prices to the consumer of TPV (60-75 mills/kWh) are about the same as those for SPS (60-70 mills/kWh), penetration considerations indicate that the impact on total energy expenditures (in absolute dollars) would be less than that of SPS with the net impact (with vs. without TPV) unresolved. TPV, like SPS, would probably have to be priced below 60 mills/kWh in order to realize a net benefit, assuming the same linear supply/demand models for electricity as used in the SPS calculations. Similar arguments would apply to fusion since it would burn an essentially unlimited fuel. In relative terms, the impact of fusion would be about the same as that of TPV, since it is deployed at about the same level as TPV in the scenarios and costs about the same at the low end. Estimates of the impacts on GNP growth due to technologies other than SPS are difficult for similar reasons. The scenarios were developed assuming a particular GNP and GNP-energy ratio; principles of equilibrium economics were used to determine the technology mix. Thus, estimation of the impact on GNP of a technology that is not the least costly is of questionable accuracy and value. An order-of-magnitude calculation of impact on GNP can be made by combining capital cost and deployment data, assuming there are no changes in the economics of the other systems. The result can then be compared to SPS results. Earlier results for SPS were based on the following assumptions: a $1000/kW nominal value for coal, a $3000/kW low value and a $6000/kW high value for SPS in the year 2000 (which should be compared to the $3400/kW nominal and $15,400/kW high values listed in Table 4.11 for the GaAlAs option). Results for SPS at $3000/kW indicate a 10% reduction in the GNP growth rate for scenario UH, 5% for scenario UI, and 3.3% for scenario CI. Nominal capital costs for the LWR and the CG/CC are also about $1000/kW. These, along with conventional coal, form the basis for comparison. At the nominal $1500/kW for the LMFBR, a 2-1/2% reduction (vs.10% for SPS) in GNP growth rate for scenario UH would be expected if the breeder is deployed at the same rate as SPS. The deployment rates for SPS and the LMFBR are about the same in scenarios UH and UI, and the breeder deployment rate is about 50% higher in scenario CI. The result is that the drag effect on GNP growth due to the LMFBR would be about one-fourth to one-third that due to SPS. At the high end (about $6000/kW) of capital costs for the LMFBR, the drag effect would be about the same as that for SPS. For fusion, the nominal capital cost of about $3000/kW (no upper limit of the range is available) is close to that for SPS, but the deployment rate is about one-fifth that of SPS across all scenarios. Thus, fusion would have a nominal drag effect about twice that of SPS for each scenario. Regional Macroecomic Effects. The results of the regional analyses are more qualitative than earlier macroeconomic results. Increased coal utilization will provide economic stimulus to the mountain West, the location of much of the low-sulfur coal in the U.S. If the power plants are located near the coal sources, this will provide an additional source of economic growth for
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==