Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />o <br />,.'") <br />1..4 <br />.s::.. <br />,".,.. <br />tv <br /> <br />1'he Bureau of Power and Light is purchasingt'uel <br /> <br /> <br />a present at an equivalent price of slightly leas than 60 <br /> <br /> <br />c nts per barrel, and in my opinion no value of ptimary <br /> <br /> <br />f lling water based upon an equivalent fuel price in eltCess <br /> <br /> <br />of one dollar per barrel should be considered. <br /> <br />S of Review ofRe ort of Mr. H. S. Sanda <br />I have reviewed the report by ~~. H. S. Sands~ <br />da ed July 19, 1938. and while I do not agree wit4 Mr. <br />Sa Sl basic assumptions of do live rIng Boulder Canyon <br />pow r over long distance Boulder Transmission Lines at <br />sya em load factor, either from an economic standpoint or <br />fro the standpoint of reliability of service, nevertheless <br />I h e made a parallel study making certain obviouscorr~c- <br />tio for essential errors in generator ratings, t~ansmiSsion <br />line capacities and systom planning, from which I Obtain~d <br />the alue of .'790 mills per kw-hr..for falling water for <br />prim ry energy at Boulder Dam instead of the 1.606 mills per <br />kw-h . obtained by Mr. Sands. Details of this review are <br />show in Section II of this report. <br />It is interesting to note that tho value ot <br />fulli g water for primary energy at Boulder Dam obtained <br />by Mr Sands' method whenco:t'rected tor essential orrors 11> <br />sligh y lower than that obtained by my own method, and in <br />no way are tho two systoms comparable regarding reliability <br />, <br /> <br />of ser ice. <br /> <br />A. B. Roberts <br /> <br />4,. <br /> <br /> <br />a <br />,I <br /> <br />i <br />;, <br /> <br />1~ <br /> <br />;~ <br /> <br />-.{ <br />'( <br /> <br />.- <br />