Issues Associated with

Retrofitting Coastal Power P

John S. Maul

Once-through C

Results Symp

University of C

Davis, Califo

January 16, 
Topics for the next 20 min

• Estimating capital costs of retrofit

• Some comparisons• Additional costs of retrofitting
Estimating capital cost

Two approaches

1. Bottom up---build up from desig

component costs and installation 

2. Top down---

• Establish a range based on known c

other projects

• Place in range based on a “degree o

difficulty” judgment
Establishing the range

• Correlation of reported project co

– 50 plants

– Coal/gas/nuclear

– Fresh/brackish/saline water source

– Wide range of climates

• Circulating water flow used as

correlating factor

• Costs fell into three clusters

– Low; average; high
Graphical correlation

Retrofit Project Costs---Degree of Difficulty

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2

Circulating Water Flowrate, gpm

RetrofitCost,Millionsof$

Easy Average Difficult

~ $425/gpm

~ $165/gpm

~ $275/gpm
Things that set degree of dif

• Siting tower

– Relocation of structures

– Land acquisition

– Grading of site for gravity return

• Excavation for circ. water lines and s

– Interferences

– Soil conditions

• Wet, unstable

• Bedrock

• Contaminated
More things

• Noise co

– Specia

– Wind w

• Plume a

– Higher – Harde
Another thing

Base-load plant with long remaining l

– Re-optimize

• Lower circulating water flow

• Higher range

– Probable re-tubing of condenser

– Relocation of inlet exit lines

– Extended outage for modifications
Some comparisons

• Maulbetsch Consulting/TetraTech

– Direct comparison at 15 plants

– MC/TT = 1.03 (Total for all 15 plan
Comparison with “Avera

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 50 100 150 20

Maulbetsch Consulting "Average", $ millions

TetraTech,$millions

Scattergood

Huntington Beach

Pittsburg

+ 40% + 20%
Comparison with “Difficu

0

100200300400500600700800

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 

Maulbetsch Consulting "Difficult", $ millions

TetraTech,$millions
Comparison with Estim

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 50 100 150 200 250 

Maulbetsch Consulting Estimate, $ millions

TetraTechEstimate,$millions

+ ~20%

- ~2

Haynes

Pittsburg

Scattergood

El Segundo
Plants with difference

• Alamitos: 6 units; 1982 MW; 800,000 

– MC; rated as “difficult” ($325 million)

• Plume abatement

• High circ. water line installation costs

• Demolition costs

– T’Tech ($210 million; ~ MC “average”)

• No plume abatement (~ $60 million)

• 3 towers vs. 6 towers (large savings on circ. 
Plants with difference

• Scattergood: 3 units; 803 MW; 344,00

– MC; rated as “average” to “difficult” ($

• Plume abatement

• One tower per unit

• Moderate but not severe line costs

– T’Tech ($160 million; > MC “difficult”)

• Plume abatement

• Two towers for Unit 3

• Costs related to switchyard

• Noise abatement
Additional (non-capital) c

• Drift/PM10 offsets

• Plant downtime

• Land acquisition/security zone enhan

• Permitting time
Drift/PM10 Offsets

• Assuming

– Seawater make-up

– Drift eliminators spec’d at 0.0005%

– All drift solids considered PM10

• For a 250 MW plant operating at 8

PM10 emissions ~ 60 tons/year
Plant downtime

• Primarily affected by tie-in to cond

and intake/discharge facilities

• Estimates vary from < 1 month to 

year

• If condenser is re-optimized, time i

much longer

• Costs are dependent on scheduling
Land acquisition/security 

• Situations where insufficient area is a

on-site

• Establish a buffer zone from near nei

• Special considerations for nuclear pla

– Location of tower may extend security z

– Additional fencing, perimeter monitors, 

– Increased security staff
Permitting costs

• No basis for estimating but might b

substantial

– Significant time requirements

– Legal and consulting assistance

Operating costs

• Additional operating power requir

– Pumping power

– Fan power

• Penalty costs—effect of cooling sys

plant performance

– Heat rate

– Plant capacity
Additional pumping pow

• Head losse

water lines

• Getting wa

tower

• Assume...

– 1000’ line

– 40’ rise

• Pump pow
Fan Power

• ~ 10,00• ~200 H• Fan po
Effect on condensing tempe

Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD)

Range

Tcond

Thot

Tcold

Circ. Water Flow

Source water temperature

Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD)

Range

Tcond

Thot

Tcold

Circ. Water Flow

Source water temperature

Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD)

Range

Tcond

Thot

Tcold

Circ. Water Flow

Source water temperature

Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD)

Range

Tcond

Thot

Tcold

Circ. Water Flow

Source water temperature

Condenser TTDApproach

TcondTamb. wb

Circ. Water 

Thot water

Condenser TTDApproach

TcondTamb. wb

Circ. Water 

Thot water

Condenser TTDApproach

TcondTamb. wb

Circ. Water 

Thot water

Condenser TTDApproach

TcondTamb. wb

Circ. Water 

Thot water

Condenser TTDApproach

TcondTamb. wb

Circ. Water 

Thot water
Cold water comparison

Moss Landing Environmental Temperatures

5052545658606264666870

01-Oct-05 20-Nov-05 09-Jan-06 28-Feb-06 19-Apr-06 08-Jun-06 28-Ju

Date

Temperature,F

Ocean Water Temperature Wet Bulb Max