Laserfiche WebLink
<br />whole, th~ problem does not appear to be critical. For <br />:)'Jr\'~M <br />example, for a 40 percent reduction in available WSCC <br />hydro energy (below the adverse year projection), the total <br />energy available will decrease by about 10.4 percent. <br />This 40 percent reduction in WSCC hydro energy <br /> <br />;";~<:,~::::~!i:':~ <br />\'~"'., , ',_, ,'i <br /> <br />". ,-, <br />:.~)f'''':..- '~:'_;:\_~{, <br />:/i~:;)J:~~K~~ <br />"..,........."~t" <br /> <br />(19,491 GWh) could be made up by a 14 percent increase <br /> <br />in non-hyqro WSCC energy, The relative percentages of <br /> <br />non-hydro energy would be greater in California than in <br /> <br /> <br />the Pacific Northwest where the proportion of hydro to <br />non-hydro is greater. Appendix IV analyzes California's <br />thermal generating capacity and its ability to meet the <br />hydro energy deficiency. <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />j <br /> <br />,,'. ^". <br /> <br />_i.L"i,,~.~_:~.i,:,h <br />