Page 11

For this particular study, the basic guide has been that the electric power produced should cost the same as that from an unassociated plant having the same net electric output as the combined plant. The procedure adopted was to charge all energy costs to the power plant and derive the difference in electric generating costs for two hypothetical plants - one combined with a water plant and the other unassociated. Thus increased operating, investment and fuel costs are reflected in the difference in electric power costs from the two plants. The electric costs have been developed in Tables II and III for the unassociated and combined plants of 150,000,000 capacity, respectively. When using gas, the difference in electric cost is 2 mills per Kwh which, when credited with 40 MWH power, results in a fuel charge of $0.22 per million Btu, 60% of the cost of gas originally. When burning coal, the difference is 1.5 mills per KWH, with a net fuel charge of $0.16 per million Btu, which is 70% of the cost of coal originally. Energy for the plants could be either of nuclear origin or any one of the three fossil fuels. A recent study by the Bechtel Corporation has indicated that the cost of energy from the former may be competitive with conventional fuel and will depend upon the progress being made in reducing costs from large plants. For this reason, it was decided to use fossil fuel costs and leave the choice of fuels for a later decision when nuclear fuel costs are more clearly defined. -8-11-Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 14,272,512 byte