Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000253 <br /> <br />/ <br /> <br />3. Increase in Power Output. When the Colorado-Big Thompson <br />project plan was submitted under Senate Document 80 and the <br />project authorized in 1937, it was believed that a number <br />of years would pass after the completion of the project be- <br />fore there would be a market for its total power output. The <br />unanticipated and spectacular growth of demand for power in <br />the State, in cornmon with experience in other parts of the <br />West, shmvs that at the present time, in advance of comple- <br />tion of the project, its total power production will not <br />meet the market demand in the area. And it is only econo~ <br />for the Government and desirable for meetj,ng the power re- <br />quirement of the area to install the maximum hydro-electric <br />capacity and provide the most flexible operating plan. This <br />means improved and additional project facilities and an oper- <br />ating plan under which a major portion of all electric energy <br />generated will be marketed at firm delivery rates. <br /> <br />The revised plans for the Colorado-Big Thompson project and <br />operating procedure will result in an increase in annual <br />prnver production available for sale from 560,000,000 k.w. <br />hours annually, of which 360,000,000 k.w. hours annually was <br />considered firm power, to a total output of 750,000,000 k.w. <br />hours annually of which 600,000,000 k.w. hours are salable as <br />firm energy. This is an increase of 66 per cent in firm power. <br />Senate Document 80 shows relative values of 5 and 1.8 mills <br />per k.w.h. for firm and secondary energy. This same difference <br />in power output values will result in an increased gross in- <br />come of $1,110,000 annually to the project. <br /> <br />4. Transmission Lines. In order to meet the increased power <br />demands, connect Big Thompson power with other Bureau of <br />Reclamation power developments in the area and to serve <br />public bodies preferred under the Federal Reclamation Law, <br />there has been incurred an additional capital expenditure <br />of about ~lO,OOO,OOO for transmission lines. <br /> <br />This increased cost, together with the advance in cost of <br />labor and material for lines originally planned, adds <br />slightly over ~14,ooo,000 to the estimated construction <br />cost of the project made in 1937. <br /> <br />5. Lower tiaintenance Costs. These changes in plans are re- <br />sponsible for a considerable portion of the increase in <br />capital investment but will result in substantially lower- <br />ing of the maintenance and operating costs as well as the in- <br />creased revenues. It must be realized that the greatly in- <br />creased demand for power in the area justified a change in <br />plans to provide the maximum in firm power output. For example, <br />the original plans included a canal along the rocky slopes of <br />the Big-Thompson Canyon for conveyance of water from the high <br />elevation on the east side of the Continental Divide to the <br />valley floor. A new route involving a series of tunnels has <br />been substituted under revised plan. This change increased <br /> <br />- 2 - <br />