My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02536
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02536
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:37:24 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:11:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.200.05.R
Description
Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Boulder Canyon Project
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
10/31/1938
Author
Roberts A. B.
Title
Report of Competitive Value of Falling Water for Primary Energy at Boulder Dam in Competition with Steam Power at the Load Center
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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 />~,-""""",,;;---,-----:~,-- <br /> <br />----... ';"=,~'.-=<-,,..-~. ,-' "._---~:.~'~.'-~.~- <br /> <br />.~r7X~~~~-~~.~_-:....,---..,' '_:~-::;~-' .._n <br /> <br />-'-~. ~,." ",. <br /> <br />-:.~,: -~~~~-r~~" --::~- <br />. .- '<:--F"- ~ - <br /> <br />-~~<~ <br /> <br />QO <br />N <br />N <br />N <br />c:.. <br />. <br /> <br />29. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />equipment at the steam plant, two mileu of baok transmis- <br />sion to the nearest receiving station and step down equip- <br />ment at the receiving station. There is a point of diff- <br />erence between Mr. Sands and myself regarding the amount of <br />back transmission required. The inclusion of additional <br />back transmission from the receiving station to the terminal <br />receiving station of the Boulder transmission line as in- <br />cluded in Mr. Sands' report cannot be Justified. If so, <br />it would be Just as logical to assume that additional costs <br />should be added to the Boulder Transmission coBt to de. <br />liver Boulder power at the steam plant site, and possibly <br />more logical, since Boulder power is competing with steam <br />power. There are only two possible assumptions which can <br />be justified in the determination of the value of falling <br />water for primary energy; either additional transmission <br />costs must be added to both steam plant and the Boulder <br />Transmission Line to deliver the power where it is actually <br />used, which will be very difficult if not impossible to <br />calculate, or, the method used by the Bureau should be <br />adopted, namely, that power delivered to any receiving sta- <br />tion on its 132,000 volt belt system, which ultimately will <br />encircle the city connecting all sources of power, is the <br /> <br />delivery point for any source of pOTIer. <br /> <br />It is interesting to note that the value of falling <br /> <br />water for primary energy by the hypothetical method used by <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />A. B. Roberts <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.