entergy corporation and subsidiaries management's financial discussion and analysis annually , beginning in 2006 , if power market prices drop below the ppa prices . accordingly , because the price is not fixed , the table above does not report power from that plant as sold forward after 2005 . under the ppas with nypa for the output of power from indian point 3 and fitzpatrick , the non-utility nuclear business is obligated to produce at an average capacity factor of 85% ( 85 % ) with a financial true-up payment to nypa should nypa's cost to purchase power due to an output shortfall be higher than the ppas' price . the calculation of any true-up payments is based on two two-year periods . for the first period , which ran through november 20 , 2002 , indian point 3 and fitzpatrick operated at 95% ( 95 % ) and 97% ( 97 % ) , respectively , under the true-up formula . credits of up to 5% ( 5 % ) reflecting period one generation above 85% ( 85 % ) can be used to offset any output shortfalls in the second period , which runs through the end of the ppas on december 31 , 2004 . entergy continually monitors industry trends in order to determine whether asset impairments or other losses could result from a decline in value , or cancellation , of merchant power projects , and records provisions for impairments and losses accordingly . marketing and trading the earnings of entergy's energy commodity services segment are exposed to commodity price market risks primarily through entergy's 50%-owned , unconsolidated investment in entergy-koch . entergy-koch trading ( ekt ) uses value-at-risk models as one measure of the market risk of a loss in fair value for ekt's natural gas and power trading portfolio . actual future gains and losses in portfolios will differ from those estimated based upon actual fluctuations in market rates , operating exposures , and the timing thereof , and changes in the portfolio of derivative financial instruments during the year . to manage its portfolio , ekt enters into various derivative and contractual transactions in accordance with the policy approved by the trading committee of the governing board of entergy-koch . the trading portfolio consists of physical and financial natural gas and power as well as other energy and weather-related contracts . these contracts take many forms , including futures , forwards , swaps , and options . characteristics of ekt's value-at-risk method and the use of that method are as follows : fffd value-at-risk is used in conjunction with stress testing , position reporting , and profit and loss reporting in order to measure and control the risk inherent in the trading and mark-to-market portfolios . fffd ekt estimates its value-at-risk using a model based on j.p . morgan's risk metrics methodology combined with a monte carlo simulation approach . fffd ekt estimates its daily value-at-risk for natural gas and power using a 97.5% ( 97.5 % ) confidence level . ekt's daily value-at-risk is a measure that indicates that , if prices moved against the positions , the loss in neutralizing the portfolio would not be expected to exceed the calculated value-at-risk . fffd ekt seeks to limit the daily value-at-risk on any given day to a certain dollar amount approved by the trading committee . ekt's value-at-risk measures , which it calls daily earnings at risk ( de@r ) , for its trading portfolio were as follows: .

2002: de@r at end of period: 15.2
average de@r for the period: 10.8
2001: de@r at end of period: 5.5
average de@r for the period: 6.4

ekt's de@r increased in 2002 compared to 2001 as a result of an increase in the size of the position held and an increase in the volatility of natural gas prices in the latter part of the year . for all derivative and contractual transactions , ekt is exposed to losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to these transactions . relevant considerations when assessing ekt's credit risk exposure include: .

Questions:
what was the total of daily earnings at risk at the end of the period in 2002?
and what was that total in 2001?
what was, then, the change in this total over the year?
and how much does this change represent in relation to the 2001 total of daily earnings, in percentage?

Answers:
15.2
5.5
9.7
176%