My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.3. ERMUSR 03-08-2005
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2005
>
03-08-2005
>
5.3. ERMUSR 03-08-2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/7/2009 10:34:58 AM
Creation date
4/7/2009 10:33:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
3/8/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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).
View images
View plain text
~~~'~ American Public Power Association <br />FEBRUARY 2005 <br />Straight Answers to False Charges about the <br />Federal Power Marketing Administrations <br />The federal Power Marketing Administrations (P;~1As) are a drain on American taxpayers <br />The federal Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) provide millions of Americans <br />served b}' non-profit public power and rural cooperative electric systems with low~ost <br />renewable hydroelectric power produced at dams operated by the U.S. Army Corps of <br />Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. The power rates paid to the PMAs by their <br />public power and rural electric cooperative customers cover all of the costs for generating <br />and transmitting electricity and for repayment, with interest, of the federal investment in <br />these hydro projects. None of the costs are borne by taxpayers. Power rates also help to <br />cover the costs of other activities authorized by these multipurpose projects such as <br />navigation, flood control, water suppl}', fish and wildlife conservation, and recreation. <br />Since PMA rates are often lower than market-based rates, thc•c are subsidized. <br />The power marketed by the PMAs is generally lowsr-st Fx•catrsc of the fuel source -falling <br />water. Hydropower -unlike nuclear, gas and coal - tt:u nr~ fuel costs. It is this method of <br />generating electricity and the fact that most of these• hcrlro projects were constructed <br />many years ago when construction and labor cost_ti wc•rt• Irrwc•r that account for the <br />favorable economics of PMA power. Private utilities th:u ficnerate electricity <br />predominantly from hydropower enjoy similarly low rues. <br />Requiring the PMAs to sell their power at market-hast•d r.ucs would better ensure the full <br />recovery of the appropriated and other debt that is rccoycr:rhlc through the PMAs' power <br />sales. <br />This issue is really a question of whether the use of market-based rates by the PMAs (e.g.; <br />they could charge whatever the market would bear for the power) to recover their costs is <br />preferable to the current use of cost-based rates. Cost-based rates are tariffs for electric <br />energy and capacity that are designed to recover the costs of generating or delivering the <br />energy and capacity. In the case of investor~wned utilities, cost-based rates also include a <br />"reasonable" return on shareholders' investments in the production facilities. Cost-based <br />rates for public power systems, rural electric cooperatives and the PMAs do not include a <br />profit or rate of return. Included in the rates that PMA customers pay to the PMAs <br />themselves is an additional interest charge that goes to pa}' back the initial federal <br />investment in the hydropower facilities. <br />continued on the back of this p¢ge <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.