Fig. 4.47 Changes in Annual Energy Expenditures with and without SPS in 2025, as a Function of SPS Energy Price SPS (or any technology that saves scarce fuels) has its best advantage, from an energy expenditures point of view, in a constrained scenario. For scenario CI, there is a net benefit (i.e., reduction in total energy expenditures) when price is below about 90 mills/kWh. In scenarios UI and UH, a net benefit results for prices in the 50-55 mills/kWh range. At 60 mills/ kWh, a likely level for SPS as indicated in Sec. 4.2, there is a net benefit only in scenario CI. The reason for this is that in an unconstrained economy, the primary effect of introducing a high-cost alternative is to raise the average cost of electricity, with small compensating price advantages elsewhere . Figure 4.48, derived in a fashion similar to that for Fig. 4.47, depicts the net changes in energy expenditures that would be expected for the various scenarios over the 2000-2030 time frame at 60 and 120 mills/kWh. It also illustrates that net benefits result only in a constrained scenario at sufficiently low prices for SPS energy. Capital Investments and GNP. To put these expenditure levels in perspective (assuming that SPS is selected over the least costly technology - i.e., coal - for other than economic reasons), the amounts of excess investment per year due to deployment of SPS instead of coal are $7-17 billion in scenario CI, $10-25 billion in scenario UI, and $20-50 billion in scenario UH.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==