Power plant siting on Wisconsin's coasts: A case study of a displaceable use

Abstract

The issue of whether power plants should be located on Wisconsin's Lake Michigan shore or inland is addressed in this article. It is quite likely that sites for several large power plants will be needed before the year 2000. Available evidence on the comparative costs of condenser cooling indicates that there may or may not be substantial economies from locating these plants at lakeshore sites depending on site characteristics, fuel costs, and other variables. Environmental impacts of coastal and inland siting are surveyed and also appear to be highly site‐specific. Important issues arise with respect to the intense competition for coastal land and the aquatic impacts at both coastal and inland sites. A third alternative, that of utilizing sites that are in the coastal zone but set back from the water's edge, has some promising aspects, but data on costs are scarce and inconclusive. Conclusions center on the importance of not ruling out either coastal or inland locations in future efforts to identify suitable power plant sites, the need to review current water‐quality measures, and the need for further research on institutions to facilitate sound siting decisions.