Discussion on “standardization of method for determining and comparing power costs in steam plants”. (Stott and Gorsuch), Cooperstown, New York, June 26, 1913. (see proceedings for May, 1913)

Publisher: IEEE - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
Publication Date: 1 January 1914
Volume: 33
Page(s): 30 - 61
ISSN (Paper): 0097-2444
DOI: 10.1109/PAIEE.1914.6661037



Henry Floy: Turning to the last pages of the paper, it is a disappointment to find that the final formula, given on page 1130, in which one looks to find the solution of the problem discussed, omits a part of the "total cost" elements mentioned on page 1119. In fact the question may be fairly raised whether "General and Miscellaneous Administration Expenses" of one plant are capable of direct comparison with those of another plant upon the basis merely of output. These expenses really have little to do with the question of scientific perfection of design or efficiency of operation of a power plant. Proportioning such expenses to power costs in the relation of such costs to total costs, as mentioned on page 1116, may be unfair. This may be seen by considering the disproportionately large amount of the president's salary, for example, compared to his time or effort, that would be allotted to power cost, when based on the ratio of expense for fuel to the total expense. Perhaps a more equitable method of proportioning the general officers' salaries would be on the basis of letters found in office files relating to the different departments, or dividing auditing expenses in proportion to the vouchers passed for the various departments. Another omission from the formula presented is the failure to take into consideration for comparison, the substituted cost of water and its treatment for boiler and condensing purposes, which might be quite different with appreciable effect on power costs in the plants being compared.