diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 7cf1ec9e6..3201a4bfe 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ nosetests.xml
.vscode
ai.md
+Claude outputs/
# Complexity
output/*.html
diff --git a/docs/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja b/docs/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja
index 343fa0323..d6e0b56d2 100644
--- a/docs/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja
+++ b/docs/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
}
-# GEOPHIRES Case Study: 500 MW EGS Modeled on Fervo Cape Station (2026 Update)
+# GEOPHIRES Case Study: 500 MW EGS Modeled on Fervo Cape Station (September 2026 Update)
## Introduction
@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ a second-of-a-kind (SOAK) analog of Phases I and II of Fervo Energy's [Cape Stat
Key results include **LCOE =** **{{ '$' ~ lcoe_usd_per_mwh ~ '/MWh' }}**, **IRR = {{ irr_pct ~ '%' }}**, and **Total CAPEX =** **{{ '$' ~ capex_usd_per_kw ~ '/kW' }}**. [Click here to go to the Results section](#results).
+The September 2026 Update aligns the case study's subsurface design with the Fervo 3.0 well design disclosed for
+Cape Station Phase II, models lateral drilling, grid interconnection, and transmission service costs explicitly, and
+updates PPA pricing to Fervo's reported range for contracts under negotiation (Fervo Energy, 2026f).
+See the [Previous Versions section](#previous-versions-section) for a summary of changes.
+
[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires/?geophires-example-id=Fervo_Project_Cape-5) to
interactively explore the case study example in the GEOPHIRES web interface.
@@ -67,7 +72,8 @@ Rather than serving as an exact facsimile of Cape Station as built, this study e
could achieve on a geologically analogous site, relying primarily on publicly available data and standardized
engineering estimates.
The model assumes the developer is a "fast follower": benefiting from the proof-of-concept established by Cape Station
-Phase I but operating without access to Fervo’s private supply chain or proprietary optimization data.
+Phase I, which reached first power in September 2026 (Fervo Energy, 2026e), but operating without access to Fervo’s
+private supply chain or proprietary optimization data.
**Public Data Reliance:** Inputs utilize publicly available data for parameter values where applicable, such as geothermal
gradient and reservoir density.
@@ -75,28 +81,39 @@ Where data is proprietary or otherwise unknown, values are inferred from public
correlations.
**Conservative Constraints:** To ensure the model serves as a robust feasibility test, some inputs are intentionally
-conservative compared to Fervo’s stated targets, such as drilling costs and water loss.
+conservative compared to Fervo’s stated targets, such as drilling costs, parasitic load, and water loss.
**Commercial Viability Threshold:** Implicit in this design is a screening for investment-grade returns.
-While inputs prioritized the most realistic and verifiable data available, in select instances where public data
-provided a range of potential values rather than a precise figure, inputs were selected from within those bounds to
-satisfy a minimum profitability constraint (IRR ≈ 20%).
-This approach reflects the reality that a Second-of-a-Kind commercial deployment would generally only proceed if
-projected returns offered a sufficient premium to justify the remaining technology risk.
-An illustrative example is Fracture Height, which was tuned to yield an effective fracture surface area sufficient
-to sustain commercial flow rates and delay thermal breakthrough, ensuring the project meets its long-term revenue
-targets.
+Where public data provided a range of potential values rather than a precise figure, inputs were selected from within
+those bounds; the case study does not tune inputs to a target return.
+The PPA price is a market input: the starting price of {{ '$' ~ starting_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh ~ '/MWh' }} is the
+midpoint of the $100–130/MWh range Fervo reports for contracts under negotiation (Fervo Energy, 2026f), which yields a
+levelized PPA price of {{ '$' ~ lppa_usd_per_mwh ~ '/MWh' }} (nominal) with the modeled escalation.
+The resulting after-tax IRR of {{ irr_pct ~ '%' }} is read as evidence that a Second-of-a-Kind deployment can clear the
+premium over remaining technology risk that a developer would require.
+The finding is contingent on current clean firm power pricing rather than on cost assumptions alone: with the
+previous version's PPA terms ($95/MWh starting price, $0.57/MWh annual escalation, no cap) and all other inputs
+unchanged, the after-tax IRR is approximately 15%.
+An illustrative example of selection within a range is Fracture Height, which was set to yield an effective fracture
+surface area consistent with the ResFrac simulation results in Singh et al. (2025).
**Fast Follower Advantage:** By entering the market after Fervo’s initial de-risking campaigns, the modeled developer
avoids the high tuition costs of early experimentation.
-For example, while Fervo’s initial drilling costs at Cape Station ranged
-from [$9.4M down to $4.8M per well](https://houston.innovationmap.com/fervo-energy-drilling-utah-project-2667300142.html)
-as they climbed the learning curve,
-this model assumes a developer can bypass those initial high-cost outliers,
-instead initiating their campaign at a stabilized commercial baseline (modeled here
-at {{ '$' ~ drilling_costs_per_well_musd ~ 'M/well' }}, aligned with the NREL ATB and 2025 cost curves).
+Fervo’s drilling costs at Cape Station fell
+from [$9.4M to $4.8M per well](https://houston.innovationmap.com/fervo-energy-drilling-utah-project-2667300142.html)
+over its Phase I learning curve, for wells with 5,000 ft laterals at roughly 400℉.
+Against the 2025 NREL drilling cost curve with the lateral costed explicitly (Akindipe and Witter, 2025), those two
+points correspond to drilling cost adjustment factors of 1.14 and 0.58.
+This model uses a factor of 0.72, the geometric mean of the ATB-aligned baseline (0.9) and Fervo’s best demonstrated
+well (0.58), applied to the larger 3.0 design well (3.06 km, 7,500 ft cased lateral, 430℉) that a developer building
+today would drill.
+The resulting {{ '$' ~ drilling_costs_per_well_musd ~ 'M/well' }} is therefore not comparable to Fervo's Phase I
+figures on a per-well basis; on a like-for-like basis, it sits between Fervo's demonstrated performance and the
+unadjusted industry baseline.
This reflects a developer who capitalizes on established industry knowledge to skip the First-of-a-Kind (FOAK)
premiums but has not yet achieved the fully optimized learning rates of a mature Nth-of-a-Kind (NOAK) operator.
+Note that the previous version of this case study, at $4.65M per well, corresponded to an effective factor of about
+0.58 once the lateral is accounted for, i.e. Fervo's best demonstrated well rather than a SOAK assumption.
### Intended Use Cases
@@ -188,8 +205,13 @@ Each bench consists of 5 wells, with 2 injectors and 3 producers.
This ratio is encoded by the case study's `Number of Injection Wells per Production Well` parameter (see [Well Bores Parameters](#well-bores-parameters-section)).
The Singh et al. paper models separate upper and lower benches.
-GEOPHIRES v3.11 does not support wells with different depths, so the case study's `Reservoir Depth` parameter is
-set to a value nominally representing an approximate average depth between the upper and lower benches.
+GEOPHIRES does not support wells with different depths, so the case study uses a single `Reservoir Depth`.
+Previous versions set it to 2.68 km, an approximate average depth between the upper and lower benches of the Phase I
+design.
+The current version sets it to 3.06 km, the depth at which the segmented gradient reaches the 430℉ (221℃) average
+reservoir temperature of the Fervo 3.0 well design used for Phase II (Fervo Energy, 2026f; 2026g).
+The [comparison with Singh et al. below](#simulation-comparison) is run at the previous depth so that it remains a
+like-for-like comparison with the Phase I design simulated by Singh et al.
See the [Technical & Engineering Results section](#technical-and-engineering-results-section) for relevant temperature results.
@@ -225,6 +247,10 @@ An equivalent GEOPHIRES simulation was run using the case study's reservoir engi
{{ reservoir_engineering_reference_simulation_params_table_md }}
+The overrides for depth, lateral length, and fracture count return the scenario to the Phase I design simulated by
+Singh et al.; the base case's 3.0 design (deeper, with longer laterals and 50% more fracture surface area per well)
+has no published numerical simulation counterpart to compare against.
+
The following table compares the average production temperature profile from the "700 ft bench spacing" scenario in Singh et al. with the GEOPHIRES simulation.
Note that both figures show temperature in Fahrenheit rather than Celsius.
@@ -244,15 +270,7 @@ as the Year 1 and Year 15 thermal endpoints align closely with the numerical sim
However, the analytical Gringarten model's thermal plateau yields a higher aggregate heat extraction than the numerical model's
gradual decline, representing an optimistic upper bound on performance compared to the conservative heterogeneity
-modeled in ResFrac.
-To bound this risk, an alternative GEOPHIRES simulation was modeled using the ResFrac profile[^upp-resfrac-profile-note].
-Results indicated that to offset the dispersion penalty under heterogeneous flow conditions, the project would require
-a higher initial reservoir temperature (achieved via deeper drilling) to compensate for the loss of the thermal plateau.
-[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires?shared-geophires-result-id=834b0096-15b1-4dd3-b262-612e9df1342f)
-to view a variant GEOPHIRES scenario (`Fervo_Project_Cape-6 Variant: ResFrac Profile + Hotter/Deeper Scenario`)
-for a 100 MWe average net production project with a 3 km well depth, yielding approximately 15°C higher production temperatures.
-
-[^upp-resfrac-profile-note]: The simulation utilized GEOPHIRES's [Generic User-Provided Temperature Profile reservoir model](https://softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/Theoretical-Basis-for-GEOPHIRES.html#reservoir-models) with temperature data derived from Figure 18 in Singh et al. (2025).
+modeled in ResFrac (see Reservoir Modeling Fidelity in the [Discussion section](#discussion-section)).
The calibration simulation above represents a 15-year unmitigated thermal decline without redrilling.
In the full case study results, the model includes redrilling events that restore production temperature when drawdown thresholds are reached,
@@ -276,11 +294,12 @@ and in the web interface under the Cash Flow tab.
| Metric | Result Value | Reference Value(s) | Reference Source |
|---------------|----------------|--------------------|------------------|
| LCOE | {{ '$' ~ lcoe_usd_per_mwh ~ '/MWh' }} | \$80/MWh | Horne et al, 2025. |
+| Levelized PPA Price | {{ '$' ~ lppa_usd_per_mwh ~ '/MWh' }} | \$100–130/MWh | Price range Fervo reports for contracts under negotiation (Fervo Energy, 2026f). See the [PPA price discussion in Sensitivity Analysis](#impact-of-ppa-price-on-lcoe) for the relationship between PPA price and LCOE. |
| After-tax IRR NPV | {{ '$' ~ npv_musd ~ 'M' }} | >$0 | Positive NPVs result in profit |
| Levered Equity | {{ project_vir }} | >1.0 | Calculations greater than 1.0 indicate the future anticipated discounted cash inflows are greater than the anticipated discounted cash outflows. |
| Project ROI | {{ project_moic }} | | .. N/A |
-| Cash Flow | [source code](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEOPHIRES/blob/main/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out#L225);Cash Flow | [source code](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEOPHIRES/blob/main/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out#L232);WACC | {{ wacc_pct ~ '%' }} | 8.3% | Fervo's target goal is to eventually achieve a "Solar Standard" WACC of 8.3% (Matson, 2024). |
-| Exploration Costs | {{ '$' ~ exploration_cost_musd ~ 'M' }} | {{ '$' ~ drilling_costs_per_well_musd*5 ~ 'M' }} | 2024b ATB NF-EGS conservative scenario exploration assumption of 5 full-size wells (NREL, 2025). Case study result conservatively includes additional costs for geophysical survey, indirect costs, and contingency. |
-| Well Drilling and Completion Costs | {{ '$' ~ drilling_costs_musd ~ 'M' }} total
+
2026-06-18T10:46:30.609778
+ 2026-09-24T10:56:05.729592
image/svg+xml
@@ -21,47 +21,47 @@
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
@@ -786,14 +877,23 @@ z
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+" clip-path="url(#pf4faf4afc2)" style="fill: #b0b0b0; stroke: #ffffff; stroke-width: 0.5; stroke-linejoin: miter"/>
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
+" clip-path="url(#pf4faf4afc2)" style="fill: #b0b0b0; stroke: #ffffff; stroke-width: 0.5; stroke-linejoin: miter"/>
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
@@ -2433,138 +2773,225 @@ z
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.png
index 6f30a05bf..7ca2dfc19 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.svg b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.svg
index d9615ec39..e7cb44a90 100644
--- a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.svg
+++ b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-lcoe.svg
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
-
+
2026-06-18T10:46:31.947570
+ 2026-09-24T10:56:01.999976
image/svg+xml
@@ -21,47 +21,47 @@
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
@@ -884,14 +956,23 @@ z
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
+" clip-path="url(#pd0e5808657)" style="fill: #4ab67d; stroke: #ffffff; stroke-width: 0.5; stroke-linejoin: miter"/>
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
+" clip-path="url(#pd0e5808657)" style="fill: #4ab67d; stroke: #ffffff; stroke-width: 0.5; stroke-linejoin: miter"/>
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.png
index 92a811578..351553a85 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.svg b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.svg
index ebf485848..ba14b1f52 100644
--- a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.svg
+++ b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-project_npv.svg
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
-
+
2026-06-18T10:46:30.745514
+ 2026-09-24T10:56:02.077101
image/svg+xml
@@ -21,47 +21,47 @@
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
@@ -120,18 +131,60 @@ z
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
@@ -869,14 +905,23 @@ z
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
+" clip-path="url(#p5c42a877bf)" style="fill: #b0b0b0; stroke: #ffffff; stroke-width: 0.5; stroke-linejoin: miter"/>
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-1.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-1.png
index 2877efee3..e90e83cee 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-1.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-1.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-2.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-2.png
index af7999bab..dc1051303 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-2.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-fracture-sensitivity-2.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-power-sensitivity.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-power-sensitivity.png
index 6c59add38..c1648243e 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-power-sensitivity.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_red-2026_production-temperature-data-vs-modeling-power-sensitivity.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/singh_et_al_base_simulation-production-temperature.png b/docs/_images/singh_et_al_base_simulation-production-temperature.png
index db6ac5e88..c28d19800 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/singh_et_al_base_simulation-production-temperature.png and b/docs/_images/singh_et_al_base_simulation-production-temperature.png differ
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/__init__.py b/src/geophires_docs/__init__.py
index 5c02a1600..2b1ae3de7 100644
--- a/src/geophires_docs/__init__.py
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/__init__.py
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
from __future__ import annotations
import json
+import math
import os
import re
from pathlib import Path
@@ -40,6 +41,18 @@ def _get_fpc5_result_file_path(project_root: Path | None = None) -> Path:
_FPC5_INPUT_FILE_PATH: Path = _get_fpc5_input_file_path()
_FPC5_RESULT_FILE_PATH: Path = _get_fpc5_result_file_path()
+_FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW: float = 500.0
+
+# Gross capacity of each Gen 2 ORC unit announced for Cape Station Phase II (Turboden, 2025; Jacobs, 2025).
+_FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW: float = 60.0
+
+
+def _get_fpc5_orc_unit_count(max_total_generation_mw: float) -> int:
+ """
+ :return: Number of Gen 2 ORC units required for nameplate capacity to cover the maximum total (gross) generation.
+ """
+ return math.ceil(max_total_generation_mw / _FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW)
+
def _get_logger(_name_: str) -> Any:
# TODO consolidate _get_logger methods into a commonly accessible utility
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/data/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_flow_rate_parametric.csv b/src/geophires_docs/data/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_flow_rate_parametric.csv
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..b3dfe6372
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/data/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_flow_rate_parametric.csv
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+flow_kg_per_s,avg_net_mw,min_net_mw,redrills,lcoe_cents_per_kwh,irr_pct,npv_musd
+80,417.13,404.96,1,10.56,23.05,272.37
+81,421.81,409.39,1,10.51,23.25,282.22
+82,426.47,413.88,1,10.46,23.44,291.86
+83,431.11,418.45,1,10.42,23.63,301.47
+84,435.74,423.09,1,10.37,23.82,311.07
+85,440.35,427.8,1,10.33,24,320.65
+86,444.94,432.58,1,10.29,24.17,330.07
+87,449.47,436.18,1,10.25,24.34,339.46
+88,454.01,441.1,1,10.21,24.51,348.78
+89,458.53,446.08,1,10.17,24.67,358.09
+90,462.97,449.84,1,10.14,24.83,367.26
+91,467.39,454.95,1,10.1,24.98,376.43
+92,471.72,458.8,1,10.06,25.14,385.44
+93,476,464.03,2,10.9,22.18,255.54
+94,480.31,467.99,2,10.86,22.36,264.45
+95,484.62,471.98,2,10.82,22.53,273.31
+96,488.93,476.01,2,10.78,22.7,282.07
+97,493.3,481.48,2,10.75,22.87,290.9
+98,497.18,485.2,2,10.72,23,298.21
+99,500.3,488.22,2,10.7,23.07,303.13
+100,503.39,491.25,2,10.68,23.14,307.98
+101,506.43,494.3,2,10.66,23.21,312.62
+102,509.43,497.36,2,10.65,23.28,317.12
+103,512.39,500.42,2,10.63,23.34,321.49
+104,515.3,503.5,2,10.62,23.39,325.66
+105,518.09,505.08,2,10.61,23.44,329.59
+106,520.92,508.18,2,10.59,23.49,333.55
+107,523.7,511.28,2,10.58,23.54,337.31
+108,526.43,514.39,2,10.57,23.58,340.9
+109,529.04,515.94,2,10.56,23.61,344.23
+110,531.68,519.07,2,10.55,23.65,347.59
+111,534.27,522.19,2,10.55,23.68,350.7
+112,536.74,523.72,2,10.54,23.7,353.53
+113,539.24,526.86,2,10.53,23.73,356.37
+114,541.6,528.36,2,10.53,23.74,358.92
+115,544.01,531.5,2,10.52,23.76,361.45
+116,546.28,532.97,2,10.52,23.77,363.71
+117,548.59,536.12,2,10.51,23.78,365.85
+118,550.77,537.57,2,10.51,23.79,367.8
+119,552.98,540.71,2,10.51,23.79,369.77
+120,555.05,542.15,2,10.51,23.79,371.31
+121,557.08,543.54,2,10.51,23.79,372.72
+122,559.14,546.68,2,10.51,23.78,374.16
+123,561.06,548.07,2,10.51,23.77,375.24
+124,562.92,549.42,2,10.51,23.76,376.19
+125,564.8,552.53,2,10.51,23.74,377.14
+126,566.54,553.88,2,10.51,23.73,377.77
+127,568.21,555.19,2,10.52,23.7,378.17
+128,569.79,556.47,2,10.52,23.68,378.46
+129,571.33,559.54,3,11.25,20.9,239.92
+130,572.84,560.81,3,11.26,20.88,239.78
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios.py b/src/geophires_docs/fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios.py
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..3280127f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios.py
@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+"""
+Supplementary Fervo_Project_Cape-5 scenario results cited in the case study documentation: the production flow rate
+parametric, which is stored as data and regenerated manually because it runs 51 simulations, and single-input
+scenarios, which are simulated when the documentation is generated.
+
+Regenerate the flow rate parametric data after changing Fervo_Project_Cape-5 inputs:
+
+ python -m geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios
+
+FervoProjectCape5TestCase.test_flow_rate_parametric_data_matches_example_result fails when the data is stale.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import csv
+import dataclasses
+from dataclasses import dataclass
+from pathlib import Path
+from typing import Any
+
+from geophires_docs import _get_fpc5_input_file_path
+from geophires_docs import _get_logger
+from geophires_x_client import GeophiresInputParameters
+from geophires_x_client import GeophiresXClient
+from geophires_x_client import GeophiresXResult
+from geophires_x_client import ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters
+
+_log = _get_logger(__name__)
+
+FPC5_FLOW_RATE_PARAMETRIC_CSV_PATH: Path = (
+ Path(__file__).parent / 'data' / 'Fervo_Project_Cape-5_flow_rate_parametric.csv'
+)
+
+_FLOW_RATE_PARAM_NAME = 'Production Flow Rate per Well'
+
+
+@dataclass(frozen=True)
+class FlowRateParametricRow:
+ flow_kg_per_s: float
+ avg_net_mw: float
+ min_net_mw: float
+ redrills: int
+ lcoe_cents_per_kwh: float
+ irr_pct: float
+ npv_musd: float
+
+ @staticmethod
+ def from_result(flow_kg_per_s: float, result: GeophiresXResult) -> FlowRateParametricRow:
+ r = result.result
+ surf_equip_sim = r['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS']
+ econ = r['ECONOMIC PARAMETERS']
+ return FlowRateParametricRow(
+ flow_kg_per_s=flow_kg_per_s,
+ avg_net_mw=surf_equip_sim['Average Net Electricity Generation']['value'],
+ min_net_mw=surf_equip_sim['Minimum Net Electricity Generation']['value'],
+ redrills=int(r['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value']),
+ lcoe_cents_per_kwh=r['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Electricity breakeven price']['value'],
+ irr_pct=econ['After-tax IRR']['value'],
+ npv_musd=econ['Project NPV']['value'],
+ )
+
+
+@dataclass(frozen=True)
+class RedrillingStep:
+ flow_below_kg_per_s: float
+ flow_at_kg_per_s: float
+ redrills_below: int
+ redrills_at: int
+
+
+@dataclass(frozen=True)
+class FlowRateParametricSummary:
+ redrilling_steps: list[RedrillingStep]
+ minimum_ppa_feasible_flow_rate_kg_per_s: float
+ base_redrills: int
+ max_irr_change_above_base_within_band_pct_pts: float
+
+
+def generate_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_csv(
+ input_params: GeophiresInputParameters | None = None,
+ flow_rates_kg_per_s: list[float] | None = None,
+ output_path: Path = FPC5_FLOW_RATE_PARAMETRIC_CSV_PATH,
+) -> list[FlowRateParametricRow]:
+ if input_params is None:
+ input_params = ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(from_file_path=_get_fpc5_input_file_path())
+
+ if flow_rates_kg_per_s is None:
+ flow_rates_kg_per_s = [float(it) for it in range(80, 131)]
+
+ client = GeophiresXClient()
+ rows = []
+ for flow_rate in flow_rates_kg_per_s:
+ _log.info(f'Simulating {_FLOW_RATE_PARAM_NAME} = {flow_rate:g} kg/s...')
+ result = client.get_geophires_result(
+ ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(
+ from_file_path=input_params.as_file_path(), params={_FLOW_RATE_PARAM_NAME: flow_rate}
+ )
+ )
+ rows.append(FlowRateParametricRow.from_result(flow_rate, result))
+
+ output_path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
+ with open(output_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8', newline='') as f:
+ writer = csv.DictWriter(
+ f, fieldnames=[it.name for it in dataclasses.fields(FlowRateParametricRow)], lineterminator='\n'
+ )
+ writer.writeheader()
+ for row in rows:
+ writer.writerow({k: f'{v:g}' if isinstance(v, float) else v for k, v in dataclasses.asdict(row).items()})
+
+ _log.info(f'✓ Wrote {output_path}')
+ return rows
+
+
+def load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric(path: Path = FPC5_FLOW_RATE_PARAMETRIC_CSV_PATH) -> list[FlowRateParametricRow]:
+ with open(path, encoding='utf-8', newline='') as f:
+ rows = [
+ FlowRateParametricRow(
+ flow_kg_per_s=float(it['flow_kg_per_s']),
+ avg_net_mw=float(it['avg_net_mw']),
+ min_net_mw=float(it['min_net_mw']),
+ redrills=int(it['redrills']),
+ lcoe_cents_per_kwh=float(it['lcoe_cents_per_kwh']),
+ irr_pct=float(it['irr_pct']),
+ npv_musd=float(it['npv_musd']),
+ )
+ for it in csv.DictReader(f)
+ ]
+
+ return sorted(rows, key=lambda it: it.flow_kg_per_s)
+
+
+def get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_row(rows: list[FlowRateParametricRow], flow_kg_per_s: float) -> FlowRateParametricRow:
+ matching_rows = [it for it in rows if it.flow_kg_per_s == flow_kg_per_s]
+ if len(matching_rows) != 1:
+ raise ValueError(f'Expected exactly one flow rate parametric row for {flow_kg_per_s:g} kg/s.')
+
+ return matching_rows[0]
+
+
+def get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary(
+ rows: list[FlowRateParametricRow],
+ base_flow_rate_kg_per_s: float,
+ ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw: float,
+) -> FlowRateParametricSummary:
+ """
+ :raises ValueError: if the parametric results no longer support the flow rate discussion in the case study
+ documentation, which assumes that minimum net generation meets the PPA minimum above a single threshold flow
+ rate and that no flow rate with fewer redrilling events than the base case meets it.
+ """
+ base_row = get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_row(rows, base_flow_rate_kg_per_s)
+
+ redrilling_steps = [
+ RedrillingStep(
+ flow_below_kg_per_s=below.flow_kg_per_s,
+ flow_at_kg_per_s=at.flow_kg_per_s,
+ redrills_below=below.redrills,
+ redrills_at=at.redrills,
+ )
+ for below, at in zip(rows, rows[1:])
+ if below.redrills != at.redrills
+ ]
+
+ feasible = [it.min_net_mw >= ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw for it in rows]
+ if not any(feasible):
+ raise ValueError(f'No flow rate meets the PPA minimum net generation ({ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw:g} MW).')
+
+ first_feasible_idx = feasible.index(True)
+ if not all(feasible[first_feasible_idx:]):
+ raise ValueError(
+ 'Minimum net generation does not meet the PPA minimum at every flow rate above the lowest one that does; '
+ 'update the flow rate discussion in the case study documentation.'
+ )
+
+ if any(it.redrills < base_row.redrills and it.min_net_mw >= ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw for it in rows):
+ raise ValueError(
+ 'A flow rate with fewer redrilling events than the base case meets the PPA minimum net generation; '
+ 'update the flow rate discussion in the case study documentation.'
+ )
+
+ band_rows_above_base = [
+ it for it in rows if it.flow_kg_per_s >= base_flow_rate_kg_per_s and it.redrills == base_row.redrills
+ ]
+
+ return FlowRateParametricSummary(
+ redrilling_steps=redrilling_steps,
+ minimum_ppa_feasible_flow_rate_kg_per_s=rows[first_feasible_idx].flow_kg_per_s,
+ base_redrills=base_row.redrills,
+ max_irr_change_above_base_within_band_pct_pts=max(
+ abs(it.irr_pct - base_row.irr_pct) for it in band_rows_above_base
+ ),
+ )
+
+
+def get_scenario_results(
+ input_params: GeophiresInputParameters,
+ scenario_params_by_name: dict[str, dict[str, Any]],
+) -> dict[str, GeophiresXResult]:
+ """
+ :return: Result of each scenario, by scenario name, where each scenario overrides the given base case input
+ parameters.
+ """
+ client = GeophiresXClient()
+ results = {}
+ for scenario_name, scenario_params in scenario_params_by_name.items():
+ _log.info(f'Simulating scenario: {scenario_name}...')
+ results[scenario_name] = client.get_geophires_result(
+ ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(from_file_path=input_params.as_file_path(), params=scenario_params)
+ )
+
+ return results
+
+
+if __name__ == '__main__':
+ generate_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_csv()
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_docs.py b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_docs.py
index 1c9f0fcb3..eaff21b12 100644
--- a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_docs.py
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_docs.py
@@ -20,6 +20,13 @@
'Maximum Drawdown': '1, -- Redrilling not modeled in Singh et al. scenario. '
'(The equivalent GEOPHIRES simulation allows drawdown to reach up to 100% without triggering redrilling)',
'Plant Lifetime': 15,
+ 'Reservoir Depth': '2.68, -- Approximate average depth between the upper and lower benches of the Phase I design '
+ 'simulated by Singh et al. The case study base case is deeper, corresponding to the Fervo 3.0 well design.',
+ 'Nonvertical Length per Multilateral Section': '5000 feet, -- Phase I lateral length (BLM, 2024). '
+ 'The case study base case uses the longer lateral of the Fervo 3.0 well design.',
+ 'Number of Fractures per Stimulated Well': '150, -- 12 stages for the 5,000 ft Phase I lateral at the case study '
+ 'stage length, clusters per stage, and stimulation success rate. '
+ 'The case study base case scales the stage count to the longer 3.0 design lateral.',
}
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs.py b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs.py
index d8564eba5..8c6e54031 100644
--- a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs.py
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs.py
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
from __future__ import annotations
from math import ceil
+from math import floor
from pathlib import Path
from typing import Any
@@ -8,12 +9,17 @@
from matplotlib import pyplot as plt
from geophires_docs import _FPC5_INPUT_FILE_PATH
+from geophires_docs import _FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW
+from geophires_docs import _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW
from geophires_docs import _FPC5_RESULT_FILE_PATH
from geophires_docs import _PROJECT_ROOT
+from geophires_docs import _get_fpc5_orc_unit_count
from geophires_docs import _get_full_production_temperature_profile
from geophires_docs import _get_full_profile
from geophires_docs import _get_input_parameters_dict
from geophires_docs import _get_logger
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import FlowRateParametricRow
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric
from geophires_x_client import GeophiresInputParameters
from geophires_x_client import GeophiresXResult
from geophires_x_client import ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters
@@ -116,20 +122,35 @@ def generate_power_production_graph(
ax.set_ylabel('Power Production (MW)', fontsize=12)
ax.set_title('Power Production Over Project Lifetime', fontsize=14)
+ ppa_minimum_mw = _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW
+ orc_unit_count = _get_fpc5_orc_unit_count(float(total_power.max()))
+ nameplate_mw = orc_unit_count * _FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW
+
# Set axis limits
ax.set_xlim(years.min(), years.max())
- ax.set_ylim(480, 630)
+ ax.set_ylim(
+ floor((min(float(net_power.min()), ppa_minimum_mw) - 20) / 10) * 10,
+ ceil((max(float(total_power.max()), nameplate_mw) + 30) / 10) * 10,
+ )
# Add horizontal reference lines
hline_x = 1.5
- ax.axhline(y=500, color='#e69500', linestyle='--', linewidth=1.5, alpha=0.8)
- ax.text(hline_x, 498, 'PPA Minimum Production Requirement', ha='left', va='top', fontsize=9, color='#e69500')
+ ax.axhline(y=ppa_minimum_mw, color='#e69500', linestyle='--', linewidth=1.5, alpha=0.8)
+ ax.text(
+ hline_x,
+ ppa_minimum_mw - 2,
+ 'PPA Minimum Production Requirement',
+ ha='left',
+ va='top',
+ fontsize=9,
+ color='#e69500',
+ )
- ax.axhline(y=600, color='#33a02c', linestyle='--', linewidth=1.5, alpha=0.8)
+ ax.axhline(y=nameplate_mw, color='#33a02c', linestyle='--', linewidth=1.5, alpha=0.8)
ax.text(
hline_x,
- 602,
- 'Nameplate capacity (combined capacity of individual ORCs)',
+ nameplate_mw + 2,
+ f'Nameplate capacity ({orc_unit_count}×{_FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW:.0f} MWe ORC units)',
ha='left',
va='bottom',
fontsize=9,
@@ -198,7 +219,10 @@ def generate_production_temperature_and_drawdown_graph(
ax.set_xlabel(_YOE_LABEL, fontsize=12)
ax.set_ylabel('Production Temperature (°C)', fontsize=12)
ax.set_xlim(years.min(), years.max())
- ax.set_ylim(200, 205)
+ ax.set_ylim(
+ floor(min(float(temperatures_celsius.min()), max_drawdown_temp) - 1),
+ ceil(float(temperatures_celsius.max()) + 1),
+ )
# Enable minor ticks on x-axis
ax.minorticks_on()
@@ -210,12 +234,13 @@ def generate_production_temperature_and_drawdown_graph(
ax.axvline(x=redrill_year, color=COLOR_REDRILLING, linestyle=':', linewidth=1.5, alpha=0.7)
# Only add label for the first redrilling event to avoid legend clutter
if i == 0:
+ y_min, y_max = ax.get_ylim()
ax.text(
redrill_year + 0.3,
- ax.get_ylim()[0] + 0.75,
+ y_min + 0.05 * (y_max - y_min),
f'Redrilling Events (n={len(redrilling_years)})',
ha='left',
- va='top',
+ va='bottom',
fontsize=9,
color=COLOR_REDRILLING,
)
@@ -315,6 +340,85 @@ def generate_production_temperature_graph(
return filename
+def generate_flow_rate_parametric_graph(
+ rows: list[FlowRateParametricRow],
+ base_flow_rate_kg_per_s: float,
+ output_dir: Path,
+ filename: str = 'fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-flow-rate.png',
+) -> None:
+ """
+ Generate the production flow rate parametric graph, with flow rates that do not meet the PPA minimum net
+ generation shaded and the base case flow rate marked.
+ """
+ _log.info('Generating flow rate parametric graph...')
+
+ color_mark = '#3366cc'
+ color_ink_muted = '#555555'
+ color_grid = '#dddddd'
+ color_infeasible = '#f2f2f2'
+
+ flow_rates = [it.flow_kg_per_s for it in rows]
+ panels: list[tuple[str, str, str]] = [
+ ('Average Net Electricity Production (MW)', 'avg_net_mw', 'MW'),
+ ('Number of times redrilling (count)', 'redrills', 'count'),
+ ('Electricity breakeven price (cents/kWh)', 'lcoe_cents_per_kwh', 'cents/kWh'),
+ ('After-tax IRR (%)', 'irr_pct', '%'),
+ ('Project NPV (MUSD)', 'npv_musd', 'MUSD'),
+ ]
+
+ infeasible_flow_rates = [it.flow_kg_per_s for it in rows if it.min_net_mw < _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW]
+ infeasible_max_flow_rate = max(infeasible_flow_rates) if len(infeasible_flow_rates) > 0 else None
+
+ fig, axes = plt.subplots(len(panels), 1, figsize=(7, 13.5))
+ for ax, (title, field_name, unit) in zip(axes, panels):
+ values = [getattr(it, field_name) for it in rows]
+ if infeasible_max_flow_rate is not None:
+ ax.axvspan(
+ min(flow_rates) - 1, infeasible_max_flow_rate + 0.5, color=color_infeasible, zorder=0, linewidth=0
+ )
+ ax.axvline(base_flow_rate_kg_per_s, color=color_ink_muted, linestyle='--', linewidth=1, zorder=1)
+ ax.scatter(flow_rates, values, s=36, color=color_mark, zorder=3, linewidths=0)
+
+ ax.set_title(title, loc='left', fontsize=13)
+ ax.set_ylabel(unit, fontsize=10, fontstyle='italic', color=color_ink_muted)
+ ax.set_xlabel('Production Flow Rate per Well (kg/s)', fontsize=10, fontstyle='italic', color=color_ink_muted)
+ ax.set_xlim(min(flow_rates) - 1, max(flow_rates) + 1)
+ ax.grid(True, color=color_grid, linewidth=0.8, zorder=0)
+ for spine in ('top', 'right'):
+ ax.spines[spine].set_visible(False)
+ ax.tick_params(colors=color_ink_muted, labelsize=9)
+
+ if field_name == 'redrills':
+ ax.set_ylim(0, max(values) + 1)
+ ax.set_yticks(range(int(max(values)) + 2))
+
+ top_ax = axes[0]
+ y_top = top_ax.get_ylim()[1]
+ top_ax.text(
+ base_flow_rate_kg_per_s + 0.6,
+ y_top,
+ f'Base case ({base_flow_rate_kg_per_s:g} kg/s)',
+ fontsize=9,
+ color=color_ink_muted,
+ va='top',
+ )
+ if infeasible_max_flow_rate is not None:
+ top_ax.text(
+ min(flow_rates) - 0.4,
+ y_top,
+ f'Minimum net generation\nbelow {_FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW:g} MW',
+ fontsize=9,
+ color=color_ink_muted,
+ va='top',
+ )
+
+ fig.tight_layout(h_pad=2.0)
+ save_path = output_dir / filename
+ fig.savefig(save_path, dpi=150)
+ plt.close(fig)
+ _log.info(f'Saved {save_path}')
+
+
def generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs(
base_case: tuple[GeophiresInputParameters, GeophiresXResult],
singh_et_al_base_simulation: tuple[GeophiresInputParameters, GeophiresXResult],
@@ -325,6 +429,11 @@ def generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs(
generate_power_production_graph(base_case, output_dir)
generate_production_temperature_and_drawdown_graph(base_case, output_dir)
+ generate_flow_rate_parametric_graph(
+ load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric(),
+ float(_get_input_parameters_dict(base_case[0])['Production Flow Rate per Well']),
+ output_dir,
+ )
if singh_et_al_base_simulation is not None:
singh_et_al_base_simulation_result: GeophiresXResult = singh_et_al_base_simulation[1]
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.py b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.py
index 8f889c71a..c4cc9de24 100755
--- a/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.py
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.py
@@ -7,21 +7,30 @@
from __future__ import annotations
import json
+from collections.abc import Callable
from pathlib import Path
from typing import Any
import numpy as np
from jinja2 import Environment
from jinja2 import FileSystemLoader
+from jinja2 import select_autoescape
from pint.facets.plain import PlainQuantity
+from geophires_docs import _FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW
+from geophires_docs import _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW
from geophires_docs import _NON_BREAKING_SPACE
from geophires_docs import _PROJECT_ROOT
from geophires_docs import _get_fpc5_input_file_path
+from geophires_docs import _get_fpc5_orc_unit_count
from geophires_docs import _get_fpc5_result_file_path
from geophires_docs import _get_input_parameters_dict
from geophires_docs import _get_logger
from geophires_docs import _get_project_root
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import FlowRateParametricRow
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import get_scenario_results
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric
from geophires_x.GeoPHIRESUtils import is_int
from geophires_x.GeoPHIRESUtils import sig_figs
from geophires_x.ParameterUtils import COMMENT_PARAMETER_NAME_PREFIX
@@ -167,7 +176,9 @@ def generate_fpc_construction_parameters_table_md(
def generate_fpc_economics_parameters_table_md(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, result: GeophiresXResult) -> str:
- stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data = f' baseline cost; ${_stim_costs_per_well_musd(result)}M all-in cost'
+ stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data = (
+ f' baseline cost; ${_stim_costs_per_well_musd(result):.2f}M/well all-in cost'
+ )
drilling_cost_per_well_additional_display_data = (
f' (Yields all-in cost of ' f'${sig_figs(_drilling_costs_per_well_musd(result),3)}M/well)'
@@ -178,6 +189,28 @@ def generate_fpc_economics_parameters_table_md(input_params: GeophiresInputParam
' ', _NON_BREAKING_SPACE
)
+ input_params_dict = _get_input_parameters_dict(input_params)
+ stim_cost_per_well_param_names = [
+ 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well',
+ 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well',
+ ]
+ additional_display_data_by_param_name = {
+ 'Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor': drilling_cost_per_well_additional_display_data,
+ 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Fracture Surface Area': stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data,
+ # Parameter units are MUSD, but the value is an annual cost
+ 'Annual License Fees Etc': '/yr',
+ }
+ value_display_override_by_param_name = {}
+ for stim_cost_per_well_param_name in stim_cost_per_well_param_names:
+ if _is_stimulated_well_sentinel(input_params_dict.get(stim_cost_per_well_param_name)):
+ value_display_override_by_param_name[stim_cost_per_well_param_name] = (
+ 'Stimulated (cost from per-area input)'
+ )
+ elif 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Fracture Surface Area' not in input_params_dict:
+ additional_display_data_by_param_name[stim_cost_per_well_param_name] = (
+ stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data
+ )
+
return get_fpc_category_parameters_table_md(
input_params,
'Economics',
@@ -188,11 +221,8 @@ def generate_fpc_economics_parameters_table_md(input_params: GeophiresInputParam
'Time steps per year',
'Print Output to Console',
],
- additional_display_data_by_param_name={
- 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well': stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data,
- 'Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well': stim_cost_per_well_additional_display_data,
- 'Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor': drilling_cost_per_well_additional_display_data,
- },
+ additional_display_data_by_param_name=additional_display_data_by_param_name,
+ value_display_override_by_param_name=value_display_override_by_param_name,
)
@@ -201,6 +231,7 @@ def get_fpc_category_parameters_table_md(
category_name: str | None,
parameters_to_exclude: list[str] | None = None,
additional_display_data_by_param_name: dict[str, str] | None = None,
+ value_display_override_by_param_name: dict[str, str] | None = None,
) -> str:
if parameters_to_exclude is None:
parameters_to_exclude = []
@@ -208,6 +239,9 @@ def get_fpc_category_parameters_table_md(
if additional_display_data_by_param_name is None:
additional_display_data_by_param_name = {}
+ if value_display_override_by_param_name is None:
+ value_display_override_by_param_name = {}
+
input_params_dict = _get_input_parameters_dict(
input_params, include_parameter_comments=True, include_line_comments=True
)
@@ -239,49 +273,19 @@ def get_fpc_category_parameters_table_md(
param_comment = (
param_val_comment_split[1].replace('-- ', '') if len(param_val_comment_split) > 1 else ' .. N/A '
)
- param_unit = _get_input_parameter_units(param_name)
- if param_unit == 'dimensionless':
- param_unit_display = '%'
- param_val = sig_figs(
- PlainQuantity(float(param_val), 'dimensionless').to('percent').magnitude,
- 10, # trim floating point errors
- )
- elif param_unit == 'USD/kWh':
- price_unit = 'USD/MWh'
- param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(price_unit)
- param_val = sig_figs(
- PlainQuantity(float(param_val), 'USD/kWh').to(price_unit).magnitude,
- 10, # trim floating point errors
- )
- elif ' ' in param_val:
- param_val_split = param_val.split(' ', maxsplit=1)
- param_val = param_val_split[0]
- param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(param_val_split[1])
- else:
- param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(param_unit)
-
- param_unit_display_prefix = '$' if param_unit and 'USD' in param_unit else ''
-
- if is_int(param_val):
- param_val = int(param_val)
-
- param_schema = _get_input_parameter_schema(param_name)
- if param_schema and 'enum_values' in param_schema:
- for enum_value in param_schema['enum_values']:
- if enum_value['int_value'] == param_val:
- enum_display = enum_value['value']
- # param_val = f'{param_val} ({enum_display})'
- param_val = enum_display
- break
param_name_display = param_name.replace(' ', _NON_BREAKING_SPACE, 2)
additional_display_data = additional_display_data_by_param_name.get(param_name, '')
+ value_display = value_display_override_by_param_name.get(
+ param_name, _get_input_parameter_value_display(param_name, param_val)
+ )
+
table_entries.append(
[
param_name_display,
- f'{param_unit_display_prefix}{param_val}{param_unit_display}{additional_display_data}',
+ f'{value_display}{additional_display_data}',
param_comment,
]
)
@@ -296,6 +300,50 @@ def _q(d: dict[str, Any]) -> PlainQuantity:
return PlainQuantity(d['value'], d['unit'])
+def _get_input_parameter_value_display(param_name: str, param_val: Any) -> str:
+ """
+ :param param_val: Input parameter value as it appears in the input file, without comment (may include a unit, e.g.
+ '7500 feet')
+ :return: Value with display units, e.g. '$115/MWh', '72%', '3.06 km'
+ """
+ param_unit = _get_input_parameter_units(param_name)
+ if param_unit == 'dimensionless':
+ param_unit_display = '%'
+ param_val = sig_figs(
+ PlainQuantity(float(param_val), 'dimensionless').to('percent').magnitude,
+ 10, # trim floating point errors
+ )
+ elif param_unit == 'USD/kWh':
+ price_unit = 'USD/MWh'
+ param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(price_unit)
+ param_val = sig_figs(
+ PlainQuantity(float(param_val), 'USD/kWh').to(price_unit).magnitude,
+ 10, # trim floating point errors
+ )
+ elif ' ' in param_val:
+ param_val_split = param_val.split(' ', maxsplit=1)
+ param_val = param_val_split[0]
+ param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(param_val_split[1])
+ else:
+ param_unit_display = _get_unit_display(param_unit)
+
+ param_unit_display_prefix = '$' if param_unit and 'USD' in param_unit else ''
+
+ if is_int(param_val):
+ param_val = int(param_val)
+
+ param_schema = _get_input_parameter_schema(param_name)
+ if param_schema and 'enum_values' in param_schema:
+ for enum_value in param_schema['enum_values']:
+ if enum_value['int_value'] == param_val:
+ enum_display = enum_value['value']
+ # param_val = f'{param_val} ({enum_display})'
+ param_val = enum_display
+ break
+
+ return f'{param_unit_display_prefix}{param_val}{param_unit_display}'
+
+
def get_fpc5_input_parameter_values(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, result: GeophiresXResult) -> dict[str, Any]:
_log.info('Extracting input parameter values...')
@@ -307,10 +355,31 @@ def get_fpc5_input_parameter_values(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, resu
params['Exploration Capital Cost']
), 'Exploration cost mismatch between parameters and result'
+ starting_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh = (
+ PlainQuantity(float(params['Starting Electricity Sale Price']), 'USD/kWh').to('USD/MWh').magnitude
+ )
+
+ # Drilling and completion cost (including indirect costs) scales linearly with the adjustment factor.
+ drilling_cost_adjustment_factor = float(params['Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor'])
+ drilling_costs_per_well_at_unit_adjustment_factor_musd = (
+ _drilling_costs_per_well_musd(result) / drilling_cost_adjustment_factor
+ )
+
+ # Yusifov & Enriquez, 2025
+ drilling_to_stimulation_cost_ratio = 46.0 / 54.0
+
return {
'exploration_cost_musd': round(sig_figs(exploration_cost_musd, 2)),
'wacc_pct': sig_figs(r['ECONOMIC PARAMETERS']['WACC']['value'], 3),
'reservoir_volume_m3': f"{r['RESERVOIR PARAMETERS']['Reservoir volume']['value']:,}",
+ 'starting_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh': round(starting_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh),
+ 'production_flow_rate_kg_per_s_display': f"{float(params['Production Flow Rate per Well']):g}",
+ 'drilling_costs_per_well_at_unit_adjustment_factor_musd': sig_figs(
+ drilling_costs_per_well_at_unit_adjustment_factor_musd, 3
+ ),
+ 'stim_costs_per_well_drilling_ratio_reference_musd': sig_figs(
+ _drilling_costs_per_well_musd(result) / drilling_to_stimulation_cost_ratio, 3
+ ),
}
@@ -355,12 +424,33 @@ def n_year_avg_net_power_mwe(years: int) -> float:
redrills = r['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value']
total_wells_including_redrilling = (1 + redrills) * _number_of_wells(result)
+ redrilling_years = _get_redrilling_years(result)
+ if len(redrilling_years) != redrills:
+ raise ValueError(
+ f'Redrilling years detected from production temperature profile ({redrilling_years}) do not match '
+ f'Number of times redrilling ({redrills}).'
+ )
+
+ first_cycle_peak_year, first_cycle_peak_temperature_degc = _get_first_cycle_peak_production_temperature(
+ result, redrilling_years
+ )
+ initial_production_temperature_degc = r['RESERVOIR SIMULATION RESULTS']['Initial Production Temperature']['value']
+
+ total_capex_musd = total_capex_q.to('MUSD').magnitude
+ interconnection_cost_musd = _interconnection_cost_musd(result)
+ interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd = _interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd(result)
+
+ max_net_generation_q = PlainQuantity(max_net_generation_mwe, 'MW')
+ transmission_cost_musd_per_yr = _annual_license_fees_musd_per_yr(result)
+
+ orc_unit_count = _get_fpc5_orc_unit_count(max_total_generation_mwe)
return {
# Economic Results
- 'lcoe_usd_per_mwh': sig_figs(
- _q(r['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Electricity breakeven price']).to('USD / MWh').magnitude, 3
+ 'lcoe_usd_per_mwh': round(
+ _q(r['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Electricity breakeven price']).to('USD / MWh').magnitude, 1
),
+ 'lppa_usd_per_mwh': round(_get_levelized_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh(result), 1),
'irr_pct': sig_figs(econ['After-tax IRR']['value'], 3),
'operations_year_of_irr': econ['Project lifetime']['value'],
'npv_musd': sig_figs(econ['Project NPV']['value'], 3),
@@ -381,6 +471,36 @@ def n_year_avg_net_power_mwe(years: int) -> float:
'capex_usd_per_kw': round(
sig_figs((total_capex_q / PlainQuantity(max_net_generation_mwe, 'MW')).to('USD / kW').magnitude, 2)
),
+ 'exploration_atb_reference_musd': sig_figs(_drilling_costs_per_well_musd(result) * 5, 3),
+ 'interconnection_cost_musd': round(sig_figs(interconnection_cost_musd, 3)),
+ 'interconnection_cost_usd_per_kw_ppa_capacity': round(
+ sig_figs(
+ (
+ PlainQuantity(interconnection_cost_musd, 'MUSD')
+ / PlainQuantity(_FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW, 'MW')
+ )
+ .to('USD / kW')
+ .magnitude,
+ 3,
+ )
+ ),
+ 'interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd': round(sig_figs(interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd, 3)),
+ 'capex_usd_per_kw_excluding_interconnection': round(
+ sig_figs(
+ (
+ PlainQuantity(total_capex_musd - interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd, 'MUSD')
+ / max_net_generation_q
+ )
+ .to('USD / kW')
+ .magnitude,
+ 2,
+ )
+ ),
+ 'surface_power_plant_pct_of_wellfield_and_plant_capex': round(
+ sig_figs(_surface_power_plant_pct_of_wellfield_and_plant_capex(result), 2)
+ ),
+ # Operating Costs
+ 'transmission_cost_musd_per_yr': sig_figs(transmission_cost_musd_per_yr, 3),
# Technical & Engineering Results
'bht_temp_degc': r['RESERVOIR PARAMETERS']['Bottom-hole temperature']['value'],
'min_net_generation_mwe': round(sig_figs(min_net_generation_mwe, 3)),
@@ -406,10 +526,137 @@ def n_year_avg_net_power_mwe(years: int) -> float:
PlainQuantity(total_fracture_surface_area_per_well_m2, 'm ** 2').to('foot ** 2').magnitude * 1e-6, 2
)
),
+ 'initial_pumping_power_pct_of_net': sig_figs(
+ surf_equip_sim['Initial pumping power/net installed power']['value'], 3
+ ),
+ 'orc_unit_count': orc_unit_count,
+ 'orc_unit_gross_capacity_mw': round(_FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW),
+ 'nameplate_capacity_mw': round(orc_unit_count * _FPC5_ORC_UNIT_GROSS_CAPACITY_MW),
+ 'number_of_wells': _number_of_wells(result),
+ 'redrilling_years': redrilling_years,
+ 'redrilling_years_display': _get_list_display(redrilling_years),
+ 'initial_production_temperature_degc_precise': round(initial_production_temperature_degc, 1),
+ 'first_cycle_peak_year': first_cycle_peak_year,
+ 'first_cycle_peak_temperature_degc': round(first_cycle_peak_temperature_degc, 1),
# TODO port all input and result values here instead of hardcoding them in the template
}
+_ITC_EXCLUDING_INTERCONNECTION_SCENARIO = 'ITC excluding interconnection from basis'
+_CURTAILMENT_5PCT_SCENARIO = 'Curtailment (5% flat derate)'
+_CURTAILMENT_10PCT_SCENARIO = 'Curtailment (10% flat derate)'
+_REDUCED_REDRILLING_SCENARIO = 'Reduced redrilling (greater fracture height)'
+_REDUCED_REDRILLING_FRACTURE_HEIGHT_MULTIPLIER = 1.2
+
+
+def get_fpc5_scenario_values(
+ input_params: GeophiresInputParameters,
+ result: GeophiresXResult,
+ scenario_results: dict[str, GeophiresXResult] | None = None,
+ flow_rate_parametric_rows: list[FlowRateParametricRow] | None = None,
+) -> dict[str, Any]:
+ """
+ :param scenario_results: Results of the scenarios returned by get_fpc5_scenario_input_parameters, by scenario
+ name; simulated if not provided.
+ :param flow_rate_parametric_rows: Production flow rate parametric results; loaded from
+ FPC5_FLOW_RATE_PARAMETRIC_CSV_PATH if not provided.
+ :return: Template values for scenario results cited in the documentation narrative
+ :raises ValueError: if the reduced redrilling scenario no longer supports its description in the documentation
+ """
+ scenario_input_params = get_fpc5_scenario_input_parameters(input_params, result)
+ if scenario_results is None:
+ scenario_results = get_scenario_results(input_params, scenario_input_params)
+
+ base_irr_pct = result.result['ECONOMIC PARAMETERS']['After-tax IRR']['value']
+ scenario_irr_changes_pct_pts = {
+ name: scenario_result.result['ECONOMIC PARAMETERS']['After-tax IRR']['value'] - base_irr_pct
+ for name, scenario_result in scenario_results.items()
+ }
+
+ if flow_rate_parametric_rows is None:
+ flow_rate_parametric_rows = load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric()
+
+ params = _get_input_parameters_dict(input_params)
+ flow_rate_summary = get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary(
+ flow_rate_parametric_rows,
+ float(params['Production Flow Rate per Well']),
+ _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW,
+ )
+
+ def _irr_reduction_display(scenario_name: str) -> str:
+ return f'{-scenario_irr_changes_pct_pts[scenario_name]:.1f}'
+
+ itc_rate_excluding_interconnection = scenario_input_params[_ITC_EXCLUDING_INTERCONNECTION_SCENARIO][
+ 'Investment Tax Credit Rate'
+ ]
+
+ return {
+ **_get_reduced_redrilling_scenario_values(
+ params, result, scenario_input_params, scenario_results[_REDUCED_REDRILLING_SCENARIO]
+ ),
+ 'itc_rate_excluding_interconnection_pct': f'{itc_rate_excluding_interconnection * 100:.2f}',
+ 'itc_rate_excluding_interconnection_pct_1dp': f'{itc_rate_excluding_interconnection * 100:.1f}',
+ 'itc_excluding_interconnection_irr_reduction_pct_pts': _irr_reduction_display(
+ _ITC_EXCLUDING_INTERCONNECTION_SCENARIO
+ ),
+ 'curtailment_5pct_utilization_factor': scenario_input_params[_CURTAILMENT_5PCT_SCENARIO]['Utilization Factor'],
+ 'curtailment_10pct_utilization_factor': scenario_input_params[_CURTAILMENT_10PCT_SCENARIO][
+ 'Utilization Factor'
+ ],
+ 'curtailment_5pct_irr_reduction_pct_pts': _irr_reduction_display(_CURTAILMENT_5PCT_SCENARIO),
+ 'curtailment_10pct_irr_reduction_pct_pts': _irr_reduction_display(_CURTAILMENT_10PCT_SCENARIO),
+ 'number_of_production_wells': _number_of_production_wells(result),
+ 'ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw': f'{_FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW:g}',
+ 'flow_rate_parametric_redrilling_steps_display': _get_list_display(
+ [
+ f'from {_get_count_word(it.redrills_below)} to {_get_count_word(it.redrills_at)} between '
+ f'{it.flow_below_kg_per_s:g} and {it.flow_at_kg_per_s:g} kg/s per well'
+ for it in flow_rate_summary.redrilling_steps
+ ]
+ ),
+ 'flow_rate_parametric_base_redrills_word': _get_count_word(flow_rate_summary.base_redrills),
+ 'flow_rate_parametric_max_irr_change_above_base_pct_pts': (
+ f'{flow_rate_summary.max_irr_change_above_base_within_band_pct_pts:.2f}'
+ ),
+ 'flow_rate_parametric_minimum_ppa_feasible_kg_per_s': (
+ f'{flow_rate_summary.minimum_ppa_feasible_flow_rate_kg_per_s:g}'
+ ),
+ }
+
+
+def get_fpc5_scenario_input_parameters(
+ input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, result: GeophiresXResult
+) -> dict[str, dict[str, Any]]:
+ """
+ :return: Input parameter overrides for the single-input scenarios cited in the documentation narrative, by
+ scenario name. The ITC scenario applies the rate to total installed cost that removes the interconnection cost
+ (including its share of inflation and interest during construction) from the ITC basis. The curtailment
+ scenarios reduce the utilization factor by 5% and 10% as flat derates. Values are rounded as in the
+ sensitivity analysis. The reduced redrilling scenario increases fracture height, and with it fracture surface
+ area and stimulation cost per stimulated well, to extend the thermal plateau.
+ """
+ params = _get_input_parameters_dict(input_params)
+ itc_rate = float(params['Investment Tax Credit Rate'])
+ total_capex_musd = _q(result.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)']['Total CAPEX']).to('MUSD').magnitude
+ itc_rate_excluding_interconnection = itc_rate * (
+ 1.0 - _interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd(result) / total_capex_musd
+ )
+ utilization_factor = float(params['Utilization Factor'])
+
+ return {
+ _ITC_EXCLUDING_INTERCONNECTION_SCENARIO: {
+ 'Investment Tax Credit Rate': round(itc_rate_excluding_interconnection, 4)
+ },
+ _CURTAILMENT_5PCT_SCENARIO: {'Utilization Factor': round(utilization_factor * 0.95, 3)},
+ _CURTAILMENT_10PCT_SCENARIO: {'Utilization Factor': round(utilization_factor * 0.90, 3)},
+ _REDUCED_REDRILLING_SCENARIO: {
+ 'Fracture Height': round(
+ float(params['Fracture Height']) * _REDUCED_REDRILLING_FRACTURE_HEIGHT_MULTIPLIER, 1
+ )
+ },
+ }
+
+
def _number_of_production_wells(result: GeophiresXResult) -> int:
return result.result['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Number of production wells']['value']
@@ -456,6 +703,397 @@ def _total_fracture_surface_area_per_well_m2(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
)
+def _is_stimulated_well_sentinel(param_value: str | None) -> bool:
+ """
+ GEOPHIRES interprets -1 for Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well (or Injection Well) as an
+ indication that the wells are stimulated, with cost apportioned from the per-fracture-surface-area input.
+ """
+ if param_value is None:
+ return False
+
+ try:
+ return float(str(param_value).split(',')[0].strip()) == -1
+ except ValueError:
+ return False
+
+
+def _interconnection_cost_musd(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ """
+ The case study enters grid interconnection cost as One-time Flat License Fees Etc.
+ """
+ flat_fees = result.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)'].get('One-time Flat License Fees Etc')
+ if flat_fees is None:
+ return 0.0
+
+ return _q(flat_fees).to('MUSD').magnitude
+
+
+def _annual_license_fees_musd_per_yr(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ """
+ The case study enters firm transmission service cost as Annual License Fees Etc.
+ Note the value is output with MUSD (rather than MUSD/yr) units, matching the input parameter units.
+ """
+ annual_fees = result.result['OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (M$/yr)'].get('Annual License Fees Etc')
+ if annual_fees is None:
+ return 0.0
+
+ return float(annual_fees['value'])
+
+
+def _interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ """
+ Interconnection cost is spent on the construction CAPEX schedule along with the rest of overnight capital cost,
+ so its share of inflation and interest during construction is proportional to its share of overnight capital.
+ """
+ capex = result.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)']
+ total_capex_musd = _q(capex['Total CAPEX']).to('MUSD').magnitude
+ occ_musd = _q(capex['Overnight Capital Cost']).to('MUSD').magnitude
+ return total_capex_musd * _interconnection_cost_musd(result) / occ_musd
+
+
+def _surface_power_plant_pct_of_wellfield_and_plant_capex(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ """
+ :return: Surface power plant cost as a percentage of drilling, completion, stimulation, field gathering and
+ surface power plant costs (i.e. excluding exploration and interconnection)
+ """
+ capex = result.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)']
+ surface_plant_musd = _q(capex['Surface power plant costs']).to('MUSD').magnitude
+ wellfield_musd = (
+ _drilling_costs_musd(result)
+ + _stim_costs_musd(result)
+ + _q(capex['Field gathering system costs']).to('MUSD').magnitude
+ )
+ return surface_plant_musd / (surface_plant_musd + wellfield_musd) * 100.0
+
+
+def _get_levelized_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ lppa_row_name = 'LPPA Levelized PPA price nominal (cents/kWh)'
+ for row in result.result.get('SAM CASH FLOW PROFILE') or []:
+ if row and row[0] == lppa_row_name:
+ cents_per_kwh_to_usd_per_mwh = 10.0
+ return float(row[1]) * cents_per_kwh_to_usd_per_mwh
+
+ raise ValueError(f'{lppa_row_name} not found in SAM cash flow profile.')
+
+
+def _get_annual_production_temperature_profile_degc(result: GeophiresXResult) -> tuple[list[int], list[float]]:
+ profile = result.power_generation_profile
+ year_idx = profile[0].index('YEAR')
+ temp_idx = profile[0].index('GEOFLUID TEMPERATURE (degC)')
+ return [int(row[year_idx]) for row in profile[1:]], [float(row[temp_idx]) for row in profile[1:]]
+
+
+def _get_redrilling_years(result: GeophiresXResult) -> list[int]:
+ """
+ Redrilling restores production temperature, so the operating year in which a redrilling event occurs appears as a
+ local minimum in the annual average production temperature profile.
+ See also generate_fervo_project_cape_5_graphs._get_redrilling_event_indexes, which detects redrilling events at
+ time step resolution from the full profile.
+ """
+ years, temps = _get_annual_production_temperature_profile_degc(result)
+ return [years[i] for i in range(1, len(temps) - 1) if temps[i - 1] > temps[i] < temps[i + 1]]
+
+
+def _get_first_cycle_peak_production_temperature(
+ result: GeophiresXResult, redrilling_years: list[int]
+) -> tuple[int, float]:
+ """
+ :return: Year and value of the peak annual production temperature prior to the first redrilling event
+ """
+ years, temps = _get_annual_production_temperature_profile_degc(result)
+ first_cycle_end_idx = years.index(redrilling_years[0]) if len(redrilling_years) > 0 else len(years)
+ first_cycle_temps = temps[:first_cycle_end_idx]
+ peak_idx = int(np.argmax(first_cycle_temps))
+ return years[peak_idx], first_cycle_temps[peak_idx]
+
+
+def _get_reduced_redrilling_scenario_values(
+ params: dict[str, Any],
+ result: GeophiresXResult,
+ scenario_input_params: dict[str, dict[str, Any]],
+ scenario_result: GeophiresXResult,
+) -> dict[str, Any]:
+ base_redrills = int(result.result['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value'])
+ redrills = int(scenario_result.result['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value'])
+ min_net_generation_mw = scenario_result.result['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS'][
+ 'Minimum Net Electricity Generation'
+ ]['value']
+ if redrills >= base_redrills or min_net_generation_mw < _FPC5_PPA_MINIMUM_NET_GENERATION_MW:
+ raise ValueError(
+ f'The reduced redrilling scenario yields {redrills} redrilling events (base case: {base_redrills}) and '
+ f'minimum net generation of {min_net_generation_mw} MW; update the scenario or its description in the '
+ f'case study documentation.'
+ )
+
+ redrilling_years = _get_redrilling_years(scenario_result)
+ if len(redrilling_years) != redrills:
+ raise ValueError(
+ f'Reduced redrilling scenario redrilling years detected from production temperature profile '
+ f'({redrilling_years}) do not match Number of times redrilling ({redrills}).'
+ )
+
+ base_fracture_height_m = float(params['Fracture Height'])
+ fracture_height_m = scenario_input_params[_REDUCED_REDRILLING_SCENARIO]['Fracture Height']
+ comparison_metric_labels = [
+ 'Fracture surface area per well (10⁶ m²)',
+ 'Redrilling events',
+ 'Total wells over project lifetime',
+ 'Stimulation ($M)',
+ 'Total CAPEX ($M)',
+ 'Redrilling ($M/yr)',
+ 'Minimum net generation (MW)',
+ 'LCOE ($/MWh)',
+ 'After-tax IRR (%)',
+ 'Project NPV ($M)',
+ ]
+ metrics_by_label = {it[0]: it for it in _FPC5_VERSION_COMPARISON_RESULT_METRICS}
+
+ return {
+ 'reduced_redrilling_base_fracture_height_m': f'{base_fracture_height_m:g}',
+ 'reduced_redrilling_fracture_height_m': f'{fracture_height_m:g}',
+ 'reduced_redrilling_fracture_height_increase_pct': (
+ f'{(fracture_height_m / base_fracture_height_m - 1.0) * 100.0:.0f}'
+ ),
+ 'reduced_redrilling_base_redrills_word': _get_count_word(base_redrills),
+ 'reduced_redrilling_redrills_word': _get_count_word(redrills),
+ 'reduced_redrilling_base_redrilling_years_display': _get_years_display(_get_redrilling_years(result)),
+ 'reduced_redrilling_redrilling_years_display': _get_years_display(redrilling_years),
+ 'reduced_redrilling_comparison_table_md': _get_result_comparison_table_md(
+ result,
+ scenario_result,
+ 'Base Case',
+ 'Reduced Redrilling',
+ [metrics_by_label[it] for it in comparison_metric_labels],
+ ),
+ }
+
+
+def _get_years_display(years: list[int]) -> str:
+ return f'year{"" if len(years) == 1 else "s"} {_get_list_display(years)}'
+
+
+def _get_count_word(count: int) -> str:
+ words = ['zero', 'one', 'two', 'three', 'four', 'five', 'six', 'seven', 'eight', 'nine', 'ten']
+ return words[count] if 0 <= count < len(words) else str(count)
+
+
+def _get_list_display(items: list[Any]) -> str:
+ items_str = [str(it) for it in items]
+ if len(items_str) <= 2:
+ return ' and '.join(items_str)
+
+ return f'{", ".join(items_str[:-1])}, and {items_str[-1]}'
+
+
+# Previous version of the case study documented in the Previous Versions section (last updated 2026-07-03). The files
+# are copies of tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.{txt,out} as of that version.
+_FPC5_PREVIOUS_VERSION_FILE_STEM = 'Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07'
+
+
+def _get_fpc5_previous_version(project_root: Path) -> tuple[GeophiresInputParameters, GeophiresXResult]:
+ previous_versions_dir = project_root / 'src/geophires_docs/previous_versions'
+ return (
+ ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(
+ from_file_path=previous_versions_dir / f'{_FPC5_PREVIOUS_VERSION_FILE_STEM}.txt'
+ ),
+ GeophiresXResult(str(previous_versions_dir / f'{_FPC5_PREVIOUS_VERSION_FILE_STEM}.out')),
+ )
+
+
+def _get_non_comment_input_parameters_dict(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters) -> dict[str, str]:
+ return {
+ k: v
+ for k, v in _get_input_parameters_dict(input_params).items()
+ if not k.startswith(('#', COMMENT_PARAMETER_NAME_PREFIX))
+ }
+
+
+def _get_version_comparison_input_value_display(param_name: str, param_val: str | None) -> str:
+ if param_val is None:
+ # Defaults are not displayed because they are not necessarily the effective values; for example, per-well
+ # stimulation cost defaults do not apply when stimulation cost per fracture surface area is provided.
+ return 'Not set'
+
+ if _is_stimulated_well_sentinel(param_val):
+ return 'Stimulated (cost from per-area input)'
+
+ if _get_input_parameter_schema_type(param_name) == 'array':
+ return param_val.replace(',', ', ')
+
+ try:
+ value_display = _get_input_parameter_value_display(param_name, param_val)
+ except ValueError:
+ # e.g. boolean values
+ return param_val
+
+ if param_name == 'Annual License Fees Etc':
+ # Parameter units are MUSD, but the value is an annual cost
+ value_display += '/yr'
+
+ return value_display
+
+
+def _format_version_comparison_number(value: float | None, decimals: int) -> str:
+ if value is None:
+ return '.. N/A'
+
+ return f'{value:,.{decimals}f}'
+
+
+def _format_version_comparison_change(
+ previous_value: float | None, value: float | None, decimals: int, is_percent: bool
+) -> str:
+ if previous_value is None or value is None:
+ return '.. N/A'
+
+ change = value - previous_value
+ if round(change, decimals) == 0:
+ return 'No change'
+
+ if is_percent:
+ return f'{change:+,.{decimals}f} pts'
+
+ relative_change_pct = 0.0 if previous_value == 0 else change / abs(previous_value) * 100.0
+ if round(relative_change_pct) == 0:
+ return f'{change:+,.{decimals}f}'
+
+ return f'{change:+,.{decimals}f} ({relative_change_pct:+.0f}%)'
+
+
+def _get_result_comparison_table_md(
+ result_a: GeophiresXResult,
+ result_b: GeophiresXResult,
+ column_a: str,
+ column_b: str,
+ metrics: list[tuple[str, Callable[[GeophiresXResult], float | None], int, bool]],
+) -> str:
+ table_md = f'| Result | {column_a} | {column_b} | Change |\n|---|---|---|---|\n'
+ for label, getter, decimals, is_percent in metrics:
+ value_a = getter(result_a)
+ value_b = getter(result_b)
+ table_md += (
+ f'| {label} '
+ f'| {_format_version_comparison_number(value_a, decimals)} '
+ f'| {_format_version_comparison_number(value_b, decimals)} '
+ f'| {_format_version_comparison_change(value_a, value_b, decimals, is_percent)} |\n'
+ )
+
+ return table_md.strip()
+
+
+def _result_value(category: str, field: str) -> Callable[[GeophiresXResult], float | None]:
+ def _get(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float | None:
+ entry = result.result.get(category, {}).get(field)
+ if entry is None:
+ return None
+
+ return float(entry['value'])
+
+ return _get
+
+
+def _result_value_or_zero(category: str, field: str) -> Callable[[GeophiresXResult], float | None]:
+ """
+ For outputs that are only printed when the corresponding input is non-zero
+ """
+
+ def _get(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float | None:
+ value = _result_value(category, field)(result)
+ return 0.0 if value is None else value
+
+ return _get
+
+
+def _average_pumping_power_pct_of_total_generation(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ surf_equip_sim = result.result['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS']
+ return (
+ surf_equip_sim['Average Pumping Power']['value']
+ / surf_equip_sim['Average Total Electricity Generation']['value']
+ * 100.0
+ )
+
+
+def _total_wells_including_redrilling(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ redrills = result.result['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value']
+ return float((1 + redrills) * _number_of_wells(result))
+
+
+def _lcoe_usd_per_mwh(result: GeophiresXResult) -> float:
+ return float(_q(result.result['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Electricity breakeven price']).to('USD / MWh').magnitude)
+
+
+_CAPEX = 'CAPITAL COSTS (M$)'
+_OPEX = 'OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (M$/yr)'
+_ECON = 'ECONOMIC PARAMETERS'
+_SURF = 'SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS'
+
+# (label, value getter, display decimals, whether the value is a percentage)
+_FPC5_VERSION_COMPARISON_RESULT_METRICS: list[tuple[str, Callable[[GeophiresXResult], float | None], int, bool]] = [
+ ('LCOE ($/MWh)', _lcoe_usd_per_mwh, 1, False),
+ ('Levelized PPA price ($/MWh)', _get_levelized_ppa_price_usd_per_mwh, 1, False),
+ ('After-tax IRR (%)', _result_value(_ECON, 'After-tax IRR'), 1, True),
+ ('Project NPV ($M)', _result_value(_ECON, 'Project NPV'), 1, False),
+ ('Levered equity profitability index', _result_value(_ECON, 'Project VIR=PI=PIR'), 2, False),
+ ('WACC (%)', _result_value(_ECON, 'WACC'), 2, True),
+ ('Investment Tax Credit ($M)', _result_value(_ECON, 'Investment Tax Credit'), 1, False),
+ ('Total CAPEX ($M)', _result_value(_CAPEX, 'Total CAPEX'), 1, False),
+ ('Total CAPEX ($/kW)', _result_value('SUMMARY OF RESULTS', 'Total CAPEX ($/kW)'), 0, False),
+ ('Overnight capital cost ($M)', _result_value(_CAPEX, 'Overnight Capital Cost'), 1, False),
+ ('Exploration ($M)', _result_value(_CAPEX, 'Exploration costs'), 1, False),
+ ('Well drilling and completion ($M)', _drilling_costs_musd, 1, False),
+ ('Well drilling and completion per well ($M)', _drilling_costs_per_well_musd, 2, False),
+ ('Stimulation ($M)', _stim_costs_musd, 1, False),
+ ('Stimulation per well ($M)', _stim_costs_per_well_musd, 2, False),
+ ('Surface power plant ($M)', _result_value(_CAPEX, 'Surface power plant costs'), 1, False),
+ ('Field gathering system ($M)', _result_value(_CAPEX, 'Field gathering system costs'), 1, False),
+ ('Grid interconnection ($M)', _result_value_or_zero(_CAPEX, 'One-time Flat License Fees Etc'), 1, False),
+ ('Total O&M ($M/yr)', _result_value(_OPEX, 'Total operating and maintenance costs'), 1, False),
+ ('Redrilling ($M/yr)', _result_value(_OPEX, 'Redrilling costs'), 1, False),
+ ('Transmission service ($M/yr)', _result_value_or_zero(_OPEX, 'Annual License Fees Etc'), 1, False),
+ ('Production wells', _result_value('SUMMARY OF RESULTS', 'Number of production wells'), 0, False),
+ ('Injection wells', _result_value('SUMMARY OF RESULTS', 'Number of injection wells'), 0, False),
+ ('Redrilling events', _result_value('ENGINEERING PARAMETERS', 'Number of times redrilling'), 0, False),
+ ('Total wells over project lifetime', _total_wells_including_redrilling, 0, False),
+ ('Minimum net generation (MW)', _result_value(_SURF, 'Minimum Net Electricity Generation'), 1, False),
+ ('Average net generation (MW)', _result_value(_SURF, 'Average Net Electricity Generation'), 1, False),
+ ('Maximum net generation (MW)', _result_value(_SURF, 'Maximum Net Electricity Generation'), 1, False),
+ ('Maximum total generation (MW)', _result_value(_SURF, 'Maximum Total Electricity Generation'), 1, False),
+ (
+ 'Average annual net generation (GWh)',
+ _result_value(_SURF, 'Average Annual Net Electricity Generation'),
+ 0,
+ False,
+ ),
+ (
+ 'Initial pumping power / net installed power (%)',
+ _result_value(_SURF, 'Initial pumping power/net installed power'),
+ 1,
+ True,
+ ),
+ ('Average pumping power / average total generation (%)', _average_pumping_power_pct_of_total_generation, 1, True),
+ ('Heat to power conversion efficiency (%)', _result_value(_SURF, 'Heat to Power Conversion Efficiency'), 1, True),
+ ('Bottom-hole temperature (℃)', _result_value('RESERVOIR PARAMETERS', 'Bottom-hole temperature'), 1, False),
+ (
+ 'Initial production temperature (℃)',
+ _result_value('RESERVOIR SIMULATION RESULTS', 'Initial Production Temperature'),
+ 1,
+ False,
+ ),
+ (
+ 'Average production temperature (℃)',
+ _result_value('RESERVOIR SIMULATION RESULTS', 'Average Production Temperature'),
+ 1,
+ False,
+ ),
+ (
+ 'Fracture surface area per well (10⁶ m²)',
+ lambda r: _total_fracture_surface_area_per_well_m2(r) / 1e6,
+ 2,
+ False,
+ ),
+]
+
+
def generate_res_eng_reference_sim_params_table_md(
base_case_input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, res_eng_reference_sim_params: dict[str, Any]
) -> str:
@@ -487,6 +1125,17 @@ def generate_fpc_opex_output_table_md(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, re
if output_param_name == 'Total operating and maintenance costs':
reference_source_display = '.. N/A '
+ elif output_param_name == 'Annual License Fees Etc':
+ # Output unit is MUSD (matching the input parameter) although the value is an annual cost
+ value_unit_display = f'${result_value_unit_dict["value"]}M/yr'
+ reference_value_display = '$16.4M/yr; ~$10M/yr'
+ reference_source_display = (
+ 'Long-term firm point-to-point transmission service for 500 MW, entered as '
+ '`Annual License Fees Etc` (see Economic Parameters). Reference values apply 2017 PacifiCorp '
+ 'OATT Schedule 7 and 1 rates (PacifiCorp, 2017) and the BPA fiscal year 2024–2025 long-term firm '
+ 'point-to-point rate (BPA, 2026) to 500 MW; the case study value escalates the PacifiCorp rate at '
+ '3% per year to 2026.'
+ )
else:
reference_source_display = _get_output_parameter_description(output_param_name)
@@ -527,24 +1176,83 @@ def generate_fpc_opex_output_table_md(input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, re
reference_source = '2024b ATB: 2028 Deep EGS Binary Conservative Scenario (NREL, 2025). '
# TODO explain why we're higher than ATB (e.g. redrilling not modeled by ATB)
+ transmission_cost_musd_per_yr = _annual_license_fees_musd_per_yr(result)
+ if transmission_cost_musd_per_yr != 0:
+ opex_excluding_transmission_usd_per_kw_per_year = (
+ (_q(result_value_unit_dict) - PlainQuantity(transmission_cost_musd_per_yr, 'MUSD / year'))
+ / PlainQuantity(get_max_net_generation_mwe(result), 'MW')
+ ).to('USD / year / kilowatt')
+ reference_source += (
+ f'The case study value includes transmission service '
+ f'(${(opex_usd_per_kw_per_year - opex_excluding_transmission_usd_per_kw_per_year).magnitude:.0f}'
+ f'/kW-yr); excluding it, total OPEX is '
+ f'${opex_excluding_transmission_usd_per_kw_per_year.magnitude:.0f}/kW-yr.'
+ )
+
table_md += f'| {output_param_name}: $/kW-yr | ${opex_usd_per_kw_per_year.magnitude:.2f}/kW-yr | $226.31/kW-yr | {reference_source} |\n'
return table_md
+def generate_fpc5_previous_version_input_changes_table_md(
+ previous_input_params: GeophiresInputParameters, input_params: GeophiresInputParameters
+) -> str:
+ """
+ :return: Markdown table of input parameters whose values differ between the previous version and this version,
+ including parameters that were added or removed
+ """
+ previous_params = _get_non_comment_input_parameters_dict(previous_input_params)
+ params = _get_non_comment_input_parameters_dict(input_params)
+
+ param_names = list(params.keys()) + [it for it in previous_params if it not in params]
+
+ table_md = '| Parameter | Previous Version | This Version |\n|---|---|---|\n'
+ for param_name in param_names:
+ previous_value_display = _get_version_comparison_input_value_display(
+ param_name, previous_params.get(param_name)
+ )
+ value_display = _get_version_comparison_input_value_display(param_name, params.get(param_name))
+ if previous_value_display == value_display:
+ continue
+
+ table_md += f'| {param_name} | {previous_value_display} | {value_display} |\n'
+
+ return table_md.strip()
+
+
+def generate_fpc5_previous_version_result_changes_table_md(
+ previous_result: GeophiresXResult, result: GeophiresXResult
+) -> str:
+ """
+ :return: Markdown table comparing key results of the previous version and this version
+ """
+ return _get_result_comparison_table_md(
+ previous_result, result, 'Previous Version', 'This Version', _FPC5_VERSION_COMPARISON_RESULT_METRICS
+ )
+
+
def generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md(
input_params: GeophiresInputParameters,
result: GeophiresXResult,
res_eng_reference_sim_params: dict[str, Any] | None = None,
project_root: Path = _PROJECT_ROOT,
+ previous_version: tuple[GeophiresInputParameters, GeophiresXResult] | None = None,
+ scenario_results: dict[str, GeophiresXResult] | None = None,
) -> None:
if res_eng_reference_sim_params is None:
res_eng_reference_sim_params = {}
+ if previous_version is None:
+ previous_version = _get_fpc5_previous_version(project_root)
+
result_values: dict[str, Any] = get_result_values(result)
# noinspection PyDictCreation
- template_values = {**get_fpc5_input_parameter_values(input_params, result), **result_values}
+ template_values = {
+ **get_fpc5_input_parameter_values(input_params, result),
+ **result_values,
+ **get_fpc5_scenario_values(input_params, result, scenario_results),
+ }
for template_key, md_method in {
'opex_result_outputs_table_md': generate_fpc_opex_output_table_md,
@@ -560,10 +1268,20 @@ def generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md(
generate_res_eng_reference_sim_params_table_md(input_params, res_eng_reference_sim_params)
)
+ template_values['previous_version_input_changes_table_md'] = generate_fpc5_previous_version_input_changes_table_md(
+ previous_version[0], input_params
+ )
+ template_values['previous_version_result_changes_table_md'] = (
+ generate_fpc5_previous_version_result_changes_table_md(previous_version[1], result)
+ )
+
docs_dir = project_root / 'docs'
# Set up Jinja environment
- env = Environment(loader=FileSystemLoader(docs_dir), autoescape=True)
+ # The template renders markdown, so only HTML and XML templates are autoescaped. HTML-escaping characters such as
+ # '&' in parameter comments and table labels would be escaped again by the markdown-to-reStructuredText conversion
+ # and render literally in the documentation (e.g. 'O&M').
+ env = Environment(loader=FileSystemLoader(docs_dir), autoescape=select_autoescape(['html', 'xml']))
template = env.get_template('Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja')
# Render template
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.out b/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.out
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..395131edf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.out
@@ -0,0 +1,477 @@
+ *****************
+ ***CASE REPORT***
+ *****************
+
+Simulation Metadata
+----------------------
+ GEOPHIRES Version: 3.14.1
+ Simulation Date: 2026-06-18
+ Simulation Time: 10:42
+ Calculation Time: 1.819 sec
+
+ ***SUMMARY OF RESULTS***
+
+ End-Use Option: Electricity
+ Average Net Electricity Production: 510.16 MW
+ Electricity breakeven price: 8.50 cents/kWh
+ Total CAPEX: 2865.75 MUSD
+ Total CAPEX ($/kW): 5595 USD/kW
+ Number of production wells: 56
+ Number of injection wells: 38
+ Flowrate per production well: 107.0 kg/sec
+ Well depth: 2.7 kilometer
+ Segment 1 Geothermal gradient: 74 degC/km
+ Segment 1 Thickness: 2.5 kilometer
+ Segment 2 Geothermal gradient: 41 degC/km
+ Segment 2 Thickness: 0.5 kilometer
+ Segment 3 Geothermal gradient: 39.1 degC/km
+
+
+ ***ECONOMIC PARAMETERS***
+
+ Economic Model = SAM Single Owner PPA
+ Real Discount Rate: 12.00 %
+ Nominal Discount Rate: 15.02 %
+ WACC: 8.31 %
+ Investment Tax Credit: 859.72 MUSD
+ Project lifetime: 30 yr
+ Capacity factor: 91.3 %
+ Project NPV: 199.08 MUSD
+ After-tax IRR: 22.40 %
+ Project VIR=PI=PIR: 1.33
+ Project MOIC: 4.31
+ Project Payback Period: 5.95 yr
+ Estimated Jobs Created: 1273
+
+ ***ENGINEERING PARAMETERS***
+
+ Number of Production Wells: 56
+ Number of Injection Wells: 38
+ Well depth: 2.7 kilometer
+ Water loss rate: 1.0 %
+ Pump efficiency: 80.0 %
+ Injection temperature: 56.6 degC
+ Production Wellbore heat transmission calculated with Ramey's model
+ Average production well temperature drop: 0.2 degC
+ Flowrate per production well: 107.0 kg/sec
+ Injection well casing ID: 8.535 in
+ Production well casing ID: 8.535 in
+ Number of times redrilling: 3
+ Power plant type: Supercritical ORC
+
+
+ ***RESOURCE CHARACTERISTICS***
+
+ Maximum reservoir temperature: 500.0 degC
+ Number of segments: 3
+ Segment 1 Geothermal gradient: 74 degC/km
+ Segment 1 Thickness: 2.5 kilometer
+ Segment 2 Geothermal gradient: 41 degC/km
+ Segment 2 Thickness: 0.5 kilometer
+ Segment 3 Geothermal gradient: 39.1 degC/km
+ Project location: 38.506196, -112.918155
+
+
+ ***RESERVOIR PARAMETERS***
+
+ Reservoir Model = Multiple Parallel Fractures Model (Gringarten)
+ Bottom-hole temperature: 205.38 degC
+ Fracture model = Rectangular
+ Well separation: fracture height: 100.00 meter
+ Fracture width: 305.00 meter
+ Fracture area: 30500.00 m**2
+ Reservoir volume calculated with fracture separation and number of fractures as input
+ Number of fractures: 14100
+ Fracture separation: 9.83 meter
+ Reservoir volume: 4225156597 m**3
+ Reservoir hydrostatic pressure: 25324.54 kPa
+ Plant outlet pressure: 13789.51 kPa
+ Production wellhead pressure: 2089.11 kPa
+ Productivity Index: 1.13 kg/sec/bar
+ Injectivity Index: 1.38 kg/sec/bar
+ Reservoir density: 2800.00 kg/m**3
+ Reservoir thermal conductivity: 3.05 W/m/K
+ Reservoir heat capacity: 790.00 J/kg/K
+
+
+ ***RESERVOIR SIMULATION RESULTS***
+
+ Maximum Production Temperature: 203.3 degC
+ Average Production Temperature: 203.0 degC
+ Minimum Production Temperature: 201.5 degC
+ Initial Production Temperature: 201.9 degC
+ Average Reservoir Heat Extraction: 3670.68 MW
+ Production Wellbore Heat Transmission Model = Ramey Model
+ Average Production Well Temperature Drop: 0.2 degC
+ Average Injection Well Pump Pressure Drop: -1181.6 kPa
+ Average Production Well Pump Pressure Drop: 10257.1 kPa
+
+
+ ***CAPITAL COSTS (M$)***
+
+ Exploration costs: 30.00 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs: 436.98 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs per well: 4.65 MUSD
+ Stimulation costs: 454.02 MUSD
+ Stimulation costs per well: 4.83 MUSD
+ Surface power plant costs: 1467.83 MUSD
+ Field gathering system costs: 48.33 MUSD
+ Total surface equipment costs: 1516.16 MUSD
+ Overnight Capital Cost: 2437.17 MUSD
+ Inflation costs during construction: 285.92 MUSD
+ Interest during construction: 142.66 MUSD
+ Total CAPEX: 2865.75 MUSD
+
+
+ ***OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (M$/yr)***
+
+ Wellfield maintenance costs: 5.81 MUSD/yr
+ Power plant maintenance costs: 24.87 MUSD/yr
+ Water costs: 3.19 MUSD/yr
+ Redrilling costs: 89.10 MUSD/yr
+ Average Annual Royalty Cost: 12.36 MUSD/yr
+ Total operating and maintenance costs: 135.33 MUSD/yr
+
+
+ ***SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS***
+ Initial geofluid availability: 0.19 MW/(kg/s)
+ Maximum Total Electricity Generation: 599.80 MW
+ Average Total Electricity Generation: 597.81 MW
+ Minimum Total Electricity Generation: 587.03 MW
+ Initial Total Electricity Generation: 589.96 MW
+ Maximum Net Electricity Generation: 512.21 MW
+ Average Net Electricity Generation: 510.16 MW
+ Minimum Net Electricity Generation: 499.10 MW
+ Initial Net Electricity Generation: 502.22 MW
+ Average Annual Total Electricity Generation: 4781.29 GWh
+ Average Annual Net Electricity Generation: 4080.29 GWh
+ Initial pumping power/net installed power: 17.47 %
+ Average Pumping Power: 87.65 MW
+ Heat to Power Conversion Efficiency: 13.90 %
+
+ ************************************************************
+ * HEATING, COOLING AND/OR ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION PROFILE *
+ ************************************************************
+ YEAR THERMAL GEOFLUID PUMP NET FIRST LAW
+ DRAWDOWN TEMPERATURE POWER POWER EFFICIENCY
+ (degC) (MW) (MW) (%)
+ 1 1.0000 201.90 87.7368 502.2182 13.7848
+ 2 1.0049 202.88 87.7057 509.2920 13.8852
+ 3 1.0058 203.06 87.7000 510.6083 13.9038
+ 4 1.0062 203.16 87.6970 511.2933 13.9134
+ 5 1.0065 203.22 87.6950 511.7461 13.9198
+ 6 1.0068 203.26 87.6939 512.0590 13.9242
+ 7 1.0066 203.23 87.7011 511.8487 13.9212
+ 8 1.0039 202.67 87.7758 507.7575 13.8627
+ 9 1.0031 202.52 87.6882 506.7524 13.8497
+ 10 1.0053 202.96 87.6819 509.8839 13.8939
+ 11 1.0059 203.10 87.6700 510.9042 13.9083
+ 12 1.0063 203.18 87.6532 511.5053 13.9170
+ 13 1.0066 203.23 87.6347 511.9262 13.9231
+ 14 1.0068 203.27 87.6198 512.1801 13.9269
+ 15 1.0062 203.16 87.6271 511.3633 13.9153
+ 16 1.0011 202.12 87.7574 503.8207 13.8073
+ 17 1.0043 202.76 87.5963 508.5351 13.8760
+ 18 1.0055 203.02 87.5948 510.3876 13.9021
+ 19 1.0061 203.13 87.5942 511.2037 13.9135
+ 20 1.0065 203.20 87.5941 511.7134 13.9207
+ 21 1.0067 203.25 87.5943 512.0726 13.9257
+ 22 1.0068 203.26 87.5978 512.1650 13.9270
+ 23 1.0054 202.99 87.6375 510.1608 13.8983
+ 24 1.0000 201.90 87.5945 502.3605 13.7887
+ 25 1.0049 202.88 87.5946 509.4031 13.8883
+ 26 1.0058 203.06 87.5948 510.7135 13.9067
+ 27 1.0062 203.16 87.5949 511.3954 13.9162
+ 28 1.0065 203.22 87.5950 511.8461 13.9225
+ 29 1.0068 203.26 87.5954 512.1575 13.9269
+ 30 1.0066 203.23 87.6039 511.9458 13.9238
+
+
+ *******************************************************************
+ * ANNUAL HEATING, COOLING AND/OR ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION PROFILE *
+ *******************************************************************
+ YEAR ELECTRICITY HEAT RESERVOIR PERCENTAGE OF
+ PROVIDED EXTRACTED HEAT CONTENT TOTAL HEAT MINED
+ (GWh/year) (GWh/year) (10^15 J) (%)
+ 1 4054.7 29270.6 1285.13 7.58
+ 2 4079.2 29356.0 1179.45 15.18
+ 3 4086.7 29382.0 1073.67 22.79
+ 4 4091.2 29397.4 967.84 30.40
+ 5 4094.2 29408.0 861.97 38.01
+ 6 4095.3 29411.9 756.09 45.62
+ 7 4082.5 29368.1 650.37 53.23
+ 8 4029.9 29185.9 545.30 60.78
+ 9 4068.9 29319.4 439.75 68.37
+ 10 4082.5 29366.7 334.03 75.98
+ 11 4088.7 29387.9 228.23 83.59
+ 12 4092.7 29401.3 122.39 91.20
+ 13 4095.5 29410.6 16.51 98.81
+ 14 4094.7 29407.5 -89.36 106.43
+ 15 4068.1 29316.1 -194.90 114.02
+ 16 4035.4 29201.6 -300.02 121.58
+ 17 4076.0 29341.6 -405.65 129.17
+ 18 4085.6 29375.1 -511.40 136.78
+ 19 4090.7 29392.9 -617.22 144.39
+ 20 4094.1 29404.9 -723.07 152.00
+ 21 4096.2 29412.2 -828.96 159.62
+ 22 4091.2 29395.1 -934.78 167.23
+ 23 4043.0 29229.8 -1040.01 174.79
+ 24 4055.6 29270.6 -1145.38 182.37
+ 25 4080.1 29356.0 -1251.06 189.97
+ 26 4087.6 29382.0 -1356.84 197.58
+ 27 4092.0 29397.4 -1462.67 205.19
+ 28 4095.0 29408.0 -1568.54 212.80
+ 29 4096.1 29411.9 -1674.42 220.42
+ 30 4085.0 29373.9 -1780.17 228.02
+
+ ***************************
+ * SAM CASH FLOW PROFILE *
+ ***************************
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Year -4 Year -3 Year -2 Year -1 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 Year 24 Year 25 Year 26 Year 27 Year 28 Year 29 Year 30
+CONSTRUCTION
+Capital expenditure schedule [construction] (%) 1.40 2.70 13.90 43.10 38.90
+Overnight capital expenditure [construction] ($) -34,120,326 -65,803,486 -338,766,095 -1,050,418,611 -948,057,633
+plus:
+Inflation cost [construction] ($) -921,249 -3,601,359 -28,187,603 -118,123,001 -135,088,260
+plus:
+Royalty supplemental payments [construction] ($) 0 0 0 0 0
+equals:
+Nominal capital expenditure [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -366,953,698 -1,168,541,612 -1,083,145,892
+
+Issuance of equity [construction] ($) 35,041,575 69,404,845 110,086,109 350,562,484 324,943,768
+Issuance of debt [construction] ($) 0 0 256,867,589 817,979,128 758,202,125
+Debt balance [construction] ($) 0 0 256,867,589 1,101,817,814 1,975,710,809
+Debt interest payment [construction] ($) 0 0 0 26,971,097 115,690,870
+
+Installed cost [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -366,953,698 -1,195,512,709 -1,198,836,763
+After-tax net cash flow [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768
+
+ENERGY
+Electricity to grid (kWh) 0.0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
+Electricity from grid (kWh) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
+Electricity to grid net (kWh) 0.0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
+
+REVENUE
+PPA price (cents/kWh) 0.0 9.50 9.50 9.56 9.61 9.67 9.73 9.79 9.84 9.90 9.96 10.01 10.07 10.13 10.18 10.24 10.30 10.36 10.41 10.47 10.53 10.58 10.64 10.70 10.75 10.81 10.87 10.93 10.98 11.04 11.10
+PPA revenue ($) 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 453,302,095
+Curtailment payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Capacity payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Salvage value ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,432,874,795
+Total revenue ($) 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 1,886,176,890
+
+Property tax net assessed value ($) 0 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589
+
+OPERATING EXPENSES
+O&M fixed expense ($) 0 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589
+Royalty rate (%) 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50
+O&M production-based expense ($) 0 6,741,335 6,782,203 6,835,432 6,883,659 6,929,652 6,972,370 6,991,289 6,941,286 7,049,108 7,113,443 14,330,069 14,425,784 14,517,341 14,596,065 14,582,311 14,545,725 14,773,302 14,889,692 14,989,985 15,084,233 15,173,691 15,236,647 15,137,888 15,266,035 15,439,555 15,549,342 15,647,770 15,741,122 15,827,033 15,865,573
+O&M capacity-based expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Fuel expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Electricity purchase ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Property tax expense ($) 0 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649
+Insurance expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Total operating expenses ($) 0 136,018,573 136,059,441 136,112,670 136,160,897 136,206,891 136,249,608 136,268,527 136,218,524 136,326,346 136,390,681 143,607,307 143,703,022 143,794,579 143,873,303 143,859,549 143,822,963 144,050,540 144,166,930 144,267,223 144,361,471 144,450,929 144,513,885 144,415,126 144,543,273 144,716,793 144,826,580 144,925,008 145,018,360 145,104,271 145,142,811
+
+EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+
+OPERATING ACTIVITIES
+EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+plus PBI if not available for debt service:
+Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
+Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 110,900,793 114,659,341 119,214,385 123,598,231 127,974,002 132,291,402 135,407,079 134,796,958 143,201,425 149,328,954 147,752,096 153,271,192 158,877,257 164,345,211 167,494,244 170,260,746 180,574,860 188,106,145 195,496,195 203,043,277 210,804,730 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
+
+INVESTING ACTIVITIES
+Total installed cost ($) -2,865,749,589
+Debt closing costs ($) 0
+Debt up-front fee ($) 0
+minus:
+Total IBI income ($) 0
+Total CBI income ($) 0
+equals:
+Purchase of property ($) -2,865,749,589
+plus:
+Reserve (increase)/decrease debt service ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease working capital ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease receivables ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+equals:
+Cash flow from investing activities ($) -2,865,749,589 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+FINANCING ACTIVITIES
+Issuance of equity ($) 890,038,781
+Size of debt ($) 1,975,710,809
+minus:
+Debt principal payment ($) 0 20,915,672 22,379,769 23,946,353 25,622,597 27,416,179 29,335,312 31,388,784 33,585,998 35,937,018 38,452,610 41,144,292 44,024,393 47,106,100 50,403,527 53,931,774 57,706,998 61,746,488 66,068,742 70,693,554 75,642,103 80,937,050 86,602,644 92,664,829 99,151,367 106,091,963 113,518,400 121,464,688 129,967,216 139,064,921 148,799,466
+equals:
+Cash flow from financing activities ($) 2,865,749,589 -20,915,672 -22,379,769 -23,946,353 -25,622,597 -27,416,179 -29,335,312 -31,388,784 -33,585,998 -35,937,018 -38,452,610 -41,144,292 -44,024,393 -47,106,100 -50,403,527 -53,931,774 -57,706,998 -61,746,488 -66,068,742 -70,693,554 -75,642,103 -80,937,050 -86,602,644 -92,664,829 -99,151,367 -106,091,963 -113,518,400 -121,464,688 -129,967,216 -139,064,921 -148,799,466
+
+PROJECT RETURNS
+Pre-tax Cash Flow:
+Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 110,900,793 114,659,341 119,214,385 123,598,231 127,974,002 132,291,402 135,407,079 134,796,958 143,201,425 149,328,954 147,752,096 153,271,192 158,877,257 164,345,211 167,494,244 170,260,746 180,574,860 188,106,145 195,496,195 203,043,277 210,804,730 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
+Cash flow from investing activities ($) -2,865,749,589 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Cash flow from financing activities ($) 2,865,749,589 -20,915,672 -22,379,769 -23,946,353 -25,622,597 -27,416,179 -29,335,312 -31,388,784 -33,585,998 -35,937,018 -38,452,610 -41,144,292 -44,024,393 -47,106,100 -50,403,527 -53,931,774 -57,706,998 -61,746,488 -66,068,742 -70,693,554 -75,642,103 -80,937,050 -86,602,644 -92,664,829 -99,151,367 -106,091,963 -113,518,400 -121,464,688 -129,967,216 -139,064,921 -148,799,466
+Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+
+Pre-tax Returns:
+Issuance of equity ($) 890,038,781
+Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+Total pre-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+
+After-tax Returns:
+Total pre-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+Federal ITC total income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -10,022,975 1,430,178 517,143 -361,577 -1,238,679 -2,104,080 -2,728,602 -2,606,306 -4,290,940 -5,519,172 -5,203,099 -6,309,374 -7,433,082 -8,529,106 -9,160,314 -9,714,845 -11,782,258 -13,291,866 -14,773,165 -16,285,940 -30,048,219 -43,738,323 -44,407,660 -46,416,067 -48,766,240 -50,861,579 -52,998,337 -55,218,540 -57,516,926 -346,893,748
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
+Total after-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 937,411,859 94,034,394 95,902,564 97,531,980 99,037,970 100,374,395 100,670,314 98,013,035 101,999,445 104,104,348 100,223,628 101,505,229 102,650,803 103,476,514 102,322,811 100,633,682 104,371,601 105,728,350 106,676,042 107,418,409 92,998,667 77,936,763 74,392,557 75,461,457 77,361,987 77,818,014 77,910,007 77,759,674 77,308,277 1,156,181,778
+
+After-tax net cash flow ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768 937,411,859 94,034,394 95,902,564 97,531,980 99,037,970 100,374,395 100,670,314 98,013,035 101,999,445 104,104,348 100,223,628 101,505,229 102,650,803 103,476,514 102,322,811 100,633,682 104,371,601 105,728,350 106,676,042 107,418,409 92,998,667 77,936,763 74,392,557 75,461,457 77,361,987 77,818,014 77,910,007 77,759,674 77,308,277 1,156,181,778
+After-tax cumulative IRR (%) NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN 2.57 7.06 10.68 13.46 15.55 17.13 18.32 19.19 19.88 20.42 20.82 21.14 21.39 21.60 21.75 21.88 21.98 22.06 22.13 22.18 22.22 22.25 22.27 22.28 22.30 22.31 22.32 22.33 22.33 22.40
+After-tax cumulative NPV ($) -35,041,575 -95,381,022 -178,587,203 -408,943,473 -594,576,116 -129,002,766 -88,399,971 -52,399,271 -20,569,075 7,530,874 32,290,170 53,878,959 72,152,480 88,685,331 103,355,339 115,633,777 126,444,954 135,950,092 144,280,176 151,441,471 157,564,609 163,085,696 167,948,034 172,213,163 175,947,002 178,757,382 180,804,968 182,504,154 184,002,625 185,338,181 186,506,136 187,522,737 188,404,849 189,167,290 199,080,591
+
+AFTER-TAX LCOE AND PPA PRICE
+Annual costs ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768 552,192,737 -293,520,048 -294,693,568 -295,819,980 -296,942,172 -298,046,732 -298,831,937 -298,631,877 -300,806,736 -302,378,106 -309,206,911 -310,660,020 -312,130,361 -313,553,901 -314,314,636 -314,958,457 -317,722,739 -319,691,411 -321,609,250 -323,559,665 -340,535,371 -357,396,015 -358,118,528 -360,710,981 -363,768,151 -366,448,908 -369,169,127 -371,986,658 -374,892,677 702,879,682
+PPA revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 453,302,095
+Electricity to grid (kWh) 0 0 0 0 0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
+
+Present value of annual costs ($) 1,298,529,377
+
+Present value of annual energy costs ($) 1,298,529,377
+Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 15,275,465,377
+LCOE Levelized cost of energy nominal (cents/kWh) 8.50
+
+Present value of PPA revenue ($) 1,497,609,968
+Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 15,275,465,377
+LPPA Levelized PPA price nominal (cents/kWh) 9.80
+
+PROJECT STATE INCOME TAXES
+EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+State taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State taxable IBI income ($) 0
+State taxable CBI income ($) 0
+minus:
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
+Total state tax depreciation ($) 0 60,897,179 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 60,897,179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+equals:
+State taxable income ($) 0 50,003,614 -7,135,017 -2,579,972 1,803,874 6,179,644 10,497,044 13,612,721 13,002,601 21,407,067 27,534,596 25,957,738 31,476,834 37,082,900 42,550,854 45,699,887 48,466,388 58,780,502 66,311,788 73,701,838 81,248,920 149,907,552 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
+
+State income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
+
+PROJECT FEDERAL INCOME TAXES
+EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal taxable IBI income ($) 0
+Federal taxable CBI income ($) 0
+Federal taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+minus:
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
+Total federal tax depreciation ($) 0 60,897,179 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 60,897,179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+equals:
+Federal taxable income ($) 0 47,728,450 -6,810,374 -2,462,584 1,721,798 5,898,471 10,019,429 12,993,342 12,410,982 20,433,045 26,281,772 24,776,661 30,044,638 35,395,628 40,614,790 43,620,542 46,261,168 56,105,990 63,294,601 70,348,404 77,552,094 143,086,758 208,277,731 211,465,045 221,028,891 232,220,190 242,197,993 252,373,032 262,945,430 273,890,125 1,651,874,992
+
+Federal income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21
+Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -10,022,975 1,430,178 517,143 -361,577 -1,238,679 -2,104,080 -2,728,602 -2,606,306 -4,290,940 -5,519,172 -5,203,099 -6,309,374 -7,433,082 -8,529,106 -9,160,314 -9,714,845 -11,782,258 -13,291,866 -14,773,165 -16,285,940 -30,048,219 -43,738,323 -44,407,660 -46,416,067 -48,766,240 -50,861,579 -52,998,337 -55,218,540 -57,516,926 -346,893,748
+
+CASH INCENTIVES
+Federal IBI income ($) 0
+State IBI income ($) 0
+Utility IBI income ($) 0
+Other IBI income ($) 0
+Total IBI income ($) 0
+
+Federal CBI income ($) 0
+State CBI income ($) 0
+Utility CBI income ($) 0
+Other CBI income ($) 0
+Total CBI income ($) 0
+
+Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Total PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+TAX CREDITS
+Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Federal ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal ITC percent income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal ITC total income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+State ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State ITC percent income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+DEBT REPAYMENT
+Debt balance ($) 1,975,710,809 1,954,795,137 1,932,415,368 1,908,469,015 1,882,846,418 1,855,430,239 1,826,094,927 1,794,706,143 1,761,120,145 1,725,183,127 1,686,730,517 1,645,586,225 1,601,561,832 1,554,455,732 1,504,052,205 1,450,120,431 1,392,413,432 1,330,666,944 1,264,598,202 1,193,904,647 1,118,262,544 1,037,325,494 950,722,850 858,058,021 758,906,654 652,814,691 539,296,291 417,831,603 287,864,387 148,799,466 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
+Debt principal payment ($) 0 20,915,672 22,379,769 23,946,353 25,622,597 27,416,179 29,335,312 31,388,784 33,585,998 35,937,018 38,452,610 41,144,292 44,024,393 47,106,100 50,403,527 53,931,774 57,706,998 61,746,488 66,068,742 70,693,554 75,642,103 80,937,050 86,602,644 92,664,829 99,151,367 106,091,963 113,518,400 121,464,688 129,967,216 139,064,921 148,799,466
+Debt total payment ($) 0 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428
+
+DSCR (DEBT FRACTION)
+EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+minus:
+Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+equals:
+Cash available for debt service (CAFDS) ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+Debt total payment ($) 0 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428
+DSCR (pre-tax) 0.0 1.57 1.58 1.60 1.62 1.63 1.65 1.65 1.64 1.67 1.70 1.67 1.69 1.70 1.72 1.71 1.71 1.75 1.77 1.78 1.80 1.82 1.83 1.81 1.83 1.86 1.88 1.90 1.91 1.93 10.94
+
+RESERVES
+Reserves working capital funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves working capital disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves working capital balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves debt service funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves debt service disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves debt service balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+
+Reserves total reserves balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Interest on reserves (%/year) 1.75
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+ ***EXTENDED ECONOMICS***
+
+ Royalty Holder NPV: 137.99 MUSD
+ Royalty Holder Average Annual Revenue: 10.60 MUSD/yr
+ Royalty Holder Total Revenue: 370.86 MUSD
diff --git a/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.txt b/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..c76b92612
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/geophires_docs/previous_versions/Fervo_Project_Cape-5_2026-07.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+# Case Study: 500 MWe EGS Project Modeled on Fervo Cape Station Phase II
+# See documentation: https://softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.html
+
+# *** ECONOMIC/FINANCIAL PARAMETERS ***
+# *************************************
+Economic Model, 5, -- The SAM Single Owner PPA economic model is used to calculate financial results including LCOE, NPV, IRR, and pro-forma cash flow analysis. See [GEOPHIRES documentation of SAM Economic Models](https://softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/SAM-Economic-Models.html) for details on how System Advisor Model financial models are integrated into GEOPHIRES.
+Inflation Rate, .027, -- US inflation as of December 2025. Note: [2024b ATB models lower inflation](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024b/definitions#inflation).
+
+Starting Electricity Sale Price, 0.095, -- Aligns with Geysers - Sacramento pricing in [2024b ATB](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024/geothermal) (NREL, 2025). See Sensitivity Analysis for effect of different prices on results.
+Electricity Escalation Rate Per Year, 0.00057, -- Calibrated to reach $100/MWh at project year 11
+Ending Electricity Sale Price, 1, -- Note that this value does not directly determine price at the end of the project life, but rather as a cap as the maximum price to which the starting price can escalate.
+Electricity Escalation Start Year, 1
+
+Fraction of Investment in Bonds, .7, -- Approximate debt required to cover CAPEX after $1 billion sponsor equity per [Matson, 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fervo-energy-technology-day-2024-entering-geothermal-decade-matson-n4stc/). Note that this source says that Fervo ultimately wants to target “15% sponsor equity, 15% bridge loan, and 70% construction to term loans”, but this case study does not attempt to model that capital structure precisely.
+Discount Rate, 0.12, -- Typical discount rates for higher-risk projects may be 12–15%.
+Inflated Bond Interest Rate, .07, -- 2024b ATB (NREL, 2025)
+
+Inflated Bond Interest Rate During Construction, 0.105, -- Higher than interest rate during normal operation to account for increased risk of default prior to COD. Value aligns with ATB discount rate (NREL, 2025).
+Bond Financing Start Year, -2, -- Equity-only for first 2 construction years (ATB)
+
+Construction Years, 5, -- Ground broken in 2023 (Fervo Energy, 2023). Expected to reach full scale production in 2028 (Fervo Energy, 2025). See [GEOPHIRES documentation](SAM-EM_Multiple-Construction-Years.html) for details on how construction years affect CAPEX, IRR, and other calculations.
+
+# ATB advanced scenario
+# Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.09,0.28,0.1,0.34,0.28
+
+# DOE scenario (alternative)
+# Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.014,0.027,0.137,0.274,0.548
+
+# DOE-ATB hybrid scenario
+Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.014,0.027,0.139,0.431,0.389
+
+Investment Tax Credit Rate, 0.3, -- Geothermal Drilling and Completions Apprenticeship Program ensures compliance with ITC labor requirements (Southern Utah University, 2024).
+Combined Income Tax Rate, .2555, -- Federal Corporate Income Tax Rate of 21% plus Utah Corporate Franchise and Income Tax Rate of 4.55%. (Note: This input uses a simple summation of statutory rates; the effective combined rate calculated in the model may differ due to standard federal-state tax interactions.)
+Property Tax Rate, 0.0022, -- Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA) tax differential incentive
+
+Capital Cost for Power Plant for Electricity Generation, 1900, -- [US DOE, 2021](https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/Waste_Heat_to_Power_Fact_Sheet.pdf). Pricing information not publicly available for Turboden or Baker Hughes Gen 2 ORC units (Turboden, 2025; Jacobs, 2025).
+Exploration Capital Cost, 30, -- Equivalent to 2024b ATB NF-EGS conservative scenario exploration assumption of 5 full-size wells (NREL, 2025), plus $1M for geophysical and field work, plus 15% contingency, plus 12% indirect costs.
+
+Well Drilling Cost Correlation, 3, -- 2025 NREL Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update (Akindipe and Witter, 2025).
+Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor, 0.9, -- 2024b Geothermal ATB ([NREL, 2025](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024b/geothermal)). Note: Fervo has claimed lower drilling costs equivalent to an adjustment factor of 0.8 (Latimer, 2025); the case study conservatively uses the higher ATB-aligned value. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different drilling costs on results.
+
+Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well, 4, -- The baseline stimulation cost is calibrated from costs of high-intensity U.S. shale wells (Baytex Energy, 2024; Quantum Proppant Technologies, 2020), which are the closest technological analogue for multi-stage EGS (Gradl, 2018). Costs are also driven by the requirement for high-strength ceramic proppant rather than standard sand, which would crush or chemically degrade (diagenesis) over a 30-year lifecycle at 200℃ (Ko et al., 2023; Shiozawa and McClure, 2014) and the premium for ultra-high-temperature (HT) downhole tools. Note that all-in costs per well are higher than the baseline cost because they include additional indirect costs and contingency. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different stimulation costs on results.
+Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well, 4, -- See Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well
+
+Field Gathering System Capital Cost Adjustment Factor, 0.54, -- Gathering costs represent 2% of facilities CAPEX per [Matson, 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fervo-energy-technology-day-2024-entering-geothermal-decade-matson-n4stc/).
+
+Royalty Rate, 0.0175, -- The BLM royalty structure is 1.75% of gross proceeds from electricity sales for the first 10 years of production (Code of Federal Regulations, 2024).
+Royalty Rate Escalation Start Year, 11, -- After the first 10 years of production, the royalty rate escalates to 3.5%.
+Royalty Rate Escalation, 0.0175, -- Escalation at Year 11 from 1.75% to 3.5%.
+Royalty Rate Maximum, 0.035, -- No further escalation beyond 3.5%.
+
+
+# *** SURFACE & SUBSURFACE TECHNICAL PARAMETERS ***
+# *************************************************
+End-Use Option, 1, -- Electricity
+Power Plant Type, 2, -- Gen 2 ORC units (Turboden, 2025).
+Plant Lifetime, 30, -- Sets the project economic horizon, aligned with Fervo's anticipated 30-year well life (Fervo Energy, 2025). Modeling Distinction: While Fervo projects physical wellbore integrity for 30 years, GEOPHIRES simulates "redrilling events" to model thermal management of the reservoir volume. This treats the 30-year lifespan as an aggregate of shorter-lived thermal cycles delineated by discrete redrilling events occurring at intervals dictated by the Maximum Drawdown parameter. The modeled cost of each redrilling event is equivalent to the drilling and stimulation cost of the entire wellfield, serving as a conservative cost proxy for the major interventions (e.g., sidetracking and stimulating laterals into fresh rock, or drilling new wells if necessary) required to sustain the PPA target against thermal depletion.
+
+Surface Temperature, 13, -- Surface temperature near Milford, UT (38.4987670, -112.9163432) ([Project InnerSpace, 2025](https://geomap.projectinnerspace.org/test/)).
+
+Number of Segments, 3
+Gradient 1, 74, -- Sedimentary overburden. 200℃ at 8500 ft depth (Fercho et al. 2024); 228.89℃ at 9824 ft (Norbeck et al. 2024).
+Thickness 1, 2.5
+Gradient 2, 41, -- Crystalline reservoir
+Thickness 2, 0.5
+Gradient 3, 39.1, -- Sugarloaf appraisal
+
+Reservoir Depth, 2.68, -- Extrapolated from surface temperature, gradient, and average production temperature of shallower and deeper producers in Singh et al., 2025.
+
+Reservoir Density, 2800, -- phyllite + quartzite + diorite + granodiorite ([Norbeck et al., 2023](https://doi.org/10.31223/X52X0B))
+Reservoir Heat Capacity, 790
+Reservoir Thermal Conductivity, 3.05
+Reservoir Porosity, 0.0118
+
+Reservoir Model, 1, -- See the [reservoir engineering calibration section](#res-eng-params-calibration-section) for additional details.
+Reservoir Volume Option, 1, -- FRAC_NUM_SEP: Reservoir volume calculated with fracture separation and number of fractures as input
+
+Number of Fractures per Stimulated Well, 150, -- The model assumes an Extreme Limited Entry stimulation design (Fervo Energy, 2023) utilizing 12 stages with 15 clusters per stage (derived from Singh et al., 2025) and 81–85% stimulation success rate per 2024b ATB Moderate Scenario (NREL, 2025).
+Fracture Separation, 9.8255, -- Based on 30 foot cluster spacing (Singh et al., 2025) marginally uprated to align with long-term thermal decline behavior trend towards wider fracture spacing (Fercho et al., 2025).
+
+Fracture Shape, 4, -- Bench design and fracture geometry in Singh et al., 2025 are given in rectangular dimensions.
+Fracture Width, 305, -- Matches intra-bench well spacing of 500 ft (corresponding to fracture length of 1000 ft) (Singh. et al., 2025)
+Fracture Height, 100, -- Actual fracture geometry is irregular and heterogeneous; this height complies with the minimum height required by the implemented bench design (200 ft; 60.96 meters) and yields an effective fracture surface area consistent with simulation results in Singh. et al., 2025.
+
+Water Loss Fraction, 0.01, -- "Long-term modeling, calibrated to early field data, predicts circulation recapture rates exceeding 99%" ([Geothermal Mythbusting: Water Use and Impacts](https://fervoenergy.com/geothermal-mythbusting-water-use-and-impacts/); Fervo Energy, 2025). Modeling in Singh et al., 2025 predicts fluid loss of 0.36% to 0.49%.
+Water Cost Adjustment Factor, 2, -- Local scarcity may increase procurement costs. Development near/on land with active/shut-in oil and gas wells could potentially utilize waste water to recover losses and offset costs.
+
+Ambient Temperature, 11.17, -- Average annual temperature of Milford, Utah ([NCEI](https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/#dataset=normals-annualseasonal&timeframe=30&station=USC00425654)). Note that this value affects heat to power conversion efficiency. The effects of hourly and seasonal ambient temperature fluctuations on efficiency and power generation are not modeled in this version of the case study.
+
+Utilization Factor, .913, -- (DeGolyer and MacNaughton, 2024)
+Plant Outlet Pressure, 2000 psi, -- McClure, 2024; Singh et al., 2025.
+Circulation Pump Efficiency, 0.80
+
+# *** Well Bores Parameters ***
+
+Number of Production Wells, 56, -- Number of production wells required to produce net generation greater than the PPA minimum and total generation less than nameplate capacity (Gen 2 ORCs gross capacity).
+Number of Injection Wells per Production Well, 0.666, -- Modeled on the reference case 5-well bench pattern (3 producers : 2 injectors) described in Singh et al., 2025.
+
+Nonvertical Length per Multilateral Section, 5000 feet, -- Target lateral length given in environmental assessment (BLM, 2024). Note that lateral length is assumed to be an upper bound constraining the number of fractures per well for a given cluster spacing.
+Number of Multilateral Sections, 0, -- This parameter is set to 0 because, for this case study, the cost of horizontal drilling is included within the 'vertical drilling cost.' This approach allows us to more directly convey the overall well drilling and completion cost.
+
+Production Flow Rate per Well, 107, -- Cape Station pilot testing reported a sustained flow rate of 95–100 kg/s and maximum flow rate of 107 kg/s (Fervo Energy, 2024). Modeling by Singh et al. suggests initial flow rates of 120–130 kg/sec that gradually decrease over time (Singh et al., 2025). The case study flow rate is chosen both as a conservative target for long-term sustainability and to achieve a more economically favorable drawdown and redrilling schedule.
+# The ATB Advanced Scenario models sustained flow rates of 110 kg/s (NREL, 2024).
+
+Production Well Diameter, 8.535, -- Inner diameter of 9⅝ inch casing size, the next standard casing size up from 7 inches, implied by announcement of "increasing casing diameter" (Fervo Energy, 2025).
+Injection Well Diameter, 8.535, -- See Production Well Diameter
+
+Production Wellhead Pressure, 303 psi, -- Modeled at a constant 300 psi in Singh et al., 2025. We use a marginally uprated value to conform to GEOPHIRES's calculated minimum wellhead pressure and nominally align with the gradual increase in WHP for constant flow rates modeled by Singh et al.
+
+Injectivity Index, 1.38, -- Based on ATB Conservative Scenario (NREL, 2025) derated to align with expected parasitic loads of 15–20% and per analyses that suggest lower productivity/injectivitity (Xing et al., 2025; Yearsley and Kombrink, 2024).
+Productivity Index, 1.13, -- See Injectivity Index
+
+Ramey Production Wellbore Model, True, -- Ramey's model estimates the geofluid temperature drop in production wells
+Injection Temperature, 53.6, -- Calibrated with GEOPHIRES model-calculated reinjection temperature (Beckers and McCabe, 2019). Close to upper bound of Project Red injection temperatures (75–125℉; 23.89–51.67℃) (Norbeck and Latimer, 2023). Note: GEOPHIRES enforces a thermodynamic optimum that overrides higher values, such as the 85°C ORC outlet temperature specified in Cape Station's plant design (DeGolyer and MacNaughton, 2024) (intended for silica scaling mitigation), resulting in a "maximum theoretical power" scenario. Support for higher reinjection temperatures may be added in future GEOPHIRES versions.
+Injection Wellbore Temperature Gain, 3, -- Empirical estimate for high-flow rate wells where rapid fluid velocity minimizes heat uptake during descent (Ramey, 1962).
+
+Maximum Drawdown, 0.0025, -- This value represents the fractional drop in production temperature compared to the initial temperature that is allowed before the wellfield is redrilled. It is calibrated to maintain the PPA minimum net electricity generation requirement. It is a very small percentage because it is relative to the initial production temperature; the temperature quickly rises higher due to thermal conditioning and plateaus until breakthrough, so any drawdown relative to the initial value signals that the temperature has already declined from its stabilized peak.
+
+# *** SIMULATION PARAMETERS ***
+# *****************************
+Maximum Temperature, 500
+Time steps per year, 12
+
+Project Latitude, 38.506196
+Project Longitude, -112.918155
diff --git a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out
index 395131edf..208431a71 100644
--- a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out
+++ b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out
@@ -4,22 +4,22 @@
Simulation Metadata
----------------------
- GEOPHIRES Version: 3.14.1
- Simulation Date: 2026-06-18
- Simulation Time: 10:42
- Calculation Time: 1.819 sec
+ GEOPHIRES Version: 3.17.0
+ Simulation Date: 2026-09-24
+ Simulation Time: 10:48
+ Calculation Time: 1.780 sec
***SUMMARY OF RESULTS***
End-Use Option: Electricity
- Average Net Electricity Production: 510.16 MW
- Electricity breakeven price: 8.50 cents/kWh
- Total CAPEX: 2865.75 MUSD
- Total CAPEX ($/kW): 5595 USD/kW
- Number of production wells: 56
- Number of injection wells: 38
+ Average Net Electricity Production: 523.70 MW
+ Electricity breakeven price: 10.58 cents/kWh
+ Total CAPEX: 3733.93 MUSD
+ Total CAPEX ($/kW): 7099 USD/kW
+ Number of production wells: 50
+ Number of injection wells: 34
Flowrate per production well: 107.0 kg/sec
- Well depth: 2.7 kilometer
+ Well depth: 3.1 kilometer
Segment 1 Geothermal gradient: 74 degC/km
Segment 1 Thickness: 2.5 kilometer
Segment 2 Geothermal gradient: 41 degC/km
@@ -31,32 +31,32 @@ Simulation Metadata
Economic Model = SAM Single Owner PPA
Real Discount Rate: 12.00 %
- Nominal Discount Rate: 15.02 %
- WACC: 8.31 %
- Investment Tax Credit: 859.72 MUSD
+ Nominal Discount Rate: 15.36 %
+ WACC: 8.41 %
+ Investment Tax Credit: 1120.18 MUSD
Project lifetime: 30 yr
Capacity factor: 91.3 %
- Project NPV: 199.08 MUSD
- After-tax IRR: 22.40 %
- Project VIR=PI=PIR: 1.33
- Project MOIC: 4.31
- Project Payback Period: 5.95 yr
- Estimated Jobs Created: 1273
+ Project NPV: 337.31 MUSD
+ After-tax IRR: 23.54 %
+ Project VIR=PI=PIR: 1.38
+ Project MOIC: 4.88
+ Project Payback Period: 4.96 yr
+ Estimated Jobs Created: 1347
***ENGINEERING PARAMETERS***
- Number of Production Wells: 56
- Number of Injection Wells: 38
- Well depth: 2.7 kilometer
+ Number of Production Wells: 50
+ Number of Injection Wells: 34
+ Well depth: 3.1 kilometer
Water loss rate: 1.0 %
Pump efficiency: 80.0 %
Injection temperature: 56.6 degC
Production Wellbore heat transmission calculated with Ramey's model
- Average production well temperature drop: 0.2 degC
+ Average production well temperature drop: 1.0 degC
Flowrate per production well: 107.0 kg/sec
- Injection well casing ID: 8.535 in
- Production well casing ID: 8.535 in
- Number of times redrilling: 3
+ Injection well casing ID: 7.825 in
+ Production well casing ID: 7.825 in
+ Number of times redrilling: 2
Power plant type: Supercritical ORC
@@ -75,20 +75,20 @@ Simulation Metadata
***RESERVOIR PARAMETERS***
Reservoir Model = Multiple Parallel Fractures Model (Gringarten)
- Bottom-hole temperature: 205.38 degC
+ Bottom-hole temperature: 220.85 degC
Fracture model = Rectangular
Well separation: fracture height: 100.00 meter
Fracture width: 305.00 meter
Fracture area: 30500.00 m**2
Reservoir volume calculated with fracture separation and number of fractures as input
- Number of fractures: 14100
+ Number of fractures: 18900
Fracture separation: 9.83 meter
- Reservoir volume: 4225156597 m**3
- Reservoir hydrostatic pressure: 25324.54 kPa
+ Reservoir volume: 5663609797 m**3
+ Reservoir hydrostatic pressure: 28782.99 kPa
Plant outlet pressure: 13789.51 kPa
- Production wellhead pressure: 2089.11 kPa
- Productivity Index: 1.13 kg/sec/bar
- Injectivity Index: 1.38 kg/sec/bar
+ Production wellhead pressure: 2702.05 kPa
+ Productivity Index: 0.98 kg/sec/bar
+ Injectivity Index: 1.20 kg/sec/bar
Reservoir density: 2800.00 kg/m**3
Reservoir thermal conductivity: 3.05 W/m/K
Reservoir heat capacity: 790.00 J/kg/K
@@ -96,58 +96,63 @@ Simulation Metadata
***RESERVOIR SIMULATION RESULTS***
- Maximum Production Temperature: 203.3 degC
- Average Production Temperature: 203.0 degC
- Minimum Production Temperature: 201.5 degC
- Initial Production Temperature: 201.9 degC
- Average Reservoir Heat Extraction: 3670.68 MW
+ Maximum Production Temperature: 218.4 degC
+ Average Production Temperature: 218.1 degC
+ Minimum Production Temperature: 216.2 degC
+ Initial Production Temperature: 216.7 degC
+ Average Reservoir Heat Extraction: 3616.52 MW
Production Wellbore Heat Transmission Model = Ramey Model
- Average Production Well Temperature Drop: 0.2 degC
- Average Injection Well Pump Pressure Drop: -1181.6 kPa
- Average Production Well Pump Pressure Drop: 10257.1 kPa
+ Average Production Well Temperature Drop: 1.0 degC
+ Average Injection Well Pump Pressure Drop: 1729.9 kPa
+ Average Production Well Pump Pressure Drop: 12497.4 kPa
***CAPITAL COSTS (M$)***
- Exploration costs: 30.00 MUSD
- Drilling and completion costs: 436.98 MUSD
- Drilling and completion costs per well: 4.65 MUSD
- Stimulation costs: 454.02 MUSD
- Stimulation costs per well: 4.83 MUSD
- Surface power plant costs: 1467.83 MUSD
- Field gathering system costs: 48.33 MUSD
- Total surface equipment costs: 1516.16 MUSD
- Overnight Capital Cost: 2437.17 MUSD
- Inflation costs during construction: 285.92 MUSD
- Interest during construction: 142.66 MUSD
- Total CAPEX: 2865.75 MUSD
+ Exploration costs: 56.00 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs: 712.00 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs per vertical production well: 4.40 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs per vertical injection well: 4.40 MUSD
+ Drilling and completion costs per non-vertical section: 4.08 MUSD
+ Stimulation costs: 609.09 MUSD
+ Stimulation costs per well: 7.25 MUSD
+ Surface power plant costs: 1552.99 MUSD
+ Field gathering system costs: 50.20 MUSD
+ Total surface equipment costs: 1603.20 MUSD
+ One-time Flat License Fees Etc: 250.00 MUSD
+ Overnight Capital Cost: 3230.28 MUSD
+ Inflation costs during construction: 318.13 MUSD
+ Interest during construction: 185.52 MUSD
+ Total CAPEX: 3733.93 MUSD
***OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (M$/yr)***
- Wellfield maintenance costs: 5.81 MUSD/yr
- Power plant maintenance costs: 24.87 MUSD/yr
- Water costs: 3.19 MUSD/yr
- Redrilling costs: 89.10 MUSD/yr
- Average Annual Royalty Cost: 12.36 MUSD/yr
- Total operating and maintenance costs: 135.33 MUSD/yr
+ Wellfield maintenance costs: 8.58 MUSD/yr
+ Power plant maintenance costs: 26.18 MUSD/yr
+ Water costs: 2.85 MUSD/yr
+ Redrilling costs: 88.07 MUSD/yr
+ Annual License Fees Etc: 21.00 MUSD
+ Average Annual Royalty Cost: 16.66 MUSD/yr
+ Total operating and maintenance costs: 163.35 MUSD/yr
***SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS***
- Initial geofluid availability: 0.19 MW/(kg/s)
- Maximum Total Electricity Generation: 599.80 MW
- Average Total Electricity Generation: 597.81 MW
- Minimum Total Electricity Generation: 587.03 MW
- Initial Total Electricity Generation: 589.96 MW
- Maximum Net Electricity Generation: 512.21 MW
- Average Net Electricity Generation: 510.16 MW
- Minimum Net Electricity Generation: 499.10 MW
- Initial Net Electricity Generation: 502.22 MW
- Average Annual Total Electricity Generation: 4781.29 GWh
- Average Annual Net Electricity Generation: 4080.29 GWh
- Initial pumping power/net installed power: 17.47 %
- Average Pumping Power: 87.65 MW
- Heat to Power Conversion Efficiency: 13.90 %
+
+ Initial geofluid availability: 0.22 MW/(kg/s)
+ Maximum Total Electricity Generation: 634.60 MW
+ Average Total Electricity Generation: 632.38 MW
+ Minimum Total Electricity Generation: 620.27 MW
+ Initial Total Electricity Generation: 623.07 MW
+ Maximum Net Electricity Generation: 525.99 MW
+ Average Net Electricity Generation: 523.70 MW
+ Minimum Net Electricity Generation: 511.28 MW
+ Initial Net Electricity Generation: 514.30 MW
+ Average Annual Total Electricity Generation: 5057.80 GWh
+ Average Annual Net Electricity Generation: 4188.58 GWh
+ Initial pumping power/net installed power: 21.15 %
+ Average Pumping Power: 108.68 MW
+ Heat to Power Conversion Efficiency: 14.48 %
************************************************************
* HEATING, COOLING AND/OR ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION PROFILE *
@@ -155,36 +160,36 @@ Simulation Metadata
YEAR THERMAL GEOFLUID PUMP NET FIRST LAW
DRAWDOWN TEMPERATURE POWER POWER EFFICIENCY
(degC) (MW) (MW) (%)
- 1 1.0000 201.90 87.7368 502.2182 13.7848
- 2 1.0049 202.88 87.7057 509.2920 13.8852
- 3 1.0058 203.06 87.7000 510.6083 13.9038
- 4 1.0062 203.16 87.6970 511.2933 13.9134
- 5 1.0065 203.22 87.6950 511.7461 13.9198
- 6 1.0068 203.26 87.6939 512.0590 13.9242
- 7 1.0066 203.23 87.7011 511.8487 13.9212
- 8 1.0039 202.67 87.7758 507.7575 13.8627
- 9 1.0031 202.52 87.6882 506.7524 13.8497
- 10 1.0053 202.96 87.6819 509.8839 13.8939
- 11 1.0059 203.10 87.6700 510.9042 13.9083
- 12 1.0063 203.18 87.6532 511.5053 13.9170
- 13 1.0066 203.23 87.6347 511.9262 13.9231
- 14 1.0068 203.27 87.6198 512.1801 13.9269
- 15 1.0062 203.16 87.6271 511.3633 13.9153
- 16 1.0011 202.12 87.7574 503.8207 13.8073
- 17 1.0043 202.76 87.5963 508.5351 13.8760
- 18 1.0055 203.02 87.5948 510.3876 13.9021
- 19 1.0061 203.13 87.5942 511.2037 13.9135
- 20 1.0065 203.20 87.5941 511.7134 13.9207
- 21 1.0067 203.25 87.5943 512.0726 13.9257
- 22 1.0068 203.26 87.5978 512.1650 13.9270
- 23 1.0054 202.99 87.6375 510.1608 13.8983
- 24 1.0000 201.90 87.5945 502.3605 13.7887
- 25 1.0049 202.88 87.5946 509.4031 13.8883
- 26 1.0058 203.06 87.5948 510.7135 13.9067
- 27 1.0062 203.16 87.5949 511.3954 13.9162
- 28 1.0065 203.22 87.5950 511.8461 13.9225
- 29 1.0068 203.26 87.5954 512.1575 13.9269
- 30 1.0066 203.23 87.6039 511.9458 13.9238
+ 1 1.0000 216.67 108.7641 514.3027 14.3459
+ 2 1.0053 217.82 108.7294 521.9599 14.4555
+ 3 1.0063 218.04 108.7229 523.3973 14.4759
+ 4 1.0068 218.15 108.7195 524.1468 14.4865
+ 5 1.0072 218.23 108.7172 524.6432 14.4935
+ 6 1.0074 218.28 108.7156 525.0097 14.4987
+ 7 1.0076 218.33 108.7142 525.2982 14.5028
+ 8 1.0078 218.36 108.7132 525.5329 14.5061
+ 9 1.0079 218.39 108.7122 525.7370 14.5090
+ 10 1.0080 218.41 108.7121 525.8697 14.5109
+ 11 1.0080 218.40 108.7152 525.8133 14.5100
+ 12 1.0071 218.22 108.7398 524.5645 14.4921
+ 13 1.0030 217.31 108.8522 518.4502 14.4040
+ 14 1.0038 217.50 108.7064 519.8278 14.4255
+ 15 1.0058 217.94 108.7013 522.7334 14.4668
+ 16 1.0066 218.09 108.6923 523.7836 14.4817
+ 17 1.0070 218.19 108.6791 524.4140 14.4908
+ 18 1.0073 218.25 108.6627 524.8616 14.4973
+ 19 1.0075 218.30 108.6457 525.2068 14.5024
+ 20 1.0077 218.34 108.6303 525.4849 14.5066
+ 21 1.0079 218.37 108.6181 525.7161 14.5100
+ 22 1.0080 218.40 108.6097 525.9077 14.5128
+ 23 1.0080 218.41 108.6060 525.9938 14.5141
+ 24 1.0078 218.37 108.6116 525.6787 14.5095
+ 25 1.0060 217.98 108.6608 523.0589 14.4719
+ 26 0.9991 216.47 108.8487 512.8622 14.3240
+ 27 1.0050 217.76 108.5996 521.6761 14.4532
+ 28 1.0062 218.01 108.5996 523.3522 14.4769
+ 29 1.0068 218.14 108.5996 524.1651 14.4884
+ 30 1.0071 218.22 108.5997 524.6893 14.4958
*******************************************************************
@@ -193,285 +198,285 @@ Simulation Metadata
YEAR ELECTRICITY HEAT RESERVOIR PERCENTAGE OF
PROVIDED EXTRACTED HEAT CONTENT TOTAL HEAT MINED
(GWh/year) (GWh/year) (10^15 J) (%)
- 1 4054.7 29270.6 1285.13 7.58
- 2 4079.2 29356.0 1179.45 15.18
- 3 4086.7 29382.0 1073.67 22.79
- 4 4091.2 29397.4 967.84 30.40
- 5 4094.2 29408.0 861.97 38.01
- 6 4095.3 29411.9 756.09 45.62
- 7 4082.5 29368.1 650.37 53.23
- 8 4029.9 29185.9 545.30 60.78
- 9 4068.9 29319.4 439.75 68.37
- 10 4082.5 29366.7 334.03 75.98
- 11 4088.7 29387.9 228.23 83.59
- 12 4092.7 29401.3 122.39 91.20
- 13 4095.5 29410.6 16.51 98.81
- 14 4094.7 29407.5 -89.36 106.43
- 15 4068.1 29316.1 -194.90 114.02
- 16 4035.4 29201.6 -300.02 121.58
- 17 4076.0 29341.6 -405.65 129.17
- 18 4085.6 29375.1 -511.40 136.78
- 19 4090.7 29392.9 -617.22 144.39
- 20 4094.1 29404.9 -723.07 152.00
- 21 4096.2 29412.2 -828.96 159.62
- 22 4091.2 29395.1 -934.78 167.23
- 23 4043.0 29229.8 -1040.01 174.79
- 24 4055.6 29270.6 -1145.38 182.37
- 25 4080.1 29356.0 -1251.06 189.97
- 26 4087.6 29382.0 -1356.84 197.58
- 27 4092.0 29397.4 -1462.67 205.19
- 28 4095.0 29408.0 -1568.54 212.80
- 29 4096.1 29411.9 -1674.42 220.42
- 30 4085.0 29373.9 -1780.17 228.02
+ 1 4154.4 28810.9 1953.94 5.04
+ 2 4181.1 28900.9 1849.90 10.10
+ 3 4189.3 28928.4 1745.75 15.16
+ 4 4194.2 28944.8 1641.55 20.22
+ 5 4197.6 28956.2 1537.31 25.29
+ 6 4200.2 28965.0 1433.04 30.36
+ 7 4202.2 28972.0 1328.74 35.42
+ 8 4204.0 28977.8 1224.42 40.49
+ 9 4205.4 28982.5 1120.08 45.57
+ 10 4205.9 28984.2 1015.74 50.64
+ 11 4202.0 28971.3 911.44 55.70
+ 12 4176.2 28885.8 807.45 60.76
+ 13 4125.5 28715.3 704.08 65.78
+ 14 4171.9 28869.3 600.15 70.83
+ 15 4185.4 28914.6 496.05 75.89
+ 16 4191.8 28936.1 391.88 80.95
+ 17 4196.1 28950.0 287.66 86.02
+ 18 4199.2 28960.1 183.41 91.09
+ 19 4201.7 28968.0 79.12 96.15
+ 20 4203.7 28974.5 -25.19 101.22
+ 21 4205.4 28980.0 -129.51 106.29
+ 22 4206.6 28983.8 -233.86 111.37
+ 23 4206.2 28982.3 -338.19 116.44
+ 24 4196.6 28950.6 -442.41 121.50
+ 25 4150.3 28797.0 -546.08 126.54
+ 26 4143.0 28769.6 -649.65 131.57
+ 27 4180.1 28893.9 -753.67 136.63
+ 28 4189.2 28924.9 -857.80 141.69
+ 29 4194.4 28942.5 -961.99 146.75
+ 30 4197.9 28954.1 -1066.23 151.82
***************************
* SAM CASH FLOW PROFILE *
***************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Year -4 Year -3 Year -2 Year -1 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 Year 24 Year 25 Year 26 Year 27 Year 28 Year 29 Year 30
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Year -3 Year -2 Year -1 Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 Year 24 Year 25 Year 26 Year 27 Year 28 Year 29 Year 30
CONSTRUCTION
-Capital expenditure schedule [construction] (%) 1.40 2.70 13.90 43.10 38.90
-Overnight capital expenditure [construction] ($) -34,120,326 -65,803,486 -338,766,095 -1,050,418,611 -948,057,633
+Capital expenditure schedule [construction] (%) 4.10 13.90 43.10 38.90
+Overnight capital expenditure [construction] ($) -132,441,575 -449,009,240 -1,392,251,673 -1,256,579,817
plus:
-Inflation cost [construction] ($) -921,249 -3,601,359 -28,187,603 -118,123,001 -135,088,260
+Inflation cost [construction] ($) -3,973,247 -27,344,663 -129,099,321 -157,711,837
plus:
-Royalty supplemental payments [construction] ($) 0 0 0 0 0
+Royalty supplemental payments [construction] ($) 0 0 0 0
equals:
-Nominal capital expenditure [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -366,953,698 -1,168,541,612 -1,083,145,892
+Nominal capital expenditure [construction] ($) -136,414,822 -476,353,903 -1,521,350,994 -1,414,291,654
-Issuance of equity [construction] ($) 35,041,575 69,404,845 110,086,109 350,562,484 324,943,768
-Issuance of debt [construction] ($) 0 0 256,867,589 817,979,128 758,202,125
-Debt balance [construction] ($) 0 0 256,867,589 1,101,817,814 1,975,710,809
-Debt interest payment [construction] ($) 0 0 0 26,971,097 115,690,870
+Issuance of equity [construction] ($) 136,414,822 142,906,171 456,405,298 424,287,496
+Issuance of debt [construction] ($) 0 333,447,732 1,064,945,696 990,004,158
+Debt balance [construction] ($) 0 333,447,732 1,433,405,440 2,573,917,169
+Debt interest payment [construction] ($) 0 0 35,012,012 150,507,571
-Installed cost [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -366,953,698 -1,195,512,709 -1,198,836,763
-After-tax net cash flow [construction] ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768
+Installed cost [construction] ($) -136,414,822 -476,353,903 -1,556,363,006 -1,564,799,225
+After-tax net cash flow [construction] ($) -136,414,822 -142,906,171 -456,405,298 -424,287,496
ENERGY
-Electricity to grid (kWh) 0.0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
-Electricity from grid (kWh) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
-Electricity to grid net (kWh) 0.0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
+Electricity to grid (kWh) 0.0 4,154,494,569 4,181,212,950 4,189,406,019 4,194,260,188 4,197,662,540 4,200,258,425 4,202,338,883 4,204,085,390 4,205,483,759 4,205,957,420 4,202,077,639 4,176,289,208 4,125,595,949 4,172,045,018 4,185,497,243 4,191,945,128 4,196,175,382 4,199,312,558 4,201,791,085 4,203,809,718 4,205,525,496 4,206,682,370 4,206,256,569 4,196,703,431 4,150,395,274 4,143,145,859 4,180,156,805 4,189,338,914 4,194,530,322 4,197,975,491
+Electricity from grid (kWh) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
+Electricity to grid net (kWh) 0.0 4,154,494,569 4,181,212,950 4,189,406,019 4,194,260,188 4,197,662,540 4,200,258,425 4,202,338,883 4,204,085,390 4,205,483,759 4,205,957,420 4,202,077,639 4,176,289,208 4,125,595,949 4,172,045,018 4,185,497,243 4,191,945,128 4,196,175,382 4,199,312,558 4,201,791,085 4,203,809,718 4,205,525,496 4,206,682,370 4,206,256,569 4,196,703,431 4,150,395,274 4,143,145,859 4,180,156,805 4,189,338,914 4,194,530,322 4,197,975,491
REVENUE
-PPA price (cents/kWh) 0.0 9.50 9.50 9.56 9.61 9.67 9.73 9.79 9.84 9.90 9.96 10.01 10.07 10.13 10.18 10.24 10.30 10.36 10.41 10.47 10.53 10.58 10.64 10.70 10.75 10.81 10.87 10.93 10.98 11.04 11.10
-PPA revenue ($) 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 453,302,095
-Curtailment payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Capacity payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Salvage value ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,432,874,795
-Total revenue ($) 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 1,886,176,890
+PPA price (cents/kWh) 0.0 11.50 11.68 11.87 12.05 12.23 12.42 12.60 12.78 12.96 13.15 13.33 13.51 13.70 13.88 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06 14.06
+PPA revenue ($) 0 477,766,875 488,491,109 497,114,918 505,366,410 513,458,082 521,462,083 529,410,652 537,324,154 545,198,915 552,957,222 560,136,949 564,341,961 565,041,621 579,038,128 588,480,912 589,387,485 589,982,259 590,423,346 590,771,827 591,055,646 591,296,885 591,459,541 591,399,674 590,056,502 583,545,575 582,526,308 587,730,047 589,021,051 589,750,963 590,235,354
+Curtailment payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Capacity payment revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Salvage value ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,866,965,478
+Total revenue ($) 0 477,766,875 488,491,109 497,114,918 505,366,410 513,458,082 521,462,083 529,410,652 537,324,154 545,198,915 552,957,222 560,136,949 564,341,961 565,041,621 579,038,128 588,480,912 589,387,485 589,982,259 590,423,346 590,771,827 591,055,646 591,296,885 591,459,541 591,399,674 590,056,502 583,545,575 582,526,308 587,730,047 589,021,051 589,750,963 2,457,200,832
-Property tax net assessed value ($) 0 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589 2,865,749,589
+Property tax net assessed value ($) 0 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956 3,733,930,956
OPERATING EXPENSES
-O&M fixed expense ($) 0 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589 122,972,589
-Royalty rate (%) 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50
-O&M production-based expense ($) 0 6,741,335 6,782,203 6,835,432 6,883,659 6,929,652 6,972,370 6,991,289 6,941,286 7,049,108 7,113,443 14,330,069 14,425,784 14,517,341 14,596,065 14,582,311 14,545,725 14,773,302 14,889,692 14,989,985 15,084,233 15,173,691 15,236,647 15,137,888 15,266,035 15,439,555 15,549,342 15,647,770 15,741,122 15,827,033 15,865,573
-O&M capacity-based expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Fuel expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Electricity purchase ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Property tax expense ($) 0 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649 6,304,649
-Insurance expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Total operating expenses ($) 0 136,018,573 136,059,441 136,112,670 136,160,897 136,206,891 136,249,608 136,268,527 136,218,524 136,326,346 136,390,681 143,607,307 143,703,022 143,794,579 143,873,303 143,859,549 143,822,963 144,050,540 144,166,930 144,267,223 144,361,471 144,450,929 144,513,885 144,415,126 144,543,273 144,716,793 144,826,580 144,925,008 145,018,360 145,104,271 145,142,811
-
-EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+O&M fixed expense ($) 0 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464 146,685,464
+Royalty rate (%) 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50
+O&M production-based expense ($) 0 8,360,920 8,548,594 8,699,511 8,843,912 8,985,516 9,125,586 9,264,686 9,403,173 9,540,981 9,676,751 19,604,793 19,751,969 19,776,457 20,266,334 20,596,832 20,628,562 20,649,379 20,664,817 20,677,014 20,686,948 20,695,391 20,701,084 20,698,989 20,651,978 20,424,095 20,388,421 20,570,552 20,615,737 20,641,284 20,658,237
+O&M capacity-based expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Fuel expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Electricity purchase ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Property tax expense ($) 0 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648 8,214,648
+Insurance expense ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Total operating expenses ($) 0 163,261,032 163,448,706 163,599,623 163,744,024 163,885,628 164,025,698 164,164,798 164,303,285 164,441,093 164,576,863 174,504,905 174,652,080 174,676,569 175,166,446 175,496,944 175,528,674 175,549,491 175,564,929 175,577,126 175,587,059 175,595,503 175,601,196 175,599,100 175,552,089 175,324,207 175,288,533 175,470,663 175,515,849 175,541,396 175,558,349
+
+EBITDA ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
-EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
-Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+EBITDA ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
plus PBI if not available for debt service:
-Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
-Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 110,900,793 114,659,341 119,214,385 123,598,231 127,974,002 132,291,402 135,407,079 134,796,958 143,201,425 149,328,954 147,752,096 153,271,192 158,877,257 164,345,211 167,494,244 170,260,746 180,574,860 188,106,145 195,496,195 203,043,277 210,804,730 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
+Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 180,174,202 178,266,805 176,225,890 174,042,112 171,705,469 169,205,261 166,530,038 163,667,550 160,604,687 157,327,424 153,820,753 150,068,615 146,053,827 141,758,004 137,161,473 132,243,186 126,980,618 121,349,670 115,324,556 108,877,684 101,979,531 94,598,507 86,700,812 78,250,278 69,208,206 59,533,190 49,180,922 38,103,995 26,251,684 13,569,711
+Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 134,331,641 146,775,598 157,289,405 167,580,274 177,866,985 188,231,125 198,715,816 209,353,320 220,153,134 231,052,934 231,811,291 239,621,265 244,311,226 262,113,678 275,822,495 281,615,626 287,452,150 293,508,747 299,870,145 306,590,903 313,721,851 321,259,838 329,099,762 336,254,135 339,013,162 347,704,586 363,078,462 375,401,207 387,957,884 2,268,072,772
INVESTING ACTIVITIES
-Total installed cost ($) -2,865,749,589
-Debt closing costs ($) 0
-Debt up-front fee ($) 0
+Total installed cost ($) -3,733,930,956
+Debt closing costs ($) 0
+Debt up-front fee ($) 0
minus:
-Total IBI income ($) 0
-Total CBI income ($) 0
+Total IBI income ($) 0
+Total CBI income ($) 0
equals:
-Purchase of property ($) -2,865,749,589
+Purchase of property ($) -3,733,930,956
plus:
-Reserve (increase)/decrease debt service ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve (increase)/decrease working capital ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve (increase)/decrease receivables ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve capital spending major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve capital spending major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserve capital spending major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease debt service ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease working capital ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease receivables ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve (increase)/decrease major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 1 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 2 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserve capital spending major equipment 3 ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
equals:
-Cash flow from investing activities ($) -2,865,749,589 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Cash flow from investing activities ($) -3,733,930,956 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
-Issuance of equity ($) 890,038,781
-Size of debt ($) 1,975,710,809
+Issuance of equity ($) 1,160,013,787
+Size of debt ($) 2,573,917,169
minus:
-Debt principal payment ($) 0 20,915,672 22,379,769 23,946,353 25,622,597 27,416,179 29,335,312 31,388,784 33,585,998 35,937,018 38,452,610 41,144,292 44,024,393 47,106,100 50,403,527 53,931,774 57,706,998 61,746,488 66,068,742 70,693,554 75,642,103 80,937,050 86,602,644 92,664,829 99,151,367 106,091,963 113,518,400 121,464,688 129,967,216 139,064,921 148,799,466
+Debt principal payment ($) 0 27,248,526 29,155,923 31,196,837 33,380,616 35,717,259 38,217,467 40,892,690 43,755,178 46,818,040 50,095,303 53,601,974 57,354,113 61,368,901 65,664,724 70,261,254 75,179,542 80,442,110 86,073,058 92,098,172 98,545,044 105,443,197 112,824,221 120,721,916 129,172,450 138,214,522 147,889,538 158,241,806 169,318,732 181,171,043 193,853,016
equals:
-Cash flow from financing activities ($) 2,865,749,589 -20,915,672 -22,379,769 -23,946,353 -25,622,597 -27,416,179 -29,335,312 -31,388,784 -33,585,998 -35,937,018 -38,452,610 -41,144,292 -44,024,393 -47,106,100 -50,403,527 -53,931,774 -57,706,998 -61,746,488 -66,068,742 -70,693,554 -75,642,103 -80,937,050 -86,602,644 -92,664,829 -99,151,367 -106,091,963 -113,518,400 -121,464,688 -129,967,216 -139,064,921 -148,799,466
+Cash flow from financing activities ($) 3,733,930,956 -27,248,526 -29,155,923 -31,196,837 -33,380,616 -35,717,259 -38,217,467 -40,892,690 -43,755,178 -46,818,040 -50,095,303 -53,601,974 -57,354,113 -61,368,901 -65,664,724 -70,261,254 -75,179,542 -80,442,110 -86,073,058 -92,098,172 -98,545,044 -105,443,197 -112,824,221 -120,721,916 -129,172,450 -138,214,522 -147,889,538 -158,241,806 -169,318,732 -181,171,043 -193,853,016
PROJECT RETURNS
Pre-tax Cash Flow:
-Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 110,900,793 114,659,341 119,214,385 123,598,231 127,974,002 132,291,402 135,407,079 134,796,958 143,201,425 149,328,954 147,752,096 153,271,192 158,877,257 164,345,211 167,494,244 170,260,746 180,574,860 188,106,145 195,496,195 203,043,277 210,804,730 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
-Cash flow from investing activities ($) -2,865,749,589 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Cash flow from financing activities ($) 2,865,749,589 -20,915,672 -22,379,769 -23,946,353 -25,622,597 -27,416,179 -29,335,312 -31,388,784 -33,585,998 -35,937,018 -38,452,610 -41,144,292 -44,024,393 -47,106,100 -50,403,527 -53,931,774 -57,706,998 -61,746,488 -66,068,742 -70,693,554 -75,642,103 -80,937,050 -86,602,644 -92,664,829 -99,151,367 -106,091,963 -113,518,400 -121,464,688 -129,967,216 -139,064,921 -148,799,466
-Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+Cash flow from operating activities ($) 0 134,331,641 146,775,598 157,289,405 167,580,274 177,866,985 188,231,125 198,715,816 209,353,320 220,153,134 231,052,934 231,811,291 239,621,265 244,311,226 262,113,678 275,822,495 281,615,626 287,452,150 293,508,747 299,870,145 306,590,903 313,721,851 321,259,838 329,099,762 336,254,135 339,013,162 347,704,586 363,078,462 375,401,207 387,957,884 2,268,072,772
+Cash flow from investing activities ($) -3,733,930,956 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Cash flow from financing activities ($) 3,733,930,956 -27,248,526 -29,155,923 -31,196,837 -33,380,616 -35,717,259 -38,217,467 -40,892,690 -43,755,178 -46,818,040 -50,095,303 -53,601,974 -57,354,113 -61,368,901 -65,664,724 -70,261,254 -75,179,542 -80,442,110 -86,073,058 -92,098,172 -98,545,044 -105,443,197 -112,824,221 -120,721,916 -129,172,450 -138,214,522 -147,889,538 -158,241,806 -169,318,732 -181,171,043 -193,853,016
+Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 107,083,116 117,619,675 126,092,568 134,199,658 142,149,726 150,013,658 157,823,127 165,598,142 173,335,094 180,957,631 178,209,317 182,267,153 182,942,325 196,448,954 205,561,241 206,436,084 207,010,040 207,435,689 207,771,973 208,045,859 208,278,654 208,435,618 208,377,846 207,081,685 200,798,641 199,815,048 204,836,656 206,082,475 206,786,840 2,074,219,755
Pre-tax Returns:
-Issuance of equity ($) 890,038,781
-Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
-Total pre-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
+Issuance of equity ($) 1,160,013,787
+Total pre-tax cash flow ($) 0 107,083,116 117,619,675 126,092,568 134,199,658 142,149,726 150,013,658 157,823,127 165,598,142 173,335,094 180,957,631 178,209,317 182,267,153 182,942,325 196,448,954 205,561,241 206,436,084 207,010,040 207,435,689 207,771,973 208,045,859 208,278,654 208,435,618 208,377,846 207,081,685 200,798,641 199,815,048 204,836,656 206,082,475 206,786,840 2,074,219,755
+Total pre-tax returns ($) -1,160,013,787 107,083,116 117,619,675 126,092,568 134,199,658 142,149,726 150,013,658 157,823,127 165,598,142 173,335,094 180,957,631 178,209,317 182,267,153 182,942,325 196,448,954 205,561,241 206,436,084 207,010,040 207,435,689 207,771,973 208,045,859 208,278,654 208,435,618 208,377,846 207,081,685 200,798,641 199,815,048 204,836,656 206,082,475 206,786,840 2,074,219,755
After-tax Returns:
-Total pre-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 89,985,121 92,279,572 95,268,032 97,975,634 100,557,823 102,956,090 104,018,295 101,210,960 107,264,406 110,876,344 106,607,804 109,246,799 111,771,157 113,941,684 113,562,470 112,553,748 118,828,372 122,037,403 124,802,641 127,401,174 129,867,680 131,603,465 128,880,530 132,413,736 137,197,917 140,224,914 142,938,698 145,512,543 147,881,254 1,581,818,650
-Federal ITC total income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -10,022,975 1,430,178 517,143 -361,577 -1,238,679 -2,104,080 -2,728,602 -2,606,306 -4,290,940 -5,519,172 -5,203,099 -6,309,374 -7,433,082 -8,529,106 -9,160,314 -9,714,845 -11,782,258 -13,291,866 -14,773,165 -16,285,940 -30,048,219 -43,738,323 -44,407,660 -46,416,067 -48,766,240 -50,861,579 -52,998,337 -55,218,540 -57,516,926 -346,893,748
-State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
-Total after-tax returns ($) -890,038,781 937,411,859 94,034,394 95,902,564 97,531,980 99,037,970 100,374,395 100,670,314 98,013,035 101,999,445 104,104,348 100,223,628 101,505,229 102,650,803 103,476,514 102,322,811 100,633,682 104,371,601 105,728,350 106,676,042 107,418,409 92,998,667 77,936,763 74,392,557 75,461,457 77,361,987 77,818,014 77,910,007 77,759,674 77,308,277 1,156,181,778
-
-After-tax net cash flow ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768 937,411,859 94,034,394 95,902,564 97,531,980 99,037,970 100,374,395 100,670,314 98,013,035 101,999,445 104,104,348 100,223,628 101,505,229 102,650,803 103,476,514 102,322,811 100,633,682 104,371,601 105,728,350 106,676,042 107,418,409 92,998,667 77,936,763 74,392,557 75,461,457 77,361,987 77,818,014 77,910,007 77,759,674 77,308,277 1,156,181,778
-After-tax cumulative IRR (%) NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN 2.57 7.06 10.68 13.46 15.55 17.13 18.32 19.19 19.88 20.42 20.82 21.14 21.39 21.60 21.75 21.88 21.98 22.06 22.13 22.18 22.22 22.25 22.27 22.28 22.30 22.31 22.32 22.33 22.33 22.40
-After-tax cumulative NPV ($) -35,041,575 -95,381,022 -178,587,203 -408,943,473 -594,576,116 -129,002,766 -88,399,971 -52,399,271 -20,569,075 7,530,874 32,290,170 53,878,959 72,152,480 88,685,331 103,355,339 115,633,777 126,444,954 135,950,092 144,280,176 151,441,471 157,564,609 163,085,696 167,948,034 172,213,163 175,947,002 178,757,382 180,804,968 182,504,154 184,002,625 185,338,181 186,506,136 187,522,737 188,404,849 189,167,290 199,080,591
+Total pre-tax returns ($) -1,160,013,787 107,083,116 117,619,675 126,092,568 134,199,658 142,149,726 150,013,658 157,823,127 165,598,142 173,335,094 180,957,631 178,209,317 182,267,153 182,942,325 196,448,954 205,561,241 206,436,084 207,010,040 207,435,689 207,771,973 208,045,859 208,278,654 208,435,618 208,377,846 207,081,685 200,798,641 199,815,048 204,836,656 206,082,475 206,786,840 2,074,219,755
+Federal ITC total income ($) 0 1,120,179,287 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -11,021,590 2,388,596 281,156 -1,781,597 -3,843,517 -5,920,957 -8,022,561 -10,154,795 -12,319,564 -14,504,374 -14,656,383 -16,221,853 -17,161,933 -20,730,345 -23,478,209 -24,639,413 -25,809,315 -27,023,330 -28,298,440 -29,645,582 -46,979,461 -64,394,928 -65,966,402 -67,400,460 -67,953,493 -69,695,646 -72,777,262 -75,247,295 -77,764,218 -454,623,847
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,501,845 542,199 63,821 -404,413 -872,459 -1,344,027 -1,821,081 -2,305,087 -2,796,479 -3,292,420 -3,326,925 -3,682,279 -3,895,672 -4,705,683 -5,329,435 -5,593,022 -5,858,584 -6,134,159 -6,423,603 -6,729,397 -10,664,100 -14,617,323 -14,974,039 -15,299,563 -15,425,099 -15,820,559 -16,520,070 -17,080,755 -17,652,084 -103,197,311
+Total after-tax returns ($) -1,160,013,787 1,213,738,967 120,550,471 126,437,545 132,013,648 137,433,751 142,748,674 147,979,485 153,138,260 158,219,052 163,160,837 160,226,009 162,363,021 161,884,721 171,012,926 176,753,597 176,203,649 175,342,141 174,278,200 173,049,930 171,670,880 150,635,094 129,423,367 127,437,405 124,381,662 117,420,049 114,298,843 115,539,324 113,754,425 111,370,539 1,516,398,598
+
+After-tax net cash flow ($) -136,414,822 -142,906,171 -456,405,298 -424,287,496 1,213,738,967 120,550,471 126,437,545 132,013,648 137,433,751 142,748,674 147,979,485 153,138,260 158,219,052 163,160,837 160,226,009 162,363,021 161,884,721 171,012,926 176,753,597 176,203,649 175,342,141 174,278,200 173,049,930 171,670,880 150,635,094 129,423,367 127,437,405 124,381,662 117,420,049 114,298,843 115,539,324 113,754,425 111,370,539 1,516,398,598
+After-tax cumulative IRR (%) NaN NaN NaN NaN 2.29 6.85 10.64 13.61 15.88 17.62 18.94 19.96 20.75 21.36 21.82 22.17 22.45 22.68 22.86 23.01 23.12 23.21 23.28 23.33 23.37 23.40 23.42 23.44 23.45 23.46 23.47 23.47 23.48 23.54
+After-tax cumulative NPV ($) -136,414,822 -260,293,264 -603,250,668 -879,622,954 -194,285,754 -135,280,230 -81,633,337 -33,078,545 10,739,341 50,191,871 85,644,548 117,448,127 145,931,788 171,394,092 193,069,114 212,108,740 228,564,650 243,633,834 257,135,079 268,802,240 278,866,489 287,537,762 295,001,493 301,419,881 306,301,908 309,937,972 313,041,535 315,667,353 317,816,150 319,629,325 321,218,136 322,574,123 323,724,930 337,307,758
AFTER-TAX LCOE AND PPA PRICE
-Annual costs ($) -35,041,575 -69,404,845 -110,086,109 -350,562,484 -324,943,768 552,192,737 -293,520,048 -294,693,568 -295,819,980 -296,942,172 -298,046,732 -298,831,937 -298,631,877 -300,806,736 -302,378,106 -309,206,911 -310,660,020 -312,130,361 -313,553,901 -314,314,636 -314,958,457 -317,722,739 -319,691,411 -321,609,250 -323,559,665 -340,535,371 -357,396,015 -358,118,528 -360,710,981 -363,768,151 -366,448,908 -369,169,127 -371,986,658 -374,892,677 702,879,682
-PPA revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 0 385,219,123 387,554,441 390,596,131 393,351,960 395,980,142 398,421,126 399,502,251 396,644,912 402,806,181 406,482,454 409,430,539 412,165,249 414,781,164 417,030,415 416,637,447 415,592,139 422,094,340 425,419,761 428,285,293 430,978,073 433,534,038 435,332,779 432,511,085 436,172,438 441,130,138 444,266,922 447,079,134 449,746,331 452,200,954 453,302,095
-Electricity to grid (kWh) 0 0 0 0 0 4,054,938,133 4,079,520,433 4,087,016,128 4,091,449,550 4,094,510,825 4,095,611,909 4,082,802,769 4,030,125,101 4,069,160,329 4,082,788,809 4,088,989,704 4,093,001,481 4,095,795,048 4,094,956,942 4,068,327,774 4,035,658,758 4,076,236,989 4,085,860,173 4,090,985,698 4,094,414,529 4,096,513,633 4,091,473,483 4,043,293,305 4,055,908,855 4,080,382,373 4,087,844,336 4,092,257,517 4,095,304,421 4,096,394,187 4,085,274,831
+Annual costs ($) -136,414,822 -142,906,171 -456,405,298 -424,287,496 735,972,092 -367,940,638 -370,677,373 -373,352,762 -376,024,331 -378,713,410 -381,431,167 -384,185,894 -386,979,863 -389,796,385 -399,910,941 -401,978,940 -403,156,900 -408,025,202 -411,727,315 -413,183,836 -414,640,117 -416,145,145 -417,721,896 -419,384,767 -440,661,791 -462,036,174 -463,962,269 -465,674,840 -466,125,527 -468,227,465 -472,190,723 -475,266,626 -478,380,425 926,163,243
+PPA revenue ($) 0 0 0 0 477,766,875 488,491,109 497,114,918 505,366,410 513,458,082 521,462,083 529,410,652 537,324,154 545,198,915 552,957,222 560,136,949 564,341,961 565,041,621 579,038,128 588,480,912 589,387,485 589,982,259 590,423,346 590,771,827 591,055,646 591,296,885 591,459,541 591,399,674 590,056,502 583,545,575 582,526,308 587,730,047 589,021,051 589,750,963 590,235,354
+Electricity to grid (kWh) 0 0 0 0 4,154,494,569 4,181,212,950 4,189,406,019 4,194,260,188 4,197,662,540 4,200,258,425 4,202,338,883 4,204,085,390 4,205,483,759 4,205,957,420 4,202,077,639 4,176,289,208 4,125,595,949 4,172,045,018 4,185,497,243 4,191,945,128 4,196,175,382 4,199,312,558 4,201,791,085 4,203,809,718 4,205,525,496 4,206,682,370 4,206,256,569 4,196,703,431 4,150,395,274 4,143,145,859 4,180,156,805 4,189,338,914 4,194,530,322 4,197,975,491
-Present value of annual costs ($) 1,298,529,377
+Present value of annual costs ($) 1,853,308,890
-Present value of annual energy costs ($) 1,298,529,377
-Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 15,275,465,377
-LCOE Levelized cost of energy nominal (cents/kWh) 8.50
+Present value of annual energy costs ($) 1,853,308,890
+Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 17,511,358,840
+LCOE Levelized cost of energy nominal (cents/kWh) 10.58
-Present value of PPA revenue ($) 1,497,609,968
-Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 15,275,465,377
-LPPA Levelized PPA price nominal (cents/kWh) 9.80
+Present value of PPA revenue ($) 2,190,616,648
+Present value of annual energy nominal (kWh) 17,511,358,840
+LPPA Levelized PPA price nominal (cents/kWh) 12.51
PROJECT STATE INCOME TAXES
-EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
-State taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State taxable IBI income ($) 0
-State taxable CBI income ($) 0
+EBITDA ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
+State taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State taxable IBI income ($) 0
+State taxable CBI income ($) 0
minus:
-Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
-Total state tax depreciation ($) 0 60,897,179 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 60,897,179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 180,174,202 178,266,805 176,225,890 174,042,112 171,705,469 169,205,261 166,530,038 163,667,550 160,604,687 157,327,424 153,820,753 150,068,615 146,053,827 141,758,004 137,161,473 132,243,186 126,980,618 121,349,670 115,324,556 108,877,684 101,979,531 94,598,507 86,700,812 78,250,278 69,208,206 59,533,190 49,180,922 38,103,995 26,251,684 13,569,711
+Total state tax depreciation ($) 0 79,346,033 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 79,346,033 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
equals:
-State taxable income ($) 0 50,003,614 -7,135,017 -2,579,972 1,803,874 6,179,644 10,497,044 13,612,721 13,002,601 21,407,067 27,534,596 25,957,738 31,476,834 37,082,900 42,550,854 45,699,887 48,466,388 58,780,502 66,311,788 73,701,838 81,248,920 149,907,552 218,206,109 221,545,359 231,565,103 243,289,880 253,743,314 264,403,386 275,479,760 286,946,176 1,730,618,116
+State taxable income ($) 0 54,985,609 -11,916,468 -1,402,661 8,888,209 19,174,919 29,539,059 40,023,751 50,661,254 61,461,069 72,360,869 73,119,225 80,929,200 85,619,160 103,421,612 117,130,430 122,923,560 128,760,085 134,816,681 141,178,079 147,898,837 234,375,818 321,259,838 329,099,762 336,254,135 339,013,162 347,704,586 363,078,462 375,401,207 387,957,884 2,268,072,772
-State income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
-State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
+State income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,501,845 542,199 63,821 -404,413 -872,459 -1,344,027 -1,821,081 -2,305,087 -2,796,479 -3,292,420 -3,326,925 -3,682,279 -3,895,672 -4,705,683 -5,329,435 -5,593,022 -5,858,584 -6,134,159 -6,423,603 -6,729,397 -10,664,100 -14,617,323 -14,974,039 -15,299,563 -15,425,099 -15,820,559 -16,520,070 -17,080,755 -17,652,084 -103,197,311
PROJECT FEDERAL INCOME TAXES
-EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
-Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,275,164 324,643 117,389 -82,076 -281,174 -477,616 -619,379 -591,618 -974,022 -1,252,824 -1,181,077 -1,432,196 -1,687,272 -1,936,064 -2,079,345 -2,205,221 -2,674,513 -3,017,186 -3,353,434 -3,696,826 -6,820,794 -9,928,378 -10,080,314 -10,536,212 -11,069,690 -11,545,321 -12,030,354 -12,534,329 -13,056,051 -78,743,124
-State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal taxable IBI income ($) 0
-Federal taxable CBI income ($) 0
-Federal taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+EBITDA ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -2,501,845 542,199 63,821 -404,413 -872,459 -1,344,027 -1,821,081 -2,305,087 -2,796,479 -3,292,420 -3,326,925 -3,682,279 -3,895,672 -4,705,683 -5,329,435 -5,593,022 -5,858,584 -6,134,159 -6,423,603 -6,729,397 -10,664,100 -14,617,323 -14,974,039 -15,299,563 -15,425,099 -15,820,559 -16,520,070 -17,080,755 -17,652,084 -103,197,311
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal taxable IBI income ($) 0
+Federal taxable CBI income ($) 0
+Federal taxable PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
minus:
-Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
-Total federal tax depreciation ($) 0 60,897,179 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 121,794,358 60,897,179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 180,174,202 178,266,805 176,225,890 174,042,112 171,705,469 169,205,261 166,530,038 163,667,550 160,604,687 157,327,424 153,820,753 150,068,615 146,053,827 141,758,004 137,161,473 132,243,186 126,980,618 121,349,670 115,324,556 108,877,684 101,979,531 94,598,507 86,700,812 78,250,278 69,208,206 59,533,190 49,180,922 38,103,995 26,251,684 13,569,711
+Total federal tax depreciation ($) 0 79,346,033 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 158,692,066 79,346,033 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
equals:
-Federal taxable income ($) 0 47,728,450 -6,810,374 -2,462,584 1,721,798 5,898,471 10,019,429 12,993,342 12,410,982 20,433,045 26,281,772 24,776,661 30,044,638 35,395,628 40,614,790 43,620,542 46,261,168 56,105,990 63,294,601 70,348,404 77,552,094 143,086,758 208,277,731 211,465,045 221,028,891 232,220,190 242,197,993 252,373,032 262,945,430 273,890,125 1,651,874,992
+Federal taxable income ($) 0 52,483,763 -11,374,269 -1,338,840 8,483,795 18,302,460 28,195,032 38,202,670 48,356,167 58,664,590 69,068,449 69,792,301 77,246,921 81,723,488 98,715,929 111,800,995 117,330,538 122,901,501 128,682,522 134,754,477 141,169,440 223,711,719 306,642,516 314,125,722 320,954,572 323,588,064 331,884,027 346,558,392 358,320,452 370,305,800 2,164,875,461
-Federal income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21
-Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -10,022,975 1,430,178 517,143 -361,577 -1,238,679 -2,104,080 -2,728,602 -2,606,306 -4,290,940 -5,519,172 -5,203,099 -6,309,374 -7,433,082 -8,529,106 -9,160,314 -9,714,845 -11,782,258 -13,291,866 -14,773,165 -16,285,940 -30,048,219 -43,738,323 -44,407,660 -46,416,067 -48,766,240 -50,861,579 -52,998,337 -55,218,540 -57,516,926 -346,893,748
+Federal income tax rate (frac) 0.0 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21
+Federal tax benefit (liability) ($) 0 -11,021,590 2,388,596 281,156 -1,781,597 -3,843,517 -5,920,957 -8,022,561 -10,154,795 -12,319,564 -14,504,374 -14,656,383 -16,221,853 -17,161,933 -20,730,345 -23,478,209 -24,639,413 -25,809,315 -27,023,330 -28,298,440 -29,645,582 -46,979,461 -64,394,928 -65,966,402 -67,400,460 -67,953,493 -69,695,646 -72,777,262 -75,247,295 -77,764,218 -454,623,847
CASH INCENTIVES
-Federal IBI income ($) 0
-State IBI income ($) 0
-Utility IBI income ($) 0
-Other IBI income ($) 0
-Total IBI income ($) 0
-
-Federal CBI income ($) 0
-State CBI income ($) 0
-Utility CBI income ($) 0
-Other CBI income ($) 0
-Total CBI income ($) 0
-
-Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Total PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal IBI income ($) 0
+State IBI income ($) 0
+Utility IBI income ($) 0
+Other IBI income ($) 0
+Total IBI income ($) 0
+
+Federal CBI income ($) 0
+State CBI income ($) 0
+Utility CBI income ($) 0
+Other CBI income ($) 0
+Total CBI income ($) 0
+
+Federal PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Utility PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Other PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Total PBI income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TAX CREDITS
-Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State PTC income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal ITC percent income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Federal ITC total income ($) 0 859,724,877 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal ITC percent income ($) 0 1,120,179,287 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Federal ITC total income ($) 0 1,120,179,287 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State ITC percent income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State ITC amount income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State ITC percent income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+State ITC total income ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DEBT REPAYMENT
-Debt balance ($) 1,975,710,809 1,954,795,137 1,932,415,368 1,908,469,015 1,882,846,418 1,855,430,239 1,826,094,927 1,794,706,143 1,761,120,145 1,725,183,127 1,686,730,517 1,645,586,225 1,601,561,832 1,554,455,732 1,504,052,205 1,450,120,431 1,392,413,432 1,330,666,944 1,264,598,202 1,193,904,647 1,118,262,544 1,037,325,494 950,722,850 858,058,021 758,906,654 652,814,691 539,296,291 417,831,603 287,864,387 148,799,466 0
-Debt interest payment ($) 0 138,299,757 136,835,660 135,269,076 133,592,831 131,799,249 129,880,117 127,826,645 125,629,430 123,278,410 120,762,819 118,071,136 115,191,036 112,109,328 108,811,901 105,283,654 101,508,430 97,468,940 93,146,686 88,521,874 83,573,325 78,278,378 72,612,785 66,550,600 60,064,061 53,123,466 45,697,028 37,750,740 29,248,212 20,150,507 10,415,963
-Debt principal payment ($) 0 20,915,672 22,379,769 23,946,353 25,622,597 27,416,179 29,335,312 31,388,784 33,585,998 35,937,018 38,452,610 41,144,292 44,024,393 47,106,100 50,403,527 53,931,774 57,706,998 61,746,488 66,068,742 70,693,554 75,642,103 80,937,050 86,602,644 92,664,829 99,151,367 106,091,963 113,518,400 121,464,688 129,967,216 139,064,921 148,799,466
-Debt total payment ($) 0 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428
+Debt balance ($) 2,573,917,169 2,546,668,643 2,517,512,721 2,486,315,884 2,452,935,268 2,417,218,009 2,379,000,542 2,338,107,853 2,294,352,675 2,247,534,634 2,197,439,331 2,143,837,357 2,086,483,244 2,025,114,343 1,959,449,620 1,889,188,366 1,814,008,824 1,733,566,714 1,647,493,656 1,555,395,484 1,456,850,441 1,351,407,244 1,238,583,023 1,117,861,108 988,688,657 850,474,136 702,584,598 544,342,792 375,024,060 193,853,016 0
+Debt interest payment ($) 0 180,174,202 178,266,805 176,225,890 174,042,112 171,705,469 169,205,261 166,530,038 163,667,550 160,604,687 157,327,424 153,820,753 150,068,615 146,053,827 141,758,004 137,161,473 132,243,186 126,980,618 121,349,670 115,324,556 108,877,684 101,979,531 94,598,507 86,700,812 78,250,278 69,208,206 59,533,190 49,180,922 38,103,995 26,251,684 13,569,711
+Debt principal payment ($) 0 27,248,526 29,155,923 31,196,837 33,380,616 35,717,259 38,217,467 40,892,690 43,755,178 46,818,040 50,095,303 53,601,974 57,354,113 61,368,901 65,664,724 70,261,254 75,179,542 80,442,110 86,073,058 92,098,172 98,545,044 105,443,197 112,824,221 120,721,916 129,172,450 138,214,522 147,889,538 158,241,806 169,318,732 181,171,043 193,853,016
+Debt total payment ($) 0 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728
DSCR (DEBT FRACTION)
-EBITDA ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
+EBITDA ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
minus:
-Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
equals:
-Cash available for debt service (CAFDS) ($) 0 249,200,550 251,495,000 254,483,461 257,191,062 259,773,251 262,171,519 263,233,723 260,426,388 266,479,835 270,091,773 265,823,232 268,462,227 270,986,586 273,157,112 272,777,899 271,769,176 278,043,800 281,252,831 284,018,069 286,616,603 289,083,108 290,818,893 288,095,959 291,629,165 296,413,345 299,440,342 302,154,126 304,727,972 307,096,683 1,741,034,078
-Debt total payment ($) 0 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428 159,215,428
-DSCR (pre-tax) 0.0 1.57 1.58 1.60 1.62 1.63 1.65 1.65 1.64 1.67 1.70 1.67 1.69 1.70 1.72 1.71 1.71 1.75 1.77 1.78 1.80 1.82 1.83 1.81 1.83 1.86 1.88 1.90 1.91 1.93 10.94
+Cash available for debt service (CAFDS) ($) 0 314,505,843 325,042,403 333,515,295 341,622,386 349,572,454 357,436,385 365,245,854 373,020,869 380,757,822 388,380,359 385,632,044 389,689,880 390,365,053 403,871,682 412,983,969 413,858,811 414,432,768 414,858,417 415,194,701 415,468,587 415,701,382 415,858,345 415,800,573 414,504,413 408,221,368 407,237,775 412,259,383 413,505,203 414,209,568 2,281,642,483
+Debt total payment ($) 0 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728 207,422,728
+DSCR (pre-tax) 0.0 1.52 1.57 1.61 1.65 1.69 1.72 1.76 1.80 1.84 1.87 1.86 1.88 1.88 1.95 1.99 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.97 1.96 1.99 1.99 2.0 11.0
RESERVES
-Reserves working capital funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves working capital disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves working capital balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves working capital funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves working capital disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves working capital balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves debt service funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves debt service disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves debt service balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves debt service funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves debt service disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves debt service balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves receivables disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves receivables balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves receivables balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 1 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 1 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 1 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 2 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 2 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 2 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 3 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves major equipment 3 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 funding ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 disbursement ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Reserves major equipment 3 balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Reserves total reserves balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Interest on reserves (%/year) 1.75
-Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+Reserves total reserves balance ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+Interest on reserves (%/year) 1.75
+Interest earned on reserves ($) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***EXTENDED ECONOMICS***
- Royalty Holder NPV: 137.99 MUSD
- Royalty Holder Average Annual Revenue: 10.60 MUSD/yr
- Royalty Holder Total Revenue: 370.86 MUSD
+ Royalty Holder NPV: 194.79 MUSD
+ Royalty Holder Average Annual Revenue: 14.70 MUSD/yr
+ Royalty Holder Total Revenue: 499.80 MUSD
diff --git a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt
index c76b92612..1c9f746fb 100644
--- a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt
+++ b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt
@@ -1,49 +1,61 @@
-# Case Study: 500 MWe EGS Project Modeled on Fervo Cape Station Phase II
+# Case Study: 500 MWe EGS Project Modeled on Fervo Cape Station Phase II (September 2026 Update)
# See documentation: https://softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.html
+# September 2026 Update: subsurface design aligned with the Fervo 3.0 well design disclosed for Cape Station Phase II
+# (Fervo Energy Q2 2026 earnings call, 2026-08-12). The case study remains a second-of-a-kind (SOAK) analog;
+# the wellfield is re-sized for the 3.0 design rather than matched to Fervo's as-built well count, and
+# lateral drilling cost is now modeled explicitly rather than folded into the vertical well cost.
# *** ECONOMIC/FINANCIAL PARAMETERS ***
# *************************************
Economic Model, 5, -- The SAM Single Owner PPA economic model is used to calculate financial results including LCOE, NPV, IRR, and pro-forma cash flow analysis. See [GEOPHIRES documentation of SAM Economic Models](https://softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/SAM-Economic-Models.html) for details on how System Advisor Model financial models are integrated into GEOPHIRES.
-Inflation Rate, .027, -- US inflation as of December 2025. Note: [2024b ATB models lower inflation](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024b/definitions#inflation).
+Inflation Rate, .03, -- US CPI-U was 3.4% year over year in July 2026 (core 2.5%) (BLS, 2026b), down from 4.2% in May 2026, when the energy index was up 23.5% year over year (BLS, 2026a). 3.0% is between core and headline and above the Federal Reserve's 2% target, a conservative assumption for a 30-year horizon. Previous versions used 2.7%, US inflation as of December 2025. Note: [2024b ATB models lower inflation](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024b/definitions#inflation). GEOPHIRES holds fixed O&M flat in nominal terms; inflation affects capital cost escalation during construction and the nominal discount rate.
-Starting Electricity Sale Price, 0.095, -- Aligns with Geysers - Sacramento pricing in [2024b ATB](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024/geothermal) (NREL, 2025). See Sensitivity Analysis for effect of different prices on results.
-Electricity Escalation Rate Per Year, 0.00057, -- Calibrated to reach $100/MWh at project year 11
-Ending Electricity Sale Price, 1, -- Note that this value does not directly determine price at the end of the project life, but rather as a cap as the maximum price to which the starting price can escalate.
-Electricity Escalation Start Year, 1
+Starting Electricity Sale Price, 0.115, -- Midpoint of the $100-130/MWh range Fervo reports for contracts currently under negotiation, of which approximately half are with hyperscale data center buyers (Fervo Energy, 2026f; 2026g). Above the prices implied by Fervo's existing contracts: Corsac Station's 15-year PPA at $107/MWh (CTVC, 2025), and Fervo's company-wide revenue backlog of approximately $7.2B across 658 MW of binding PPAs (Fervo Energy, 2026g), which implies roughly $91/MWh assuming 15-year terms at 91.3% capacity factor. Pricing for the subsequent 396 MW Google PPA was not disclosed (Fervo Energy, 2026b). The SOAK project is assumed to contract in 2026 or later for a 2030 commercial operation date. Previous versions used $95/MWh, aligned with Geysers - Sacramento pricing in [2024b ATB](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024/geothermal) (NREL, 2025). See Sensitivity Analysis for effect of different prices on results.
+Electricity Escalation Rate Per Year, 0.00183, -- $1.83/MWh per year. GEOPHIRES supports only linear (additive) escalation; this value reproduces the 15-year present value, at the case study WACC of approximately 8.4%, of a 1.5% per year compounding escalator on the $115/MWh starting price. 1.5% is the escalator in Ormat's 2025 Heber 1 geothermal PPA (CTVC, 2025); Fervo's PPA escalation terms are not disclosed. Reaches $140.6/MWh in operating year 15 versus $141.7/MWh under compounding. Previous versions used $0.57/MWh per year, calibrated to reach $100/MWh at project year 11 from a $95/MWh start.
+Ending Electricity Sale Price, 0.1406, -- Caps escalation at $140.6/MWh, the price reached in operating year 15, so that the price is held flat after the 15-year PPA term rather than continuing to escalate through the 30-year project lifetime. This represents an assumed post-contract re-contracting or merchant price equal to the final contract price. Note that this value does not directly determine price at the end of the project life, but rather acts as a cap on the price to which the starting price can escalate; previous versions set it to $1/kWh (no effective cap).
+Electricity Escalation Start Year, 0, -- The first escalation step is applied in the second operating year, matching a PPA whose price escalates annually from the first anniversary of commercial operation. Previous versions used 1, which GEOPHIRES applies as the first step in the third operating year.
-Fraction of Investment in Bonds, .7, -- Approximate debt required to cover CAPEX after $1 billion sponsor equity per [Matson, 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fervo-energy-technology-day-2024-entering-geothermal-decade-matson-n4stc/). Note that this source says that Fervo ultimately wants to target “15% sponsor equity, 15% bridge loan, and 70% construction to term loans”, but this case study does not attempt to model that capital structure precisely.
+Fraction of Investment in Bonds, .7, -- Approximate debt required to cover CAPEX after $1 billion sponsor equity per [Matson, 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fervo-energy-technology-day-2024-entering-geothermal-decade-matson-n4stc/). Note that this source says that Fervo ultimately wants to target “15% sponsor equity, 15% bridge loan, and 70% construction to term loans”, but this case study does not attempt to model that capital structure precisely. Reference: Fervo closed a $421.4M non-recourse project debt facility (the Project Granite Facility) for Cape Station Phase I in Q1 2026 (Fervo Energy, 2026a; 2026c). Against the approximately $7,000/kW FOAK cost of the roughly 100 MW Phase I (Fervo Energy, 2026d; 2026e), that is roughly 60% debt. Fervo also entered into an agreement with Liberty Mutual to monetize Phase I tax credits, providing additional non-sponsor capital (Fervo Energy, 2026c).
Discount Rate, 0.12, -- Typical discount rates for higher-risk projects may be 12–15%.
Inflated Bond Interest Rate, .07, -- 2024b ATB (NREL, 2025)
Inflated Bond Interest Rate During Construction, 0.105, -- Higher than interest rate during normal operation to account for increased risk of default prior to COD. Value aligns with ATB discount rate (NREL, 2025).
-Bond Financing Start Year, -2, -- Equity-only for first 2 construction years (ATB)
+Bond Financing Start Year, -2, -- Equity-only for the first construction year. The 4-year schedule merges the first two years (exploration and early development) of the 5-year DOE-ATB hybrid schedule, so the equity-only share of overnight capital cost (4.1%) is unchanged from previous versions, which were equity-only for the first 2 of 5 construction years (ATB).
-Construction Years, 5, -- Ground broken in 2023 (Fervo Energy, 2023). Expected to reach full scale production in 2028 (Fervo Energy, 2025). See [GEOPHIRES documentation](SAM-EM_Multiple-Construction-Years.html) for details on how construction years affect CAPEX, IRR, and other calculations.
+Construction Years, 4, -- Fervo's FOAK timeline at Cape Station ran from ground breaking in September 2023 (Fervo Energy, 2023b) to expected full-scale production in 2028 (Fervo Energy, 2025c), which the previous version of this case study modeled as 5 years. Phase I (approximately 100 MWe in three 33 MWe GeoBlocks) reached first power in September 2026, three years after ground breaking, with contractual COD expected by October 1, 2026 for the first GeoBlock and by January 1, 2027 for the other two; Phase II (400 MWe) is under construction with expected COD in 2028 (Fervo Energy, 2026e). A SOAK developer is modeled with one fewer year: Fervo reports Phase I went from site preparation to a constructed power unit in under two years, and estimates that at steady state each of its three rigs could drill about 1.5 wells per month (Fervo Energy, 2026f), a pace at which this case study's 84-well initial campaign takes roughly 19 months. See [GEOPHIRES documentation](SAM-EM_Multiple-Construction-Years.html) for details on how construction years affect CAPEX, IRR, and other calculations.
-# ATB advanced scenario
+# ATB advanced scenario (5-year)
# Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.09,0.28,0.1,0.34,0.28
-# DOE scenario (alternative)
+# DOE scenario (alternative, 5-year)
# Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.014,0.027,0.137,0.274,0.548
-# DOE-ATB hybrid scenario
-Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.014,0.027,0.139,0.431,0.389
+# DOE-ATB hybrid scenario (5-year, previous version)
+# Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.014,0.027,0.139,0.431,0.389
-Investment Tax Credit Rate, 0.3, -- Geothermal Drilling and Completions Apprenticeship Program ensures compliance with ITC labor requirements (Southern Utah University, 2024).
+# DOE-ATB hybrid scenario compressed to 4 years: first two years of the 5-year schedule (exploration and early development) merged
+Construction CAPEX Schedule, 0.041,0.139,0.431,0.389
+
+Investment Tax Credit Rate, 0.3, -- Statutory rate; Geothermal Drilling and Completions Apprenticeship Program ensures compliance with ITC labor requirements (Southern Utah University, 2024). GEOPHIRES's SAM Single Owner PPA model applies this rate to total installed cost, which includes the interconnection cost entered under One-time Flat License Fees Etc. Under IRC §48(a)(8) qualified interconnection property is in the ITC basis only for energy property of 5 MW or less, so the model overstates the credit by approximately $87M (30% of the $289M interconnection cost including its inflation and interest during construction); an equivalent rate of 0.2768 on total installed cost would remove it and reduces IRR by about 1.4 points. The statutory rate is retained for clarity because the overstatement is offset in direction, and likely in magnitude, by an unmodeled benefit on the same line item: in non-ISO balancing authorities such as PacifiCorp, network upgrade costs, the majority of interconnection cost, are often refunded to the interconnection customer over up to 20 years with interest once the plant reaches commercial operation (Seel et al., 2026). Taxpayer-owned point-of-interconnection facilities may also qualify as integral power conditioning and transfer equipment regardless of project size, which would reduce the overstatement further.
Combined Income Tax Rate, .2555, -- Federal Corporate Income Tax Rate of 21% plus Utah Corporate Franchise and Income Tax Rate of 4.55%. (Note: This input uses a simple summation of statutory rates; the effective combined rate calculated in the model may differ due to standard federal-state tax interactions.)
Property Tax Rate, 0.0022, -- Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA) tax differential incentive
-Capital Cost for Power Plant for Electricity Generation, 1900, -- [US DOE, 2021](https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/Waste_Heat_to_Power_Fact_Sheet.pdf). Pricing information not publicly available for Turboden or Baker Hughes Gen 2 ORC units (Turboden, 2025; Jacobs, 2025).
-Exploration Capital Cost, 30, -- Equivalent to 2024b ATB NF-EGS conservative scenario exploration assumption of 5 full-size wells (NREL, 2025), plus $1M for geophysical and field work, plus 15% contingency, plus 12% indirect costs.
+Capital Cost for Power Plant for Electricity Generation, 1900, -- [US DOE, 2021](https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/Waste_Heat_to_Power_Fact_Sheet.pdf). Pricing information not publicly available for Turboden or Baker Hughes Gen 2 ORC units (Turboden, 2025; Jacobs, 2025). Note: Fervo states that drilling, completion and well pad facilities are about half of pre-COD CAPEX and surface power generation equipment about half (Fervo Energy, 2026f); this case study yields roughly 47% subsurface (drilling, completion, stimulation and gathering) / 53% surface plant, excluding interconnection and exploration, so the plant cost may be modestly overstated and/or the well costs understated relative to Fervo's actuals.
+Exploration Capital Cost, 56, -- Equivalent to 2024b ATB NF-EGS conservative scenario exploration assumption of 5 full-size wells (NREL, 2025) at this case study's all-in well cost of $8.48M, plus $1M for geophysical and field work, plus 15% contingency, plus 12% indirect costs: (5 × $8.48M + $1M) × 1.15 × 1.12 = $55.9M. Previous versions used $30M, derived the same way from a $4.65M well. Recompute this value whenever the per-well drilling and completion cost changes.
Well Drilling Cost Correlation, 3, -- 2025 NREL Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update (Akindipe and Witter, 2025).
-Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor, 0.9, -- 2024b Geothermal ATB ([NREL, 2025](https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2024b/geothermal)). Note: Fervo has claimed lower drilling costs equivalent to an adjustment factor of 0.8 (Latimer, 2025); the case study conservatively uses the higher ATB-aligned value. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different drilling costs on results.
+Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor, 0.72, -- Applied to both the vertical correlation and the lateral cost. Yields $8.5M/well all-in (vertical $4.40M + lateral $4.08M, each including 5% indirect costs) versus $11.8M at factor 1.0 for the 3.06 km TVD, 7,500 ft lateral geometry. Calibration: Fervo's first Cape Station well ($9.4M) and best Phase I well ($4.8M), both 5,000 ft lateral 2.0-design wells, correspond to factors of 1.14 and 0.58 respectively against the same correlation with the lateral costed explicitly. The SOAK value of 0.72 is the geometric mean of the ATB-aligned baseline (0.9) and Fervo's best demonstrated well (0.58), decomposing as 0.70 for a fast follower's learning position times 1.029 for the temperature adjustment at 221℃ (NREL 2025 drilling cost curves). It is about 4% above the INTERMEDIATE1 drilling technology scenario (US DOE, 2019) at factor 1.0 ($8.1M/well for the same geometry, with the lateral at that scenario's per-meter cost). Fervo cites batch drilling among its drilling efficiency gains, reports a record 21-day spud-to-total-depth time on the Sawtooth 7 well, and has trialed rotary steerable systems on deeper wells (Fervo Energy, 2026a; 2026f). Reference points: 0.58 ($6.8M/well) for Fervo-demonstrated performance; 0.9 ($10.6M/well) for the unadjusted ATB baseline; Latimer's stated target of under $4M/well (Latimer, 2025) corresponds to roughly 0.35 and is treated as a NOAK aspiration rather than a SOAK comparable. Note: the previous version used 0.9 on the vertical correlation only with the lateral folded in, which yielded $4.65M/well at 2.68 km; against the lateral-inclusive correlation that was an effective factor of about 0.58, i.e. Fervo's best demonstrated well rather than a conservative SOAK assumption. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different drilling costs on results.
+All-in Nonvertical Drilling Costs, 2360, -- USD per meter of lateral before the adjustment factor and indirect costs. Value from the 2025 NREL geothermal drilling cost curve (Akindipe and Witter, 2025) for the vertical large diameter baseline correlation at 3.06 km, as computed by the SWS Geothermal Platform drilling cost calculator; the calculator assumes the same per-meter cost for lateral and vertical sections. Scaled by the Well Drilling and Completion Capital Cost Adjustment Factor and by Multilaterals Cased.
+Multilaterals Cased, True, -- Fervo's laterals are cased and cemented for plug-and-perf multistage stimulation (Norbeck et al., 2024). GEOPHIRES halves the lateral cost when this is False (the default), on the assumption that casing and cementing are 50% of drilling cost.
-Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well, 4, -- The baseline stimulation cost is calibrated from costs of high-intensity U.S. shale wells (Baytex Energy, 2024; Quantum Proppant Technologies, 2020), which are the closest technological analogue for multi-stage EGS (Gradl, 2018). Costs are also driven by the requirement for high-strength ceramic proppant rather than standard sand, which would crush or chemically degrade (diagenesis) over a 30-year lifecycle at 200℃ (Ko et al., 2023; Shiozawa and McClure, 2014) and the premium for ultra-high-temperature (HT) downhole tools. Note that all-in costs per well are higher than the baseline cost because they include additional indirect costs and contingency. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different stimulation costs on results.
-Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well, 4, -- See Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Injection Well
+Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Fracture Surface Area, 0.875, -- USD per square meter of nominal (single-face, planar) fracture area, before adjustment factor, indirect costs and contingency; GEOPHIRES multiplies by Fracture Width × Fracture Height × Number of Fractures per Stimulated Well × number of stimulated wells. Equivalent to $4M per 12-stage 5,000 ft lateral (150 fractures) and $6M per 18-stage 7,500 ft lateral (225 fractures) at the case study fracture geometry, i.e. the same per-stage calibration used in previous versions: high-intensity U.S. shale wells (Baytex Energy, 2024; Quantum Proppant Technologies, 2020), the closest technological analogue for multi-stage EGS (Gradl, 2018). Costs are also driven by the requirement for high-strength ceramic proppant rather than standard sand, which would crush or chemically degrade (diagenesis) over a 30-year lifecycle at 200℃ (Ko et al., 2023; Shiozawa and McClure, 2014) and the premium for ultra-high-temperature (HT) downhole tools. Fervo also reports sourcing equipment to pump at the higher pressures required by the deeper Phase II wells (Fervo Energy, 2026f). Parameterizing by area rather than per well makes stimulation cost track fracture count and geometry automatically in sensitivity and variant scenarios. Note that all-in costs per well are higher than the direct cost because they include indirect costs and contingency. See [Sensitivity Analysis](#sensitivity-analysis-section) for effect of different stimulation costs on results.
+Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well, -1, -- Indicates that production wells are stimulated (in addition to injection wells, which GEOPHIRES stimulates by default); the per-area cost is then apportioned across all wells.
Field Gathering System Capital Cost Adjustment Factor, 0.54, -- Gathering costs represent 2% of facilities CAPEX per [Matson, 2024](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fervo-energy-technology-day-2024-entering-geothermal-decade-matson-n4stc/).
+One-time Flat License Fees Etc, 250, -- Grid interconnection cost (point-of-interconnection facilities plus transmission network upgrades), $500/kW for 500 MWe. Based on PacifiCorp cluster-study cost estimates for recent geothermal interconnection requests in Beaver and Millard Counties, Utah: $417/kW (ERIS) to $500/kW (NRIS) for a 40 MW request in Beaver County (2021 study) and $450/kW for a 40 MW request in Millard County (2022 study); recent requests of 250-750 MW across PacifiCorp, BPA and Duke averaged $426/kW, and projects with high interconnection costs cluster along the same transmission lines, especially in southern Utah and Wyoming (Seel et al., 2026). The NRIS figure is used because the PPA structure requires firm delivery. Fervo's actual Cape Station interconnection cost is not publicly disclosed; an MLQ.ai analysis of Fervo's IPO filing, reported by Utility Dive, puts Fervo's Cape Station Phase II interconnection and transmission rights at approximately 290 MW against 384 MW of contracted capacity (Utility Dive, 2026). GEOPHIRES adds this parameter to overnight capital cost without indirect cost or contingency loading, spreads it over the construction schedule with inflation and interest during construction, and includes it in the depreciable and property-tax basis. Not modeled: in non-ISO balancing authorities such as PacifiCorp, network upgrade costs paid up front are often refunded to the interconnection customer over up to 20 years with interest once the plant reaches commercial operation (Seel et al., 2026), so the value here is conservative. Previous versions did not include interconnection cost (see the Discussion section of the case study documentation).
+Annual License Fees Etc, 21, -- Long-term firm point-to-point transmission service for 500 MW, $M per year, held flat in nominal terms by GEOPHIRES. PacifiCorp OATT Schedule 7 (firm point-to-point) was $32,029/MW-year and Schedule 1 (scheduling, system control and dispatch) $801/MW-year effective June 2017 (PacifiCorp, 2017); escalated at 3% per year to 2026 (approximately $42,800/MW-year, an assumption pending the 2026 Transmission Formula Annual Update in FERC docket ER26-2546) and applied to the 500 MW contracted capacity. The unescalated 2017 rate gives $16.4M/year; reserving the 525 MW maximum net output gives $22.5M/year. For comparison, BPA's long-term firm point-to-point rate for fiscal years 2024-2025 was $1.648/kW-month, about $20,000/MW-year (BPA, 2026). Assumes delivery within or at the edge of PacifiCorp's system; delivery to a CAISO offtaker across an intervening system (e.g. the Intermountain HVDC line or NV Energy) would add a second firm reservation and charge. Transmission losses (in kind) are not included. Insurance premiums, which the case study documentation lists as unmodeled, are not included in this value.
+
Royalty Rate, 0.0175, -- The BLM royalty structure is 1.75% of gross proceeds from electricity sales for the first 10 years of production (Code of Federal Regulations, 2024).
Royalty Rate Escalation Start Year, 11, -- After the first 10 years of production, the royalty rate escalates to 3.5%.
Royalty Rate Escalation, 0.0175, -- Escalation at Year 11 from 1.75% to 3.5%.
@@ -54,7 +66,7 @@ Royalty Rate Maximum, 0.035, -- No further escalation beyond 3.5%.
# *************************************************
End-Use Option, 1, -- Electricity
Power Plant Type, 2, -- Gen 2 ORC units (Turboden, 2025).
-Plant Lifetime, 30, -- Sets the project economic horizon, aligned with Fervo's anticipated 30-year well life (Fervo Energy, 2025). Modeling Distinction: While Fervo projects physical wellbore integrity for 30 years, GEOPHIRES simulates "redrilling events" to model thermal management of the reservoir volume. This treats the 30-year lifespan as an aggregate of shorter-lived thermal cycles delineated by discrete redrilling events occurring at intervals dictated by the Maximum Drawdown parameter. The modeled cost of each redrilling event is equivalent to the drilling and stimulation cost of the entire wellfield, serving as a conservative cost proxy for the major interventions (e.g., sidetracking and stimulating laterals into fresh rock, or drilling new wells if necessary) required to sustain the PPA target against thermal depletion.
+Plant Lifetime, 30, -- Sets the project economic horizon, aligned with Fervo's anticipated 30-year well life (Fervo Energy, 2025a). Modeling Distinction: While Fervo projects physical wellbore integrity for 30 years, GEOPHIRES simulates "redrilling events" to model thermal management of the reservoir volume. This treats the 30-year lifespan as an aggregate of shorter-lived thermal cycles delineated by discrete redrilling events occurring at intervals dictated by the Maximum Drawdown parameter. The modeled cost of each redrilling event is equivalent to the drilling and stimulation cost of the entire wellfield, serving as a conservative cost proxy for the major interventions (e.g., sidetracking and stimulating laterals into fresh rock, or drilling new wells if necessary) required to sustain the PPA target against thermal depletion. Fervo describes its approach as a makeup-well drilling program in which later wells benefit from cumulative learnings (Fervo Energy, 2026f).
Surface Temperature, 13, -- Surface temperature near Milford, UT (38.4987670, -112.9163432) ([Project InnerSpace, 2025](https://geomap.projectinnerspace.org/test/)).
@@ -65,7 +77,7 @@ Gradient 2, 41, -- Crystalline reservoir
Thickness 2, 0.5
Gradient 3, 39.1, -- Sugarloaf appraisal
-Reservoir Depth, 2.68, -- Extrapolated from surface temperature, gradient, and average production temperature of shallower and deeper producers in Singh et al., 2025.
+Reservoir Depth, 3.06, -- Depth at which the segmented gradient yields a bottom-hole temperature of approximately 221℃ (430℉), the average reservoir temperature design point of the Fervo 3.0 well design used for Cape Station Phase II (Fervo Energy, 2026f; 2026g). The previous value of 2.68 km was extrapolated from surface temperature, gradient, and average production temperature of shallower and deeper producers in Singh et al., 2025, corresponding to the roughly 400℉ Phase I design. Fervo reports 460℉ at the Sawtooth 7 well (Fervo Energy, 2026a), so 430℉ is not an upper bound for the resource.
Reservoir Density, 2800, -- phyllite + quartzite + diorite + granodiorite ([Norbeck et al., 2023](https://doi.org/10.31223/X52X0B))
Reservoir Heat Capacity, 790
@@ -75,14 +87,14 @@ Reservoir Porosity, 0.0118
Reservoir Model, 1, -- See the [reservoir engineering calibration section](#res-eng-params-calibration-section) for additional details.
Reservoir Volume Option, 1, -- FRAC_NUM_SEP: Reservoir volume calculated with fracture separation and number of fractures as input
-Number of Fractures per Stimulated Well, 150, -- The model assumes an Extreme Limited Entry stimulation design (Fervo Energy, 2023) utilizing 12 stages with 15 clusters per stage (derived from Singh et al., 2025) and 81–85% stimulation success rate per 2024b ATB Moderate Scenario (NREL, 2025).
+Number of Fractures per Stimulated Well, 225, -- The model assumes an Extreme Limited Entry stimulation design (Fervo Energy, 2023a) utilizing 15 clusters per stage (derived from Singh et al., 2025) and 81–85% stimulation success rate per 2024b ATB Moderate Scenario (NREL, 2025). The previous 12-stage count for a 5,000 ft lateral is scaled proportionally to 18 stages for the 7,500 ft lateral of the Fervo 3.0 design, preserving the stage length of approximately 417 ft. Fervo attributes more stimulated reservoir volume per well and a more gradual decline profile to the longer laterals (Fervo Energy, 2026f).
Fracture Separation, 9.8255, -- Based on 30 foot cluster spacing (Singh et al., 2025) marginally uprated to align with long-term thermal decline behavior trend towards wider fracture spacing (Fercho et al., 2025).
Fracture Shape, 4, -- Bench design and fracture geometry in Singh et al., 2025 are given in rectangular dimensions.
Fracture Width, 305, -- Matches intra-bench well spacing of 500 ft (corresponding to fracture length of 1000 ft) (Singh. et al., 2025)
Fracture Height, 100, -- Actual fracture geometry is irregular and heterogeneous; this height complies with the minimum height required by the implemented bench design (200 ft; 60.96 meters) and yields an effective fracture surface area consistent with simulation results in Singh. et al., 2025.
-Water Loss Fraction, 0.01, -- "Long-term modeling, calibrated to early field data, predicts circulation recapture rates exceeding 99%" ([Geothermal Mythbusting: Water Use and Impacts](https://fervoenergy.com/geothermal-mythbusting-water-use-and-impacts/); Fervo Energy, 2025). Modeling in Singh et al., 2025 predicts fluid loss of 0.36% to 0.49%.
+Water Loss Fraction, 0.01, -- Fervo states that "long-term modeling, calibrated to early field data, predicts high circulation recapture rates" and that previous studies have shown recapture rates of 80% to 99% ([Geothermal Mythbusting: Water Use and Impacts](https://fervoenergy.com/geothermal-mythbusting-water-use-and-impacts/); Fervo Energy, 2025a). The 1% loss fraction corresponds to the top of that range. Modeling in Singh et al., 2025 predicts fluid loss of 0.36% to 0.49%.
Water Cost Adjustment Factor, 2, -- Local scarcity may increase procurement costs. Development near/on land with active/shut-in oil and gas wells could potentially utilize waste water to recover losses and offset costs.
Ambient Temperature, 11.17, -- Average annual temperature of Milford, Utah ([NCEI](https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals/#dataset=normals-annualseasonal&timeframe=30&station=USC00425654)). Note that this value affects heat to power conversion efficiency. The effects of hourly and seasonal ambient temperature fluctuations on efficiency and power generation are not modeled in this version of the case study.
@@ -93,22 +105,23 @@ Circulation Pump Efficiency, 0.80
# *** Well Bores Parameters ***
-Number of Production Wells, 56, -- Number of production wells required to produce net generation greater than the PPA minimum and total generation less than nameplate capacity (Gen 2 ORCs gross capacity).
+Number of Production Wells, 50, -- Number of production wells required to produce net generation greater than the PPA minimum and total generation less than nameplate capacity (11 × 60 MWe Gen 2 ORCs = 660 MWe gross; the previous version assumed 10 units, which cannot deliver 500 MWe net at a parasitic load of 20% or more). Reduced from 56 in the previous version; Fervo reports approximately 27% more power output for the same amount of steel at 430℉ versus 400℉ (Fervo Energy, 2026f), partly offset by the higher parasitic load now modeled (see Injectivity Index). 49 producers also satisfies the PPA minimum (500.2 MWe) but with lower NPV; 50 provides an 11 MWe margin. The resulting 84 initial wells (50 producers, 34 injectors) for 500 MWe is comparable to the up to 80 wells Fervo anticipates for the 400 MWe Phase II program (Fervo Energy, 2026f). The resulting average of ~12.6 MW gross (~10.5 MWe net) per production well is below the 15 MW gross power per production well Fervo shows for the 3.0 design (Fervo Energy, 2026g), which appears to require flow rates above the 107 kg/s modeled here (see Production Flow Rate per Well).
Number of Injection Wells per Production Well, 0.666, -- Modeled on the reference case 5-well bench pattern (3 producers : 2 injectors) described in Singh et al., 2025.
-Nonvertical Length per Multilateral Section, 5000 feet, -- Target lateral length given in environmental assessment (BLM, 2024). Note that lateral length is assumed to be an upper bound constraining the number of fractures per well for a given cluster spacing.
-Number of Multilateral Sections, 0, -- This parameter is set to 0 because, for this case study, the cost of horizontal drilling is included within the 'vertical drilling cost.' This approach allows us to more directly convey the overall well drilling and completion cost.
+Nonvertical Length per Multilateral Section, 7500 feet, -- Lateral length of the Fervo 3.0 well design used for Cape Station Phase II (Fervo Energy, 2026f; 2026g); Phase I used 5,000 ft laterals, the target length given in the environmental assessment (BLM, 2024). Note that lateral length is assumed to be an upper bound constraining the number of fractures per well for a given cluster spacing.
+Well Geometry Configuration, 4, -- L configuration: vertical section to reservoir depth plus one lateral per well. Required for GEOPHIRES to cost the lateral explicitly.
+Number of Multilateral Sections per Vertical Section, 1, -- One lateral per well (producers and injectors); GEOPHIRES multiplies by the total well count, so this does not need updating when the number of wells changes. Previous versions set Number of Multilateral Sections to 0 and folded lateral cost into the vertical well cost via the adjustment factor; the lateral is now costed explicitly (see All-in Nonvertical Drilling Costs and Multilaterals Cased). Requires GEOPHIRES 3.16.1 or later.
-Production Flow Rate per Well, 107, -- Cape Station pilot testing reported a sustained flow rate of 95–100 kg/s and maximum flow rate of 107 kg/s (Fervo Energy, 2024). Modeling by Singh et al. suggests initial flow rates of 120–130 kg/sec that gradually decrease over time (Singh et al., 2025). The case study flow rate is chosen both as a conservative target for long-term sustainability and to achieve a more economically favorable drawdown and redrilling schedule.
+Production Flow Rate per Well, 107, -- Cape Station pilot testing reported a sustained flow rate of 95–100 kg/s and maximum flow rate of 107 kg/s (Fervo Energy, 2024). Modeling by Singh et al. suggests initial flow rates of 120–130 kg/sec that gradually decrease over time (Singh et al., 2025). The case study flow rate is chosen both as a conservative target for long-term sustainability and to achieve a more economically favorable drawdown and redrilling schedule. Pumping load is set by the Productivity and Injectivity Index parameters rather than by flow rate; see Injectivity Index.
# The ATB Advanced Scenario models sustained flow rates of 110 kg/s (NREL, 2024).
-Production Well Diameter, 8.535, -- Inner diameter of 9⅝ inch casing size, the next standard casing size up from 7 inches, implied by announcement of "increasing casing diameter" (Fervo Energy, 2025).
-Injection Well Diameter, 8.535, -- See Production Well Diameter
+Production Well Diameter, 7.825, -- Inner diameter of 8⅝ inch, 36 lb/ft casing. Fervo disclosed 8⅝ inch casing for the 3.0 well design (up from 7 inch in Phase I) (Fervo Energy, 2026f; 2026g); the previous version of this case study inferred 9⅝ inch (8.535 in ID) from a less specific announcement (Fervo Energy, 2025b). Casing weight is not disclosed; API IDs for 8⅝ in range from about 7.5 in (49 lb/ft) to 8.1 in (24 lb/ft).
+Injection Well Diameter, 7.825, -- See Production Well Diameter
Production Wellhead Pressure, 303 psi, -- Modeled at a constant 300 psi in Singh et al., 2025. We use a marginally uprated value to conform to GEOPHIRES's calculated minimum wellhead pressure and nominally align with the gradual increase in WHP for constant flow rates modeled by Singh et al.
-Injectivity Index, 1.38, -- Based on ATB Conservative Scenario (NREL, 2025) derated to align with expected parasitic loads of 15–20% and per analyses that suggest lower productivity/injectivitity (Xing et al., 2025; Yearsley and Kombrink, 2024).
-Productivity Index, 1.13, -- See Injectivity Index
+Injectivity Index, 1.20, -- Based on ATB Conservative Scenario (NREL, 2025) derated per analyses that suggest lower productivity/injectivitity (Xing et al., 2025; Yearsley and Kombrink, 2024), and further derated in this version (from 1.38) to yield a parasitic load of at least 20% of net generation. Norbeck (2026) reported observed parasitic loads of approximately 25–35% in Phase I operations with a goal of eventually reaching 15–20%; a SOAK case is not credibly modeled below the low end of that goal. The previous version's ~16% aligned with the 16.7% ceiling implied by Fervo's Phase II procurement of 480 MW gross for 400 MW net, which is a design target rather than observed performance. Result: 21.1% initial and 20.8% average pumping power relative to net generation (17.2% relative to gross generation). The production-side pressure drop is dominated by flow ÷ Productivity Index; the injection side becomes pump-limited once flow ÷ Injectivity Index exceeds the plant outlet pressure, which occurs below an Injectivity Index of roughly 1.38 at 107 kg/s per producer.
+Productivity Index, 0.98, -- See Injectivity Index. Derated from 1.13 in proportion with the Injectivity Index (ratio 1.22 preserved).
Ramey Production Wellbore Model, True, -- Ramey's model estimates the geofluid temperature drop in production wells
Injection Temperature, 53.6, -- Calibrated with GEOPHIRES model-calculated reinjection temperature (Beckers and McCabe, 2019). Close to upper bound of Project Red injection temperatures (75–125℉; 23.89–51.67℃) (Norbeck and Latimer, 2023). Note: GEOPHIRES enforces a thermodynamic optimum that overrides higher values, such as the 85°C ORC outlet temperature specified in Cape Station's plant design (DeGolyer and MacNaughton, 2024) (intended for silica scaling mitigation), resulting in a "maximum theoretical power" scenario. Support for higher reinjection temperatures may be added in future GEOPHIRES versions.
@@ -123,3 +136,20 @@ Time steps per year, 12
Project Latitude, 38.506196
Project Longitude, -112.918155
+
+# *** ADDITIONAL REFERENCES (September 2026 Update) ***
+# Fervo Energy. (2026a, August 12). Fervo Energy Reports Second Quarter 2026 Results. https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-reports-second-quarter-2026-results/
+# Fervo Energy. (2026b, September 1). Fervo Energy and Google Sign 396 MW PPA. https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-and-google-sign-396-mw-ppa/
+# Fervo Energy. (2026c, June 22). First Quarter 2026 Results. https://ir.fervoenergy.com/news-releases/news-release-details/fervo-energy-reports-first-quarter-2026-results
+# Fervo Energy. (2026d, May 11). Form S-1/A (Amendment No. 3). Cape Station Phase I overnight capital cost of approximately $7,000/kW. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1853868/000162828026033127/fervoenergy-sx1a3.htm
+# Fervo Energy. (2026e, September 24). Fervo Energy Achieves First Power at Cape Station, a Landmark Moment for the Future of Enhanced Geothermal Systems. https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-achieves-first-power-at-cape-station-a-landmark-moment-for-the-future-of-enhanced-geothermal-systems/
+# Fervo Energy. (2026f, August 12). Fervo Energy (FRVO) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript. The Motley Fool, published August 19, 2026. https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2026/08/19/fervo-energy-frvo-q2-2026-earnings-call-transcript/ (webcast replay: https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/va49yxkc/)
+# Fervo Energy. (2026g, August 12). Q2 2026 Quarterly Results [Earnings presentation]. https://ir.fervoenergy.com/static-files/28260ce5-2ac0-458e-bfb7-2d80f3709cae
+# BLS. (2026a, June 10). Consumer Price Index - May 2026. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_06102026.htm
+# BLS. (2026b, August 12). Consumer Price Index - July 2026. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_08122026.htm
+# CTVC. (2025, September 2). The $783m PPA that keeps on drilling #260. https://www.ctvc.co/the-783m-ppa-that-keeps-on-drilling-260/
+# PacifiCorp. (2017, June 1). FAQ: Transmission and Ancillary Service Rate Changes. https://www.oasis.oati.com/PPW/PPWdocs/Rate_Update_FAQ_20170601.pdf
+# BPA. (2026, June). BPA Facts (DOE/BP-5493). Transmission rates (fiscal years 2024-2025). https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
+# US DOE. (2019). GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet (p. 163, drilling cost scenarios). https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/06/f63/GeoVision-full-report-opt.pdf
+# Seel, J., Manderlink, N., Mulvaney Kemp, J., Rand, J., Gorman, W., Wiser, R., Cotton, W., Porter, K. (2026, February). Generator Interconnection Costs to the Transmission System in non-ISO Balancing Authorities. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/2026-02/lbnl_2026.02.23_ba_interconnection_costs.pdf
+# Utility Dive. (2026, June 5). Fervo Energy faces transmission constraints in the West, analysts say. https://www.utilitydive.com/news/fervo-energy-geothermal-transmission-constraints/822141/
diff --git a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-6.out b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-6.out
index a486b14e4..a6add3479 100644
--- a/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-6.out
+++ b/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-6.out
@@ -4,10 +4,10 @@
Simulation Metadata
----------------------
- GEOPHIRES Version: 3.14.1
- Simulation Date: 2026-06-18
- Simulation Time: 10:42
- Calculation Time: 1.929 sec
+ GEOPHIRES Version: 3.17.0
+ Simulation Date: 2026-09-24
+ Simulation Time: 10:48
+ Calculation Time: 1.838 sec
***SUMMARY OF RESULTS***
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ Simulation Metadata
***SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS***
+
Initial geofluid availability: 0.19 MW/(kg/s)
Maximum Total Electricity Generation: 119.94 MW
Average Total Electricity Generation: 119.51 MW
diff --git a/tests/geophires_x_tests/test_fervo_project_cape_5.py b/tests/geophires_x_tests/test_fervo_project_cape_5.py
index 99b8c64b6..9b25d808f 100644
--- a/tests/geophires_x_tests/test_fervo_project_cape_5.py
+++ b/tests/geophires_x_tests/test_fervo_project_cape_5.py
@@ -9,6 +9,10 @@
from base_test_case import BaseTestCase
from geophires_docs import generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import FlowRateParametricRow
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_row
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary
+from geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios import load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric
from geophires_x.GeoPHIRESUtils import quantity
from geophires_x.GeoPHIRESUtils import sig_figs
from geophires_x.Parameter import HasQuantity
@@ -115,34 +119,36 @@ def test_fervo_project_cape_5_results_against_reference_values(self):
)
min_net_gen = r.result['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS']['Minimum Net Electricity Generation']['value']
- self.assertGreater(min_net_gen, 499)
- self.assertLess(min_net_gen, 505)
+ self.assertGreater(min_net_gen, 500)
+ self.assertLess(min_net_gen, 520)
max_total_gen = r.result['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS']['Maximum Total Electricity Generation'][
'value'
]
- self.assertGreater(max_total_gen, 550)
- self.assertLess(max_total_gen, 600)
+ self.assertGreater(max_total_gen, 600)
+ self.assertLess(max_total_gen, 660) # Exceeding 660 MW would require a 12th 60 MWe Gen 2 ORC unit
lcoe = r.result['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Electricity breakeven price']['value']
- self.assertGreater(lcoe, 7.5)
- self.assertLess(lcoe, 8.75)
+ self.assertGreater(lcoe, 9.5)
+ self.assertLess(lcoe, 11.5)
redrills = r.result['ENGINEERING PARAMETERS']['Number of times redrilling']['value']
self.assertGreater(redrills, 1)
self.assertLess(redrills, 6)
max_phase_2_permitted_wells = 320
- self.assertLess(self._number_of_wells(r) * redrills, max_phase_2_permitted_wells)
- self.assertGreater(self._number_of_wells(r) * redrills, max_phase_2_permitted_wells * 0.75)
+ total_wells_over_project_lifetime = self._number_of_wells(r) * (1 + redrills)
+ self.assertLessEqual(total_wells_over_project_lifetime, max_phase_2_permitted_wells)
+ self.assertGreater(total_wells_over_project_lifetime, max_phase_2_permitted_wells * 0.75)
- well_cost = r.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)']['Drilling and completion costs per well']['value']
- self.assertLess(well_cost, 5.0)
- self.assertGreater(well_cost, 4.0)
+ # Between Fervo's best demonstrated Phase I well (adjustment factor 0.58) and the unadjusted ATB baseline (0.9)
+ well_cost = r.result['CAPITAL COSTS (M$)']['Drilling and completion costs']['value'] / self._number_of_wells(r)
+ self.assertLess(well_cost, 10.6)
+ self.assertGreater(well_cost, 6.8)
pumping_power_pct = r.result['SURFACE EQUIPMENT SIMULATION RESULTS'][
'Initial pumping power/net installed power'
]['value']
- self.assertGreater(pumping_power_pct, 14.5)
+ self.assertGreater(pumping_power_pct, 20)
self.assertLess(pumping_power_pct, 30)
num_prod_wells = r.result['SUMMARY OF RESULTS']['Number of production wells']['value']
@@ -174,7 +180,7 @@ def generate_documentation_markdown() -> None:
example_result = GeophiresXResult(self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out'))
- expected_drilling_cost_MUSD_per_well = 4.46
+ expected_drilling_cost_MUSD_per_well = 8.48
# number_of_doublets = inputs_in_markdown['Number of Doublets']['value']
number_of_wells = self._number_of_wells(example_result)
self.assertAlmostEqualWithinPercentage(
@@ -184,8 +190,8 @@ def generate_documentation_markdown() -> None:
)
self.assertEqual('MUSD', results_in_markdown['Well Drilling and Completion Costs']['unit'])
- expected_base_stim_cost_MUSD_per_well = 4.0
- expected_all_in_stim_cost_MUSD_per_well = 4.83
+ expected_base_stim_cost_USD_per_m2 = 0.875
+ expected_all_in_stim_cost_MUSD_per_well = 7.25
self.assertAlmostEqualWithinSigFigs(
expected_all_in_stim_cost_MUSD_per_well * number_of_wells,
results_in_markdown['Stimulation Costs']['value'],
@@ -194,10 +200,15 @@ def generate_documentation_markdown() -> None:
self.assertEqual('MUSD', results_in_markdown['Stimulation Costs']['unit'])
self.assertEqual(
- expected_base_stim_cost_MUSD_per_well,
- inputs_in_markdown['Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well']['value'],
+ expected_base_stim_cost_USD_per_m2,
+ inputs_in_markdown['Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Fracture Surface Area']['value'],
+ )
+ self.assertEqual(
+ 'USD/m**2', inputs_in_markdown['Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Fracture Surface Area']['unit']
+ )
+ self.assertEqual(
+ 'Stimulated', inputs_in_markdown['Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well']['value']
)
- self.assertEqual('MUSD', inputs_in_markdown['Reservoir Stimulation Capital Cost per Production Well']['unit'])
class _Q(HasQuantity):
def __init__(self, vu: dict[str, Any]):
@@ -287,6 +298,118 @@ def __init__(self, vu: dict[str, Any]):
num_sig_figs=3,
)
+ def test_flow_rate_parametric_data_matches_example_result(self) -> None:
+ """
+ The flow rate parametric data is regenerated manually (see geophires_docs.fervo_project_cape_5_scenarios), so
+ this test fails when Fervo_Project_Cape-5 changes without the data being regenerated.
+ """
+ input_params = ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(
+ from_file_path=self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt')
+ )
+ result = GeophiresXResult(self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out'))
+ base_flow_rate = float(self._get_input_parameters(input_params)['Production Flow Rate per Well'])
+
+ base_row = get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_row(load_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric(), base_flow_rate)
+ expected_base_row = FlowRateParametricRow.from_result(base_flow_rate, result)
+ self.assertEqual(expected_base_row.redrills, base_row.redrills)
+ for field_name in ['avg_net_mw', 'min_net_mw', 'lcoe_cents_per_kwh', 'irr_pct', 'npv_musd']:
+ with self.subTest(field_name=field_name):
+ self.assertAlmostEqual(getattr(expected_base_row, field_name), getattr(base_row, field_name), places=2)
+
+ def test_get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary(self) -> None:
+ def _row(flow: float, min_net_mw: float, redrills: int, irr_pct: float) -> FlowRateParametricRow:
+ return FlowRateParametricRow(
+ flow_kg_per_s=flow,
+ avg_net_mw=min_net_mw + 10,
+ min_net_mw=min_net_mw,
+ redrills=redrills,
+ lcoe_cents_per_kwh=10.0,
+ irr_pct=irr_pct,
+ npv_musd=300.0,
+ )
+
+ rows = [
+ _row(90, 480, 1, 25.0),
+ _row(91, 490, 2, 22.0),
+ _row(92, 500, 2, 23.0),
+ _row(93, 510, 2, 23.3),
+ _row(94, 520, 2, 23.1),
+ _row(95, 530, 3, 21.0),
+ ]
+ summary = get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary(rows, 92, 500)
+ self.assertEqual(
+ [(90, 91, 1, 2), (94, 95, 2, 3)],
+ [
+ (it.flow_below_kg_per_s, it.flow_at_kg_per_s, it.redrills_below, it.redrills_at)
+ for it in summary.redrilling_steps
+ ],
+ )
+ self.assertEqual(92, summary.minimum_ppa_feasible_flow_rate_kg_per_s)
+ self.assertEqual(2, summary.base_redrills)
+ self.assertAlmostEqual(0.3, summary.max_irr_change_above_base_within_band_pct_pts, places=6)
+
+ with self.assertRaises(ValueError):
+ # A flow rate with fewer redrilling events than the base case meets the PPA minimum.
+ get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary([_row(90, 500, 1, 25.0), *rows[1:]], 92, 500)
+
+ with self.assertRaises(ValueError):
+ # Base case flow rate is not in the parametric data.
+ get_fpc5_flow_rate_parametric_summary(rows, 107, 500)
+
+ def test_scenario_input_parameters(self) -> None:
+ input_params = ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(
+ from_file_path=self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt')
+ )
+ result = GeophiresXResult(self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out'))
+ scenario_params = generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.get_fpc5_scenario_input_parameters(input_params, result)
+
+ # Rates and utilization factors stated in the Investment Tax Credit Rate and Utilization Factor discussions and
+ # used in the sensitivity analysis, and the reduced redrilling scenario's fracture height (+20%).
+ self.assertEqual(
+ [
+ {'Investment Tax Credit Rate': 0.2768},
+ {'Utilization Factor': 0.867},
+ {'Utilization Factor': 0.822},
+ {'Fracture Height': 120.0},
+ ],
+ list(scenario_params.values()),
+ )
+
+ def test_previous_version_comparison_tables(self) -> None:
+ # noinspection PyProtectedMember
+ previous_input_params, previous_result = generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md._get_fpc5_previous_version(
+ Path(self._get_test_file_path('../../')).absolute()
+ )
+ input_params = ImmutableGeophiresInputParameters(
+ from_file_path=self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt')
+ )
+ result = GeophiresXResult(self._get_test_file_path('../examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out'))
+
+ input_changes_md = generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.generate_fpc5_previous_version_input_changes_table_md(
+ previous_input_params, input_params
+ )
+ self.assertIn('| Reservoir Depth | 2.68 km | 3.06 km |', input_changes_md)
+ self.assertIn('| Number of Multilateral Sections | 0 | Not set |', input_changes_md)
+ self.assertNotIn('| Fracture Separation |', input_changes_md) # Unchanged
+
+ result_changes_md = generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.generate_fpc5_previous_version_result_changes_table_md(
+ previous_result, result
+ )
+ self.assertIn('| LCOE ($/MWh) | 85.0 |', result_changes_md)
+ self.assertIn('| Redrilling events | 3 |', result_changes_md)
+
+ # Previous and this version compared to themselves
+ self.assertEqual(
+ '| Parameter | Previous Version | This Version |\n|---|---|---|',
+ generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.generate_fpc5_previous_version_input_changes_table_md(
+ input_params, input_params
+ ),
+ )
+ self.assertNotIn(
+ 'pts',
+ generate_fervo_project_cape_5_md.generate_fpc5_previous_version_result_changes_table_md(result, result),
+ )
+
def parse_markdown_results_structured(self, markdown_text: str) -> dict:
"""
Parses result values from markdown into a structured dictionary with values and units.
@@ -446,6 +569,12 @@ def _parse_value_unit(self, raw_string: str) -> dict:
value = float(match.group(1))
return {'value': value, 'unit': 'USD/kW'}
+ # Dollar per square meter format, optionally followed by additional display data ($X/m² ... -> USD/m**2)
+ match = re.match(r'^\$(\d+\.?\d*)/m²', clean_str)
+ if match:
+ value = float(match.group(1))
+ return {'value': value, 'unit': 'USD/m**2'}
+
# Percentage format (X.X%)
match = re.search(r'(\d+\.?\d*)%$', clean_str)
if match:
diff --git a/tests/regenerate-example-result.sh b/tests/regenerate-example-result.sh
index f236a0e02..502d00526 100755
--- a/tests/regenerate-example-result.sh
+++ b/tests/regenerate-example-result.sh
@@ -17,7 +17,12 @@ cd "$(dirname "$0")"
echo "Regenerating example: $1..."
-if [[ $1 == "Fervo_Project_Cape-6" ]]
+# Syncing Fervo_Project_Cape-6 from the 2026-09 revision of Fervo_Project_Cape-5 requires
+# GEOPHIRES_SYNC_FPC6_FROM_FPC5=true. The overrides below do not yet scale Fervo_Project_Cape-5's interconnection and
+# transmission costs to 100 MWe, and the 100 MWe well count and plant sizing have not been re-derived for the Fervo 3.0
+# well design. Until they are, Fervo_Project_Cape-6 retains the inputs derived from the previous revision of
+# Fervo_Project_Cape-5.
+if [[ $1 == "Fervo_Project_Cape-6" && "$GEOPHIRES_SYNC_FPC6_FROM_FPC5" == "true" ]]
then
echo "Syncing Fervo_Project_Cape-6.txt from Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt..."
## Variants
@@ -462,6 +501,8 @@ See [Redrilling Assumptions](#technical-operational-considerations) below for fu
The case study also includes a 100 MWe model, `Fervo_Project_Cape-6`, with equivalent capacity to Phase I.
Note that like the 500 MWe model, `Fervo_Project_Cape-6` represents a SOAK project and not the real-world Phase I implementation as built by Fervo.
+`Fervo_Project_Cape-6` has not yet been updated for the September 2026 Update and reflects the inputs of the
+previous version of this case study.
[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires/?geophires-example-id=Fervo_Project_Cape-6) to view the
100 MWe model in the GEOPHIRES web interface.
@@ -470,32 +511,62 @@ and [Fervo_Project_Cape-6.out](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEO
### Reduced Redrilling Scenario
-[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires?shared-geophires-result-id=4eb5e843-be61-4518-8fda-7d0b41348e53)
-to view a scenario with reduced redrilling in the web interface, representing an effective longer well life compared to the base case.
-Redrilling is reduced via greater effective fracture surface area per stimulated well, achieved by an increased number of fractures per well and greater fracture height.
-Stimulation cost is increased to nominally reflect the larger required job size.
-
-{# TODO port scenario to source code instead of out-of-band shared result
- (probably would want to generate similar to Fervo_Project_Cape-6 #}
+This scenario increases `Fracture Height` by {{ reduced_redrilling_fracture_height_increase_pct }}% (from
+{{ reduced_redrilling_base_fracture_height_m }} m to {{ reduced_redrilling_fracture_height_m }} m), which increases
+fracture surface area per stimulated well by the same proportion and extends the thermal plateau.
+Stimulation cost, which the case study parameterizes per unit fracture surface area, increases accordingly.
+The number of redrilling events falls from {{ reduced_redrilling_base_redrills_word }}
+({{ reduced_redrilling_base_redrilling_years_display }} of operations) to {{ reduced_redrilling_redrills_word }}
+({{ reduced_redrilling_redrilling_years_display }}), and minimum net generation remains above the
+{{ ppa_minimum_net_generation_mw }} MWe PPA requirement.
-### ResFrac Profile + Hotter/Deeper Scenario
+{{ reduced_redrilling_comparison_table_md }}
-[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires?shared-geophires-result-id=834b0096-15b1-4dd3-b262-612e9df1342f)
-to view the `Fervo_Project_Cape-6 Variant: ResFrac Profile + Hotter/Deeper Scenario` in the web interface.
-Note that this scenario models two redrilling events (rather than three) and yields 100 MWe average net generation
-(rather than 100 MWe minimum net generation), reflected in the power generation profile below.
+GEOPHIRES amortizes the cost of all redrilling events uniformly over the project lifetime (see Redrilling Assumptions
+in the [Discussion section](#discussion-section)), so each avoided event reduces operating costs from the first year of
+operations.
+This overstates the value of avoiding a late redrilling event compared with incurring its cost in the year it occurs.
-{# TODO port scenario to source code instead of out-of-band shared result #}
+[Click here](https://gtp.scientificwebservices.com/geophires/?geophires-example-id=Fervo_Project_Cape-5) to open the
+base case in the GEOPHIRES web interface, and set `Fracture Height` to {{ reduced_redrilling_fracture_height_m }} to
+reproduce this scenario.
-
-
-See the [Simulation Comparison section](#simulation-comparison) for details.
+
### Previous Versions
Documentation is available for the following previous case study versions, which are deprecated in favor of this version.
{# @formatter:off #}
+#### `Fervo_Project_Cape-5` (Previous Revision)
+
+Source code: [Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEOPHIRES/blob/fe21df0ec4b85430e3abd96e74811f9e19824478/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.txt),
+[Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEOPHIRES/blob/fe21df0ec4b85430e3abd96e74811f9e19824478/tests/examples/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.out),
+and [documentation template](https://github.com/softwareengineerprogrammer/GEOPHIRES/blob/fe21df0ec4b85430e3abd96e74811f9e19824478/docs/Fervo_Project_Cape-5.md.jinja)
+
+Last Updated: 2026-07-03
+
+Key differences in the September 2026 Update:
+
+1. Subsurface design aligned with the Fervo 3.0 well design: 3.06 km reservoir depth (221℃ / 430℉), 7,500 ft cased laterals, 8⅝ inch casing, and 225 fractures per well
+1. Lateral drilling cost modeled explicitly (`Well Geometry Configuration`, `Number of Multilateral Sections per Vertical Section`, `Multilaterals Cased`, `All-in Nonvertical Drilling Costs`), with the drilling cost adjustment factor recalibrated to 0.72 against Fervo's disclosed Phase I well costs
+1. Stimulation cost parameterized per unit fracture surface area
+1. Parasitic load calibrated to 20% or more of net generation (Productivity Index and Injectivity Index derated)
+1. Wellfield re-sized to 50 production wells and 34 injection wells; nameplate capacity of 11 Gen 2 ORC units
+1. Grid interconnection ($250M) and firm transmission service ($21M/yr) added
+1. PPA starting price of $115/MWh with a 1.5%-equivalent escalator from the second operating year, capped at the year 15 price
+1. Construction period of 4 years; inflation rate of 3.0%; exploration cost re-derived from the current well cost
+1. `ResFrac Profile + Hotter/Deeper Scenario` variant removed. It applied the Singh et al. (2025) temperature profile for the Phase I design to the previous version's 100 MWe inputs at a 3 km depth; the base case now uses the deeper 3.0 design, to which that profile does not apply
+1. Reduced Redrilling Scenario rebuilt on current inputs (greater fracture height) and generated with the documentation instead of linked as a shared result
+
+The following tables list every input parameter whose value differs between the previous version and this version,
+and compare key results.
+Input parameter comments are not compared; see the input files for the rationale behind each change.
+
+{{ previous_version_input_changes_table_md }}
+
+{{ previous_version_result_changes_table_md }}
+
#### `Fervo_Project_Cape-4`
[Version documentation](Fervo_Project_Cape-4.html)
@@ -534,6 +605,9 @@ Users may wish to explicitly encode these cost factors in their own models by us
For OPEX, such parameters may include `Wellfield O&M Cost Adjustment Factor`,
`Surface Plant O&M Cost Adjustment Factor` or `Total O&M Cost`. For CAPEX, `One-time Flat License Fees Etc` or
`Total Capital Cost` may be appropriate.
+Note that the case study itself uses `One-time Flat License Fees Etc` for grid interconnection cost and
+`Annual License Fees Etc` for transmission service cost, so additional costs entered via these parameters should be
+added to the case study values.
### Financial Considerations
@@ -544,16 +618,19 @@ Including these may reduce the levered IRR.
1. Transaction & Closing Fees: The Total CAPEX includes interest during construction but does not explicitly budget for debt closing or bank fees. In large-scale energy infrastructure, these transaction costs may constitute a small percent of total debt volume. [Click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/451) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
1. Reserve Accounts: The cash flow analysis assumes immediate liquidity. It does not model working capital, debt service, or major equipment replacement reserve accounts. Project financial partners may require that the project owner(s) establish and fund reserve accounts. [Click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/460) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
1. Insurance Premiums: The model does not include a specific line item for insurance. For EGS projects involving deep subsurface risks, insurance premiums could represent an additional annual operating expense. [Click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/369) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
+1. Investment Tax Credit Basis: GEOPHIRES's SAM Single Owner PPA model applies the ITC rate to total installed cost, which includes the grid interconnection cost. Qualified interconnection property is only eligible for the ITC for energy property of 5 MW or less (IRC §48(a)(8)), so the model overstates the credit by approximately {{ '$' ~ (interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd * 0.3) | round | int ~ 'M' }} (30% of the {{ '$' ~ interconnection_share_of_total_capex_musd ~ 'M' }} interconnection cost including its share of inflation and interest during construction). The case study retains the statutory 30% rate because the same line item carries an unmodeled benefit in the other direction: in non-ISO balancing authorities such as PacifiCorp, network upgrade costs, the majority of interconnection cost, are often refunded to the interconnection customer over up to 20 years with interest once the plant reaches commercial operation (Seel et al., 2026). An ITC rate of {{ itc_rate_excluding_interconnection_pct }}% applied to total installed cost removes the overstatement and reduces the after-tax IRR by approximately {{ itc_excluding_interconnection_irr_reduction_pct_pts }} percentage points. A parameter that excludes a specified amount from the ITC basis, or an ITC amount input, would allow both effects to be modeled explicitly.
### Technical & Operational Considerations
-1. Grid Interconnection & Transmission: For a 500 MWe project, interconnection costs (substation upgrades, gen-tie lines) can be substantial. Unless the site is adjacent to high-capacity transmission with available queue space, interconnection costs could add materially to the project budget.
+1. Grid Interconnection & Transmission: The case study includes {{ '$' ~ interconnection_cost_musd ~ 'M' }} of network resource interconnection cost in CAPEX (entered as `One-time Flat License Fees Etc`) and {{ '$' ~ transmission_cost_musd_per_yr ~ 'M/yr' }} of long-term firm point-to-point transmission service in OPEX (entered as `Annual License Fees Etc`); see the Economic Parameters table for derivations. Not modeled: refunds of network upgrade costs to the interconnection customer after commercial operation (see Investment Tax Credit Basis above); a second firm transmission reservation that would be required to deliver across an intervening system to a CAISO offtaker, which could roughly double the transmission cost; transmission losses; and escalation of the transmission rate, which GEOPHIRES holds flat in nominal terms.
+1. Curtailment: Curtailment is not modeled. The `Utilization Factor` input represents plant availability, and the GEOPHIRES SAM Economic Model integration does not currently support grid-limit or curtailment inputs. The case study assumes network resource interconnection service sufficient for full output. As an illustration, reducing the `Utilization Factor` by 5% and 10% (to {{ curtailment_5pct_utilization_factor }} and {{ curtailment_10pct_utilization_factor }}) as a flat proxy for curtailment reduces the after-tax IRR by approximately {{ curtailment_5pct_irr_reduction_pct_pts }} and {{ curtailment_10pct_irr_reduction_pct_pts }} percentage points, respectively. A per-year utilization factor schedule would also allow a first-year commissioning ramp to be modeled, such as the ramp-up Fervo reports for the first Phase I GeoBlock as it brings the full well system online after first power (Fervo Energy, 2026e).
+1. Nominal O&M Costs: GEOPHIRES holds fixed O&M costs, including the transmission service cost, flat in nominal terms. At the case study's 3.0% inflation rate, this represents a declining real cost over the 30-year project lifetime, which is optimistic.
1. Seasonal and Hourly Performance Granularity: As noted in the Surface Plant Parameters, this study uses a fixed annual average ambient temperature. It does not model the seasonal or hourly impacts on air-cooled condenser efficiency. In reality, power output would likely dip during peak summer hours and increase during winter. Future versions of GEOPHIRES may add support for these considerations; [click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/395) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
-1. Redrilling Assumptions: Management of thermal decline is modeled as periodic redrilling events that reset the reservoir's heat content to initial conditions at intervals determined by the `Maximum Drawdown` parameter. The cost of these events is amortized into a uniform annual operating expense. In reality, these events may be scheduled as discrete capital-intensive campaigns punctuated by years of lower spending, or as a continuous program of make-up well drilling to mitigate decline. [Click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/381) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
-1. Reservoir Modeling Fidelity: The base case utilizes the Gringarten analytical model, which produces a characteristic thermal plateau maintained until a sharp breakthrough event. A key open question is whether this idealized profile provides an acceptably accurate approximation of drawdown over time, or if it masks the gradual dispersion caused by flow channeling and heterogeneity. Future work should evaluate whether Gringarten remains the optimal scoping proxy, or if an alternative analytical solution[^alt-analytical-solution-proposal] would offer a superior balance of speed and realism by better mimicking the shape of numerical simulation outputs.
-1. ORC Efficiency: The power generation results rely on the GEOPHIRES built-in supercritical ORC efficiency correlation, which assumes the selection of an optimal working fluid for each specific geofluid temperature. For further details, please refer to the [Surface Plant section in the Theoretical Basis for GEOPHIRES](Theoretical-Basis-for-GEOPHIRES.html#surface-plant). This limitation may be addressed in the future by [FGEM integration](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/395).
+1. Redrilling Assumptions: Management of thermal decline is modeled as periodic redrilling events that reset the reservoir's heat content to initial conditions at intervals determined by the `Maximum Drawdown` parameter. The cost of these events is amortized into a uniform annual operating expense. In reality, these events may be scheduled as discrete capital-intensive campaigns punctuated by years of lower spending, or as a continuous program of make-up well drilling to mitigate decline. Fervo describes its approach as a makeup-well drilling program in which later wells benefit from cumulative learnings (Fervo Energy, 2026f). [Click here](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/381) to view the relevant GEOPHIRES tracking issue on GitHub.
+1. Reservoir Modeling Fidelity: The base case utilizes the Gringarten analytical model, which produces a characteristic thermal plateau maintained until a sharp breakthrough event. A key open question is whether this idealized profile provides an acceptably accurate approximation of drawdown over time, or if it masks the gradual dispersion caused by flow channeling and heterogeneity. The [Project Red case study](Fervo_Project_Red.html) compares the GEOPHIRES Gringarten model against the first two years of measured production temperatures from Fervo's Project Red and finds close alignment when the active fracture count is de-rated for heterogeneous flow; that record does not yet extend to the long-term decline that determines redrilling timing. Future work should evaluate whether Gringarten remains the optimal scoping proxy, or if an alternative analytical solution[^alt-analytical-solution-proposal] would offer a superior balance of speed and realism by better mimicking the shape of numerical simulation outputs.
+1. ORC Efficiency: The power generation results rely on the GEOPHIRES built-in supercritical ORC efficiency correlation, which assumes the selection of an optimal working fluid for each specific geofluid temperature. For further details, please refer to the [Surface Plant section in the Theoretical Basis for GEOPHIRES](Theoretical-Basis-for-GEOPHIRES.html#surface-plant). GEOPHIRES warns that the built-in ORC correlations may not be valid above a production temperature of 200℃; the case study production temperature (approximately {{ average_production_temperature_degc ~ '℃' }}) exceeds this, which adds uncertainty to the modeled conversion efficiency and power plant cost. This limitation may be addressed in the future by [FGEM integration](https://github.com/NatLabRockies/GEOPHIRES-X/issues/395).
-[^alt-analytical-solution-proposal]: Possible alternatives might include Residence Time Distribution (RTD) modeling, or a parameterized profile generator based on the Bezier curve approach used in the "ResFrac Profile" variant.
+[^alt-analytical-solution-proposal]: Possible alternatives might include Residence Time Distribution (RTD) modeling, or a parameterized profile generator (for example, Bezier curves fitted to numerical simulation results, as in the ResFrac Profile variant included in previous versions of this case study).
---
@@ -568,6 +645,18 @@ https://www.baytexenergy.com/content/uploads/2024/04/24-04-Baytex-Eagle-Ford-Pre
Beckers, K., McCabe, K. (2019) GEOPHIRES v2.0: updated geothermal techno-economic simulation tool. Geotherm Energy
7,5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40517-019-0119-6
+BLS. (2026a, June 10). Consumer Price Index – May 2026.
+https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_06102026.htm
+
+BLS. (2026b, August 12). Consumer Price Index – July 2026.
+https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_08122026.htm
+
+BPA. (2026, June). BPA Facts (DOE/BP-5493). Transmission rates (fiscal years 2024–2025).
+https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
+
+CTVC. (2025, September 2). The $783m PPA that keeps on drilling #260.
+https://www.ctvc.co/the-783m-ppa-that-keeps-on-drilling-260/
+
DeGolyer and MacNaughton. (2024, September 24).
Report as of June 30, 2024 on Heat Initially In Place associated with the Project Cape Area prepared for Fervo Energy.
Securities and Exchange Commission, Exhibit 99.1.
@@ -583,25 +672,49 @@ Update on the geology, temperature, fracturing, and resource potential at the Ca
acquired from the drilling of additional horizontal EGS wells. Proceedings of the 50th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir
Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/pdf/IGAstandard/SGW/2025/Fercho.pdf
-Fervo Energy. (2023, September 19). Fervo’s Commercialization Plans for Enhanced Geothermal Systems (
+Fervo Energy. (2023a, September 19). Fervo’s Commercialization Plans for Enhanced Geothermal Systems (
EGS). https://egi.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/09.45-Emma-McConville-Fervo_EGI_Sept-19-2023.pdf
-Fervo Energy. (2023, September 25). Fervo Energy Breaks Ground on the World’s Largest Next-gen Geothermal Project.
+Fervo Energy. (2023b, September 25). Fervo Energy Breaks Ground on the World’s Largest Next-gen Geothermal Project.
https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-breaks-ground-on-the-worlds-largest-next-gen-geothermal-project/
Fervo Energy. (2024, September 10). Fervo Energy’s Record-Breaking Production Results Showcase Rapid Scale Up of
Enhanced
Geothermal. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240910997008/en/Fervo-Energys-Record-Breaking-Production-Results-Showcase-Rapid-Scale-Up-of-Enhanced-Geothermal
-Fervo Energy. (2025, March 31). Geothermal Mythbusting: Water Use and
+Fervo Energy. (2025a, March 31). Geothermal Mythbusting: Water Use and
Impacts. https://fervoenergy.com/geothermal-mythbusting-water-use-and-impacts/
-Fervo Energy. (2025, April 15). Fervo Energy Announces 31 MW Power Purchase Agreement with Shell
+Fervo Energy. (2025b, April 15). Fervo Energy Announces 31 MW Power Purchase Agreement with Shell
Energy. https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-announces-31-mw-power-purchase-agreement-with-shell-energy/
-Fervo Energy (2025, June 11). Fervo Energy Secures $206 Million In New Financing To Accelerate Cape Station Development.
+Fervo Energy. (2025c, June 11). Fervo Energy Secures $206 Million In New Financing To Accelerate Cape Station Development.
https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-secures-new-financing-to-accelerate-development/
+Fervo Energy. (2026a, August 12). Fervo Energy Reports Second Quarter 2026 Results.
+https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-reports-second-quarter-2026-results/
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026b, September 1). Fervo Energy and Google Sign 396 MW PPA.
+https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-and-google-sign-396-mw-ppa/
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026c, June 22). Fervo Energy Reports First Quarter 2026 Results.
+https://ir.fervoenergy.com/news-releases/news-release-details/fervo-energy-reports-first-quarter-2026-results
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026d, May 11). Form S-1/A Registration Statement (Amendment No. 3). U.S. Securities and Exchange
+Commission. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1853868/000162828026033127/fervoenergy-sx1a3.htm
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026e, September 24). Fervo Energy Achieves First Power at Cape Station, a Landmark Moment for the
+Future of Enhanced Geothermal Systems.
+https://fervoenergy.com/fervo-energy-achieves-first-power-at-cape-station-a-landmark-moment-for-the-future-of-enhanced-geothermal-systems/
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026f, August 12). Fervo Energy (FRVO) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript. The Motley Fool,
+published August 19, 2026.
+https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2026/08/19/fervo-energy-frvo-q2-2026-earnings-call-transcript/
+(webcast replay: https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/va49yxkc/)
+
+Fervo Energy. (2026g, August 12). Q2 2026 Quarterly Results [Earnings presentation].
+https://ir.fervoenergy.com/static-files/28260ce5-2ac0-458e-bfb7-2d80f3709cae
+
Gradl, C. (2018). Review of Recent Unconventional Completion Innovations and their Applicability to EGS Wells. Stanford
Geothermal Workshop.
https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/pdf/IGAstandard/SGW/2018/Gradl.pdf
@@ -651,9 +764,16 @@ Rapid Cost Reductions and Performance Improvements. https://doi.org/10.31223/X5V
Norbeck J., Latimer T. (2023). Commercial-Scale Demonstration of a First-of-a-Kind Enhanced Geothermal
System. https://doi.org/10.31223/X52X0B
+PacifiCorp. (2017, June 1). FAQ: Transmission and Ancillary Service Rate Changes.
+https://www.oasis.oati.com/PPW/PPWdocs/Rate_Update_FAQ_20170601.pdf
+
Quantum Proppant Technologies. (2020). Well Completion Technology. World
Oil. https://quantumprot.com/uploads/images/2b8583e8ce8038681a19d5ad1314e204.pdf
+Seel, J., Manderlink, N., Mulvaney Kemp, J., Rand, J., Gorman, W., Wiser, R., Cotton, W., Porter, K. (2026, February).
+Generator Interconnection Costs to the Transmission System in non-ISO Balancing Authorities. Lawrence Berkeley National
+Laboratory. https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/2026-02/lbnl_2026.02.23_ba_interconnection_costs.pdf
+
Shiozawa, S., & McClure, M. (2014). EGS Designs with Horizontal Wells, Multiple Stages, and Proppant. ResFrac.
https://www.resfrac.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Shiozawa.pdf
@@ -672,9 +792,15 @@ U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management. (2024, October).
Finding of No Significant Impact and Decision Record DOI-BLM-UT-C010-2024-0018-EA.
https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/2033002/200625761/20120795/251020775/DOI-BLM-UT-C010-2024-0018-EA_FONSI_DR_%20Fervo%20EA_signed.pdf
+US DOE. (2019). GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet (p. 163, drilling cost scenarios).
+https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/06/f63/GeoVision-full-report-opt.pdf
+
US DOE. (2021). Combined Heat and Power Technology Fact Sheet Series: Waste Heat to
Power. https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/Waste_Heat_to_Power_Fact_Sheet.pdf
+Utility Dive. (2026, June 5). Fervo Energy faces transmission constraints in the West, analysts say.
+https://www.utilitydive.com/news/fervo-energy-geothermal-transmission-constraints/822141/
+
Xing, P., England, K., Moore, J., McLennan, J. (2025, February 10).
Analysis of the 2024 Circulation Tests at Utah FORGE and the Response of Fiber Optic Sensing
Data.
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-power-production.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-power-production.png
index 144331af5..82a409f73 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-power-production.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-power-production.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-production-temperature.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-production-temperature.png
index 7b9782771..cb27a6589 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-production-temperature.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-production-temperature.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-flow-rate.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-flow-rate.png
index 36e2e2493..ad20527c4 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-flow-rate.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-flow-rate.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.png b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.png
index 3c3149ad5..fd54408a3 100644
Binary files a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.png and b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.png differ
diff --git a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.svg b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.svg
index 096597396..7e16b46fa 100644
--- a/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.svg
+++ b/docs/_images/fervo_project_cape-5-sensitivity-analysis-irr.svg
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
-