Laserfiche WebLink
<br />on17~1_ <br /> <br />periods of each ye3r. Use of native ;.rkansas River Vl1ltor only, >lQuld <br />rcleg3to the ontire powor syston to 11 river-run status, vdth praoti- <br />cally no firn energy cenor3tion and tho powor systOI:l would inDcdiatoly <br />becone infeasiblo. The existing operation studios :lI'e not susoeptible <br />to a breakdo,m which would daoonstrate potonti31 fim energy gcperation <br />by Colorado River wator s8p3rate froT.\ native :.rkansas River water. .\n <br />erroneous pioture would rusult fron attcclpting such a breakde~m of <br />existing studies. <br /> <br />6. Question - Furnish an analysis, shCJ\7ing for each pow"rplant <br />separately and for all conbincd capital and annual costs (fixed and <br />operating) assuning fixed costs based on interest at 3% and at 2-1/2% <br />and fifty-year ~Jortization of capital investnent, electric energy r <br />output, filT.! and secondary, the 3vera;:0 production cost pcr kilcwatt I: <br />hour of saleable energy, and production cost per kilovl1ltt hClur l' or firn <br />power 3ssur.lin;:: socondary en8rQT is sold at 3-1/2 mlls per kilowatt <br />h-:lU"e <br /> <br />'\T1s':rcr - ,\ c=p1lI'ison of cosLs and rovenuos fe,r individual <br />pOVlcrplants Vlould bo nislcading. The necossa~ penking capacity is <br />ccncentratod in specific pl;:mts at such points :'.S the necessaT'J rogu- <br />latory water stvro.g8 C3pclCity is 3vailablo. PowerpLmts which would <br />provide-peelking c3p3city 3re essential to eln:,r coordimltud po,!or Systa.:l, <br />hQYlCVCr, such poYr2rp13l1ts YiIOuld shorr a 1m'Ier usa lo.ctor .:lnd .:t CO;]p.:t..ri- <br />son of totell pow0r generation cn an individwl I)lnnt bnsis would not <br />present a true picture. ;,lthough physically sepelratod, the prClject <br />pow8rPL:o.nts l'Till bo interoonnooted and oporo.tod as a systen. The <br />location elnd c"'-pacity of the plants is the culninatiJn of ccnplioo.tod <br />studios. "s o.n oxaDplG, oo.rly studies were [1o.de of C'. single plant o.t <br />the lower end of tho systen helYing substo.ntially th0 s .1::10 genc:rnting <br />co.po.city o.s tho prosont threo lowor plo.nts. The plan for th0 sin"lo <br />plo.nt rms disco.rded in favor of three separate plants along the power <br />canal for reasons of economy and fle:xibility. <br /> <br />Table S, Power Systoo Average Rate Determination StudYJ presents <br />a financial analysis of the power system with Ootober 1953 oonstruction <br />costs and assuming amortization of the power investment at 3 peroent <br />interest in 50 years follovdng a 9-ycar development period and socondary <br />onergy sold at 3.5 mills per kilowatthour. The study shows that the; <br />specified repayment conditions can be met by selling firm pov:or at a <br />rate of 5.5 mills per kilowatthour. The table also shows tho avoro."e <br />o <br />annual generation and sales of the individual prnvurplants aft"r tho <br />dovolopment poriod, also averago production oost for the pOI'1"r system <br />during the ontire repayment period. <br /> <br />- 6 - <br />