WSP03469 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

= 0') ~ 2 J1 c 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 '-' . : . . ~ . . ~ . . - . . g . .; u . . u ~ . -- . . hours of energy worth the $25 million. While the avoidance of spill is generally desirable from a power production as well as a flood control viewpoint, the reservation of too much storage space to protect against SRill can result in reduced power head and a resultant loss pf electrical energy. Moreover, as previously mentioned, too large a flood-control storage reservation can also reduce the conservation benefits of the project. The present flood contr 1 I. space of 5,35 million acre-feet amounts to 38 percent of the average annual virgin runoff of the Colorado River and an even higher percentage of the observed runoff. Which is, of course .1 , 12 lower than the virgin runoff because of up stream consumptive 13 use, 14 Compared to other river systems in the western 15 United States, this flood control reservation appears to be 16 quite high, 17 Insofar as the Metropilitan Water District is con- ..' :"1 18 cerned, the energy and water values used in the studies of the I 19 Corps and Bureau, 20 mills per kilowatt hour and $30 per acre- 20 foot are low. Higher values such as we have suggested as 21 being applicable to our situation, that is, 40 mills per kilo- 22 watt hour and $150 per acre-foot, would tend to justify more 23 conservation storage and either increased downstream channel 24 capacities or greater periodic flood damages. I , I 25 I should say in passing here, that the flood damages