System purchases that we might need to make. We purchased biomass and wind from various facilities in california and in the west. And at the time of this reporting we totaled between 2011 and 2012 a balance of Renewable Energy credits of 53,544 megawatt hours. We utilized for our own rps compliance 80,185 and that is drawn from that mix of Renewable Energy credits that we generated and owned and those that we purchased. This is certainly not asking you to speculate on this hypothesis. Yes. So does the commission have any qualms against using Public Utilities commission purchasing electricity on the market because they did express those qualms when they came to cleanpowersf. What is the difference, you think . I think the fact that our underlying resource is 100 greenhouse gasfree. Through our own hetchy system and because we have more of that power than what we consume, our ability to be a net contributor to the greenness, i think, is an influencing factor on their comfort of using Ren
Be more on the water side than the energy side. I mean water and electricity are very different things, but as resource, there is probably many more people in the bay area who get benefit from the water then get benefit from electricity. So you could look at it that way. Sure, you could. With the bulk of the percentage or proportion on water versus energy. And just so im being clear in describing to you the method that we are using, while each asset is categorized as either a water, a power or a joint water and power asset, the sharing of the costs is applied uniformly. So we didnt look for example at mountain tunnel and say, what is the split for that particular asset . The whole system was assessed and the 55 45 was the resulting allocation. And with respect to mountain tunnel, it is a joint asset. It does provide both water and Power Service to the hetchy system. It conveys water that is held behind Drinking Water that is held behind oshaughnessey dam and throughs through the dam th
Its one system, many times one in the same asset is serving two purposes. Other times, assets are strictly dedicated to providing Water Service and districtly dedicated to providing Power Service, but those providing both components we split those costs between water and power ratepayers. 55 to power and 45 to water. That is an historic that is an historic method that has been applied to the hetch hetchy system for all upcountry facilities. We arrived at that method its referred to as the separable cost methods where you look at what it would have cost to provide the Water Service separate from the Power Service or the Power Service separate from the Water Service and see how the costs would have broken out . When we performed that analysis some years ago, utilizing consultants, we arrived at a figure a split, went into negotiations with our wholesale water customers, who also had views on how these asset costs should be shared and arrived at the 55 45 split. This is a method the separ
Cost to provide the Water Service separate from the Power Service or the Power Service separate from the Water Service and see how the costs would have broken out . When we performed that analysis some years ago, utilizing consultants, we arrived at a figure a split, went into negotiations with our wholesale water customers, who also had views on how these asset costs should be shared and arrived at the 55 45 split. This is a method the separable cost method is used by the federal Energy Regulatory commission and other municipal utilities with joint asset as components of their service. Its a recognized method. Its not a required method though . No, and its not the only method. Its one of the methods that is used, but it is a commonly used method across the nation for allocating costs. Why wouldnt you in a simplified world the layperson would probably say well, what is the revenue or the volume, measuring the volume that we generate from electricity and revenue that we generate from wa
Uniformly. So we didnt look for example at mountain tunnel and say, what is the split for that particular asset . The whole system was assessed and the 55 45 was the resulting allocation. And with respect to mountain tunnel, it is a joint asset. It does provide both water and Power Service to the hetchy system. It conveys water that is held behind Drinking Water that is held behind oshaughnessey dam and throughs through the dam through canyon power tunnel to kirkwood powerhouse. From kirkwood powerhouse, it flows into mountain tunnel. From mountain tunnel, the tunnel ends at a regulating reservoir called Priest Reservoir and down into moccasin and generates electricity. So that Drinking Water from the dam is providing both the Drinking Water service and a powergeneration service. Mountain tunnel is part of the system that allows us to do both of those things and so it has been categorized historically as a joint asset. Your final question to describe the opportunities for getting energ