the expenses related to the voluntary severance program offered to employees.
Approximately 200 employees from the Non-Utility Nuclear business and 150 employees in the Utility business accepted the voluntary severance program offers.
Net Revenue Utility Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007.
## Table 0 ##
The purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to higher capacity charges.
A portion of the variance is due to the amortization of deferred capacity costs and is offset in base revenues due to base rate increases implemented to recover incremental deferred and ongoing purchased power capacity charges.
The volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of less favorable weather compared to the same period in 2007 and decreased electricity usage primarily during the unbilled sales period.
Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike, which hit the Utility's service territories in September 2008, contributed an estimated $46 million to the decrease in electricity usage.
Industrial sales were also depressed by the continuing effects of the hurricanes and, especially in the latter part of the year, because of the overall decline of the economy, leading to lower usage in the latter part of the year affecting both the large customer industrial segment as well as small and mid-sized industrial customers.
The decreases in electricity usage were partially offset by an increase in residential and commercial customer electricity usage that occurred during the periods of the year not affected by the hurricanes.
The retail electric price variance is primarily due to: ·an increase in the Attala power plant costs recovered through the power management rider by Entergy Mississippi.
The net income effect of this recovery is limited to a portion representing an allowed return on equity with the remainder offset by Attala power plant costs in other operation and maintenance expenses, depreciation expenses, and taxes other than income taxes; ·a storm damage rider that became effective in October 2007 at Entergy Mississippi; and ·an Energy Efficiency rider that became effective in November 2007 at Entergy Arkansas.
The establishment of the storm damage rider and the Energy Efficiency rider results in an increase in rider revenue and a corresponding increase in other operation and maintenance expense with no impact on net income.
The retail electric price variance was partially offset by: ·the absence of interim storm recoveries through the formula rate plans at Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana which ceased upon the Act 55 financing of storm costs in the third quarter 2008; and ·a credit passed on to customers as a result of the Act 55 storm cost financings.
Refer to "Liquidity and Capital Resources - Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita" below and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the interim recovery of storm costs and the Act 55 storm cost financings.
planned consumer and customer promotions and merchandising events subsequent to the effective date of the price increases.
In addition, promotional allowances may be increased subsequent to the effective date, delaying or partially offsetting the impact of price increases on net sales.
Raw Materials Cocoa products are the most significant raw materials we use to produce our chocolate products.
Cocoa products, including cocoa liquor, cocoa butter and cocoa powder processed from cocoa beans, are used to meet manufacturing requirements.
Cocoa products are purchased directly from third party suppliers.
These third party suppliers source cocoa beans which are grown principally in Far Eastern, West African and South American equatorial regions.
West Africa accounts for approximately 70% of the world’s supply of cocoa beans.
Historically, there have been instances of adverse weather, crop disease, civil disruptions, and other problems in cocoa-producing countries that have caused price fluctuations, but have never resulted in total loss of a particular producing country’s cocoa crop and/or exports.
In the event that such a disruption would occur in any given country, we believe cocoa from other producing countries and from current physical cocoa stocks in consuming countries would provide a significant supply buffer.
During 2011, average cocoa futures contract prices traded in a range between $0.99 and $1.55 per pound, based on the IntercontinentalExchange futures contract.
During the first half of 2011, cocoa futures traded at prices that were near 30-year highs.
During the fourth quarter of 2011, cocoa futures prices declined significantly due to a very large West African crop which resulted in a substantial global surplus for the year.
The table below shows annual average cocoa prices, and the highest and lowest monthly averages for each of the calendar years indicated.
The prices are the monthly averages of the quotations at noon of the three active futures trading contracts closest to maturity on the IntercontinentalExchange.
## Table 1 ##
Source: International Cocoa Organization Quarterly Bulletin of Cocoa Statistics Our costs will not necessarily reflect market price fluctuations because of our forward purchasing and hedging practices, premiums and discounts reflective of varying delivery times, and supply and demand for our specific varieties and grades of cocoa liquor, cocoa butter and cocoa powder.
As a result, the average futures contract prices are not necessarily indicative of our average costs.
The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, which is a five-year farm bill, impacts the prices of sugar, corn, peanuts and dairy products because it sets price support levels for these commodities.
During 2011, prices for fluid milk ranged from a low of $0.17 to a high of $0.21 per pound, on a class II fluid milk basis.
Prices were substantially higher than the prior year due to strong export demand for dairy products and high feed costs.
Our costs for certain dairy products may not necessarily reflect market price fluctuations because of our forward purchasing practices.
The price of sugar is subject to price supports under U. S.  farm legislation.
This legislation establishes import quotas and duties to support the price of sugar.
As a result, sugar prices paid by users in the U. S.  are currently substantially higher than prices on the world sugar market.
In 2011, sugar supplies in the U. S.  were negatively impacted by government import restrictions, strong demand and high world market prices.
As a result,
In 2012, the Company expects reported earnings per share-diluted of $2.79 to $2.89.
Reported earnings per share-diluted includes anticipated business realignment and impairment charges of $0.16 to $0.19 per sharediluted related to the Next Century program.
Reported gross margin, reported EBIT margin and reported earnings per share-diluted will be impacted by these charges, in addition to closing and integration costs related to the Brookside acquisition estimated at $0.04 to $0.05 per share-diluted.
We expect reported gross margin to increase approximately 90 basis points in 2012.
In 2011, the actual return on pension plan assets was below our plan assumption and discount rates were lower, which will result in higher non-service related pension costs in 2012.
Therefore, we expect non-service related pension expenses of $19 million in 2012, or $0.05 per share-diluted.
These expenses include interest on plan participants’ previously earned account balances, offset by expected earnings on plan assets, actuarial gains or losses caused by interest rate changes and variations in pension asset performance and settlement costs, which accelerate the recognition of actuarial gains and losses when participants withdraw funds from the plans.
The Company’s defined benefit plans are well funded and have been closed to new entrants since 2007 and 2008.
This results in ongoing service costs that are stable and predictable compared to the non-service related expenses which can be very volatile.
The Company believes that adjusted net income and earnings per share-diluted which excludes non-service related pension expenses will provide investors with a better understanding of the underlying profitability of the ongoing business and, therefore, will be excluded beginning in 2012.
The historical details of these expenses is available on the Company’s website within the Investors section.
We have good visibility into our full-year cost structure and despite higher input costs in 2012, we expect adjusted gross margin to increase about 75 basis points driven by productivity and cost savings, as well as net price realization.
Therefore, we expect full-year adjusted earnings per share-diluted, including the adjustment for non-service related pension expenses, to increase 9% to 11%.
Note: In the Outlook above, the Company has provided income measures excluding certain items, in addition to net income determined in accordance with GAAP.
These non-GAAP financial measures are used in evaluating results of operations for internal purposes.
These non-GAAP measures are not intended to replace the presentation of financial results in accordance with GAAP.
Rather, the Company believes exclusion of such items provides additional information to investors to facilitate the comparison of past and present operations.
In 2011, the Company recorded GAAP charges of $49.2 million, or $0.13 per share-diluted, attributable to the Next Century program and the global supply chain transformation program.
Additionally, in the third quarter of 2011, the Company recorded a pre-tax gain of $17.0 million, or $0.05 per share-diluted, from the sale of trademark licensing rights.
In 2012, the Company expects to record total GAAP charges of about $55 million to $65 million, or $0.16 to $0.19 per share-diluted, attributable to the Next Century program.
In 2012, acquisition closing and integration costs related to the Brookside acquisition are expected to be $0.04 to $0.05 per sharediluted and non-service related pension expenses are expected to be $19.0 million, or $0.05 per share-diluted.
Below is a reconciliation of GAAP and non-GAAP items to the Company’s 2010 and 2011 adjusted earnings per share-diluted and projected adjusted earnings per share-diluted for 2012:
## Table 2 ##
THE HERSHEY COMPANY NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) We based the asset return assumption of 8.0% for 2011 and 8.5% for 2010 and 2009 on current and expected asset allocations, as well as historical and expected returns on the plan asset categories.
The historical geometric average return over the 24 years prior to December 31, 2011, was approximately 8.2%.
Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the amounts reported for the postretirement health care plans.
A one-percentage point change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:
## Table 3 ##
Plan Assets We broadly diversify our pension plan assets across domestic and international common stock and fixed income asset classes.
Our asset investment policies specify ranges of asset allocation percentages for each asset class.
The ranges for the domestic pension plans were as follows:
## Table 4 ##
As of December 31, 2011, actual allocations were within the specified ranges.
We expect the level of volatility in pension plan asset returns to be in line with the overall volatility of the markets within each asset class.
The following table sets forth by level, within the fair value hierarchy, pension plan assets at their fair value as of December 31, 2011:
## Table 5 ##

<table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2007 net revenue</td><td>$4,618</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased power capacity</td><td>-25</td></tr><tr><td>Volume/weather</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Retail electric price</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>2008 net revenue</td><td>$4,589</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> Cocoa Futures Contract Prices  (dollarsper pound)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2011</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td><td> 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Annual Average</td><td>$1.34</td><td>$1.36</td><td>$1.28</td><td>$1.19</td><td>$.86</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>1.55</td><td>1.53</td><td>1.52</td><td>1.50</td><td>.95</td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>0.99</td><td>1.26</td><td>1.10</td><td>.86</td><td>.75</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td> 2010</td><td>2011</td><td> 2012 (Projected)</td></tr><tr><td>Reported EPS-Diluted</td><td>$2.21</td><td>$2.74</td><td>$2.79 – $2.89</td></tr><tr><td>Gain on sale of trademark licensing rights</td><td>—</td><td>-.05</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total Business Realignment and Impairment Charges</td><td>.34</td><td>.13</td><td>.16 – .19</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisition closing and integration charges</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>.04 – .05</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted EPS-Diluted including non-service related pension expenses</td><td>2.55</td><td>2.82</td><td>3.03 – 3.09</td></tr><tr><td>Non-service related pension expenses</td><td>.02</td><td>.01</td><td>.05</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted EPS-Diluted excluding non-service related pension expenses</td><td>$2.57</td><td>$2.83</td><td>$3.08 – $3.14</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Impact of assumed health care cost trend rates</td><td> One-Percentage Point Increase</td><td>One-Percentage Point (Decrease)</td></tr><tr><td> In thousands of dollars</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Effect on total service and interest cost components</td><td>$240</td><td>$-218</td></tr><tr><td>Effect on post-retirement benefit obligation</td><td>5,082</td><td>-4,650</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Asset Class</td><td> Target Allocation  2011</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>58% – 85%</td></tr><tr><td>Debt securities</td><td>15% – 42%</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and certain other investments</td><td>0% – 5%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> In thousands of dollars</td><td> Quoted prices in active markets of identical assets (Level 1)</td><td> Significant other observable inputs (Level 2)</td><td colspan="2"> Significant other unobservable inputs (Level 3)</td><td> Total assets measured at fair value asof December 31, 2011</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$4,266</td><td>$15,875</td><td> $</td><td> —</td><td>$20,141</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. all-cap<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>79,164</td><td>133,580</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>212,744</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. large-cap<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>114,463</td><td>—</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>114,463</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. small/mid-cap</td><td>21,008</td><td>—</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>21,008</td></tr><tr><td>International all-cap<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>117,415</td><td>2,962</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>120,377</td></tr><tr><td>Global all-cap<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>212,891</td><td>8,903</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>221,794</td></tr><tr><td>Domestic real estate</td><td>22,250</td><td>—</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>22,250</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. government/agency</td><td>90,403</td><td>2,319</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>92,722</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate bonds<sup>(e)</sup></td><td>44,932</td><td>3,433</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>48,365</td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized obligations<sup>(f)</sup></td><td>29,507</td><td>6,631</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>36,138</td></tr><tr><td>International government/corporate bonds<sup>(g)</sup></td><td>20,997</td><td>30,422</td><td> </td><td> —</td><td>51,419</td></tr><tr><td>Total Investments</td><td>$757,296</td><td>$204,125</td><td> $</td><td> —</td><td>$961,421</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the percent of net revenue utility change in net revenue