Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"-"':. :-'~,~,,",,: .". ~"-<.:'" _'--'",;,,~,:'.:::,;,.->:;~..%;'S.;.,_:--"7- "~~'_~="_c?"?::=-:~~ - :,,>:,;;"",-:,,!:,.?_<"'1"':"""-{;;-~'",~--'!'-<-t'c~_' ~-: <br /> <br />.~, '''!~.. ~q''f~;'2f.,''']:;~:-:~;~~:t?il <br />4. <br /> <br />'",~' <br />C <br />N <br />C'-J <br /> <br />C' <br />. <br /> <br />The Bureau of Power and Light is purchasing fuel <br />at present at an equivalent price of slightly less than 60 <br />cents per barrel, and in my opinion no value of primary <br />fulling water based upon an equivalent fuel price in excess <br />of one dollar per barrel should be considered. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Summary of Review of Report of Mr. H.. S. Sands <br /> <br />I have reviewed the report by Mr. H. S. Sands, <br /> <br />dated July 19, 1938, and while I do not agree with Mr. <br /> <br />Sands' basic assumptions of delivering Boulder Canyon <br /> <br />power over long distance Boulder Transmission Lines at <br /> <br />system load factor, either from an economic standpoint or <br /> <br />from the standpoint of reliability of service, nevertheless <br /> <br />I have made a parallel study making certain obvious correc- <br /> <br />tions for essential errors in generator ratings, transmission <br /> <br />line capacities and system planning, from which I obtained <br /> <br />the value of .790 mills per kw-hr. for falling water for <br /> <br />primary energy at Boulder Dam instead of the 1.606 mills per <br /> <br />kw-hr. obtained by l~. Sands. Details of this review are <br /> <br />shown in Seotion II of this report. <br /> <br />It is interesting to note that the value ot <br /> <br />falling water for primary energy at Boulder Dam obtained <br /> <br />by j~. Sands' method when correoted for essential errors is <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />slightly lower than that obtained by my own method, and in <br />no way are tho two systems comparable regarding reliability <br />of service. <br /> <br />A. B. Roberts <br />