My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01806
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD01806
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:07:12 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/12/1998
Description
CF Section - Request for Approval on Loans for New Projects - Windsor Canal and Reservoir Company
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
<br />voltages. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2. A pumping station utilizing two 300 horsepower electric pumps would enable WRCC (0 pump <br />approximately 120 acre-feet of water per day from Big Windsor Reservoir. At this rate, <br />approximately 1,600 acre-feet of water could be pumped in 60 days. at a cost of approximately <br />513. iT per acre-foot per year. Poudre Valley REA would provide service and a standard 480-volt <br />transformer to the site. A monthly minimum KV A charge of $1.50 per KV A would be assessed <br />by REA for the 150 ICY A transformer. Advantages of this option are that REA is responsible for <br />the servicing and maintenance of the transformer and replacement transformers are readily <br />available. Service and partS for 480-volt motors is also more readily available. Disadvantages of <br />this option are thar 1hc mOlOrs are slightly less efficient and electricity rates are higher, resulting in <br />a net higher pumping cost per acre.foot. Also, the lower pumping capacity means slower delivery <br />and less total water delivered in a season. <br /> <br />3. This option would utilize the same pipeline, concrete well strUcture. and pumps as option number <br />one but would utilize diesel engines to power the pumps. The advantages of diesel power are that <br />the pumps cooId be llpet'lIred at any time without a demand charge, there are no minimum monthly <br />charges for moll!hs when power is not used, service for diesel engines is more readily available than <br />service for high voltage motors, pumps wouk1 not be effected by power outages, diesel fuel COStS <br />have been stable for the past ten years and are expected to remain so, and WRCC would own the <br />power source and not be subject to rare increases. The estimated cost per acre-foot of water for this <br />option is the cheapest of aU optiOllS at approximately S10.12 per acre foot per year. Disadvantages <br />of this option are primarily the environmental. aspects assoc:iated with the diesel engines including <br />air-quality. storage of diesel fuel. and the noise of the engines in close proximity to the area camp <br />sites. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />4. This option would utilUc the same pipeline. concrell: well strUctUre. and pumps as option number <br />two but would utilae diesel enginc:s to power lhc pumps. The estimated cost for this option is <br />approximately 511.53 per acre-foot per year. Advantages and disadvantages for this option arc the <br />same as those l~ted for option munber 3. . <br /> <br />Table 1 summarizes 1hc constrUction costs of the above four options and Table 2 lists constrUction. loan, and <br />power cOSts of the four options. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.