Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2. Project Energy. Table 2 is a tabulation showing the <br />eRSP energy generation, project irrigation pumping use, sales, and <br />purchases for the years 1978 through 2052. All the quantities are "at <br />loadtl and are based on the assumption that energy transmission losses <br />will be 7 percent of the load. The energy generation was estimated by <br />summer and winter seasons, using the method heretofore described. <br /> <br />The estimated future requirements for project irrigation pumping <br />were then subtracted. For the period between fiscal year 1978 and the <br />end of fiscal year 1989, when the firm contracts will expire, the remain- <br />ing amounts were then compared to the firm sales (the contractual MW <br />under contract times 2550 hours for each season). <br /> <br />If the aforementioned amounts exceed the firm sales, the energy <br />left over is assumed to be sold as nonfirm energy. If the amounts are <br />less than the firm sales, the energy deficit is assumed to be made up <br />by purchases. It will be noted from Table 2 that, for most of the <br />period between fiscal year 1979 and fiscal year 1989, it is expected <br />that there will be non firm sales in the summer season and that <br />purchases will be necessary in the winter season. It has been <br />assumed that the new contracts for the years after fiscal year 1989 <br />will be made in such a way that all the energy over and above project <br />uses can be sold as firm energy, and purchases of firming energy can <br />be eliminated. The project irrigation pumping use is expected to <br />increase from 1 GWH in fiscal year 1978 to 139 GWH in fiscal year <br />1988. The irrigation pumping use includes requirements for salinity <br />control and irrigation pumping requirements of the participating <br />projects excluding Bonneville Unit (CUp) pumping and the amount of <br />Navajo Indian irrigation project pumping which is served out of the <br />Navajo Da~ Powerplant, assuming that the latter plant will go into <br />service in 1982. These pumping requirements have been netted out <br />of the generation. An estimated use of 4 GWH annually for visitor <br />centers and government camps was also netted out of the CRSP gener- <br />ation. The project generation is expected to increase gradually <br />between 1978 and 1988 due to the Central Utah Project. Other than <br />these increases, the general trend is downward after 1978 due to the <br />anticipated upstream water depletions by the participating projects. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3. Project Capacity. Table 3 is a tabulation showing <br />the salable CRSP capacity broken down among project irrigation <br />pumping, capacity in firm energy sales, and peaking capacity. The <br />fourteen sequence method explained in above paragraph was also used to <br />estimate future project capacity. However, instead of using the average <br />of the fourteen sequences, as was done for energy, the lower quartile <br />was used; i.e., it was assumed that the capacity sales would be equal <br />to the generating capacity available based on a series of years with <br />lower quartile water supply. This was done on the assumption that <br />adverse year capacity would be sold on a long-term basis and that half <br />of the ext'ra capacity between the ad'Je'rse and the ave'rage yea'r capa- <br />bility could be sold season to season. The capacities shown on the <br />table are "at load" data. In determining the "at load" data, it was <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />