competitive supply aes 2019s competitive supply line of business consists of generating facilities that sell electricity directly to wholesale customers in competitive markets . additionally , as compared to the contract generation segment discussed above , these generating facilities generally sell less than 75% ( 75 % ) of their output pursuant to long-term contracts with pre-determined pricing provisions and/or sell into power pools , under shorter-term contracts or into daily spot markets . the prices paid for electricity under short-term contracts and in the spot markets are unpredictable and can be , and from time to time have been , volatile . the results of operations of aes 2019s competitive supply business are also more sensitive to the impact of market fluctuations in the price of electricity , natural gas , coal and other raw materials . in the united kingdom , txu europe entered administration in november 2002 and is no longer performing under its contracts with drax and barry . as described in the footnotes and in other sections of the discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations , txu europe 2019s failure to perform under its contracts has had a material adverse effect on the results of operations of these businesses . two aes competitive supply businesses , aes wolf hollow , l.p . and granite ridge have fuel supply agreements with el paso merchant energy l.p . an affiliate of el paso corp. , which has encountered financial difficulties . the company does not believe the financial difficulties of el paso corp . will have a material adverse effect on el paso merchant energy l.p . 2019s performance under the supply agreement ; however , there can be no assurance that a further deterioration in el paso corp 2019s financial condition will not have a material adverse effect on the ability of el paso merchant energy l.p . to perform its obligations . while el paso corp 2019s financial condition may not have a material adverse effect on el paso merchant energy , l.p . at this time , it could lead to a default under the aes wolf hollow , l.p . 2019s fuel supply agreement , in which case aes wolf hollow , l.p . 2019s lenders may seek to declare a default under its credit agreements . aes wolf hollow , l.p . is working in concert with its lenders to explore options to avoid such a default . the revenues from our facilities that distribute electricity to end-use customers are generally subject to regulation . these businesses are generally required to obtain third party approval or confirmation of rate increases before they can be passed on to the customers through tariffs . these businesses comprise the large utilities and growth distribution segments of the company . revenues from contract generation and competitive supply are not regulated . the distribution of revenues between the segments for the years ended december 31 , 2002 , 2001 and 2000 is as follows: .

========================================
	2002	2001	2000
large utilities	36% ( 36 % )	21% ( 21 % )	22% ( 22 % )
growth distribution	14% ( 14 % )	21% ( 21 % )	21% ( 21 % )
contract generation	29% ( 29 % )	32% ( 32 % )	27% ( 27 % )
competitive supply	21% ( 21 % )	26% ( 26 % )	30% ( 30 % )
========================================

development costs certain subsidiaries and affiliates of the company ( domestic and non-u.s. ) are in various stages of developing and constructing greenfield power plants , some but not all of which have signed long-term contracts or made similar arrangements for the sale of electricity . successful completion depends upon overcoming substantial risks , including , but not limited to , risks relating to failures of siting , financing , construction , permitting , governmental approvals or the potential for termination of the power sales contract as a result of a failure to meet certain milestones . as of december 31 , 2002 , capitalized costs for projects under development and in early stage construction were approximately $ 15 million and capitalized costs for projects under construction were approximately $ 3.2 billion . the company believes .

Question: for the years 2002 , 2001 , and 2000 , what was the average distribution of revenue to the large utilities segment?
Program: add(36%, 21%), add(#0, 22%), divide(#1, const_3)
Answer: 0.26333