My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07461
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07461
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:27:26 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:24:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8143.600.30
Description
John Martin Reservoir - Other Studies
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
9/1/1982
Author
Dept of Army
Title
John Martin Dam and Reservoir - Small Hydropower Addition Reconnaissance Report
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.
/
49
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 />I-'Ht..L1i\1INA" Y <br />. SUBJECT TO REV.ION <br /> <br />a <br />1":"'1 <br />( ::1 <br /> <br />kilowatt hour during peak periods. These charges can and do fluctuate <br />according to availability. <br /> <br />~ <br />CJ1 <br />to <br /> <br />"B. Projp~t Rpn~fit Evalu~tion. <br /> <br />1. The basis for evaluating the annual benefits of alternate plans <br /> <br /> <br />for hydroelectric generation at John Martin Dam is to determine the annual <br /> <br /> <br />costs of the most likely thermal alternative source of power. Because of the <br /> <br /> <br />abundance of coal supplies available in the study area. a coal-fired thermal <br /> <br /> <br />alternative was chosen as the benefit measure. This benefit evaluation <br /> <br /> <br />procedure is presented quite thoroughly in the December 1981 report of the <br /> <br /> <br />U.S. Water Resources Council entitled ..Implementing Procedures For Evaluating <br /> <br /> <br />Hydropower Benefits-. <br /> <br />2. A first step in evaluating the hydropower project is to verify the <br /> <br /> <br />validity of claiming a benefit attributable to dependable capacity. A <br /> <br /> <br />capacity benefit should be considered only when the hydropower plant is able <br /> <br /> <br />to deliver capacity during the power system's peak demand season. The peak <br /> <br /> <br />electrical demand seaSon in southeastern Colorado occurs during the summer <br /> <br /> <br />months because of air conditioning loads and irrigation pumping requirements. <br /> <br /> <br />An example of this demand distribution is the load requirement of the small <br /> <br /> <br />system operated by the Southeast Colorado Power Association which serves the <br /> <br /> <br />rural areas near John Martin Dam. The base load of this system is about 19 <br /> <br /> <br />megawatts. however. a peak demand of 28 megawatts occurs during the summer <br /> <br /> <br />months. The Arkansas River Power Authority consists of six member-communities <br /> <br /> <br />in the vicinity of John Martin Dam. This electric system also is <br /> <br /> <br />characterized by a pronounced summer peak demand. The months of June. July <br /> <br /> <br />and August were. therefore. selected as the peakload months for the evaluation <br /> <br /> <br />of John Martin Dam. No dependable capacity credit is claimed for the months <br /> <br /> <br />of April. May. September and October. <br /> <br />3. As described in the WRC's report. the measurement of a small <br /> <br /> <br />~hydropower plant's dependable capacity is a reflection of hydrologic <br /> <br /> <br />availability. For a project such as John Martin Dam where releases are not <br /> <br /> <br />regu lated for peaking power purposes. the hydrologic ava i 1 a bi 1 i ty is der i ved <br /> <br /> <br />from a power generation-duration curve and is equal to the plant factor for <br /> <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.