You have been asked to evaluate the economic implications of various methods for cooling condenser effluents from a 200-MW steam-electric plant. In this regard, cooling ponds and once-through cooling systems have been eliminated from consideration because of their adverse ecological effects. It has been decided to use cooling towers to dissipate waste heat to the atmosphere. There are two basic types of cooling towers: wet and dry. Furthermore, heat may be removed from condenser water by (1) forcing (mechanically) air through the tower or (2) allowing heat transfer to occur by making use of natural draft. Consequently, there are four basic cooling tower designs that could be considered. Assuming that the cost of capital to the utility company is 12% per year, your job is to recommend the best alternative (i.e., the least expensive during the service life) in view of the data in Table P6-6. Further, assume that each alternative is capable of satisfactorily removing waste heat from the condensers of a 200-MW power plant.

What noneconomk factors can you identify that might also play a role in the decision-making process?

Alternative Types of Cooling Towers for a 200-Megawatt Fossil-Fired Power Plant Operating at Full Capacity in Problem 6-6 TABLE P6-6 Alternative Wet Tower Wet Tower Dry Tower Dry Tower Mech. Draft $3 milliorn 40 200-hp Natural Draft S8.7 million None Mech. Draft $5.1 million 20 200-hp LD. Natural Draft $9.0 million None Initial cost Power for LD. fans Power for pumps induced-draft fans fans 20 150-hp pumps $0.15 million 20 150-hp pumps $0.10 million 40100-hp pumps 50.17 million 40 100-hp pumps $0.12 million Mechanical maintenance/year Service life Market value 30 vears 30 years 30 years 30 years