The financial attractiveness of any project depends on the relationship between anticipated rewards and expected risks. In the case of the SPS, potential problems or downside risk plays a major role in project financing. Risk can be measured through cash flow scenarios or in terms of pay-off periods. The busbar cost of electricity is found to be the single most important factor in cash flow and rate of return. The large capital requirements for SPS through R&D and the initial operational phases tend to favor some form of public sector financing. The federal government or a consortium of governments may be the only available source of financing during start-up operations. Even when the SPS reaches maturity, the private sector would face an extreme challenge to finance the program. A joint venture partnership between government and the private sector is possible where the public interest would be assured by regulation of prices and profits, and government license of the technology. Just how government regulation and the private sector would interface with the SPS requires greater clarification, especially as it regards electricity pricing, industrial relocation, and private sector financing. Power plant regulation falls primarily under the jurisdictional review of state and local entities. The regulatory framework is in a state of flux, and processes vary by jurisdiction. The role of state Public Utility Commissions in financing and rate regulation is changing. PUCs' approvals of utilities' pre-commitment to the SPS may be conditional on government guarantees regarding electric power pricing. In lieu of the federal government's establishment of a national energy policy, many states are going their own way, creating a de facto decentralized trend in energy policy. States want and are asserting increasing control over power plant planning. This poses a potential problem for the SPS. The inherent characteristics of the SPS will require regional coordination of power plant regulation and transmission interties. No present regulatory framework exists at interstate levels. Land-intensive rectennas may require federally mandated, state-coordinated land use and energy planning. The establishment of a national power grid, currently under study at the federal level, may alleviate or solve many of these problems. Regulatory approvals for current power plant technologies and other delays in regulatory processes now consume a decade or more. This is an indication of the potential time constraints in developing and operating the SPS. Two categories of concern have been studied with respect to integrating SPS electricity with the then existing utilities. The first has concentrated on questions of ownership, management and other institutional factors remains from the utilities' point of view. The resolution of these factors remains rather nebulous because of the difficulty of predicting future situations. It is fairly clear, however, that while the SPS could be integrated into projected utility networks, the task will not be easy. Technical considerations regarding the location of rectenna sites across the U.S. and providing power to land centers appears to present no great difficulty even under rather severe constraints. There are regional differences but even these are less than might have been anticipated. There are no federal standards which exist protecting the worker and/or general public from potential hazards of microwave exposure. ''Voluntary"
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==