U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Service
PB-254 307
Economic & Financial Impacts of Federal
Air & Water Pollution Controls on the
Electric Utility Ind. Executive Summary
Temple, Barker & Sloane, Inc.
Prepared For
Environmental Protection Agency
May 1976
-------
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Service
PB-254 307
Economic & Financial Impacts of Federal
Air & Water Pollution Controls on the
Electric Utility Ind. Executive Summary
Temple, Barker & Sloane, inc.
Prepared For
Environmental Protection Agency
May 1976
-------
EPA-230/3-76-013/V
ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL IMPACTS OF
FEDERAL AIR AND WATER
POLLUTION CONTROLS
ON THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF PLANNING & EVALUATION
TEMPLE, BARKER a SLOANE, INC,
15 WALNUT STREET
WELLESLEY HILLS, MASSACHUSETTS 02131
MAY 1976
-------
SHEET | EPA 230/3-7b-U
4. Title and Subtitle _. . -, — .
Economic and Financi
Air and Water Pollution Controls
Utility Industry - Executive Sur
1J j -
al Impact of Federal
on the Electric
nmary
7. Author(s)
Temple, Barker and Sloane, Incorporated
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Temple, Barker and Sloane, Incorporated
15 Walnut Street
Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts 02181
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
Office of Planning and Evaluation
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Wae?hi ng-t-nn f D.C- 20460
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts ^ study focused on ft& det£
the electric utility industry which are
pollution controls for the 1975-1990 pe
financial projections at the national a
mission of the financing needs and prot
ycles in corporate business financing.
the secondary impacts of the legislatic
research effort concluded that capital
jy $25.0 billion (1975 dollars) during
most be raised in the capital markets.
iverage residential customer's electric
.985 (1975 dollars) . Assuming the indu
xmtrol equipment to its customers and
appmvi rrwf*sl y 14 pp>rvv=>r|^-) f +-h«a •Jfy^nst-r
1/T Key Words and""Document Analysi'sl 17o. Descriptors
17b. Idcntif icrs/Opcn-linded Terms
17c. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
Release Unlimited
i y £1 J *ir y lems of the industry in the context of trends and
In addition, the study includes an analysis of
>n on major industrial users of electricity- The
expenditures for plants in service will increase
the 1975-1985 period, of which $19.3 billion
The direct impact of the regulations upon the
bill will be an increase of $2.80 per month by
istry is able to pass on the costs of pollution
offer investors a competitive return on equity
y .will generally be able t£> obtain the financing
required. The study contains two parts; the firs
is an executive summary, bound separately; the
second is a six-volume technical report which
includes all methodoloaical and analytical: detail,
1
19. Security Class (This |21. No. of Pages |
Report) ' - -~
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
Papc
UNCLASSIFIED
-------
FOREWORD
This report is the result of a major program of
studies sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency
as part of its continuing effort to assess the economic
impacts of its regulatory programs. Unlike many of EPA's
other industry economic studies where the focus is on the
impact of a particular regulation, this study was aimed at
examining the combined effect of all of EPA's direct regu-
latory programs on the electric utility industry. This was
an ambitious objective and in some instances it was not
possible to take every regulation into account due to the
lack of data or the absence of final regulations; however,
it was possible to focus quantitatively on the most signif-
icant programs, primarily those dealing with air and water
pollution control.
In addition to providing an assessment of the
combined impact of EPA's regulatory programs, a major objec-
tive of this study was to advance the methodologies used
in previous studies so as to provide more accurate conclu-
sions as well as provide a better foundation for future
studies. This was done in many cases by making use of more
up-to-date or previously unused data in areas such as in-
dustry production cost and pollution control cost. However,
advances also may have been made in the basic analytical
techniques used for impact analysis.
In sponsoring this study the EPA wanted to make
an independent assessment of the electric utility industry.
Although the overall conclusions are endorsed by the Agency,
there may be instances in which technical judgments of the
contractor differ from those of the EPA. Similarly, assump-
tions used in the study that are of a policy nature should
not be construed as an indication of EPA policy intentions.
This report was prepared for EPA by Temple, Barker
& Sloane, Inc. of Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts under contract
number 68-01-2803. Additional copies are available through
the National Technical Information Service, Springfield,
Virginia 22151. Further information concerning this and
other economic studies conducted by EPA can be obtained
through the Office of Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page
Table of Contents - Technical Report (iii)
Preface (ix)
Summary Conclusions 1
Background 5
Baseline Projections 7
Requirements of the Regulations 11
Financial Impacts of the Regulations 16
Financing Pollution Control 22
Regional Impacts 28
Secondary Impacts 31
(ii)
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TECHNICAL REPORT
Preface (ix)
Structure of the Report (xi)
VOL, I CHARACTERIZATION OF THE ELECTRIC
UTILITY INDUSTRY DURING 1960-1975
1960-1965: Security.and Prosperity 1-3
1966-1973: Uncertainty and Adversity 1-6
1974: The Nadir? 1-12
VOL, II NATIONAL BASELINE PROJECTIONS
1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF BASELINE
CASE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS FOR THE
ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY II-l
Approach II-l
Summary of Baseline Case Financial
Projections II-4
Comparison with Alternative Scenarios II-8
2 BASELINE DEMAND PROJECTIONS 11-13
3 BASELINE CAPACITY AND GENERATION
PROJECTIONS . 11-18
Capacity 11-19
Capacity Factors and Generation 11-30
i
4 COST FACTORS 11-33
Capital Cost Factors 11-33
Operating and Maintenance Cost Factors 11-37
(i-ii)
-------
Page
5 FINANCIAL POLICIES AND COSTS 11-42
Industry Structure 11-42
Capital Structure and Capital Costs 11-43
Accounting Practices 11-45
Taxes 11-46
VOL, III NATIONAL FINANCIAL IMPACTS
1 INTRODUCTION AND CONCLUSIONS III-l
HISTORY OF THE REGULATIONS AND
AMOUNT OF CAPACITY AFFECTED II1-4
History of the Clean Air Act
Regulations II.I-4
History of Federal Water Pollution
Control Regulations III-7
Capacity Impacted by Federal
Air and Water Regulations III-8
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES IMPACTS
OF AIR AND WATER REGULATIONS II1-20
Capital Expenditures by Regulation III-2Q
Timing of Capital Expenditure
Requirements II1-22
Capital Expenditures by Type of
Pollution Control Equipment 111-23
Capital Expenditures to Make
up Capacity Losses I11-26
Other Air Regulations 111-28
OTHER FINANCIAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS III-32
External Financing Requirements 111-32
Operation and Maintenance Costs 111-34
Operating Revenues and Consumer
Charges Impacts III-35
(iv)
-------
Impact on the Average Residential
Bill for Electricity 111-36
Energy Impacts III-39
ASSUMPTIONS FOR ANALYSIS OF
THE AIR REGULATIONS II1-42
Capacity Affected by the Regulations 111-43
Capital Costs 111-48
Operation and Maintenance Costs II1-50
Capacity Loss/Energy Penalty 111-51
Financing - 111-52
ASSUMPTIONS FOR ANALYSIS OF
WATER REGULATIONS III-53
Capacity Affected 111-55
Capital and Operation and
Maintenance Cost Estimates 111-65
COMPARISON OF CURRENT ANALYSIS OF WATER
REGULATIONS AND DECEMBER 1974 RESULTS III-70
VOL, IV FINANCING IN CAPITAL MARKETS
1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
CONCERNING ELECTRIC UTILITY FINANCING IV-1
Introduction IV-1
Summary Conclusions IV-2
2 RECENT TRENDS AND CYCLES IN
CORPORATE BUSINESS FINANCING IV-6
The Need for Corporate Financing IV-7
Corporate Sources of Funds IV-9
Inflation and the Need for External Funds IV-11
External Funds Raised in Financial Markets IV-13
The Cyclical Patterns of External Funds IV-14
(v)
-------
Page
The Changing Corporate Balance Sheet IV-15
Corporate External Funds Within
The Financial System IV-16
Corporate Financing in 1975 IV-18
FUTURE PROJECTIONS OF CORPORATE
FINANCIAL NEEDS IV-19
The Determinants of External Financing IV-19
Three Alternative Scenarios for
1975-1985 IV-22
Corporate External Needs in Competition
with Other Sectors of the Economy IV-26
The Supply and Demand for Funds
in Three Alternative Scenarios IV-29
Variations Within a Credit Cycle IV-34
Conclusions IV-34
ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY FINANCIAL
RESULTS AND FINANCING, 1960-1975 IV-36
1960-1965: Growth and Prosperity IV-36
1966-1973: Growth Without Prosperity IV-40
1974: Financial Nadir? IV-48
1975 IV-52
PROJECTIONS OF ELECTRIC UTILITY
INDUSTRY FINANCING, 1975-1985 IV-54
The Industry's Financing Requirements IV-54
Investor-Owned Electric Utility Needs
Versus Available Funds and Total
Corporate Needs IV-55
Projected Financial Strength of
Investor-Owned Utilities IV-60
Concluding Comments • IV-66
(vi)
-------
Page
FINANCING PROBLEMS OF INDIVIDUAL SYSTEMS IV-68
Three Categories of Financial Health IV-68
Intercompany Comparisons of Returns
and Interest Coverage IV-71
Determinants of Interest Coverage Ratios IV-75
Conclusions Concerning Electric
Utility Financing Problems IV-78
VOL, V REGIONAL IMPACT PROJECTIONS
1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF REGIONAL
IMPACT PROJECTIONS V-l
2 REGIONAL BASELINE PROJECTIONS V-5
Operating Projections V-7
Financial Projections V-12
3 REGIONAL POLLUTION CONTROL IMPACTS V-19
Methodology V-19
Impact of Pollution Control Compliance
Measured by Consumer Charges .' V-21
Impacts Projected Region by Region ' V-23
i
Summary of Regional Capital Expenditures! j
and Operating and Maintenance Expenses i ,' V-41
VOL. VI SECONDARY IMPACTS
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERALL CONCLUSION VI-1
Introduction VI-1
Overall Conclusion VI-1
2 IMPACTS ON THE MAJOR USERS OF ELECTRICITY VI-4
Methodology VI-5
Major Assumptions VI-8
Possible Refinement VI-10
(vii)
-------
IMPACTS UPON THE U.S. SULFUR INDUSTRY
AND ADDITIONAL SECONDARY IMPACTS VI-12
Sulfur Industry VI-12
Other Areas VI-26
(viii)
-------
PREFACE
This report has been submitted to the Environmental
Protection Agency in fulfillment of contract No. 68-01-2803
by Temple, Barker & Sloane, Inc., 15 Walnut Street, Wellesley
Hills, Massachusetts.
The research methodology employed in this study is
based on a computerized Policy-Testing model (PTm) of the elec-
tric utility industry. This model is one of a series of in-
dustry models developed by Temple, Barker & Sloane,Inc. (TBS) to
project the economic and financial implications of alternative
policy options in the form of industry structure, rates and
method of expansion, financial strategies, regulatory actions,
taxation policy, economic conditions, etc. PTm(Electric Util-
ities) was initially developed by Drs. Howard W. Pifer and
Michael L. Tennican, both of TBS, to assist the National Power
Survey's Technical Advisory Committee on Finance in preparing
its projections. It later served as the methodology for the
Environmental Protection Agency's evaluation of the economic
impact of its effluent guidelines upon the electric utility
industry.
TBS wishes to express its gratitude to the many
organizations and individuals who contributed to this study.
The work has benefited from the cooperation of the industry's
Clean Air Coordinating Committee and its predecessor, the
Utility Water Act Group. The comments of the many people in
EPA, other Agencies, and the industry who reviewed the earlier
versions of this report have also made a substantial contri-
bution to this final product. Particular thanks is due to
our project managers at EPA, James M. Speyer and James R. Ferry,
for the special efforts they also put into the study.
(ix)
-------
J-
THE ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL IMPACTS
OF AIR AND WATER POLLUTION CONTROLS
ON THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of a study by
Temple, Barker & Sloane, Inc. (TBS) for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) of the economic and finan-
cial impacts of federal environmental control regulations
upon the U.S. electric utility industry. The study con-
siders the effects of water effluent guidelines issued
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and
of air quality regulations issued under the Clean Air Act
of 1970. The analysis focuses upon the 1975-1980 and 1975-
1985 time periods.
SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
The study addresses the impacts of federal pollu-
tion control regulations in four respects: (1) the direct
financial impacts of the regulations on the electric utility
industry and its customers; (2) the effect on the ability of
the investor-owned segment of the industry to finance both
its basic needs and the pollution control equipment associ-
ated with the regulations; (3) the differences in impacts on
utilities and consumers in different regions; and (4) the
secondary impacts upon other industries, especially upon
major industrial users of electricity. The major conclu-
sions in each area are summarized below.
-------
-2-
Direct Financial Impacts
The major direct financial impacts upon the elec-
tric utility industry and its customers are projected to be
as follows:
Capital expenditures for plant in service
will increase as a result of the regula-
tions by $25.0 billion during the 1975-
1985 period, or 10.5 percent on a base of
$237.1 billion (1975 dollars).1
Capital expenditures in the 1975-1980
period will increase as a result of the
regulations by $14.5 billion, or 12.3 per-
cent of the industry's baseline level of
capital expenditures.
As a result, external financing during the
1975-1985 period will increase by$21.9
billion, or 11.5 percent of the baseline
projection.
External financing during the 1975-1980
period will increase by $14.5 billion, or
16.1 percent of the baseline projection
for this period.
\.
The combined effect upon operating revenues
and average consumer charges is projected
to be a 6.7 percent increase by .1985.
The direct impact of the regulations upon
the average residential customer's electric
bill will be an increase of approximately
$2.80 per month on an average 1985 bill of
$42.40 per month.
The direct and indirect impact of the regu-
lations, including secondary price increases
in industries dependent upon electricity,
will be an increase of approximately $5.80
per month in the average residential cus-
tomer's cost of goods and services, including
electricity.
All dollar figures unless otherwise noted are expressed
in constant 1975 dollars.
-------
- 3 -
External Financing Impacts
The effect of federal pollution control legislation
on the ability of the investor-owned segment of the industry
to obtain external financing can be summarized as follows:
• External financing during the 1975-1985
period will increase for investor-owned
systems by $19.3 billion, or 12.5 per-
cent of the $155.0 billion required be-
fore consideration of pollution control
equipment.
• -External financing in the early part of
this period (1975-1980) will increase by
$13.0 billion, or 17.8 percent of a base
of $73.0 billion .
• The increases in external financing amount
to 1.5 percent of net household savings for
the 1975-1985 period. It should be noted
that the baseline financing needs of the
investor-owned systems are projected to
reach record levels of approximately 12.5
percent of net household savings over this
same 1975-1985 period.
• Assuming the industry is able to pass on
the costs of pollution control equipment
to its customers and to offer investors
a competitive return on equity (approxi-
mately 14 percent), the industry generally
will be able to obtain the financing re-
quired both for baseline needs and for
pollution control equipment.
• Under current levels of return on equity
(approximately 11.5 percent) and with the
present accounting treatments required by
some state regulatory commissions, some
utility systems may be unable to finance
both their basic capacity needs and pol-
lution control equipment in the next decade.
However, the necessary financing should be
available if state regulatory commissions take
appropriate actions, such as allowing adequate
returns on equity, changing accounting policy,
etc.
-------
-4-
Finally, the financing outlook for pol-
lution control is guardedly optimistic
due to favorable trends in earnings and
in recent regulatory decisions.
Regional Impacts
The financial impacts of federal pollution control
regulations vary significantly among regions of the country,
as is summarized below:
Capital expenditures for pollution control
equipment in the 1975-1985 period range
from a high of $5 billion in the East North
Central region2 to a low of $0.4 billion in
New England. The other regions in order of
impact are: South Atlantic ($4.5), West
South Central ($3.4), East South Central,
($3.4), West North Central ($2.8), Mountain
($2.5), Middle Atlantic ($2.5), and Pacific
($0.6).
The impact in relation to baseline capital
expenditures ranges from a 16.7 percent in-
crease in the West South Central region to
a 2.2 percent impact in the Pacific region.
Based upon percentage increase in average
consumer charges, which measures the rela-
tive total effect felt by customers in each
region, the overall ranking from most to
least affected region in the 1975-1985 peri-
od would be: Mountain (11.1 percent), East
South Central (10.2), West North Central
(10.1), West South Central (9.0), East
North Central (8.3), South Atlantic (5.2),
Middle Atlantic (4.1), New England (1.8),
and Pacific (1.3).
2
The geographic regions used in this research effort are the regions
designated by the Bureau of the Census. See map on Page 29. impacts
were not estimated for the tenth Census region, Alaska and Hawaii,
in this analysis.
-------
- 5 -
Secondary Impacts
The effects of pollution control expenditures and
operations in the electric utility industry will be felt in
other industries as follows:
Generally the impacts will be very small both
on major users of electricity and on other
areas such as the sulfur industry.
Product price increases in the most electric-
ity-intensive industry, primary aluminum,
would be only 1.1 percent by 1985 if all
increased electricity costs due to pollution
control were passed directly on in the form
of increased product prices-. Only three
other industries would exceed 0.5 percent
increases.
In another area, the sulfur industry does
not appear to be threatened by the volume
of potential production of by-product
sulfur from the installation of regener-
able scrubbers. The likely level of by-
product sulfur production by 1985 will
amount to only 2.5 percent of the sulfur
industry's projected volume. This 2.5 percent
compares to a projected ten-year increase
in industry volume of 50 to 80 percent (4 to
5 percent per year).
BACKGROUND
Since 1971, when EPA first promulgated ambient air
quality standards, each new regulation has tended to be
evaluated on an individual basis. While such analyses focused
attention on the issue at hand, they were often weak in two
respects: first, they ignored the impact of other pollution
control regulations on the industry; and second, they failed
to address the effect of the changed conditions in the indus-
try which have resulted from the Arab oil embargo and the
economic slowdown of 1974-1975.
-------
-6-
To overcome those weaknesses, the Office of Man-
agement and Budget (OMB) requested EPA to conduct compre-
hensive economic and financial analyses of pollution
control regulations in six major industries. The electric
utility industry, being a major source of at least three
forms of pollution—thermal effluent discharges, sulfur di-
oxide emissions into the air, and suspended particulate
emissions—was selected as one of the six industries to be
studied.
This report presents the result of the comprehen-
sive analysis of the electric utility industry. As requested
by OMB, the report focuses upon the financial effects rather
than physical or technical effects of pollution control
regulations. It is designed to meet five study objectives:
(1) to update and bring together in one document the assess-
ment of the financial impact of federal pollution control regu-
lations for both air and water; (2) to determine the industry's
ability to raise the capital funds required to meet the regula-
tions; (3) to identify the effect of the regulations upon the
average residential customer; (4) to estimate the direct
effects of federal pollution control regulations on different
geographic regions; and (5) to determine whether there will
\
be significant secondary effects upon the industries for which
electricity costs are already a significant fraction of total
costs.
With respect to the Clean Air Act of 1970, the anal-
ysis has focused upon two regulations: (1) sulfur dioxide
and (2) total suspended particulates. The electric utility
industry is a major emission source of both. In terms of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the report deals with
-------
-7-
three types of effluent guidelines: (1) thermal effluent;
(2) entrainment of organisms; and (3) chemical effluent (both
1977 and 1983 guidelines). In addition to these primary
areas, which are the focus of the summary conclusions pre-
sented above, the report also discusses non-significant de-
terioration requirements, nitrogen oxide regulations, and
pollution control equipment which is being installed for non-
federal reasons (e.g., State Water Quality Standards or
economic reasons, such as the lack of available cooling
water).
BASELINE PROJECTIONS
Even before consideration of pollution control
regulations, the electric utility industry's outlook for
the 1975-1985 period is similar to the last decade in
that the industry will require major capital expenditures
and external financing to meet the growth in demand for
electrical energy. The outlook differs, however, in two
important respects. First, while most projections are for
somewhat lower rates of growth in demand, all projections
of future demand—and therefore of required capacity addi-
tions—are much less certain than was characteristic of
demand projections prior to 1974. Second, projected fuel
prices are much higher and much less certain than those
of the period prior to 1974.
Detailed projections of the industry's baseline
conditions (i.e., conditions before consideration of pol-
lution controls) have been developed in order to provide
a basis for estimating and evaluating the financial impacts
of federal pollution control regulations. The baseline
projections of peak load, kilowatt-hour sales, and the
-------
—8 —
related levels of capital expenditures and external financing
3
are summarized in the following table.
SELECTED BASELINE PROJECTIONS
(billions 1975 dollars)
1975-1980
- I
5-Year Growth Rate in
Sales (kwh)
5-Year Growth Rate in
Peak Load (kw)
Capital Expenditures
(net of change in CWIP*)
since 1974
External Financing
since 1974.
6.1%
5.9%
$118.3
$89.8
^Construction Work in Progress
Source: Exhibits II-l and II-8
1975-1985
5.3%
5.2%
$237.1
$191.2
The growth rates for peak load and sales, shown in
the above table, were developed from published industry
projections and have been reconciled against recent utility
experience and the Federal Energy Administration's revised
Project Independence projections (February 1976).4 The growth
rates used in this analysis are one to two percentage points
below the industry's historic rate of growth of approximately
7.3 percent per year from 1960 to 1973.
All tables included in the Executive Summary are excerpts from the six-
volume study. The Economic and Financial Impacts of Air and Water
Pollution Controls on the Electric Utility Industry. The sources
listed in the tables refer to the exhibits provided at the end of
each volume.
4
Project Independence projections estimate a growth rate-in sales of
5.7 percent (1975-1985).
If efforts to encourage energy conservation result in even lower growth
rates for peak load and total sales, then baseline capital.expenditures
would be lower and the impacts of pollution control regulations described
later would be slightly lower in absolute terms. However, the expenses
of retrofitting existing capacity would be unchanged. Thus, pollution
control expenditures as a percentage of baseline capital expenditures
might increase.
-------
-9-
Even based on the moderate sales and peak demand
growth rates used in this study, TBS projects a substantial
increase in capacity additions during 1975-1985. From a
1974 year-end level of 476 million kilowatts of capacity, the
industry is projected to expand to 631 million kilowatts
at the end of 1980 and to 751 million kilowatts at the end
of 1985—an increase of almost 60 percent over the eleven-
year period.
The capital expenditures projection reflects both
peak demand expansion and the continuing escalation in plant
costs. New coal-fired units, which in 1970 cost approxi-
mately $120 per kilowatt when they came on-stream, rose to
$210 per kilowatt for units placed into service in 1975, and
are projected to rise to $700 per kilowatt by 1985 (current
6
dollars excluding AFDC and pollution control. Nuclear plant
costs are rising equivalently, up from approximately $150 per
kilowatt for units placed into service in 1970 to $388 for
those put into service in 1975 (current dollars excluding
AFDC, nuclear fuel, and pollution control). Those costs are
expected to continue to rise to approximately $900 per kilo-
watt for plants completed in 1985. The resulting projections
for electric utility capital expenditures for plants placed
into service (i.e., net of the change in CWIP) are $118.3
billion in the 1975-1980 period and $237.1 billion in 1975-
1985, excluding AFDC.
External financing is almost a direct function of
capital expenditures: $89.8 billion through 1980 and $191.2
billion through 1985. These amounts contrast with the in-
dustry's total capitalization of approximately $160 billion
in 1975.
/»
Allowance for Funds During Construction.
-------
-10-
The remaining key baseline projections which
follow from the figures above are summarized in the next
table. "'
SELECTED BASELINE PROJECTIONS - II
(1975
Annual Operating Revenues
(billion dollars)
Average Consumer Charges
(mills per kwh)
Average Residential
Customer's Bill
(dollars per month)
Source: Exhibit I I -8
*
dollars)
1975 1980
$51.4 $74.0
29.6 31.7
$25.60 $34.00
1985
$96.8
32.0
$42.40
As displayed above, operating revenues are pro-
jected to increase in 1975 dollars from a present annual
level of approximately $51 billion to about $74 billion by
1980 and to over $96 billion by 1985. Consumer charges per
kilowatt-hour, on the other hand, are expected to increase
much less. The projected year-by-year pattern detailed in
later exhibits shows consumer charges increasing for about
three years, through 1977, and then tracking evenly with
inflation (i.e., remaining virtually constant when reported
in constant dollars). The 90 percent increase in operating
revenues described above, therefore, is not expected to be
the result of real increases in the price of electricity,
but rather is a function of increased usage of electricity
by customers.
-------
-11-
The projection of the average residential cus-
tomer's bill indicates this clearly. The average monthly
bill is expected to increase over 30 percent from 1975 to
1980 and over 65 percent from 1975 to 1985 in real terms
(i.e., in 1975 dollars). Over that entire period, however,
electricity rates as described above are projected to in-
crease by less than 7 percent in real terms. The remainder
of the increase in the average monthly bill stems from in-
creases in the usage of electricity from a 1975 level of
approximately 8,155 kilowatt-hours per residential customer
to a 1985 level of 12,481 kilowatt-hours.
The combined effect of the projected growth in
energy usage and the projected increase in consumer charges
is estimated to be an increase in the average residential
bill from its 1975 level of $25.60 per month to approximately
$42.40 per month in 1985. In current dollars, reflecting
the effect of inflation, the average bill in 1985 will be
just over $70 per month.
REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS
In order to determine the economic and financial
impact of the federal regulations, EPA has attempted to
estimate the amount and type of the generating capacity now
in service and projected in the baseline forecast which will
be affected by the federal regulations. In addition, EPA
has attempted to make similar estimates of the capacity
which will be affected by State Water Quality Standards and
other non-federal requirements. An important concept in this
analysis is the separation of pollution control equipment
installed to meet federal regulations from that required by
local or state regulations and from that installed because
-------
-12-
adequate supplies of water are simply not available for once-
through cooling. These estimates were made separately for
each region of the country. State Implementation Plans for
enforcement of the federal air regulations are taken to be
direct federal requirements for controls.
Pollution Control Equipment to be Installed
Each of the various federal regulations affects a
slightly different set of electric generating plants. The
sections below summarize the extent to which treatments and
equipment will have to be adopted to meet the federal regula-
tions.
First, the chemical guidelines are relatively broad
in coverage compared to other regulations. It is EPA's esti-
mate that by 1985 these guidelines will require new expendi-
tures at approximately 40 percent of the nation's nuclear
capacity and at 60 percent of the fossil capacity.
Second, the thermal and entrainment guidelines will
require the installation of cooling towers on approximately
one-fourth of the industry's nuclear and fossil capacity by
1985. In addition, an almost equal amount of closed-cycle
cooling capacity will be built for economic reasons due to
the unavailability of adequate cooling water for once-through
cooling and for compliance with State Water Quality Standards,
as shown in the table below.
-------
-13-
COOLING TOWERS INSTALLED 1975-1985
(million kw)
Nuclear
1985 Capacity
Cooling 'Towers Installed
Due to:
Economic Reasons
State Water Quality
Standards
Federal Regulations*
TOTAL
132.0
34.5
72.6
Fossi1
465.1
54.8
32.3
99.5
186.6
^Thermal and entrainment regulations, after 316(a)
exemptions
Source: Exhibit 111-13
Third, the state sulfur dioxide regulations will
require approximately two-thirds of the industry's coal
capacity to adopt some significant change in operations by
1985 to meet the applicable emission limitation. The table
below lists the four major compliance strategies and the
expected degree to which each will be required. Washing
and blending, which are the least expensive methods of
compliance, are feasible only at plants which are very
close to compliance already and therefore are expected to
be used at about 11 percent of the units in service
in 1985. Western low-sulfur and medium-sulfur coal are
each expected to be used at approximately 21 percent of
the 1985 units. Scrubbers are expected to be used on
35 percent of all coal capacity in service in 1985.
-------
-14-
SULFUR DIOXIDE CONTROL STRATEGIES
(million kw)
1980 1985
Total Coal Capacity 276.8 332.9
Total Not Requiring Controls 88.9 (32.1%) 74.8 (22.5%)
Total Requiring S02 Controls 187.9 (67.9%) 258.1 (77.5%)
Strategies:
Washing or Blending 32.7 (13.4%) 37.2 (11.1%)
Western Low-Sulfur Coal 34.0 (12.3%) 69.8 (21.0%)
Medium-Sulfur Coal 33.2 (12.0%) 33.2 (10.0%)
Scrubbers 83.5 (30.2%) 117.2 (35.4%J
TOTAL 187.9 (67.9%) 258.1 (77.5%)
Source: EPA and Sobotka & Co., Inc., November 1975 (see Exhibit
III-9)
Fourth, the total suspended particulate regulation
sets maximum emission levels for the particles in flue gases.
There are two available technologies, the electrostatic
precipitator and the venturi scrubber, by which to bring an
out-of-compliance plant into compliance with the regulation.
This analysis has assumed that all plants installing a scrub-
ber for SO^ control would incorporate a venturi scrubber if
particulate control were also required. All other plants
requiring controls were assumed to rely upon precipitators.
Approximately 40 percent of existing plants, in EPA's judg-
ment, will be able to meet the regulations with their
current equipment. The remaining coal plants either will
have to install electrostatic precipitators or upgrade
their precipitators to a higher efficiency rating.
Timing of Regulations
The heaviest impacts of the regulations will be
felt in the 1977-1981 period because of the timing of the
compliance schedules. The air regulations require all
retrofitted units to be in compliance as soon as possible.
-------
-15-
EPA has estimated that all retrofit should be completed
before 1980. All new sources (estimated to be those plants
7
coming on-line in 1977 and later ) are required to be in
compliance when they are placed in service. The thermal
effluent guidelines mandate compliance for existing plants
by 1981, but also allow for partial exemptions and variances
through 1983. The chemical guidelines require existing plants
to comply with best practical technology (BPT) by 1977 and
with best available technology (BAT) by 1983. New sources
also are required to comply with both thermal and chemical
effluent guidelines at the date they are placed into service.
As new coal plants continue to be built, signifi-
cant economic effects will continue after the early 1980s
as well. The baseline projections anticipate that coal-
fired units will continue to account for almost 50 percent
of total plant additions through 1990 and beyond, and that
all will require pollution control equipment.
Unit Costs for Pollution
Control Equipment
Pollution control equipment varies substantially
in cost from one type of control to another. As the table
below shows, the capital costs used in this analysis range
from under $2 per kilowatt for chemical effluent control to
$86 for a retrofitted scrubber with a particulate venturi
(in 1975 dollars).
Unfortunately, for most units,there is a limited
choice among the alternatives to meet a regulation. The
plant, site, fuel, and regulation generally limit the choice
to one or two options.
This definition of new sources was used for analytical purposes only.
The Clean Air Act requires all powerplants which commence construction
after August 1971 to meet federal New Source Performance Standards.
-------
-16-
CAPITAL COSTS FOR
SELECTED POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT
(1975 dollars per kw)
ffater Guidelines
Chemical Effluent Treatment
(fossil)
Mechanical Cooling Tower
(fossil)
Air Regulations
Scrubber
Scrubber with Particulate Venturi
Western Low Sulfur Coal with
Precipitator
Washing and Blending
Precipitator
Retrofitted
Units
$ 2.01
24.09
70.27
86.83
62.40
5.40
45.50
Estimates in table based on 1975 in-service year costs.
New
Units
$ 1.52
5.77
55.50
77.06
65.88
56.00
Source: Air control costs: PEDCO Environmental Specialists,
Inc.; water control costs: EPA
FINANCIAL IMPACTS OF THE REGULATIONS
Federal air and water pollution control regulations
result in four major types of financial impact: (1) capital
expenditures for pollution control equipment, (2) external
financing for the capital expenditures program, (3) operation
and maintenance expenses related to the pollution control
\
equipment, and (4) the net effect of these costs upon opera-
ting revenues and average electric rates (consumer charges).
The sections below describe each area of financial impact and
conclude with a discussion of the impact of the regulations
upon the average residential customer's monthly bill. In
addition, one non-financial impact category, the effects
upon total energy usage by the industry, is also summarized
below.
-------
-17-
Capital Expenditures
The impact of the regulations on the industry's
capital expenditures for plant placed into service (that is,
0
net of the increase in construction-work-in-progress) as
mentioned earlier will be an increase of $25.0 billion in
1975 dollars during the next eleven years. That represents
a 10.5 percent increase over the baseline level of capital
expenditures. Almost 60 percent of that impact, $14.5
billion, will be required through 1980.
Of these impacts, the water regulations account
for only 6 percent by 1980 and 20 percent by 1985. As the
table below shows, the sulfur dioxide and particulate regu-
lations account for the major capital expenditures over the
decade 1975-1985, respectively 46 percent and 34 percent of
the total.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES IMPACTS
NET OF INCREASE IN CWIP
(billion 1975 dollars)
Baseline Capital
Expenditures
Water Regulations
-Chemical
-Thermal
-Entrainment
Subtotal
I Air Regulations
-Sulfur dioxide
-Particulates
1975-1980
$118.3
+ 0.6
+ 0.3
+ 0.0
+$0.9
+ 8.6
+ 5.0
Subtotal +$ 13.6
Total Impact +$'14.5
% Increase from Baseline 12.3%
Source: Exhibits III-4
and III-5
1975-1985
$237.1
+ 0.9
+ 3.6
+ 0.5
+$ 5.0
+ 11.6
+ 8.4
+$20.0
+$ 25:0
10 . 5%
8"Capital expenditures" as used in this report refers to cumulative cash
expenditures for plant placed into service and excludes both the increase
in CWIP and the non-cash allowance for funds during construction (AFDC).
-------
-18-
Three types of pollution control equipment account for 91 per-
cent of these total expenditures. Scrubbers, the most expen-
sive per kilowatt, are projected to account for 51 percent
($12.8 billion by 1985, of which $9.8 billion is to meet SO2
standards and $3.0 billion is to meet particulate standards).
Precipitators and precipitator upgrades required by federal
regulations will represent 24 percent ($5.9 billion). Cooling
towers will account for the remaining 16 percent ($4.1 billion).
Included in these costs are allocated costs for
replacement generating capacity to make up any energy require- -
ment and unit derating caused by the pollution control equip-
ment. The total which is attributable to replacement capacity
is $4.0 billion in the 1975-1985 period. Scrubbers will account
for $2.1 billion of that, cooling towers for $1.7 billion,
and all other equipment for the remaining $0.2 billion.
External Financing
These capital expenditure requirements will neces-
sitate a significant amount of financing by the utilities in
the nation's debt and equity markets. In fact, total exter-
nal financing impacts are almost equal to the amount of the
capital expenditures impacts for three reasons: (1) the defi-
nition of capital expenditures for this analysis refers to
cash outlays only, excluding AFDC; (2) the same convention also
excludes CWIP increases from what is reported as capital ex-
penditures impacts, but those increases must still be financed
in the capital markets; and (3) the industry's internal sources
of funds already are allocated to baseline capital projects
and generally are not available for incremental investments in
pollution control facilities. The impact on external financing
is $14.5 billion by 1980 and $21.9 billion in the full 1975-
-------
-19-
1985 period. Those amounts represent increases above the
baseline financing levels for the industry of 17.8 percent
by 1980 and 12.5 percent by 1985. The industry's financing
needs are so important that an entire volume of the report,
Volume IV, is devoted to capital availability. Its conclu-
sions are also summarized in a later section of this Execu-
tive Summary.
Operating and Maintenance Expenses
The increases in operating and maintenance expenses
in relation to the baseline projections are estimated to be
6.0 percent in 1985. That increase covers the operating costs
of the pollution control equipment, including the premium,
if any, paid for low-sulfur fuel used to meet the regulations.
The total increase in operating and maintenance expenses is
projected to be $1.8 billion per year by 1980 and $3.2 bil-
lion per year by 1985. The water regulations account for
$0.5 billion of that latter number, while the air regulations
account for $2.7 billion.
Operating Revenues and
Consumer Charges
The total cost to consumers of pollution control in
the electric utility industry is represented by the addi-
tional revenues collected from consumers to cover pollution
control capital and operating costs. The total premium paid
by consumers because of federal pollution control regulations
is. .projected to be $3.9 billion in 1980 and $6.5 billion in
1985. The air regulations account for the majority of the
cost, $3.4 billion in 1980; the water regulations account for
the remaining $0.5 billion. The air1 and water proportions
in 1985 are $5.3 and $1.2 billion, respectively. Over the
entire period 1975-1985 the cumulative cost to consumers of
federal pollution controls on this industry will be $40.2
billion.
-------
-20-
The average increase in costs to consumers will be
approximately 5.3 percent in 1980 and 6.7 percent by 1985.
On a kilowatt-hour basis the cost of the average consumer
charge will increase by approximately 1.7 mills by 1980 on
a base charge of 31.7 mills per kilowatt-hour. Of rthis 1980
impact, the air regulations account for 1.5 mills, the water
regulations for 0.2 mills. By 1985, the average consumer
charge will increase 2.1 mills per kilowatt-hour on a base of
32.0 mills. The air and water regulations account for 1.7
and 0.4 mills, respectively, of the 1985 total. The table
below illustrates this change.
AVERAGE CONSUMER CHARGES
(mills/kwh - 1975 dollars)
1980
Baseline
Impact of
Air & Water
Regulations
Total
31.7
1.7 (5.3%)
33.4
1985
32.0
2.1 (6.7%)
34.1
To view these costs in perspective it is useful to
relate them to the average monthly bill paid by residential
customers. The average bill is projected to increase even
in the absence of pollution control impacts at a real growth
of approximately 5 percent per year, from $25.60 per month in
1975 to $42.40 per month in 1985, reflecting a continuing
growth in electricity usage per customer. In current dollars
the bill is estimated to be $70.80 in 1985.
The direct increase in an average residential elec-
tric bill as a result of the federal pollution control regula-
tions will be approximately $1.80 per month in 1980 and $2.80
per month in 1985. In relative terms, those impacts represent
5.3 percent and 6.7 percent increases.
-------
-21-
Another important measure of pollution control
costs is the combined direct and indirect increase in the
monthly bill, that is, the total cost of pollution control
allocated just over residential customers' usage. The
assumption in using this measure is that all impacts which
are charged first to industries are ultimately passed on to
residential customers in the form of price increases on
their products and services. Under that assumption, the
direct and indirect increase in the average residential cus-
tomer's total costs will be approximately $4 by 1980 and
$5.80 by 1985. These dollar amounts represent 5.3 and 6.7
percent increases in the direct and indirect .costs of elec-
tricity to consumers in the respective years.
Energy Impacts
The capacity deratings and the energy required to
operate pollution control equipment will require the addi-
tion of 4.3 million kilowatts of capacity by 1980 and a
total of 9.2 million kilowatts by 1985. That level of addi-
tions represents approximately a 1 percent increase in the
industry's total capacity.
The energy penalty resulting from pollution control
equipment will be 0.2 quads (quadrillion Btu) in 1980 and 0.5
quads in 1985. The industry's total energy consumption under
the baseline conditions is projected to be 25.8 and 33.2
in the same years. Consequently, the energy penalty is ap-
proximately 1.5 percent in 1985. Energy penalties by strategy
for nuclear and fossil units are illustrated below. It should
be noted that these estimates do not include indirect energy
impacts such as energy to mine limestone for scrubbers or
increased fuel consumption to move Western low-sulfur coal
to eastern markets.
-------
-22-
CAPACITY LOSSES AND ENERGY PENALTIES
FOR FOSSIL AND NUCLEAR UNITS AFFECTED
BT AIR AND WATER REGULATIONS
Total Industry Capacity
(million kw)
Capacity Losses Since 1974
(million kw)
Fossil
Scrubbers
Western Low-Sulfur Coal
Precipitators
Cooling Towers
SUBTOTAL
Nuclear
Cooling Towers
TOTAL
1980 1985
631.0 751.1
3.3
.2
.3
.4
4.2
.1
4.3
4.6
.2
.3
3.0
8.1
1.1
9.2
Total Industry Energy (quads*) 25.8 33.2
Energy Perialtles (quads*)
Fossil
Scrubbers7 0.2 0.3
Precipitators 0.0 0.0
Cooling Towers 0.0 0.2«»
SUBTOTAL 0.2 0.4
Nuclear
Cooling Towers 0.0 0.1«*
TOTAL 0.2 0.5
Quadrillion Btu
Cooling Toaers - Fnergy Penalties have been rounded; actual
detail is as'fallout: fossil - 0.15; Nuclear - 0.05
Note: Values listed as "0.0" are too small to show
at this level of detail.
Source: Exhibit III-2
FINANCING POLLUTION CONTROL
The electric utility industry's pollution control
equipment financing requirements represent a 12.5 percent in-
crease over the industry's 1975-1985 baseline needs, which
are themselves projected to be at record levels. Moreover,
the industry's requirements are likely to be a large and
increasing fraction of the total supply of funds available
to all sectors of the economy, so that investors' perceptions
-------
-23-
of the financial health of the industry and its constituent
firms is crucial to the industry's success in meeting its
total requirements. The report's conclusions on the above
topics are summarized below.
The Industry's Financing Requirements
The electric utility industry will need external
financing of approximately $191.2 billion (1975 dollars) from
1975 to 1985 before consideration of federal pollution con-
trol regulations. Of this total, $155.0 billion is required
by investor-owned utilities; the remaining $36.2 billion
represents the needs of the public segment of the industry.
The private industry's financing requirements are approxi-
mately $12.2 billion per year from 1975 to 1980 and $16.4
billion per year from 1981 to 1985.
The total industry's 1975-1985 financing needs will
be increased by $21.9 billion (from $191.2 to $213.1 billion)
by federal pollution control legislation. Investor-owned
companies are responsible for $19.3 billion (88.1 percent) of
the incremental financing need and for $174.3 billion (82
percent) of the need for both baseline and pollution control
financing. These private financing requirements average
about $2.2 billion per year from 1975 to 1980 and $1.3 billion
per year from 1981 to 1985, reflecting the profile of expen-
ditures for retrofitting existing plant capacity.
Electric Utilities' Needs vs. the Total
Supply of Funds
The electric utility industry's future external
financing needs will be significantly above historical levels
relative to the probable amounts of other corporate financing
-------
-24-
and of total U.S. sources and uses of funds. Assuming that
household savings in the future continue to be at their his-
torical average of 6 percent of GNP and assuming that the real
growth rate in GNP is 3.5 percent, the industry's future net
external financing needs will increase from an historical
high of 11.5 percent of household net savings in the 1970-
1974 credit cycle to a level of 12.5 percent in the 1975-
1985 period even before consideration of pollution control
expenditures. Pollution control financing is projected to
raise the industry's requirements to 14 percent of net house-
hold savings. Nonetheless, as is briefly reviewed below,
assuming the industry is able to pass on the costs of pollu-
tion control equipment to its customers and to offer investors
a competitive return on equity (approximately 14 percent), the
industry generally will be able to obtain the financing re-
quired both for baseline needs- and for pollution control
equipment.
The Industry's Position in the Competition
for Funds
Some observers have predicted that electric
utilities will be attempting to meet their financing needs
in very tight overall capital market conditions, but this
difficult prospect seems unlikely, at least through 1980.
In these projections, the financing needs of all non-financial
corporations may be as high as 83 percent of net household
savings. And, if total corporate financing needs are that
high, utilities will be competing for record levels of funds
in extraordinarily tight capital markets. However, the
extremely high levels of total corporate financing needs en-
visoned in this scenario are not very likely to occur. And,
even in the event of tight capital markets, it is within the
-------
-25-
power of state regulatory commissions to grant price in-
creases sufficient to enable utilities to "crowd out" many
weaker corporate borrowers.
Under more probable projections of total corporate
financing needs, capital market conditions will be less tight,
but the electric utility industry's financing needs will
still be difficult to meet unless the industry's interest
coverage ratios and returns on common equity continue to
improve relative to the 1974-1975 levels. If total corporate
financing needs are equal to about 63 percent of net house-
hold savings—a level which compares with a 65 percent share
in the last credit cycle and a 58 percent share in the 1967-
1970 credit cycle—capital market conditions will be moderately
tight. The electric utility industry's financing needs before
consideration of pollution control will represent 20 percent
of total corporate financing. The industry's share including
its pollution control financing needs will rise to 22 percent
of the total. These shares compare with a record-high level
of 18 percent in the most recent credit cycle. However, a
modest increase in the current financial health of the elec-
tric utility industry should enable it to compete success-
fully for the amounts of funds required in the 1975-1985
period.
If total non-financial corporate demand for fi-
nancing is lower than the levels of the most recent credit
cycle, as is likely, future capital market conditions will
be relatively easy. If so, however, the electric utility
industry's share of total corporate financing will be well
above the peak historical level of 18 percent. Before
consideration of pollution control financing, the industry's
needs will rise to 32 percent of the corporate sector's
total. With pollution control financing, the industry's
-------
-26-
share will rise to 36 percent. Such shares are possible,
but only if utilities have very strong financial statistics.
Unless regulators allow returns on common equity and interest
coverage ratios that enable the electric utility industry to
regain its status of the 1960s as a low-risk industry, inves-
tors may be very unwilling to commit as much as a third of
their corporate investment portfolio to the industry.
Possible Problems of Individual Firms
Even if adequate sources of funds are available
for the industry as a whole and even if the industry's finan- "
cial strength is, on average, adequate to enable it to com-
pete effectively for these funds, some firms may still have
difficulty in obtaining capital. The industry average ratios
have historically been the aggregate of individual company
ratios which vary widely. Therefore, even when the industry's
average rate of return on equity has been equal to the rate
of return demanded by investors, a number of firms have had
lower returns on equity and interest coverage ratios that
have severely hampered their access to external financing.
Therefore, the special problems of individual firms are of
importance. In recent years, these problems have sometimes
been severe. In fact, some firms are currently unable to
finance desired basic capacity additions except through methods,
such as the issuance of stock at prices less than book value,
that are costly and perhaps unsustainable in the long run.
Individual electric utilities may be able to improve
their financial health by further improvements in efficiency
and by reductions in service, but the resolution of the fi-
nancing difficulties faced currently by a number of utilities
depends essentially on the decisions of state regulatory com-
missions. Pollution control revenue bonds and reductions in
-------
-27-
debt ratios have been advanced as solutions for the interest cov-
erage problems facing some companies, but TBS's judgment is that
neither will substantially alleviate these companies' financing
difficulties. Moreover, the first alternative will not help
and the second alternative may hurt these companies' efforts
to issue common stock at reasonable prices. Thus, the basic
requirement for returning ailing companies to financial health
is an increase in revenues, which increase it is within the
power of regulatory commissions to create.
In many instances, the price increase required to
restore individual companies to financial health is simply
the relatively small increase required to bring returns on
equity to levels demanded in the marketplace by investors.
In some instances, however, the increases may take a form
different from, or in addition to, the increases associated
with an adequate return on equity. The increases may, for
example, be those associated with a conversion from flow-
through accounting to normalized accounting or with the
inclusion of construction work in progress in a utility's
rate base.
Recent Trends
Fortunately, recent trends in the capital markets
and in regulation provide a basis for some optimism concerning
the electric utility industry's ability to meet its external
financing needs. Although a number of considerations (such
as GNP growth rates, net household savings rates, the financ-
ing needs of other corporations and other sectors, etc.) are
relevant, the basic determinant of the industry's access to
funds is the level of its allowed return on common equity
relative to the rates of return required in the capital mar-
kets. The basis for optimism is twofold. First, a number of
recent regulatory decisions have allowed rates of return well
-------
-28-
above historical levels. Second, as rates of inflation have
abated, the returns on investments comparable in risk to
utility securities have declined. As as result, the industry's
interest coverage ratios and common stock prices have been
improving significantly in recent months. In early 1976, for
example, a sample of 40 large electric utilities had common
stock prices averaging 99 percent of book value. This compares
with a 1974 value of 52 percent for Moody's Public Utility
Index (based on 24 electric utility systems).
REGIONAL IMPACTS
The nine census regions will be affected differently
by the implementation of the air and water pollution control
regulations. (See map on the following page.) The differences
are primarily due to the amount of generating capacity which
falls under the purview of the regulations. The differences
in financial impact can best be established by displaying the
differences among regions in additional capital expenditures
and consumer required charges by 1985.
The $25 billion impact in capital expenditures at the
national level is dispersed across regions in amounts varying
from a high of $5 billion in the East North Central region
to a low of $0.5 billion in New England. Between these ex-
tremes, the remaining regions will require additional capital
expenditures in the following order: South Atlantic ($4.5),
West South Central ($3.4), East South Central, ($3.4), West
North Central ($2.8), Mountain ($2.5), Middle Atlantic ($2.5),
and Pacific ($0.6).
While the absolute amount of capital expenditures
needed in some regions is relatively high, that amount may
not represent as significant a percentage increase in the
-------
WEST NORTHVCENTRAi
§
td
c|
O
O
w
c!
ra
o
M
8
a
M
n
»
t?d
o
w
O
!2
09
I
to
CO
I
-------
-30-
total capital outlays as may be the case in some regions
starting out from a ;small base. The average change in addi-
tional capital expenditures as a percent of baseline capital
expenditures (without pollution control) is 10.5 percent.
The range among regions is 2.2 percent (Pacific) to 16.7
percent (West South Central). Among the other regions, three
are above the national average (Mountain, East South Central,
and East North Central) arid four are below (West South Central,
South Atlantic, Middle Atlantic and New England). Therefore
the degree of the impact varies depending upon whether the
focus is on absolute capital requirements or on the magnitude
of the change from a base level.
The same relationship exists regarding the degree of
impact where consumer charges are used as a measure. The regions
with the largest changes do not necessarily have the highest
total consumer charges. The range of increases in consumer
charges attributable to pollution control is 1.3 to 11.1 per-
cent in 1985, while the national average is 6.7 percent.
On that basis, the regions will be affected as follows:
Mountain (11.1), East South Central (10.2), West North
Central (10.1), West South Central (9.0), East North Central
(8.3), South Atlantic (5.2), Middle Atlantic (4.1), New
England (1.8), and Pacific (1.3).
The regional analysis has identified four key
factors which account for-the differences in impacts among
regions: (1) the amount of coal capacity in the region;
(2) the amount of capacity affected by .the air regulations
or the water regulations or both; (3) the pollution control
technology chosen to comply with each regulation; and (4) •
the usage of electricity per customer which reflects, among
other things, the variations in the use of electrical heating
instead of oil or gas.
-------
-31-
SECONDARY IMPACTS
The overall conclusion of this analysis is that
secondary economic impacts of pollution control equipment in
the electric utility industry will be very small on major
users of electricity and on other areas such as the sulfur
industry.
Major Users
Secondary economic impacts on major users of elec-
tricity will be small by any measure. In the primary aluminum.
industry—the most electricity-intensive industry and the
one where the impact will be greatest—higher costs for
electricity brought about by utility expenditures for pollu-
tion control equipment will cause an increase in product
price of 1.1 percent by 1975 (assuming an otherwise unchanged
industry return on investment). The increase will exceed 0.5
percent in only four of the ten most electricity-intensive
industries. The average for all industries will be less than
0.1 percent. In addition, these figures are based on conser-
vation assumptions which may overstate the effects. In any
event, when experienced over a ten-year period, even the
1.1 percent increase projected for primary alumimum prices
appears quite modest in comparison with the 30 percent price
increase that occurred between 1971 and 1974 (and the even
larger increase since 1974).
Other Areas
The sulfur industry is the area most likely to be
affected as utilities install pollution control equipment.
However, the production of by-product sulfuric acid from
regenerable scrubbers is likely to be only about 2.5 percent
-------
-32-
of industry production by 1985. An addition of that size--
in an industry expected to grow at a 4 to 5 percent annual
rate over the next decade-—is unlikely to have major conse-
quences for product prices or existing sulfur producers. In
a similar fashion, as electric utilities install pollution
control equipment, the economic impact on other areas will be
small. Those industries producing pollution control equipment
will of course be stimulated by the expenditure of $25 billion
(1975 dollars) between 1975 and 1985. Purchases of limestone
will be increased but are not expected to seriously affect
limestone markets. Employment impacts will be mixed: jobs
will increase for the construction and installation of pol-
lution control equipment—40,000 to 50,000 construction jobs
annually. On the other hand, price increases in the electric
utility industry and other industries may reduce demand from
what it would otherwise be, so that total employment in these
industries may grow at a slightly slower rate because of environ-
mental regulations. Consequently, there will be little if any
net change in employment overall.
Although there will be increased costs for elec-
tricity passed on to commercial and industrial customers,
those increases will not cause significant changes in the
economic structure of any individual industry. In fact,
the impacts are sufficiently small even in the most electricity-
intensive industry that one can conclude that the overall
effects of the pollution control expenditures will be diffused
broadly throughout the entire economy.
------- |