for pumping the water from the Colorado River to Los Angeles: and, assuming that that plant was starting in 1930, he has worked out the final figures of kilowatt hours required for load to be generated. Now, bringing over that figure, he finds that, in 1930, there would be required from the Colorado River, on that basis, a total of 816,000.000 kilowatt hours. He finds that the revenue, at the figure used in published statements given to support this proposition, would be $0.00445 per kilowatt hour. Mr. SWING. Will you transpose that into horsepower? You have given that in kilowatt hours. Mr. BALLARD. Well, it depends on your load factor. There are 8,760 hours in the year; and if you are on 50 per cent of the time, one kilowatt will equal 4,380 kilowatt hours in a year. If you are going to take 50 per cent as your load factor, you take this and divide it by that figure. If you take some other load factor, you change it correspondingly. Mr. SWING. If you will just take those figures and transpose them into horsepower, what would it be? Mr. BALLARD. At what load factor? Mr. SWING. Just as it is. Mr. BALLARD. This does not give any load factor? Mr. SWING. Will you give the firm horsepower? Can you transpose that into firm horsepower? Mr. BALLARD. What do you mean by "firm horsepower ? Mr. SWING. That is the same expression that you used a while ago. You said that this Boulder Dam project is proposed to give 600,000 firm horsepower. What will 600,000 firm horsepower be per kilowatt hour? Mr. BALLARD. Well, I just assumed what they meant by "firm horsepower." I said that they said that 600,000 firm horsepower would be produced, operating 24 hours a day, and 8,760 hours a year. Mr. SWING. What would that be in kilowatt hours? Mr. BALLARD. That would be .746 kilowatts, multiplied by 8,760 hours for each horsepower. You can figure that. However, we will go on to this: This is an increase from 816,000,000 kilowatt hours in 1930, to 2,650,000,000 kilowatt hours in 1945. The gross revenue in the year 1930 would be $2,050,000, at the rate I have stated; and the fixed charges to support the proposition and the operating expenses would be $8,690,000; and the deficit in the first year would be $6,150,000; and the rate necessary to support the proposition the first year without a deficit, instead of being $0.00445 would be $0.0152. And that is carried on in the same manner through the several years in this statement. The deficit in the second year, for example, is $5,830,000. In the tenth year the deficit would be $2,340,000. In 1945, this statement shows that the revenue would be $9,000,000, as against operating expenses of $8,690,000. There, it would be on the other side of the ledger. But in the 15 years prior to that the accumulated deficits would be $52,082,000. If that money were put out at interest at 4 per cent, it would amount to something like $15,000,000 on that amount, which would make the total principal and interest something like $67,000,000. Mr. RAKER. Does that mean for the 56 cities? What does that mean? Mr. BALLARD. There are 54 cities taken in this statement. Mr. RAKER. Does that mean that the 54 cities would obtain all of their electric supply from the Boulder Canyon Dam? Mr. BALLARD. All excepting that which is supplied by the present hydroelectric plants of the city of Los Angeles, and that supplied by the Los Angeles Gas & Electric Co. in Los Angeles. Mr. RAKER. That would be excluding all electric energy from the private companies? Mr. BALLARD. From the Edison Co.: yes, sir. Mr. RAKER. And assuming that they would get all of their power, except that which you have stated, from Boulder Canyon Dam, and with the increase in population and increase of electricity, there would be a deficit of $56,000,000? Mr. BALLARD. $67,000,000. Mr. RAKER. $67,000,000? Mr. BALLARD. In 15 years; yes, sir. Mr. SWING. In other words, you would charge these parties with the cost of the whole output of the Boulder Canyon Dam, without making any allowance for what would be used by Nevada and by the railroads? Mr. BALLARD. No; we are making no allowance for that. That is, those 54 municipalities under that municipal ownership bill.. I assume that there would probably be some benefit from the project in Arizona; and whatever the proportion of that would be would be taken from this deficit. On the other hand, I assume that, as soon as the bars are let down, Arizona will develop its own Diamond Creek proposition, which is a very good proposition. Mr. RAKER. If these 54 cities at the end of 15 years would be $67.000,000 short, what proportion of the 600,000 horsepower generated by this dam would be used? Mr. BALLARD. The total use of the 600.000 horsepower figured here in this table is 2,650,000,000 kilowatt hours. The first year it would be a little over one-third of that. Mr. RAKER. And two-thirds of it would not be used? Mr. RAKER. And could be disposed of in other ways? Mr. BALLARD. If there is a market for it. Mr. RAKER. Well, we will assume that there is a market. Mr. BALLARD. Well, I will not assume that there is a market, because there is not without supplementing something else. Mr. RAKER. What I am getting at is that you are figuring on onethird of the amount of energy that would be developed by the dam? Mr. BALLARD. Yes: about one-third: that is all the market there is in the 54 municipalities. Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Ballard, I think you have covered the municipalities in connection with your general statement. If you have any further statement to make, I believe it would be wise to do so without interruption. Mr. RAKER. Just one question: Did you complete your analysis of those 54 municipalities? Mr. BALLARD. Yes, sir; and if you would like I will file it with the committee. Mr. HAYDEN. That statement may be inserted in the record. (The statement referred to is as follows:) Increase in population for 54 southern California municipalities, 1900-1930 1 1930 estimate is based on the following assumptions: Los Angeles had a 6.3 per cent annual cumulative increase in population during the decade 1910-1020. In 1923 the estimated population was 800,000 but this was, no doubt, an abnormal increase. The remaining 53 towns had a 6.5 per cent annual cumulative increase from 1910 to 1920. Assuming that this same rate continues for these 33 towns up to 1923 the total population for the 54 towns, including Los Angeles, would be 1,245,000. U Using this same per cent increase⚫ on this total gives 2,000,000 population for the 54 towns in 1930. |