kickingfrog Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/832748--pickering-nuclear-plant-ordered-to-quit-killing-fish Carola Vyhnak Urban Affairs Reporter The Pickering nuclear power plant is killing fish by the millions. Close to one million fish and 62 million fish eggs and larvae die each year when they’re sucked into the water intake channel in Lake Ontario, which the plant uses to cool steam condensers. The fish, which include alewife, northern pike, Chinook salmon and rainbow smelt, are killed when they’re trapped on intake screens or suffer cold water shock after leaving warmer water that’s discharged into the lake. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has told Ontario Power Generation, which operates the plant, to reduce fish mortality by 80 per cent. And in renewing Pickering A station’s operating licence last month, the nuclear regulator asked for annual public reports on fish mortality and the effectiveness of steps OPG is taking to reduce rates. “Quite clearly we were talking about a lot of fish,” says a spokesperson for the commission, adding that while the kill has been going on “forever,” environmental issues were only recently added to licensing considerations. But while the requirement for regular reports is a “huge start,” says an environmental watchdog, OPG hasn’t done enough to stop what he calls the “biggest killer of fish on the lake.” A 610-metre barrier net it has strung in front of the channel is insufficient because it’s removed in winter and “does nothing about thermal pollution and nothing about larvae and eggs,” says Mark Mattson, president of Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, a grassroots charity working to protect the health of the lake. “This is important to the lake’s ecosystem — the birds and people who eat the fish, and the commercial fishery,” he said in an interview. “What a terrible precedent it is that one of the biggest public corporations can just ignore the rules for fish and fish habitat in Canada.” Mattson calls the plant’s cooling system the worst of available technologies. “It sucks in clean water along with fish, eggs and larvae, then spits it back at close to hot-tub temperatures.” The combined thermal plume from Pickering stations A and B ranges from 150 to 800 hectares at the water surface year round, and 50 to 300 hectares at the bottom during cold weather, he said. But OPG denies plant operations are having an adverse effect on aquatic life or habitat and maintains there’s no evidence that thermal emissions are killing fish. The agency installed the net and is monitoring mortality rates and lake temperatures because “we’re always looking for ways to reduce the impact on the environment,” said spokesperson Ted Gruetzner. After four months, it’s too soon to say how effective the net is, but already fewer large fish are being seen. Small swimmers can still get through. Installed last October, the net was removed for the winter because of the risks to divers doing maintenance work, Gruetzner explained, adding that fish are less likely to enter the channel in cold weather. Noting that OPG spends more than $1 million a year on habitat projects in the province, he said the operator will consider stocking the lake with fish to replace those killed. The nuclear safety commission told OPG in October 2008 to fix the problem, reducing mortality for adult fish by 80 per cent and for eggs and larvae by 60 per cent. Citing the company’s failure to protect the lake’s inhabitants, the commission called the fish kill “an unreasonable risk to the environment.” The Darlington nuclear plant uses a different intake system that doesn’t draw fish in. Edited July 7, 2010 by kickingfrog
Headhunter Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 Very interesting article... thanks for posting it. If the numbers represented in the article are actually fact, I would think that a certain special interest group, who have been hounding folks here on the board about keeping Lake O fish, would have a new target to pursue. HH
alexcba Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 Very interesting article... thanks for posting it. If the numbers represented in the article are actually fact, I would think that a certain special interest group, who have been hounding folks here on the board about keeping Lake O fish, would have a new target to pursue. HH
uglyfish Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 OPG takes a lot of heat for this kinda stuff... but what they never report is the millions upon millions they spend on research to solve problems and make things better. Not just the nuke plants, but all the plants they operate.
Spiel Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 This is not new "News" (sadly) and OPG doesn't have an exclusive on this. Unfortunately this problem appears to be a problem all around the Great Lakes and not just with Hydro production but also with companies that use lake water for cooling operations. Imagine the numbers of fish lost? http://www.ofncommun...showtopic=44812
crappieperchhunter Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 Don't bother OPG with this now during a heat wave. I don't wanna lose my AC Have them pencil in a resolution in September/October or next April/May
Twocoda Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 i wonder if thats where all the Lake Huron salmon went ...strange it would only gobble up the big ones though ...
WeedLine Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 There are tons of fish in Lake O. Don't worry about the nuke, worry about asian carp.
bucktail Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 I think they should turn the cooling system off........
Twocoda Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 I think they should turn the cooling system off........ DOH!!!! OK Homer
ehg Posted July 7, 2010 Report Posted July 7, 2010 It still is good fishing around there in mid-winter. The numbers seem high but maybe new diversions from intake will lower amount.
Michael_Brown Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 With the millions they spend in research and other environmental programs to greenwash their image, they should possibly consider changing their system to something similar to Darlington. They have already dumped enough cash into upgrades and repairs why not adopt a better water intake system. Yes it would cost money but it would also create jobs, improve the system and reduce the impact on the ecosystem and it might just help their public image to show they are being proactive in solving a problem.
Carp Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 My uncle works at the Pickering nuke plant. He says there's always lots of fish sucked against the grates, including large trout, salmon, muskie and walleye. It's one of the prices we pay for nuclear energy.
discophish Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Why don't they just plug up the intake hole with golf balls and rubber tires? The major think tanks can redeem their method elsewhere.
OhioFisherman Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 I used to deliver stuff to the power plants in my area along the lake shore(Erie. Unless falling water( eg Niagra ) is used to generate electrical power it is a standard practice in coal generated plants to heat water and produce steam to turn the turbines. The power plant in Lorain Ohio used to have a stack of fish outside every morning that had been caught on their water intake screens. So it is not just nuclear plants, and I never got a chance to see what was happening at the water purification plants. It is just my guess that supplying a large city with water requires a tremendous water intake? Possibly more than a power plant? The plant in Lorain used to give the fish to farmers for fertilizer.
daryl0815 Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 I work at both Pickering and Darligton sites, The nets that they are using now do seem to be working as far as keeping fish out of the intake screens, however, in the winter, the nets are taken away for a few months, and so that could be a bit of an issue. Most of the fish being sucked into the intake now are gobies, which is ok in my books. Like many others on here have said, OPG isnt the only company on the great lakes, or most large bodies of water that has a water intake system that sucks fish in, they are just the ones with the spotlight on them right now, and the ones who actually have to be accountable for the ammount of fish that they kill. The CNSC is the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, who told OPG to lower its intake of fish, not anyone from the MNR or government, imagine all of the non regulated companies and what they are doing to the lakes!
Dara Posted July 9, 2010 Report Posted July 9, 2010 Dalton is looking for an excuse to raise power rates again
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now