Activists want plant to be fish-friendly

April 22, 2010 at 12:00a.m.

Associated Press

TOLEDO

Electricity-generating plants that suck water out of lakes and rivers are coming under attack by environmentalists who call them “fish-killing machines.”

Activists in Ohio want regulators to force the operator of a plant along Lake Erie to install costly changes that would stop millions of fish from being killed each year. But the utility that operates the plant says the changes could drive up electricity rates.

Hundreds of power plants and factories around the nation use water from rivers, lakes, oceans and creeks to cool their machines. Older plants use systems that trap millions of fish in screens and suck in smaller aquatic organisms.

Two states — New York and California — now are considering proposals designed to limit the fish kills. Some plants in other states have been forced to make changes.

The power plant in Ohio sits at the mouth of the Maumee River, one of Lake Erie’s main tributaries that’s a prime spot for spawning walleye and near some of the lake’s most popular fishing spots.

Its owner, Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., is installing gate-like devices that the company hopes will cut down on the 46 million adult fish that die each year at the power plant in Toledo.

How well the idea will work isn’t known.

The company thinks the $500,000 fix could reduce fish kills by close to 80 percent, said FirstEnergy spokesman Mark Durbin.

The company’s plan is much less expensive than building a $100 million cooling tower, which is what environmentalists want.

Those groups say cooling towers have been proven to save 90 percent of the fish that are killed and question whether the gate-like devices will work.

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has proposed allowing FirstEnergy to test its plan through the end of the year and then study the results.

Ohio regulators will hear from the public Thursday night at a meeting about the plan and whether to renew the plant’s water-discharge permit.

Environmentalists say that the cost of cooling tower isn’t that great when compared with the cost of killing fish in an area that is magnet for anglers.

“They haven’t factored in the economic impact this fish-killing machine has on Lake Erie,” said Shannon Fisk, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled a year ago that states can weigh costs against benefits in deciding whether to order power plants to make environmental upgrades protecting fish. The ruling was a victory for the power industry, which advocated for the use of cost-benefit analysis on environmental issues.