turned to a river, lake, or the ocean, or recycled through a cooling tower 

 or pond where some of the water is consumed by evaporation. 



The point is, the waste heat must be dissipated somewhere into the en- 

 vironment or used for purposes other than conversion to electricity. Im- 

 proved powerplant efficiency can help extend our fuel supplies and also 

 lessen cooling requirements. Since the oceans contain over 97 percent 

 of the world's water,* their use as a heat sink should have the least notice- 

 able effect on the environment. Many electrical generating plants should 

 thus be sited to take advantage of the excellent heat absorbing capacity 

 provided by the oceans. Nine nuclear powerplants in the United States 

 are presently in operation at sites on bays or tidal rivers. The influence 

 of their cooling water discharges into the ocean can be minimized with 

 detailed knowledge of the existing physical and biological factors. 



If upwards of 1000 nuclear plants are required by the end of the 

 century, as is anticipated by some industry projections, some fraction 

 should and will be situated in the coastal zone. To accommodate them, 

 new approaches to coastal siting are being explored with an eye to con- 

 serving land. One is the construction of so-called "nuclear-parks" in which 

 a number of nuclear generating stations would be clustered at a single 

 location. Another sites nuclear powerplants offshore on floating "islands" 

 inside protective breakwaters. Other energy generation and energy conver- 

 sion facilities can be envisioned that would benefit by ocean siting. 



NACOA stresses that an accommodation must be reached between the 

 legitimate concerns for our environment and the energy needs of a dynamic 

 society. NACOA feels that both can be substantially satisfied if available 

 technology is utilized and if a concerted and unified efTort is made to 

 carefully weigh the alternatives and then move ahead. NACOA feels that 

 the oceanic solutions to many of these problems have not received as much 

 attention as they merit. 



NACOA feels that a national objective of our ocean program should 

 be to have the technology and environmental information in hand such 

 that decision-makers can judge the consequences of proceeding with off- 

 shore oil and gas development as well as the placing of new energy-related 

 facilities safely and economically in offshore waters. Several advantages 

 can be identified. First, more coastal land could be retained for recreation 

 or for wildlife preserves. Second, adequate cooling water could be ob- 

 tained without the often severe problems associated with thermal discharges 

 in restricted water. Third, by placing the facilities remote from people 

 and in many cases placing them on the bottom, well below the turbulent 

 environment of the surface, it is possible to design in much improved 

 safety features. In short, progress doesn't have to mean a degraded environ- 



* Roughly 2 percent is tied up in icecaps and glaciers and less than 1 percent is in 

 fresh water lakes, streams, and groundwater. 



22 



