Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"',J <br />L") <br /> <br />"~ <br />~~:" <br /> <br />.,:$";_:1 <br /> <br />C <br />C", <br />c.> <br />C <br /> <br />Power Cost <br /> <br />The steering committee concluded that all cost estimates would be <br />based upon e.en1ation fnctora Dtnttlng with 1969 prlcc~ And <br />continuing through 1976 when the last unit is scheduled to be in <br />service. The escalation factors selected vary depending on the <br />type of work involved, but result in a weighted average of 5.3 <br />percent per year compounded for the generating station and 4.5 <br />percent for transmission facilities. <br /> <br />G <br /> <br />The joint power system encompasses (1) the generating station, <br />including buildings, coal storage and handling facilities, <br />precipitators, water diversion cooling towers, and other <br />appurtenant items in addition to the boilers, turbines, and <br />generators; (2) the western portion of the transmission system <br />with all appurtenant works; and (3) the southern portion of the <br />transmission system with its appurtenant works. Operation and <br />maintenance costs arc estimated separately. <br /> <br />Generation costs are estimated to be $134.05 per kilowatt and <br />joint transmission costs are estimated to average $71.30 per <br />kilowatt. For its 561,000 kw entitlement, therefore, the cost <br />to the United States would be $75,200,000 for generation and <br />$40,000,000 for transmission. The total cost of the joint project <br />would be $481,000,000, of which the United States' share would <br />be $115,200,000. <br /> <br />Alternative Sources of Po",er <br /> <br />By barring consideration of ne", conventional hydroelectric <br />pm,erplants on the Colorado River between Hoover Dam and Glen <br />Canyon Dam, the Colorado River Basin Project Act eliminated con- <br />ventional hydroelectric power facilities as a potential source <br />of power for the Central Arizona Project since there are no <br />other suitable power sites. Prior to authorization of the <br />Central Arizona Project, consideration of pumpback storage hydro- <br />electric possibilities indicated that, although such facilities <br />had potential for contributing revenues to the Lower Colorado <br />River Basin Development Fund, they were not suitable as a basic <br />source of project pumping energy. <br /> <br />Thus, the only practicable alternative to the kind of arrangement <br />reflected in the Navajo Project Participation Agreement would be <br />direct purchase of the power and energy required for project pumping. <br /> <br />5 <br />