampling sites. Rocky bottoms in
particular were "depauperate," and only the mud substrates contained
organisms. Comparison of benthos up and downstream of the plants' dis-
charges was difficult, since substrates were not usually the same.
Results were therefore inconclusive. Comparisons of organisms on artifi-
cial substrates at the Sammis plant indicated a reduction in total numbers
of individuals (diptera and ephemeroptera) in the discharge compared to
ambient, although these were not totally eliminated from the discharge
area. At the Beckjord and Kyger Creek plants, organism group diversity
and total numbers of individuals increased in the discharge samples, as
a result of a "tremendous increase" in the caddisfly (Hydropsyche and
Cheumajopsyche) populations. At the Cane Run Station, organism group diver-
35
sity and total individuals were apparently unchanged by the thermal
effluent. In 1972, due to flood conditions, artificial substrates were
not recovered from any of the stations except from the Tanners Creek
plant. At the latter, greater numbers of caddisfly larvae were observed
-------
72
at the discharge than either above or below it. The study points out that
artificial substrates obtain a population of organisms distinct from that
obtained in dredge samples, the former likely originating as drift fauna
from streams tributary to the Ohio.
Examination of thermal effects on macroinvertebrates in waters tribu-
tary to the Ohio River is important, since these waters are the likely
sources of drift organisms in the Ohio River mainstem.
At Petersburg, Indiana, in 1969 and 1970, modified Hester-Dendy
samplers were submerged to depths of 1 foot in the White River, at various
locations up and downstream of a thermal discharge from an electric gen-
32
erating station. The river bottom in the area studied was described
as rather soft, with clean shifting sand along the shallow stretches.
The deeper holes tended to have bottoms of silt and "organic ooze". The
major groups of invertebrates collected were chironomids, caddisworms, and
mayfly nymphs. Numbers of macroinvertebrates were greater in 1970 than
in 1969, a result attributed to differences in river flow and siltation.
In the 10-acre area receiving the heated discharge, the chironomid larvae
Glyptotendipes lobiferus and the caddisworm Psychomyia were more abundant
than in upstream sampling locations. Another caddisworm, Cheumatopsyche sp.
was increased in numbers by an average temperature elevation of 5°F, but
was depressed by 9°F. Numbers of mayflies were depressed at an average
elevation of 5°F, with the possible exception of Stenomema sp. and Tricory-
thodes sp., which appeared to be unaffected. Continuous temperature
recordings were not made; the maximum ambient temperature measured weekly
was 84°F in July, 1969; the maximum discharge temperature was 103°F, and
at 600 feet downstream of the outfall, water temperature was 90°F. The
corresponding temperatures in August, 1970, were 86°F, 107°F, and 90°F
-------
73
32
(1,900 feet downstream of the outfall), respectively.
At the Cayuga Generating Station on the Wabash River in Indiana,
effects of a thermal discharge on macroinvertebrates were studied in the
summers of 1970, 1971 and 1972. Modified Hester-Dendy samplers
(masonite) were suspended about 1 foot below the water surface, at eight
zones selected to represent distinct types of habitat< (Since the
samplers were suspended in the water, only drift organisms were collected).
In 1971, the densities of Trichoptera were lower in the warmer segment^
of the river; chironomid densities were about the same, regardless of
temperature, in samples collected for 4 weeks, and decreased with temp-
erature in samples collected for 6 weeks. Temperatures were reported to
range from 24 to about 32°C. Species of Epherneroptera (mayfly nymphs)
did not respond similarly, e.g., Stenonema increased in the zones where
temperature increased, while Isonychia remained constant. An "extremely
low flow" period which occurred in the summer of 1971, may have confounded
the effects of temperature since, as was -pointed out by the author, rapid
flow of water over the gills of Ephemeroptera is necessary to obtain
oxygen. Densities of Stenonema, Baetis, and Isonychia were "abnormally
low" in samples located in low-flow reaches of the river. Tricorythodes
was apparently unaffected by the low flows, and numbers increased with
increasing temperature in the range 24 to 32°C. In 1972, numbers of
Trichopteran larvae increased in zones with increased temperatures, within
the range 20 to 30°C, in June and August, and decreased with increasing
temperatures in July. (The apparently higher temperatures observed in the;
summer of 1971 compared to 1972, despite the addition of a second 500-Mw
plant in May of 1972, could perhaps be attributed to the low flow that
s
occurred in the summer of 1971). Contradictory responses were also observed
in numbers of Isonychia, whose densities increased in the warmer zones in
31
June and August but decreased in July. These results are difficult to
-------
74
relate to temperature unless continuous temperature data are available.
The lack of temperature data is a primary deficiency in most studies
of thermal effects on aquatic biota. At best, instantaneous temperature
measurements are made on particular sampling dates, or discharge tempera-
tures are obtained from the utility and plume temperature data are cal-
culated or inferred from that information, taking flow rates into account.
Continuous temperature measurements within the area of interest are es-
sential, since factors such as flow rates, and meteorological conditions
caJi change continuously, irregularly, and unpredictably, in addition to
changes? that occur in power plant loads. The temperatures that are
measured at particular sampling locations on particular dates at particular
times may not necessarily be representative of the temperatures prevailing
during the entire period of study, nor even a major portion of it. Such
information is particularly essential to the study of macroinvertebrates
and periphyton.
On Little-Three-Mile Creek (LTMC), which joins the Ohio River near
Aberdeen, Ohio, the effects of a thermal discharge from the J. M. Stuart
Electrical Generating Station on aquatic biota were investigated in 1970
00
and 1971. The station draws water from the Ohio River and discharges
the heated effluent into LTMC, about 1.57 km from its mouth. A weir
at the mouth of the creek appears to accelerate mixing of the heated dis-
charge with the Ohio River. Drift invertebrates of LTMC were sampled in
July, 1970, with Hester-Dendy samplers, while bottom fauna in four adjacent
zones in the Ohio River mainstem were taken with a Petersen dredge in
August, 1971. Drift samples which had not been subjected to the heated
discharge from the station contained four orders and six genera of in-
sects, of which chironomids comprised 81%. In the group of drift samples
subjected to periodic temperature elevations due to the discharge, four
-------
75
orders and six genera were again present, but were dominated by trichopterans
(52%). A dense algal covering was also found on the samplers. In the Ohio
River mainstem, the dredge samples were dominated by oligochaetes, probably
because the bottom substrate was mainly mud and detritus. Samples from
Kennedy Creek, a backwater area across the Ohio River from LTMC, contained
six times as many oligochaetes as did the river samples. Kennedy Creek
does not receive a thermal discharge and was used in the study as a control
area. The authors concluded that "the paucity of organisms in LTMC was
probably the result of high temperatures". No continuous temperature
measurements in the LTMC were made, but from temperatures measured daily
at the condenser exit of the station, and from other information obtained
from the utility, it was concluded that an average temperature increase
of 20°F above ambient existed in LTMC from the outfall to the weir through-
out most of the study after October, 1970, when commercial operation began.
Little cooling, up to a maximum of 4 F, was observed in the mile between
33
the outfall and the weir during the period of study.
c. Fish
At the four power plants mentioned in (a) above, fish responses to
the heated effluents were investigated. Sampling of fish popula-
tions in 1971 made use of gill nets, frame nets, and bag seines; the mesh
sizes and net lengths selected depended on the species and size of fish
expected. In 1972, electroshocking methods were used. Each method tends
to sample particular species, i.e., electroshocking is more selective
toward species near the surface or in shallower waters. (There are in-
dications that fish can see and subsequently avoid electroshocking equip-
ment, so that sampling at night or in highly turbid waters is more success-
ful than daytime electrofishing in clear waters). Nets and traps are more
-------
76
selective for fish that move over a fairly large area of the water, and
probably collect a higher percentage of bottom species.
In the summer of 1971, visual observations of young-of-the-year
gizzard shad and emerald shiners indicated that current velocities at
the discharge of the Beckjord and Kyger Creek plants prevented the fry
from maintaining positions in the heated effluent. Adult shiners were
observed to move into the heated effluent and discharge canal at Kyger
Creek about the middle of June when temperatures in the discharge were
30.1°C (about 86°F). No mortalities were observed and captured specimens
"revealed no physical damage or parasitic infestation and all fish appeared
normal in appearance and condition."
At the Beckjord plant, adult Notropis appeared to be more numerous
in the heated effluent than elsewhere. It was estimated that the highest
temperatures these fish were exposed to was approximately 32.5°C (about
90°F).
At Cane Run, no differences were apparent between the very few
Notropis observed in the heated effluent and the ambient river. At the
Sammis station, no attempt was made to compare abundance of Notropis in
the ambient river and discharge due to the presence of the New Cumberland
dam. Fish species caught in the discharge and in the ambient river are
listed in Table 4.1. River fish which were not captured in the discharges
were smallmouth buffalo, black bullhead, mooneye, golden redhorse, white
bass, drum, and smallmouth bass. With the exception of the golden red-
horse, the investigators did not consider the absence of these species
from the discharge to be significant, considering catch records. Fish
preferring the warmer water of the discharges during spring included carp
-------
Table 4.1
Ambient Versus Discharge Fish Species
at Each Power Plant3
W. C. BECKJORD STATION
KYGER CREEK PLANT
AMBIENT
Species
Sauger
Bluegill
Mooneye
Golden Redhorse
Channel Catfish
Carpsucker
Carp
Longnose Gar
White Crappie
White Bass
Gizzard Shad
W. H.
ABOVE DAM
Species
Carp
Brown Bullhead
Bluegill
Black Bullhead
Yellow Bullhead
DISCHARGE
Species
Sauger
Gizzard Shad
Channel Catfish
Carp
White Crappie
Bluegill
Warmouth
Rockbass
Longnose Gar
SAMMIS STATION
BELOW DAM
Species
Quillback Carpsucker
Brown Bullhead
White Crappie
Carp
Yellow Bullhead
Channel Catfish
Spotted Bass
Gizzard Shad
Bluegill
Yellow Perch
White Catfish
Redear Sunfish
Orangespotted Sunfish
AMBIENT
Species
Carp
White Crappie
Channel Catfish
Silver Chub
Brown Bullhead
Goldfish
Drum
CANE RUN STATION
AMBIENT
Species
Silver Chub
Channel Catfish
Drum
DISCHARGE
Species
Spotted Sucker
Carp
Channel Catfish
Spotted Bass
Longnose Gar
Gizzard Shad
White Crappie
Bluegill
Brown Bullhead
DISCHARGE
Species
Silver Chub
American Eel
Gizzard Shad
Carpsucker
Drum
Channel Catfish
aWAPORA, Inc. The effect of temperature on aquatic life in the Ohio River - Final Report July 1970-September 1971.
-------
78
and channel catfish. During warm summer weather, most species avoided
the discharges except channel catfish, longnose gar, emerald shiners, and
gizzard shad. From comparisons of gonad weight and body weight, the in-
vestigators concluded that the heated effluent either did not accelerate
spawning, or fish residence time in the heated water was too short to
cause an observable effect. No attempt was made, other than visual observa-
tions, to ascertain whether residence in the heated discharges had effects on
fish condition (e.g., weight-length ratios) nor were there observations on the
effects of rapid plant shutdown on fish resident in the discharge, which is
presently a potential impact of major concern.
In the Wabash River, the distribution and abundance of fish populations
near two electrical generating stations were studied during the summer and
31
early fall from 1967 to 1972. For purposes of the study, a segment of
the river (about 3.47 km long) in the vicinity of the Wabash station was
divided into three thermal zones, based on conditions found during the
summer: a cool, upstream section, a short, hot section with temperatures
7 to 9°C (about 13 to 16°F) above ambient, and a long, downstream section
usually 1 to 3°C (about 2 to 5°F) higher than ambient. Results of a variety
of sampling methods indicated that the fish concentrated in areas of the
river that were close to their optimum temperatures, and moved out of
the area if temperatures exceeded a certain level. Based on his observa-
tions, Gammon postulated thermal ranges for fish species common to the
river (see Table 4.2). From results of electrofishing data, he also pre-
sented interesting graphs demonstrating the population response to tempera-
ture (see Figure 4.1). The number of species caught in the thermal zones
decreased sharply above a temperature of about 31.5 C (88.7 F). The
number of individuals caught was at maximum between 27 and 30°C (about 81
-------
79
Table 4.2
Ranges of Temperature which Probably Include the Final
Temperature Preferenda of Common Species in the Wabash River'
Common Name
Scientific Name
Optimum
Temperature
Range - °C
Carp
Longnose gar
Shortnose gar
No. River carpsucker
Buffalofish
Flathead catfish
Channel catfish
Freshwater drum
Gizzard shad
Central Quillback
White crappie
Spotted bass
White bass
Skipjack herring
Sauger
GoIdeye
Mooneye
Golden and Shorthead
Redhorse
Cypr-i-nus oarpio
Lepisosteus osseus
Lepisosteus platostomus
Carp-Codes oarpio
lotiobus sp.
Pylod-iotis olivaris
Ictalurus punotatus
Aplodinotus gnmniens
Dorosoma ceped-umion
Carp-lodes oyprinus
Pomox-is annularis
Mioropterus punotualatus
Morone ahrysops
Alosa ckrysoahloris
Sti.zosted.i-an oanadense
Hiodon alosoides
Hiodon terg-isus
Moxostoma erythrtanm &
M. breviaeps
33.0
33.0
33.0
31.5
31.0
31.5
30.0
29.0
28.5
29.0
27.0
28.0
28.0
27.0
27.0
27.5
27.5
26.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
34.5
34.0
33.5
32.0
31.0
31.0
31.0
31.0
30.0
29.5
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
27.5
Gammon, J. R. The effect of thermal inputs on the populations of fish and
macroinvertebrates in the Wabash River. Tech, Rept. No. 32. Pursue
University Water Research Center (1973).
-------
80
o 1968
• 1969
A 1970
DI97I
26
28 30 32 34 36
MEAN TEMPERATURE °C
38
Figure 4.1
Diversity, Density, and Biomass of Fish in Three Thermal Zones of
the Wabash Segment as Determined by D. C. Electrofishing.
(The Vertical Line is the Current Thermal Maximum Allowed
During Summer Months - 32.2°C. (90°F.))
1968;
1969; + 1970; a 1971.'
Gammon, J. R. The effect of thermal inputs on the populations of
fish and macroinvertebrates in the Wabash River. Tech. Rept. No. 32.
Purdue University Water Research Center (1973).
-------
81
to 86 F), and decreased markedly at temperatures above and below this
range. Biomass decreased between 30 and 32 C (86 to 90 F) but the drop
was less marked than the decrease in density at the same temperature because
smaller species such as crappie, white and spotted bass, skipjack herring,
goldeye, and mooneye moved out due to lower temperature preferenda, while
larger species such as carp, gar, buffalofish, and catfish, which prefer
higher temperatures, moved in. During cool summers, when normal river temp-
erature was less than 25 C (77 F), most of the species preferred the warm
segments of the river, while during hot spells, the fish moved completely
31
out of the effluent stream to cooler segments of the river.
At the Cayuga Generating Station, also on the Wabash River, a 5.2 km
segment was subdivided into 8 subareas representing various habitats.
Most fish were collected by electrofishing, although hoop and "D" nets were
used in certain years. The density of most species populations in the
Cayuga study was directly proportional to velocity of the current, except
for a few species such as gizzard shad, white bass, and longnose gar
which were more numerous in shallow, slow-moving areas. Of the species
encountered, two groups appeared to be permanently affected by the
thermal conditions, i.e., flathead catfish which responded to higher
temperatures with enhanced reproductive success, and redhorse which
O-I
appeared to be the most thermally sensitive species. It was suggested
that the population density of this latter species could be reduced as a
result of higher temperatures. Long-term changes in the density of other
species were not detected.
In the vicinity of a heated discharge into the White River in Indiana,
fish were collected by electroshocking methods in the summer of 1969 and
32
1970. It was estimated that there were 20% fewer centrarchids (bass,
-------
82
sunfish, crappie) per acre in the mixing zone than upstream. Estimated
populations in 1970 showed no decrease in numbers of centrarchids from
those of 1969, despite operation of an additional generator. Based on
population estimates, catch statistics, and sighting of young-of-year
fishes, the investigators concluded that fish reproduction in the area
32
was "as successful" as in the years immediately prior to plant operation.
No increased occurrence of fish diseases was indicated as a result of the
heated effluent.
Near Aberdeen, Ohio, the J. M. Stuart Electrical Generating Station
pumps cooling water from the Ohio River and discharges the heated water to
Little-Three-Mile Creek (LTMC). As was mentioned previously, the discharge
33
flows into the Ohio River through a weir at the mouth of the creek. In
1970 and 1971, sampling of fish in LTMC by several methods indicated that
prior to startup of the station, a variety of fish, mainly young-of-year
gizzard shad, preferred this stream to normal Ohio River conditions,
apparently because of the increased current in the creek brought about by
unheated water being pumped through the Station and into the creek. After
startup, sauger, bluegill sunfish, and white crappie were apparently
forced out of LTMC by elevated temperatures. Flathead catfish, spotted
bass, white bass, and longear sunfish moved from the Ohio into LTMC in
the fall of 1970 when only one unit was operating. In the fall of 1971
with two units operating and twice the volume of water flowing through
the weir at the mouth of LTMC, the movement of some species was apparently
blocked by the higher exit velocity. Channel catfish and carp moved in
and out of LTMC in response to temperature levels; a few were killed when
trapped in an isolated pocket of cooler water.
-------
83
A kill of about 7,500 fish, mainly 1970 year-class gizzard shad, occurred
in January, 1971, probably the result of rapid decrease in temperature
from 25.6°C (78°F) to 8.9°C (48°F).33
-------
84
4.2 Entrainment and Condenser Passage Effects
4.2.1 General Review
a. Introduction
Water taken into an installation for cooling purposes must be cleaned of
debris that can clog condenser tubes or damage pumps. It is common practice at
water intakes to construct a grill or bar rack to prevent large material such
as floating logs from entering the intake. A second screening device is used
to remove smaller debris. Organisms, mostly fish, which are too large to pass
through these devices can be drawn against them due to the intake flow velocity
and killed by starvation, exhaustion, or asphyxiation. The numbers and species
of fish that are killed by impingement will depend on the intake velocities,
the swimming speeds of the various individuals, their size, and their physical
condition. These numbers can be unacceptably large from any reasonable point
of view, or small enough to have no effect on a given population. Whatever the
case, any loss of fish by impingement can be considered undesirable. A good
review of the problem and methods of minimizing this adverse effect of cooling
water use has been prepared by the Office of Air and Water Programs of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and will not be discussed here. Instead,
discussion in this section will concentrate on condenser passage effects.
In current industry practice, the smallest mesh size commonly used in power
plant intake screening devices is 3/8". Thus, any aquatic organisms small enough
to pass through 3/8" openings are potentially subject to entrainment and passage
through the pumps and condensers of a power plant's circulating water system. A
hypothetical time-course of temperature change to which such organisms become
subjected is presented graphically in Figure 4.2.
Entrainable organisms include (a) phytoplankton; (b) zooplankton; (c) the
meroplanktonic eggs and larvae of certain fish and invertebrates; (d) the acci-
dental and transient plankters such as normally-benthic invertebrates and nor-
mally-demersal fish eggs and larvae; (e) the fry and juveniles of many species
of fish; and (f) other groups such as the protozoa, bacteria, and aquatic fungi.
-------
85
o
o
-------
86
In a power plant which employs a wet "closed-cycle" cooling system,
aquatic microbiota are entrained in a makeup flow which is small in com-
parison with the flow through a plant which uses once-through cooling.
Although the distribution of plankton in natural waters is stratified and
clumped (patchy), rather than uniform or random, a general assumption can
be made that in most cases, the quantity of aquatic microbiota entrained
will proportionately reflect the rate of intake or makeup flow (for the
same aquatic ecosystem and amount of care in designing and locating the
intake).
On the other hand, mortality of entrained multicellular organisms is
nearly total in evaporative cooling towers or spray canal cooling systems,
due to high temperatures, prolonged residence in the system and recircula-
tion through the condensers, and chemical conditions in such systems.
Regarding power plants which employ cooling lakes, the differences (in
species composition and quantities of organisms) between makeup flow en-
trainment and blowdown return depend upon lake surface area, turnover,
winds, dew points, makeup temperatures, chemical conditions, and other
factors. Such are not normal objects of studies of entrainment effects,
but rather of cooling lake management. Consequently, the effects of entrain-
ment and condenser passage discussed in the present section will be related
to power plants which employ once-through cooling.
During condenser passage, entrained organisms may be subjected to
(a) thermal shock, due to heat transfer in the condenser; (b) mechanical
shocks and abrasion, due to turbulence, cavitation, and collision with
pump impellers and irregular surfaces in the system; (c) pressure changes,
due to pumping and hydrostatic head differences; (d) toxic chemicals in-
culding chlorine or other biocides used for shock defouling of condenser
-------
87
tubes; and (e) additional thermal stress, turbulence, and heavy predation
in the discharge area.
9
Considering primarily the effects of thermal shock, Coutant suggested
that a power plant could be visualized as a "large artificial predator"
acting on populations of entrainable organisms. He noted that thermal
shocks could be lethal to entrained organisms or could produce sublethal
effects which ultimately affected the survival of the organism or the
dynamics of its population. However, Coutant further proposed that such
adverse thermal effects were not obligatory to the entrainment process,
but occurred rather as a result of sufficient combinations of temperature
elevation and duration of exposure.
Although the effects of thermal shock on entrained organisms have
received considerable attention in recent years, and although many direct
studies of entrainment damage have been conducted at various power plants,
there remains a paucity of physiological and toxicological data on the
effects of thermal shock on most species of plankton. However, heuristic
Q O£ O"7 OQ
attempts have been made ' ' ' to employ thermal tolerance and thermal
39
resistance principles, derived from studies of fish physiology in the
interpretation and prediction of thermal effects of condenser passage on
diverse kinds of aquatic biota.
Figure 4.3 provides a basic graphic representation of such principles.
A hypothetical organism's "zone of thermal tolerance" is shown to be
bounded by upper and lower "incipient lethal temperatures," which are
simplistically represented here as functions of the temperatures to which
the organism is acclimated (although in reality there are many other
influences). Within the zone of thermal tolerance, the organism (or,
rigorously, 50% or some other fraction of the organisms tested) theoretically
-------
88
TEMPERATURE OF
INSTANTANEOUS DEATH
^W$S^^S$^
UPPER ZONE OF THERMAL RESISTANCE
ULTIMATE INCIPIENT^
LETHAL TEMPERATURE
50% MORTALITY
10% MORTALITY
ZONE OF THERMAL TOLERANCE
THERMAL RESISTANCES
5 10 15 20
ACCLIMATION TEMPERATURE (°C)
Figure 4.3
Thermal Tolerance of a Hypothetical Fish in
Relation to Thermal Acclimation3
Fry, F. E., Hart, J. S., and Walker, K. F. Lethal temperature
reactions for a sample of young speckled trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)
Univ. of Toronto Studies, Biol. Series. Publ. Ontario Fish. Res. Lab
66: 5-35 (1946).
-------
89
can live indefinitely (by operational definition). In the "zones of
thermal resistance," located outside the lethal temperature boundaries in
Figure 4.3, the organism can survive only for a certain period of time, which
becomes progressively shorter the more the incipient lethal temperature is
exceeded (of course, only the upper zone is pertinent to discussion of en-
trainment effects). Such "resistance time" can be expressed another way
(Figure 4.4)in a "survival nomogram," which graphically represents what
might be termed the "rate of dying" of an organism in its zone of thermal
O f
resistance.
When an organism becomes entrained in a power plant cooling system
and subjected to one of the time-temperature courses shown in Figure 4.2,
the experience is more complex than the step-function single temperature
changes on which were based the principles underlying Figures 4.3 and 4.4.
Rather, the initial quick temperature elevation experienced by an entrained
organism in the condenser tubes is followed by a decline back to ambient
water temperatures. The rate of such decline depends mostly on the design
and location of the plant's discharge. Assuming that the ambient water
temperature is within the entrained organism's zone of thermal tolerance,
and the maximum cooling water temperature reached is within the zone of
thermal resistance, then the "thermal dose" experienced by the organism
will depend both upon the amount by which the upper incipient lethal tem-
perature is exceeded and the length of time during which it is exceeded.
This "thermal dose" may be viewed as one critical determiner of the fate
of an entrained organism, with regard both to lethal and certain sublethal
9,36
effects. Coutant has discussed the desirability of employing this con-
cept in the design of power plant cooling systems, to minimize damage.
-------
33
32
31
30
29
o
uT 28
cr
| 27
cc
LU
35 26
LU
25
24
23
22
21
INSTANTANEOUS DEATH
ACCLIMATION TEMPERATURES
ULTIMATE INCIPIENT LETHAL TEMPERATURE -
SECONDARY LETHALITY_
r "^•>
(ZONE OF TOLERANCE)
\-
t
IOU 10' 10^ 10° 10"
TIME, min.
Figure 4.4
o
Median Resistance Times to High Temperatures by a Hypothetical Organism
aCoutant, C. C. Biological aspects of thermal pollution. I. Entrainment and discharge canal
effects. CRC Grit. Rev. in Environ. Control. 1:341-381 (1970).
-------
91
In the following discussions, the results of a number of power plant
entrairunent studies are considered. Such studies, in the aggregate, pro-
vide descriptions of entrainment effects regarding diverse combinations of
cooling system designs (AT, times of exposure, biocide use, types of dis-
charges, etc.)> types of aquatic ecosystems, and methods of investigation.
In general, these studies verify that in many instances, considerable
damage to entrained organisms has resulted from thermal stress, as well as
from other types of stresses and shocks listed previously. In other cases,
however, measurable damage has been slight. By examining these studies
in the aggregate, it appears that some general principles can be discerned
regarding the causes and extent of entrainment damage.
b. Effects on Phytoplankton
Direct microscopic observation of net phytoplankton cell numbers and
40 41
species composition has been employed by a few investigators ' as a prin-
cipal method for studying effects of condenser passage. However, although
widely used in field studies, such an approach is exceptionally demanding
of time and technical personnel. Moreover, it is often not possible in
microscopic observation to accurately determine proportions of live and
dead cells in phytoplankton samples, nor is it normally feasible to perform
meaningful study of the physiologically-responsive nanoplankton (less than
10 microns in cell diameter) by such a method, due to taxonomic and meth-
odolrgical limitations. Consequently, most studies of the effects of con-
denser passage on phytoplankton have principally employed various indirect
physiological measurements, including those of primary productivity (usually
42 43
by some modification of the methods of Strickland and Parsons, ' and
chlorophyll a^ concentration.
-------
92
The most frequently-reported major effect of condenser passage on
phytoplankton, observed in comparisons of primary productivities in con-
denser discharge samples with those in condenser intake samples, has been
the apparent stimulation of photosynthesis during months when ambient
(intake) water temperatures are low, and the apparent partial inhibition ,
of photosynthesis during warmer months. Although most such data exhibit
considerable variability, this type of effect has been evident in a number
of studies.
For example, in both laboratory simulations and actual entrainment
studies at the Chalk Point power plant on the Patuxent River estuary in
Maryland, Morgan and Stress found that at an average AT of 8°C, producti-
vity of phytoplankton usually increased somewhat during condenser transit
at times when intake water temperatures were below 16°C. When intake water
temperatures exceeded 20°C, however, photosynthetic inhibition was observed
in discharge samples. At the Indian River power plant in Delaware, at an
average AT of 6-7°C and a condenser transit time of approximately two
minutes, photosynthetic rates of entrained plankton reportedly were stimu-
lated (as much as doubled) during most of the year, when ambient water
temperatures were below 22°C. During the summer months, however, reduced
photosynthesis was observed in discharge samples. ' From studies at
47
the Indian Point power plant on the Hudson River, Lauer reported that at
a AT of approximately 8°C, condenser passage resulted in increased pro-
ductivity during most of the year, but productivity was reduced somewhat
in summer, when discharge temperatures exceeded 32°C. At the Crane power
plant, located on a Chesapeake Bay tributary, primary production was in-
creased in discharge samples (AT - 10°C) during most of the year, but was
reduced in summer, whenever ambient water temperatures exceeded 26°C.
:o. 48
-------
93
At the Millstone Point power plant on the Niantic River estuary (Long
Island Sound), with an average AT of approximately 13°C, photosynthetic
49 50
inhibiton of 25-29% was observed ' in spring and summer, with inhibi-
tion being more pronounced at higher temperatures. Reductions in AT below
7°C lessened the inhibition. In the cooler months, photosynthetic stimula-
tion up to 200-300% of intake values (winter average approximately 25%)
was reported.
In studies regarding the York River power plant in Virginia, discharge
sample productivity was higher than that of intake samples in the cooler
months, when intake water temperatures were below 10°C. When intake tem-
peratures were in the 15-20°C range, inhibition was observed at AT's ex-
ceeding 5.6°C, with inhibition generally greater at higher intake tempera-
tures and AT's. In special operation of part of the Waukegan Station
(Lake Michigan) at a 12°C AT, reduction in productivity of condenser-
passed phytoplankton samples generally occured only when intake water tem-
52
peratures exceeded 8°C. At the Allen power station on Lake Wylie, North
Carolina, neither thermal stimulation nor inhibition of photosynthesis
was evident in entrained algae when intake water temperatures were less
than 9°C. AT ranged from 5.5-17°C. With increase in intake temperatures,
however, inhibition occurred and became progressively pronounced. At
intake temperatures above 28°C, productivity reduction was observed at
AT's of 5.5-ll°C.53
From studies such as the preceding, it appears that such increases
and decreases in primary productivity, observable in comparisons of con-
denser intake and discharge samples, primarily represent sublethal,
physiological effects on the phytoplankton, and that decreases are pro-
duced mainly by thermal stress during condenser transit. Except during
-------
94
periods of condenser chlorination, chlorophyll a_ concentrations have not
been observed to decline when reductions in productivity were mea-
44 52 54 55 56
sured. » > > » since chlorophyll ei degrades upon cell death, it
appears that the cells become metabolically impaired in such cases, but
not killed. Thus, these effects have been interpreted by most investiga-
tors as stimulation and inhibition of photosynthesis. The higher the dis-
charge temperature or AT at a given power plant and aquatic system, the
more generally pronounced is the photosynthetic inhibition observed.
Apparently consistent also with the "thermal dose" concept discussed
earlier, more pronounced inhibition also has resulted from post-discharge
storage of condenser-passed phytoplankton at discharge (vs. ambient control)
55 53
temperatures. In addition, Gurtz and Weiss found progressively greater
inhibition as discharged phytoplankton flowed down the long discharge
canal of the Allen power plant.
A number of investigators have reported that photosynthetic inhibi-
tion in condenser-passed phytoplankton may not become fully evident imme-
diately after discharge. In addition to such delayed expression, there
also is evidence that inhibition may be persistent in the affected cells.
In studies at the Waukegan station, inhibition was not measurable
until after the first 24 hours of storage at ambient (intake) temperatures.
Afterwards, such inhibition persisted during the 75-hour period of obser-
52,56 57
vation. Ayers, also observed delayed phytoplankton damage at the
44
Waukegan station. Morgan and Stress reported no recovery of photosyn-
thetic ability in their samples from the Chalk Point power ^lant, during
4 hours of observation.
Most power plant entrainment studies have included observation of con-
denser-passed organisms at times when the plant is producing no power.
-------
95
By running the circulating water pumps without transfer of heat in the
condensers, the effects of mechanical damage to entrained organisms can
be studied for comparison with the combined thermal-mechanical effects
measured during normal plant operation.
Mechanical damage to entrained phytoplankton has been studied by
productivity and chlorophyll assays, as well as by microscopic observation
for broken diatom frustules or other signs of structural cell damage.
Although some cases of mechanical damage to phytoplankton have been re-
ported, however, such effects seem not to be nearly as evident or signi-
ficant as those apparently due to thermal stresses.
At the Indian River power plant, some mechanical damage to fragile
phytoplankters such as small flagellates and dinoflagellates was observed
but it was concluded that these effects were much less significant than
46
were those of thermal stress in the warmer months. On Lake Michigan,
variable reductions in productivity were reported in entrainment studies
58 59
conducted when the Palisades power station was pumping unheated water '
but at the Waukegan Station, broken diatom frustules were not observed
52
during unheated circulation.
At the Allen power plant on Lake Wylie, North Carolina, some photo-
53
synthetic stimulation appeared to result from mechanical effects. The
possibility was suggested by these investigations that the mechanical
shocks in the cooling system of the Allen plant may have produced fragmen-
tation of chains of filamentous algae, thereby increasing cell surface
areas and, consequently, metabolic potentials.
Severe reductions in productivity of phytoplankton entrained during
condenser chlorination also has been observed in many studies. >>»»»»
-------
96
In a number of such observations, observed cell damage and loss, as well
as reduction in chlorophyll a^ content of discharge samples, accompanied
the reduced productivity ' ' implying that such chlorination practices
were destroying phytoplankton, rather than only producing sublethal met-
abolic depression.
Additional considerations regarding chlorine and other toxic chemicals
are discussed in Section 4.3.
c. Effects on Zooplankton and Other Crustacea
In most studies of the effects of cooling water entrainment on zoo-
planktonic Crustacea, observed mobility of individual organisms has been
employed as the criterion signifying their viable condition. A plankter
observed to be immobile (sometimes after probing by the observer), is
operationally counted as "dead," by consideration similar to that of Reeve
and Cooper, who demonstrated that loss of swimming ability was mostly
irreversible and usually followed by death of the organism. In some en-
trainment studies, an intermediate, (even more subjectively-determined)
"distressed" category also has been used for descriptive purposes.
In attempts to reduce observer - subjectivity and other problems,
50 59 62
some investigators j-^J0^ recently have employed a vital staining tech-
63
nique using neutral red dye. With this technique, living microcrustacea
quickly stain red, whereas dead organisms remain unstained or very lightly
stained. This type of technique shows some promise, although it reportedly
appears not to be as effective with cyclopod copepods as it is with cala-
noids, and cladocera appear to stain quickly only in their digestive
59
tracts. Of course, the determination of degree of staining of plankton
also involves some observer subjectivity.
-------
97
Both thermal and mechanical stresses have been observed by various
investigators to be lethal to entrained Crustacea. Lethal "thermal doses"
for entrained opossum shrimp (Neomysis awatschensis) were exceeded for
example, in laboratory simulations and condenser passage studies at the
Pittsburgh and Contra Costa power plants on the Sacramento - San Joaquin
64,65,66
estuary in California, when discharge temperatures exceeded 30 C.
At discharge temperatures below this level entrainment mortality of en-
3.
trained Neomysis usually was less than 10%. At 32°C, mortality usually
exceeded 65%. (See Figure 4.5). In these studies, the AT and condenser
transit time were approximately 9-10.5°C and 5 minutes, respectively.
However, Neomysis mortality was described by these workers as being in-
fluenced more by absolute discharge temperature than by AT, presumably
due to the relative independence of this organism's upper lethal tempera-
ture from modification by acclimation. From studies at the Indian Point
47
power plant on the Hudson River, Lauer also reported increased entrain-
ment mortality of Neomysis and other Crustacea when discharge temperatures
exceeded 32°C in summer.
The potential significance of the duration of condenser transit, as
well as of temperature, in the effects of entrainment on zooplankton was
67 55
emphasized by Icanberry, et al., and Jensen, et al. In studies at
a
That is, there was a 10%, difference between the mean percentate of dead
Neomysis observed in condenser discharge samples and that seen in intake
samples, by a commonly-employed procedure of correcting mortalities to
allow for dead organisms which enter the system.
-------
98
90
80
70
5 60
CO
o
cc
LU
Q_
50
40
30
20
10
-£ ^^__
-/s ($=
A
A
Figure 4.5
Neomysis Survival in Relation
to Maximum Temperature
A - 0 MINUTES
• - 2
0-4
0-6 MINUTES
EXPOSURE
70
75 80 85
MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE °F
Hair, J. P. Upper ]etha] teirpe^atnre and thermal shock tolerances of the
oprssiiw Rhriinp. Neoirys is awa_t scben_si_s, from the Sacramento-San
Joaquin estuary, California. Calif. Fish and Game 57:17-27 (1971)
-------
99
four coastal power plants in California, a regression analysis of absolute
discharge temperatures vs. zooplankton entrainment mortalities (mostly of
copepods) was significant and linear. With average AT's at the Potreo,
Humboldt Bay, Mass Landing, and Morro Bay power plants of 9, 15, 13 and
13°C, respectively, and condenser transit times of 1.4, 3.4, 11.6, and
11.9 minutes, respectively, average zooplankton entrainment mortalities
were reported as 1.3, 5.9, 10.7 and 6.7%, respectively. When discharged
zooplankton were held for 24 hours at discharge temperatures, further
increase in % mortality were observed. When held similarly at intake
temperatures, neither significant recovery nor delayed mortality were
noted.
Some mechanical damage to entrainment zooplankton also has been re-
ported. At the Waukegan power station on Lake Michigan, for example,
lethal time-temperature conditions apparently are not reached in condenser
transit, since increases in the AT did not produce increased zooplankton
CO f.Q
mortalities. ' In these studies, an average zooplankton mortality of
approximately 6% was observed during circulation of unheated water,
as compared with an average mortality of approximately 8% during normal
station operation. Mortalities of entrained zooplankton at other operat-
ing power plants on Lake Michigan, including those at Palisades ' '
Point Beach ' and Escanaba also have been reported to average 7-12%;
and mechanical damage also has been identified as the principal factor
in zooplankton entrainment mortalities in the Palisades studies, even at
a 14°C AT.
9
With regard to Coutant's analogy of a power plant as a "large,
artificial predator" upon populations of entrainable organisms, it is
-------
100
noteworthy that such obviously would be a somewhat selective predator.
Entrainment damage which results from lethal time-temperature combinations
at various power plants obviously is skewed against stenothermal species
of plankton. Similarly, for power plants in which entrainment damage to
zooplankton is primarily mechanical, the "predation" also is selective,
skewed against the larger entrained organisms. In the Waukegan studies,
for example, average condenser-passage mortality to zooplankters larger
than 0.9 mm was approximately 17%; mortality to those smaller averaged less
than 5%.52
As was reported for entrained phytoplankton, delayed effects also
have been reported for zooplankton. From investigations at the Millstone
Point power plant on Long Island Sound, Carpenter, et al., observed on
eventual zooplankton entrainment mortality of approximately 70%. Immedi-
ate examination of samples at the condenser discharge, however, showed
only a 15% kill. On the other hand, a significant recovery of condenser-
passed zooplankton, sometimes exceeding 20% of those observed to be im-
mobile immediately after discharge, was reported to occur after 4 hours
52,68
of storage at intake water temperatures in the Waukegan power plant study.
Reduced hatchability of entrained zooplankton eggs was reported by
73 74
Mihursky. In addition, Heinle observed reduced reproductive success
in laboratory cultures of zooplankton collected from the Chalk Point sta-
tion (although this effect was attributed in part to chlorination effects).
On the other hand, a slight increase in viability of discharged zooplankton
52
eggs were reported at Waukegan although details of the study were not
described.
High entrainment mortality of zooplankton during condenser chlorina-
tion has been observed in a number of studies. ' ' ' Additional con-
siderations regarding chlorine and other toxic chemicals are discussed in
Section 4.3.
-------
101
d. Effects on Fish Eggs, Larvae and Young
Damage to the eggs, larvae, and entrainable young of fishes in a power
plant cooling water system is a potentially serious problem, for which in
many cases, the possibilities of corrective cooling water system design do
no appear able to provide adequate solutions. Rather, every attempt should
be made to avoid such problems, by judicious design and location of intakes.
Although Kerr reported high survival of entrained chinook salmon
and striped bass fry collected at the condenser discharge of the Contra
9
Costa power plant, Coutant has observed that Kerr failed to (a) provide
information on intake or discharge temperatures, (b) consider the stresses
experienced by the fry, or additional mortality, in the plants long dis-
charge canal, and (c) consider sublethal effects on the fry.
50 77
At the Millstone Point and Chalk Point power plants, mortality to
entrained fish larval was reported at and above 90%. At the Indian Point
station, approximately 46% of entrained white perch and striped bass larvae
47
reportedly were killed and considerable concern has been expressed regard-
7 A f\ f\
ing the impact of thi3 loss. , Chadwick has identified 30-32°C as the
condenser discharge temperature range which, if exceeded, can result in
mortality of most entrained striped bass larvae from thermal effects alone.
In a preliminary report on his investigations at the Connecticut
79
Yankee power plant, (Connecticut River), Marcy stated that at condenser
discharge temperatures of 28, 33, and 35°C, the 93-second condenser tran-
sit at the plant was survived by only 35, 19 and 0% respectively of en-
trained fish larvae and fry (mostly alewives and blueback herring). In
addition, almost none of the young fish were observed to survive subsequent
transit down the long (1.83 km) discharge canal in summer, when condenser
-------
102
80
discharge temperatures exceeded 30°C. In a later report, Marcy attri-
buted 72-87% of the observed mortalities to mechanical damage, with thermal
stress responsible for the rest.
As with zooplankton, mechanical damage to entrained young fish in-
80,81
creases with size of the fish. On the other hand, mechanical destruc-
tion of entrained fish eggs also appears to occur. At the Vienna, Maryland,
power plant, 99.7% average mortality of striped bass eggs was reported
82
by Flemer, et al., who observed large differences in the numbers of
eggs entering and leaving the cooling system.
e. Additional Considerations
The kinds of aquatic organisms which become entrained in power plant
cooling water systems are vital to the energy flow, nutrient budget, and
dynamic stability of the aquatic ecosystem affected, as well as to the pro-
duction of various species of commercial and recreational importance to
man. In any case in which ecological damage resulting from such entrain-
ment may reasonably be expected to have a potentially significant adverse
effect on any of these important natural processes, remedial measures must
be taken.
g
Coutant has observed "clearly, the impact of entraining suspended
organisms, in the cooling water flow (assuming some damage is incurred
thereby) will depend upon the proportion of total volume of the receiving
body that is diverted through the condensers. There is potential for more
serious ecological implications at locations where a substantial portion
of a total stream flow is diverted for cooling, or where a substantial pro-
portion of a lake or estuary is recirculated in cooling flow, than where
this percentage is low,"
-------
103
In every aquatic ecosystem, certain kinds and amounts of biotic damage
can be inflicted without resulting in significant or detectable ecological
impact. Planktonic populations for example, are naturally exposed to con-
siderable grazing or predation (which dramatically affects the abundance);
seasonal and transient changes in the physical, chemical, and biological
characteristics of their environments; and many other natural stresses and
limiting influences. The life span of most plankters in natural waters
is less than a month, but density dependent phenomena such as rates of re-
production and natural mortality enable populations to compensate for large
losses. With regard to entrainment losses of fish eggs, larvae, and young,
it is noteworthy that in species which have pelagic eggs and larvae, natu-
ral survival rates from egg to adult are characteristically low, 0.001%
v , . 83,84,85
being not uncommon.
In view of considerations such as these, it is not surprising that
in many aquatic studies conducted at power plant sites, even in cases
where comparatively high entrainment damage had been observed, no ecologi-
49,52,74,75,86,87,88,89
cally significant effects were measurable.
On the other hand, although a number of general principles concerning
entrainment effects apparently can be surmised from studies such as those
previously discussed in this section, it also is true that many important
questions regarding investigative methods and ecological significances of
entrainment damage remain largely unanswered. Examples are listed below:
(1) Diel variations in the physiology, behavior, and distribution of en-
entrainable organisms can profoundly affect the results of sampling,
as well as of measurements of lethal and sublethal effects of entrain-
ment. Examples of these include the heterotrophic activity of phyto-
plankton and the vertical distribution of zooplankton. Influence
-------
104
of such phenomena on the results of entrainment studies need to be
better characterized.
(2) Microbial groups such as the protozoa, natural bacteria, and nannoplank-
ton are important in the dynamics of aquatic ecosystems and are gener-
ally characterized by high physiological responsiveness. Effects of
entrainment on these organisms need to be investigated further.
(3) Influences of sampling mortality, as well as sampling gear efficiency
and selectivity, need to be further characterized and/or reduced. In
zooplankton entrainment studies, for example, mortality in intake
samples commonly is subtracted from that in discharge samples. Since
sampling mortality largely affects fragile organisms, estimations of
entrainment damage can thereby be influenced. In addition, studies
are needed regarding the influences of sublethal stresses to entrained
zooplankters on their abilities to evade sampling gear. Such stresses
can appreciably reduce gear evasion in condenser discharge samples,
resulting in higher collections of live (albeit stressed) plankters
after condenser passage.
(4) Delayed effects of entrainment, including moribundity, sublethal stress,
and recovery, need to be further investigated.
(5) More information is needed on the ecological significances of in-
creased susceptibility of entrained organisms to predation losses. ''
(6) Influences of skewed entrainment mortality and changes in reproductive
potentials on plankton community dynamics warrant further study.
(7) Better characterization of compensatory population response potentials
is needed.
-------
105
It should be obvious from the proceeding examples (which are by no
means comprehensive) that although a great deal of work is needed to enable
better characterization and assessment of the effects of cooling water
system entrainment on aquatic biota, most of the areas of uncertainty re-
flect limitations in state-of-the-art biological methodology and knowledge.
It also should be apparent that it is not necessary that every question
which biologists can pose be answered before certain general conclusions
can be reached regarding effects of entrainment.
4.2.2 Ohio River Studies
Although the effects of entrainment and condenser passage have been
studied extensively at power plants elsewhere in the nation, this type
of potential damage apparently has been omitted from investigation at
Ohio River plants. The preceding general review therefore was presented
as background for consideration of entrainment effects of Ohio River power
plants which utilize once-through cooling.
Entrainment losses to Ohio River biota can be expected to include the
planktonic and drift organisms, including insect life forms and normally-
benthic accidentals. The composition and abundance of these are highly
variable with flow, season, and river segment. Most of the river's fishes
cast demersal eggs which are only accidentally susceptible to entrainment
(although this does not always imply insignificance), and much tributary
spawning apparently occurs. However, the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus
grunniens) is an important Ohio River species with pelagic eggs, and of
course the fry, larvae, and dislodged eggs of other species are entrain-
able.
35
Although some of the WAPORA data at the Cane Run, Kyger Creek,
Sammis, and Beckjord plants can be considered marginally pertinent to the
-------
106
question of entrainment damage, in that phytoplankton and zooplankton
samples were collected at locations upstream and downstream of the plants'
discharges, no direct intake-discharge observations or measurements of
viable plankters were made in these studies. No significant effects on
plankton abundance and composition were observed at these plants during
the studies. The designs of these plants can be characterized as subject-
ing entrained organisms to relatively low time-temperature combinations,
i.e., Cane Run — 40 seconds, 10°C AT, 600,000 gpm; Kyger Creek — 3
minutes, 6.6°C AT, 820,000 gpm; Sammis — 4 minutes, 9°C AT, 805,000 gpm;
Beckjord — 11°C, 510,000 gpm.
Organisms entrained at the J. M. Stuart plant, in contrast, are sub-
jected to markedly higher time-temperature "doses," i.e., 8 minutes,
13°C AT. Limited sampling of the intake and effluent stream at this plant
was made during 4 days in the summer of 1972. High mortalities of zoo-
plankton were observed after condenser transit. In June, with intake
temperatures of 22 to 23°C (about 71 to 73°F) and AT's of 8 to 16.5°C
93
(14 to 30°F), most microcrustacea in the discharge were dead. Most of
the mortality observed was for Cyclops. In August, when intake tempera-
ture was 27°C (80.6°F) and AT was 13.7°C (about 25°F), 91% of the zooplank-
ton in the discharge were dead, compared to 35% dead in the intake samples.
Most of the dead organisms were Ceriodaphnia, Cyclops, Diaptomus, and
u • 93
Daphnia.
More extensive work at the Stuart plant, supplemented by laboratory
studies, was carried out in 1970 to 1973 by workers at the University of
94,95
Cincinnati. ' Results of the 1970-71 study indicated that increases
in temperature up to 18°C AT (32.4°F AT) tended to increase the rates of
algal primary production, when the ambient water temperatures were less
-------
107
than 10°C (50°F). At ambient temperatures greater than this value, any
temperature elevations decreased the rates of primary production. Bac-
terial metabolism, as measured by uptake of glucose, was decreased or
unchanged by temperature increases up to 8°C (14.4°F), and increased in
most cases with temperature elevations greater than 8°C (14.4°F). Periphy-
ton growth was inhibited by the warmer waters, although earlier spring and
higher winter biomass accumulations occurred at these stations than in the
cold water stations. In laboratory experiments, the zooplankton Daphnia
magna was acclimated to several temperatures and then subjected to 2-hour
thermal shocks at temperatures up to 32°C (89.6°F). Filtering rates were
decreased, respiration rates were increased, and longevity decreased by
94
the temperature shock treatments.
In 1972, increased generating capacity at the Stuart plant resulted
in a range of temperature increases at the outfall of 7.0 to 25.0°C
(12.6 to 45°F) above ambient, with a mean of 15°C (27°F). The correspond-
ing range for 1970-71 was 1.5 to 20.0°C (2.7 to 36°F), with a mean of
8.5°C (15.3°F) above ambient. Passage through the plant's condensers
reduced algal photosynthesis rates more severely in 1972 than in 1971.
Maximal rates of bacterial uptake of glucose were inhibited when water
temperatures exceeded 34°C (93.2°F). Zooplankton numbers were not signi-
ficantly different in the outfall area from those in the intake area,
during a period when the maximum temperature at the outfall reached 26°C
(about 79°F). A possible exception was the number of Cyclops, which
showed decreases 75% of the time. The workers postulated that severe zoo-
plankton mortality would occur during the periods when outfall temperatures
reached 40°C (104°F). Data collected during this latter period were not
95
included in the report. No significant effects of the thermal effluent
exiting from the weir were observed on the flora and zooplankton at the
sampling stations 1000 feet below the weir, in the Ohio River mainstem.
-------
108
4.3 Chemical Discharge Effects
4.3.1 General Review
Cooling water use presently requires the addition of chemicals to water
to maintain heat transfer surfaces free of biological growths, silt, and
salt deposits, and to prevent or retard corrosion. Chemicals are also needed
in cooling towers to prevent microbial deterioration of the tower fill. (Op-
eration of cooling towers additionally increases the concentrations of salts
and other compounds already present in the water due to evaporative loss of
water. This concentration effect is particularly important in an estuary,
where a discharge of abnormally saline water can have detrimental effects
on the resident biota.) Closed-cycle operation with cooling ponds can
require treatment of the ponds with algicides to prevent blooms of unde-
sirable algae. The number, nature and concentrations of the chemicals required
for these purposes will depend primarily on the chemical and biological
characteristics of the water at a particular site.
Chemicals that are commonly added to cooling water include chromates,
zinc, phosphates, and silicates for corrosion control; chlorine, hypochlorite,
chlorophenols, quaternary amines, and organometallic compounds for bacterial
growth control; acids and alkalis for pH control necessary to prevent scale
formation; lignin-tannins, polyacrylamides, polyethylene amines, and other
polyelectrolytes to reduce silt deposition. Treatment of boilers to
prevent scale, corrosion, and cracking, involves the use of di-or trisodium
97
phosphates, sodium nitrate, ammonia or cyclohexylamine. Hydrazine and mor-
pholine, which are used to scavenge oxygen, should not appear in the water
-------
109
discharge since these compounds form gaseous decomposition products. Various
chemicals are also used for pre-operational and occasional cleaning of piping
and other surfaces. The most common algicide added to cooling ponds is
copper sulfate. Descriptions of the various chemicals and methodology of
use in power plant operation, as well as data on toxicity concentration
QO QQ IQQ
levels for aquatic biota, are available ' ' and will not be reviewed
here.
When discharged to the receiving water, these chemicals and/or their re-
action products can have toxic effects on aquatic life, particularly on those
organisms such as fish which are resident in the plume area and thus subjected
to chemical discharges before the latter are diluted in the ambient river.
Most chemicals added to cooling water are, under normal power plant practice,
discharged at concentrations below laboratory-determined toxicity levels.
However, the latter may not always be an adequate measure of toxicity effects
under field conditions due to (a) possible synergistic effects of the higher
water temperatures in a cooling water discharge, (b) possible synergistic
and/or cumulative effects of other chemicals already present in the water and
in the tissues of the organism, (c) presence of untested species or individuals
more sensitive to a particular chemical than the tested individuals, (d) pos-
sible long-term sublethal effects that may not manifest themselves until later
in the life cycle of the organism. Characteristics of the water, such as pH
and hardness, can also effect toxicity responses. For example, trivalent chro-
mium seems to be more toxic to fish than hexavalent chromium. In hard water,
however, the solubility of trivalent chromium is reduced by precipitation,
depending on the pH and mineral content of the water. Hexavalent chromium
98
then becomes more lethal to fish than trivalent chromium.
-------
110
Cooling water treatment is thus a site-specific problem that may
often be only cursorily investigated, resulting in addition of unnecessary
chemicals or excessive amounts of necessary ones.
Careless or accidental additions can be a major cause of detrimental
effects. For example, at a power plant discharge on the Saginaw River in
Michigan, intermittent chlorination on a day in October, 1971, resulted
»3
in the death of several thousand fish. The highest total residual chlorine,
measured 20 feet downstream from the outfall, was 1.36 mg/1, indicating
that chlorination had probably been in excess of what was necessary.
Terminology:
free chlorine; Hypochlorous acid (HOC1), hypochlorite ion (OC1~), or a
mixture of both. Chlorine is added either as Cl , which
quickly hydrolyzes in water to form HOC1, or is added as
sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl.
combined chlorine: Compounds formed from the reaction of free chlorine
with ammonia, phenols, ammonia-containing compounds, or
any other compounds in which some of the oxidizing power
of chlorine is retained.
residual chlorine: The concentration of chlorine measured at the sampling
point. In the case of cooling water, this point is usually
after the condenser exit or in the discharge canal.
free residual chlorine: HOC1 or OC1 remaining in the water at the sampling
point.
total residual chlorine: the sum of the free and combined residual chlorine.
-------
Ill
On another occasion at a power plant on Lake Michigan, about 800 to 120C
fish were killed in the discharge channel as a result of the chlorination prc
cedure. Measurements of total residual chlorine by personnel of the Michigar
Department of Natural Resources using a portable amperometric titrator, indi-
cated a maximum free chlorine concentration of 2.93 mg/1 and a maximum total
residual chlorine concentration of 3.05 mg/1 in the discharge canal. The
highest reading obtained in the plant by company personnel was 0.2 mg/1 total
102
residual chlorine, using the orthotolidine color comparator. This inciden
points out the importance of adequate measuring instruments and the calibrate
of such. The amperometric method has been recommended as the most accurat
for determination of free and combined chlorine.
More attention has been paid to the effects of chlorine on aquatic
biota than to other cooling water chemicals because this is the most commonly
used biocide in either once-thru or closed-cycle systems to prevent slime
formation on condenser surfaces and deterioration of cooling tower wood fill.
Since effective condenser desliming requires only that there be some free
residual chlorine (e.g., 0.1 mg/1) at the exit of the condenser, excessive
residual chlorine concentrations in the discharge should not ordinarily occur
if chlorination is carefully controlled. However, under conditions where the
cooling water contains unusually high levels of ammonia (e.g., >0.1 mg/1) or
organic compounds containing amino or phenolic groups, reactions with the
chlorine will produce combined chlorine compounds (e.g., chloramines and
chlorophenols) that are toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms, and which
do not degrade or dissipate as rapidly in water as free chlorine.
-------
112
Additionally, high ammonia concentrations in the makeup water require
high levels of chlorination, since it is the free, not the combined chlorine
that is most effective in slime control. Circumstances of high concentrations
of ammonia and/or ammonia—containing compounds can occur when the source of
cooling water also serves as receiving water for upstream sewage effluent,
or during periods of high run-off from agricultural or dairy lands. In some
cases, dechlorination of the effluent may be necessary to protect aquatic
life. At a paper mill in Toledo, Oregon, the addition of 3.8 parts of sodium
bisulfite to 1 part of residual chlorine decreased the latter level in boiler
feed water from 1 mg/liter to less than 0.1 mg/1 in less than 5 seconds.
Other dechlorinating agents include sodium thiosulfate and sulfur dioxide.
Use of dechlorinating agents, which also tend to remove oxygen from the water,
needs investigation as to their effects on organisms entrained in the cooling
water. Alternative methods of condenser slime control involve mechanical
scrubbing techniques; the effectiveness of these methods, with or without
concurrent chlorination, will depend on the characteristics of the water and
season of the year. In some cases, the addition of a biocide to a condenser
system may not be necessary. At the Oswego Steam Station on Lake Ontario in
upstate New York, for example, the low level of nutrients in the intake water
and the abrasive effect of fine suspended particles of glacial till in the
water, make the use of biocides unnecessary.
The EPA National Water Quality Laboratory has recommended criteria for
chlorine concentrations that provide some protection for freshwater aquatic
103
life. These are presented in Table 4.3. To date, there are no federal or
state standards that are specific for chlorine, although there are prohibitions
*0n March 4, 1974, the U.S.EPA published in the Federal Register proposed
effluent guidelines for steam electric power plants. These proposed guide-
lines do contain standards specific for chlorine.
-------
Table 4.3
Residual Chlorine Criteria for Freshwater Aquatic Lifec
Type of Chlorine Use
Concentration of Total Residual Chlorine Degree of Protection
Continuous
Not to exceed 0.01 mg/1
Not to exceed 0.002 mg/1
This concentration would not protect
trout and salmon and some important
fish-food organisma; it could be partially
lethal to sensitive life stages of sensi-
tive fish species.
This concentration should protect most
aquatic organisms.
Intermittent
For a period of 2 hr/day, up to, but
not to exceed 0.2 mg/1
This concentration would not protect trout
and salmon.
For a period of 2 hr/day, up to, but not
to exceed, 0.04 mg/1
This concentration should protect most
species of fish.
From Brungs, W. A. Effects of residual chlorine on aquatic life. J. Water Pol. Contr. Fed.
45:2180-2193 (1973).
-------
114
against discharging substances toxic to aquatic life. It is likely that the
criteria set forth in Table 4.3 will serve as a basis for future standards.
A problem in the interpretation of the criteria concerns the question of
where in the receiving water should the criteria be applied, i.e., before
mixing or after mixing with the ambient stream? The lower limit of accurate
field measurement of total chlorine using present techniques is 0.1 mg/1.
Standards of 0.04, 0.01, and 0.002 mg/1, for example, will present difficulties
in determination of compliance. For this reason, standards for chlorine
that require measurement in the effluent before outfall to the receiving water
may be more useful.
A point that should be kept in mind is that attempts to regulate the dis-
charge of chlorine in cooling water may have little effect on the upgrading of
a river as a whole if chlorinated sewage discharges are allowed at present
residual chlorine concentrations. It has been shown, for example, that fish
species diversity was markedly reduced in stream locations immediately below
the outfalls of 149 sewage treatment plants, compared to upstream locations.
Chlorine concentrations up to 2.0 mg/1 were maintained in these discharges,
107
and were determined to be a major cause of the reduction in species diversity.
Since public health is of primary importance, chlorination of sewage should
not presently be terminated. Dechlorination or alternative disinfection
methods need to be investigated. Ozonation is one such alternative that may
prove even more effective for disinfection than chlorination (it has been
shown that chlorination at the usual rate does not kill all pathogenic or-
ganisms in sewage).i°8,109 In t^e meantime, control of chlorine in cooling
-------
115
water discharges can certainly prevent injury to aquatic life in the vicinity
of the discharges.
Discharge of sublethal concentrations of chemicals does not ensure
absence of undesirable effects on a receiving water and its biota. Heavy
metals such as Hg, Zn, Cr, and Cu have been shown to accumulate in sediments
and bottom-dwelling organisms. Enrichment of heavy metals and some
organic compounds was also observed in the surface microlayer of water in
Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island. Bioaccumulation can lead to toxic
concentrations higher up the food chain. Long-term exposure of aquatic
organisms to sublethal concentrations of cooling water chemicals has been
little studied, if at all. Claims by manufacturers of "environmentally
safe" or "non-polluting" biocides should be carefully investigated.
4.3.2 Ohio River Studies
On the Ohio River and tributaries little effort has been made to
evaluate the effects of chemical constituents of cooling water discharges
on the river's ecosystems. The relatively detailed studies at four power
34 35
plants carried out by WAPORA in 1971 and 1972 ' apparently did not
include chlorination effects, although the Kyger Creek, Tanners Creek,
112
Beckjord, Sammis, and Cane Run plants all chlorinate their cooling water.
15 31
Similarly, Gammon ' did not report any observations of chlorination
effects on the biota of the Wabash River. This is unfortunate, because
incidents of avoidance and mortality may have been related to discharges
-------
116
of chlorine as has been observed elsewhere. Bryant and co-workers made
some attempts to include effects of chlorination in their study at the
30
Beckjord plant but little can be concluded from the study since
chlorination occurred simultaneously with the discharge of heated water,
and it was not possible to separate the effects of the two. Additionally,
the few number of samples taken did not warrant making any statistically
significant conclusions.
As was mentioned in Section 4.3.1 above, the presence of ammonia
(NH +) in the cooling water will affect the nature of the residual chlorine
discharged to the receiving water. A portion of the data obtained by
94
Miller and Kallendorf in 1971 and 1972 on ammonia in the Ohio River is
shown in Figure 4.6, and indicates that in the stretch of the river near
River Mile 405.7, ammonia (NH, -N) concentrations ranged from 0.1 to about
0.33-mg/l. If such water is chlorinated upon intake into the condensers
of a cooling system, concentrations of monochloramine (NH Cl) up to about
1.2 mg/1 (equivalent to about 1.6 mg/1 molecular chlorine) can appear in
the discharge. This concentration is many times the maximum recommended
criteria for protection of warmwater fish species during intermittent
chlorination (saa iable 4.3). Some fish species have been shown to avoid
113
lethal concentrations of chlorine if they can sense a chlorine gradient,
and it would seem safe to assume that other fish species in the Ohio River
could do likewise. However, since chlorination of cooling water is
-------
.420
.360
Figure 4.6
Annual Cycle of the Variation of NH + - N (mg/1) in the Ohio River near RM 405.T
.300
.240
.180
.120
.060
0
J
L
M
M
J
MONTH
0
N
D
aFrom Miller, M. C. and Kallendorf, R. J. The Effect of a Thermal Effluent on the Aquatic Micro-
flora and Zooplankton of Little-Three-Mile Creek and the Ohio River at Aberdeen, Ohio. Dept. of
Biol. Sciences, Univ. of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio (1973).
-------
118
intermittent, fish resident in a thermal plume may be shocked by the
sudden discharge of chlorinated effluent and be unable to move away,
resulting in injury or death.
It is common practice at some power plants to chlorinate only a
portion (e.g., half) of the cooling water stream (split-stream
chlorination). Upon remixing with the unchlorinated portion after
passage through the condensers, some of the residual chlorine in the
free and combined forms reacts with chlorine-demanding substances in
the unchlorinated stream, with the result that the total residual
chlorine concentration in the effluent to the receiving body of water
is substantially decreased. Information obtained from some power plants
on the Ohio River indicates that not all practice split-stream chlorina-
tion. Residual chlorine in the discharges appear to range from 1.4 mg/1
to "nil" (see Table 4.4). It would be interesting to examine the ex-
periences and circumstances at the West End station, whose cooling water
is apparently not chlorinated.
Passage of cooling water containing monochloramine through a cooling
tower results in the removal of some of the combined chlorine due to the
tendency of monochloramine to form dichloramine (NHC10) if free chlorine
is present, by the reaction:
NH Cl + HOC1 ->- NHC12 + H2°
The dichloramine is volatile and is scrubbed out of the cooling water in the
tower, leading to a shift in equilibrium and the formation of more dichloramine.
-------
119
Table 4.4
Residual Chlorine at Ohio River Power Plants
Name and River Mile Location of Plant Residual Chlorine Comments
(mg/1)
Phillips, RM 15.8
Beaver Valley, RM 35 (with cooling
towers)
nil
0.1
Predicted concentration
Kammer, RM 111.1
Mitchell, RM 101.9 (with cooling
towers)
0.5 - 0.75
Just above 0
Measured in cooling tower
blowdown.
Willow Island, RM 160.5
Philip Sporn, RM 241.6
Joppa, RM 951.2
J. M. Stuart, RM 405.7
1.0
0.5 - 1.0
0 - 1.0
0.05
Uses mechanical cleaning
for condenser tubes.
Clifty Creek, RM 558.4
0.2 - 1.5
Before mixing with un-
chlorinated discharge.
Ohio River, RM 777
Culley, RM 773.4
Gallager, RM 531.5
West End, RM 471.4
0.4
0.2
0.75
Condenser cooling water
is not chlorinated.
Miami Fort, RM 490.3
W. C. Beckjord, RM 453.0
Tidd, RM 75.0
0.5 or 1 (free)
0.5
0.35
Before mixing with
unchlorinated discharge.
Cardinal, RM 74.4
0.35
Before mixing with un-
chlorinated discharge.
Toronto, RM 57.5
R. E. Burger, RM 97.6
Kyger Creek, RM 260.2
1.5
0.5
0.4 (free)
0.8 (total)
Before mixing with un-
chlorinated discharge.
Tanners Creek, RM 495.5
W. H. Sammis, RM 55.0
0.75 - 1.4
0.1 - 0.5
Table prepared from information supplied to the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency by the corresponding utilities, and discharge permit applications.
Unless otherwise specified in parenthesis, values are for total residual
chlorine at the discharge from the condenser.
-------
120
The proportions of mono- and dichloramine in chlorinated water will depend
114
on the concentrations of the chloride ion, ammonia, chlorine, and pH. For
example, given a chloride ion concentration of 10 mg/1, ammonia concentration
of 1.0 mg/1, a residual chlorine concentration of 1.0 mg/1, and a pH of 7.5,
about 97.3% of the residual chlorine will be in the form of monochloramine,
114
and about 2.6% in the form of dichloramine.
It is sometimes assumed that most of the chloramines in cooling water
will be lost in cooling towers by the reactions given above, but there is
little hard data to support this. Draley conducted a limited study of
chlorination at the J. E. Amos power plant on the Kanawha River, a tribu-
tary to the Ohio River at about River Mile 270, and calculated that 40% of
the chloramines were lost per pass through the cooling tower circulating-
water system. The chlorination procedure consisted of injecting aqueous
chlorine for half an hour at the rate of about 1.3 to 1.6 mg/1. The
concentration of free chlorine at the condenser was about 0.1 mg/1; the
total residual chlorine concentration reached a maximum of 0.63 mg/1 at
the condenser discharge, and 0.32 mg/1 in the discharge from the cooling
tower basin. After addition of chlorine was stopped, free chlorine was
undetectable within 10 minutes, but more than two hours elapsed before
total residual chlorine could no longer be detected in the cooling tower
sluice by the amperometric titration method (sensitivity perhaps 0.01 or
0.02 mg/1).115
The importance of controlling all chemical discharges rather than simply
those in cooling water is illustrated by the effect on water quality and
-------
121
fish life of a 16-week shutdown of steel mills on the upper Ohio River in
1959. Steel mills discharge not only heated water but iron, dissolved
solids, acids, and phenolic-type materials. Sampling by ORSANCO, and
comparison with many years of data, showed conclusively that there was a
decrease in phenolic compounds, threshold-odor intensity and dissolved
iron content during the shutdown. When the mills resumed operation, the
values of these indicators more than doubled at most sampling stations.
Manganese concentrations in the upper river system were also lower during
the shutdown period than in previous years. Cessation of mill operations
resulted in only minor changes in the hardness, sulfate and dissolved-
solids concentrations in the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers, but there
were marked reductions in the concentrations of these indicators in the
Mahoning Rivers. These effects were attributed to the impact of acid
coal mine drainage which apparently masked the effects of steel-mill
wastes in the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers. Fluoride concentrations
in the upper Ohio River and tributaries during the shutdown averaged
0.4 ppm, which is about one-half the average value observed in previous
years when the mills were operating.
Changes in the fish fauna in this stretch of the river as a result
of the steel mill shutdown were investigated by Krumholz and Minckley.
Collection of fish with rotenone from the auxiliary lock chamber at
Montgomery Lock and Dam yielded more than twice as many different kinds
of fish and more than five times as many individuals within 11 days after
the beginning of the shutdown, than comparable samples taken from the same
-------
122
area before the shutdown. There was no substantial change in the numbers
of the "usual" river fish such as. the emerald shiner, the carp, the cat-
fishes and some of the sunfishes, but there was an increased abundance of
bigeye chub, common sucker, the stoneroller, the creek chub, and several
shiners, all of which can be classified as "clean-water" fishes. It was
concluded that these species had moved into this stretch of the river
from clear backwaters and creeks, rather than from less polluted parts
of the main channel.
Because a decrease in water temperature occurred coincidentally with
the reduction in chemical additions to the river, it is not possible to
state unequivocally that the appearance of a more diverse fish fauna
occurred as a result of one change rather than the other. It seems safe
to conclude that abatement of both thermal and chemical additions is
necessary if a diverse fauna is to exist in the Ohio River.
-------
123
-------
124
Conclusions and Recommendations
Some aspects of the present water quality and aquatic life of the Ohio
River are unsatisfactory» and can be traced to one or more of the following:
a. Construction of dams and modification of the river channel for
navigation.
b. Heavy silt loads in run-off, due mainly to deforestation, agri-
culture, and construction.
c. Discharge of effluents from coal mines.
d. Discharge of municipal waste.
e. Discharge of industrial waste chemicals.
f. Discharge of heated water.
If it is assumed that further degradation is to be prevented, and
that, additionally, present water quality conditions are to be changed for
the better, then each df the above factors needs to be scrutinized as to
the feasibility of reversing present trends.
For all practical purposes, the presence of the locks and dams must
be considered irreversible. Similarly, control of run-off would involve
concerted efforts of a large number df private and public enterprise through-
out the river basin and is presently beyond the realistic control of Ohio River
agencies such as ORSANCO, USEPA, and the individual states.
The last four factors, however, appear to be capable of control by
these agencies. Concentration of efforts on just one of these four, e.g.,
thermal discharges, will have limited effect on upgrading the river as a
whole, but can have significant effect on local conditions.
-------
125
Reports of studies on the biological effects of cooling water use on
the Ohio River and tributaries have provided good insight into some aspects
of the problem, but suffer from one or more deficiencies, including:
a. Lack of continuous or frequent plume temperature measurements.
b. Lack of statistical treatment of phytoplankton and zooplankton
data to determine significance of effects.
c. Exclusion of chlorine and other chemical discharges from considera-
tion of discharge plume effects.
d. Little information on effects of plant shutdown or variations in
plant loads.
e. Little information on migration habits, movements, and spawning
sites of river fish.
f. Lack of water quality considerations in plume effects.
g. Little characterization and measurement of natural seasonal
variations in populations of river biota.
h. Little attempt to separate condenser passage effects from plume
effects.
Despite difficulties inherent in the study of complex life systems
such as the Ohio River and its biota, several well-established relation-
ships and effects have been observed with regard to cooling water use. It
is thus no longer excusable to cite the lack of information as a basis for
inaction. Even in the so-called "grey areas," action can be taken that
can minimize adverse effects until more conclusive results are obtained.
The following is a list, by no means complete, of measures that can be
taken to prevent or minimize adverse effects of cooling water use on the
Ohio River:
-------
126
a. Proper siting and design of intake structures.
Details of the problem are discussed in reference 96.
Selection of intake velocities and the placement and type of screening
device best suited for a particular site should be made primarily on the
basis of biological effects, and only secondarily on economic factors. A
knowledge of the river flow characteristics, and the species and habits of
fish in the area is essential. This will involve a preconstruction survey
of fish populations and habits.
b. Minimization of entrainment effects.
Loss of phytoplankton productivity from the Ohio River due to entrain-
ment will usually be a minor effect regardless of the nature of the cooling
system, since algae have relatively short generation times (hours) and
populations bypassing the plant can quickly recover. Loss of zooplankton,
pelagic fish eggs and fry, however, is undesirable, and at sites where
this loss can occur, intake volumes should be kept low, e.g., less than 1%
of the river flow (cumulative effects of other water intakes on the river
should be considered in this regard). Also, shortening the exposure times
to elevated temperatures can reduce zooplankton mortalities due to condenser
passage effects. The responses of a particular zooplankton population to a
given time-temperature condition are specific, and can only be determined by
condenser passage studies such as are outlined in Section 4.2. Implicit in
these studies is statistical validity of the results.
c. Design of discharge structures such that fish do not have access
to the discharge canals, and cannot be trapped in small bays.
d. Avoidance of spawning areas.
It is apparent from the few studies made on the Ohio River and tribu-
taries that spawning and nursery habitats occur mainly in the creeks and
-------
127
backwaters. Siting of intakes or discharges on creeks or streams should
therefore be avoided. Similarly, thermal plumes should not intersect these
tributaries. Before a decision is made as to the location of a discharge,
the spawning habits and movements of the fish in the area should be investi-
gated. Construction of weirs or other obstruction across the mouth of a
tributary creek should also be avoided.
e. Maintenance of a zone of passage.
This is a parameter that is not always clearly defined. One estimate
would restrict a thermal discharge to 25% or less, of the river volume and
area. In terms of blocking fish movement, this could be regarded as too
severe a restriction of the discharge; however, in terms of protecting a
major portion of the river plankton from the effects of the thermal plume,
this does not appear to be an unreasonable standard. A zone of passage
should take into account the habits of the particular fish moving through
the area. For example, if most of the fish migrate close to the shore and
avoid the mid channel because of barge traffic, a thermal plume that hugs
the shore for a considerable distance would hamper fish movement, even if
the 25% standard was complied with. This stresses the importance of pre-
construction fish studies.
f. Gradual shutdown.
By allowing routine shutdown of a power plant to proceed slowly, e.g.,
not over 2°F/hr* rate of temperature decrease, cold-kill of fish in winter
can be largely avoided. During an emergency shutdown, this rate cannot
usually be achieved, and mortality of some resident fish can be expected.
g. Careful control of chlorination.
If intermittent chlorination is used to control condenser sliming, a
concentration of 0.1 mg/1 free residual chlorine at the condenser exit
*This figure is only an estimate and may be too high for some species. No
investigation has been made on the decreased rate that could be tolerated
by most fish species.
-------
128
should not be exceeded. Injection of the chlorine immediately upstream of
the condensers would be the optimum location to give the maximum concen-
tration of chlorine where it is needed. Injection of chlorine too far
upstream of the condensers could lead to excessive chlorination if ammonia
is present. Hold-up of blowdown (from cooling towers) during the chlorina-
tion period, dilution with unchlorinated discharge, or dechlorination, are
methods that can be used to reduce the residual chlorine concentration in
the effluent to the river. A total residual chlorine concentration not to
exceed 0.2 mg/1 in the effluent, would provide protection of Ohio River
fish even at the immediate outfall.
The question of whether or not to require backfitting of power plants
already in operation needs a case by case analysis. Intake structures can
be modified to minimize impingement effects if unacceptable fish kills
occur regularly. The criteria of unacceptability is presently subjective.
For example, here are several points of view:
a. The death of even one gizzard shad is unacceptable.
b. Mortality of a number of fish such that the population's com-
pensatory response can not make up for it, is unacceptable.
c. Kills of "rough" or "trash" fish are acceptable. Kills of more
"desirable" fish such as walleye and sauger are unacceptable.
The study of a given fish population to determine compensatory
ability is expensive and would require many years of work. It appears
simpler to apply the available information to minimize impingement mor-
talities. Similarly, modification of existing discharge canals to prevent
fish access would be a major factor in reducing thermal death.
The necessity to backfit with supplemental cooling systems also
requires individual site study. The conditions which might require such
-------
129
backfitting include circumstances where, for example,
a. The thermal discharge occupies a major portion (area and volume)
of the river.
b. The intake volume and time-temperature conditions are such as to
expose a large fraction (e.g., 10% or more) of the river plankton
to lethal conditions. This can only be determined by careful
condenser-passage studies.
c. It is desired to add additional electrical generating capacity
while maintaining a diverse fish fauna in the mainstem and tri-
butaries that will include species that prefer cool water.
In all cases, the environmental effects of the alternative cooling
systems should be carefully considered.
-------
130
Section 4 References
1. Patrick, R. Some effects of temperature on freshwater algae. In
"Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution," Chap. 7. P. A. Krenkel and
F. L. Parker, eds. Vanderbilt Univ. Press (1969).
2. Indian Point Nuclear Generating Plant Unit 2 Final Environmental
Statement. Docket No. 50-247. Vol. 1, September 1972.
3. Wurtz, C. B. The effects of heated discharges on freshwater benthos.
In "Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution," Chap. 8. P. A. Krenkel
and F. L. Parker, eds. Vanderbilt Univ. Press (1969).
4. Mihursky, J. A. and Kennedy, V. S. Water temperature criteria to
protect aquatic life. Araer. Fish. Soc. Special Publ. 4:20-32 (1967).
5. Mills, H. B., Starrett, W. C. and Bellrose, F. C. Man's effect on the
fish and wildlife of the Illinois River, Illinois Nat. Hist. Survey
Biol. Notes 57 (1966).
6. Coutant, C. The effect of a heated water effluent upon the macroin-
vertebrates riffle fauna of the Delaware River. Proc. Penn. Acad, Sci.
36:58-71 (1962).
7. Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant Final Environmental Statement
Docket 50-255. USAEC Direct, of Licensing (June 1972).
8. Clarks J. R. Thermal pollution and aquatic life. Scientific American
220 (3):18-27 (1969).
-------
131
9. Coutant, C. C. Biological aspects of thermal pollution. I Entrain-
ment and discharge canal effects. CRC Critical Reviews in Environmen-
tal Control, pp. 341-381 (1970).
10. Nucleonics Week 14 (34). August 23, 1973.
11. Meldrim, J. W. and Gift, J. J. Temperature preference, avoidance and
shock experiments with estuarine fishes, Icthyological Associates
Bull. 7 (1971). Box 35, RD 2 Middleton, Delaware 19709.
12. Coutant, C. C. and Goodyear, C. P. Thermal Effects. J. Water Pol.
Contr. Fed. 44:1250-1294 (1972).
13. Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Final Environmental State-
ment. Docket Nos. 50-295, 50-304. USAEC Directorate of Licensing.
December 1972.
14. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Draft Environmental Statement.
Docket No. 50-219. USAEC Dir. of Licensing (undated).
15. Norris, R. S. and Gammon, J. R. The effect of the heated water
effluent on the aquatic biota of Little-Three-Mile Creek. Dept. of
Zoology, DePauw University, Greencastle, Indiana, 1972.
16. Trembley, F. J. Research project on effects of condenser discharge
waiter on aquatic life. Progress Report 1960. The Institute of
Research, Lehigh Univ. (1961).
17. Nebeker, A. V. Effect of high winter water temperatures on adult
emergence of aquatic insects. Water Res. 5:777-783 (1971).
-------
132
18. Gammon, J. R. The response of fish populations in the Wabash River
to heated effluents. Pre-print of talk delivered at the 3rd National
Symp. on Radioecology, Oak Ridge, Tenn., May 11, 1971.
19. Hall, C. A. S. Migration and metabolism in a temperature system eco-
system. Ecol. 53:585-604 (1972).
20. Hawkes, H. A. Ecological changes of applied significance induced by
the discharge of heated waters. In "Engineering Aspects of Thermal
Pollution," Chap. 2. F. L. Parker and P. A. Krenkel, eds. Vanderbilt
Univ. Press (1969).
21. Lagler, K. F. Bardach, J. E. and Miller, R. R. Ichthyology. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., (1962) p. 291.
22. de Sylva, D. P. Theoretical considerations of the effects of heated
effluents on marine fishes. In "Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollu-
tion," Chap. 9. P. A. Krenkel and F. L. Parker, eds. Vanderbilt
Univ. Press (1969).
23. Coutant, C. C. Effect of thermal shock on vulnerability to predation
in juvenile salmonids. I. Single shock temperature. Battelle Pacific
Northwest Laboratories, November 1972. p. 1-17.
24. Sylvester, J. R. Effect of thermal stress on predator avoidance in
sockeye salmon. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 29(5):601-603 (1972).
25. Demont, D. and Miller, R. First reported incidence of gas-bubble di-
sease in the heated effluent of a steam generating station. Proc.
25th Annual Conf. of Southeast Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners
October 17-20, 1971. p. 392-399.
-------
133
26. Johnson, D. W. Pesticides and fishes — a review of selected litera-
ture. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 97:398-424 (1968).
27. Macek, K. J., Hutchinson, C., and Cope, 0. B. The effects of tempera-
ture on the susceptibility of bluegills and rainbow trout to selected
pesticides. Bulletin Environ. Contam. and Toxic. 4:174-183 (1969).
28. Handbook of chemistry and physics, 44th ed., p. 1706. Chemical Rubber
Company 1962-63.
29. Budde, M. L., et al. An investigation of the effect of heated water
discharge from the Beckjard electric plant on the microorganisms in
the Ohio River. Thomas More College Biology Station, California,
Kentucky (October 1971).
30. Bryant, B. et al. An investigation of the effects of heated water
discharge on the lower trophic levels of an Ohio River food chain
at the Beckjord electric plant, New Richmond, Ohio. Thomas More
College Biology Station, California, Kentucky. (November 1972).
31. Gammon, J. R. The effect of thermal inputs on the populations of
fish and macroinvertebrates in the Wabash River. Tech. Rept. No. 32
Purdue Univ. Water Research Center (June 1973).
32. Profitt, M. A. and Benda, R. S. Growth and movement of fishes, and
distribution of invertebrates, related to a heated discharge into
the White River at Petersburg, Indiana, Report of Investigations
No. 5 Indiana University Water Resources Center (December 1971).
-------
134
33. Norris, R. S. and Gammon, J. R. The effect of the heated water efflu-
ent on the aquatic biota of Little-Three-Mile Creek. Dept. of Zoology,
DePauw Univ. Greencastle, Indiana (1972).
34. WAPORA, Inc. The effect of temperature on aquatic life in the Ohio
River - Final Report July 1970-September 1971.
35. WAPORA, Inc. Continued surveillance of thermal effects of power plants
along the Ohio River, 1972 (May 31, 1973).
36. Coutant, C. C. Effects on organisms of entrainment in cooling water:
steps toward predictability. Nuclear Safety. 12: 600-607. 1971.
37. Jaske, R. T., W. L. Templeton, and C. C. Coutant. Thermal death models.
Indust. Water Eng. 6: 24-27. 1969.
38. Jaske, R. T., W. L. Templeton, and C. C. Coutant. Methods for evaluating
effects of transient conditions in heavily loaded and exten-
sively regulated streams. In; Water - 1970. Chem. Eng. Prog.
Symp. Ser., No. 107, pp. 31-39. Amer. Inst. of Chem. Eng.,
New York. 1970.
39. Fry, F. E. J., J. S. Hart, and K. F. Walker, Lethal temperature
relations for a sample of young speckled trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)
Univ. of Toronto Studies, Biol. Series. Publ. Ontario Fish. Res.
Lab. 66: 5-35. 1946.
40. Williams, G. C., et. al. Studies on the effects of a steam-electric
generating plant on the marine environment at Northport, New York.
Tech. Rep. No. 9, Mar. Sci, Res. Ctr., S. U. N .Y., Stony Brook.
1971.
41. Mulford, R. A. Morgantown entrainment. Part IV. Phytoplankton
taxonomic studies. In: Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake
Screening Workshop. Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins Univ. Balti-
more, Md. L. ^>. Jensen, ed. In Press. 1973.
-------
135
42. Strickland, J. D. H., and T. R. Parsons. A Practical Handbook of
Seawater Analysis. Fish. Res. Rd. Canada Bull. 167. 311 pp.
1968.
43. Steeman Nielsen, E. The use of radioactive carbon for measuring
organic production in the sea. Journal du Conseil Permanent
Intl. Pour LfExploration de las Her. 18: 117-140. 1952.
44. Morgan, R. P. and R. G. Stress. Destruction of phytoplankton in the
cooling water supply of a steam electric station. Chesapeake
Sci. 10: 165-171. 1969.
45. Brooks, A. S. The influence of a thermal effluent on the phytoplankton
ecology of the Indian River estuary, Delaware. Ph. D. Thesis.
Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Maryland. 1972.
46. Jensen, L. D., et al. Ihe influence of a thermal effluent on the
ecology of the Indian River estuary, Delaware. Edison Electric
Inst. RP—49 Proj. Rep. No. 10. 1973.
47. Lauer, G. J. Testimony on effects of operation of Indian Point Units
1 and 2 on Hudson River biota. USAEC. Docket No. 50-247. 1972.
48. Smith, R. A., and A. S. Brooks. Entrainment studies at three mid-
Atlantic power plants. I. Phytoplankton and primary production.
Johns Hopkins Univ. Cooling Water Res. Proj. RP-49 (in prepara-
tion). 1973.
49. Carpenter, E. J., S. J. Anderosn, and B. B. Peck. Entrainment of marine
plankton trhough Millstone Unit One. Woods Hole Oceanographic
Inst., Woods Hole, Massachusetts. 1972.
50. Carpenter, E. J., B. B. Peck, and S. J. Anderson. Summary of entrain-
ment research at the Millstone Point nuclear power station,
1970-1972. In; Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake Screening
Workshop. Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore,
Maryland. L. D. Jensen, ed. In Press. 1973.
-------
136
51. Warinner, J. E., and M. L. Brehmer. The effects of thermal effluents
on marine organisms. Intl. J. Air and Water Pollution. 10:
277-269. 1966.
52. Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories, Inc. Intake-discharge experiments
at Waukegan generating station. Project XI. IBT No. W9861.
1972.
53. Gurtz, M. E., and C. M. Weiss. Field Investigations of the response
of phytoplankton to thermal stress. ESE Publ. No. 321. Univ.
of North Carolina School of Public Health, Chapel Hill. 1972.
54. Hamilton, D. H., D. A. Flemer, C. W. Keefe, and J. A. Mihursky.
Power plants: effects of chlorination on estuarine primary
production. Science. 169: 197-198. 1970.
55. Jensen, L. D., A. S. Brooks, R. A. Smith and R. M. Davies. Effects
of entrainment at three mid-Atlantic power plants - a summary of
results from the Johns Hopkins University - Electric Power
Research Institute (RP-49) cooling water research project.
In; Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop.
Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Maryland. L.
D. Jensen, ed. In Press. 1973.
56. Verdiun, J. Testimony for AEC operating license hearing. Zion
nuclear power station. Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304. 1973.
57. Ayers, J. C., et al. Benton Harbon Power Plant Limnological Studies.
Par IV. Cook Plant preoperational studies, 1969. Special Rep.
No. 44. Great Lakes Res. Div., Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan. 1969.
58. Consumers Power Company. Palisades Plant Special Report: Environ-
mental impact of plant operation up to July 1, 1972. Docket No.
50-255. 1972.
59. Consumers Power Company. Palisades Plant Semiannual Operations Report
No. 4, July 1-December 31, 1972. Operating License No. DPR -20.
Docket No. 50-255. 1973.
-------
137
60. Mitchell, C. T., and W. J. North. Temperature time effects on marine
plankton passing through the cooling water system at San Onofre
Generating Station. Marine Biol. Consultants, Inc. Costa Mesa,
Calif. 90 pp. 1971.
61. Reeve, M. R., and E. Cosper. The acute thermal effects of heated
effluents on the copepod Acartia tonsa from a subtropical bay
and some problems of assessment. F. A. 0. Techn. Conf. on
Marine Pollution and its effects on living resources and fishing.
Rome, Italy. Dec. 9-18, 1970. 1970.
62. Heinle, D. R., H. S. Millsaps, and C. V. Millsaps. Zooplankton
studies at Morgantown. In; Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake
Screening Workshop. Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins Univ., Balti-
more, Maryland. L. D. Jensen, Ed. In Press. 1973.
63. Dressel, D. W., D. R. Heinle, and M. C. Grote. Vital staining to
sort live from dead copepods. Chesapeake Sci. 13: 156-159. 1972.
64. Hair, J. R. 1971. Upper lethal temperature and thermal shock tolerances
of the opossum shrimp, Neomvsis awatschensis, from the Sacremento -
San Joaquin estuary, California. Calif. Fish and Game. 57 (1): 17-27.
*
65. Kelley, R. Mortality of Neomysis awatschensis Brant resulting from
exposure to high temperatures at Pacific Gas and Electric
Company's Pittsburgh Power Plant. Rep. No. 71-3. California
Dept. Fish and Game, Sacramento. 1971.
66. Chadwick, H. K. Entrainment and thermal effects on a mysid shrimp
and striped bass in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. In;
Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop. Feb.
5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, Maryland. L. D.
Jensen, ed. In Press. 1973.
-------
138
67. Icanberry, J. W., and J. R. Adams. Zooplankton survival in cooling
water systems of four thermal power plants on the California coast-
interim report. In; Proceedings, Entrainment and Intake Screening
workshop. Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.
L. D. Jensen, ed. In Press. 1973.
68. McNaught, D. C. Testimony for AEC operating license hearing, Zion
Nuclear Power Station. Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304. 1973.
69. Reynolds, J. Z. Control of thermal discharges to the Great Lakes.
Presented at A. I. Ch. E. 75th Natl. Mtg., Detroit, Michigan,
June 3-6, 1973. 1973.
70. University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Dept. of Botany. Environmental
Studies at Point Beach Nuclear Plant. Report No. PER 1.
Wisconsin Elect. Power Co. and Wisconsin - Michigan Power Co.
1970.
71. University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Dept. of Botany. Environmental
studies at Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant. Report No. PER 3.
Wisconsin Electric Power Co., and Wisconsin - Michigan Power
Co. 1972.
72. Environmental Protection Agency. Lake Michigan Entrainment Studies:
Big Rock Power Plant. Gross lie Lab. Working Rep. No. 1. 1971.
73. Mihursky, J. A. Patuxent thermal study, progress report. Univ. of
Maryland Nat. Resources Inst. Ref. No. 66-67. 1966.
74. Heinle, D. R. Temperature and Zooplankton. Chesapeake Sci. 10: 186-209
(1969).
-'5. Heinle, D. R. The effects of temperature on the population dynamics
of estuarine copepods. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Maryland, College
Park. 1969.
-------
139
76. Kerr, J. E. Studies on fish preservation at the Contra Costa steam
plant of the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. California Fish and
Game Fish. Bull. 92: 1-66. 1954.
77. Flemer, D. A., et. al. Preliminary report on the effects of a steam
electric station operation on entrained organisms. In; Post-
operative assessment of the effects of estuarine power plants
(J. A. Mihursky and A. J. McErlean, co-principal investigators).
Progress report to Maryland D.N.R. Chesapeake Bay Lab. Ref. No.
71-24a. 1971.
78. USAEC. Final environmental statement, Indian Point Nuclear Power
Station. Docket No. 50-247.
79. Marcy, B. C. Vulnerability and survival of young Connecticut River
fish entrained at a nuclear power plant canal. J. Fish. Res.
Bd. Canada. 30: 1195-1203. Also In; Proceedings, Entrainment
and Intake Screening Workshop. Feb. 5-9, 1973. Johns Hopkins
Univ. Baltimore, Md. L. D. Jensen, ed. In press. 1973.
80. Marcy, B. C. Survival of young fish in the discharge canal of a nu-
clear power reactor. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada. 28: 1057-1060.
1971.
81. Oglesby, R. T., and D. J. Allee. Ecology of Cayuga Lake and the
proposed Bell Station. Water Res. Mar. Sci. Center. Cornell
Univ. Ithaca, N. Y. No. 27: 315-328. 1969.
82. Flemer, D. A., et. al. The effects of steam electric station operation
on entrained organisms. In; Postoperative assessment of the
effects of estuarine power plants (J. A. Mihursky
and A. J. McErlean, co-principal investigators). Nat. Resour.
Inst. Ref. No. 71-2b. 1971.
-------
140
83. Leggett, W. C. Studies on the reprocutive biology of the American
shad (Alosa saoidissima Wilson). A comparison of populations
from four rivers of the Atlantic seaboard. Ph. D. Thesis.
McGill University, Montreal. 1969.
84. Kissil, G. Contributions to the life history of the alewife, Alosa
pseudoharenous, in Connecticut. Ph.D. Thesis. University
of Connecticut, Storrs, Conn. 1969.
85. Carlander, K. D. Handbook of freshwater fishery biology. Vol. I.
Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa. 1969.
86. Howells, G. P. Hudson River at Indian Point. Ann. Rep., 4/16/68 to
4/15/69. Inst. of Environ. Medicine, NYU Meidcal Center, New
York. 1969.
87. Marine Sciences Research Center. Biological effects of thermal
pollution, Northport, New York. S. U. N. Y. Tech. Rep. Ser.
No. 3. 1970.
88. Marine Sciences Research Center. Studies on the effects of a steam-
electric generating plant on the marine environment at Northport,
New York. S. U. N. Y. Tech. Rep. Series No. 9. 1971.
89. Spigarelli, S. A., and W. Prepejchal. The effects of thermal dis-
charge on the inshore biological communities of Lake Michigan.
In; Radiological Physics Div. Ann. Rep.: Environmental Research.
ANL - 7860, Part III, pp. 109-117. 1971.
90. Coutant, C. C. Effect of thermal shock on vulnerability to predation
in juvenile salmonids. II. A dose response by rainbow trout
to three shock temperatures. USAEC Res. and Devi. Rep. No.
BNWL-1519. Batelle Northwest, Richland, Washington. 1970.
-------
141
91. Coutant, C. C., and J. M. Dean. Relationships between equilibrium
loss and death as responses of juvenile chinook salmon and rain-
bow trout to accute thermal shock. USAEC Res. and Devi. Rep.
No. BNWL-1520. Batelle - Northwest, Richland, Washington. 1970.
92. Goodyear, C. P. A simple technique for detecting effects of toxicants
or other stresses on predator-prey interaction. Trans. Amer.
Fish. Soc. 101: 367-370. 1972.
93. Braidech, T. E. Study of zooplankton entrainment at the J. M.
Stuart Power Generating Station, Aberdeen, Ohio. National
Field Investigations Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. June 23, 1972
and August 4, 1972.
94. Miller, M. C., Kallendorf, R. J., and Reed, J. P. The effect of
thermal enrichment on the aquatic microflora of Little Three
Mile Creek and the Ohio River at Aberdeen, Ohio. First Annual
Report, 1971-1972. Dayton Power and Light Company, Dayton,
Ohio. Dept of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, Ohio. 1972.
95. Miller, M. C. and Kallendorf, R. J. The effect of a thermal
effluent on the aquatic microflora and zooplankton of Little
Three Mile Creek and the Ohio River at Aberdeen, Ohio. 1972-73
Annual Report, Dayton Power and Light Company. Department
of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,
Ohio. 1973.
96. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973, Office of Air and Water
Programs. Development document for proposed best technology
available for minimizing adverse environmental impact of cool-
ing water intake structures. EPA 440/1-74/015.
-------
142
97. Aynsley, E. and Jackson, M. R. Industrial waste studies: steam
generating plants. Draft Final Report, Contract No. EPA.WQO
68-01-0032. Water Quality Office, U. S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency.
98. Becker, C. D. and Thatcher, T. 0. Toxicity of power plant chemicals
to aquatic life. WASH-1249, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (1973).
99. McKim, J. M., Christenses, G. M., Tucker, J. H., and Lewis, M. J.
Effects of pollution on freshwater fish. Journal Water Pol. Contr.
Fed. 45:1370-1407 (1973).
100. Lee, G. F. and Stratton, C. L. Effect of cooling tower blowdown on
receiving water quality - a literature review. Water Chemistry
Program, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin (1972).
101. Truchan, J. and Basch, R. A survey of chlorine concentrations in the
Weadock Power Plant discharge channel. Michigan Dept. of Natural
Resources, Bureau of Water Management (1971).
102. Massey, A. A survey of chlorine concentrations in the Consumers Power
Company's Big Rock Point Power Plant discharge channel. Water
Resources Commission, Bureau of Water Management (1972).
103. Brungs, W. A. Effects of residual chlorine on aquatic life. Jour.
Water Pol. Contr. Fed. 45:2180-2193 (1973).
104. Center for Environmental Studies and Environmental Statement Project,
Argonne National Laboratory. Summary of recent technical in-
formation concerning thermal discharges into Lake Michigan.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region V5 (1972).
105. Carey, J. W. Experiences with stainless steel tubes in utility con-
densers. Nickel Topics 24:5-7 (1971).
-------
143
106. Environmental Statement, Oswego Steam Station Unit 5. U. S. Army
Engineer District, Buffalo, New York (1971).
107. Tsai, C. Water quality and fish life below sewage outfalls. Trans. Am.
Fish. Soc., 102:281-292 (1973).
108. Clark, N. A., Berg, G. , Kabler, P. W. and Chang, S. L. Human enteric
viruses in water: source, survival, and removability. Adv. in
Water Pollution Res. 2:523-536 (1964).
109. Kelly, S. M. and Sanderson, W. W. The effect of chlorine in water on
enteric viruses. Am. Jour. Pub. Health 48:1323 (1958).
110. Mathis, B. J. and Cummings, T. F. Selected metals in sediments, water,
and biota in the Illinois River. Jour. Wat. Pol. Contr. Fed.
45:1573-1583 (1973).
111. Duce, R. A., et al. Enrichment of heavy metals and organic compounds
in the surface microlayer of Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island.
Science 176:161-163 (1972).
112. Federal Power Commission. Steam electric plant air and water quality
control data for the year ended Dec. 31, 1970 (1973).
113. Sprague, J. B. and Drury, D. E. Avoidance reactions of salmonid fish
to representative pollutants. Adv. in Water Pol. Res. (1969).
114. Draley, J. E. The treatment of cooling waters with chlorine. ANL/ES-23,
Argonne National Laboratory (1972).
115. Draley, J. E. Chlorination experiments at the John E. Amos plant of the
Appalachian Power Company: April 9-10, 1973. ANL/ES-23, Argonne
National Laboratory (1973).
-------
144
116. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission. River quality
conditions during a 16-week shutdown of upper Ohio Valley
steel mills (1961).
117. Krumholz, L. A. and Minckley, W. L. Changes in the fish population
in the Upper Ohio River following temperary pollution abatement.
Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 93:1-5 (1964).
118. Altman, P. L. and Dittmer, D. S., eds., Biology Data Book, 2nd ed. ,
Vol. II, Federation of American Societies for Experimental
Biology (1973).
-------
145
-------
146
5. RIVER TEMPERATURE MODELS
This section details the theoretical development of each of the
models chosen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to be evaluated
by Argonne. Of the three models chosen (STREAM, COLHEAT and Edinger-Geyer)
both the COLHEAT and Edinger-Geyer models belong to a category of models
generally termed heat budget models. Since the heat budget concept is
central in the development of these two models, Section 5.1 is devoted to
the theory underlying the heat budget concept. Section 5.2 presents the
theoretical foundation of each of the models in some detail.
5.1 The Heat Budget
All bodies of water exchange heat with the atmosphere surrounding
them. Hence, the simplest method of disposing of heated waste waters is
to discharge them directly into a water body and then allow natural forces
to bring the water body to an equilibrium temperature. Since the various
mechanisms by which heat is exchanged with the atmosphere are well known,
a heat budget can be used to calculate the change in temperature of the
affected water body.
Oddly enough, heat budget studies were not initiated to predict
water temperatures, but were undertaken by hydrologists and hydraulic engineers
to determine evaporation rates. Schmidt used the heat budget approach to
approximate ocean evaporation in 1915 and since then it has been applied
many times to many different bodies of water including the well known studies
made at Lake Hefner and Lake Colorado City.
The heat exchange mechanisms, shown in Figs. 5.1 and 5.2 along with
their range in magnitude of monthly average values for northern latitudes,
-------
147
Figure 5.1
MECHANISMS OF HEAT TRANSFER
ACROSS A WATER SURFACE
H5 =Solar Rod. (4OO-28OO BTU ft'2 Day'1 )
Ha = L.W. Atmos. Rod. (24OO-320O BTU ft'2 Day'1 )
Hbr*L.W. Bock Rod. (240O-36OO BTU fr2Doy-')
Hc • Evop. Heat Loss (2OOO-80OO BTU ft'2 Day'1 )
Hc»Cond. Heat Loss, or Gain
(-32O-t4OO BTU fr2Doy-')
Hsr = Refl. Solar
(40-2OO BTU ft-2DOy-' )
Har= Atmos. Refl.
(70-I2O BTU ff-2Doy-')
NET RATE AT WHICH HEAT CROSSES WATER SURFACE
AH=(HS+ Ha -Hsr-Har ) - (Hbr± Hc -I- He ) BTU ft'2 Day'1
H
R
Temp. Dependent Terms
H
Absorbed Radiation
Independent of Temp.
br
~ (Tc + 460 )4
- T
He - W(es -e
*From: J. E. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment,
Edison Electric Institute, New York, June 1965.
-------
Figure 5.2
Heat Dissipation From Water Surface By
Evaporation, Radiation, Conduction and Advection
During January and June
Heat
From
Water
Surface
I06BTU
Per
Acre Hr.
0 10 20 30 40
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
10 20 30 40
Water Temperature Above Natural °F
*From: F. L. Parker and P. A. Krenkel, Physical and Engineering Aspects of Thermal
Pollution, CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio, 1970.
00
-------
149,
are: incoming short-wave solar radiation (Hg); long-wave atmospheric radia-
tion (H ); outgoing long-wave back radiation (Hbr); heat loss due to evapor-
ation (H ); reflected solar and atmospheric radiation (Hsr and Har); and
loss or gain by conduction (H ). The relationship among these mechanisms
which describes the net rate at which heat crosses the air-water interface
can be written as:
/ RTFT \
AH = H + H - H - H - (H. ± H + H ) —^ ) (5.1)
S a. 31 ell Ul \~ C \ r+.L
where AH is the net heat change.
Short-Wave Solar Radiation, H_
II • """ I I • I I .1 I-. I I ••!! .-..!• . ^
The incoming solar radiation is short wave radiation (.14 < wave-
length < 4 microns) which originates directly at the sun and is passed to
the earth's surface. Not all the sun's shortwave energy directed towards
the earth reaches the earth's surface because it is depleted by absorption
by ozone, scattering by dry air, absorption and scattering by particulates,
and absorption and scattering by water vapor. In addition, factors such as
latitude, time of day, season, and cloud cover determine just how much short
wave solar radiation actually touches the earth's surface. For these rea- t
sons, even though techniques have been developed to calculate empirically
the quantity of solar radiation reaching the earth's surface, this quantity
can be measured to a greater degree of accuracy with a Pyrheliometer.
Long-Wave Atmospheric Radiation, H
-^ ' • ' —" "• -.,..-,...-, g.
Long wave atmospheric radiation (4 < wavelength < 120 microns) depends
primarily on air-temperature and humidity, and increases as the air moisture
content increases. It may often constitute the major input on warm cloudy
-------
150
days when the amount of direct solar radiation has decreased to zero. It
is a function of many variables,, principally the distributions of moisture,
temperature, ozone, and carbon dioxide. Although it is possible to measure
H directly, it is more convenient to calculate than measure it.
a
Reflected Solar and Atmospheric Radiation, H and H „
ST cLT
The amounts of solar and atmospheric energy reflected from a water
surface are calculated using a reflectivity coefficient which is the ratio
of reflected to incident radiation. Hence solar reflectivity is defined as:
Similarly, atmospheric reflectivity is defined as:
Har
a
Solar reflectivity is more variable than atmospheric reflectivity because
solar reflectivity is a function of the sun's attitude and the type and
amount of cloud cover, while atmospheric reflectivity remains relatively
constant and is usually taken to be equal to 0.03.
Absorbed Radiation, Hr
The four preceeding radiation terms, which are all independent of
water temperature, can be lumped together and called absorbed radiation H
so
Hr = Hs+Ha-Hsr-Har ^2 3... ] C5.4)
Likewise (5.1) can be rewritten as
AH = Hj. - (Hb ± Hc + He) (—f^ ) (5.5)
\£t - day/
-------
151
Back Radiation, H^r
Water returns energy to the atmosphere in the form of long wave
radiation (4 < wavelength < 120 microns) and radiates as almost a perfect
black body. Hence, the rate at which heat is lost due to back radiation can
be computed from the Stefan-Boltzman fourth-power radiation law:
Hbr = 0.97 a(Ts + 460)4 (5.6)
where
(BTU i
—=5 )
ft2 - day/
0.97 = emissivity of water
BTU \
a = Stefan-Boltzman constant = 4.15 x 10
T = Water surface Temperature, °F
ft-day^F4
Evaporation , He
Each pound of water that is evaporated from a water body carries its
latent heat of vaporization of 1054 BTU's at 68°F. Though there are many
empirical methods for estimating evaporation, there are no methods of measur-
ing evaporation directly. The Lake Hefner studies were set up explicitly
for determining correct evaporation relationships by utilizing the water
budget approach to measure evaporation "directly".
A general evaporation formula, which assumes a linear relationship
between the rate of evaporation, water vapor pressure and wind speed is:
H = (a + bW) (e - e ) - - (5.7)
6 S a \ft2 - day/
where
a,b = empirical coefficients
W = wind speed, mph
e& = air vapor pressure, mm Hg.
eg = saturation vapor pressure of water determined from
water surface temperature, mm Hg.
-------
152
Three evaporation formulae which are used frequently are the Lake Hefner
equation;
He - 11.4 W(es - ea) (-
e s a
t - day
the Lake Colorado City equation,
- CS.9,
and the Meyer equation
/ 'RTIT \
H. - (73 + 7.3W) (e - e ) -/^ - ) (5.10)
e b d \^£tz _ fa^ j
The empirical coefficients, a and b, are different for the differ-
ent equations because (1) of differences in the local topography of the
three areas, (2) the data was averaged over different time periods in each
study, and (3) the reference height at which the wind and air-vapor pres-
sure measurements are made in the Mayer equation formulation is different
than the reference height used in formulating the other two equations.
Edinger and Geyer make a point concerning evaporation coefficients
that is particularly noteworthy.
"It would also be expected that the (evaporation)
coefficients would be much different for rivers
and streams than for lakes and might well be de-
pendent on water velocity and turbulence, par-
ticularly in the case of smaller rivers".
Heat Conduction, HC
Heat is exchanged between water and air when the air temperature is
greater or less than the water temperature. The rate at which heat is con-
ducted between air and water is equal to the product of a heat transfer
coefficient and the temperature differential.
-------
153
There is no single direct method to measure the rate at which heat
is conducted between air and water. However, heat transfer by conduction
has been likened to heat transfer by evaporation by Bowen and he has ar-
rived at a proportionality factor relating heat conduction and evaporation,
namely:
B = JT C
e
where B (the Bowen ratio) is given by
C' (T ' T P
_
B ~
1000 (es - ea) (5.12)
and
T = air temperature, °F
a.
TS = water temperature, °F
e& = air vapor pressure, mm Hg.
eg - saturated water vapor pressure, mm Hg.
P = barometric pressure, mm Hg.
C1 = empirical coefficient
Hence, the rate of heat conduction can be written, using (5.7, 5.11 and 5.12)
as >
C' (a + bW) (T - T ) P
Hc = - TOGO - C5'1^
Studies have shown that C' varies from about 0.24 to 0.28.
The Net Rate of Heat Transfer, AH
The rate at which heat is entering or leaving a water body is given
by (5.1), using the notation that the net rate of heat transfer is negative
when heat is being lost across the water surface, and positive when being
gained across the water surface. Substitution of the expressions developed
-------
154
above into (5.1) yields
AH = Hr - 0.97 a(Ts + 460)4 - (a + bW) (eg - e&)
where H is the absorbed radiation and is independent of water temperature.
The three remaining terms on the right hand side of (5.14) are, respectively,
back radiation, evaporative heat loss, and the conductive heat loss, and all
are dependent on the water surface temperature.
5.2 River Temperature Prediction Models
Three river temperature prediction models were chosen by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V to be evaluated for use on
the Ohio River by the Argonne National Laboratory. The models selected were
the COLHEAT model developed by the Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory
for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission; the Edinger-Geyer One Dimensional
Model which is named after its developers and which has been coded by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V; and the STREAM model developed
by the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) specifically
for use on the Ohio River. Each model chosen for this study has been documented,
verified to some extent by its developers, and described in the literature.
The remainder of this section is devoted to a description of each of the
study models. However, since each model has been documented, no attempt is
made in this report to present a user's guide to each of the models.
5.2.1 The COLHEAT River Simulation Model6
The COLHEAT River Simulation Model was formulated by the Hanford
Engineering Development Laboratory under a contract with the U.S. Atomic
-------
155
Energy Commission. Initially, a model was needed to evaluate the
effects of cold water discharges from the depths of Lake Roosevelt
behind Grand Coulee Dam during periods when the impoundment became
stratified. As more and more impoundments were placed between the
Hanford project (river mile 390) and Grand Coulee Dam (river mile
597), the demand for a simulation model to evaluate the effects of
these impoundments became even greater. The COLHEAT Model was
developed to meet this demand.
Since its development, the model has been verified with
data recorded on the Columbia River beginning in 1966. Following
the Columbia River application, the Division of Reactor Development
and Technology of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission requested that
the simulation capabilities of COLHEAT be applied to other river
systems. Consequently, it was used in 1967 to simulate temperature
7
profiles of the Deerfield River in Vermont, in 1968 of the Illinois
Q
River; and in 1970 for the simulation of temperatures in an irriga-
9
tion canal. More recently COLHEAT has been used in conjunction
with a subprogram called MAXPWR (maximum power) which estimates the
total potential direct cooling capacity of major U.S. rivers.
COLHEAT is a far-field, one-dimensional model designed to
simulate temperatures along a river. The computational procedures
are based on a fixed volume approach to river modeling wherein a river
reach is divided into segments through which water is transported,
acted upon, and modified by the local environment which is introduced
-------
156
by means of an explicit heat budget. Typically, the operation of
the model consists of providing temperatures and flows at an upstream
location and simulating the subsequent temperature history at one or
more downstream locations. Routinely, average temperatures are com-
puted for a time period of one day. During the computational pro-
cedures the time period is divided into equal increments called steps
during which heat is exchanged with the atmosphere, water is trans-
ported downstream, and advected energy is added to the river. (Each
of these three model components is described below.)
Operation of COLHEAT requires the following information:
• River dimensions reduced to equivalent nonparallel
trapezoidal cross sections
• Water temperatures at the upstream end of the simu-
lation
• River flows
• Meteorological data (air temperature, dew point tem-
perature, wind speed, cloud cover, solar radiation)
• Tributary flows and temperatures
• Advected heat loads
The output of the model consists of a temperature record over time at a
specified location.
-------
157
COLHEAT Heat Budget
COLHEAT employs a heat budget to simulate the affect of the local
environment on the rate of heat exchanged between the water body and the
atncsphere. The particular heat budget used by COLHEAT was originally de-
vised by Raphael and will be discussed using the terms defined in Section
5.1.
The rate of heat exchange between air and water that is used by
COLHEAT can be written as
^ = Hr " "far ± Hc " He + HA C5'15)
where
H. = advected heat rate
Hr = Hs - Hsr
and the other terms are defined in Section 5.1. Note that H£ does not in-
clude the long wave atmospheric radiation H nor the long wave atmospheric
reflected radiation, H , however these terms are included in H, .
cli DX
Solar radiation, H , can be obtained directly from the U.S.
Weather Bureau. Solar reflected radiation is obtained from the relationship
H = R H , where R is the solar reflectivity. The COLHEAT model uses
oX oX o oX
12
an R between 0.84 and 0.94, based on studies by Budyko.
The COLHEAT model includes the effects of emission and reception of
long wave radiation (H , H and H, ) in the familiar Stefan-Boltzman fourth
ci ctr or
power relationship and calls the resultant radiation term back radiation.
Hence, for COLHEAT,
R - 0.97 ofT* + BlJ) ( BTU ) (5.16)
br s a \ftz - day/
where
-------
158
a is the Stefan Boltzman constant
T is the absolute water surface temperature, °F
T is the absolute air temperature, °F
a
The value of B is a function of the amount of cloud cover and the water
vapor pressure in the air and can be determined from standard charts.
The evaporative heat loss, H , is computed by the COLHEAT model
using the Lake Hefner evaporation formula
/ 'RTTT \
He = 11.4 W(es - ea) ETU ) (5.8)
\ft* - day/
where
W = wind speed, nph
e = air vapor pressure, mm Hg.
e = saturation vapor pressure of water determined from
water surface temperature, mm Hg.
To account for conduction, COLHEAT relies on the Bowen ratio as
discussed in Section 5.1. Using the Hefner information for the wind function
and choosing a value of 0.61 for the Bowen coefficient- the conduction term,
(5.13), becomes,
/ RTTT \
H = 0.00707 WP(T - T ) ( -mu ) (5.17)
\ft - hr /
where
W is the wind speed, mph
P is the atmospheric pressure, in Hg.
T is the mean air temperature above 20 m, °C
T is the mean water surface temperature, °C
The advected heat, H., will be discussed under the heading "transport
mechanism" because that is when the advected heat is added to the river seg-
ment under study.
-------
159
Transport Mechanism
In order to successfully simulate temperature, it is necessary to
accurately represent the hydraulic characteristic of a river. In particular
a surface area, volume, and velocity or travel time must be defined before
the heat budget discussed in the previous section may be applied.
In the COLHEAT model a river is divided lengthwise into segments,
the cross section of which is approximated by a trapezoid with the river
bottom parallel to the water surface. Values representative of the surface
and bottom width, and the depth at both the upstream and downstream end of
the segment as well as the segment length must be input to the code. The
values are used in computing the surface area and volume associated with
each segment.
Typically, all the water moving past a point on a river is not tra-
veling at the same velocity. In general, the velocity of the water travel-
ing near the banks of the river is less than the velocity of the water in
the central portions of the river. The results of a study conducted by
Wasley^ of shallow triangular channels along with the mathematical models
14
developed by Matalas and Conover led to the construction of the cross
sectional velocity distribution shown in Fig. 5.3, for systems bounded by
frictional constraints. Assuming this cross sectional representation, Jaske
used the average velocity contour U in Fig. 5.3 to define two regions:
1. A central region (shaded portion) wherein water traveling
at velocities greater than U is represented by an average
velocity which is equal to 1.37 U. This portion contains
53% of the stream cross section.
2. Adjacent regions wherein water traveling at velocities
less than U are represented by an average velocity which
is equal to 0.60 U. This portion contains 47% of the
stream cross section.
-------
Stream
Center
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1
1/2 Width Fraction
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.:
Triangular Section
Rectangular Section
0.9 1.0
0
c.
o
c.
c
O
U
Contours Expressed as -=— - Fraction of U.
~U *
Figure 5.3
Theoretical Velocity Contours
*From: R. T. Jaske, "The Use of Digital Systems Nbdeling in the Evaluation of Regional Water
Quality Involving Single or Multiple Releases," Chemical Engineering Progress, No. 90
Vol. 64, 1968.
-------
161
The ratio of the velocities in these two regions is approximately
(1.37U/.60 U = 2.).
In order to account for this information a "parallel trough" river
representation is utilized by the CRSM. For such an abstraction the river
is divided crosswise into three parallel troughs, an inner trough contain-
ing rapidly moving water and two identical outer troughs containing slower
moving water, as is shown in Fig. 5.4.
s River Segment 1
River Segment 2
/
Flow
/\ Outer Trough
Inner Trough
Outer Trough
Figure 5.4
Coded River Configuration
The velocity of the water in the inner trough is assumed to be
twice the velocity of the water in the outer two troughs. Unless different
ratios are input to the code the inner trough is assumed to be comprised of
1/2 the total cross sectional area with each outer trough containing 1/4 of
the total area. The ratio of velocities and of cross sectional areas are
used to compute the fraction of the total flow moving through each trough.
During a specified time increment, defined previously as a time
step, a certain volume of water flows into and out of each river segmenti
Associated with this flow and with the water residing in each river segment
is a bulk temperature. Initially all temperatures are equated to a repre-
-------
162
sentative input value. Subsequently, according to conservation of mass and
assuming no storage within a section, the code steps backwards (upstream)
starting at the end of a reach to determine where the volume of water pre-
sently located in a particular river segment was located in the previous
step. Complete mixing is assumed and conservation of energy is used to
arrive at the "new" bulk temperature of the river segment section.
To clarify this explanation an example of how a river reach is coded
is presented in Fig. 5.5; and the calculations associated with determining
the temperature in the last river section are shown in Table 5.1.
At points of confluence of a tributary with the mainstream the
assumption is made that the water in the mainstream at the confluence pre-
cedes the water in the triburary.
A temperature simulation model must contain the capability to esti-
mate the effect of thermal discharges into a river. Mvected energy can be
input into COLHEAT enabling the temperature rise and subsequent decay result-
ing from the thermal loading of a river to be investigated. Assuming com-
plete mixing at the discharge point, the rise in temperature of a particular
river section due to the effect of advected energy can be found from
HA
AT = ^ (5.18)
where
AT = rise in temperature of a particular river section
in one time step, °F
H. = the amount of advected energy added per time step,
BTU/step
V = the volume of the river section into which the thermal
discharge is being made, ft3
Following the insertion of energy into a river, complete mixing is
assumed and conservation of energy is used to estimate the bulk temperature
-------
163
V^ = Volume of section 1
P. = Flow out of section 1 per time
step
T^ = Bulk temperature of section 1
Figure 5.5*
Water Transport in Idealized Trough
+
£3
'out
•out
Table 5.1*
SUMMARY OF CALCULATIONS WITHOUT TRIBUTARIES
CUE
It. f4 iV,
'•• £'•'<
1
4
?b. yj
-------
164
for each river section. Partial mixing routines which incorporate the
phenomena of diffusion between adjacent troughs may be inserted into the
model, however, in this study only the complete mixing routine is used.
The procedures discussed above are computed during each time step
with the order of computation represented by Fig. 5.6. The computational
procedure represents a numerical estimation of the solution to the differ-
ential form of the conservation of energy equation. Assuming that no sig-
nificant amount of energy is lost to the river banks, the conservation equa-
tion is
d(V-C'T)
—ar-= HtA + «ic'Ti - c' T+ H
(5.19)
where
t = time
V- = volume of water in river section i
C1 = heat capacity of water
q. = flow of water into section i
a = flow of water out of section i
Ti = temperature of water entering section i
TS = temperature of water residing in section i
R = heat exchange rate at the air/water interface
H. = rate at which advected energy is being added to the
system
Assuming a constant volume and heat capacity (5.19) reduces to
dT
Ht
A
IT
H.
(5.20)
The COLHEAT code computes a term-by-term numerical approximation
of the solution to this equation to simulate temperatures in each river
section.
-------
165
1
HEAT BUDGET
TRANSPORT (CONVECTION)
ADVECTION
(ADDITION OF WASTE HEAT)
MIXING
Figure 5.6
Block Diagram of COLHEAT Computational Procedure
During a Given Time Step
-------
166
5.2.2 EdjLnger-G_ey^jMe-j)jmen_s_ional River Model
The Edinger-Geyer one-dimensional river model is formulated using
the standard heat budget technique. It was developed for the use of indi-
vidual power companies so that they could estimate by means of desk top
calculations the temperature distribution which occurred in the vicinity
of a power plant and which resulted from heated water being discharged into
the river. Hence, as is described below, the equations in the heat budget
analysis are linearized for computational simplicity with knowledge of their
approximate nature. Likewise, the simple hydrodynamic approach of assuming
mean velocities in rectangular channels was to allow slide rule calculations
in lieu of digital computer use.
The model is a far field, one-dimensional, steady-state model that
can be used to predict temperatures along a river. The theoretical basis
of the model is a heat budget which is used to determine an equilibrium
temperature, E, and a heat exchange coefficient, K. To simulate river
temperatures the model analyzes a slug of water as it flows downstream,
making sure that the meteorological parameters and the advected heat are
updated at prescribed intervals.
Operation of the model requires:
Meteorological data (air temperature, dew point temperature,
wind speed, and solar radiation).
River dimensions (surface width and hydrologic depth)
River flows
Quantity of advected heat
Water temperatures at the upstream end of the simulation.
-------
167
Heat_Budget
The basic heat budget equation used in the Edinger-Geyer formula-
tion is:
where
Hr = Hs + Ha - Hsr ' Har
and
H = Short wave solar radiation
H_ = Long wave atmospheric radiation
3-
H = Reflected solar radiation
j i
H _. = Reflected atmospheric radiation
3.x
H. = Long wave back radiation
H = Conductive heat loss or gain
H = Evaporative heat loss
G
Solar radiation, H , is measured directly by the U.S. Weather
o
Bureau and usually this measured value is employed in the model.
The magnitude of the long wave radiation is estimated in the
Edinger-Geyer formulation through the use of Brunts formula which is
Ha
4.5 x 10"8 (T + 460)4 (c + 0.031 v'e") ( -J^ ) (5.22)
a a \ft2 - day/
where
BTU
H = Long-wave atmospheric radiation, I
a \ft - day/
T = Air temperature measured about six feet
above the water surface, °F.
e = Air vapor pressure measured about six feet above
water surface, mm Hg.
c = A coefficient determined from the air temperature
and ratio of the measured solar radiation to the
clear sky solar radiation (see Figs. 5.7 and 5.8).
The fractions of the solar and atmospheric radiant energy that is
reflected from a water surface are calculated using solar and atmospheric
reflectivity coefficients which are defined as:
-------
Figure 5.7
CIEAR SKY SOIAR RADIATION
(After Kbberg, 1962)
&
CM
£
I
g
-H
15
o
CO
3000. -
2CXX). —
1000. -
Jan Feo Mar
l»by June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
*From: J. E. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment, Edison
Electric Institute, New York, June 1965.
-------
Ficure 5.8
8
o
r.irjirr c COEFFICIENT FRO:: AIR TE FEATURE, T&, ATJE
RATIO :£A3URZD SOIAR RADL".TIOi: TO CLEAR SICT RADIATION
(ATter Kbberg, 1962)
VO
*From:
28 52 36 to !A 14-8 52 56 60 6^ 68 72 76 Qo 5k 88 92
Air Temperature, Ta, °F
J. E. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment. Edison
Electric Institute, New York, June 1965.
-------
170
Hsr
R = r^-i- , Solar Reflectivity (5.23)
S Hs
Har
R = 0 — , Atmospheric Reflectivity
ar Ha
Both of these coefficients are constants in the Edinger-Geyer formulation
with R „ = 0.05 and R0 = 0.03.
sr ar
The back radiation term, E , is computed from the Stefan-Boltzman
fourth-power radiation law:
Hbr = 0.97 a(Ts + 460)4 (5.24)
where
R = Rate of back radiation, ( — f^- - }
br \ft2 - day/
a = Stefan-Boltzman constant
T = Water surface temperature, °F
The Edinger-Geyer formulation approximates (5.24) by expanding the terms in
parenthesis and dropping all terms except the first order term. This approx-
imation yields
- 0.97 «,(460)4 4 * 1 - (5.2S)
a result which is low by 4.9% at Tg = 50°F and low by 14.9% at Tg = 100°F.
The evaporative heat, H , is represented in the Edinger-Geyer model
by the general equation:
He = (a + bW) (ea - e ) ( -^ - ) (5.26)
\ft - day/
where
a,b = coefficients depending on evaporation formula used
W = wind speed, mph
e = air vapor pressure, mm Hg.
a
e = the saturation vapor pressure determined from water
surface temperature, mm Hg.
-------
171
The user of the model supplies the a and b coefficients.
The heat conduction term, HC, is found using the Bowen ratio, where
the Bowen coefficient is set equal to 0.26. Hence, H at atmospheric pres-
sure is:
H_ = 0.26 (a + bW) (T_ - TJ \—- - ) (5.27)
C S a \ft2 - day/
Using the expressions obtained above, the net rate of heat trans-
fer, AH shown in (5.21), can be written as:
AH = HR - 0.97 a Tg + 460 - (a + bw) (eg - ea)
II
0J4] -
J
- 0.26 (a + bw) (T - TJ ) (5.28)
IH s Vft2 - day/
Equation (5.28) is the basic equation for the heat budget used by the
Edinger-Geyer model. The heat loss terms in (5.28) are: (I) the back radia-
tion, R , (II) the evaporative heat loss in its general form, He, and (III)
the conductive heat loss, H . The assumption that only the linear term of
the back radiation formula is retained will be re -introduced later.
Equation (5.28) serves as the first step in the equilibrium temper-
ature approach which was introduced by Edinger-Geyer to aid in the prediction
of water temperatures.
Equilibrium Temperature and the Exchange Coefficient
The equilibrium temperature is defined as that water surface temper-
ature for which the net exchange of heat at the air-water interface is
zero. Hence, at the equilibrium temperature, T = E, AH = 0 and there is a
j
corresponding saturation vapor pressure, e_ = ec. Then (5.28) can be
*? £j v
written as:
*For this study a = 0 and b = 11.4, the Lake Heffner coefficients.
-------
172
HR = 0.97 a \( E + 460J 4J + (a + bW) (e£
0.26 (a + bW) (E - T ) ?BTU ) (5.29)
a \£t2 - day/
Note that for a given set of conditions (Hj., Ta, ea, and W), a body of water
that has a temperature below equilibrium temperature will approach equlibrium
temperature by wanning, and a body above equilibrium will approach equilb-
rium temperature by cooling. The absorption radiation term, HR, can be
removed from (5.29) by subtracting (5.29) from (5.28) to yield:
AH = -
r f / \4 / N4!
0.97 a / (ls + 460) - (E + 460) >
1
+ (a + bW) (es - eE) + (a + bw) 0.26 (Tg - E) (5.30)
The relationship between water temperature and its saturation vapor
pressure is shown in Fig. 5.9. If it is assumed that the vapor pressure dif-
ference is proportional to the temperature difference for 10 °F temperature
increments, then a linear relationship can be established:
(es - eE) = @ (Ts - E) (5.31)
where
e - ep = vapor pressure difference, mm Hg.
S ±j
T - E = temperature difference, °F
3 = proportionality factor, nm ^
Also, the fourth power radiation terms can be expanded and, it has been
shown,4 that if the linear term of the expansion is retained, the fourth
order power term is approximated to within 15% accuracy.
When the two above approximations are inserted into (5.30), it
becomes
ff 1 1 / RTIT
AH = -< 15.7 + (0.26 + e) (a + bW) (T - E) > ? ) (5.32)
-------
173
Figure 5.9
SATURATION VAPOR PRESSURE VS WATER TEMPERATURE
(OR DEW POINT TEMPERATURE)
100
00
TO
60
IfO
0
10 20 JO 1|
Saturation Vapor Pressure, cm Hg
: J. E. Edinger and J. C.
1
H
"1
1
1
1
,
i
/
r
r
/
/
J
1
i
(
J
f
—t
f
\- -
f
f
/
/
}
f
t
f
/
i
/
i
/
/
f
t
r
/
/
/
/
s
/
S
r
>'
f
/
/
/
\t
t
1
f
S
s
s
..._
^
p-
P°!!!: PI' ; ?«er.alld J' c- GeXer, Hga^Exchange in the Environment.
bdison Electric Institute, New York, June \96T. ~
-------
174
The exchange coefficient, K, is defined as the net rate at which
heat is lost or gained by a body of water for a unit temperature difference
and is given by:
K = 15.7 + (0.26+0) (a + bw) (•— — A (5.33)
\ftz - day - °F/
Hence, (5.32) can be written compactly as
/ RTJT \
AH = - K (T - E) (—£^ \ (5.34)
s \£t - day/
The exchange coefficient should be evaluated for each 10°F tempera-
ture range for each of the evaporation formulae. When the exchange coeffi-
cient is evaluated for a particular evaporation formula, it is no more
4
reliable than the evaporation formula itself. Edinger-Geyer present a
series of figures, tables, and equations which systematize the calculation
of the exchange coefficient, K, and the determination of the equilibrium
_ *
temperature, E.
Non-Stratified One-Dimensional Temperature Distribution
In the non-stratified one-dimensional temperature distribution, water
temperatures vary longitudinally along the river, but are constant with
river depth and width. Raised temperatures, resulting from the addition of
heat (advected heat) to the water body by a heat source such as a power
plant, decay in the downstream direction and attempt to approach the equil-
ibrium temperature by heat exchange between the water and the atmosphere.
Since the heat added to the water body is assumed to be thoroughly mixed,
the rate at which the temperature changes in the downstream direction can
be considered as being proportional to the product of the exchange coefficient
and the temperature excess. If longitudinal advection is the dominating
trnnsport mechanism, under steady-state conditions, the equation for the
*Some• of the tables and graphs in Reference 4 are in error and an errata
sheet has been issued by Johns Hopkins.
-------
175
rate of temperature change in the longitudinal direction, assuming a
rectangular cross-section, is
PCp Dug = - K(T - E) (5.35)
where
p = density of water, 62.4 Ibs/ft
RTII
C = specific heat of water, 1.0
D = mean depth, ft
U = mean stream velocity, ft/sec
dT °F
-T— - = longitudinal temperature gradient, -rr
T = stream temperature, °F
x, = distance, ft
The solution of (5.35) is
T = E + (Tm - E) e p (5.36)
where T is the mixed tempc/ature at the heat source discharge and can be
found from
S
xm ~ o: "o ' \" " or ; LR
where
T =7^ Tn + (1 -7? ) Tn roF^ (5.37)
Noting that
ft3
Qp = source withdrawal, —
Qn = total river flow, ft /sec
T = temperature of source discharge, °F
Tp = temperature of river before heat is added, °F
x1W1 = k
where
W = width of river
o
A = surface area, ft
-------
176
(5.36) becomes
KA
T = E + (T - E) e (5.38)
m
Equation (5.36) or (5.38) can be used to calculate temperatures in a river
downstream from a heat source. Either (5.36) or (5.38) along with the heat
budget, the selection of the equilibrium temperature E, and the calculation
of the heat exchange coefficient, K, form the basis of the Edinger-Geyer
one-dimensional river model.
Transport Nfechanism
Equations (5.36) and (5.38) are steady-state equations since they
do not take into account the time variation of temperature in the stream,
nor the time variation of any of the physical parameters. As an approxima-
tion, it can be assumed that if the time of water travel between two points
is less than the period of averaging used for all the time varying parameters
(K, E, TR, T , T ) then the steady-state equation can be used. The time of
travel is
xl
t = - days (5.39)
Hence, if a daily average value is computed then the equation can
be applied for a distance between two points equal to one day of water
travel. Also the application of (5.36) or (5.38) does not depend on begin-
ning a reach at the source discharge but can be applied between reaches of
the stream. The temperature is first computed between the plant discharge
and the first reach, then the computed temperature at the end of the first
reach is taken as the mixed temperature for the beginning of the second
reach and so on downstream until the allowable time of travel (say 1 day)
has expired. At this point all the time varying parameters are updated
and the model continues calculating temperatures as it proceeds downstream.
New sources of heat are assimilated by the river as they are encountered.
-------
177
5.2.3 The STREAM River Simulation Package17
The STREAM River Simulation Package was developed by the Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) to enhance the application of
electronic river quality monitor systems in the operation of water quality
management programs. STREAM is different from the other two models reviewed
in this study in that it is a water quality model rather than solely a river
temperature prediction model. Hence, river temperature is but one output para-
meter available from the model, the others being parameters such as dissolved
oxygen, conductivity, chorides, etc.* Though the model was designed specifi-
17
cally for use on the Ohio River, the authors claim that it is applicable to
any free flowing or canalized river.
Essentially, the river temperature prediction module incorporated
within STREAM is a one dimensional, steady state, far field model. The model
has three modes of operation.
PROFILE -- The temperature profile along the river is
given on a specified date.
FORECAST -- A particular point along the river is selected
and the temperature variation as a function of
time is given for that locale.
RUN -- The model follows a slug of water downstream and
predicts the temperature of that slug as it moves
downstream. Both time and location are output
variables.
Operation of the STREAM temperature module requires the following
information
The ambient temperature of the mainstream
River flow
• River velocity as a function of the river mile
*However, since this study is concerned only with the river temperature
prediction capability of STREAM, no further mention of the model's other
output parameters will be made.
-------
178
• The rate and location of heat discharged into the river
• Tributary flows and temperatures
Specification of heat die-away constant.
The Temperature Module
The temperature module within STREAM calculates temperature rise and
die-away resulting from thermal discharges or from tributary discharges. The
module does not use an explicit heat budget as do the other two models reviewed
for the following reasons:
"Many temperature models were examined in the course of
developing 'STREAM' and all were found unsuitable because
copious meteorological data, most of which is not readily
available, were required to calculate heat budgets, and then
temperatures. In addition, many stream temperature models
require physical cross-section data for purposes of deter-
mining diffusion characteristics. Since these types of
temperature models did not readily lend themselves to an
efficient modeling mechanism, particularly a mechanism
involving only water quality data, another approach was
tried."1?
The other approach tried was the formulation of the postulate that within the
time frame of one day, unnatural stream temperatures will exponentially approach
natural stream temperatures. For the purposes of the STREAM model natural tem-
perature is defined as the river temperature measured at monitoring stations
18
having no apparent heat sources immediately upstream from them.
Consequently, the temperature change resulting as the river flows
downstream is calculated based on the exponential die-away of the difference
between the river temperature and the estimated normal temperature of the river.
This relationship is given by
T = T + (AT) 10"Kt (°F) (5.40)
T = temperature of the river downstream from a tributary
or heat discharge point, °F
-------
179
T = normal temperature of the river, °F
AT = temperature differential (T - T ), °F
K = decay constant, day
t = travel time, day
T = temperature at heat discharge point or at tributary
0 inflow, °F
18
The decay constant, K, is usually chosen to be 1.0.
Hence, the STREAM temperature module is rather unique since it is inde-
pendent of day-by-day detailed weather variables, such as wind speed, humidity,
cloud cover, solar radiation etc.
The Transport Mechanism
The transport mechanism consists of a travel time module which calcula-
tes the time of travel to the next model discontinuity* as well as the distance
traveled by the end of the day. An assumption basic to the travel time module
is that velocity at a constant flow can always be defined as a linear function
of river milepoint. More simpTy, this means that given the velocity at two con-
secutive discontinuites, the velocity between these two discontinuites is
assumed to vary linearly, that is
V = a + bx (mi/day) (5-41)
where
a is the V intercept, mile/day
b is the slope, I/day
x is the milepoint, miles
Once the velocity coefficients, a and b, are specified by the user, the model
uses these values until a different set is specified at some downstream mile
point.
*By discontinuities are meant place dependent events such as location of
power plants, location of dams, changes in the river channel, etc.
-------
180
The calculation of travel time to the next discontinuity is based
upon
t = - (days) (5.42)
V
where
t = time, days
d = distance between the upstream discontinuity and
the downstream discontinuity, mi
V = the arithmetic average of the velocities at the
upstream and downstream discontinuity points, mi/day
The transport mechanism works as follows: the time increment cal-
culated by (5.42) is added to the accumulated elapsed time within the day
being simulated and checks to determine if the total elapsed time exceeds
one day. If not the temperature is calculated. If the elapsed time exceeds
one day, the downstream mile point reached at the end of the day is deter-
mined, the temperature parameters are updated, and the travel time module
initiated for the new day.
-------
181
-------
182
Section 5 References
1. F. L. Parker and P. A. Krenkel, Physical and Engineering Aspects of
Thermal Pollution, CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio, 1970.
2. E. R. Anderson, 'Water Loss Investigations: Lake Hefner Studies,"
U.S. Geological Survey Paper No. 269, 1964.
3. G. E. Harbeck, et al., "The Effect of the Addition of Heat from a
Power Plant on tEe Thermal Structure and Evaporation of Lake Colorado
City, Texas," U.S. Geological Survey Paper No. 272B, 1959.
4. J. E. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment,
Edison Electric Institute, New York, June 1965.
5. I. S. Bowen, "The Ratio of Heat Losses by Conduction and by Evapora-
tion from any Water Surface," Physical Review, June 1926.
6. HEDL Environmental Engineering Staff, The COLHEAT River Simulation
Model, Report No. HEDL-TME 72-103, Hanford Engineering Development
Laboratory, Richland, Washington, August 1972.
7. R. T. Jaske, A Test Simulation of the Deerfield River, Report No.
BNWL-628, Battelle Northwest Laboratory", Richland, Washington,
December 1967.
8. R. T. Jaske, A Test Simulation of the Temperature of the Illinois
River and a Prediction of the Effects of Dresden II and Dresden III
Reactors, Report No. BNWL-728, Battelle Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
Washington, April 1968.
9. D. E. Peterson and R. T. Jaske, Simulation Modeling of Thermal Effluent
in an Irrigation System, Report No. BNWL-1277, Battelle Northwest~
Laboratory, Richland, Washington, January 1970.
10. D. E. Peterson, et al., Thermal Effects of Projected Power Growth:
The National OutToak"7 Report No. HEDL-TME-73-45, Hanford Engineering
Development Laboratory, Richland, Washington, July 1973.
11. J. M. Raphael, "Prediction of Temperature in Rivers and Reservoirs,"
ASCE Journal of the Power Division, July 1962.
12. M. I. Budyko, "Heat Balance of the Earth's Surface," Leningrad, 1956.
13. R. V. Wasley, ASCE Proceedings, Hydraulics Division, September 1961.
14. N. C. Malalas and W. J. Conover, "Derivation of the Velocity Profile
from a Statistical Model of Turbulence," Water Resources Research,
June 1965.
-------
183
15. R. T. Jaske, "The Use of Digital Systems Modeling in the Evaluation
of Regional Water Quality Involving Single or Multiple Releases,"
Chemical Engineering Progress, No. 90, Vol. 64, 1968.
16. G. E. Koberg, "Methods to Compute Long Wave Radiation from the
Atmosphere and Reflected Solar Radiation from a Water Surface,"
USGS Professional Paper, 1962.
17. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, Automated Forecast
Procedures for River Quality Management - Volume I: Project Report,
June 1972.
18. D. A. Dunsmore and W. A. Bonvillain, "STREAM - A Generalized Dynamic
Working River Model," Paper presented at COMMON meeting, Miami Beach,
Florida, October 1972.
-------
184
6. MODEL EVALUATION
Three river temperature prediction models (COLHEAT, Edinger-Geyer*, and
STREAM) were chosen by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
gion V, for evaluation by the Argonne National Laboratory. The purpose of the
evaluation is to select the most appropriate model for use as a river tempera-
ture prediction mechanism for various river conditions. The first part of this
section describes the model evaluation strategy that was adopted as well as the
data which were used in the evaluation procedure. The second part of this
section presents the results of the evaluation.
6.1 Evaluation Design
As each model was obtained it was placed on Argonne's IBM 360/195
digital computer. The COLHEAT model was obtained directly from the Hanford
Engineering Development Laboratory while the STREAM model was obtained from
the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) by way of the U.S.
**
EPA Region V. Both of these models were programmed for computers other than
an IBM 360 so some modifications in the code had to be made before the models
could be tested on Argonne's computer. Only the temperature and the several
travel modules of STREAM were placed on Argonne's computer since the water qua-
lity routines were of no interest in this study. The EPA Region V version of
the Edinger-Geyer model was written for an IBM 360 computer and was easily im-
plemented on the Argonne system.
*In this report the "Edinger-Geyer Model" means the U.S. EPA Region V computer
program version of the Edinger-Geyer one-dimensional river temperature pre-
diction model described in reference 3 of this section.
**COLHEAT was programmed for a Univac 1108 while STREAM was programmed for an
IBM 1130.
-------
185
The year 1964 was chosen as the base year for the purpose of model
evaluation. Three events led to the selection of 1964 as the base year; first,
the most recently published soundings of the entire Ohio River by the Corps
of Engineers are for 1964; second, a previous study of the Ohio River used
1964 as a base year and part of the data collected for that study was made
available to Argonne; and third, the year 1969 was also considered as a
potential base year but because of the rather lengthy period of time (rela-
tive to the length of this program) required by some of the power companies
to compile and transmit advected heat data to Argonne, this alternative was
rejected.
Each model was tested on the Ohio River in the 300 mile reach between
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Huntington, West Virginia (see Fig. 6.1). This
reach was chosen in order to present the models with a stringent test. It was
felt that the numerous thermal discharges occuring within the reach coupled
with the lower flows relative to the remaining 700 miles of the river would
test each model's precision* to the utmost since there are five measuring sta-
tions located along this reach
Data Acquisition
In order to apply the river temperature prediction models to the Ohio
River, the following data is needed:
• Meteorological data (air temperature, dew point temperature,
cloud cover, wind speed,and solar radiation)
• River dimensions
• Flow data for the Ohio River main stem and its major tributaries
• Measured water temperature
• Major heat inputs into the river
*Precision is defined herein as the ability of a model to replicate field
measurements.
-------
186
MUSKINGUM R.
HOCKING R
2,
-------
187
a. Meteorological Data
Meteorological information recorded at weather stations located along
the Ohio River was obtained from the National Weather Record Center at Asheville,
North Carolina. Along the first three hundred mile reach of the Ohio, daily
values of air temperature, dew point temperature, wind speed and cloud cover
are recorded at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Huntington, West Virginia. Daily
values of solar radiation are not measured along this river reach, but can be
approximated by values measured elsewhere, such as State College, Pennsylvania.
For model evaluation, the meteorological data recorded at Huntington, West
Virginia Tri-State Airport Station were used and the solar radiation data were
taken from the State College, Pennsylvania Station. At both Huntington and
State College the daily average values obtained were used in both the COLHEAT
and Edinger-Geyer Models (meteorological data is not necessary for the STREAM
Model).
The 1964 average monthly and normal average monthly air temperatures,
precipitation amounts and wind speeds for Huntington, West Virginia are shown
in Table 6.1. It is seen that 1964 was a cool dry year relative to a normal
year.
b. River Dimensions
Soundings of the Ohio River have been recorded by the Corps of Engi-
neers, most recently in 1964, in order to determine river contour charts for
navigational purposes. The charts can be used to construct actual river cross
sections from which cross-sectional areas can be calculated or found using a
planemeter. This rather time consuming process of computing cross sectional
areas had been accomplished previously by the Battelle-Northwest Labora-
tory which supplied this data to Argonne.
-------
188
Table 6.1
1964 Average Monthly and Normal* Average Monthly
Air Temperatures, Precipitation Amounts, and
Wind Speeds for Huntington, West Virginia
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Air
Temperature , °F
1964 Normal
34.2
32.1
46.4
58.0
66.0
71.7
76.0
73.0
65.7
52.2
48.0
39.4
36.6
37.7
44.8
55.7
64.6
72.0
75.2
74.0
68.2
57.3
45.5
37.4
Precipitation,
In.
1964 Normal
2.11
3.07
4.53
3.09
1.25
1.97
2.18
6.21
4.53
0.80
3.37
3.90
3.65
3.04
4.20
3.67
3.89
4.10
4.50
2.82
2.54
1.85
2.46
2.81
Wind
Speed, MPH
1964 Normal
7.7
7.1
8.3
7.8
5.9
5.5
4.4
4.9
4.5
4.7
5.4
6.5
7.3
7.4
8.0
7.5
6.2
5.1
4.9
6.3
5.9
5.5
6.7
7.2
*By normal is meant revised climatological standard normals based on the period
1931-1960. Normals are arithmetic averages that have been adjusted to represent
observations at the present location of the weather instruments.
Data Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, "Local Climatological
Data - Huntington, West Virginia," 1964.
E. L. Thackston and F. L. Parker, Effect of Geographical Location on Cooling Pond
Requirements and Performance, EPA Report 16130 FDQ 03/71, March 1971.
-------
189
c. Flows
Daily flow values are recorded by the United States Department of the
Interior, Geological Survey (USGS) for many locations along the Ohio River and
on most of the major tributaries (see Table 6.2). The values are summarized by
hydraulic year (October - September) in publications available from the appro-
priate branch office in the state which has jurisdiction over the waterway.
For the model evaluation phase of this report the flows used were
those measured at Sewickly, Pennsylvania and Parkersburg, West Virginia.
d. Water Temperature
Since actual water temperatures are needed to determine the precision
of the river temperature prediction models, emphasis was placed on obtaining
recorded river temperatures at as many locations as possible. Three sources
have been contacted to obtain the required river temperatures:
• U. S. Geological Survey
• Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission
• Municipal Water Works with intakes in the Ohio River
A listing of Ohio River Temperature data for the year 1964 is given in Table 6.3.
Originally the measurements from five stations were to be used in the model
evaluation phase; these stations being the first five shown in the table,
but as is explained later, the South Heights temperatures could not be used.
e. Major Heat Inputs to the River
All the models require the daily discharges from heat sources. The
Battelle Northwest Laboratory provided Argonne with power plant daily dis-
charge data that they had obtained for their study. This information in-
cluded :
The daily electric demand served by most of the power
plants operating in 1964 and discharging into the river,
The thermal and boiler efficiency of most of these plants.
-------
190
Table 6.2
A. Ohio River
Station
Sewickley, Pa.
St. Marys, W. Va.
Parker sburg, W. Va.
Pomeroy, Ohio
Point Pleasant, W. Va.
Huntington, W. Va.
Ashland, Ky.
Maysville, Ky.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Louisville, Ky.
Evansville, Ind.
Golconda, 111.
Metropolis, Ind.
B. Major Tributaries
Monongahela R.
(Braddock, Pa.)
Allegheny R.
(Natrona, Pa.)
Kanawha R.
(Charleston, W. Va.)
Kentucky R.
(Lockport, Ky.)
Green R.
(Calhoun, Ky.)
Cumberland R.
(Smithland, Ky.)
Tennessee R.
(Paducah, Ky.)
Flow Measurement
River Mile
11.8
135.0
184.4
265.4
265.4
311.6
322.5
405.1
470.5
607.3
792.3
903.1
944.0
Stations
Reported
Flow
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Quality
good
poor
good
poor
poor
poor
poor
poor
poor
good
poor
poor
fair
good
good
fair
fair
fair
poor
good
Good means that about 951 of the measured daily discharges are within 10
accuracy.
Fair means that about 951 of the measured daily discharges are within 15
accuracy.
Poor means that daily discharges have less than "fair" accuracy.
-------
191
Table 6.3
Ohio River Temperature Data
Station (Type)
South Heights, Pa. (W)
Stratton, Ohio (0)
Wheeling, W. Va. (W)
Parkersburg, W. Va. (W)
Huntington, W. Va. (0)
Ironton, Ohio (W)
Cincinnati, Ohio (0)
Markland Dam (U)
Madison, Ind. (W)
Louisville, Ky. (0)
Evansville, Ind. (W)
River Mile
15
53.8
86,8
230.
304.
325.
462.
531.5
560.
601.
790.
Frequency of
Measurement
D
• H
D
D
H
D
H
D
D
H
D
i ,
D = Daily H = Hourly
0 = ORSANCO U = U.S.G.S. W =< Water Works
-------
192
A list of key individuals who were capable of supplying data to
Argonne was obtained from Mr. James Carson, the Chairman of the Power In-
dustry Advisory Committee to the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commis-
sion. These individuals were contacted and asked to supply Argonne with
data that would complement/supplement the data obtained from Battelle-North-
west Laboratory. Those power plants in the 300 mile river reach used for
model evaluation are shown in Table 6.4. The average daily thermal discharge
from each of these plants was used in each model's river temperature simula-
tion.
Table 6.4
Power Plants Included in Model Evaluation
Plant*
J. H. Reed
F. Phillips
W. H. Sammis
Toronto
Tidd
Windsor
R. E. Burger
kammer
Willow Island
Philip Sporn
Kyger Creek
River Milepoint
2.3
15.6
55.0
59.1
74.5
79.5
102.5
111.1
160.5
241.0
260.2
*The Shippingport plant (100 MW generating capacity) is not included in this
list because 1) the Battelle Northwest Laboratory did not have data on this
plant and 2) Duquesne Power and Light would not supply Argonne with the daily
data necessary to compute daily thermal discharges.
Thermal discharges by industrial sources were estimated from the
data that each industry files with the United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agertcy in order to obtain a discharge permit. These data were used to
-------
193
represent 1964 industrial thermal discharges and were analyzed for each
industry possessing a discharge permit on the Pittsburgh-Huntington
reach of the Ohio River. For those industries that discharged large
*
amounts of heat into the Ohio River a daily heat input was computed
and included in the model evaluation phase. The selected industries
and their river mile points are given in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5
Industrial Advected Heat Sources Used in Model Evaluation
Industry River Milepoint
St. Joseph Lead Company 28.5
Crucible Steel 36.5
Wheeling Steel 68.8
Wheeling Steel 71.0
Koppers Company 71.0
Pittsburgh Plate Glass 119.7
Dupont 190.5
Evaluation Strategy
Four criteria were chosen to evaluate each model, namely:
1) How well the computed temperatures replicate observed
temperatures;
2) The ease with which a user becomes proficient in model
implementation;
3) How difficult it is to obtain the input data needed to
implement the model; and
41 How theoretically complete (accurate) each model is.
*By large amounts of heat discharged by industrial sources are meant discharges
of at least 750 MWH/day.
-------
194
The cost of running each model is not selected as an evaluation
criteria since this study is concerned with choosing that model which best
replicates river temperatures. However, a cost comparison was made during
the model evaluation phase resulting in an approximate cost per model per
equivalent computer run. These costs were: COLHEAT $4.25; STREAM $2.75;
and Edinger-Geyer $4.75.
It is recognized that the four criteria are not independent of one
another. For example, a more theoretically complete model usually requires
a larger number of input parameters than does a non-rigorous model, hence,
3 and 4 are related.
Since this study is concerned with selecting a model which best
replicates observed data, criteria one is weighted more heavily than the
other criteria. In fact, criteria 2, 3, and 4 are weighted about equally,
with criteria 1 weighted about as heavily as criteria 2, 3, and 4 combined.
a. Application of Criteria 1
Criteria 1 is applied to the model evaluation procedure by comparing
the 1964 average daily water temperatures predicted by each model with the
actual 1964 average daily water temperatures observed at each of the four
water temperature stations. The stations selected and their river mile points
are Stratton, Ohio (53.8); Wheeling, West Virginia (86.8); Parkersburg, West
Virginia (230.0); and Huntington, West Virginia (304.0). The degree to which
the computed and observed water temperatures correlate is determined by evalu-
ating statistically the difference between observed and predicted water tem-
peratures as well as observing how closely the form of the predicted tempera-
ture follows that of the observed temperatures.
-------
195
b. Application of Criteria 2
Criteria 2 is concerned with how quickly can a user learn to
implement the model, and once this is learned, how easy is the model to
use. This is a rather subjective evaluation and is based on our experience
in implementing each of the models.
c. Application of Criteria 3
Criteria 3 is concerned with how difficult it is to obtain the data
necessary to run each model. When this study waS begun Argonne had no Ohio
River data that could be applied to the niodel evaluation. Hence, the data
gathering difficulty could be measured in time, the time needed to assemble
the data.
d. Application of Criteria 4
Theoretical completeness is ascertained by analyzing the theoretical
development of each model as well as the assumptions inherent in the develop-
ment.
6.2 Evaluation Results
Originally each model was given the daily measured water temperature
for 1964 at South Heights, Pennsylvania (milepoint 15) as its initial condi-
tions. However, these recorded temperatures exhibited such large day to day
variations (see Fig. 6.2) that they were considered unsuitable for model
evaluation. In order to obtain an initial temperature as close as possible
to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, temperatures recorded at Oakmont, Pennsylvania,
near the mouth of the Allegheny River, and Chaleroi, Pennsylvania, near the
mouth of the Monongahela River, were weighted by the river flow to obtain a
temperature near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The formula used to obtain the
Pittsburgh temperature is:
T F + T F
rp
TP =
-------
Figure 6.2
in
c?
cc
CO-
LO
in
a.
Q
LU
CC
o:
UJ
500
Measured Temperatures at South Heights and
Computed Temperatures at Pittsburgh
South Heights
Pittsburgh
i.oo
31.00
61.00
91.00
121.00
151.00 181.00
DflTE
211.00 241.00 271.00 301.03 331.00 331.30
-------
197
where
T = Temperature at Pittsburgh
T = Temperature at Oakmont
T = Temperature at Chaleroi
F = Flow at Oakmont
F = Flow at Chaleroi
The temperatures used as Pittsburgh temperatures are shown in Fig. 6.2.
Each model used the computed Pittsburgh temperatures as initial
conditions to predict temperatures at Stratton, Wheeling, Parkersburg,
and Huntington. The results for each model at each temperature station
are shown in Figs. 6.3 - 6.26.
6.2.1 Computer Temperature - Observed Temperature Correlation
Stratton, Ohio ^
The water temperatures at Stratton, Ohio, are measured by an
ORSANCO robot monitor which is located at the discharge of the raw water
pumps of the water treatment plant of Ohio Edison Company's Sammis Power
Plant. Water temperatures are measured hourly and are averaged over the day.
As shown in Fig. 6.3, the STREAM Model regularly predicts tempera-
tures which are lower than the actual observed temperatures. This under-
prediction characteristic is particularly evident from days 181 through 271
(July through October) which constitute the potential low flow periods.
STREAM generally follows the form of the observed temperatures except during
January when the observed temperatures are about 6° C higher than the pre-
dicted temperatures.
The temperatures predicted by COLHEAT are shown with the observed
water temperatures in Fig. 6.4. The temperatures predicted by COLHEAT are
-------
Figure 6.3
Computed and Measured Temperatures at
Stratton, Ohio STREAM Model
o
c-,,' „',
31- CO 61. CO 81. 01
121.00
151.00 181.00
DRTE
COMPUTED
MEASURED
211.03 2<4l.03 £71. CO 331.03 331.00 331.03
CO
-------
Figure 6.4
oo
t—
-------
Figure 6.5
o I
<=. I
Et
c_
z:
Computed and Measured Temperatures at
Strattonr Ohio — Edinger-Geyer Model
CCMPUTED
MEASURED
r-o
o
o
r-^ 31 CO GI.OO 91.00 121.00 151
.00 1 81 . 00 2 11 . 00 24 1 . 00 21 1 . CC 301 . 0^
DflTE
( — H—-
331.00
2c 1 . C'J
-------
Figure 6.6
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Stratton, Ohio - STREAM Model
ce
CO
o
CE
CC
-t
(X
C-
UJ
t—
X
X
ill
o
tj
51
*T"
cc
'-tj
cr
I —
(j~>
121,
—
0
w
o •
""
o
C3
r*'
o
in
n
r>
O
T)
,-
/ ^':V.
""•
.
/
XX
/'
/
/ . ' • " • ' '
/
/
/ . '
/ " * . **
/••-""'
/ ' '"
/ ••
J _x
.".-"• • t-.
'/• ' • ••' '•'"
' 1 1 1 ., J 1 1 1 j ^
OP 3.50 7.00 10.50 1U.OO 17.50 31.00 ei.50 £8.00 31. Sf
MEASURED
35.00
-------
en
Figure 6.7
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Stratton, Ohio - COLHEAT Model
or
Or-'.
o_
(X
_
0
2-1
i.
3.5C
7.00
—I
10.SO
—(-
11.00
17.SO
21.00
—I
2H.SO
-4-
£8. CO
-*-
55.00
-------
Figure 6.8
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Stratton, Ohio - Edinger-Geyer Model
IT
ID
O)
O
cr
a:
U~i
I—
CX
a.
UJ
a
EJ
cc
UJ
>-
UJ
L3
-+•
CC
u_:
L3
3. SO
7.0Q
10.50
IH.OO 17. SO
MEASURED
21.00
2U.50
28.00 31. SO 35.03
-------
Figure 6.9
rr
CO
.
ex.
UJ
ac
Computed and Measured Temperatures at Wheeling,
West Virginia STREAM Model
102,
COMPUTED
MEASURED
1.00
31.00
61.00
91.00
121.00
151.00 181.00
DflTE
211.00
2U1.00
271.00
301.00
331.00
361.00
N)
O
-------
Figure 6.10
03
cn
UJ
UJ
a:
G
Q
2:
I—
cc
UJ
TL
O
<_)
12.
Computed and Measured Temperatures at Wheeling,
West Virginia — COLHEAT Model
COMPUTED
MEASURED
K)
O
Cn
151.00 181.00
DOTE
-------
Figure 6.11
3"
o
en
e:
uu
Computed and Measured Temperatures
at Wheeling, West Virginia — Edinger
Geyer Model
202.
COMPUTED
MEASURED
"1.00
31.03
SI. 00
121.00
131.00 181.00
DRTE
211.00 2141.00 271.00 301.20 331.50 331.00
Cx)
o
ON
-------
18 T
cn
cr
G
X
Tt
LU
O
CC
UJ
122
Figure 6.12
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Wheeling, West Virginia - STREAM Model
I.Ca 17.50 21.00
MEASURED
24.50
28.OC
K)
o
31.SO
35.00
-------
S't
T
Figure 6.13
Measured-Computed Temperature Scoatter Diagram
for Wheeling, West Virginia - COLHEAT Model
O
CO
o.cc
• /• i :
7.00 10.50 14.00 17.50
MEASURED
—I
81.00
I
'4.10 28. CO
31. SC
3S.OO
-------
O_
•z.
UJ
Figure 6.14
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Wheeling, West Virginia - Edinger-Geyer Model
to
en
(X
>
3
LD
—I
UJ
O
VD
or
u>
>—
UJ
4-
oc
z
c
212,
.SO 7.00
10.50 14.00 17.50
MEASURED
21.00
38.00
31.SO
3S.03
-------
Figure 6.15
1 i
Computed and Measured Temperatures at
Parkersburg, West Virginia STREAM Model
COMPUTED
MEASURED
1.00
31.00
-1.00
151.00 181.03
DRTE
241.CO
-------
Figure 6.16
.Ct
Computed and Measured Temperatures at Parkersburg,
West Virginia COLHEAT Model
COMPUTED
MEASURED
i.OO
31.CO 61.00
121.00
151. CO 181.00
DOTE
211.00 241.CO ?71.CC 3C1.CO 33L.OC 3S1.CC
-------
Figure 6_JL7__ J
1_ Computed, and- Measured-$
at Parkersburgi West Virginia,'- tidinger-
--, - -Ge^er-JMod^l--
COMPUTED
MEASURED
31.CO
El. GO
91.00
121.00
tsJ
M
t-o
151.03 181.00
DflTE
211.00
-------
Figure 6.18
cc
co
to
cc
UJ
^
rr.
or
o.
-------
o
o
l/i-
Figure 6.19
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Parkersburg, West Virginia-COLHEAT Model
CO
en
g.J
ts)
\—I
-Pa.
so
C.SO 7.00 10.50 U.OO [7.50
MEASURED
21.00
n. so
28. CO
31.50
35.00
-------
Figure 6.20
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Parkersburg, West Virginia - Edinger-Geyer Model'
°
iS
t-o
t—'
LJ
oc
tu
cc
o
o.c
lo.so
?.so
MEASURED
21.00
2^.50
28.CQ
-------
Figure 6.21
L U
l I
4
Computed and Measured Temperatures at Huntington,
West Virginia STREAM Model
COMPUTED,
MEASURED
31.00
61.00 91.00
121.00
151.00 181.00
DflTE
211.00 2141.00 271.00 301.00 331.00 351.00
-------
Figure 6.22
j/'••-. /• •
Computed and Measured Temperatures at Huntington,
West Virginia COLHEAT ModeJ
COMPUTED
MEASURED
-4-
3l.Cn 61.CO 91.00
121.CO IS'..00 181.OC
CHTE
211.00 am. ca ?i:.cr ?r. .00 STI.CC
-------
Figure 6.23
Computed and Measured Temperatures
at Huntington, West Virginia
Edinger-Geyer Model
COMPUTED
NffiASURED
00
is1.. oc is'..cc iei.cc 21:
X- 1 V v <-.
-------
rr
t£>
en
cr
G
a
o
(X
UJ
cc
Figure 6.24
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for
Huntington, West Virginia - STREAM Model
124.
o
0 /
3.50 7.00
-4-
10.50 1H.00 17.50
MEASURED
21.00
28.00
31.50
H
55.00
-------
Figure 6.25
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram
for Huntington, West Virginia - COLHEAT Model
CO
O)
tsj
ts)
O
C_J
0_
O
m
31
cr
LU
o
23.
3.SO 7.00 10.50 11.00 17.50
MEASURED
21.50
28.00
—i 1
31.50 3S.OO
-------
LU
C
O
t-J°
Figure 6.26
Measured-Computed Temperature Scatter Diagram for
Huntington, West Virginia - Edinger-Geyer Model
LU
CD
cc
LJ
r-'T
•I
"I
Q 1
14
"
0.30 3.50
10.SO
U.00 17.50
MEASURED
£1.00
24.50
28.00
-------
222
more consistent with the observed temperatures than were STREAM'S tempera-
tures. COLHEAT predicts high in September by about 1.5° C and low in July
by about 2.5 C. Elsewhere, except January, COLHEAT replicates the observed
temperatures to a high degree of precision. COLHEAT follows the form of the
observed data rather well except for January when the observed temperatures
are about 6° C higher than the predicted temperatures.
The Edinger-Geyer Model, shown in Fig. 6.5, predicts rather high
in the months of July, August, September, and October, particularly in
September when it differs by approximately 6° C from the measured water
temperature. The form of the observed temperatures is not followed as
well by Edinger-Geyer as by the other two models though its predicted
January temperatures are as low as those predicted by the other models.
Scatter diagrams, which compare computed and observed values,
are often useful aids in judging the precision of a model. Figures 6.6
through 6.8 show the scatter diagrams for the STREAM, COLHEAT, and
Edinger-Geyer Models, respectively, at Stratton, Ohio. The line drawn
at an angle of 45 with the horizontal signifies where the points would lie
if there was a perfect match between observed and computed values. Points
below the line indicate that the model predicts low while points above the
line indicate that the model predicts high. The scatter diagrams indicate
that STREAM predicts low regularly; COLHEAT predicts temperatures that
are close to the observed values; and Edinger-Geyer predicts well at the
middle temperatures (7°-21° C) but predicts high at high temperatures and
low at low temperatures.
Other statistical parameters have been determined for each model
at each temperature measurement station. Regression lines were computed
-------
and drawn for each model, the difference between each observed temperature
and its corresponding computed temperature was calculated, and the tempera-
ture difference distribution was constructed for each of the models. These
data are presented in Appendix A.
Wheeling, West Virginia
The water temperatures at Wheeling, West Virginia, are measured
daily by the City of Wheeling and reported to ORSANCO. The City of Wheeling
has provided the following description of the 1964 water temperature measure-
ment procedure:
"The raw water temperatures recorded during
these years were taken from the raw water
main extending underground from the intake
pier in the Ohio River through the pumping
station and then underground to the sedi-
mentation basins. This line to the sedi-
mentation basins is tapped and runs into
our filtration plant raw water testing tap.
Here the stream is continuously running in-
to a pail with the thermometer in it and
the temperature usually recorded at 8 AM.
This is done except when the plant is shut
down."2
The STREAM Model, shown in Fig. 6.9, once again regularly predicts
temperatures that are lower than the observed river temperatures. However,
the form of the predicted temperature curve follows quite closely the form
exhibited by the observed temperature curve. The COLHEAT Model, Fig. 6.10,
is more precise than the STREAM Model at Wheeling, but its form following
-------
224
characteristic is not quite as good. The Edinger-Geyer Model, Fig. 6.11,
again, predicts higher temperatures during the warm months than actually
occur. Also the curve traced by Edinger-Geyer's predicted temperature
does not follow the observed temperature curve as well as the other two
models do.
The scatter diagrams contained in Figs. 6.12 through 6.14 show
that STREAM predicts consistently low, sometimes as much as 3.5° C, while
COLHEAT more nearly replicates observed temperatures. The Edinger-Geyer
Model begins predicting too high at about 14° C and as observed temperature
increases so does the amount of Edinger-Geyer's overpredictions.
Parkersburg, West Virginia
The water temperature at Parkersburg is measured daily and is
reported to ORSANCO who incorporates the temperature into their Ohio River
data base. The observed and computed river temperatures for each of the
models are shown in Figs. 6.15 through 6.17. Again the STREAM Model pre-
dicts temperatures that are consistently lower than the observed water
temperatures. The COLHEAT Model predicts temperatures that are consistent
with observed temperatures (Fig. 6.16) for most of the year except for May
and August when the COLHEAT predicted temperature is significantly higher
(about 5° C) than the observed temperature. Both STREAM and COLHEAT's
curve of computed temperatures closely approximates the curve of observed
temperature. The overpredictive characteristic of the Edinger-Geyer Model
(Fig. 6.17) becomes more pronounced at Parkersburg. The model predicts
temperatures 3°-5° C higher than observed for the months of July, August,
September, October and most of November.
-------
225
The scatter diagrams shown in Figs. 6.18 through 6.20 serve to
amplify the statements made in the preceding paragraph. STREAM constantly
predicts low; COLHEAT predicts low at low temperatures and high at high
temperatures but is closer to the observed values than the other two models.
Edinger-Geyer predicts low at low temperatures, quite high at high
temperatures and is more widely scattered about the 45° line than are
the other two models.
Huntington, West Virginia
The water temperatures at Huntington, West Virginia, are measured
by an ORSANCO robot monitor that is located at the raw water intake pump
discharge of the Huntington Water Company's 40th Street pumping station.
Water temperatures are measured hourly and are averaged over the day.
Figures 6.21, 6.22, and 6.23 show the observed daily temperatures
at Huntington for 1964 plotted along with the daily water temperatures com-
puted by the STREAM, COLHEAT, and Edinger-Geyer Models, respectively. The
comments regarding the two temperature plots for each model are the same
as for the other stations. STREAM (Fig. 6.21) predicts lower temperatures
than observed, while COLHEAT (Fig. 6.22) predicts temperatures more in line
with observed temperatures than does STREAM. However, COLHEAT does pre-
dict temperatures that average about 2° C higher than observed in May,
June, and July. The Edinger-Geyer Model (Fig. 6.23) again predicts about
4° C high for the months of May, June, July, August, and September. Each model's
predicted temperature curve seems to follow the form of the observed tempera-
ture curve equally well. The scatter diagrams, shown in Figs. 6.24 through
6.26 serve to reinforce the statements made above.
-------
226
Conclusions - Criteria 1
The temperatures predicted by the COLHEAT model at the four river
temperature measurement stations considered in this study agree more favor-
ably with the actual measurements taken at these stations than do the tempera-
tures computed by the other two models. This conclusion is based on an analy-
sis of the temperature-time plots and the scatter diagrams presented earlier
in this section as well as on the statistical analysis presented in Appendix
A.
As shown above, the STREAM Model constantly predicts lower tempera-
tures than those actually observed. STREAM'S tendency to underpredict tem-
peratures could be troublesome when the model is used to predict river
temperatures during times of low flow or when using the model to predict
the effect of new heat sources. The temperatures predicted by the Edinger-
Geyer Model are not consistent with observed river temperatures. The Edinger-
Geyer Model predicts too low at the lower river temperatures and too high at
the higher river temperatures. Moreover, the prediction error of the model
seems to get worse the further downstream the model is used.
One criticism that might be made of the GOLHEAT Model is that it
tends to predict higher temperatures than are actually measured when the
river is at its warmest. This is an interesting criticism because COLHEAT
might be expected to underpredict temperatures during the warm months since
it computes the bulk temperature of a river section rather than that section's
surface temperature (By bulk temperature is meant the temperature of the
thoroughly mixed volume of water comprising the river section in question.
In the evaluation phase of this study the river sections used by COLHEAT
-------
227
were 1-5 miles in length and had a volume on the order of 100 million cubic
feet). It might be expected that, during the warmer months, the bulk or
average temperature might be slightly cooler than the temperature at the
river's surface.
One explanation of this apparent discrepancy might be the river
temperature measurement stations themselves. It may be that the water,
whose temperature is measured, is being pumped from a deeper cooler portion
of the river during the warm months. Another explanation is that the Lake
Hefner evaporation formula used by COLHEAT has limitations when applied
to the Ohio River.
6.2.2 Criteria 2 - Ease of jJse
Ease of use means how quickly can a user learn to implement the
model, and once the implementation procedure is mastered, how easy is the
model to use. As stated previously this is the most subjective test used
in the evaluation procedure and is based on our experience in implement-
ing each of the models. Based on our experience, STREAM is the easiest
model to use of the three.
6.2.3 Criteria 3 - .Inp_ut_Jj_at_a Acquisition
Criteria 3 is concerned with how difficult it is to obtain the
data necessary to run each model. COLHEAT and Edinger-Geyer require
meteorological data because they employ a heat budget, whereas STREAM
requires no meteorological data. It has been our experience that
meteorological data is relatively easy to get and can be obtained in
a rather short amount of time. All three models require advected heat
-------
228
*
inputs and this parameter is the most difficult to obtain. Consequently,
we conclude that there is essentially no more difficulty involved in obtain-
ing input data for one model than the other two.
6.2.4 Criteria 4 - Theoretical Completeness
The theoretical formulation of STREAM is quite different from
that of COLHEAT and Edinger-Geyer since STREAM does not utilize a heat
budget. Instead, STREAM postulates an exponential decay of the added
heat as one moves downstream from the heat source. Expressed in equation
form, this is
T = Tn + (AT) 10"Kt (6.2)
where
T = temperature of the river downstream
from the heat source, °F
T = normal (ambient) temperature of the
n river, °F
AT = temperature differential (T - T ), °F
K = decay constant, day
t = travel time, days
T = temperature at heat discharge point, °F
3 4
Equation (6.2) is similar to several ' simplified river temperature pre-
diction models, except for one major difference: The exchange coefficient
K is not usually held constant but is a function of meteorological conditions.
*A11 three models also require cross-sectional areas (Even though it has
been stated that STREAM does not require cross-sectional areas, they were
needed for velocity computations) which are nearly as difficult to obtain
as the advected heat inputs.
-------
229
The exchange coefficient, K, is set equal to 1.0 in the STREAM
Model. The explanation for this choice is:
"The verification of 1.0 as the default
value for the Dunvillain (K) constant
was accomplished during the following
year after its postulation. Several
hundred modeling activities utilizing
the temperature module were tried with
existing monitoring data and thermal
generating statistics supplied by local
power plants. The results were beyond
expectation! Not one time did a tempera-
ture fall outside the two-degree F. accep-
tance level.'"5
Care must be taken in the verification of any model. During this study,
STREAM was run in the PROFILE mode between Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and
Wheeling, West Virginia. Temperatures were input to the model daily
at Pittsburgh and the profile for September 15, 1964, is shown in Fig.
6.27. (September 15 was chosen because this day had the lowest flow of
1964, 3200 cfs.) Note that the temperature increase caused by the Phillips
Plant dissipates in about six miles, while the temperature increments due
to the other heat sources take less distance to die away. To the best
of our knowledge, ' ' * the closest downstream placement of a monitor to
a power plant cooling water discharge during STREAM'S verification runs was
6.4 miles. The monitor was located at Aurora, Indiana, 6.4 miles downstream
*
of the Miami Fort Plant. Hence, one reason that the Dunvillain constant
*At the Miami Fort Plant the flows are considerably higher than at Phillips.
In fact, in 1964, a seven-day average flow of 3200 cfs would be expected only
once every 100 years. (Reference: Corps of Engineers, "Frequency Charts for
Low Flows on the Ohio River," June 1970.)
-------
TEMPERATURE, °F
ro
OJ
en
OJ
o
m
CO
en
O
-si
O
oo
o
ST. JOSEPH LEAD
CRUCIBLE STEEL
TORONTO
WHEELING STEEL
TIDD
WINDSOR
PHILLIPS
SAMMIS
CD
•i
CD
rt
CD
Cfl
CD
O"
CD
ID
ON
(X
CD
CD
0£Z
-------
231
has checked so well against observed data is that the observed data has
always occurred at the flat portion of the exponential die-away curve,
five or more time constants removed from its origin. This explains why
success has also been achieved with K values of 0.5 and 1.5.
It has been stated that:
"With regard to changing the heat decay
rate to reflect changes in meteorological
conditions, it should be recognized, first
of all, that with dynamic modeling, river
temperatures at the starting point of a
model run are varied day by day, and thus
compensation is automatically provided
for variations in such factors as air,
temperature, humidity, cloud cover, and
wind direction."7
This procedure was followed in the model evaluation phase of this study,
and STREAM regularly predicted lower temperatures than observed for 1964.
A problem was encountered with STREAM'S travel modules during the
model evaluation phase. As stated in Section 5, an assumption basic to the
travel time module is that the velocity at a constant flow can always be
defined as a linear function of river mile point. Hence, for constant
flow
V = a + b x (mile/day) (6.3)
-------
232
where
a is the V intercept, mile/day
b is the slope, (day )
x is the mile point, miles
The coefficient a and b can be determined if the flow, Q, and the cross-
sectional area, A, at two discontinuity points are known. Then at point
Q2
x,, V, = Q-j/A-, and at point x~, V"2 = .—; the solution of the resulting set
if
of simultaneous equations yields the proper value of a and b. Using these
coefficients in the STREAM travel modules will result in both travel times
between points as well as distances traveled during designated time periods.
We found for several sets of coefficients, a and b, the river
velocity became "negative" with the result that a water parcel moves up-
stream instead of downstream. The difficulty was traced to the distance
and time calculations made in Subroutines BACK and TRAVL of the STREAM
Model. We modified these subroutines, and the model worked satisfactorily.
Our modification procedure was as follows: Assume the river is numbered
mile point 981 at Pittsburgh and mile point 0 at Cairo. Then the time of
travel downstream between any two discontinuities is
t = xjF^ C6.4)
where XT is downstream of x, so that
then
a + b x
-------
233
If the time of travel is known and no discontinuities are encountered
between x1 and x?, the mile point of the point reached downstream from x,
can be determined from
-a + (a + b x, ) e t
Similarly, traveling back upstream to calculate the point at which the
parcel of water was released t units previously, the result is
-a + (a + b x~) e
x1 - - B-* - (6.7)
Some difficulty was also encountered in the initial runs of the
Edinger-Geyer Model. The fluctuations of the equilibrium temperature, as
calculated by the model, were excessive, and the calculated equilibrium
temperature itself was very high during the summer months. This difficulty
seemed to arise because of the model's linearization of several of the in-
herent nonlinear relations involved in the heat budget formulation. Specifi-
cally, the procedure to calculate long-wave radiation seemed especially vulner-
able to linearization and was replaced by the techniques used in the COLHEAT
Model to simulate long -wave radiation. Another cause of these difficulties
arises from the fact that the original Edinger-Geyer formulation is not
really amenable to large day-to-day changes in meteorological parameters. As
9
Koberg states, more agreement between measured temperatures and computed
temperatures is obtained when the computations are made with long-wave
radiation averaged over a month or longer.
No difficulties of a theoretical nature were encountered when
utilizing the COLHEAT Model.
-------
234
We conclude that of the three models evaluated the COLHEAT Model
is the most theoretically complete.
6.2.5 Model Selection
Based on the criteria outlined above, we conclude that the COLHEAT
Model is the most appropriate model of the three evaluated to use for river
temperature prediction on the Ohio River at the present time.
It must be understood that criteria one (computed - observed
temperature correlation) depends heavily on the river temperatures measured
at the four river stations. These temperatures are regarded as "truth"
and the computed temperature from each model is compared to this "true"
temperature. Now whether temperatures measured in a bucket at Wheeling,
West Virginia, faithfully reproduce the actual water temperature of the
Ohio at Wheeling is questionable, but these temperatures were measured
and were available.
The value of the measured river temperature data used in this
study brings into focus the problems involved in honestly validating a
model. To confidently evaluate the three models used in this study, more
reliable measured temperatures are required. ORSANCO, through their
monitoring program, is progressing toward this end, but more should be
done if a model is to be used with complete confidence. Some suggestions
are as follows:
1) Pick a river reach for validation (e.g.,
Pittsburgh-Huntington reach).
2) Place sufficient monitors along the river
or monitor manually such that temperatures
are recorded at mile increments downstream
from major heat sources (e.g., the ones used
in the Pittsburgh-Huntington reach) until
there is no evidence of residual thermal ~
die away.
-------
235
3) Take measurements at other strategic
locations in the reach of interest
(e.g., mouths of tributaries).
4) Take these measurements hourly if a robot
monitor is used and daily if done manually.
If done manually, make certain the measure-
ments are made at the same point and the
same time each day.
5) Make the validation measurements over a
sufficient period of time so that seasonal
river temperature variations are included.
A great deal of money and time has been spent in designing a large
number of river temperature models. The time is at hand to make vigorous
attempts to obtain good data from problem rivers so that the proper model
may be used with confidence in each case.
-------
236
Section 6 References
1. D. E. Peterson and R. T. Jaske, Potential Thermal Effects of an
Expanding Power Industry: Ohio River Basin I, Battelle Northwest
Laboratory Report No. BNWL-1299, February, 1970.
2. H. W. Defibaugh, Personal Communication, October 1973.
3. J. E. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment,
Edison Electric Institute, New York, June 1965.~
4. V. Novotny and P. A. Krenkel, "Simplified Mathematical Model of
Temperature Changes in Rivers," Journal of the Water Pollution
Control Federation, February 1977^~~
5. D. A. Dunsmore and W. A. Bonvillain, "STREAM - A Generalized
Dynamic Working River Model," Paper presented at COMMON meeting,
Miami Beach, Florida, October 1972.
6. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, Automated Forecast
Procedures for River Quality Management - Volume I: Project Report,
June 1972.
7. R. J. Boes, "Effect of Thermal Discharges from J. M. Stuart Power
Plant," Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Memorandum,
September 22, 1972.
8. R. J. Boes, "Effect of Thermal Discharge from J. M. Stuart Power
Plant on Downstream Ohio River Temperatures," Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission Memorandum, June 23, 1972.
9. G. E. Koberg, "Methods to Compute Long Wave Radiation from the
Atmosphere and Reflected Solar Radiation from a Water Surface,"
USGS Professional Paper, 1962.
-------
237
-------
238
7. OHIO RIVER TEMPERATURE PREDICTION STUDY
In this section the COLHEAT river temperature simulation model is
used to predict river temperature profiles along the Ohio River from its
origin at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to below Louisville, Kentucky. The pur-
pose of these simulations is to determine the natural temperature along the
Ohio River under certain conditions and to compare the natural temperature
with that occurring when man-made heat inputs are added to the river. This
comparison, along with a knowledge of the various state* temperature stand-
ards , may be used to detect anticipated water temperature violations and to
pinpoint when and where they may occur.
This portion of the report is divided into two parts. Section 7.1
gives a brief description of both the state standards and the Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) standards as they apply to water
temperature while Section 7.2 is devoted to the Ohio River temperature simula-
tions.
7.1 Water Temperature Standards
A. State Standards
The water temperature standards adopted by each of the six states
contiguous to the Ohio River are similar in nature. Each state has three
general types of water temperature criteria that must be met.
are: 1) monthly maximum allowable temperatures, 2) a maximum allowable tem-
perature increase above a defined base temperature, and 3) an allowable mixing
zone at the edge of which, temperature criteria must be met.
Monthly Maximum jUlpwab 1 e Temperatures
The monthly maximum allowable temperature along the Ohio River by
each state is given in Table 7.1. In addition to its monthly maximum
*For the purposes of this report the term "states" means the following
ORSANCO signatory states: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
and West Virginia.
-------
Table 7.1
Manthly Maximun Allowable Temperature
Along the Ohio River
\45tate
- MonthiX^
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
4 , .
West
Illinois Indiana Kentucky Ohio Pennsylvania Virginia
(Tentative)
50°F (10.0°C)
50 (10.0)
60 (15.6)
70 (21.1)
80 (26.7)
87 (30.6)
89 (31.7)
89 (31.7)
87 (30.6)
78 (25.6)
70 (21.1)
57 (13.9)
50°F (10.0°C)
50 (10.0)
60 (15.6)
70 (21.1)
80 (26.7)
87 (30.6)
89 (31.7)
89 (31.7)
87 (30.6)
78 (25.6)
70 (21.1)
57 (13.9)
50°F (10.0°C)
50 (10.0)
60 (15.6)
70 (21.1)
80 (26.7)
87 (30.6)
89 (31.7)
89 (31.7)
87 (30.6)
78 (25.6)
70 (21.1)
57 (13.9)
50°F (10.0°C)
50 (10.0)
60 (15.6)
70 (21.1)
80 (26.7)
87 (30.6)
89 (31.7)
89 (31.7)
87 (30.6)
78 (25.6)
70 (21.1)
57 (13.9)
87°F (30.6°C)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
87 (30.6)
50°F (10.0°C)
50 (10.0)
60 (15.6)
70 (21.1)
80 (26.7)
87 (30.6)
89 (31.7)
89 (31.7)
87 (30.6)
78 (25.6)
70 (21.1)
57 (13.9)
O-l
-------
240
allowable temperatures the State of Illinois requires that:
"The water temperature at representative locations
in the main river shall not exceed the maximum
limits (shown in Table 7.1) during more than one
percent of the hours in the 12-month period end-
ing with any month. Iforeover, at no time shall
the water temperature at such locations exceed
the maximum limits (shown in Table 7.1) by more
than 3°F.Hl
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has no allowable monthly maximum
temperature as such, but instead has the requirement that the Ohio River
experience:
"Not more than a 5°F rise above ambient tempera-
ture, or a maximum of 87°F, whichever is less;
not to be changed by more than 2°F during any
one hour period."2
Maximum Allowable Temperature Increase
Most of the states limit the maximum temperature rise to 5°F above
natural temperature where natural temperature is defined as:
"The normal daily and seasonal temperature
fluctuations that existed before the addition
of heat due to other than natural causes."3
Of course, if the monthly maximum allowable temperature is less than a 5°F
increment above natural temperature, the full incremental 5°F rise is not
allowed.
Pennsylvania also allows a 5°F rise, but the base temperature used
is ambient temperature which is defined as:
"The temperature of the water body upstream of a
heated waste discharge or waste discharge complex.
The ambient temperature sampling point should be
unaffected by any sources of waste heat."2
Perhaps the key statement here is that the sampling point should be "unaf-
fected by any source of waste heat." Taken literally, this statement means
-------
241
that the ambient temperature is, in actuality, the natural temperature be-
cause only at the natural temperature is it a certainty that the sample point
is "unaffected by any source of waste heat."
Mixing Zones
Each state has its own definition of what constitutes a mixing zone.
Since all of the models evaluated in this study are far-field models, mixing
zones shall not be considered in this report. Moreover, it should be pointed
out that none of the models evaluated in this report should be used.for^stimula-
tions involving mixing zones. Near-field or the so-called thermal plume models
should be used for this type of simulation.
B. Ohio River Valley Water_Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) Standard4
The ORSANCO standard regarding heat input into the Ohio River requires
that the aggregate heat-discharge rate not be of such magnitude that an in-
crease in river temperature of more than 5°F results. The allowable heat
discharge rate is given by:
HR = 62.4 Q (TA - TR) (0.9)
where
HR = allowable heat-discharge rate (Btu/sec)
T
A = allowable maximum temperature as specified
as follows:
TA TA
January 50 July 89
February 50 August 89
March 60 September 87
April 70 October 78
May 80 November 70
June 87 December 57
-------
242
TR = River temperature (daily average in °F) upstream from
the discharge
Q = River flow, measured flow but not less than critical
flow values specified below:
River Reach
Critical flow
From To in cfs*
Pittsburgh, Pa. (mi.0.0) Willow Is. Dam (161.7) 6,500
Willow Is. Dam (161.7) Gallipolis Dam (279.2) 7,400
Gallipolis Dam (279.2) Meldahl Dam (436.2) 9,700
Meldahl Dam (436.2) McAlpine Dam (605.8) 11,900
McAlpine Dam (605.8 Uniontown Dam (846.0) 14,200
Uniontown Dam (846.0) Smithland Dam (918.5) 19,500
Smithland Dam (918.5) Cairo Point (981.0) 48,100
*Minimum daily flow once in ten years.
7.2 Ohio River Temperature Simulations
7.2.1 Data
Water temperatures along the Ohio River from Pittsburgh, Pennsylania
to river mile 705, about one hundred miles below Louisville, Kentucky were
simulated under various conditions. A river temperature profile was deter-
mined for each day from May 24 through November 10 for a year in the mid-to-
late 1970's. Thirty year average, once in ten years low flows were applied
to the river in the months of July, August, and September. The magnitude
of these flows and their points of entrance into the model are shown in
Table 7.2. Regular flows (those actually measured on a daily basis in 1964)
were applied to the river on the other dates.
The meteorological parameters used were those measured on a daily
basis in 1964. Three weather stations were used:
1. Huntington, West Virginia - the data from this station were
used to simulate meteorological conditions from Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania to Maysville, Kentucky (see Fig. 7.1).
-------
243
2. Cincinnati, Ohio - the data from this station were used to
simulate meteorological conditions from Maysville, Kentucky
to Madison, Indiana.
3. Louisville, Kentucky - the data from this station were used
to simulate meteorological conditions from Madison, Indiana
to milepoint 705.
Solar radiation measurements were taken from State College, Pennsylvania
and Indianapolis, Indiana. Water temperature of the river at Pittsburgh
was initialized daily using the 1964 calculated water temperatures at
Pittsburgh as described in Section 6.
The advected heat input to the river due to once-through cooling
steam-electric power plants is given in Table 7.3. These figures were ob-
tained by using the latest yearly average data available for each power
plant and calculating the advected heat input in MVH/day from this data.
It was assumed that the daily average advected heat input from an individual
plant remained constant each day.
Table 7.2
Thirty Day Average, Once in Ten Years Low Flows and
the Mile Point Where these Flows Enter the Simulation
City Flow (cfs)* Milepoint Initiated
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Wheeling, W. Va.
Parkeisburg, W. Va.
Huntington, W. Va.
Maysville, Ky.
Louisville, Ky.
6,800
7,600
9,000
10,800
12,200
14,700
0.0
87.2
185.1
261.0
410.0
550.0
7.2.2
*Source: Corps of Engineers, "Frequency Charts for Low Flows on
the Ohio River," June 1970. Due to delays in the reservoir
construction upon which these charts are based, the flow
figures given are higher than actually occurring.
Results
The results shown in this section are for 30-day average once in
ten year low flows. Low flow profiles were obtained for each day from July 1
-------
BEAVER K
O
(A
ALLEGHENYff
PITTSBURGH
HONONGAHELA K
Milepoint 705
PADUCAH VK^
Nk
-#>
20 40 60
SCALE - MILES
Figure 7.1
The Ohio River
-------
245
Table 7.3
Factors Used to Determine Daily Mvected Heat Input
Due to Each Steam-Electric Power Plant
Using Once-Through Cooling
Milepoint
2.3
15.6
33.8
55.0
59.1
74.5
75.0
102.5
111.1
160.5
241.0
260.2
405.7
453.5
471.4
490.3
494.5
558.5
604.0
616.6
618.0
Notes : 1 .
2.
Plant
J. H. Reed
F. Phillips
Shippingport
W. H. Sammis
Toronto
Tidd
Cardinal
R. E. Burger
Kammer
Willow Island
Philip Sporn
Kyger Creek
J. M. Stuart
W. C. Beckjord
West End
Miami Fort
Tanners Creek
Clifty Creek
Paddy's Run
Cane Run
Gal lager
Generating
Capacity
(MW)
180.0
411.2
100.0
2303.5
175.8
226.3
1230.5
544.0
712.5
215.0
1105.5
1086.3
1830.6
1220.3
219.3
393.2
1100.3
1303.6
337.5
1016.7
637
Source: National Coal As so
Factors - 1972 Edition, Dec
Source: Federal Power Comn
Construction Costs and Annu
Heat Rate2
/BTU\
\KWH/
18,814
11,829
10,3403
9,290
14,089
12,022
9,0673
10,603
9,998
10,687
9,238
9,309
9,180
9,5753
15,116
10,753
9,513
9,407
13,829
10,111
10,0004
Plant
Factor
(%)
35
58.4
21.2
60.9
44.1
60
80
64
63.3
78.1
69
76
77
65
26
55.8
74
82
18
57
70
Advected
Heat Rate
(mi\
(WJ
5,568
11,213
801
44,233
4,668
6,503
28,868
13,708
16,134
6,700
23,818
26,123
43,768
25,898
3,775
8,837
26,756
34,447
3,567
21,118
15,951
ciation, Steam Electric Plant
ember 1972.
dssion, Steam Electric Plant
al Production Expenses - 24th
Annual Supplement 1971, February 1973, except where noted.
3. Heat Rate figure is for 1969. Data supplied by the Ohio
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission.
4. Estimate
5. Source: Engineering estimate based on plant factors obtained
f ran Federal Power Coimissicn
-------
246
through September 30, and three of these profiles are presented in this
report for three typical days during the low flow period - July 25, August
18, and September 11. No attempt was made to pick the "worst" day, that is,
a day which would cause a maximum temperature increment near any power plant.
Thirty-day average flows were selected rather than 7-day average flows in
order to be more conservative.
It should be mentioned that 30-day average once in ten year low
flows are not expected to persist over a 3-month period as modeled in this
section. It might be argued that the assumption of such a lengthy low flow
period permits the effect of an upstream power plant to be felt downstream,
further than a distance equal to that traveled by a slug of water during
30 days of low flow. For the lowest flow shown in Table 7.2 (6800 cfs), a
slug of water travels approximately 120 miles in 30 days. It is seen from
the results in this section that the temperature increase from any power
plant is negligible at this distance downstream from its discharge point.
The strategies shown in. this section were selected by the staff
of the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region V and are meant
to provide answers to "what if" questions. Hence, these strategies should
not be construed to be conclusions or recommendations resulting from this
study.
Figures 7.2 and 7.4 depict the temperature profile along the Ohio
River on July 25 for both average power plant loads and for no loads.*
Figures 7.3 and 7.5 show the difference between natural river temperatures
*"No loads" means no man caused heat sources are put into the river. Thus,
the "no load" case approximates the natural temperature of the river.
-------
en
en
7/25, FIRST HflLF OF PH10 RIVF.R
^3.00
Tf.MP (C)
27.00 28.00 29.00
—i- ?~~xr'RE E D+
30.00 31.00
32.00 33.00
3400
-T PHILLIPS
.SHIPPINGPORT
jSAMMIS 8 TORONTO
TIDD
CARDINAL
jKYGER CREEK
fKANAWHA R.
3500
-I
^—~
£%
•£ H
1/1 a H
(D
^ d"
{13 C
o
Hi
(D
-------
CC
UJ
L_
o
Li_
_J
Figure 7.3
Temperature Rise, °C Due to Power Plant Cooling
Water Discharge, July 25 - Part 1
(T;
CC
O
CC
c:
UJ
T.
_J
O
°0.00
tsj
-U
00
25.00
50.00
75.00
100.00
125.00
150.00 175.00
MILE PT.
200.00
225.00
250.00
275.00
300.00
325.00
330.00
ANALSIIU, CALIF^R.MA
-------
d
UJ
Figure 7.4
Ohio River Temperature Profile, July 25 - Part 2
LOADS
NO LOADS
Q_
X
36S.3U
1415.00
465.00
-t-
490.00
515.00 S40.00
MILE PT.
565.00
590.00
615.00
640.00
655.00
633.
-------
Figure 7.5
Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant
Cooling Water Discharge, July 25-Part 2
t-o
On
o
CT!
CD
s:
(X
oJ
7G
SIS.00 SilO.OO
MILE PI".
69C.CJ
-------
251
and those resulting when loads are applied to the river. It can be seen
from Figs. 7.2 and 7.3 that the Sammis, Toronto, Tidd, and Cardinal plant
complex violates both the maximum allowable monthly temperature (31.7°C)
standard and the 2.8°C (5.0°F) temperature increment standard.
Figures 7.6 and 7.8 show the temperature profile along the river
for August 18. There is no monthly maximum temperature violation, but
Fig. 7.7 shows that the Cardinal and Kammer plant cause the incremental
temperature to rise greater than 2.8°C.
The river temperature profile for September 11 is given in Figs.
7.10 and 7.12. The maximum allowable monthly temperature for September is
30.6°C. Figure 7.10 clearly shows that this temperature is exceeded near
the Cardinal, Burger and Kammer plants as is the 2.8°C maximum tempera-
ture rise (see Fig. 7.11).
Strategy 1
Since violations occurred near the Cardinal and Sammis plants,
one strategy applied was to take Cardinal and Sammis completely off line.
The results of this strategy are shown in Figs. 7.14 through 7.16. The
top line represents operation as usual, the lower solid line represents
the strategy (Sammis and Cardinal off line}, and the dotted line represents
natural temperatures. It is seen that water temperature standards are met
if Cardinal and Sammis are taken off line.
2
A second strategy was applied to the river, namely: what would
the result be if the advected heat discharged from the Kyger Creek and
Stuart plants were cut by 501 and 67%, respectively (Cardinal and Sammis
remain off line). Again, the top line represents normal heat loads, the
lower solid line represents the strategy and the dotted line represents
the natural river temperature ( figs. 7.]7 through 7.]9).
-------
en
COLHERT MODEL ** PROFILE 8/18. FIRST HRLF OF OHIO RIVEH
33.00
_
g<"REED
8^
8
o i
PHILLIPS
, SAMMIS 8 TORONTO
.TIDD
CARDINAL
BURGER
KAMMER
KYGER CREEK
KANAWHA R.
g
fl?
o>
3
rt-
0)
O
l-h
I
zsz
-------
Figure 7.7
Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling
Water Discharge, August 18 - Part 1
o
o
LL_
CD
i
!l
CO
\
CO
UJ
o
o
cr
UJ
o
LJ
58
KJ
tn
co.oo
25.00
50.00
75.00
100.00
125.00
150.00 175.00
MILE PT.
200.00
225.00
250.00
275.00
300. CO
325. c:
350.00
-------
Figure 7.8
Ohio River Temperature Profile, August 18 - Part 2
LOADS
NO LOADS
cc
G_
cn
71
i.90.QO
HIS.00
UUO.OQ
455.00
490.00
SIS 00 540.00 56S.OO 590.00 615.00
MILE PT.
640.
-------
Figure 7.9
Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant
Cooling Water Discharge, August 18-Part 2
o ;
o i
0,'T
cc
o
x:
o
tn
en
O
CC
390.GO
415.00
4UO.OO
US5.00
H90.00
SIS.00 5UO.OO
MILE PT.
sss.oo
590.00
CIS.00
eno.oo
565.00
6S3.C3
-------
tr
:
o
CT;
_J
' Figure 7.10
Ohio River Temperature Profile, September 11 - Part 1
LOADS
NO LOADS
en
3.00
25.00
£0.00
7S.OO
100.00
125.00
150.00 175.00
MILE PT.
200.00
225.00
250.00
275.00
300.00
—I
32S.CO :
-------
cc
O
u.
o
or
Q-
cr
UJ
•r.
—i
o
LJ
60
cc't
Figure 7.11
Temperature Rise, C, Due to Power Plant Cooling
Water Discharge, September 11 - Part 1
en
--a
25.00
50.00
75.00
100.00
125.00
150.00 175.00
MILE PT.
200.00
225.00
250.00
275.00
3CO.OO
325.00
350.00
CALIFORNIA TJVPL ;
-------
Figure 7.12
Ohio River Temperature Profile, September 11 - Part 2
LOADS
NO LOADS
oc
UJ
O
or
—>
3
J65.00
tv)
On
oo
3i3.00
ms.co
14CS.OQ
430.00
515.00 540.00 S6S.OO
MILE PT.
590.00
615.00
6HO.DO
665.00
-------
Figure 7.13
Temperature Rise, °C, Due to Power Plant Cooling
Water Discharge, September 11 - Part 2
K)
tn
O
cc
^55.03 390. CO
'415.03
•WO.CO
U65.00
480.00
515.00 540.00
MILE PT.
56S.OO
530.00
CIS.CO
640.00
665.00
-------
OO
STRRTEGY 1 (SflMMIS flND CflRDINRL OFF LINE)
r>
o
o
t3
c
l> !
-> I
z
o
c.
o
^3.00
8
8
8
rn o
o
c/i
o
^j
en
g
26.00
TEMP (C)
27.00 28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
BURGER
KAMMER
WILLOW ISLAND
35.00
g
I
CD
CD
I
2? ^
O H-
H-i 03
H- C
t—1 H
0) CD
l-h ~~J
O
rt
0)
en
t-o
ON
C
-------
CO
oo
PROFILE 8/18, STRRTEGY 1 (SflMMlS flNO CRROINflL OFF LINE)
z
o
§>
B-.
o
o
p
8
J=5i-
no
o
o
p
3
PO
c/i
en
o
8
3!
8
REED
TEMP (G
24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00 28.00
—H 1 1 1 1
29.00
30.00
—I
31.00
—I
PHILLIPS
SAMMIS 8 TORONTO
CARDINAL
BURGER
KAMMER
WILLOW ISLAND
32.00
—I
33.00
—I
g g
^* C^
§ M
en
H
0)
I
0!
00
-------
CO
CD
PROFILE 9/11, STRflTEGY 1 (SflMMlS RND CflRDINflL OFF LINE)
53.00
24.00
TEMP (C)
27.00 28.00
H h
29.00 30.00
31.00
32.00
SAMMIS 8 TORONTO
BURGER
KAMMER
WILLOW ISLAND
33.00
p
03
rt
I
Hh
H-
H 3
c/i
r+ ~~J
n>
0\
I-
(D
K)
en
-------
Figure 7.17
Temperature Profile for Strategy 2 - July 25
LOADS
NO LOADS
-------
1 (
1 ' • 1 • -p
i , i i
J Figure 7.18 -L -' •_..„;-__!.
, • . i i : ' i ' i ' ! •
Temperature Profile for Strateov ? - A,,m,ci- ic ! ! !
; -j •- j ; ! , _ ", '"*'~w ^
\
' i ^~-
; 1 U- — -
, .. : . (
; ; 1 £
o j , ,-J
: . f: 1
; - ! ^- ; E
, , v. 1 , ^'
i . ^ i-/'..
!_.:... ."^ -O:.
! C\j 1 <^~
; >—
: "i
! i i-J :
' ""Z. • r
, • ' ~- ' .0
1 i ; ! ! , ; i | ! • , • i 1.U/UW
;ii ; . • ; , j - i ' • j
i ' ' ' ! ' - ' ' - ' \Tr\ T r\ A n
j i ! ( ' . ' " " i " " ; " " ""," "" ~" ' T' ---!-- - ^j(j LQ^Jj
1 ' ' ! ' ! ' ' i i 1
: ' ; • ' 1 - . ' I , , | 1 , ; ;
i i , i • ; , 1 ' i : i
; . i j • 1 . a • : ' : i • . ! H :• •• ! t ^ '
. _j ..J. i __!___ . t~ • • _. -__ . ; • _ ' : i j_ • ^_ .; • i i
! | . , CJ ^ : . j , '""";" T ]' ] ;----,- -f— -^ --- . ( -, -
: i ; "1 * 3 ' ' ' ' i " i "' i £ • " ;
! ! i . 1 ^ < '•• i f • : i . i /\ . i
1 ' : i 3 ^ ^ ! ! '"[ : i ! - \ i
i" : w • /' VS ' ' ' ' ' ! / ! \ : '
- „ . . ' , \ . !'.'!: / ' \ i i
: I.-1 iTv^x* " ~77-""i j^\r\"i"
.-'-' J .1' •/__„ _Li . ^-^n^ • ' : /^ ' ''"• ^^X^
": ~*^.~~*r i i : ; ' ~^^j ^1 ' i : ''"-^
i < ,*•"•. . ., i j ',..., ^-<^~^ i " * ~ r~
. __• ..,:!..-"_ . ./_• 1. _i.j i:: ' i ; r • r. i i J i ; i :
.-'•••:•; i ;.| ; '. •;"]-''""' --(--]— '—,—- " ;-"
i • i 01- i ' I ' i '--; ; ' i : ' - - i ' '•-• 1 i ! • i : : !
1 ' -:'•-' ! i , i ' ; > ' I : ! ~i •• * j • =
L-Li" _'. X.:.i.:_i. ._L_; M : i ; : • i ; i ' i ' ! • i
: ! iiJ : !d
' — i
i ' •-< i
! I o i
\ • < ' cc i P
I u_ i ^j
i i . ; cj
! i i '"~p"
' 9^' : '•
L-- - *_J. rx o^ - o> j
1 . i . i , ; •. .:. i i i .. ' :T" "T " ' H- ;—:— --
-1 1 -J-: ., 1 !_1J ,. ._•„.: L ' i'j 1 i ": i ' j
, i \ ! "; i i i i ••", r H- -i- -- ;- i--- [-, -- , ----- -
L '••!•! ! i i • i ; I ; ' i L i i i ' i • ! : • • 1 .
, . i i : ! 1 :!,:,.! ! "T — , -'- " , T " ~
; i - j i ; ! j - i , ,- {- ; • ! ' : ; , ,--!
i ' ' ; ' ' ; j • ' . i i .-.._- j. .
, , i__J h ; i , , L__^ • ! • ; j i , : : ;
K)
185.CO 210.00 33S.CO 2GO.OO 283.00 310.03 335.00 360.00 38S.CO 410.00 435.00
MILE PT.
-------
CD
U'l
?•• -r * -:
• ! • !
9/11. .SinniEGT 2\ (KTCEh SOX HND.S'lUfli'U
S9Z
-------
266
Strategy 3
A third strategy applied was as follows: let all power plants
discharge at their regular rates except for Stuart, Tanners Creek and
Cane Run. Stuart's discharge rate is cut to 331 of its normal discharge
rate as it was in strategy two, while Tanners Creek and Cane Run are cut
to 50% of their normal discharge rate. The results are shown in Figs. 7.20
through 7.22. The top line represents the normal situation, i.e., no
strategy, the lower solid line represents the strategy and the dotted line
represents the natural river temperature.
Several other strategies could have been tried, but were not due
to time limitations. However, it is seen that the COLHEAT model is quite
capable of being used to develop strategies for enforcement agencies.
*By regular rates are meant those advected heat rates shown in Table 7.3.
-------
o
ID
CC
UJ
cr
CJ
CJ
a;
o
in
UJ
a:
in
cc
(X
QC
LO
CM
r-
UJ
LI-
ED
ac
a_
97.
. 00
ts)
LOADS
NO LOADS
Figure 7.20
Temperature Profile for Strategy 3 - July 25
U7S.OO
500.00
525.00
550.00 575.00
MILE PT.
600.00
—I
62;;. oo
650.00
700.00
CALIFORNIA C' '/ 'JTEC; r- 'ODUCTS. INC A*iAHFJM. CAL'FQ'tNIA CHART NO 00
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
o
in
2
oc
o
in
UJ
cc
en
cc
CO
)—
o
cc
OC
en
cc
CL
99.
Figure 7.22
Tenperature Profile for Strategy 3 - September 11
LOADS
NO LOADS
txj
O
'.O
%50.00 475.00
500.00 525.00 550.00 575.00
MILE PT.
600.00
625.00
650.00
675.00
700.00
f.ALIFORNIA I 'IMPUTrn PrillUCTj. INC
CHAilT NO GO
-------
270
Section 7 References
1. State of Illinois Pollution Control Board, Water Pollution Regulations
of Illinois, July 1973. ~
2. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources,
Water Quality Criteria, July 1973.
3. State of Indiana, Revised and Promulgated Water Quality Standards
SPC 1R-3, SPC 7R-2", SPC 11517 July 1973.
4. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, Pollution Control
Standard No. 2-70.
-------
272
8. THERMAL PLUMES IN RIVERS WITH EMPHASIS ON THE OHIO RIVER
This section of the report will address the localized thermal plume
in rivers like the Ohio River. Unfortunately, the available field data on
thermal plumes for the Ohio are extremely sketchy and typically exists either
in terms of poor quality aerial infra-red data or sketchy boat temperature
measurements. None of the data received from EPA or electric utility sources
for this short study were of sufficient quality or quantity to provide any
physical insight to individual plume dispersion at any of the investigated
locations. This will be discussed in more detail below; therefore some data
from other rivers are briefly discussed to provide the insight as to how river
plumes behave in low and high river flows.
Section 8.1 discusses the basic physics of river plumes and describes
an example of three categories of thermal discharges into rivers: surface
discharge into low river flow, surface discharge into high river flow, and a
submerged diffuser discharge.
These examples from surface and submerged discharge cases are dis-
cussed to indicate the kinds of plume characteristics that can be expected
from different kinds of outfall structures. It should be kept in mind that
localized river flows and local river topography are important in the design
and performance of any discharge. Consequently, the results of the plume
studies discussed in Section 8.1 should not be blindly extrapolated to the
Ohio River but yet they will provide insight into river plume fundamentals.
Section 8.2 discusses the data available on the Ohio River both by
aerial infra-red surveys and boat measurements. The inadequacy and only
scoping nature of those surveys are reported.
Section 8.3 describes the controversy over the J. M. Stuart Power
Plant involving a three-unit discharge and the compliance with state toipera-
ture standards. Mathematical models of plume dispersion utilized by WAPORA
-------
273
and ORSANCO for the J. M. Stuart discharge are critically discussed.
8.1 Thermal Plumes in Rivers
The most common method of disposing of a heated effluent into a
river is by means of a channel or canal discharging at the water surface.
The vast majority of older plants use this type of outfall structure as
part of a once-through cooling system.
There are three important reasons for analyzing the definable
thermal plume. The first is the desire to assess and, therefore, avoid pos-
sible recirculation of heated water into the intake. The second is the
necessity to develop an appropriate design to meet mixing zone limitations
or other possible temperature standards imposed by governmental agencies.
The third is the desire to help predict biological effects relating to
changes in the physical and chemical properties of the water.
A heated effluent discharged into a river by means of a low dis-
charge velocity outfall can result in a stratified plume where little
mixing takes place. Such heated layers are usually not acceptable if they
extend over a major portion of the river width because most state and federal
river standards require a zone of free passage for migrating fish. These
heated layers can also extend upstream to the intake location and recircu-
late under low flow conditions reducing plant efficiency. A high velocity
discharge into a river current may, in certain cases, cause too much penetra-
tion and blockage of the river. Consequently, many surface discharges into
rivers are made at an angle to the river flow (typically 20-60°).
Usually the discharge in a river is located at some distance down-
stream of the intake to avoid the recirculation possibility noted above. If
no significant river current exists during parts of the year, it is wise to
locate the discharge at a higher vertical elevation than the intake to avoid
or eliminate recirculation. The use of skimmer wall intakes for run-of-the
river impoundments is often recommended.
-------
274
8.1.1 Plume Physics
A heated effluent may pass through several regimes of flow as it
is dispersed into the receiving body of water. Motivated by both physical
and biological considerations, the discharge plume is divided into two re-
gions, the near and far fields. As the name suggests, the near field is
that part of the thermal discharge closest to the actual outfall. The near
field normally possesses a significant velocity disparity with the rest of
the water body and for that reason is often called the jet regime. Corres-
pondingly, the far field is referred to as the thermal plume or simply as
the plume, although the term "plume" is also used to mean any point not at
ambient conditions. This rather confusing usage of terms is nevertheless
quite common and there is quite often slippage from one usage to the other.
The point of separation between the near and the far fields is quite
nebulous. Consequently, the intermediate field, a transition zone possess-
ing properties of both the near and far fields, is commonly discussed. The
definitions of near and far fields themselves are somewhat arbitrary, but
the generally acknowledged characteristics are:
Near Field
1. Definable thermal plume where temperature and
velocity excesses are greater than about 20%
of their outfall values.
2. Hydrodynamics of the plume are important. Par-
ticulars of the outfall structure must be con-
sidered. Characteristic nondimensional groups
are the aspect ratio, the initial densimetric
Froude number, the ratio of ambient to outfall
velocities, the bottom slope, and the ratio of
discharge depth to initial water depth.
3. Exposure time for organisms is on the order of
an hour.
-------
275
Far Field
1. Peripheral area of the plume where velocity
and temperature excesses are small.
2. Ambient conditions are predominant in determining
dilution with virtually no dependence on outfall
characteristics. Diffusion by means of ambient
turbulence is considered to be the prevailing
mechanism.
3. Exposure time for organisms is on the order of
several hours to a day.
There are five mechanisms governing dispersion, diffusion, and
dissipation of momentum and energy within a thermal plume. They are: jet
entrainment, cross flow interaction, ambient-turbulence-induced diffusion,
buoyant spreading, and surface heat exchange. These processes are shown
schematically in Fig. 8.1. Each mechanism will now be briefly defined and
discussed.
1. Jet Entrainment
Entrainment refers to the incorporation of ambient fluid into the
momentum dominated jet due to the large shear velocities between the dis-
charged and receiving water. Figure 8.2 illustrates an entraining jet,
This gathering of ambient fluid into the jet is assumed to be the principal
mechanism for mixing in the near and intermediate fields where jet momentum
dominates.
Tank studies by Ellison and Turner indicate that the rate of
vertical entrainment decreases as the densimetric Froude Number, IF, in-
creases. For densimetric Froude numbers less than about 1.2, vertical en-
trainment is negligible.
Because of the above described dependency on local densimetric
Froude number, vertical entrainment may be suppressed in certain regions of
the plume. The scenario of a typical thermal plume is shown schematically
-------
•NEAR FIELD-
-*-H-INTERMEDIATE FIELD->4«-
•FAR FIELD
DISCHARGE
SURFACE HEAT LOSS
VERTICAL
ENTRAPMENT
VERTICAL SECTION
BUOYANT FORCES INHIBIT ENTRAPMENT
PASSIVE DIFFUSION
DUE TO AMBIENT
TURBULENCE
DISCHARGE
LATERAL
ENTRAPMENT
CROSS FLOW
INTERACTION
-J
BUOYANT
SPREADING
PLUME DRIFTING
WITH AMBIENT CURRENT
PLANE VIEW
Figure 8.1: Plume Dispersion Process.
-------
277
AMBIENT VELOCITY
LATERAL
ENTRAPMENT
POSSIBLE RECIRCULATION
OF PLUME WATER
SHORE
LATERAL
ENTRAPMENT
LATERAL
ENTRAPMENT
VERTICAL
ENTRAPMENT
Figure 8.2: Entrainment of a Jet in a
River Crossflow.
-------
278
in Fig. 8.3a. At the point of discharge (indicated by "0" in the figure),
the densiraetric Froude number is larger than 1.2 and the plume will entrain
vertically. Rapid mixing causes the densimetric Froude number to decrease
until (at position x-. in the figure) vertical entrainment effectively ceases.
The stabilizing effects of buoyancy limit mixing to lateral entrainment
alone, hence the densijnetric Froude number will level off and may actually
begin increasing. If the densimetric Froude number again becomes great
enough, vertical entrainment will resume (position ^ in the figure),
Vertical entrainment may also be limited by interaction with the
bottom of the river. This is a common occurrence for discharges into shal-
low water. Figure 8.3b illustrates such effects indicating that vertical
mixing is suppressed in the region where the plume is attached to the bottom.
2. Cross Flow Interaction and Advection
In the presence of an ambient cross current, the jet will bend in
the downcurrent direction. Such bending is the result of a pressure gradient
across the jet produced by the complex interaction of jet and ambient fluid.
There are additional ways that cross flow may affect jet behavior.
Jet bending can adversely affect mixing by limiting entrainment on the lee
side of the jet by partially isolating it from free ambient water. Cutoff
of the lee side from ambient water can lead to the recirculation of partly
diluted plume water as illustrated in Fig. 8.2. This is especially the
case for river plumes under the influence of large river currents during
high flow. Also, jets in the presence of a cross flow will generally ex-
hibit asymmetric velocity and temperature profiles. Cross flow interaction
may prevent the jet from becoming fully developed, thereby complicating both
the modeling and experimental analysis of jet hydrodynamics.
-------
279
0
UlF > 1.2—
-IF 1.2-
VERTICAL
ENTRAPMENT
377/777777.
BUOYANCY INHIBITS VERTICAL
ENTRAPMENT
BOTTOM
VERTICAL
ENTRAPMENT
RESUMES
A. EFFECTS OF BUOYANCY ON VERTICAL ENTRAPMENT
0
xl
DISCHARGE
SURFACE
PLUME
ATTACHED
TO BOTTOM
B. EFFECTS OF BOTTOM ON VERTICAL ENTRAPMENT
Figure 8.3: Schematic View of Entrainment
Process with the Effects of
Buoyancy and Bottom.
-------
280
3. Ambient-Turbulence-Induced Diffusion
Ambient turbulence refers to the turbulence which exists in all
natural bodies of water. The genesis of this turbulence in rivers is nor-
mally attributed to bottom friction as the river water flows downcurrent and
to wind stress at the water surface. Groins or bends in the river usually
generate additional turbulence which aids in plume mixing. For large river
flows and ambient currents, this bottom generated turbulence is thought to
play a major role in plume dispersion. Ambient turbulence is, in general,
more significant in river plume dispersion than in lake plume dispersion.
The effects of winds is less in rivers than in lakes due to the much shorter
fetch.
4. Buoyant Spreading
Buoyant forces develop due to the density disparity between discharged
and receiving water and due to the variable density within the jet. These
forces increase horizontal spreading and, as noted earlier, may inhibit verti-
cal entrainment. The importance of buoyancy is measured by the densimetric
Froude number discussed earlier. Depending on heat loss and mixing parameters,
the discharged fluid may enter a regime of stratified flow where buoyant forces
are dominant.
5. Surface Heat Loss
There is a continual heat exchange between water surface and the at-
mosphere through conduction, radiation, and evaporation as is discussed in
Section 5. At a specific water surface temperature, T , known as the equil-
C
ibrium temperature there is no net exchange of heat with the atmosphere. The
temperature of a natural body of water continually approaches equilibrium,
but seldom reaches it because of the time needed to exchange large amounts
of heat with the atmosphere. Consequently, the ambient temperature is lower
-------
281
than equilibrium during spring heating and higher than equilibrium during
fall cooling. During winter and summer months the ambient temperature is
very close to equilibrium. Normally, however, condenser cooling water will
be at a temperature greater than equilibrium and net heat loss from the plume
surface will result. Since temperature excesses in the plume are generally
small, the rate of surface heat loss is often assumed to be proportional to
the difference between the plume temperature and the equilibrium temperature.
Most treatments of surface heat exchange use the ambient water surface tem-
perature, T , as the equilibrium value even though T - T may be quite dif-
ferent from T - T at certain times of the year.
3.
For typical values of the surface heat exchange parameter, K, the
amount of heat transfer in the measurable plume by this mechanism is small.
Unless surface areas are large, surface heat loss has minimal effect on plume
temperatures. It is generally thought that only negligible heat is lost to
the atmosphere of a thermal plume before it disperses to a fully mixed con-
dition laterally and vertically in the river.
Of the five processes only this one, surface heat exchange, involves
actual removal of heat from the ambient surface. The other four are merely
ways in which the excess heat is mixed into and moved around the water body.
In the regions of greatest interest, the near and intermediate fields, only
a few percent of the excess heat is lost to the atmosphere through surface
heat exchange. Consequently, the four processes of plume dilution are those
of significant importance in modeling these fields.
8.1.2 Some General River Plume Characteristics
There are indeed complex interactions among the various factors that
influence the shape of a thermal plume in a river. The primary consideration
is whether the thermal plume will tend to be dispersed across the entire width
of the river or whether it will hug the shoreline for considerable distances
-------
282
downstream. Each may be considered biologically unsatisfactory for differ-
ent reasons, the first in terms of possibly interfering with fish migrations
and the second in terms of potential damage to aquatic feeding grounds or
spawning areas along the generally shallow shoreline affected by the plume.
Edinger, Brady, and Geyer discuss the tendency for the plume to
traverse the river to the opposite shore in terms of four major factors:
(a) the lateral component of the discharge momentum,
(b) the buoyancy of the heated discharge,
(c) the lateral diffusion rate of the ambient river
water, and
(d) the offshore component of the wind.
The authors note that it is difficult to quantify the relative ijnportance of
these factors in relation to the tendency of the ambient river current to
sweep the plume directly down the shoreline due to the high variability of
meteorological, hydrological, and plant operating conditions.
On the basis of limited analyses of field data of plumes in rivers
2
of low flow, Edinger, et_ al_., make some generalizations. If the river flow
is low and winds are absent, the buoyancy of the heated discharge is usually
sufficient to cause the plume to spread to the other si.de of the river in a
relatively thin surface layer within several river widths downstream. Tur-
bulent eddies generated by bottom friction then cause a slow erosion of the
plume-ambient interface as the plume moves further downcurrent. This con-
tinues until the heated effluent becomes fully-mixed with the river flow.
This fully-mixed condition is usually reached before a significant fraction
7
of heat is transferred to the atmosphere by surface heat transfer.
An example of this lateral spreading effect under low flow river
conditions is given in Figs. 8.4 and 8.5 which appear in a paper by Stefan
and Skoglund.3 The isotherms plotted are for the Allen S. King Plant on a
tributary of the Mississippi River (called Lake St. Croix). Plant and en-
-------
400
0
1000
283
DISTANCE (FT)
2000
3000
4000
Figure 8.4: Water Temperature Stratification in
Lake St. Croix near Cooling Water Outfall of
the A. S. King Plant on September 4, 1970.
Vertical Section along Axis of Discharge
Channel. Temperatures in °F.3
COOLING WATER
DISCHARGE CANAL
Figure 8.5: Isotherms at 3 inch depth in Lake St. Croix
near Cooling Water Outfall of the A. S. King
Plant on June 12, 1970. Wind from S.E.
14 mph.3
-------
284
vironmental conditions for these two surveys are given in Table 8.1. The
A. S. King discharge is through an open channel normal to the shore. Flow
from this outfall is at a low densimetric Froude number which explains the
strong temperature stratification from the surface to about a 10 ft depth
with its inhibiting effect on turbulent mixing (Fig. 8.4). Figure 8.5 shows
for a separate survey that the spread of the plume and wind effects can be
significant.
An important physical phenomenon can occur for river discharges of
very low initial densimetric Froude number. (Discharges of low initial den-
simetric Froude number are principly found with older plants. More recent
discharge designs are mostly of the high initial densimetric Froude number
type.) When the discharge densimetric Froude is very low, a stagnant wedge
may be formed. Rather than the plume being swept downstream by the river
flow, it may float over the river flow and gradually work its way upstream
toward the intake. If the plume reaches the intake, recirculation can be a
problem. Obviously, this situation can occur only for rivers with a low flow.
The length of the upstream wedge as well as the interfacial profile can be
predicted by the stagnant wedge models. Some experimental verification of
these models has been done by Polk, et^ al., who presented field data from
four southeastern plants. Refinements to the models have been proposed to
account for downstream advection of heat plus loss due to surface cooling
of the warm water wedge.
As the flow rate in a river is increased, the stronger vertical
turbulent eddies will eventually impose enough dilution on the early stages
of the buoyant plume to inhibit significant lateral progress to the far shore
2
boundary. The process of lateral diffusion is ever present yet is a re-
latively slow mechanism for lateral spreading. The plume in such larger
current cases becomes somewhat more diluted and vertically mixed; it will
-------
285
Table 8.1: Plant Discharge, River, and Weather
Conditions _
for Allen S. King Power Station
Date of Survey September 4, 1970 June 12, 1970
Cooling Water Flow Rate, 0 614 cfs 639 cfs
River Flow Rate, QR . 1707 cfs 3784 cfs
Q/QR 0.36 0.169
Average River Velocity 0.06 fps 0.06 fps
Outfall Temperature 88.4 °F 90.8 °F
Ambient Temperature 74.7°F 79.3°F
Wet Bulb Temperature 62.0 °F 66.0 °F
Dry Bulb Temperature 87.2 °F 81.2 °F
Wind Speed 4.2 mph 14 mph
Cloud Cover 10 I 100 %
-------
286
also tend to follow the shoreline for much greater distances. It is expected
that the plume will become dispersed across the full width of the river be-
7
fore much heat has been lost by surface heat transfer.
An example of this case is the Monticello Plant (near Minneapolis -
St. Paul) on the Mississippi River seen in Figs. 8.6 and 8.7 (Ref. 3). The
outfall here is an open surface channel nearly parallel to the river. Table
8.2 summarizes the basic characteristics of that survey date (July 1, 1971)
of Figs. 8.6 and 8.7. In contrast to the A. S. King case, there is a very
persistent transverse temperature stratification that develops. Stefan and
Skoglund note that a stratification in the horizontal direction does not in-
hibit turbulent mixing of the plume and ambient water to the same extent that
vertical stratification does. Therefore, the surface temperature decay at
the low flow A. S. King site is slower than at the high river flow case of
Monticello. Figure 8.8 shows how the plume surface areas, AS, vary as
Q /QR decrease. Note that for each case, the excess temperature should ap-
proach Q /QR for that date. Stefan and Skoglund were able to eliminate
Q /QR as an independent parameter by using the non-dimensional ization that
appears in Fig. 8.9. A good data fit (after the data of Fig. 8.9 were re-
plotted) was the function
AU
s
< 400
J
A U \- 0,17
ASU
— - 400
-------
287
DISTANCE (FT)
200 400
X=2000 FT
O O O
X=4500 FT
X= 17,450 FT
Figure 8.6: Water Temperature Distribution in
Mississippi River downstream of Monticello
on July 1, 1971. River cross sections at
different distances X from the outfall.3
80o\^^ 77°
ISCHARGE CHANNEL 79°
PLANT
Figure 8.7: Isotherms at Surface of Mississippi River
downstream of Monticello on July 1, 1971.3
-------
Table 8.2. Plant Discharge, River, and Weather Characteristics
for Monticello Site^
Date of
Survey
6-22-71
7-01-71
8-02-71
9-20-71
11-09-71
cfs
555
565
529
633
208
cfs
4224
6234
2048
1215
18656
V*
.131
.091
.258
.521
.011
U
ft/sec
2.11
3.25
1.74
1.01
6.43
To
op
90
87
80.5
74.2
57
Tc
76
73.3
66.8
61
33
Wet
Bulb
Temp.
°F
67
63.6
60
59
44
Dry
Bulb
Temp.
op
80
73.6
66
68
47
Wind
mph
10.3
8
8
6.5
7-10
Cloud
Cover
13
50
85
48
0
K)
00
00
Q = cooling water flow rate; Q^ = river flow; U = average river velocity; T = discharge temperature;
T = ambient (cold) temperature.
w
-------
289
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
DATE
D 9-20-71
• 8-2-71
-22-71
-1-71
-9-71
I I I
Op/Op
.521
.258 -
.131
.091
.on -
j L
I I I
I I I
i i
io2
Figure 8.8:
10'
ASU/Qp
Relative Surface Temperature Increment
versus Surface Area-Velocity-Discharge
Parameter, Downstream of Mmticello.3
0. CC.
O 10
— IC\J
I
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.1 cr
O O
—icvj 0.4
0.2
0
l i — i — i — i — TTI — i — i — rri — i
DATE
D 9-20-
1 1 1
QP/QR _
71 .521
— • 8-2-71 .258 —
A 6-22-71 .131
n 0 7-1-71 .091
~~ g • 11-9-71 .Oil —
o
A *
~~ A
1 1 J 1 l ill i
—
—
l l l
10'
10'
ASU/Qp
10'
Figure 8.9: Reduced Relative Surface Temperature Incre-
ment versus Surface Area-Velocity Discharge
Parameter, Downstream of Nfonticello.3
-------
290
where T is the surface temperature.
The data also show consistently larger areas for the A. S. King site
than for Monticello. The relative river flows were indeed the major cause yet
it must be understood that areas depend on a number of parameters including
the cooling water flow rate, average river flow velocity, outfall geometry,
densimetric Froude number of the discharge and surface heat loss (only at in-
creasing distances from the outfall).
An increasing number of plants on rivers are using submerged dif-
fusers, single and multi-port. For example, there is the Quad Cities Plant
on the Mississippi River using once-through cooling and the Susquehanna Plant
using the Susquehanna River for blowdown. Submerging the discharge permits
more ambient entrainment water to mix with the effluent than if it were dis-
charged at the surface. Strict state and federal temperature standards im-
posed in recent years have made submerged discharges much more attactive.
Typical of these submerged discharges is the relatively shallow nature of
river systems (compared to large lakes and coastal waters), and the low buoy-
ancy of the thermal diffuser discharge as compared to sewage diffusers.
An example of the use of a single port discharge to rapidly dissip-
ate the excess heat from a plant sited on a river is the case of the Baxter
Wilson Steam Electric Station located on the Mississippi River near Vicksburg.
The Plant is a 500 MWe unit with an average cooling water flow of 412 cfs with
an average excess temperature at discharge of 25°F. The condenser cooling
water is discharged through an underwater discharge pipe, eight feet in dia-
meter which extends approximately 100 feet from the low water level shoreline.
The field data were collected on this discharge for a period of 15 months
from June 1969 to August 1970. Of particular interest were plumes taken in
August and September since those months were considered critical for the
thermal discharge due to the combination of high river temperatures and low
-------
291
river flow. Figure 8.10 sketches the location of boat measuring stations in
the river. The stations in the direction of river flow are spaced 20 feet
apart. Temperature measurements were taken at each grid point at depths of
1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 feet. Tables 8.3 and 8.4 provide plant and river data
for the 17 surveys made and Table 8.5 summarizes the main results in terms of
maximum length, L, maximum width, W, and area of the 4 and 5°F surface iso-
therms. Figures S.lla and 8.lib plot some horizontal and vertical isotherms
for the survey date of August 9, 1970. The measurements tended to show
(a) The heated effluent remained close to the shore
and within 300 feet from the shore.
(b) High dilution factors and high ambient river
turbulence caused a rapid drop in temperature
downstream of the outfall. The excess tem-
perature rise of 2°F was typically at a distance
of only 200 feet downcurrent of the outfall.
(c) High temperature rises (greater than 5°F above
ambient) were confined to a very small region
immediately above the outfall.
(d) Only 6.5% of the river cross section was affected
by the plume.
Of special importance was the application of Mississippi stream tem-
perature standards to the plant surveys. The requirements were that the tem-^
perature "... shall not be increased more than 109F above natural temperature
nor exceed 93°F after reasonable mixing."* During the 17 surveys the 10°F
rise criteria was exceeded only on February 6, 1970 with a 14.5°F temperature
rise at a 20 foot depth location immediately above the outfall. The maxijnum
»
temperature criteria of 93°F was exceeded only on August 9, 1970 when a 95.4°F
temperature was observed; the 95°F contour covered an area of 15 feet by 10
feet immediately above the outfall. Rapid temperature decays were observed
on those two dates as with the other 15 surveys.
The Additional dilution water available to the submerged discharge
is the reason for the very high dilutions in this case as compared to typi-
* These standards have since been revised.
-------
292
N2 + 80
WI + 00
NO+ 00
WI+00
N2 + 80
WI + 80
DISCHARGE LINE
200
220
240
260
280
300
REFERENCE LINE
NO+ 00
WI + 80
NO+ 00
W2+00
RIVER FLOW
123456789 10
12
Figure 8.10: Location of Sampling Stations for
Temperature Measurements.5
-------
293
Operational IJata for Baxter Wilson Steam Llectric
Generatuig Station5
Mississippi River Eteta Near Vicksburg, Mississippi
for Survey Dates (Including \ir Tempor.jrurf"-)1*
NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
'10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
susvn
DATi
H/2S/69
HJ/16/«.9
12/11/69
12/23/69
2/6/70
3/0/70
3/28/70
6/5/70
6/12/70
6/20/70
7/2/70
7/18/70
7/25/70
8/2/70
8/9/70
8/14/70
8/21/70
PLANT
I.OAD
(MO
477
500
530
500
552
486
467
S40
503
484
503
503
461
S26
471
515
486
COOLING
HATER
(GPMxlO ^)
183
182
175
173
155
191
196
208
194
194
198
184
180
177
181
187
189
COOLING WATER
TEM>ERATURE, °F
IN
76
69
45
44
41
47
SO
75
76
79
81
83
81
86
86
83
83
ot rr
100
93
70
69
69
69
70
98
98
100
103
108
104
113
110
108
107
HEAT
ADDED
(BTtl/Hte![l"6)
2070
2160
2240
2165
21 bO
2092
1950
2348
2140
2060
2140
2230
2000
2320
2050
2270
2110
NO
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
OKIE
9/28/69
10/16/69
12/11/69
12/23/69
2/6/70
3/6/70
3/28/70
6/5/70
6/12/70
6/20/70
7/2/70
7/18/70
7/25/70
8/2/70
8/S/70
8/14/70
8/21/70
STAG
FT.
9 8
6 2
9.8
10.9
12.1
23 0
21 5
26.3
26.0
26 0
23 9
10.1
8.4
6.9
8.6
11.7
13.1
DISQ1ARQ
CFSxlO~'
306
248
328
370
442
647
700
688
705
681
615
320
302
262
312
375
406
WRII.YI
mrp
"I
^(1
1]')
44
42
39
46
49
"4
75
79
81
83
81
85
86
83
83
MR "n^n1
"i (i
'.(>. s
18.3
49.-!
45.5
sn 5
59 1
74.0
88.5
85.0
86 2
87.5
82.1
86.-
82.7
92.0
87.0
Simmary of Observed Temwratures
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Date
9/28/69
10/16/69
12/11/69
12/23/69
2/06/70
3/06/70
3/28/70
6/05/70
6/12/70
6/20/70
7/02/70
7/18/70
7/25/70
8/02/70
8/09/70
8/14/70
8/21/70
Ifex. Tem>.
"F Depth Rise
82.0 1 6.0
, 77.75 1 8.75
51.50 1 7.50
51.00 1 9.00
53.50 20 14.50
48.75 25 2.75
51.25 25 2.25
79.0 25 5.00
79.50 25 5.50
82.24 25 3.24
85.50 25 4. SO
91.00 5 8.00
88.00 10 7.00
93.50 1 8.50
95.40 1 9.40
90.00 10 7.00
93.0 5 10.0
Max.
Down-Str.
Tem>.
T Stat.
76 10
71 12
47 12
45 12
39 10
46 12
49 12
74 10
75 10
80 12
82 12
84 12
82 12
87 12
87 12
86 12
85 12
Ambient
River
°F
76 •
69
44
42
39
46
49
74
75
79
81
83
81
85
86
83
83
4°F Rise Isotherm 5°F Rise Isotherm
I.
W
Ft. | Ft.
72 1 48
108
182
160
62
IS
26
23
27
121
58
122
108
172
104
92
108
A (4°
Rjse)
2301
8832
11600
86 8800
32 1344
8 I 75
12
7
11
93
44
93
200
124
211
7100
1804
8285
108 | 6083
54
37
4541
Center
Down
River
82
96
140
130
80
164
68
80
76
112
86
110
103
138
2800 i 103
From
Shore
66
58
63
58
61
83
60
62
63
60
62
78
63
58
57
L
-Ft.
W
Ft.
44 37
86
86
120 72
A (5°
Rise)
1008
5411
6046
133 | 65 5424
57 ! 29 ; 1095
6
78
S3
78
70
100
43
4 19
44 ', 2102
35 1244
70 4404
70 3334
24
26
1518
709
Center
Cown
River
74
88
us
us
79
164
91
Prom
Shore
68
70
68
63
62
83
68
84 ,60
94
72
90 58
103
58
72 60
L - Mutunm Length of Bounding Isotherm
W - Muumin Width of Bomding Isotherm
A • Plmiwteivd Area of Bomding Isotherm
Center Distances Measured Relative to Grid Origin
-------
294
8887 86
m,\
5 220
12 II
10 9 87 6 5 43
STATION NOS. DOWN RIVER AT 20 FT. INTERVALS
TEMPERATURE CONTOURS AT I FT. DEPTH 8/9/70
1 220
12
10 9876543
STATION NOS. DOWN RIVER AT 20 FT. INTERVALS
TEMPERATURE CONTOURS AT 5 FT. DEPTH 8/9/70
Figure 8.1la: Temperature Contours.5
-------
220 240 260 280
DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT ON LEFT BANK
TEMPERATURE PROFILES - STATION 4 8/9/70
300
CO
or
UJ
CD
QL.
UJ
o
220 240 260 280
DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT ON LEFT BANK
TEMPERATURE PROFILES - STATION 12 8/9/70
300
F-'igure 8. lib: Temperature Profiles5
-------
296
cal onshore surface discharges. Tremendous flow in the Mississippi, even
under low flow conditions, caused the very rapid reduction in plume tempera-
ture and produced thorough mixing in a small portion of the river. Temper-
atures decreased rapidly both laterally across the river and in the downstream
direction. Unfortunately, not all rivers are as deep or have the large flows
that the Mississippi has.
8.1.3 Time-Temperature History in a Thermal Plume
Of particular importance in any analysis of thermal plumes is the
length of time organisms spend in the plume. Of interest is the path and
temperatures along that path of plankton passing through the intake, then
through the discharge, and finably downcurrent in the river. Of importance
also is the time-temperature history of phytoplankton or zooplankton entrained
into the discharge plume from the ambient river water. Stefan and Skoglund
have analyzed their Monticello plant data in terms of such histories. Their
approach can be followed with data on other sites and other rivers also.
First they calculated the fraction of cross sectional area, for each distance
downstream, of excess temperature ration (Tg - TC)/(TQ - TC). This is plot-
ted for the high current date of November 9, 1971 and the lower current date
of September 20, 1971 in Fig. 8.12. The decreased lateral spreading of the
shore-bound plume for the high current date is clearly visible in the top
sketch in Fig. 8.12. Temperatures are related to longitudinal distances and
lateral cross-sectional areas by assuming (as no plume velocities were mea-
sured) that organisms traveling in the plume are moving at the speed of the
ambient current. Since the average river velocity for the November 9 and
September 20 dates are about 1 ft/sec and 6.4 ft/sec, respectively, the re-
sidence times for the same river reach will differ by a factor of about 1 to
6. Consequently, for 17,000 ft say, the residence times are 208 and 40.5
-------
(TS-TC)/(TO-TC) = .04
-.45 TO .20
4 6 8 10 12 13
DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM (I03 FT)
Figure 8.12:
DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM (10° FT)
Fraction of Mississippi River Cross-Sectional
Area Encompassed by Indicated Relative Water
Temperature Increments Downstream of Monti-
cello on November 9, 1971, Qp/QR = 0.011
(top) and on September 20, 1971,
= 0,521 (bottom).3
-------
298
minutes for those low and high flow situations, respectively. These differ-
ences can be observed by comparing graphs like Fig. 8.13 for each date for
MDnticello. For any given time of travel, the figure reveals the temperatures
observed at the cross section the organism is located as well as the area of
such isotherms. Figure 8.14 plots the time-temperature history of organisms
swept past the plant on three dates at Nbnticello. Only the warmest possible
path is assumed taken by these organisms. Note that the amplitude of the tem-
perature shock is quite small and the exposure time in the plume is also quite
short. The higher current appears to reduce the temperature amplitude faster.
A larger temperature increase is encountered by organisms entrained into the
intake and passed through the condensers. The above curves and discussion
were meant only to provide some physical insight into the duration of exposure
to temperatures of organisms in the ambient water and to indicate what can be
calculated for biological interpretation from good thermal plume measurements.
Velocity measurements in the plume would have sharpened the accuracy of the
travel times.
8.1.4 Dynamic Nature of Thermal Plumes
It is important to note that thermal plume temperatures from river
plants are not constant with time. First, the stream temperatures themselves
vary with diurnal and seasonal changes in addition to certain weather-induced
random fluctuations. These variations over a time period of a day can typi-
cally change on the order of 2-3C°. These variations directly affect the
plume temperatures by approximately that amount.
A second type of transient effect exists. This involves the often
rapid internal variations within the thermal plume itself which have been
noticed even when the initial discharge and receiving body are relatively
steady. Data taken6 at the Piacenza Plant on the Po River in Italy indicate
-------
299
60
120
TIME (MINUTES)
ISO
Figure 8.13: Temperature-Area-Time Diagram for
Nfcnticello, September 20, 1971.3
oc
LiJ
Q_
-60
0
Figure 8.14:
60
TIME (MINUTES)
120
180
Maximum Water Temperatures Encountered by
Plankton in Mississippi River Moving past
the Cooling Water Outfall of the MDnticello
Plant on Three Different Dates.3
-------
300
that a 1-3°C variation in temperature over a 60 second period is quite typi-
cal in the higher temperature mixing regions of river plumes, at a fixed loca-
tion. These fluctuations decrease in magnitude as the plume temperatures
approach ambient.
Another cause of fluctuating plume temperatures, over a larger time
scale, however, is the response of thermal plumes to variations in plant load
on an hourly or even shorter time scale as reflected in the differences in
cooling water flow rate and effluent temperature.
A fourth cause of plume temperature fluctuations is the effect of
the wind which may cause the plume to meander with significant spatial changes
in plume location. These flucatuations are probably significant, however,
only under the lower river currents and higher winds. Such wind effects are
most pronounced with lake plumes or plumes in run-of-river impoundments.
Stefan and Skoglund suggest a fifth cause of temperature fluctuations.
When the river temperature reaches 4°C or less, the heated plume will tend to
sink as it cools to 4°C, the maximum density of water. This sinking plume
phenomenon in winter is sensitive to seasonal and random weather changes at
the initial location of sinking as well as the variations (of the order of 4C°)
in the temperatures near the river bottom in the vicinity of the outfall.
Those temperature variations in the sinking plume itself can occur within very
short time periods.
The small scale temperature fluctuations described above all affect
the river organisms in terms of metabolic rates, reproduction, death, etc.,
and consequently should not be ignored in any biological assessment of the
impact of a power plant on a river.
8.1.5 Effect of Channel Curvature on Dispersion of Plumes
As a general rule, the winding nature of a river reach will add to
the turbulent mixing and act as an aid to plume dispersion. Edinger, Brady,
-------
301
2
and Geyer describe the complicating effect of upstream channel curvature in
relation to the E. D. Edwards Power Station on the Illinois River (see Fig.
8.15). A preliminary analysis of field data from the site indicated greater
plume dilution than would be expected had the river been straight with the
same hydraulic characteristics. As a result, the test sections for field
data acquisition had to be moved closer to the outfall. Also, the plant is
small compared to the river size indicating a plume which is not enlarged by
re-entrainment effects caused by .the far bank. The authors explained the
smaller plume as due mainly to the fact that the direction of the turbulent
vorticity (rolling eddies) associated with bottom friction in the upstream
flow tends to be conserved around the bend in the river channel so that at
the discharge cross section, the eddies appear to act strongly in the lateral
direction increasing the plume's initial lateral spreading. The direction of
these rolling eddies is sketched in Fig. 8.15. It is suspected that this
phenomenon lasts only a relatively short distance downstream of the bend until
these dominant eddies are transformed into a new flow alignment by the river
bottom friction. The authors suggest that this added lateral mixing phenomenon
may be used effectively in the siting of discharges on the outside downstream
corner of river bends to take advantage of this three-dimensional phenomenon.
An important feature in far-field plume dispersion is the transverse
mixing of the plume with ambient river water. A recent report by Holley ana-
lyzes mixing in the far field of such a river plume. Transverse diffusion
coefficients were determined from dye and temperature tracer studies in the
IJssel and Waal Rivers of the Netherlands. Holley found that the nonbuoyant
aspect of transverse spreading in a river can result from two different mech-
anisms, diffusion and advection. The magnitude of the diffusion coefficient
can be influenced by at least three different factors: (a) turbulence due
to bo11""! shear, (b) turbulence due to the distrubance caused by structures
-------
302
0 200 400
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.15: Sketch of Edwards Plant Site on Illinois
River Showing Effect of Channel Curvature.2
-------
303
such as groins, and (c) secondary motions, particularly those associated with
channel bends. The net diffusion coefficient can vary with the local depth
and velocity and/or with position in the river cross section. Advection can
also cause transverse spreading. Advective motion typically arises from
changes in the geometry of the channel with longitudinal distance. These
changes in depth and width can produce net transverse velocities which in turn
cause plume spreading of the same order of magnitude as that due to diffusion!
By the change of moments method, Hblley calculates diffusion coefficients
accounting for all these factors.
8.1.6 Near and Farshore Boundary Effects and the Fully-Mixed Condition
Some effects of the near and far shore boundaries on plume disper-
o
sion in a river have been discussed by Edinger. Edinger first notes that
an effect of the near and far shore boundaries of a river is to contain the
released heat as it reaches the fully-mixed condition. It is generally thought
that the fully-mixed state is reached before surface heqt dissipation becomes
effective. Compared to the unbounded situation of a thermal discharge into
a large lake or coastal region, the centerline temperature decreases more
slowly with distance in a river due to the greater lateral mixing that takes
place for the unbounded case. Also, centerline temperatures for the unbounded
case approach a zero temperature rise while for a river, these temperatures
approach the fully-mixed temperature excess. As alluded to above, tempera-
ture rises should decrease laterally less rapidly for a river than for the
unbounded case. Consequently, the lake or coastal plume should be relatively
snorter but wider; the effects of the river boundaries is to confine the plume
laterally but stretch it out longitudinally.
A more subtle aspect of the thermal plume from a river plant is that
it can cause a discrepancy between the theoretical and observed fully-mixed
temperature of that discharge on the stream.
-------
304
The concept of fully-mixed excess temperature, em, is generally
used in one -dimensional analyses of heat dissipation from multiple sources
on a river. Each thermal discharge in these analyses is assumed to be fully-
mixed with the available river water passing the station. The thermal plume
itself is ignored as well as the distance to which the plume becomes fully-
mized with the ambient river water. In short, these stream analyses and
mathematical models of water quality assume each heated discharge mixes freely
with the river at the point of discharge. That fully-mixed temperature is
defined:
Here H is the heat rejection rate of the plant and Qr is the river flow
rate. This can be written:
= _V [££<) (8.2)
P
where r is the heat rejection rate per unit megawatt plant electrical pro-
duction. The computation of further downstream heat decay depends on the
accuracy of the above formulas in describing e .
Edinger, Brady, and Geyer attempted to evaluate that assumption
by collecting data at a number of sites. The data are presented for three
plants in Fig. 8.16. Equation (8.2) gives a linear relationship between 6^
is seen in the figure. It is seen, however, that the data for em
j.
only approaches the theoretical 9 as an upper limit. The authors ascribe
the lower fully mixed temperatures determined in the field to many factors
including:
(1) The heat storage and heat loss to the atmosphere within the
thermal plume itself before complete mixing is attained,
-------
305
LEGEND
PLANT WITH r = 4.2x10
PLANT WITH r = 2.3 x I06
PLANT WITH r = 2.0x10
_ HEAT REJECTED (MW)
ELEC. PRODUCTION (MW)
I I I I 1
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20
PLANT LOADING PER UNIT RIVER FLOW, Hp/Qr (MWs/m3)
Figure 8.16: Comparison of Fully Mixed Excess Tempera-
tures and Computed Plant Loading per unit
River Flow for Three Plants.2
-------
306
(2) The short term variations in river flow and plant loading
that are not accounted for,
(3) The difficulty in measuring in the field small temperature
increases at low plant loadings or high river flows,
(4) Dilution water that is unaccounted for which may enter from
the ground or surface sources downstream of the point of
discharge.
Due to all these probable reasons, the fully-mixed excess tempera-
ture as computed from plant and river conditions is a fiction which is sel-
dom attained in the field yet may be approached usually as an upper limit.
Using the theoretical fully-mixed temperature for those one-dimensional heat
dissipation models will underestimate the temperatures of the thermal plumes
and will overestimate, to a varying degree, the temperatures in the down cur-
rent fully-mixed portion of the heated discharge.
8.2 Thermal Plumes on the Ohio River
As stated in the introduction to Chapter 8, the plume temperature
data available for the Ohio River is either of a general scoping nature
(two poor quality infra-red surveys) or of a sketchy nature (sparsely spaced
boat measurements) intended to provide information on thermal plume mixing
zones and possible temperature standards violations. Particularly lacking
for the boat measurements were plant operating conditions and ambient river
currents; although superfluous for ascertaining standards violations, that
additional data is most necessary for a physical and analytical interpreta-
tion of the plumes. Consequently, neither set of data noted above and avail-
able in the literature can give any real insight into plume behavior on the
Ohio River.
There is, however, reasonably good data, though proprietary, on the
Philip Sporn Plant encompassing fourteen detailed temperature surveys. Two
of these surveys have been published and one of them will be discussed in
Section 8.2.2.
-------
307
8.2.1 Boat Msasurements Taken for Temperature Standards Compliance
Among the boat surveys done on the Ohio River are the series en-
9-13
titled, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report," done by Reising, King,
and Kramer of the EPA Indiana Office. Those surveys were done in four days
in August 1973. The purpose of the studies was to monitor the Culley, ALCOA,
Ohio River, Gallagher, Tanner's Creek, and Clifty Creek Power Plants on the
Ohio River for possible state and federal temperature standards violations.
All these plants are on the Indiana side of the Ohio River facing Kentucky
on the opposite shore.
The Indiana-Kentucky Water Quality Standards fail to adequately de-
fine the boundaries of a 5°F mixing zone. The Indiana water quality stand-
ards suggest that an unspecified mixing zone "should be limited to no more
than 1/4 of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of flow of the stream,
leaving at least 3/4 free as a zone of passage for aquatic biota nor should
it extend over 1/2 of the width of the stream." The Kentucky standards also
provide for zone of passage for fish and drift organisms yet do not specify
its dimensions. Indiana requires that the maximum temperature limit for
the main stem of the Ohio River determined on a monthly basis not be ex-
ceeded. The monthly maximum for August is 89 °F.
In these surveys, temperature measurements were made at four cross
sections of the river, one upstream of the discharge for ambient conditions
and three downstream to check for violations. Water temperatures were mea-
sured by a YSI Model 54 Oxygen Meter equipped with a 50-foot probe. Ryan
Model F thermographs were used to continuously monitor temperature fluctua-
tions. Intake velocities and chlorine residual at the discharge were also
measured in these studies.
The data and a brief discussion appears in Tables 8.6-8.10 -'ind
Figs. 8.17-8.21. The data are not in sufficient detail to be able to as-
-------
308
Table 8.6a. Survey of Culley Generating Station,
Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company93
Location: near Newburgh, Indiana, Mile Point 773.4
Generating Capacity: 385 Mfe
Date of Survey: August 9, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 120.',6 MGD
River Flow Data: The 7 day, 10 year low flow is 14,300 cfs and the flow at
the time o.~ the survey was 30,500 cfs. The study was con- j
ducted under normal suimer flow conditions.
Ambient Temperature: 82.4°F I
Outfall Temperature: 94.1°F
River Cross Sections Kfonitored: '- j
(A) 900 feet upstream (L, 1/5, 3/5, R)* from surface to j
5 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(B) point of discharge (L, 1/5, 3/5, R) from surface to
5 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(C) 0.4 mile downstream (L, 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, R) from surface
to 4 m depth at 1 m intervals. The ALCOA cooling water intake is
located here,
(A1) point of discharge for ALCOA Plant, (L, 1/4, 1/2,
3/4, R) from surface to S m depth at 1 m intervals,
(B1) 4,500 feet downstream of ALOCA discharge (L, 1/5,
1/4, 2/5 (island)) from surface to 6 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(C1) 2.9 miles downstream of ALCOA discharge (L, 1/3, 2/3,
R) from surface to 6 m depth at 1 m intervals.
Results:
(1) The heated plume from the Culley Station spread across
about 1/4 of the river width at 0.4 mile downstream where it inter-
sected the cooling water intake of the ALCOA Power Plant. The
maximum temperature at ALCOA'S cooling water intake was 87.8°F
with a AT of 5.4 °F.
(2) The heated discharge from the Culley Station does not
reach ambient temperature before it is recirculated through the
ALCOA,. Power Plant.
(3) Maxima temperature rises of 5.4°F were measured at
Sections C and C' downstream of both the Culley and ALCOA Power
Plants.
(4) Both plants discharge their heated effluents into the
Ohio River within 3,500 feet of each other. The discharges are
then influences by an island which restricts the mixing of the
heated water with the cooler river water and in effect channels
the heated water along the near shore bank of the Ohio River for
over 3 miles downstream.
(5) Temperature fluctuations were measured by two Ryan
thermographs installed in the Ohio River over an eight day
period. The first thermograph. A', was located at the right
side of the river directly across from the Culley water intake
to measure ambient temperature. The second thermograph, B1, was
located at approximately 3,500 feet downstream of the ALCOA
water discharge. The upstream thermograph was attached to a
navigation buoy at a 1.5 m depth. The buoy was located on the
right side of the river directly across from the Culley Station
water intake but in an area unaffected by the cooling water dis-
charge. The downstream thermograph was placed on the bottom
near the left edge of the river in 1.5 meters of water at approx-
imately 3,500 feet downstream of the ALCOA cooling water discharge.
A maximum increase of 4.5°F between the two thermographs A and B
was observed over that eight-day period.
*L and R refer to left and right sides of river facing upstream.
-------
309
Table 8.6b: Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) Station
Location: Newburgh, Indiana, Mile Point 773.7 (0.3 mile downstream of
Culley Station)
Generating Capacity: 750 MWe
Date of Survey: August 9, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 400.52 MGD
River Flow Rate: (see Table 8.6a)
Ambient Temperature: 84.2°F (the ALCOA intake was, at the time of the survey
drawing water from the river surface to a depth of 12 feet. The
intake water temperature varied with depth due to the heated plume
from the Culley Plant located 0.3 mile upstream. The average tem-
perature of the ALCOA intake water was 84.2°F).
Outfall Temperature: 104°F
River Cross Sections Nfonitored: (see Table 8.6a)
Results:
(1) At a point 4,500 feet downstream of this discharge,
the maximum river temperature was 89.6°F with an excess above
ambient (measured as the ALCOA intake temperature) of 5.4°F and
at 2.9 miles downstream the river temperature ranged from 82.4
to 84.2°F.
(2) The heated water discharge from both the Culley and
ALCOA Power Plants was restricted to the north one-third of the
river due to a series of islands which acted as a barrier and
prohibited mixing with the entire river.
(3) Complete mixing was achieved at 2.9 miles downstream
from the ALCOA discharge and was assisted by the new Newburgh
lock and dam located 2.4 miles downstream.
-------
A-900 ft. UPSTREAM OF THE SIGECO,CULLEY STATION
B- POINT OF COOLING WATER DISCHARGE , CULLEY STATION
C-A'-0.4mi, DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
AT CULLEY STATION AND ADJACENT THE ALCOA COOLING
WATER INTAKE,
B'-POINT OF COOLING WATER DISCHARGE , ALCOA STATION
C-4500ft. DOWNSTREAM OF THE ALCOA STATION COOLING
WATER DISCHARGE
D- 2,9 mi. DOWNSTREAM OF THE ALCOA STATION COOLING
WATER DISCHARGE
|H TEMPERATURES <5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
TEMPERATURES >5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
NEW NEWBURGH DAM
SCALE
I
2
1000
1000 2000 3000
MILES
FEET
THERMOGRAPH-B
ISLANDS
Figure 8.17: Sketch of Culley Station and
ALCOA Plant Thermal Plumes
August 9, 1973 (Ref. 9)
THERM06RAPH-A
SIGECO-CULLEY
-------
311
Table 8.7: Survey of Ohio River Station.
Southern Indiana GELS and Electric Company^
Location: Evansville, Indiana, Mile Point 793.7
Generating Capacity: 112 MWe
Date of Survey: August 10, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 150 MGD
River Flow Rate: The 7 day, once in 10 year low flow is 14,300 cfs, and
the flow at the time of the survey was 34,400 cfs. The
study was conducted under normal summert flow conditions.
i
Ambient Temperature: 82.4°F »
Outfall Temperature: 89.6°F
River Cross Sections Nbnitored:
(A) 500 feet upstream (I, 1/3, 2/3, R) from surface to
7 m depth at 1 m interval sf
(B) point of discharge (L, 1/3, 2/3, R) from surface to
9 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(C) 1,000 feet downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface
to 10 m depth at 1 m intervals.
Results:
(1) The river returned to ambient temperature in less
than 1,000 feet downstream.
(2) Lower ambient water temperatures were observed along
the right bank of the river. The cooler water from the Green
River which enters the Ohio River 9 miles upstream from this
discharge is causing the lower temperature along the right bank
of the river.
-------
SIGECO STATION
A-500 ft. UPSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
B- AT THE POINT OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
C- 1000 ft. DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
^ TEMPERATURES >5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
H TEMPERATURES <5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
SCALE
J.
2
1000
1000
2000 3000
MILES
FEET
Figure 8.18: Sketch of the Ohio River Station Thermal
Plume, August 10, 1973 (Kef. 10).
-------
313
Table 8.8: Survey of Gallagher Station,
Public Service Company of Indiana^
Location: New Albany, Indiana, Mile Point 610
Generating Capacity: 600 Wfe
Date o.f Survey: August 20, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 462.7 MGD
River Flow Rate: The 7 day, once in 10 year low flow is 14,300 cfs and the
flow at the time of the survey was 50,000 cfs. The study
was conducted under higher than usual summer flow. The
discharge is located in the Cannelton pool and the pool
elevation was 4.4 feet above normal during this study.
Ambient Temperature: 84.2°F
Outfall Temperature: 96.8°F
River Cross Sections Monitored:
(A) 500 feet upstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
6 m depth at 1 m intervals.
(B) Point of discharge (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
8 m depth at 1 m intervals.
(C) 1,000 feet downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface
to 7 m depth at 1 m intervals.
(D) 3,500 feet downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface
to 7 m depth at 1 m intervals.
Results:
(1) An excess temperature of 2.6°F above ambient was
measured 1,000 feet downstream of the discharge. The river
returned to ambient temperature at a distance of 3,500 feet
downstream.
(2) The ambient temperature on the Indiana side of the
river was slightly higher (1-2°F) than the remainder of the
river.
The plume extended beyond 1/4 of the distance across
the river from the Indiana bank.
-------
GALLAGHER STATION
A-500 ft UPSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
B-AT THE POINT OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
C- 1000 ft. DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
D-3500 ft DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
TEMPERATURES <5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
SCALE
i
I 2 0
1000
0 1000 2000 3000
MILES
FEET
20>
-------
315
Table 8.9: Survey of Tanner's Creek Power Station,
Indiana-Michigan Electric Company^
Location: Near Lawrenceburg, Indiana, Mile Point 494
Generating Capacity: 1098 Mtfe
Date of Survey: August 21, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 996.4 MGD (combined cooling water from both outfalls)
River Flow Rate: The 7 day, once in 10 year low flow is 12,100'cfs and the
flow at the time of the survey was 39,000 cfs. The study-
was conducted under normal summer flow conditions.
Ambient Temperature: 81.5°F
Outfall Temperature: 90.5°F
River Cross Sections Nbnitored:
(A) 0.2 mile upstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
10 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(B) point of discharge (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
13 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(C) 2,200 feet downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
12 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(D) 0.8 miles downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
19 m depth at 1 m intervals,
Results:
(1) The heated plume spread laterally across the river
toward the opposite shore fron the plant (towards Kentucky bank)
and covered more than 751 of the river at 2,200 feet downstream
of the discharge.
(2) The maximum temperature excess was 1.8°F at 0.8 miles
downstream with the top two meters of the river being between
0.9°F and 1.8°F above ambient temperature.
-------
TANNERS CREEK STATION
A-0,2 mi, UPSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
B-AT THE POINT OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
C-2,200ft, DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
D-0,8mi, DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
TEMPERATURES <5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
1000
1000 2000 3000
MILES
FEET
Figure 8.20: Sketch of the Tanner's Creek
Station Thermal Plume,
August 21, 1973 (Ref. 12).
-------
317
Table 8.10: Survey of Clifty Creek Power Station,
Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corporation^
Location: Near Madison, Indiana, Mile Point 560
Generating Capacity: 1304 MVe
Date of Survey: August 21, 1973
Plant Discharge Rate: 17S2.1 MOD
River Flow Rate: The 7 day, once in 10 year low flow is 12,100 cfs and
the flow at the time of the survey was 45,000 cfs. The
study was conducted under normal summer flow conditions.
Ambient Temperature: 80.6°F
Outfall Temperature: 91.4°F
River Cross Sections Monitored:
(A) 0.2 mile upstream (L, 1/3, 2/3, R) from surface to
9 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(B) point of discharge (L, 1/3, 2/3, R) from surface to
10 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(C) 1,000 feet downstream (L, 2/5, 2/3, R) from surface
to 10 m depth at 1 m intervals,
(D) 0.8 mile downstream (L, 1/4, 3/4, R) from surface to
10 m depth at 1 m intervals.
Results:
(1) The heated plume extended across the river beyond
t>ro -thirds the distance to the opposite (Kentucky) shore and
extended beyond 1,000 feet downstream of the discharge at which
point the maximum temperature measured was 5.4°F above ambient.
(2) At 0.9 mile downstream of the discharge, the plume
extended beyond 3/4 of the distance across the river with a max-
imum 1.8°F excess temperature attained at the surface.
Notes:
The centerline of the plume appears to be from 2/5-3/4
the river width from the plant side of the river, determined from
the measurements at the 1,000 feet and 0.9 mile cross sections.
The bifurcated-shaped plume as illustrated in Figure 8.21 is an
EPA representation of the measurements which did not accompany
the original EPA report.13 The representation in the figure
illustrates an appearance of bifurcation after Section C. This
is only an appearance since ambient temperature was measured at
the 1/3 width measuring station at Section D. Transect D loca-
tion in the river was determined by the point where the river
returned to ambient temperature (within 1°C). This occurred
at a distance of 0.9 mile downstream of the cooling water dis-
charge. The plume interpretation given in Figure 8.21 is thus
really an unqualified interpretation of the plume shape because
temperatures were not collected between 1000 feet and 0.9 mile.
In short, there is no data to substantiate the bifurcated-shape
of the plume.
-------
CLIFTY CREEK
POWER PLAN!
OHIO RIVER
A-0,2 mi. UPSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
B-AT THE POINT OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
C-1000 ft. DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
D-0,9 mi, DOWNSTREAM OF THE COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
TEMPERATURES >5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
M TEMPERATURES <5°F ABOVE AMBIENT
Figure 8.21:
MILES
FEET
Sketch of the Clifty Creek
Station Thermal Plume,
August 21, 1973 (Ref. 13)
-------
319
certain specific plume characteristics from these surveys other than some
general notes on some individual temperatures and plume spreading. Plant
conditions are given in terms of capacity. The actual load conditions were
not determined; also no ambient river velocities were measured. Only an
approximate river velocity can be determined by dividing an approximate
river discharge rate by an estimated river cross sectional area. Thus the
surveys can be used only as surveys and only a scoping interest can be
satisfied.
Other scoping surveys have been done yet without data reduction
plotting, and discussion. These surveys are listed in Table 8.11. Typi-
cally, temperatures with depth were measured and recorded in tabular form
at about 15 locations in the river (in total, above and below the discharge).
Plant power level and discharge flow are given only in terms of rated values.
Again, those studies may be sufficient for the monitoring of plants as tq
state and federal temperature violations, but not. for model development and
verification or as an aid to understanding plume dispersion.
8.2.2 Comprehensive Surveys by Boat at the Philip Sporn Plant
We are aware of only one plant on the Ohio River where systematic
measurements have been obtained of the plume temperature field. Fourteen
weekly synopic surveys were made by Geyer e_t aJU from July 12, 1967 to
October 25, 1967. Only two surveys (July 19, 1967 and August 23, 1967)
appear in the literature. '
This site (see Fig. 8.22) represents the classical oblique river
discharge case since the geometrical river boundaries are quite regular
with fairly regular (non-fluctuating) flow conditions. The Ohio River at
the Sporn site (near New Haven, West Virginia) is wide and relatively shal-
low. The river width is approximately 1000 feet; the mean annual flow is about
-------
320
Table 8.11: Additional Plume Surveys for Temperature Standards Verification
14
Plant
Kanawha River
Plant
Mitchell
Power Plant
Mitchell
Power Plant
Elrama
Power Plant
Elrama
Power Plant
Conesville
Station
Philo Station
Beverly
Power Plant
Reed
Power Plant
Phillips
Power Plant
Phillips
Power Plant
Sammis
Power Plant
Sajimis
Power Plant
Saimis
Power Plant
Cardinal $ Tidd
Power Plant
Cardinal fi Tidd
Power Plant
Burger
Power Plant
Burger
Power Plant
Kammer
Power Plant
Willow Island
Power Plant
Philip Sporn
Philip Sporn
Philip Sporn
Kyger Creek
Beckjord
Power Plant
J. M. Stuart
Miami Fort
Station
Tanners Creek
Station
Raver
Kanawha
River
Monongahela
River
Monongahela
River
Monongahela
River
Monongahela
River
Muskingum
River
Muskingum
River
Muskingum
River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Little Three
Mile Creek -
Ohio River
Ohio River
Ohio River
Power
Company
Appalachian
Power Company
West Perm
Power Company
West Perm
Power Company
Duquesne
Light Company
Duquesne
Light Company
Columbus §
Southern Electric
Ohio Power
Company
Ohio Power Conpany
Duquesne
Light Company
Duquesne
Light Company
Duquesne
Light Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Edison
Company
Ohio Power Company
Monongahela Power
Conpany
Appalachian
Power Company
Appalachian
Power Company
Appalachian
Power Company
Ohio Valley
hlectric Company
Cincinnati Power
§ Light Company
Dayton Power; and
Light Company
Cincinnati Gas and
Electric Company
Indiana and Mich-
igan Power
Date
10/10/68
7/15/68
10/11/68
7/16/68
9/11/68
9/25/69
9/23/69
9/23/69
7/17/68
7/18/68
7/18/69
9/13/68
12/20/68
7/2/69
10/3/68
9/30/69
10/4/69
10/1/70
10/11/68
10/4/68
10/10/68
6/26/69
8/8/70
10/9/68
10/3/7?
10/3/72
LO/3/72
tO/3/7?
No. of Cross
Sections Temp.
was Measured
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
3
4
4
3
3
3
4
6
4
6
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
No. of No. of PC
Depths
Measured
2-7
2-5
2-5
2-6
2-5
2-3
2-3
2-7
2-5
2-6
7-6
1-8
2-9
3-8
4-10
2-9
2-7
2-7
2-7
2-5
2-7
3-7
2-7
3-9
---
—
—
—
Per Cix
Sectic
5
5
5
5
5
3-5
3-5
3-5
2-5
5
4
5
1-5
5
5
3-5
4-5
3-5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1-7
1-8
1-8
1-5
Company
-------
321
OHIO
WEST VIRGINIA
DISCHARGED, AB
INTAKE
PHILIP
SPORN
PLANT
0
2000 4000 6000
FEET
Figure 8.22:
Philip Sport Power Plant on
Ohio River with Field Data
Locations.17
-------
322
50,000 cfs with a maximum depth of flow of 27 feet. The plant's electrical
capacity is 1050 MW with a nominal discharge flow of 1,350 cfs. The dis-
charge enters the river on the downstream side of a 250 ft long sheet piling
wall which is at 45° to the downstream river direction. One complicating
feature is the location of various concrete walls and coal barge docking
facilities downstream of the sheet piling wall. With barges present, the
discharge can be effectively directed 90° to the shore! The outfall width
is approximately 80 feet with a depth of 20 feet. The presence of moored
barges may reduce the effective discharge width.
The Sporn site, especially the August 23, 1967 data, is a favorite
for analytical model comparisons ' since that data and the site in general
often represents periods of quasi-steady conditions. That data of August 23
represents the least change in upstream conditions during all fourteen sur^
vey periods (see Table 8.12).
The survey data collected at the site were lateral and vertical
temperatures traverses at each of six river sections located in Fig. 8.22.
Most surveys were conducted over a period of five hours. Data were taken
and recorded on sheets illustrated by Table 8.13, one set for each survey
date. Table 8.13 lists the temperature data collected from the August 23,
1967 survey. Isotherms for the data at Sections C (1000 feet downstream of
plant), D (3000 feet downstream of plant) and E (4400 feet downstream of
plant) are given in Fig. 8.23. Since the ambient velocity is greater than
the initial jet velocity on that date, it is expected that the plume hugs
the nearshore for a considerable distance downstream. Lateral spreading is
slow and results from turbulent mixing with the ambient river water as well
2
as some lateral buoyant spreading. Edinger et al. attempt to explain sets
-------
323
Table 8.12: Atmospheric and River Conditions for August 23, 1967,
and Maximum Discharge Situation for Philip Sporn Plant16,17
Meteorological Conditions During Period Selected for Study
Air temperature 64°F
Relative humidity 91%
Dewpoint temperature 62°F
-2 -1
Solar radiation 0.23 Cal cm min
1200 Btu ft"2 day'1
Wind speed 5 mi hr
Wind direction 100°A
Hydrological Conditions During Period Selected for Study
River stage 539 ft
River flow 19,000 ft3 sec"1
Intake temperature 77.5°F
Discharge flow 120 x 106 ft3 day"1
1400 ft3 sec"1
River velocity 1.13 ft/sec
Heated Effluent Under Maximum Discharge
Temperature 89.6 °F
Flow rate 1,400 cfs
Velocity 0.87 ft/sec
Mixed temperature rise 0.9°F
-------
C.
O
t^
H
0
Tl
c/>
Tl
X
<;
6
DATA
PLANT
INFORMATION
METEOROLOC.
STATION
r
•f
01
6O
70
?s
oO
O
**
ya
G
•<
o
tl
"~f,
c
»
<
m
•<
*
m
o
X
n
M
a
>
•<
DATE OF SURVEY: 8/2
EET
OF
7* V' OH
n r- -i ^
03 - -c m
>8^5
Soc?
Sc^i
^z"^
3°<5
OPKINS
VIRONM
WR
ROJ
UNIVERSITY
ENTAL ENG. SCIENCES
DISCHARGE
RP49
g
i—1
a>
oo
•
h-'
Ol
£5
og H-
S£
«s
£
vo
ON
•O !.
Met
O\P
S>
»-i
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER
PHILIP SPORN PLANT
RACINE, WEST VIRGINIA
-------
325
Table 8.13 (contd.)
16
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
DEFT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL }-NG. SCIENCES
tLI COOLING WATI.R DISCHARGE
RESEARCH PROJECT RP49
DAY OF SURVEY, WEDNESDAY
DATF OF SURVFY- S/23/67
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER
PHILIP M'ORN PLANT
RACfNE, VEST VIRGINIA
SHt.LT 1 OF 2
1
RIVER SEC, /\
D1ST. PROM LEFT BANK
SURFACE TEMP.
STARTOl/f FINSSH 0>9,0 DRY BUL B
°F WETBULB&,9°F
19.0
'/*
71$
1' LEVEL
ns.
3' LEVEL
5' LEVEL
7-2.2
780
no
10' LEVEL
7R2
15' LEVEL
20' LEVEL
70.0
TO
25' LEVEL
11
30' LEVEL
12
35' LEVEL
n
RIVER SEC.
STARTo^fe
DRYBULB
F WETBULB4/.£ °F
14
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
O
?o
•voo
7^0
15
SURFACE TEMP
77.9
19,0
16
T. LEVEL
7ST2
7Z1 T8.H
-SO
17
3' LEVEL
n?
19,2
18
5' LEVEL
in
Wo
-U
19
10' LEVEL
TIM
no
20
15' LEVEL
m
21
20' LEVEL
22
25' LEVEL
30' LEVEL
24
3o' LEVEL
•25
RIVER SEC. C
DRYBUL 8
26
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
0
IIQ
IkD
AGO
wo
OfD
27
SURFACE TEMP.
Vt-3
19.2
2_3_
29
jL°_
3?
37
33
T LEVEL
3' LEVEL
183
5' LEVEL
10' LEVEL
J5' LEVEL
20' LEVEL
no
.'&2m
-------
326
THE JOHNS KOI'KINS LMNL'RSITY
HtPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENG. SCIENCES
1 El COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
RESEARCH i'ROJhCl RP-W
DAY OF SURVEY: WEDNESDAY
Table 8.13 (contd.)16
DATE OF SURVEY- X'23-67
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER
PHILIP t:PORN PLANT
RACINE. WEST VIRGINIA
Si! i [IT 1 OF 2
RIVER SEC. ~\)
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
STARTOgS"0 FINISH 04 3-5" DRY BULB 7(5-2 °F WETBUL ->/$~°F
O
!(,&
200
3$0
360 ^Sf>
600
SURFACE TEMP.
$0.
?U
8I.D
T LEVEL
^
Bl.D
SI.5
^5^1.^
3' LEVEL
M2i
m
Hf
5' LEVEL
TSfc
T-U
W79,/
10' LEVEL
^a
ft/
15' LEVEL
20' LEVEL
m
no
10
25' LEVEL
11
30' LEVEL
12
35' LEVEL
13
RIVER SEC.
TART
FINISH
DRYBULB
°FWETBULB
U
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
8VOSSO
920
wo
15
SURFACE TEMP
16
r LEVEL
n
,
17
3' LEVEL
m
18
5' LEVEL
nt
19
10' LEVEL
m
n\
no
20
15' LEVEL
no
Tit)
21
20' LEVEL
T/.o
m
22
25' LEVEL
23
30' LEVEL
24
35' LEVEL
-------
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENG. SCIENCES
EEI COOLING WATER DISCHARGE
RESEARCH PROJECT RP49
DAY OF SURVEY: WEDNESDAY
327
Table 8.13 (contd.)16
DATE OF SURVEY: 8/23/67
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER
PHILIP SPORN PLANT
RACINE, WEST VIRGINIA
SHEET 1 OF 2
RIVER SEC. £ COIN'S.
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
START
FINISH
DRYBULB
°F WETBULB
e
(,^950
740
mv
I DM) MO
~r
SURFACE TEMP.
3fl#j7fc"?ffmoia)3
V LEVEL
3' LEVEL
790
m #4
5' LEVEL
10' LEVEL
&MI
15' LEVEL
m
Mm
20' LEVEL
Bs
10
25' LEVEL
11
30' LEVEL
12
13
35' LEVEL
RIVER SEC.
FINISH
DRYBULB74,S"°F WETBULB /,b.$"°F
14
OtST. FROM LEFT BANK
0
Wo
15
16
SURFACE TEMP
n\
#0
n m
T LEVEL
17
3' LEVEL
/
13
5' LEVEL
m
mm
m
W
19
10' LEVEL
mm.
20
15' LEVEL
nxSl
21
20* LEVEL
mM
22
25' LEVEL
TO
23
30' LEVEL
24
25
35' LEVEL
RIVER SEC. /\-3,*D
START
FINISH
DRYBUL B ??.ff °F WETBUL B£?.3 °F
26
DIST. FROM LEFT BANK
/*
27
28
SURFACE TEMP.
7a5"?8&
T LEVEL
29
3' LEVEL
30
31
32
33
34
35
5' LEVEL
10' LEVEL
15' LEVcL
20' LEVEL
25' LEVEL
30' LEVEL
-------
80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 800 880 960 1040
i i i i i i
0 80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 800 880 960 1040
to
00
80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720 800 880 960 1040
Figure 8.23: Isotherms from Field Data at
the Philip Sporn Plant for
August 23, L967 at positions
C, D, and E at 1000, 3000, and
4400 ft, respectively, from the
discharge.!7
-------
329
of Philip Sporn data by averaging similar sets of data (for similar plant
and environmental conditions) and plotting the results using a computerized
contouring program. They attempt to show the general trend of the plume
shape after most of the eddy noise has been smoothed out. The authors are
presently modifying the discussion in their draft report and their results
will be presented in the final published version of Reference 2.
The Philip Sporn data is interesting in that it represents many
different conditions. Plumes are seen on days of low flow to spread to the
opposite shore while on days of high flow the plume hugs the nearshore for
considerable distances downstream. Mareover, the presence of barges ef-
fectively directs the plume at a 90° angle to the shore with altered outfall
conditions. An interesting study could be made by analyzing that data when
it becomes non-proprietary.
8.2.3 Scoping Studies by Aerial Infra-red Mappings
On August 25, 1972, aerial infra-red photographs were taken by EPA18
over portions of the Nfonongahela, Ohio, and Allegheny Rivers in the Pitts-
burgh, Pennsylvania area between the hours 1158 and 1358 EOT. Thermal
infra-red (8-14 micron wavelength) imagery was obtained using an HRB-Singer
AN/AAS-14A optical/mechanical scanner. The aircraft altitude varied between
4000 and 8700 feet above terrain. Ground coverage obtained of interpreta-
tive value is a swath along the flight path approximately 80° wide, which
from the altitude flown, results in a path 6700-14,600 feet wide. It was
expected that temperatures to within 0.5°C could be quantitatively observed
and discussed; however, the poor resolution of the optical equipment has
made any quantitative measurements impossible at this time.
A schematic of the area covered during the flight is shown in Fig.
8.24 along with the observable plumes numbered for reference. These plumes
-------
40°30W
Figure 8.24: Location of Plumes Measured on
the \ugust 25, 1972 Aerial In-
fra-red Survey.
40°30' N
-------
331
are identified wherever possible from Table 8.14. Only latitude-longitude
locations of the individual plumes were readily available; mile point loca-
tions were not known for unidentified plants. Only names and mile points
of plants on the Ohio River could be determined in the tirae available for
this study. Also included in the Table is the areal extent and length of
each plums determined approximately from the imagery. These numbers are
rough approximations because it is difficult on an infra-red photograph to
distinguish the precise plume boundaries. Figures 8.25-8.38 are graphical
interpretations of the plumes photographed. Plumes from the Allegheny and
Manongahela Rivers are included in this discussion for completeness and as
a contrast to the Ohio River plumes. No attempt could be made to disting-
uish the actual temperature level of the plume, but instead, the qualitative
evidence of contrast between the river ambient and the heated discharge was
taken to determine the extent of the plume.
In general, thermal discharges along the Ohio River on this August
25 date are converted downstream with an apparently large current. Even the
larger plumes along the Ohio do not show evidence of reaching the opposite
shore, while the reverse is in evidence along the Mmongahela and Allegheny
Rivers. The two plumes associated with the Allegheny appear to be quite nar-
row, their length to width ratio are much less than is usual for a plume in
the absence of a longshore current. The plumes along the northern Monon-
gahela show signs of convection toward the Pittsburgh area due to apparently
large currents, while plumes on the sourthem portions of the MDnongahela
bend less downstream due to apparent small currents in that section of the
river. This might be explained in that the Monongahela is increased in flow
from the sourthern portion to the northern by the addition of a large tri-
butary slightly downstream of plume 31.
-------
332
Table 8.14: Index' ' of Thermal Plumes Measured by the Aerial Infra-red Survey
of August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)
Discharge #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
River
MDnongahela
MDnongahela
Nfonongahela
MDnongahela
Nbnongahela
MDnongahela
MDnongahela
Nbnongahela
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Allegheny
Allegheny
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
ftnongahela
MDnongahela
Nbnongahela
MDnongahela
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
Nfanongahela
Nbnongahela
Nbnongahela
MDnongahela
Quadrangle
Nbp
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E., Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E., Pa.
Ambridge, Pa.
Ambridge, Pa.
Baden, Pa.
Baden, Pa.
Baden, Pa.
Baden, Pa.
Beaver, Pa.
Beaver, Pa.
Midland, Pa.
Hookstown, Pa.
Beaver, Pa.
New Kensington W ,
Pa.
New Kensington W. ,
Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Braddock, Pa.
Braddock, Pa.
NtKeesport, Pa.
NtKeesport, Pa.
Pittsburgh E., Pa.
Pittsburgh E. , Pa.
Pittsburgh E., Pa.
NfcKeesport, Pa.
Qassport, Pa.
NtKeesport, Pa.
Qassport , Pa.
NfcKeesport, Pa.
Glassport, Pa.
MDnongahela, Pa.
Loc:
N-Lat
40'24'38"
40°24'41"
40°24'45"
40°24'41"
40°24'45"
40°25'3"
40°25 '36"
40°2S'39"
40°31'S4"
40°34'15"
40-37M5"
40°37'48"
40°37'56"
40°38'02"
40°40'22"
40°39'30"
40-38' 19"
40°37'13"
40°41'10"
40°32'42"
40°32'13"
40-25'9"
40°22'43"
40-22 '29"
40°22'15"
40-22' 10"
40°24'51"
40°23'54"
40"24'30"
40°21'18"
40020'15"
40°17'42"
40°18'34"
40°17'18"
40°15'10"
40°13'21"
it ion
W-Long
79°53'20"
•'9-53' 24"
70°53'32"
79°54'54"
79°57'6"
79°57'6"
79°57'26"
79°57'30"
80°10'08"
80-14 '00"
80°14'08"
80°14'08"
80°14'08"
80°14 '12"
80°20'20"
80°21 '26"
80-28 '05"
80-26 '20"
80°15'45"
79°46'02"
79°47'36"
80°57'21"
79°50' 37"
79-50' 24"
79-50' 24"
79-50' 23"
79°S4 '29"
79-55M2"
79-57' 05"
79°51'13"
79°53'42"
79°52'06"
79°52 '54"
79-S2'25"
79°55'00"
79°58' 16"
Area of Thermal
Influence (ft2)
(approx)
300,000
360,000
240,000
400,000
160,000
100,000
320,000
NA
120,000
720,000
360,000
80,000
1,360,000
180,000
720,000
400,000
1,200,000
480,000
720,000
960,000
600,000
600,000
720,000
640,000
40,000
140,000
1,400,000
160,000
120,000
40,000
240,000
400,000
480,000
720,000
Furthest Extent
of Influence (ft)
(approx)
600
600
600
800
800
700
900
NA
800
1800
1200
400
3400
900
1800
2000
2000
1200
1200
1600
1700
1600
800
1200
1200
800
400
1400
1800
400
600
400
600
800
1200
1600
Time
(EDT)
1146
1146
1149
1153
1158
1158
1158
1158
1201
1205
1206
1206
1207
1207
1213
1215
1216
1216
1210
1306
1306
1320
1311
1311
1310
1309
1321
1321
1325
1332
1337
1338
1337
1341
1343
1352
Remarks
Two thermal levels (5)
Included in *7
No discharge exists here
Two thermal levels (5)
Location question (2)
Location question (2)
Two thermal levels (5)
Two thermal levels (5)
Two thermal levels (5)
(1); Two thermal levels (5)
(1)
(2)
(2) ; "spans" river (3)
(2); "spans" river (3)
Two thermal levels (5)
(2)
(1)
Two thermal levels (5)
Two thermal levels (S)
(1) Questionable if discharge is actually present.
(2) Thermal area evident; exact discharge location in question.
(3) Warmer effluent extends from one river bank to other.
(4) The key to plant names for the Allegheny and MDnongahela plumes is presently unavailable.
(5) Relative scale which indicates clear evidence of discharge being present.
-------
333
MONON6AHELA RIVER
0 KXX) 3000 5000 7000
Figure 8.25:
Sketches of Thermal Plumes
1-4, 27, 28 on the Mmongahela
River drawn from Infra-red
Photographs of August 25, 1972.
(Ref. 18).
-------
334
MONONGAHELA RIVER
0 1000 3000 9000 7000
SCALE - FEET
Figure 8.26:
Sketches of Thermal Plumes
5-8, 22, 29 on the ffonongahela
River drawn from Infra-red
Photographs of August 25, 1972.
(Ref. 18).
-------
335
-OHIO RIVER
0 COO 3000 5000 7000
=^K=JBK=
SCALE- FEET
Figure 8.27: Sketch of Thermal Plume 10 on the
Ohio River drawn from Infra-red
Photographs of August 25, 197218
(Plume 10: F. Phillips Plant,
Duquesne Power and Light).
-------
336
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
^•cr»"cr=i ~~
SCALE-FEET
OHIO RIVER
Figure 8.28: Sketch of Thermal Plumes 11-14
on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 197218 (Plumes 11-14:
Jones and Laughlin Steel Co.).
-------
337
0 1000 3000 500O 7000
mm=mm=
SCALE- FEET
Figure 8.29: Sketch of Thermal Plumes 15, 16
on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 197218 (Plume 15:
St. Joseph Lead Company,
Plume 16: Koppers Corporation),
-------
338
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
=^•=••1=
SCALE-FEET
-OHIO RIVER
Figure 8.30:
Sketch of Thermal Plume 17 on
the Ohio River drawn from Infra-'
red Photographs of August 25,
197218 (Plume 17: Crucible
Steel Company).
-------
339
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
3^E=^K-—
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.31:
Sketch of Thermal Plume 18 on the
Ohio River drawn from Infra-red
Photographs of August 25, 197218
(Plume 18: Shippingport Power
Plant, Duquesne Power and Light)
-------
340
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
^•=MBB=
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.32:
Sketch of Thermal Plume 19
on the Ohio River drawn from
Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 197218 (Plume 19:
Colonial Steel Corporation).
-------
341
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
••=•••=
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.33: Sketch of Thermal Plumes 20, 21
on the Allegheny River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
342
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
••C=^BK=
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.34:
Sketch of Thermal Plumes 23-26,
30 on the Nfonongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
343
MONONGAHELA RIVER
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
•K=MC=
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.35: Sketch of Thermal Plumes 31, 33
on the MDnongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
344
01000 3000 5000 7000
MONONGAHELA RIVER
Figure 8.36 :
Sketch of Thermal Plumes 32, 34
on the Manongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
345
01000 3000 5000 7000
:••=*••=:
SCALE-FEET
MONONGAHELA RIVER
Figure 8.37: Sketch of Thermal Plume 35 on
the Mmongahela River drawn
from Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
346
MONONGAHELA RIVER
0 1000 3000 5000 7000
rmm—=mm-—
SCALE-FEET
Figure 8.38:
Sketch of Thermal Plume 36 on the
Monongahela River drav/n from
Infra-red Photographs of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18).
-------
347
On October 3, 1972 a second EPA aerial survey was performed;19
this time about 500 miles of the Ohio River were photographed. The equip-
ment was essentially the same as that used in the previous survey; again,
the results of this survey were not of quantitative value. A list of the
plumes seen and their respective time of overflight and location is given
in Table 8.15. Observed lengths and widths were calculated from the scale
determined from the camera height and the local length of the camera. Dur-
ing most of the flight, the altitude was kept at 5200 feet; however, to ob-
serve the plumes more closely, the altitude was lowered to 2500 feet above
the river. Sketches of the plumes are shown in Figs. 8.39-8.44. A brief
description of each plume is given below:
(1) Sammis Power Plant:
There are three submerged outfalls from the Sammis Power Plant
which discharge the heated effluent upstream of the New Cumberland
Locks and Dam. The dam serves as an excellent mixer for the heated
discharge since all the water that flows over or under the gates of
the dam becomes essentially vertically mixed. As can be seen from
Fig. 8.39, below the dam there is no measurable temperature gradient.
The discharge spreads out both laterally and longitudinally; how-
ever, the plume does not reach the far shore.
(2) Cardinal/Tidd Power Plants:
The heated discharge associated with the Cardinal Power Plant
has a secondary source, that being the Tidd Power Plant located
1/2 mile upstream from the Cardinal Plant. Both discharges are of
surface type; the heated water is inertially driven so that the
plume does reach the opposite shore, but the reasonably strong cur-
rent does convect the plume along shore at distances far from the
plant. These plants appear to alter the ambient substantially
since there is a distinct temperature contrast between the upstream
river water and that located 5 miles below the plant. A third tra-
verse of the plant was made at an altitude of 1000 feet, and at this
altitude, clearly discernible wave-like disturbances can be seen.
The waves appear to be propagating away from the discharge outlet,
but no distinct wavelength is observable.
(3) J. M. Stuart Power Plant:
The Stuart Power Plant has a surface discharge located 4 miles
upstream of Maysville, Kentucky. The effluent is first discharged
into Little Three Mile Creek which then flows into the river. At
-------
348
Table 8.15: Index of Thermal Plumes Measured by the
Aerial Infra-red Survey of
August 25, 1972 (Ref. 18)
Plant
W. H. Sammis
Cardinal/Tidd
J. M. Stuart
W. C. Beckjord
Miami Fort
Tanners Creek
Ohio River
Mile Point
55.0
75.0/74.5
405.7
453.3
490.3
494.5
Generating
Capacity (Mfe)
2303.5
1230.5/226.3
1220.4
1220.3
393.2
1100.3
(ft)
2,700
5,100
10,000
9,000
N/A
N/A
Plume
Length Width
(ft)
800
1,100
800
500
N/A
N/A
-------
SAMMIS PLANT
1428-1429 EOT
2500ft,
Figure 8.39: Sketch of Thermal Plume from
Samnis Power Plant from Infra-
red Photographs of October 3,
1972 (Ref. 19). Scale:
1 inch = 1000 ft.
-------
CARDINAL PLANT-
1415-1416 EOT
2500ft
on
O
igure 8.40 Sketch oi Thermal Plume from
Cardin.il-Tidd Power Plants from
Infra-red Photographs of
CLtober 3, 1972 (Rcf. I1')-
Scale 1 Lncii = 1UOH ft.
-------
LITTLE THREE MILE CREEK
COOLING TO*E»S
.0000
OHIO RIVER
skcKh of Thermal Plmic I IT
1. M. Stiurt Power I'l.in! li
Inir.i-red Phot our, ijilis ol
(X-toher ^, 1'172 (Kef. I1')
Scale 1 inch = inno ft.
-------
OHIO RIVER
m*m+^l,
I
BECKJORD PLANT
1050 EOT
5200ft
Cn
to
Figure 8.42:
Sketch of Thermal Plume from the
Beckjord Power Plant from Infra-
red Photographs of October 3,
1972 (Ref. 19). Scale:
1 inch = 2080 ft.
-------
en
Sketch of Thermal P.imc from the
Miami fort Rawer Piint from
Infra-red Photop-.i] ,,s of
October 3, 1972 (I., l. 1'>1
Scale I inch = 1000 ft
-------
SEWAGE PLANT
TANNERS CREEK PLANT-
1220 EOT
2500 ft.
OHIO RIVER
on
t-iRure 8.44 sketch of Thermal PUme from the
Tanners ( reek Power Plant from
Infra-red photographs of
October 1, ia^2 (Hef. 191
Scale 1 inch = 1000 ft.
-------
355
this location, the river flow is rapid enough that the plume does
not cross half the width of the river. The river ambient is much
lighter at this location, and therefore the full extent of the
plume is more difficult to evaluate; however, a clearly defined
plume does extend more than 2 miles below the plant.
(4) Beckjord Power Plant:
The Beckjord Power Plant discharges the heated effluent
through a pipe on the bottom aligned in the downstream direction. The
plant is located 3 miles downstream of New Richmond, Ohio, on the
north side of the river. The plume was quite visible and extended
downstream for nearly 2 miles, but stayed very close to the shore.
In the far field, the plume was difficult to recognize due to con-
trast with the ambient; if more resolution were available, it is
probable that the location of heated waters further downstream
would have been more distinguishable.
(5) Miami Port Power Plant:
The Miami Fort Power Plant consists of a submerged discharge
about 500 feet downstream of the power plant. The plume was ex-
tremely difficult to discern since the ambient river temperature
was quite warm and, therefore, the river color quite light. The
Great Miami River discharges cold water into the Ohio River 2
miles downstream of the power plant. That discharge was clearly
visible with respect to the warmer Ohio River.
(6) Tanners Creek Power Plant:
The Tanners Creek Power Plant is located 4 miles downstream
of the Miami Fort Plant. Similar to Miami Fort, the discharge
from Tanners Creek is submerged, and is released very close to
the bottom of the river. On this survey, only a small plume was
observed whose origin could be traced to the Tanners Creek area.
A plume was located emanating from Tanners Creek, but that loca-
tion corresponds to the Lawrenceburg Sewage Treatment Plant outfall.
As was mentioned earlier, usual thermal scanning techniques are capable
of measuring temperatures to within 0.5°C, yet no quantitative results were
evidenced from these surveys. A brief description of the difficulties en-
countered are given below:
(1) This scanner does not take reference temperatures on each
transect of the plume, rather, it takes a reference at the
beginning of the flight.
(2) Because these photographs were reproduced electrically from
a pre-amplified signal, they are subject to inherent electrical
noise during amplification. Recent techniques save the pre-
amplified signal for later processing.
-------
356
(3) Errors associated with sinuous flight paths and changes in
altitude cause distortions, evidenced by the lack of clarity
away from the center of the photograph.
(4) In addition, poor weather conditions, flight procedures
and operation of the scanner all cause additional in-
accuracies in the measurements.
It is believed that the EPA-NERC procedures can be modified18'19
to perfect the technique to give quantitative results, hopefully, near the
theoretical limit of .5°C; as to this report, qualitative differences are
all that have any significance.
70-7X
8.3 The J. M. Stuart Power Station Controversy °
The Dayton Power and Light Company of Dayton, Ohio presently has
three fossil-fueled plants in operation discharging into Little Three Mile
Creek just before that Creek enters the Ohio River. The Federal EPA feels
that biological damage has already occurred in Little Three Mile Creek even
before the third unit went into operation, and that a company proposal to
transfer the three unit discharge to the Ohio River will not satisfy Ohio
21
temperature standards. At the time EPA recommended that the following
criteria be met:
(1) a 600 foot mixing zone beyond which temperatures must not
exceed a 5°F temperature excess,
(2) a set of monthly maximm temperatures that cannot be
exceeded beyond the mixing zone,
(3) a passageway for fish which should contain preferably
751 of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of flow
of the stream, and
(4) a minimal temperature rise at the Beckjord Plant 47.3
miles downstream.*
*It should be noted that Ohio water quality standards have been substantially
changed since this controversy.
-------
357
The Power Company with their consultants WAPORA, Inc. argues that the re-
moval of the three-unit heated discharge from Little Three Mile Creek to the
Ohio River by means of a submerged discharge will satisfy Ohio temperature
standards. A sketchy EPA field survey14 taken October 3, 1972 showed that
about 2500 ft downstream of the Little Three Mile Creek - Ohio River con-
fluence, the temperature excess was 4.5°F. Clearly, existing temperature
standards were being violated by discharging the three unit effluent into
Three Mile Creek.
Argonne National Laboratory was requested to review the controversy
and evaluate the WAPORA and ORSANCO modeling efforts in this regard.
Conditions at the Stuart site used in the mathematical modeling are
given in Table 8.16. Information on maximum permissible temperatures for
the river with and without the heated discharge is given in Table 8.17 along
with observed maximum daily temperatures and minimum daily flows near the
Stuart site. Column 4 of Table 8.17 evaluates the increased river temper-
ature if the discharged heat from the Stuart Plant is fully mixed with the
river flow. Column 5 compares those maximum temperatures to the permissible
monthly maximum temperatures required by ORSANCO and the EPA.
After evaluating several alternative designs, WAPORA suggests an
800 foot line diffuser with 11 circular ports of 4 foot diamter with a port
spacing of 80 feet. Each port will be discharging in the direction of the
river flow. This choice was made to prevent interference between jets which
would cause re-entrainment and inefficient dilution. WAPORA used the Hirst
fj *
model to justify their conclusion that the above diffuser will satisfy the
temperature standards. The results of the Hirst model application is given
in Table 8.18 and Figs. 8.45-8.52. Plotted is the centerline trajectory,
time of travel, and isotherms in the vertical section through the orifice
centerline. Table 8.19 summarizes the percent of river cross section area
-------
358
Table 8.16: River and Plant Data Required for Nbdeling the
Stuart Discharge a
River Flow:
Critical: 9,700 cfs (ORSANCO data)
Average: 91,000 cfs (USGS data)
Plant Flow:
Units 1 and 2: 1004 cfs
Units 1, 2, 3: 1506 cfs
Temperature Rise Across Condensers:
23.2°F
Ambient Surface Water Temperature:
Non Stratified: 69.3°F (ORSANCO data)
Stratified: 84.4°F
Ambient Bottom Water Temperature for Stratified Case:
78°F
Linear Temperature Stratification (for sample stratified case only)
= 5 x 10"5 ft"1
Average Width of River: 1600 ft
Average Depth of River: 33 ft
Depth of River at Point Of Discharge: 41 ft
Average River Cross Section: 53,000 ft2
-------
Table 8.17: Analyses of Maximum Mixed Ten|)erature Rise
20c
•
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Maximum Daily
Temperature at
Cincinnati, °F
46.9
46.9
53.3
64.0
75.6
81.9
85.0
84.3
82.8
75
69
56.6
Minimum Daily
Flow (cfs)
Maysville ,
Kentucky
25,000
20,000
27,000
50,000
25,000
17,000
15,800
9,500
9,000
6,300
7,400
13,000
Mixed Temperature
Rise,* °F
1.4
1.8
1.3
0.7
1.4
2.1
2.2
3.7
3.9
5.6
4.7
2.7
Maximum
Temperature,**
op
48.3
48.7
54.6
64.7
77.0
84.0
87.2
88.0
86.7
80.6
73.7
59.3
Permissible
Temperature ,***
50
50
60
70
80
87
89
89
87
78
70
57
*Using minajnum flow
**Using minimum flow and maximum water temperatures
***ORSANCO Pollution Control Standard No. 2-70
en
-------
Table 8.18: Solution of Hirst ffodel
20a
Case
No.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Jet Axis
Distance from
Discharge, ft
56.1
38.7
70.6
41.9
53.9
32.0
83.4
34.6
x, Horizontal
Distance ,
ft
34.2
29.4
58.4
35.8
28.5
22.9
72.1
29.8
z, Vertical
Distance
ft Dilution
38.8 .114
21.8
37.3 .025
19.8
40.8 .078
19.6
40.4 .017
16.4
Temperature
Rise**
2.5
.3
.6
.0
1.7
-1.5
.4
-1.2
Jet
Half -Width,
ft
10.1
5.9
24.5
7.8
12.2
5.8
25.4
7.4
Analysis
Condition*
N-C -U3-D4
S-C -U3-D4
N-N1-U3-D4
S-N1-U3-D4
N-C -U2-D4
S-C -U2-D4
N-N1-U2-D4
S-N1-U2-D4
dp.
* N - Non-stratified intake temperature = 69.3°F
1 "'"'a
S - Stratified, intake temperature = 78°F, Surface temperature = 84.4; — -r—
C - Critical river flow = 9300 cfs
Nl - Normal river flow = 91000 cfs
U3 - No. of units = 3
U2 - No. of units = 2
D14 - Diameter of discharge = 14'
D4 - Diameter of discharge = 4'
**AT above intake temperature, °F at surface or equilibrium location
5 x 10"5 ft"1
o\
o
-------
00» - TIME OF FLOW, SEC
- TEMPERATURE RISES
ABOVE AMBIENT, °F
20 30
DOWNSTREAM DISTANCE, FT
Figure 8.45:
WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to
J. M. Stuart Plant, Case 9 (3 units
non-stratified ambient, critical river
_ _ ~ *^ rti_ *
-------
39
-84°
30
-83°
-82°
20
-8IC
o
CD
CJ
10
-80°
-79°
I PIPE
0.0• - TIME OF FLOW, SEC.
(0)
TEMPERATURE RISES
ABOVE AMBIENT, °F
10 20 30
DOWNSTREAM DISTANCE, FT
Figure 8.46:
WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to
J. M. Stuart Plant, Case 10 (3 units,
stratified ambient, critical river
40
50
a\
-------
39
0.0* - TIME OF FLOW, SEC.
0)- TEMPERATURE RISES
ABOVE AMBIENT, °F
20 30
DOWNSTREAM DISTANCE, FT
Figure 8.47:
WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to
J. M. Stuart Plant, Case 11 (3 units,
non-stratified ambient, normal river
flow)20b
-------
39
-84C
30
-83°
a.
c_
-82C
20
-8IC
O
QD
-------
0.0. - TIME OF FLOW, SEC
- TEMPERATURE RISES
ABOVE AMBIENT, °F
0
0
ON
01
20 30
DOWNSTREAM DISTANCE, FT
Figure 8.49: WAPORA Application of Hirst Model
to J. M. Stuart Plant, Case 13
(2 units, non-stratified ambient,
critical river flow)20b
-------
39
-84°
30
-83°
a.
ex
-82C
CtL
O
UJ
>
O
00
O
^.
-------
0.0. - TIME OF FLOW, SEC.
- TEMPERATURE RISES
ABOVE AMBIENT, °F
0
CH
20 30
DOWNSTREAM DISTANCE, FT
Figure 8.51:
WAPORA Application of Hirst Model to
J. M. Stuart Plant, Case 15 (2 units,
non--stratified ambientr, normal river
-------
39
-84°
30
-83°
-82°
20
-8IC
o
en
-------
369
Table 8.19: Percentage of River Cross-Sectional Area
Occupied by the 5°F Isotherm for the
Diffuser Proposed by WAPORA2Ob
Percent of Cross-sectional Area
Case Greater than 5°F Temperature Excess
9 5.5
10 3.1
11 4.4
12 2.2
13 4.7
14 2.4
15 2.9
16 1.8
-------
370
that is above 5°F rise (the mixing zone criterion). The areas indicated are
29a
substantially less than 25% of the river cross section. It is stated
that this design will meet the maximum temperature rise criteria but not the
maximum absolute temperature on those days when the ambient water tempera-
ture is close to the permissible maximum temperature as given in Table 8.16.
WAPORA indicates that the above results show feasibility of a diffuser sys-
tem to satisfy state and federal requirements but that design optimization
is required before construction is authorized.
The results of the WAPORA calculation seem reasonable; however,
the Hirst model is not strictly valid in this case. First, the Hirst ana-
lysis assumes no boundary interference either from a river bottom or the
river surface. As seen in Figs. 8.45-8.52, the discharge is directed from
the bottom and consequently a cutoff of dilution water will occur and alter
the mixing and trajectory of the plume. Surface temperatures calculated
also assume an infinite ambient water body with dilution water coming from
above the river surface. The predictions of the Hirst model are not con-
servative but optimistic in the light of boundary interferences.
Secondly, the Hirst model has been improved upon by Shirazi, Davis
and Byram ' in which the effects of ambient turbulence were added to the
*7 f>
model. Hydraulic model studies by McQuivey, Keefer, and Shirazi showed
that the effects of ambient turbulence in a coflow discharge increased mix-
ing in an important way. The Hirst model used by WAPORA did not include
ambient turbulence in the differential equations. Moreover, the Hirst model
gave an opposite trend in centerline temperature decay than was indicated
by the data in coflow cases like the J. M. Stuart problem (centerline tem-
perature increased with increasing densimetric Froude number of discharge
for coflow cases instead of decreasing as was indicated by the data). The
two difficulties with the Hirst model (in coflow situations) were remedied
-------
/
371
in the improved version of the model published by Shirazi, Davis, and By-
ram. The above difficulties with the Hirst model add additional uncertain-
ties to WAPORA's predictions.
Thirdly, WAPORA applies the Hirst model for cases of current and
stratification. There is presently almost no experimental data with cur-
rent and stratification to verify Hirst's model. Consequently, the results
of the model for those cases (cases 10, 12, 14, and 16) are open to ques-
tion.
In the face of these uncertainties to WAPORA's use of the Hirst
model, it would be useful to recalculate model predictions based upon the
improved Hirst simulation done by Shirazi, Davis, and Byram. tore import-
antly, however, the undertaking of hydraulic model tests to verify the
feasibility of a diffuser discharge in satisfying mixing zone and zone of
passage criteria would be useful. This model study would eradicate many of
the doubts in the application of the Hirst model. If feasibility is demon-
strated in the hydraulic model, optimality would be easier to establish.
All this assumes that the frequency of violation of the maximum monthly
temperatures, which will occur, is satisfactory to the EPA.
Concerning the temperatures occurring at the Beckjord Plant 47.3
miles downstream, three methods have been used for that calculation. The
first and most correct is the energy budget approach in which a one-dimen-
sional fully-mixed heated discharge is assumed. The heat is lost to the
atmosphere by surface cooling and is determined from meteorological para-
27
meters. WAPORA used Thackston and Parker for the heat transfer coef-
20a
ficient, K, and employed a steady-state heat budget model to determine
temperatures at Beckjord. Based upon K values of 145 in July, 98 in Novem-
ber, 131 in July for extreme conditions, this results in corresponding 1.4°F,
1.6°F, and 1.9°F temperature increase at Beckjord. More precise results
-------
372
might have been obtained using a more dynamic model like COLHEAT or the
transient version of the Edinger-Geyer approach due to the large travel -
time from the J. M. Stuart to the Beckjord Plant. Also, use of the equil-
ibrium temperature instead of the natural temperature as a base for heat
losses is more accurate.
28
The second approach recommended by WAPORA is the Le Bosquet method
for determination of K. Tichenor and Shirazi criticize this method since
the Le Bosquet's K values are determined from field data in which the dif-
ference in temperature between water and air is assumed to be the driving
force for surface cooling. They state that Le Bosquet's equation for K is
not applicable to the standard exponential temperature decay model (used by
WAPORA) which uses equilibrium temperature. Thus the higher values of K
recommended by Le Bosquet (since air temperature is usually lower than equil-
ibrium temperature) cannot be used to predict a lower excess temperature at
the Beckjord Plant.
The third approach is that employed by ORSANCO in which they use23a
their own exponential decay formula for temperature excesses applied to the
river reach between the J. M. Stuart to the Beckjord Plant. Manipulating
their exponential decay formula into the more standard heat budget formula-
20c
tion one can see that an unrealistically high value of surface heat trans-
fer coefficient was being used by ORSANCO, which would underpredict temper-
ature rises downstream. Also, the ORSANCO model uses a formula which is
independent of meteorological conditions which cannot be correct.
At the present time, all three units of the J. M. Stuart Plant are
discharging into Little Three Mile Creek. Since the heat input into the
Creek and, therefore, into the Ohio River is the same as if a diffuser were
installed in the Ohio, boat measurements at the Beckjord site can presently
determine the effect on river temperature there due to the upstream Stuart
-------
373
site. Taking temperature measurements at Beckjord when one, two, and three
units are operating at Stuart would clearly be the best approach. Verifying
or improving one of the above models for downstream temperature prediction
would then allow the prediction of temperature at arbitrary power levels and
river flows.
The best of the above model formulations is the first one although
improvements on that could be affected. An increase in temperature on the
order of 2°F needs to be judged by EPA as satisfactory if the three unit
J. M. Stuart Plant is to be given a permit for once-through cooling.
In summary our recommendations are as follows:
(1) Although the application of the Hirst model by WAPORA is
reasonable, predictions should be recalculated based upon
the improved version of the Hirst model developed by
Shirazi, Davis, and Byram.
(2) Hydraulic model studies should be undertaken to properly
ascertain the effects of the free surface and bottom.
Recirculation of heated water due to constraining bound-
aries can then be better assessed. Hydraulic model studies
can better test feasibility of the WAPORA design in meeting
state and federal standards as well as provide a tool for
optimization of that design.
(3) A more dynamic model could be applied over the 47.3 mile
reach between the Stuart and Beckjord Plants to better
assess the effects of the Stuart Plant on the downstream
Beckjord Plant. Mare directly, boat measurements at the
Beckjord site can presently determine the effect of the
upstream J. M. Stuart Plant; one, two, and three units;
since all three units are in operation at this time. A
verified model can predict the frequency of excess temper-
atures at the Beckjord sites under different plant and
river flow conditions.
-------
374
References
1. T. Ellison and J. Turner, "Turbulent Entrainment in Stratified Flows,"
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 6_ (3), October 1969.
2. Edinger, J., D. Brady, and J. Geyer, "Heat Exchange in the Environment
(Revised)," Report No. 14, Electric Power Research Institute, Cooling
Water Research Project (RP 49), Department of Geography and Environmental
Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, February
1974, (Draft).
3. Stefan, H. and T. Skoglund, "Evaluation of Water Temperature Fields Re-
sulting from Heated Water Discharges," First World Conference on Water
Resources, Chicago, Illinois, September 1973.
4. Polk, E., B. Benedict, and F. Parker, "Cooling Water Density Wedges in
Streams," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Volume 97, HY10,
p 1639-1652, October 1971.
5. McKie, W., "Temperature Distribution in the Vicinity of a Cooling Water
Discharge into the Mississippi River," paper presented at the Heat Trans-
fer Division of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York
City, November 26-30, 1972.
6. Rota, A., and R. Zavatarelli, "Systematic Measurements of Velocity and
Temperature in the Po River in the Vicinity of the Discharge of Condenser
Water from the Thermoelectric Power Plant at Piacenza - Period from August
to September 1972," Information Center for Experimental Studies, Report
MISTER NO. 5A/B, Milan, Italy, March 1973 (in Italian).
7. Holley, E., "Transverse Mixing in Rivers," Delft Hydraulics Laboratory
Report S132, Delft, The Netherlands, December 1971.
8. Edinger, J., "Temperature Distribution Analysis," Environmental Protection
Agency Contract Number 68-01-1823, Strafford, Pennsylvania, June 1, 1973.
9a. Reising, R. and B. King, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report, Southern
Indiana Gas and Electric Company, Culley Station, Newburgh, Indiana" pre-
pared by U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indiana District Office,
111 Diamond Avenue, Evansville, Indiana, August 9, 1973.
9b. Reising, R. and B. King, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report, Aluminum
Company of America Station, Newburgh, Indiana," prepared by U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Indiana District Office, 111 Diamond Avenue, Evans-
fille, Indiana, August 9, 1973.
10. Reising, R. and B. King, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report, Southern
Indiana Gas and Electric Company, Ohio River Station, Evansville, Indiana,"
prepared by U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indiana District Office,
111 Diamond Avenue, Evansville, Indiana, August 10, 1973.
11. Reising, R. and B. Kramer, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report, Public
Service Company of Indiana, Gallagher Station, New Albany, Indiana," pre-
pared by U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indiana District Office,
111 Diamond Avenue, Evansville, Indiana, August 20, 1973.
-------
375
12. Reising, R. and B. Kramer, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report,
Indiana-Michigan Electric Company, Tanner's Creek Station, Lawrence-
burg, Indiana," prepared by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Indiana District Office, 111 Diamond Avenue, Evansville, Indiana,
August 21, 1973.
13. Reising R. and B. Kramer, "Point Source and Stream Survey Report,
Indiana-Kentucky Electric Corporation, Clifty Creek Station, Madison,
Indiana," prepared by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Indiana
District Office, 111 Diamond Avenue, Evansville, Indiana, August 21,
1973.
14. Environmental Protection Agency data entitled, "Thermal Pollution
Studies," July 1968 - October 1970.
15. Geyer, J., Edinger, J., Graves, W., and D. Brady, "Field Sites and Sur-
vey Methods," The Johns Hopkins University, Cooling Water Studies for
Edison Electric Institute Report No. 3, Department of Environmental
Engineering Source, Baltimore, Maryland, June 1968.
16. Brady D. and J. Geyer, "Development of a General Computer Model for
Simulating Thermal Discharges in Three Dimensions," The Johns Hopkins
tiiiversity, Cooling Water Studies for Edison Electric Institute, Report
No. 7, Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering, Baltimore,
Maryland, February 1972.
17. Till, H., "A Computer Model for Three-Dimensional Simulation of Thermal
Discharges into Rivers," doctoral dissertation, Department of Nuclear
Engineering, University of Missouri, Rolla, 1973.
18. Pressman, A., "Aerial Infra-red Survey of Portions of the Monongahela,
Ohio, and Allegheny Rivers: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Vicinity," Monitor-
ing Operations Division, EPA-NERC, Las Vegas, Nevada, prepared for Sur-
veillance and Analysis Division, EPA - Region III, Project No. N89.6,
June 1973.
19. Aerial Infra-red Survey done by Surveillance and Analysis Division,
EPA-Region III (tx> be published).
20a. Frank, L. Parker Associates, WAPORA, Incorporated, "Movement of the
Discharges of the Heated Effluent From the J. M. Stuart Power Plant,"
for Dayton Power and Light Company, Dayton, Ohio, July 1972.
20b. Letter to Mr. Howard Palmer, Vice President, Environmental Management,
Dayton Power and Light Company, Dayton, Ohio, from Frank L. Parker,
WAPORA, Inc., August 7, 1972.
20c. Letter to Mr. Howard Palmer, Vice President, Environmental Management,
Dayton Power and Light Company, Dayton, Ohio from Frank L. Parker,
WAPORA, Inc., August 21, 1972.
21. Statement of Gary S. Milburn, United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V In the Matter of J. M. Stuart Power Station, Hearings
before the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board, August 8, 1972.
-------
370
22a. Letter to Gary S. Milburn, Enforcement Division, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency Region V, Chicago, Illinois, from Bruce A. Tichenor and
Mostafa Shirazi of Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific Northwest
Water Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, July 28, 1972.
22b. Letter to Gary S. Milburn, Enforcement Division, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency Region V, Chicago, Illinois, from Bruce A. Tichenor and
Mostafa Shirazi of Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific Northwest
Water Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, September 7, 1972.
23a. Memorandum from Robert J. Boes of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanita-
tion Commission, Cincinnati, Ohio to Robert K. Horton, Executive
Director on the subject, "Effect of Thermal Discharges from J. M. Stuart
Power Plant on Downstream Ohio River Temperatures."
23b. Memorandum from Robert J. Boes of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanita-
tion Commission, Cincinnati, Ohio to Robert K. Horton, Executive
Director on the subject, "Effect of Thermal Discharges from J. M. Stuart
Power Plant," September 22, 1972.
24. Hirst, E., "Analysis of Round, Turbulent, Buoyant Jets Discharged to
Flowing Stratified Ambients," Oak Ridge National Laboratory Report
ORNL-TM-3470, June 1971.
25a. Shirazi, M., L. Davis, K. Byram, "An Evaluation of Ambient Turbulence
Effects on a Buoyant Plume Madel," Proceedings of the 1973 Summer Com-
puter Simulation Conference, Montreal, Canada, July 17-19, 1973.
26. M^Quivey, R., T. Keefer, M. Shirazi, "Basic Data Report on the Turbulent
Spread of Heat and Matter," Lhited States Department of Interior Geo-
logical Survey, liiited States Environmental Protection Agency Report,
Fort Collins, Colorado, August 1971.
27. Thackston, E., and F. Parker, "Effect of Geographic Location on Cooling
Pond Requirements and Performance," Department of Environmental and
Water Resources Engineering, Vanderbilt University, prepared for the
Water Quality Office Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution
Control Research Series Report 16130 FDQ 03/71, March 1971.
28. Le Bosquet, A., "Cooling Water Benefits from Increased River Flows,"
Journal New England Water Works Association, Volume 60, pp. 111-116,
1946.
-------
-------
378
Appendix A
Statistical Analysis
The river temperatures computed by each of the models were compared
with the river temperatures measured at the four tarperature measuranent
stations used in this study (see Section 6). Figures A.I and A. 2 show the
frequency distributions of the difference between observed and computed
temperatures for each model at each station. These figures also show the
mean and the standard deviation of the distribution as well as the number
of sample points compared at each station.
The computational procedure used to obtain these statistical
parameters was as follows:
N
For the mean, y y ,
_i «
y - 2=V~ (A.I)
where
N = Number of sample points
d = T - TX/I, the temperature difference
a c M' r
and
T = Computed temperature
T = Measured temperature
The standard deviation, a, is given by
a = (A. 2)
where
N -
I (d - y)
? M i2 ^ ^
I (d - y)
a=l
2
(A. 3)
-------
•STR&TTON•
IUU
. 90
UJ 8°
O
5 70
cr
3 60
CJ
o
u. 50
o
£ 40
UJ
E 30
^ 20
10
0
1 1 1 1 1
_
-
-
1 — =
M -
r~\ 1 -
— i K-I i 1
— i — i — i — i — i — i —
p. =-0,59
cr = 1.60
N =299
.
-
•
-
"
' 1 '
1 I--U-I l__l
IUU
90
uj 80
-------
100
90
uj 80
0
5 70
§ 60
fe 50
£ 40
UJ
" 30
°- 20
10
0
^
-
-
_
-
. .
I — i — r~
^J
, i I
/I 7 1
"I
1 _
1
|
~ I 1
I
i
i n i
1 1
fJ. -- -0.06
a = 202
N = 366
,
L
i i
374
1
-
-
-1
-
-
1 1
90
uj 80
£ 70
§ 60
o
fe 50
£ 40
£ 30
°- 20
10
0
III!
-
-
-
-
, ,
I
i i 1
1 I 1
-d -
PARKERSBURG —
inn
' i
1
1
\— — 1
n -
1 1
i i —
i ]
T ! i 1 1 1
p. - -258
a = 1 23
N = 350
—
- ~
-
—
— 1 ! ! 1 1 1
*. -? -i n i ? 14
90
uj 80
O
if 70
§60
u. 50
o
£ 40
£ 30
*- 20
10
0
—
-
-
-
-
1
1
_
-T" "
4 -3 -
r----,
! 1 — —
/i = I.OI
a- = 2 82
N = 255
-
, — ~
- r i— r "i i
i i ! i
7 -1 0 1 234
-4 -3-2-1 0 I 2
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, °C
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, °C
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, °C
COLHEAT
STREAM
E8G
OJ
CO
o
100
90
uj 80
£ 70
tt fin
o
u. 50
o
t; 40
UJ
X 30
UJ
°- 20
10
n
-T III
^
-
-
[
1 -
, 1
1 1 L— J 1
1 1 I 1 1
\l -- 070
o- = 1 47
N = 329
_
-
,
- L
' 1 ~l^
i -i
90
uj 80
o
£ 70
8 60
o
u.50
£ 40
LU
£ 30
LU
°- 20
10
n
- HUNII
i i i i i i
-
i j
1 1
r"1 i 1 1 I---
i i
<0 1 UN
1 1 1 1 1 1
p. -- -254
a = 1 07
N = 313
-
-
-
-
-
1 -L- 1
inn
90
uj 80
I 70
8 60
o
u. 50
o
£ 40
UJ
g 30
LU
°- 20
10
n
i i i i i
-
-
-
-
-
-
r.r-
i i ^ -.4- ---\ i
l i i i l 1
/i = 173
a = 209
N = 233
-
-
-
-
- ^ r...-, -
i-— -[""1 i
i i i i i i
-4-3-2-1 0 I 2 34
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, °C
01234
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, °C
-4-3-2-101234
TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE, "C
Figure A.2
-------
381
A linear regression analysis was performed on the data of each
scatter diagram shown in Section 6. These scatter diagrams plot measured
temperatures on the horizontal axis and computed temperatures on the vertical
axis for each model at each temperature measurement station. The linear re-
ft
gression analysis determines a line that best fits the data and which repre-
sents a functional relationship between the measured and computed temperature.
The regression coefficients, intercepts and correlation coefficients
are computed as follows : First the sum of the cross products of the devia-
tions from the mean, S , is computed from
Jllx>
Smc
N N
I (Tca - V I CTmc* - V
where
T denotes the mean of the measured temperatures at a
station.
T denotes the mean of the computed temperatures at a
station for a model
Next, S is found by substituting T for T in (A.4). The slope, G ,
jimi in c mo
of the regression line is given by
S
r - mc
Gmc - 3 (A. 5)
By "best fit" is meant the line that has the property that the sum of
the squares of vertical deviations of observations from this line is
smaller than the corresponding sum of squares of deviations from any other
line. See R. L. Wine, Statistics for Scientists and Engineers. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs., N.J., 1964, for further amplification.
-------
382
and the intercept, a by
amc = Tc " Gmc Tm ^A'6^
Finally, the correlation coefficient is calculated
S2
rmc ' ^T (A'7)
mm cc
where S is found in (A.4) by substituting T for T .
^•V* *** ill
The regression line for each model at each temperature measure-
ment station and its correlation coefficient are shown in Fig. A.3.
-------
383.
0_
35.Q
STRATTON
STREAM ,'//
35.0
WHEELING
28.0-
- 21.0
14.0
7.0
rE-G * °'983
0.985
0 7.0 14.0 21.0 28.0 35.0 °" 70 14.0 21.0
PARKERSBURG HUNTINGTON
28.0 35.0
35.0
28.0
21.0
14.0
7.0
35.0
28.0
21.0
14.0
7.0
T=. , - 0.980
E-
-------
384
Appendix B
Fish Names
Common Name
Scientific Name
Bigeye chub
Black bass
Black bullhead
Blue catfish
Blue sucker
Bluegill sunfish
Brown bullhead
Brook trout
Buffalofish
Bullhead
Carp
Catfish
Channel catfish
Chinook salmon
Coho salmon
Common sucker
Crappie
Creek chub
Emerald shiner
Flathead catfish
Freshwater drum
Gar pike
Hybopsis amblops
Micropterus sp.
lotalurus melas
Ictalurus furoatus
Cycleptus elangatus
Lepomis majsvoohirus
Ictalurus nebulosus
Salvelinus fontinalis
Ictiobus sp.
lotalurus sp.
Cypvinus oavp-io
latalurus aatus
Ictalwnts pimatatus
Oncorhyncus tstiattytsoha
Onaovhynaus kisutoh
Catostomus commersoni
Poxomis sp.
Semoti-lus atromaaulatus
Notpopis atheviono-ldes
Pylod-ictis olivaris
Aplodinotus gvunniens
Lepisosteus osseus
-------
385
Common Name
Scientific Name
Gizzard shad
Golden redhorse
Goldeye
Lake sturgeon
Largemouth bass
Longear sunfish
Mooneye
Mudpuppy
Muskellunge
Rainbow trout
Sauger
Shiners
Skipjack herring
Smallroouth bass
Sockeye salmon
Spoon-bill cat
Spotted bass
Stoneroller
Striped bass
Sunfishes
Walleye
White bass
White perch
Yellow perch
Dorosoma oepedianum
Moxostoma erythrunm
Hiodon alosaides
Aeipenser fulveseens
Micropteru.8 salmoides
Lepom-is megalotis
H-iodon tergisus
Neaturus moculosus
Esox masquinongy ohioeneis
Salmo gairdneri
Stizostedion aanadense
Notropis sp.
Alosa ckrysochloris
Miaroptems dolomieui
Onaorhyncus nerka
Polyodcm spatkula
Mieropterus punatulatus
Campostoma anomalum
Morone scucatilis
Lepomis sp.
Stizostedion vitretan vitreum
MoTone ahrysops
Morone americana
Perca flav&eoene
-------
386
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 1- Report No. 2.
SHEET EPA-905/9-74-004
4. Title and Subtitle
Ohio River Cooling Water Study
7. Author(s) Anthony Policastro, James 0. Reisa, Jr.,
Br^ian P. Butz, Donald R. Schreoardus, Barbara-Ann Lewis
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
2. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
EPA Region V
Enforcement Division
1 N. Wacker Drive
Chicago. Illinois 60606
S.^ecipient's Accession No.
1. Report Date
June 1974
6.
8. Performing Organization Kept.
No.
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contract /Grant No.
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
Final
14.
5. Supplementary Notes
EPA Project Officers: Gary Mil burn, Region V and Charles Kaplan, Region IV
6. Abstracts y^ stu(jy presents a review and critique of existing technical information
relevant to the environmental effects of the use of the Ohio River main stem for
cooling. In order to evaluate the effect of heat discharges on the indigenous
aquatic life of the Ohio River, an extensive review and critique of past and existim
studies dealing with the biological aspects of cooling water was undertaken. In ord<
to judge the effect of heat discharges on tfie thermal regime of the river, three one^
dimensional river temperature prediction models - COLHEAT, STREAM and Edinger-Geyer
were evaluated, and the most appropriate model was selected to analyze changes in
temperature distribution along the river. The effects of heat discharges on the
thermal regime of the river near the points of discharge were evaluated by analyzing
and critiquing available thermal plume study results.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17a. Descriptors
Aquatic biology, Cooling water, temperature discharges
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Ohio River, heat discharges, temperature prediction, COLHEAT, STREAM,
Edinger-Geyer
17c. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
19. Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
22. Price
FORM NTIS-35 (REV. 3-72)
THIS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED
USCOMM-DC 14952
------- |