My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume II Appendix K, Part 1
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume II Appendix K, Part 1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2013 3:47:00 PM
Creation date
2/27/2013 1:09:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
related to the Platte River Endangered Species Partnership (aka Platte River Recovery Implementation Program or PRRIP)
State
NE
Basin
North Platte
Date
7/1/1998
Author
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Office of Hydropower Licensing
Title
Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - Volume II, Appendix K, Part 1 - Kingsley Dam (FERC Project No. 1417) and North Platte/Keystone Dam (FERC Project No. 1835) Projects, Nebraska, FERC/FEIS-0063
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
551
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
.Q <br />o. <br />COMMENTS OF CENTRAL NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER AND <br />IRRIGATION DISTRICT <br />Production Costs. The "without Projects" plan removes <br />118 MW of hydroelectric capacity producing 450 GWh /yr in <br />energy on average, though available energy varies <br />significantly. It responds to these losses with the <br />installation of two 160 MW peakers early (in 2003 and 2006 <br />instead of 2007 and 2010), with installation of a 182 MW <br />capacity coal plant early (in 2008 instead of 2012), and <br />with expansion of that coal plant by 118 MW to 300 MW.W <br />The result is that during the four year period from 2008 to <br />2012, up to 262 megawatts of capacity is added beyond the <br />118 MW replaced. <br />The vast majority of the difference in attributed <br />"economic value" between the two expansion plans occurs <br />during the four years from 2008 to 2012.b' This difference <br />corresponds directly to the early construction of a 300 MW <br />coal plant under the "no Projects" plan and the resultant <br />availability of substantial excess capacity.p' During that <br />four year period, the added fossil units replace not only <br />the 450 GWh previously provided by the hydro units, but also <br />1200 GWh from other generation, including substantial <br />W NPPD, Comments of Nebraska Public Power District on <br />the Scoping Document for the Revised Draft_ Environmental <br />Impact Statement and the Commission Staff Report on Scoping <br />Meetings, Attachment R, Table A -3 (Feb. 12, 1993) ("NPPD, <br />Comments on RDEIS Scoping'). <br />bI S= RDEIS, App. G, Tables G -4, G -5. <br />N/ NPPD, Comments on RDEIS Scoping at Attachment R, <br />Table A -3. <br />- 44 - <br />RESPONSES TO CENTRAL NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER AND <br />IRRIGATION DISTRICT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.