|
|
Enron Mail |
Checking to see if you want to go to the meeting.
---------------------- Forwarded by Clement Lau/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2000 05:59 PM --------------------------- Bruce Golden@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/09/2000 05:50 PM To: Clement Lau/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Heat rate and Capacity table 9:30 AM it is - we will meet in Mike Coleman's office on 3AC13 Thanx Bruce Clement Lau@ECT 02/09/2000 05:30 PM To: Bruce Golden/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Re: Heat rate and Capacity table It 9:30am OK for you? I will go over to your office for the meeting, and maybe get Doug and Ben to join us. Bruce Golden@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/09/2000 05:07 PM To: Clement Lau/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Heat rate and Capacity table His data was LHV. roughly multiply by 1.11 to get HHV. For some reason several of the ENA proposals used LHV, so I though that LHV maybe usual for ENA deals. If you are modeling a long term Enron owned deal then we should model degradation on heat rate (Santee Cooper, ReBox). If it is a EPC directly to a host (ElectriCities, Springfield, City of Austin), the sale would be new & clean but we would model our three year power transaction with just the initial heat rate degradation. You and I ought to look at the degradation curve that most closely matches and eyeball the year 1, 2 and 3 average degradation. How 'bout in the morning - you pick the time - I have an 11AM tech meeting. Thanx Bruce Clement Lau@ECT 02/09/2000 04:14 PM To: Bruce Golden/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Heat rate and Capacity table Bernstein's model has a table that provide the heat rate and capacity based on ISO/90 degrees, chiller/no chiller, gas compression, etc. I am not sure whether I should go with these numbers, but I know the heat rate is off because I heard that the heat rate is 10,300 HHV instead of 9,300 HHV (unless Bernstein's model is in HHV, which I was told was not). I got your message about not modeling capacity degradation. Should we still model heat rate degradation? Please tell me when you would be available to discuss further. Thanks.
|