Laserfiche WebLink
ERMU-Owned Portfolios rart*. ', : <br /> Mean Lower Costs for Custo ers <br /> ERMU-owned resource <br /> t1 <br /> j portfolios including Big Stone II <br /> Results Projected Power Supply Cost <br /> t and other resources cost less <br /> ERMU Comparison of Power Supply Alternatives I than likely Connexus options. <br /> P1Base Scenario I <br /> 5180 r=GRC Rango .. -'. <br /> ..„, CasP I -CRF Avq s �..so U-O <br /> . 5160 C,st,d_GRE,, , - .. ERMU-owned gas resource <br /> g " H r9Ke 2A BSII Gm V,,,,,i <br /> 1 ° $140 c.m.2P PSI'r`Ag(0.9,0 nt. ; i " portfolios are next-best to <br /> �4s ,ase 3A has(Mum_ µ,�-.� <br /> t ' '3 p $1 20 C�.wr•36 C'as(111ercY.=ntt <br /> L 1 a $100 Big Stone II-based ones. <br /> �. D 580 <br /> ro $60 <br /> 0 <br /> t $20 The cost savings between the <br /> Big Stone II portfolios and <br /> 1 <br /> ,, the CURB Incremental Case IA <br /> is $6 million to $8 million/year. <br /> *RW Beck study for ERMU, Chart 17. 17 <br /> ( ( ( <br />