The competitive analysis will be more variable since the amount of information known and available about any power generation differs from scheme to scheme. This difference in information is characteristic of elements in any portfolio and is part of the reason why the methodology of evaluation should be based on a portfolio concept. For example, the direct cost of proven and available technology will be readily available, whereas the possible cost of a fusion system may be essentially unknown. Each element or system in a portfolio will have its own profile of costs, benefits, risks, and uncertainties. These have to be shown as they are appraised by knowledgeable people. At this time there are few general rules for portfolio evaluation because the utility of such general rules depends on the data available. The factors that should be dealt with, however, are (1) estimates of annualized and mills per kilowatt-hour at direct costs, development dollars to date and risk and uncertainties, and major environmental and social pro's and con's. For the purposes of the evaluation, it will be necessary to establish the constraints and standards of performance and reliability for the SSPS component of the total power generation and distribution system. Since SSPS will be part of a hybrid system, its strengths and standards of performance will be determined by the system as a whole and therefore will be largely developed by implication for SSPS. To compare feasible hybrid energy systems with substantial SSPS components to conventional and advanced systems of equivalent capability, a question that will have to be considered is what is the appropriate size for a single SSPS plant, given the reliability standards of the entire system. Power systems are complicated. The great Northeast power failure of 1965 made that clear to all. While some comparisons can be made between prime movers or between transmission and distribution techniques, such analysis must finally be done within a coherent systematic framework and must account for all of the activities and apparatus needed to provide the power to the consumer. As in the case of the conventional systems, it will also be necessary for SSPS to identify and characterize the principal environmental, social, and political issues surrounding the generation, conversion, and use of energy and assign costs to them. 4) Utility Cost Accounting — Basis for Cost Comparison Alternative generating plants can be compared in one of two ways. • The “mills per kilowatt-hour” method that pro-rates the annual fixed costs of owning plant and equipment across the amount of energy produced in a year, and adding to this figure the direct (or variable) cost of energy generation — fuel. • A present-value analysis that capitalizes expected future operating costs (i.e., the direct or variable costs) and adds these, as a lump sum, to the original capital outlay for the facilities.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==