WSP01752 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L'" if) Ct') C\J CHAPTER V COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES This chapter is included to show direct comparisons between the vari- ous alternative plans presented in Chapter IV. The comparative data is presented in tabular form. The first table shows differences in physical data such as water supply and irrigable lands. The second table gives an appraisal level economic analysis of each alternative, including construc- tion costs, annual equivalent costs, annual benefits, and the ratio of ben- efits to costs. The third table shows a list of structures included in each plan, with the capacity or length of each structure indicated. The first two alternative plans, without provision of water for oil shale processing, would cost less than the other plans because of smaller capacities for the White River Feeder Conduit and Lake Avery enlargement and exclusion of the Oil Shale Diversion Dam. The savings in cost do not compensate, however, for the loss of benefits associated with providing a water supply for the oil shale industry, as reflected in the benefit-cost ratios. Water for the coal industry and for irrigation is in each plan, although with varying amounts. The effects of minor plan variations were tested by including them in separate alternatives. The Morapos feeder system, for example, is included in two of the plans, one with a closed conduit and one with an open canal. Variations in the White River feeder system include gravity flow through a buried pipeline, gravity flow through a shorter pipeline and tunnel combination (coal emphasis plan), and pumped flow through an even shorter pipeline (alternative without oil shale--with surface irrigation). An extension of the Yellow Jacket Conduit was assumed to be a canal, a long pipeline, and a short pipeline. The Oak Ridge Conduit was assumed to be a canal in the surface irrigation plan, and in the coal emphasis plan was assumed to feed into a long canal which would extend miles beyond Flag Creek. The last plan, a combination of private development with Federal management of natural resources, is an attempt to evaluate a condition in which there would be no structural development except those that would probably be built pri- vately. Relative advantages or disadvantages of each variation, in terms of economics, are reflected in the comparative table. The MOP compromise alternative is considered the best of the plans investigated in this study because it would provide (1) the needed water supply at the appropriate locations, (2) with the most favorable benefit- cost ratio, and (3) with the least possible environmental effects. Included in the information yet needed are engineering and economic data for feasibility designs and natural resource data for environmental 65