Employment and Land Requirements for Alternatives to Byron ... · tQm&~'~- lO2a~L Reviewed Bn:...

6-ea;d- &-33

License Renewal ApplicationEmployment and Land Requirements Calculation Package

Employment and Land Requirements for.Alternatives to Byron Units 1 and 2 and

Braidwood Units 1 and 2

LR Chapter 7 Energy Alternatives

September 18, 2012

Prepared for:

Exelon Nuclear

Prepared by:

Chuck ConradTetra Tech

Aiken, South Carolina


Approval Page

Employment and Land Requirements forAlternatives to Byron Units I and 2 and

Braidwood Units I and 2

September 18, 2012

Author: Date:

tQm&~'~- lO2a~L

Reviewed Bn:

VrPoject Manger:.

i/gA


Employment and Land Requirements forAlternatives to Byron Units I and 2 and

Braidwood Units I and 2

This discussion supports the alternatives analysis in Chapter 7 of the EnvironmentalReport.

Spreadsheets were used to estimate (1) the number of full time employees needed forconstruction and operation of hypothetical coal- and gas-fired and nuclear electricgeneration units that could be built to provide the same net generating capacity as theexisting units (rounded up to 2,400 megawatts electric (MWe) to be the same for bothByron and Braidwood), (2) the amount of land required for a variety of alternativeelectric generation technologies (e.g. coal- and gas- fired electric generation units,nuclear, hydropower, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, wind, and geothermal) that couldprovide approximately the same net generating capacity as the existing units. For thecoal- and gas-fired alternatives the net generating capacity was based on availablestandard-size units (four 600 MW units for coal and six 400 MW units for gas).

All estimates are based on data from recent studies and projects constructed within thepast eight years. The available data was normalized by determining the amount perMW for each alternative technology. To estimate the number of employees or amountof land needed, the analyst inputs the size (in MW) of the alternative technology into thespreadsheet. The spreadsheet multiplies the size of the plant by the amount per MWand enters the result in a summary table. Figure 1 is the summary table from thespreadsheet. Figure 2 shows the calculations for the gas-fired alternative. Figure 3show the calculations for the pulverized coal-fired alternative. Figure 4 shows thecalculations for the new nuclear power alternative. Figure 5 shows the land requirementcalculations for renewable alternatives (e.g., hydropower, solar, wind, and geothermaltechnologies).

3

Assumed Facility Characteristics Renewable Fueled Land Requirements 0I Square miles reqirdwo tomptace capaciry I

Fossil Fueled Employment and Site Characteristics

Full Tim m I R ulred

Peak Constructioni Workcforce11,7831

Average Construction Workftorce1 991 1

Acres Required for Facllity

Ararqiedt elcecpct

New Nuclear Employment and Site Characteristics

Main page

Figure 2 - Gas-Fired Alternative

Combinea Cycle Natural Gas

Full time Acres Acres per Peak Peak Const. Average Ave. ConstFull time employees required for MW for Construction workers per Construction workers per

Facility Net MWe employees per MW facility facility workers MW workers MWDeer Creek Station (DOE 2010) 300 30 0.100 40 0.133 360 1.200 - -

Chouteau Power Plant (AECI 2009) 540 33 0.061 22 0.041 340 0.630 225 0.417McIntosh Peaking (PSEC 2009) 360 - - 12 0.033 120 0.333 100 0.278Jack County Power Plant (PBS&J 2008) 600 10.9 0.018Hardin County (GDS 2007a) 150 2.7 0.018 100 0.667 75 0.500San Jacinto (GDS 2007b) 150 - - 3.2 0.021 100 0.667 75 0.500Toquop Energy Project (BLM 2007) 1100 25 0.023 50 0.045 1200 1.091 500 0.455Chula Vista Upgrade (CH2MHiII 2007) 100 2 0.020 3.8 0.038 147 1.470 79 0.790Vernon Power (COV 2006) 914 20 0.022 13.7 0.015 499 0.546 266 0.291South Bay Project (LSPSB 2006) 620 22 0.035 12.9 0.021 401 0.647 193 0.311Wellton-Mohawk (DOI 2005) 620 25 0.040 23 0.037 300 0.484 - -

West County Energy Center (FPL 2005) 2200 50 0.023 82 0.037 1000 0.455 350 0.159COB Energy Facility (BPA 2004) 1160 30 0.026 50.6 0.044 543 0.468 352 0.303Wanapa Energy Center (DOI 2004) 1200 30 0.025 47 0.039 600 0.500 --

BP Cherry Point (EFSEC 2004) 720 30 0.042 33 0.046 706 0.981 372 0.517Catoctin Power (Golder 2004) 600 25 0.042 20 0.033 450 0.750 175 0.292Faribault Energy Park (MEQB 2004) 250 13 0.052 12 0.048 250 1.000 138 0.552

Average 0.039 0.039 0.743 0.413

CalculationsDesired Net Output 2,400 MWe

Gross Capacity (assume 4% used on site) 2,500 MWe

2500 MWe x 0.039 Employees/MW = 94 Employees

2500 MWe x 0.039 Acres/MW = 93.600 Acres

2500 MWe x 0.743 Cons. Workers/MW = 1,783 Peak Construction workers

2500 MWe x 0.413 Cons. Workers/MW = 991 Ave. Construction workers

CC N. Gas

Pulverized Coal Boilers

Peak AverageFull time Acres Acres per Peak Construction Average Construction

Net Full time employees required for MW for Construction workers per Construction workers perFacility MWe employees per MW facility facility workers MW workers MW

Ely Energy Center (DOI 2008) 1500 214 0.143 694 0.463 2342 1.561 1221 0.814Nelson Dewey (ACE 2008) 300 26 0.087 30 0.100 425 1.417 - -Highwood Generatoin Station (USDA 2007a) 250 65 0.260 14.8 0.059 550 2.200 350 1.400Mesaba Energy (NETL 2007) 1212 185 0.153 200 0.165 1617 1.334 1078 0.889Toquop Energy Project (BLM 2007) 750 110 0.147 132 0.176 1100 1.467 450 0.600White Pine Energy Station (DOI 2007) 1590 135 0.085 239 0.150 1200 0.755 760 0.478Desert Rock Energy (SGP 2007) 1410 200 0.142 149 0.106 1700 1.206 1100 0.780AECI Carroll County (USDA 2007b) 660 139 0.211 165.3 0.250 1281 - 1.941 444 0.673Jamestown (JBPU 2006) 43 6 0.140 7.1 0.165 200 4.651 120 2.791Dry Fork Station (EDAW 2006) 385 75 0.195 31.8 0.083 1019 2.647 496 1.288Seminole Generating Station (Golder 2006) 750 50 0.067 96 0.128 1500 2.000 600 0.800Pee Dee Station (MACTEC 2006) 1200 200 0.167 128.1 0.107 1400 1.167 - -Cliffside Project (Duke 2005) 1600 80 0.050 - 1000 0.625 - -Big Stone II (OTPC 2005) 600 35 0.058 67 0.112 1400 2.333 625 1.042

Average 0.136 0.159 1.807 1.050

CalculationsDesired Net Output 2,400 MW


2550 MW x 0.136 Employees/MW = 326 Employees

2550 MW x 0.159 Acres/MW = 382 Acres

2550 MW x 1.807 Cons. Workers/MW = 4,337 Peak Construction workers

2550 MWe x 1.05 Cons. Workers/MW = 2,520 Ave. Construction workers

Pulverized Coal

0 -

Nuclear Generation Units

Peak AverageFull time Acres Acres per Peak Construction Average Construction

Net Full time employees required for MW for Construction workers per Construction workers perFacility MWe employees per MW facility facility workers MW workers MW

Turkey Point (FPL 2012) 2200 806 0.366 218 0.099 3950 1.795 2184 0.993South Texas Project (STPNOC 2011) 2600 888 0.342 300 0.115 5950 2.288 3340 1.285Comanche Peak (LGC 2011) 3200 412 0.129 400 0.125 4953 1.548 1906 0.596Fermi (DTE 2011) 1585 900 0.568 123 0.078 2900 1.830 - -

Calvert Cliffs (UniStar 2011) 1562 363 0.232 320 0.205 3950 2.529 2727 1.746Shearon Harris (PEC 2011) 2399 773 0.322 118 0.049 3150 1.313 - -

Vogtle (SN 2011) 2234 660 0.295 376 0.168 4400 1.970 3152 1.411V.C. Summer (SCE&G 2011) 2214 800 0.361 240 0.108 3600 1.626 2120 0.958North Anna (Dominion 2010) 1500 500 0.333 128.5 0.086 2500 1.667 - -

PSEG (PSE&G 2010) 2214 600 0.271 240 0.108 3600 1.626 2120 0.958Bell Bend (UniStar 2010) 1600 363 0.227 178.9 0.112 3950 2.469 2727 1.704Levy County (PEF 2009) 2399 773 0.322 300 0.125 3300 1.376 1794 0.748William States Lee III (DE 2009) 2399 957 0.399 141 0.059 4512 1.881 2000 0.834

Average 0.321 0.111 1.840 1.123

CalculationsDesired Net Output 2,400 MW


2540 MW x 0.321 Employees/MW = 770 Employees

2540 MW x 0.111 Acres/MW = 266 Acres

2540 MW x 1.84 Cons. Workers/MW = 4,416 Peak Construction workers

2540 MWe x 1.123 Cons. Workers/MW - 2,695 Ave. Construction workers

Nuclear

Figure 4 - Combination of Gas and Coal Alternatives

Combination of Gas and Coal

Coal fired portion1,200 MWe

1,200 MWe

Gas fired portion1,200 MWe

1,200 MWe

Total Acres

Total employees

x

x

x

x

0.159 AcresMWe

0.136 EmployeesMWe

0.039 Acres

MWe

0.039 Employees

= 190.8 acres

= 163 Employees

= 46.8 acres

= 47 Employees

= 190.8

= 163

MWe

acres (coal)

Employees (coal)

+ 46.8 acres (gas)

+ 47 Employees (gas)

= 237.6

= 210

acres

Employees

Combination

is

Figure 5 - Land Requirements for Renewable Technologies and Oil

Hydropower2,400 MWe x 1,544 square miles

1,000 MWe= 3,707 square miles

Sources:

(NRC 1996b)

(NRC 1996b)

Sl units9,600 square kilometers

Solar Photovoltaic2,400 MWe x 5.40 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 30,695 acres

1 MWe 0.38 solar capacity factor

30,695 acres x 0.00156 square miles = 48 square milesacre

Solar Thermal

2,400 MWe x 9.40 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 53,432 acres1 MWe 0.38 solar capacity factor

53,432 acres x 0.00156 square miles = 83 square milesacre

Wind (present capacity factor)

Total Area Occupied2,400 MWe x 29.9 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 439,347 acres

1 MWe 0.147 wind capacity factorStructure Footprint

2,400 MWe x 0.25 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 3,673 acres1 MWe 0.147 wind capacity factor

Wind (future capacity factor)

Total Area Occupied2,400 MWe x 29.9 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 131,804 acres

1 MWe 0.49 wind capacity factor

Structure Footprint2,400 MWe x 0.25 acres x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor = 1,102 acres

1 MWe 0.49 wind capacity factor

Geothermal

12,422 hectares(PMJ, 2010)

124 square kilometers

21,623 hectares(PMJ, 2010)


(NREL 2009)(MISO 2011 b)

(NREL 2009)(MISO 2011 b)

(NREL 2009)(DOE 2008a)

(NREL 2009)(DOE 2008a)

177,798 hectares

1,487 hectares

53,339 hectares

446 hectares

2,400 MWe

10,232 acres

a 4.5 acre x 0.90 nuclear capacity factor =

1 MWe 0.95 geo capacity factor

x 0.00156 square miles =

acre

10,232

16

acres

square miles

(Shibaki 2003) 4,141 hectares(NRRI 2007)


Renewables

Land/electricity

(acre/MWe)[hectares/MlWe]

Solar Radiation available(kWhr/m 21 day)

ROI: IL, IN, IA, MI, MO, WIPV Average 5.4

4.06 4.49 [2.2]4.92

Thermal 9.43.25 3.91 [3.8]4.56

Source: NREL 2012

Southwestern USPV Average 4.0

5.79 6.29 [1.6]6.78

Thermal 5.75.24 6.45 [2.3]7.65

Source: NREL 2012 Source: DOE 2012

The average solar radiation available for the ROI as well as for Southern California (where solar technologies are mostpromising) was derived from NREL maps of solar photovoltaics (PV) resource potential and concentrating solar power (CSP)resource potential for the United States. The land requirement per MWe was used to calculate the land requirement for asolar plant.

Solar acre per MW

References:References numbers are for Byron - same references for Braidwood

Natural Gas Combined Cycle

266 AECI (Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.) 2009, Environmental Assessment, Proposed Combined-Cycle Power Plant,Mayes County, Oklahoma, March, Available at http://vw.rurdev.usda.gov/UWP-EA-AssociatedElectricCoop.html

267 BCW (Benton County, Washington) 2003. Final EIS Plymouth Generating Facility Plymouth. Washington. June 2003.

268 SLM (Bureau of Land Management) 2007. Toquop Energy Praject DEIS. Ely Field Office, Nevada, October 2007.

269 BPA (Bonneville Power Administration) 2004. FinalEISforCOBfEnergyFacility DOE/EIS-0343. June 2004.

270 CEC (California Energy Commission) 2003. Pico Power Project: Application For Certification (02-AFC-3) Santa ClaraCounty. September 2003.

271 CH2MHiII 2007 Application for Certification: Chula Vista Energy Upgrade Project August 2007.

272 COV (City of Vernon) 2006. Application for Certification: Vernon Power Plant. Docket Number 06-AFC-4. Jun 30, 2005.

DOE (Department of Energy) 2010 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Deer Creek Station Energy Facility Project,273 Brookings County, South Dakota, DOEIEIS-0415, January, Available at http:l/.wwrurdev.usda.gov/UWP-

Deer0/%20Creek%20Power.html

274 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior) 2004. Wanapa Energy Center FinalEnvironmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0342, December 2004.

275 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior) 2005. Weliton-Mohawk Generating Facility Draft EIS. DOEJEIS-0358. July 2005.

276 EFSEC (Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council) 2004. BP Cherry Point Cogeneration Praject: Volume 1 - Final EIS.DDE/EIS-0349. August 2004.

279 FPL (Florida Power & Light) 2003. Turkey Point Expansion Project Volume 1 of 3. November 2003.

280 FPL (Florida Power & Light) 2005. Site Certification Application for West County Energy Center April 2005.

281 GDS Associates, Inc, 2007a, Rural Utilities Services, Hardin County Peaking Facility Enviommental Assessment,December, Availiable at http://w.rurdev.usda.gov/UWP-East-Texas-Electric-Hardin.html

282 GDOS Associates, Inc, 2007b, Rural Utilities Services, San Jacinto County Peaking Facility Enviornmental Assessment,December, Availiable at hftp://wwwmrdev.usda.gov/UWP-East-Texas-Electric-SanJacinto.html

Golder (Golder Associates) 2004. Sempra Energy Resources Environmental Report in Support of OPCN Application284 Catoctin Power Project Frederick County, Maryland. February 2004.

278 LSPSB (L.S. Power South Bay LLC) 2006 Application for Certification: South Bay Replacement Project. Docket Number06-AFC-3. June 30, 2006.

283 MEQB (Minnesota Environmental Quality Board) 2004. Draft EIS FaPrbault Energy Park Project EQB Docket Number 02-48-PPS-FEP. February 2004.

284 PBS&J 2008. Environmental Assessment of the Proposed Jack County Power Plant Expansion Project. Jack County,Texas, June, Available at hntp:lfiww.mrdev.usda govlUWP-Brazos-Electric-Assessm.html

285 PSEC (PowerSouth Energy Cooperative), 2009, Environmental Assessment Proposed Peaking Load Generation Unit,McIntosh, Alabama, March, Available at http:l/wrurdev.usda.gov/UWP-EA-PowerSouthEnergy.html

Pulverized CoalACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) 2008, WP&L 300 MW Power Plant Volume 1 FEIS, July, Available at

249 http:/lpsc.wi.gov/apps35/ert_search/content/SearchResult.aspx

250 BLM (Bureau of Land Management) 2007. Toquop Energy Project DEIS. Ely Field Office, Nevada, October 2007.

DOI (U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management) 2007. Draft EIS for the White Pine Energy Station251 Project April 2007 Available at

http:llww.blm'gov/nv/stlen/f/tyjely-eo ffice/blm programs/energy/egarý_energy-prmjectstwhite-pineý-energyO/white-pi

ne_energy0.html

DOI (Department of the Interior) 2008, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Ely Energy Center, NV-040-09-001252 EIS, December, Available at

http://wwwblm'govlnv/st/en/fo/ely-ield-officeblbm-programs/energy/orn-line-_transmission/ely-energy-center'html

Duke (Duke Power) 2005. Preliminary Application For Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Cliffside257 Project May 2005.

253 EDAW (EDAW Platte) 2006. Request for Waiver of Permit Application for the Dry Fork Station. Prepared for Wyomingdepartment of Environmental Quality Industrial Siting Division. May 2006.

277 Golder (Golder Associates Inc.) 2006. Site Certification Application for Seminole Generating Station Unit 3. March.

JBPU (Jamestown Board of Public Utilities) 2006, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Jamestown Clean Coal255 Project, Jamestown, Chautauqua County, New York, October, Available at

http:/www.jamestownbpu.corVdeis/Jamestown%20CIean%2OCoal`%2Project%20DEIS-Section%205.pdf

256 MACTEC (MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.) 2006. Draft EIS Santee Cooper Pee Dee Electrical GeneratingStation. October 31, 2006.

261 MDEQ (Montana Department of Environmental Quality) 2002. Roundup Power Project Draft Environmental ImpactStatement. November 15, 2002.

References

NETL (National Energy Technology Laboratory) 2007, Mesaba Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement,262 Vol 1, DOEiEIS-0382D, November, Available at

http:l/ww.netL.doe.govltechnologieslcoalpowerlcctclEISleis_mesaba.htmi

258 OTPC (Otter Tail Power Company) 2005. Application for an Energy Conversion Facility Sibng Permit Big Stone ItProject. July 2005.

259 PSCW (Public Service Commission of Wisconsin) 2003. Final Environmental Impact Statement Elm Road Generating

Station. Docket 05-CE-130. July 2003.

263 SGP (Sithe Global Power LLC) 2007 Desert Rock Energy Project Draft EIS. May 2007.

264 USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) 2007a, Final Environmental Impact Statement Highwood Generating

Station, January, Available at htp:/ltw .rurdev.usda.gov/UWP-Southern-Montana-Electric.html

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development) 2007b. Final EIS Proposed Baseload Power Plant

265 Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. July 2007.

Nuclear286 DE 2009 Duke Energy, William States Lee Ill, Units 1 & 2 COLA, April, Available at http:l/ww.nrc.govlreactorslnew-

reactorslcollleeldocuments.html#application

Dominion 2010, Dominion Virginia Power, North Anna Unit 3 COLA, Part 3, Environmental Report, Rev 3, June,Available at http:/www.nrc.govlreactorstnew-reactorsfcotnorth-anna/documents.html~application

053 DTE 2011 Detroit Edison Company, Fermi 3 COLA, Part 3, Environmental Report, Rev 2, March, Available athttp:li .nrc.govlreactors/new-reactorslcollfermitdocuments.html#application

287 STPNOC 2011 STP Nuclear Operating Company, South Texas Project Units 3 and 4 Final Environmental ImpactStatement, Available at http:llpbadupws.nrc.govldocslML1 103/ML1 10340962.html

288 FPL 2012 Florida Power & Light, Turkey Point Plant, Units 6 & 7, COL Application, Part 3, Rev 3, January, Available at

http://w .nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactorslcol/turkey-point/documents.html

LGC 2011 Luminant Generation Company LLC , Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4, COL Application,

289 Part 3 Environmental Report, Available at http:llwww.nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactorslcollcomanche-peakldocuments.html#application

290 PEC 2011 Progress Energy Carolinas, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, COL Application, Part 3, EnvironmentalReport, June, Available at http:ll// .nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactors/col/harris/documents.html#application

PEF 2009 Progress Energy Florida Levy Units 1 and 2 COLA, Part 3, Rev 1 Available at261 http:ll/w.nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactorslcolllevyldocuments.html#application

054 PSE&G 2010 Public Service Electric and Gas Company, PSEG ESP Application, Part 3, Environmental Report, Rev 0,June, Available at http:llm.nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactorslesplpseg.html

292 SCG&E 2011 South Carolina Gas & Electric, V.C. Summer COL Application, Part 3, Environmental Report, Rev 2,August, Available at http:liwww.nrc.govlreactorslnew-reactorslcollsummerldocuments.html#application

293 SN 2011 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 & 4, COL Application, Part 3Environmental Report, Available at http://l.nrc govlreactors/new-reactors/colvogtle/documents.html#application

057 UniStar 2010, UniStar Nuclear, Bell Send Nuclear Power Plant, COLA, Part 3 Environmental Report, Rev 2, July,05 Available at http:lww.nrc.govlreactors/new-reactrslcUbell-bend/documents.html#application

294 UniStar 2011, UniStar Nuclear, Calvert Cliffs Power Plant Unit 3 COLA, Part 3 Environmental Report, Rev 7, January,Available at http:llý.nrc.gov/reactrs/new-reactrscoVtcavert-cliffs/documents.htmWapplication

Renewables

062 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 2012. SunShot Vision Study, Chapter 7, "Solar Power Environmental Impacts andSiting Challenges." Available at http:/Iw l.eere.energy.gov/solarlsunshotlvisionstudy.html.

NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) 2009, Denholm, P., M. Hand, M. Jackson, and S. Ong. 2009. Land-Use

205 Requirements of Modem Wind Power Plants in the United States, Technical Report NRELITP-6A2-45834. August.Available at http:ll/I.nrel.govldocs/fyO9ostil45834.pdf

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 2008a. 20% Wind Energy by 2030, Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S.206 Electricity Supply. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. DOE/GO-102008-2567. July. Available at

http:llww.nrel.govldocslfyO~osti/41869.pdf

MISO (Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator) 201 lb, Wind Capacity Credit Update with CPnode Results,Item 2 LOLEWG, November, Available athttps://w.midwestiso.orgLibrary/Repository/Meeting%2OMateriaVStakeholder/LOLEWG/2011120111109/20111109%2

0LOLEWG%201tem%2002%20%2OWind%2OCapecity%2OCredit.pdf

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 1996b. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of167 Nuclear Plants. NUREG 1437. Washington, DC. May.

199 NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory). 2012. Solar Maps, Available at http:llm.nrel.govlgislsolar.htmi

NRRI (National Regulatory Research Institute) 2007. What Generation Mix Suits Your State? Tools for Comparing

240 Fourteen Technologies across Nine Criteria. Febmary 14, 2007. Available at http://vl .nrri.ohio-state.edu/dspacelhandle/2068/1045.

PJM (PJM Interconnection, LLC). 2010. PJM Manual 21, Rules and Procedures for Determination of Generating244 Capability. Revision: 09. May. Available at http:llpjm.coml-lmedia/documentslmanualslm2l.ashx

Shibaki, Masashi, 2003. Geothermal Energy for Electric Power, Renewable Energy Policy Project, Washington, D.C.,

296 December 2003.

References

Employment and Land Requirements for Alternatives to Byron ... · tQm&~'~- lO2a~L Reviewed Bn:...

Documents

Transcript of Employment and Land Requirements for Alternatives to Byron ... · tQm&~'~- lO2a~L Reviewed Bn:...