HomeMy WebLinkAboutFeasibility Assessment Biomass Heating Holy Name Catholic Church Ketchikan FinalReport Coffman LeeBolling 9-11-2018-BIO
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems
at Holy Name Catholic Church and School
in Ketchikan, Alaska
800 F Street, Anchorage, AK 99501
p (907) 276-6664 f (907) 276-5042
Lee Bolling, PE
Walter Heins, PE
FINAL REPORT – 9/11/2018
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. i
Contents
1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1
2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2
3. Preliminary Site Investigation ............................................................................................ 3
BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................................................................................................. 3
EXISTING HEATING SYSTEM .............................................................................................................................................. 3
AVAILABLE SPACE, STREET ACCESS, FUEL STORAGE AND SITE CONSTRAINTS .............................................................................. 4
4. Biomass System ................................................................................................................. 6
BIOMASS SYSTEM OPTIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 6
BIOMASS SYSTEM INTEGRATION ........................................................................................................................................ 7
HEAT PUMP ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................................................................... 7
5. Energy Consumption and Costs .......................................................................................... 9
ENERGY COSTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
CORD WOOD ................................................................................................................................................................ 9
WOOD PELLETS ............................................................................................................................................................. 9
HEATING OIL ............................................................................................................................................................... 10
ELECTRICITY ................................................................................................................................................................ 10
EXISTING FUEL OIL CONSUMPTION .................................................................................................................................. 11
BIOMASS SYSTEM CONSUMPTION ................................................................................................................................... 11
HEAT PUMP CONSUMPTION ........................................................................................................................................... 11
6. Preliminary Cost Estimating ............................................................................................. 12
7. Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................... 14
O&M COSTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 14
DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................................................................ 14
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 16
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................... 17
HEAT PUMP SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................. 18
8. Forest Resource and Fuel Availability Assessments .......................................................... 19
FUEL AVAILABILITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 19
AIR QUALITY PERMITTING .............................................................................................................................................. 19
9. General Biomass Technology Information ........................................................................ 20
HEATING WITH WOOD FUEL ........................................................................................................................................... 20
TYPES OF WOOD FUEL .................................................................................................................................................. 20
HIGH EFFICIENCY WOOD PELLET BOILERS ......................................................................................................................... 21
HIGH EFFICIENCY CORDWOOD BOILERS ............................................................................................................................ 21
LOW EFFICIENCY CORDWOOD BOILERS ............................................................................................................................. 21
HIGH EFFICIENCY WOOD STOVES .................................................................................................................................... 22
BULK FUEL BOILERS ...................................................................................................................................................... 22
HEAT PUMPS............................................................................................................................................................... 22
GRANTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. ii
Appendices
Appendix A – Site Photos
Appendix B – Economic Analysis Spreadsheets
Appendix C – AWEDTG Field Data Sheets
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. iii
Abbreviations
ACF Accumulated Cash Flow
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
AFUE Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C Benefit / Cost Ratio
BTU British Thermal Unit
BTU/hr BTU per hour
COP Coefficient of Performance
CFM Cubic Feet per Minute
Eff Efficiency
F Fahrenheit
ft Feet
GPM Gallons Per Minute
HP Horsepower
HVAC Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning
in Inch(es)
kW Kilowatt(s)
kWh Kilowatt-Hour
lb(s) Pound(s)
MBH Thousand BTUs per Hour
O&M Operations and Maintenance
MMBTU One Million BTUs
PC Project Cost
R R-Value
SF Square Feet, Supply Fan
TEMP Temperature
TPY Tons per Year
V Volts
VRF Variable Refrigerant Flow
W Watts
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. iv
List of Figures
Figure 1 – Church Building ............................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 2 – School Building ............................................................................................................................. 2
Figure 3 – Holy Name Church and School Layout ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 4 – Twin Heat ME80i Pellet Boiler...................................................................................................... 6
Figure 5 – Example of Outdoor Pellet Silo Connected to Twin Heat ME80i Boiler ....................................... 7
List of Tables
Table 1 – Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1
Table 2 – Energy Comparison Overview ....................................................................................................... 1
Table 3 – Building Characteristics ................................................................................................................. 3
Table 4 – Boiler Equipment ........................................................................................................................... 4
Table 5 – Energy Comparison ....................................................................................................................... 9
Table 6 – Existing Fuel Oil Consumption ..................................................................................................... 11
Table 7 – Proposed Biomass System Fuel Consumption ............................................................................ 11
Table 8 – Proposed Heat Pump Energy Consumption ................................................................................ 11
Table 9 – Estimate of Probable Cost ........................................................................................................... 13
Table 10 – Discount and Escalation rates ................................................................................................... 14
Table 11 – Economic Definitions ................................................................................................................. 15
Table 12 – Economic Analysis Results ......................................................................................................... 16
Table 13 – Sensitivity Analysis – Heating Oil Price vs Wood Pellet Price .................................................... 17
Table 14 – Sensitivity Analysis – Wood Pellet Price vs Project Cost ........................................................... 17
Table 15 – Sensitivity Analysis – Heat Pump Alternative ............................................................................ 18
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 1
1. Executive Summary
Coffman performed a preliminary biomass feasibility assessment for the Holy Name Catholic Church and
School in Ketchikan, Alaska, to determine the technical and economic viability of a biomass heating
system. The proposed biomass heating system is a wood pellet boiler located in a detached building with
a buried heat piping loop to the church. As part of the project, the hydronic systems of the church and
school would be connected so that the pellet boiler could serve both buildings. A local wood pellet
supplier would deliver pellets to an adjacent wood pellet silo.
Due to the low price of heating oil at $2.90/gal and high cost of wood pellets at $327/ton, the benefit to
cost ratios for the project is less than 1.0, and thus would not typically be considered economically justified
at this time. However, the price of heating oil has varied greatly over time and as heating oil prices rise
the project does become more economically viable. For example, when heating oil reaches $3.47/gal the
wood pellet boiler project becomes economically justified.
Heat Pumps could be another solution to reduce energy costs and fossil fuel consumption, as the cost of
electricity in Ketchikan is quite low due to hydropower. Evaluating the full economics of a heat pump
system is outside the scope of this study, however, preliminary calculations show that a heat pump system
(COP of 2.5) with a project cost of $200,000 is economically justified with a benefit to cost ratio of 1.35.
It is recommended that a heat pump system be further studied to develop a detailed estimate of probable
costs for the project.
A summary of the economic analysis is shown in the following table.
Table 1 – Executive Summary
Item Wood Pellet Boiler
System
Heat Pump
System
Project Capital Cost ($235,000) ($200,000)
Present Value of Project Benefits (20-year life) $401,286 $401,286
Present Value of Operating Costs (20-year life) ($241,511) ($131,349)
Benefit / Cost Ratio of Project (20-year life) 0.68 1.35
Net Present Value (20-year life) ($75,225) $69,937
Year Cash Flow is Net Positive First Year First Year
Payback Period
(Year Accumulated Cash Flow > Project Capital Cost) >20 years 16 years
The current energy prices in Ketchikan are shown in the following table. Using Heat Pumps and burning
wood pellets are less expensive than heating oil on an energy basis.
Table 2 – Energy Comparison Overview
Community Fuel Type Units Gross
BTU/unit
System
Efficiency $/unit Delivered
$/MMBTU
Ketchikan
Heat Pump
(COP of 2.5)
kWh of
Elec Input 10,236 COP of 2.5 $0.10 $11.72
Wood Pellets ton 16,600,000 80% $327 $24.62
Electricity kWh 3,412 99% $0.10 $29.60
Heating Oil gal 134,000 65% $2.90 $33.30
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 2
2. Introduction
A preliminary feasibility assessment was completed to determine the technical and economic viability of
biomass heating systems at the Holy Name Catholic Church and School, located in Ketchikan, Alaska. The
Holy Name Church operates and maintains both the church building and school building. The church was
awarded a biomass pre-feasibility study from the Fairbanks Economic Development Corporation (FEDC).
In this report the buildings will be referred to as the “church” or “school”.
Figure 1 – Church Building
Figure 2 – School Building
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 3
3. Preliminary Site Investigation
A site visit was completed at the church and school by Coffman Engineers on June 29th, 2018. The inspector
was Walter Heins P.E., a senior mechanical engineer who has been involved in many biomass projects
over the years.
Building Descriptions
The church and school buildings are both two story buildings that are connected by an enclosed
breezeway. Both the church and the school are occupied daily. There have been no energy audits
completed for the buildings. For each building, the square footage, date of construction, occupant
characteristics and type of construction is shown in the following table.
Table 3 – Building Characteristics
Building Square
Footage
Year
Built
Occupants Type of Construction
Church 16,000 1985 200 on Sunday,
10 on other days
CMU block and metal stud walls (R-19 to R-30)
and built-up flat roof with rigid insulation (R-60)
School 21,600 1965 75 students
The lower level has masonry walls (R-10) and
the upper level is stick frame (R-16). The roof is
wood truss with fiberglass batt insulation (R-24).
Existing Heating System
Each building is heated with a cast-iron sectional oil-fired boilers that feed perimeter baseboard units,
cabinet unit heaters and heating coils using water as the hydronic fluid. There is no centralized DDC control
system for the heating systems. The church uses thermostats to control the heating system. The only
control system in the church is an interlock on the Kitchen AHU and Kitchen Hood. The school utilizes
thermostats to control the heating system as well. The school also has a pneumatic control system to
actuate pneumatic thermostats in the classrooms and pneumatic controlled valves for the AHU.
The church domestic hot water (DHW) is provided by an indirect hot water heater off of the boiler loop.
There are electric water heaters in the kitchen and janitor closet by restrooms, which allows DHW to be
supplied without using the oil boiler. The school DHW is provided by an indirect hot water heater off of
the boiler loop.
The school boiler is the original boiler, installed in 1965. Maintenance personnel reported that the school
boiler is operational, but it is past its expected lifespan. Parts for the boiler are currently difficult to obtain.
Replacement of the boiler will likely occur in the near future. The church boiler was installed in 1985 and
is in good operational order. The church boiler is a different make than school boiler and parts are more
readily available. There are no plans to replace this boiler in the near future.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 4
The following table shows the heating capacities of the boiler plants.
Table 4 – Boiler Equipment
School Boiler Plant DHW Plant Fuel Tankage
Church
Weil-McLain, Oil-Boiler
Model BL-976-S-W,
625,000 BTU/hr Gross Output
1. Amtrol, Indirect Water
Heater, 41 gal
2. Bradford White, Electric
Water Heater, 47 gal
3. Reliance, Electric Water
Heater, 28 gal
500-gal above ground
fuel tank
School
Cleaver-Brooks,
Progress Oil Boiler,
1,000,000 BTU/hr Gross Output
Bock Hot Water Heater,
Direct-Fired,
85 gal
Two 300-gal above
ground fuel tanks located
indoors adjacent to
boiler room
The boilers and central pumps are located in mechanical rooms. The combustion efficiency of the boilers
is unknown, as no combustion test reports were available. For this study, the Annual Fuel Utilization
Efficiency of the boiler system is estimated at 65% to account for typical oil boiler inefficiencies, including
short cycling, due to the age of the boilers.
Available Space, Street Access, Fuel Storage and Site Constraints
The church and school have good site access around both buildings. There is an asphalt access drive that
traverses the west and south sides of the buildings, which allows easy access around the buildings. There
is a playground on the south side of the school.
There is no practical space inside the buildings for a biomass system that includes fuel storage. There may
be space in the school boiler room if the existing boiler is removed. However, there is no good spot for a
pellet storage box (inside the building) or pellet silo outside the building that is close enough to transfer
pellets to the biomass system. Therefore, for this analysis the biomass boiler system will be located in a
detached biomass building with an outdoor silo adjacent to it.
The preferred location of a detached biomass building and silo, is on the west side of the church and
school in the asphalt access drive. The silo could be easily accessed by delivery trucks and the biomass
building can be easily accessed for maintenance and operation.
A site layout of the major site constraints at the church and school is shown on the following page.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 5
Figure 3 – Holy Name Church and School Layout
CHURCH
SCHOOL
PLAYGROUND
CHURCH
BOILER ROOM
SCHOOL
BOILER ROOM
PROPOSED
PELLET SILO
PROPOSED
PELLET BOILER
BUILDING
PROPOSED
BURIED PIPING
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6
4. Biomass System
Biomass System Options
The biomass boiler system selected as the basis of design for the church and school is a wood pellet boiler.
Wood pellets are the best fit for the buildings because they are fully automated boilers that require limited
labor for operation and fuel handling. Cord wood boiler systems were not considered because they
require manual loading and firing of cord wood, which requires significant labor. Currently the church
does not have available staff to handle cord wood and adding the cost of paying for this additional labor
would further decrease the economics of the option.
Wood chip systems were considered, but were not selected because of the availability of local wood
pellets. The handling of pellets is much easier than wood chips or cord wood and the fuel feeder systems
typically run with less maintenance than chip systems.
For this study, a Twin Heat ME80i wood pellet boiler was selected. The high efficiency boiler can modulate
down to 30% load and still maintain efficiencies of 85% or higher, according to manufacturer
documentation. The ME80i unit can produce 80kW of thermal output (or 273,000 BTU/hr).
During final design more research should go into final boiler determination based on Alaska reliability,
size, operation, fuel handling, etc. The Alaska Energy Authority can provide further information on systems
that have been used successfully in Alaska.
Figure 4 – Twin Heat ME80i Pellet Boiler
The biomass boiler would be installed in an 8ft wide x 16ft long insulated building. The building could be
built onsite or fabricated offsite and shipped to the site as a module. The biomass building would include
a thermal storage tank, pellet augers, pump, piping and wiring for a fully complete system. The module
would be installed on a concrete pad with a pellet silo adjacent to it. A Twin Heat outdoor galvanized
steel pellet silo, that can hold 12 tons of pellets, was selected as the basis of design. A flexible pellet
auger connects from the bottom of the silo to the Twin Heat pellet boiler. A manufacturer provided
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 7
general arrangement drawing of the pellet boiler, flexible auger and pellet silo is shown in the following
figure.
Figure 5 – Example of Outdoor Pellet Silo Connected to Twin Heat ME80i Boiler
The combustion efficiency of the pellet boiler can reach higher than 85%. Using thermal storage will also
help the unit run at higher efficiencies during normal operation. For this study, an Annual Fuel Utilization
Efficiency of 80% was used, to account for normal operations throughout the year.
Biomass System Integration
The detached biomass boiler building will house the pellet boiler and thermal storage tank. The pellet
boiler and thermal storage tank will operate with glycol. A buried, insulated piping loop will transfer heat
using glycol from the boiler building to the church’s mechanical room. In the mechanical room, a new
heat exchanger will transfer heat from the pellet boiler loop to the church’s heating system. The heat
exchanger is used to separate the church’s hydronic system (using water) from the pellet boiler’s glycol
loop, so that the buried line can be freeze protected. A new pump will be required to pump glycol from
the pellet boiler building to the church heat exchanger. The new pellet boiler building will require an
electrical connection to power the pellet boiler and associated facility lighting and equipment.
A new supply and return line will be run inside the church and school buildings through the breezeway to
connect both the church and school hydronic systems together. This will allow the pellet boiler to heat
both buildings. The existing oil boilers in both buildings could be used to add heat if the pellet boiler could
not carry the load or was down for regular maintenance activities.
Heat Pump Alternative
Due to the relatively low cost of electricity in Ketchikan, it was observed that heat pumps are another
option for offsetting heating oil at the buildings. Heat pumps use electricity to drive a refrigeration cycle
that can be used to heat a building or domestic hot water.
There are many styles of heat pump units available. Air-to-Air heat pumps and variable refrigerant flow
(VRF) units take heat out of the outside air and use cassettes inside the buildings to heat interior spaces.
These systems would work relatively efficiently at the church and school, but would require a new heat
12 Ton Pellet Silo
ME80i
Boiler
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 8
distribution system. The existing hydronic system, radiators and heating coils could not be used to deliver
heat to the spaces using this type of heat pump system. Air-to-Air and VRF units are readily available on
the market and manufactures include Daikin, Mitsubishi and others.
Air-to-Water heat pumps are also becoming more prevalent. These units take heat out of the outside air
and can heat water. An air-to-water heat pump could be installed on the return line of the existing boiler
system in both the church and school. It would utilize the existing hydronic system to transfer heat to the
spaces in the buildings. The benefit of the air-to-water heat pump is that the existing hydronic system
can be used, and a new heat distribution system is not needed. However, air-to-water heat pumps that
can output high temperature water are typically only available in Europe and Japan, with limited support
in the U.S. As these units come to the U.S. market in the future, the air-to-water heat pumps may be a
viable option. For example, Sanden and Mitsubishi both make a CO2 heat pump that is not available in
the U.S. yet.
Ground source heat pumps that use a buried piping in the ground, will likely not be a feasible system for
the church and school due to the small size of the building heat load. Ground source heat pumps are
better suited for large loads because the ground source heat pumps are expensive, and a lot of ene rgy
needs to be offset in order for the systems to be economical. Ground source heat pumps are not
recommended for the church and school due to these reasons.
The downside of the heat pumps is that they do not operate well when temperatures get colder outside.
A hybrid system may be needed where the heating oil boiler is still used to heat the buildings during the
coldest days when the heat pumps cannot carry the load.
A site visit by a heat pump contractor may be a good start for further evaluating the options and costs of
a heat pump system.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 9
5. Energy Consumption and Costs
Energy Costs
The table below shows the energy comparison of different fuel types in the community. The system
efficiency is used to calculate the delivered MMBTU’s of energy to the building. The delivered cost of
energy to the building, in $/MMBTU, is the most accurate way to compare costs of different energy types.
Heating oil is the most expensive heating fuel on the list at $33.30/MMBTU. Wood Pellets and heating
with electric resistance heaters are the next cheapest at $24.62/MMBTU and $29.60/MMBTU,
respectively. Wood pellets are not that much cheaper than heating oil or electric, due to the relatively
high cost of pellet delivery to Ketchikan.
The lowest cost form of energy is heat pumps, which range from $11.72/MMBTU to $14.65/MMBTU
based on COP’s of 2.5 to 2.0. The COP (or Coefficient of Performance) is the ratio of the useful heating
provided compared to the amount of energy consumed by the heat pump. Higher COPs mean lower
operating costs.
Based on the energy comparison of fuels at Ketchikan, it can be seen that heat pumps do offer the most
affordable heating opportunity. This is do to the relatively low cost of electricity in the area, which is used
to power heat pumps.
Table 5 – Energy Comparison
Community Fuel Type Units Gross
BTU/unit
System
Efficiency $/unit Delivered
$/MMBTU
Ketchikan
Heat Pump
(COP of 2.5)
kWh of
Elec Input
10,236 COP of 2.5 $0.10 $11.72
Heat Pump
(COP of 2.0)
kWh of
Elec Input
6,824 COP of 2.0 $0.10 $14.65
Wood Pellets ton 16,600,000 80% $327 $24.62
Electricity kWh 3,412 99% $0.10 $29.60
Heating Oil gal 134,000 65% $2.90 $33.30
Cord Wood
Cord wood was evaluated as a biomass fuel, but was not considered viable due to the additional handling
requirements. In order to burn cord wood, a person is required to stack, move and load the cord wood
boiler daily, if not multiple times per day. Cord wood was not considered viable because the Church
wishes to have a more automated biomass system that does not require additional labor. Plus, there is
limited space onsite to store large volumes of cord wood.
Wood Pellets
There is currently no local wood pellet manufacturer in Ketchikan, AK. There was a pellet mill in Ketchikan,
but is no longer in service. Marble Construction is the local wood pellet distributer using pellets out of
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 10
British Columbia. Wood pellets are shipped to Ketchikan in containers and are stored at the distributor’s
pellet storage. A pellet augur truck is used to transport the wood pellets to client’s silos, such as the
Ketchikan Airport. The delivered price of wood pellets to a client is $350/ton. The pellets are
approximately 5% moisture content and have an energy content of 8,300 BTU/lb (16,600,000 BTU/ton).
True Value Hardware in Ketchikan also sells wood pellets. They only sell 40lb bags of pellets, not bulk
delivery. Pellets can be purchased by pallet, which contain 50 of the 40lb bags, or one ton of pellets. The
pellet cost is $327/ton, which was used for this study.
If a local supplier of pellets becomes available in the future at a lower cost, the pellet system could become
much more viable.
Heating Oil
The high price of fuel oil is the main economic driver for the use of lower cost biomass heating. Fuel oil is
currently purchased at $2.90/gal, based on heating oil records. The price of fuel oil has fluctuated greatly
over time, and currently appears to be at a lower price than in the recent past. The wide variation of fuel
oil prices is a disadvantage compared to more stably priced wood pellets. For this study, the energy
content of fuel oil is based on 134,000 BTU/gal, according to “Heating Values of Fuels” by the UAF
Cooperative Extension, 2009.
Electricity
Electricity for the church is provided by the Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU). According to the utility data
the effective electricity rate at the church is $0.10/kWh. The effective electricity rate is the cost of all
electric costs (demand, energy, customer charges) per kWH for a billing period. Due to the relatively low
cost of electricity, it is a cheaper heating source than heating oil on a BTU basis. There are 3,412 BTU per
kWh.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 11
Existing Fuel Oil Consumption
The existing heating oil consumption at the church and school is shown below, based on available heating
oil purchase records. The total combined cost of heating oil usage at both facilities is $17,110 per year.
Table 6 – Existing Fuel Oil Consumption
Building Fuel Type Annual
Consumption
Net
MMBTU/yr
Avg. Annual
Cost
Church Heating Oil 2,600 gal 226.5 $7,540
School Heating Oil 3,300 gal 287.4 $9,570
Total Heating Oil 5,900 gal 513.9 $17,110
Biomass System Consumption
It is estimated that the proposed biomass system offset approximately 98% of the heating energy for the
church and school buildings. The remaining 2% of the heating energy will be provided by the existing oil
boilers. This result is based on an analysis of the building’s annual heating oil consumption, the heat
output of the pellet boiler and BIN weather data for the area.
Table 7 – Proposed Biomass System Fuel Consumption
Building Fuel Type
%
Heating
Source
Net
MMBTU/yr
Annual
Consumption
Energy
Cost
Total
Energy
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Church and
School
Buildings
Wood Pellets 98% 503.6 38 tons $12,401
$12,823 $4,287 Fuel Oil 2% 10.3 118 gal $342
Additional Electricity N/A N/A 800 kWh $80
Note – Based on wood pellets at $327/ton, heating oil at $2.90/gal and electricity at $0.10/kWh.
Heat Pump Consumption
If heat pumps were used instead, it is estimated that the heat pumps would offset 95% of the heating
energy for the church and school buildings. The remaining 5% of the heating energy will be provided by
the existing oil boilers. The following table is an estimate of the electrical and heating oil consumption
of the building using heat pumps with a COP of 2.5. As can be seen, at current energy prices, the heat
pump saves over double what the pellet system does in energy costs (note this does not address
construction costs).
Table 8 – Proposed Heat Pump Energy Consumption
Building Fuel Type
%
Heating
Source
Net
MMBTU/yr
Annual
Consumption
Energy
Cost
Total
Energy
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Church and
School
Buildings
Heat Pump
(COP=2.5) 95% 488.2 57,233 $5,723 $6,579 $10,531
Fuel Oil 5% 25.7 295 gal $856
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 12
6. Preliminary Cost Estimating
An estimate of probable costs was completed for installing the wood pellet boiler systems at each school.
The estimate is based equipment quotes and from previous projects in Alaska. A remote factor of 5% was
used to account for shipping costs. Project and Construction Management was estimated at 5%.
Engineering design and permitting was estimated at 20%. A 25% contingency is used as no specific design
engineering effort has been completed, specific quotes for all materials have not been prepared, and all
the integration components have not been determined. Thus, there are unknowns related to the extent
of Mechanical, Electrical, and Civil work required for the proposed project.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 13
Table 9 – Estimate of Probable Cost
Category Description Cost
Site Work Building Foundation $5,000
Buried Utilities $5,000
Subtotal $10,000
Electrical Utilities Service Entrance $3,000
Conduit and Wiring $3,000
Subtotal $6,000
Biomass Boiler
Building Detached Boiler Building (8'x16') @ $200/SF $25,600
Twin Heat ME80i Pellet Boiler $20,000
Insulated SS Chimney $3,000
Flexible pellet auger $1,200
Outdoor Galvanized Steel Pellet Silo (12 tons) $5,000
Thermal Storage Tank 200 gal $3,000
Mechanical, Piping and pump allowance $15,000
Electrical allowance $25,000
Shipping to Ketchikan $5,000
Subtotal $102,800
Building
Connections Insulated Pipe to Church $7,000
Heat Exchanger $3,000
Piping tie-in of Church and School $20,000
Subtotal $30,000
Subtotal Material and Installation Cost $148,800
Remote Factor 5% $7,440
Subtotal $156,240
Project and Construction Management 5% $7,812
Subtotal $156,612
Design Fees and Permitting 20% $31,323
Subtotal $187,935
Contingency 25% $46,984
Total Project Cost $234,919
Total Budgetary Cost $235,000
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 14
7. Economic Analysis
The following assumptions were used to complete the economic analysis for this study.
Table 10 – Discount and Escalation rates
Real Discount Rate for Net Present Value Analysis 3%
Wood Fuel Escalation Rate 2%
Fossil Fuel Escalation Rate 5%
Electricity Escalation Rate 2%
O&M Escalation Rate 2%
The real discount rate, or minimum attractive rate of return, is 3.0% and is the current rate used for all
Life Cycle Cost Analysis by the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development. This is a typical
rate used for completing economic analysis for entities that have not established their own internal
minimum attractive rate of return. The escalation rates used for the wood, heating oil, electricity and
O&M rates are based on rates used in previous Alaska Energy Authority funded biomass pre-feasibility
studies. The wood fuel escalation rate was set at 2%. The electricity escalation rate was set at 2%, because
the majority of the power in the community is from stably priced hydropower.
A net present value analysis was completed using real dollars (constant dollars) and the real discount rate,
as required per the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Handbook.
O&M Costs
Non-fuel related operations and maintenance costs (O&M) were estimated at $600 per year. The
estimate is based on annual maintenance time for similar pellet boilers. For only the first two years of
service, the maintenance cost is doubled to account for maintenance staff getting used to operating the
new system.
Definitions
There are many different economic terms used in this study. A listing of all the terms with their definition
is provided below for reference.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 15
Table 11 – Economic Definitions
Economic Term Description
Project Capital Cost This is the opinion of probable cost for designing and constructing the
project.
Present Value of
Project Benefits
(20-year life)
The present value of all of the heating oil that would have been consumed
by the existing heating oil-fired heating system, over a 20-year period.
Present Value of
Operating Costs
(20-year life)
The present value of all of the proposed biomass systems operating costs
over a 20-year period. This includes wood fuel, additional electricity, and
O&M costs for the proposed biomass system and the heating oil required by
the existing equipment to supply the remaining amount of heat to the
building.
Benefit / Cost Ratio of
Project
(20-year life)
This is the benefit to cost ratio over the 20-year period. A project that has a
benefit to cost ratio greater than 1.0 is economically justified. It is defined
as follows:
𝐵𝑐𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑖𝑟 / 𝐵𝑛𝑟𝑟 𝑅𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛= 𝑂𝑉(𝑂𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑐𝑟 𝐵𝑐𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑖𝑟𝑟)− 𝑂𝑉(𝑂𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑐 𝐵𝑛𝑟𝑟𝑟)
𝑂𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑐𝑟 𝐵𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝐵𝑛𝑟𝑟
Where:
PV = The present value over the 20-year period
Reference Sullivan, Wicks and Koelling, “Engineering Economy”, 14th ed.,
2009, pg. 440, Modified B-C Ratio.
Net Present Value
(20-year life)
This is the net present value of the project over a 20-year period. If the
project has a net present value greater than zero, the project is economically
justified. This quantity accounts for the project capital cost, project benefits
and operating costs.
Payback Period (Year
Accumulated Cash Flow
> Project Capital Cost)
The Payback Period is the number of years it takes for the accumulated cash
flow of the project to be greater than or equal to the project capital cost.
This quantity includes escalating energy prices and O&M rates. This quantity
is calculated as follows:
𝐼𝑛𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑐𝑐 𝐵𝑛𝑟𝑟≤∑𝑅𝑘
𝐽
𝑘=0
Where:
J = Year that the accumulated cash flow is greater than or equal to the
Project Capital Cost.
𝑅𝑘 = Project Cash flow for the kth year.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 16
Results
An economic analysis was completed to determine the simple payback, benefit to cost ratio, and net
present value of the proposed wood pellet boiler system at the Holy Name Church and School. A wood
pellet boiler would be located in a detached biomass building and a buried heat loop would connect to
the new heat exchanger in the church’s mechanical room. The church and school hydronic systems would
be tied together so that the pellet boiler could serve both buildings. The wood pellet boiler would
supplement heat for the existing oil boilers. A pellet silo would be located next to the pellet boiler building
and filled by a local pellet supplier.
Due to the low price of heating oil at $2.90/gal and high cost of wood pellets at $327/ton, the benefit to
cost ratios for the project is less than 1.0. Any project with a benefit to cost ratio less than 1.0 is typically
not considered economically justified, and therefore the wood pellet system is not economically justified
at this time.
However, historically the price of heating oil has varied greatly over time and as heating oil prices rise the
project does become more economically viable. For example, when heating oil reaches $3.47/gal the
wood pellet boiler project becomes economically justified. This can be seen in the sensitivity analysis on
the next page.
During the analysis, it was observed that heat pumps could be another viable solution to reduce energy
costs and fossil fuel consumption, due to the low cost of electricity in Ketchikan. Evaluating the full
economics of a heat pump system is outside the scope of this study, however, preliminary calculations
show that a heat pump system (COP of 2.5) with a total project cost of $200,000 is economically justified
with a benefit to cost ratio of 1.35. It is recommended that a heat pump system be further studied to
develop a detailed estimate of probable costs for the project.
The results are shown in the table below. Refer to Appendix B for the economic analysis spreadsheets for
greater detail. (Note: values shown in red and parenthesis are negative numbers)
Table 12 – Economic Analysis Results
Item Wood Pellet Boiler
System
Heat Pump
System
Project Capital Cost ($235,000) ($200,000)
Present Value of Project Benefits (20-year life) $401,286 $401,286
Present Value of Operating Costs (20-year life) ($241,511) ($131,349)
Benefit / Cost Ratio of Project (20-year life) 0.68 1.35
Net Present Value
(20-year life) ($75,225) $69,937
Year Cash Flow is Net Positive First Year First Year
Payback Period
(Year Accumulated Cash Flow > Project Capital Cost) >20 years 16 years
* ROM (rough order of magnitude) estimate.
Another opportunity to make the heat pump system more economical would be to negotiate a lower rate
with KPU electric utility by giving them demand response control. This would allow utility to shut down
heat pumps when electric demand is high in the area. In this case the existing oil boiler would provide
heat while the heat pumps are turned off during a utility demand control. Even though additional heating
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 17
oil will be used to fire the boilers, the low cost of demand control electricity will more than offset this
cost.
Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis was completed to show how changing heating oil prices, wood pellet prices, and
project costs affect the benefit to cost (B/C) ratios of the project. As heating oil costs increase and wood
costs decrease, the project becomes more economically viable. The B/C ratios greater than 1.0 are
economically justified and are highlighted in green. B/C ratios less than 1.0 are not economically justified
and are highlighted in orange.
Table 13 – Sensitivity Analysis – Heating Oil Price vs Wood Pellet Price
B/C Ratios Wood Pellet Price
$250/ton $300/ton $350/ton $400/ton $450/ton
Heating
Oil
Price
$2.75/gal 0.81 0.67 0.53 0.38 0.24
$3.00/gal 0.96 0.81 0.67 0.53 0.39
$3.25/gal 1.10 0.96 0.82 0.67 0.53
$3.50/gal 1.25 1.10 0.96 0.82 0.67
$3.75/gal 1.39 1.25 1.10 0.96 0.82
$4.00/gal 1.54 1.39 1.25 1.11 0.96
$4.25/gal 1.68 1.54 1.39 1.25 1.11
$4.50/gal 1.82 1.68 1.54 1.39 1.25
$4.75/gal 1.97 1.82 1.68 1.54 1.39
$5.00/gal 2.11 1.97 1.83 1.68 1.54
$5.25/gal 2.26 2.11 1.97 1.83 1.68
Note: Based on a project cost of $235,000.
Table 14 – Sensitivity Analysis – Wood Pellet Price vs Project Cost
B/C Ratios Project Cost
($150,000) ($200,000) ($250,000) ($300,000) ($350,000)
Wood
Pellet
Price
$150/ton 1.86 1.40 1.12 0.93 0.80
$200/ton 1.64 1.23 0.98 0.82 0.70
$250/ton 1.41 1.06 0.85 0.71 0.60
$300/ton 1.19 0.89 0.71 0.59 0.51
$350/ton 0.96 0.72 0.58 0.48 0.41
$400/ton 0.74 0.55 0.44 0.37 0.32
$450/ton 0.51 0.38 0.31 0.26 0.22
$500/ton 0.29 0.22 0.17 0.14 0.12
Note: Based on heating oil price of $2.90/gal.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 18
Heat Pump Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis was completed for the heat pump alternative. The project cost and the price of
electricity are the two main variables for the heat pump economics. A heat pump system with a COP of
2.5 was used.
Table 15 – Sensitivity Analysis – Heat Pump Alternative
B/C Ratios Project Cost
($150,000) ($200,000) ($250,000) ($300,000) ($350,000)
Electricity
Rate
$0.08/kWh 1.93 1.45 1.16 0.97 0.83
$0.09/kWh 1.87 1.40 1.12 0.93 0.80
$0.09/kWh 1.84 1.38 1.10 0.92 0.79
$0.10/kWh 1.80 1.35 1.08 0.90 0.77
$0.11/kWh 1.73 1.30 1.04 0.87 0.74
$0.12/kWh 1.66 1.25 1.00 0.83 0.71
$0.13/kWh 1.60 1.20 0.96 0.80 0.68
$0.14/kWh 1.53 1.15 0.92 0.76 0.66
$0.15/kWh 1.46 1.10 0.88 0.73 0.63
$0.16/kWh 1.39 1.05 0.84 0.70 0.60
$0.17/kWh 1.33 0.99 0.80 0.66 0.57
Note: Based on heating oil price of $2.90/gal and heat pump with COP of 2.5.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 19
8. Forest Resource and Fuel Availability Assessments
Fuel Availability
There are two local wood pellet suppliers in Ketchikan: Marble Construction and True Value Hardware.
Marble Construction distributes pellets out of British Columbia. Wood pellets are shipped to Ketchikan in
containers and are stored in bulk at the distributor’s pellet storage.
True Value Hardware in Ketchikan also sells wood pellets. They only sell 40lb bags of pellets, not bulk
delivery. Pellets can be purchased by pallet, which contains 50 of the 40lb bags, or one ton of pellets.
There appears to be adequate pellet availability from both distributers. No further forest resource
assessments were obtained.
Air Quality Permitting
Currently, air quality permitting is regulated according to the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation Section 18 AAC 50 Air Quality Control regulations. Per these regulations, a minor air quality
permit is required if a new wood boiler or wood stove produces one of the following conditions per
Section 18 AAC 50.502 (C)(1): 40 tons per year (TPY) of carbon dioxide (CO2), 15 TPY of particulate matter
greater than 10 microns (PM-10), 40 TPY of sulfur dioxide, 0.6 TPY of lead, 100 TPY of carbon monoxide
within 10 kilometers of a carbon monoxide nonattainment area, or 10 TPY of direct PM -2.5 emissions.
These regulations assume that the device will operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per year and that no
fuel burning equipment is used. If a new wood boiler or wood stove is installed in addition to a fuel
burning heating device, the increase in air pollutants cannot exceed the following per AAC 50.502 (C)(3):
10 TPY of PM-10, 10 TPY of sulfur dioxide, 10 TPY of nitrogen oxides, 100 TPY of carbon monoxide within
10 kilometers of a carbon monoxide nonattainment area, or 10 TPY of direct PM-2.5 emissions. Per the
Wood-fired Heating Device Visible Emission Standards (Section 18 AAC 50.075), a person may not operate
a wood-fired heating device in a manner that causes black smoke or visible emissions that exceed 50
percent opacity for more than 15 minutes in any hour in an area where an air quality advisory is in effect.
From Coffman’s discussions with Patrick Dunn at the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,
these regulations are focused on permitting industrial applications of wood burning equipment. In his
opinion, it would be unlikely that an individual wood boiler would require an air quality permit unless
several boilers were to be installed and operated at the same site. If several boilers were installed and
operated together, the emissions produced could be greater than 40 tons of CO2 per year. This would
require permitting per AAC 50.502 (C)(1) or (C)(3). Permitting would not be required on the residential
wood fired stoves unless they violated the Wood-fired Heating Device Visible Emission Standards (Section
18 AAC 50.075). Recent similarly sized Garn wood fired boiler systems installed in Alaska have not
required air quality permits.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 20
9. General Biomass Technology Information
Heating with Wood Fuel
Wood fuels are among the most cost-effective and reliable sources of heating fuel for communities
adjacent to forestland when the wood fuels are processed, handled, and combusted appropriately.
Compared to other heating energy fuels, such as oil and propane, wood fuels typically have lower energy
density and higher associated transportation and handling costs. Due to this low bulk density, wood fuels
have a shorter viable haul distance when compared to fossil fuels. This short haul distance also creates an
advantage for local communities to utilize locally-sourced wood fuels, while simultaneously retaining local
energy dollars.
Most communities in rural Alaska are particularly vulnerable to high energy prices due to the large number
of heating degree days and expensive shipping costs. For many communities, wood-fueled heating can
lower fuel costs. For example, cordwood sourced at $250 per cord is just 25% of the cost per MMBTU as
#1 fuel oil sourced at $7 per gallon. In addition to the financial savings, the local communities also benefit
from the multiplier effect of circulating energy dollars within the community longer, more stable energy
prices, job creation, and more active forest management.
The local cordwood market is influenced by land ownership, existing forest management and ecological
conditions, local demand and supply, and the State of Alaska Energy Assistance program.
Types of Wood Fuel
Wood fuels are specified by energy density, moisture content, ash content, and granulometry. Each of
these characteristics affects the wood fuel’s handling characteristics, storage requirements, and
combustion process. Higher quality fuels have lower moisture, ash, dirt, and rock contents, consistent
granulometry, and higher energy density. Different types of fuel quality can be used in wood heating
projects as long as the infrastructure specifications match the fuel content characteristics. Typically, lower
quality fuel will be the lowest cost fuel, but it will require more expensive storage, handling, and
combustion infrastructure, as well as additional maintenance.
Projects in rural Alaska must be designed around the availability of wood fuels. Some fuels can be
harvested and manufactured on site, such as cordwood, woodchips, and briquettes. Wood pellets can
also be used, but typically require a larger scale pellet manufacturer to make them. The economic
feasibility of manufacturing on site is determined by a financial assessment of the project. Typically, larger
projects offer more flexibility in terms of owning and operating the wood harvesting and manufacturing
equipment, such as a wood chipper, splitter, or equipment to haul wood out of forest, than smaller
projects.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 21
High Efficiency Wood Pellet Boilers
High efficiency pellet boilers are designed to burn wood pellets cleanly and efficiently. These boilers utilize
pellet storage bins or silos that hold a large percentage of the building’s annual pellet supply. Augers or
vacuums transfer pellets from the silos to a pellet hopper adjacent to the pellet boiler, where pellets can
be fed into the boiler for burning. Pellets are automatically loaded into the pellet boiler and do not require
manual loading such as in a Garn cordwood boiler. The pellet boilers typically have a 3 to 1 turn down
ratio, which allows the firing rate to modulate from 100% down to 33% fire. This allows the boiler to
properly match building heat demand, increasing boiler efficiency. The efficiencies of these boilers can
range from 85% to 92% efficiency depending on firing rate.
High Efficiency Cordwood Boilers
High Efficiency Low Emission (HELE) cordwood boilers are designed to burn cordwood fuel cleanly and
efficiently. The boilers use cordwood that is typically seasoned to 25% moisture content (MC) or less and
meet the dimensions required for loading and firing. The amount of cordwood burned by the boiler will
depend on the heat load profile of the building and the utilization of the fuel oil system as back up. Two
HELE cordwood boiler suppliers include Garn (www.garn.com) and TarmUSA (www.woodboilers.com).
Both of these suppliers have units operating in Alaska. TarmUSA has a number of residential units
operating in Alaska and has models that range between 100,000 to 300,000 BTU/hr. Garn boilers,
manufactured by Dectra Corporation, are used in Tanana, Kasilof, Dot Lake, Thorne Bay, Coffman Cove
and other locations to heat homes, washaterias, schools, and community buildings.
The Garn boiler has a unique construction, which is basically a wood boiler housed in a large water tank.
Garn boilers come in several sizes and are appropriate for facilities using 100,000 to 1,000,000 BTUs per
hour. The jacket of water surrounding the fire box absorbs heat and is piped into buildings via a heat
exchanger, and then transferred to an existing building heating system, in-floor radiant tubing, unit
heaters, or baseboard heaters. In installations where the Garn boiler is in a detached building, there are
additional heat exchangers, pumps and a glycol circulation loop that are necessary to transfer heat to the
building while allowing for freeze protection. Radiant floor heating is the most efficient heating method
when using wood boilers such as Garns, because they can operate using lower supply water temperatures
compared to baseboards.
Garn boilers are approximately 87% efficient and store a large quantity of water. For example, the Garn
WHS-2000 holds approximately 1,825 gallons of heated water. Garns also produce virtually no smoke
when at full burn, because of a primary and secondary gasification (2,000 ºF) burning process. Garns are
manually stocked with cordwood and can be loaded multiple times a day during periods of high heating
demand. Garns are simple to operate with only three moving parts: a handle, door and blower. Garns
produce very little ash and require minimal maintenance. Removing ash and inspecting fans are typical
maintenance requirements. Fans are used to produce a draft that increases combustion temperatures
and boiler efficiency. In cold climates, Garns can be equipped with exterior insulated storage tanks for
extra hot water circulating capacity. Most facilities using cordwood boilers keep existing oil-fired systems
operational to provide heating backup during biomass boiler downtimes and to provide additional heat
for peak heating demand periods.
Low Efficiency Cordwood Boilers
Outdoor boilers are categorized as low-efficiency, high emission (LEHE) systems. These boiler systems are
not recommended as they produce significant emission issues and do not combust wood fuels efficiently
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 22
or completely, resulting in significant energy waste and pollution. These systems require significantly
more wood to be purchased, handled and combusted to heat a facility as compared to a HELE system.
Additionally, several states have placed a moratorium on installing LEHE boilers because of air quality
issues (Washington). These LEHE systems can have combustion efficiencies as low as 25% percent and
produce more than nine times the emission rate of standard industrial boilers. In comparison, HELEs can
operate around 87% efficiency.
High Efficiency Wood Stoves
Newer high efficiency wood stoves are available on the market that produce minimal smoke, minimal ash
and require less firewood. New EPA-certified wood stoves produce significantly less smoke than older
uncertified wood stoves. High efficiency wood stoves are easy to operate with minimal maintenance
compared to other biomass systems. The Blaze King Classic high efficiency wood stove
(www.blazeking.com) is a recommended model, due to its built-in thermostats that monitor the heat
output of the stove. This stove automatically adjusts the air required for combustion. This unique
technology, combined with the efficiencies of a catalytic combustor with a built-in thermostat, provides
the longest burn times of any wood stove. The Blaze King stove allows for optimal combustion and less
frequent loading and firing times.
Bulk Fuel Boilers
Bulk fuel boilers usually burn wood chips, sawdust, bark or pellets and are designed around the wood
resources that are available from the local forests or local industry. Several large facilities in Tok, Craig,
and Delta Junction (Delta Greely High School) are using bulk fuel biomass systems. Tok uses a commercial
grinder to process woodchips. The chips are then dumped into a bin and are carried by a conveyor belt
to the boiler. The wood fuel comes from timber scraps, local sawmills and forest thinning projects. The
Delta Greely High School has a woodchip bulk fuel boiler that heats the 77,000 square foot facility. The
Delta Greely system, designed by Coffman engineers, includes a completely separate boiler building which
includes a chip storage bunker and space for storage of tractor trailers full of chips (so handling of frozen
chips could be avoided). Woodchips are stored in the concrete bunker and augers move the material on
a conveyor belt to the boilers.
Heat Pumps
Heat pumps can be an energy-efficient alternative for heating buildings located in moderate heating
climates. Electricity is used to drive a refrigeration cycle in the heat pump, which transfers heat from the
outside air to the inside of the building. The Department of Energy is a great source for more information
on heat pumps.
https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/heat-and-cool/heat-pump-systems
https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/heat-pump-systems/air-source-heat-pumps
Grants
There are state, federal, and local grant opportunities for biomass work for feasibility studies, design and
construction. If a project is pursued, a thorough search of websites and discussions with the AEA Biomass
group is recommended to make sure no possible funding opportunities are missed. Below are some
funding opportunities and existing past grants that have been awarded.
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 23
The U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development has over fifty financial assistance programs for a
variety of rural applications. This includes energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.
http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services
The city of Nulato was awarded a $40,420 grant for engineering services for a wood energy project by the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the United States Forest Service. Links regarding the
award of the Woody Biomass Utilization Project recipients are shown below:
http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/releases/07/renewablewoods.shtml
Delta Junction was awarded a grant for engineering from the Alaska Energy Authority from the Renewable
Energy Fund for $831,203. This fund provides assistance to utilities, independent power producers, local
governments, and tribal governments for feasibility studies, reconnaissance studies, energy resource
monitoring, and work related to the design and construction of eligible facilities.
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/RenewableEnergyFund
The Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group (AWEDTG) consists of a coalition of federal and state
agencies and not-for-profit organizations that have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to
explore opportunities to increase the utilization of wood for energy and biofuels production in Alaska. A
pre-feasibility study for Aleknagik was conducted in 2012 for the AWEDTG. The preliminary costs for the
biomass system(s) are $346,257 for the city hall and health center system and $439,096 for the city hall,
health center, and future washateria system.
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/AEEE/Biomass
The Emerging Energy Technology Fund grand program provides funds to eligible applicants for
demonstrations projects of technologies that have a reasonable expectation to be commercially viable
within five years and that are designed to: test emerging energy technologies or methods of conserving
energy, improve an existing energy technology, or deploy an existing technology that has not previously
been demonstrated in Alaska.
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/EETF1
The U.S. Forest Service also has grants available, such as the Wood Innovation Program. In 2018, there
was $8 million of grant money available to communities to expand and accelerate wood products and
wood energy markets.
https://www.fs.usda.gov/naspf/programs/wood-education-and-resource-center/2018-wood-
innovations-program-request-proposals
Department of Energy (DOE) funding options can be accessed at these links:
https://www.energy.gov/energy-economy/funding-financing
https://www.energy.gov/eere/wipo/energy-efficiency-and-conservation-block-grant-program
https://www.energy.gov/eere/funding/apply-eere-funding-opportunities
https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/html/funding.html#general
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc. 24
Also, the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) and DOE have revolving loan funds that can be
used for energy improvements.
https://www.ahfc.us/efficiency/non-residential-buildings/energy-efficiency-revolving-loan-fund-aeerlp/
https://www.energy.gov/savings/energy-efficiency-revolving-loan-fund-program
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Appendix A
Site Photos
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Church Photos
1. North Elevation of Church 2. South Elevation of Church
3. East Elevation of Church 4. Church Fuel Storage
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Church Photos
5. Church Boiler 6. Church Water Heater
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Church Photos
7. Church AHU-1 8. AHU-1 Control
9. Exhaust Fan 10. Church Hydronic Pumps
11. Church Heating Main 12. Church Electrical Panels
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Church Photos
13. Church Electrical Panels 14. Church Electrical Service
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
School Photos
15. North Elevation of School 16. South Elevation of School
17. East Elevation of School 18. West Elevation of Church and School
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
School Photos
19. School Boiler 20. School Water Heater
21. School AHU-1 22. School Air Compressor
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
School Photos
23. School Fuel Tank 24. School Hydronic Pump
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
School Photos
25. School Electrical Service 26. School Electrical Panels
27. School Electrical Panels
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Appendix B
Economic Analysis Spreadsheets
Holy Name Church and SchoolKetchikan, AlaskaProject Capital Cost($235,000)Present Value of Project Benefits (20-year life)$401,286Present Value of Operating Costs (20-year life)($241,511)Benefit / Cost Ratio of Project (20-year life)0.68Net Present Value (20-year life)($75,225)Year Accumulated Cash Flow is Net PositiveFirst YearPayback Period (Year Accumulated Cash Flow > Project Capital Cost)>20 yearsDiscount Rate for Net Present Value Analysis3%Wood Fuel Escalation Rate2%Fossil Fuel Escalation Rate5%Electricity Escalation Rate2%O&M Escalation Rate2%YearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYear1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20Existing Heating System Operating CostsExisting Heating Oil Consumption$2.905,900gal$17,110$17,966$18,864$19,807$20,797$21,837$22,929$24,075$25,279$26,543$27,870$29,264$30,727$32,263$33,877$35,570$37,349$39,216$41,177$43,236Biomass System Operating CostsWood Pellet Cost (Delivered)$32798%38.0tons($12,426)($12,675)($12,928)($13,187)($13,450)($13,719)($13,994)($14,274)($14,559)($14,850)($15,147)($15,450)($15,759)($16,074)($16,396)($16,724)($17,058)($17,399)($17,747)($18,102)Fossil Fuel$2.902%118gal($342)($359)($377)($396)($416)($437)($459)($482)($506)($531)($557)($585)($615)($645)($678)($711)($747)($784)($824)($865)Additional Electricity$0.10800kWh($80)($82)($83)($85)($87)($88)($90)($92)($94)($96)($98)($99)($101)($103)($106)($108)($110)($112)($114)($117)Operation and Maintenance Costs($600)($612)($624)($637)($649)($662)($676)($689)($703)($717)($731)($746)($761)($776)($792)($808)($824)($840)($857)($874)Additional Operation and Maintenance Costs for first 2 years($600)($612)$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0Total Operating Costs($14,048)($14,339)($14,013)($14,304)($14,602)($14,907)($15,218)($15,536)($15,861)($16,194)($16,534)($16,881)($17,236)($17,599)($17,971)($18,350)($18,739)($19,136)($19,542)($19,958)Annual Operating Cost Savings$3,062 $3,626 $4,851 $5,503 $6,195 $6,930 $7,711 $8,539 $9,418 $10,349 $11,337 $12,383 $13,491 $14,664 $15,906 $17,220 $18,610 $20,081 $21,635 $23,278Accumulated Cash Flow$3,062 $6,688 $11,539 $17,042 $23,237 $30,167 $37,878 $46,417 $55,835 $66,185 $77,521 $89,904 $103,395 $118,060 $133,966 $151,186 $169,796 $189,876 $211,512 $234,790Net Present Value($232,027) ($228,609) ($224,170) ($219,281) ($213,937) ($208,133) ($201,863) ($195,122) ($187,904) ($180,203) ($172,013) ($163,328) ($154,142) ($144,447) ($134,237) ($123,506) ($112,247) ($100,452) ($88,113) ($75,225)Economic Analysis ResultsInflation RatesDescription Unit CostHeating Source ProportionAnnual Energy UnitsEnergy Units
Feasibility Assessment for Biomass Heating Systems Holy Name Catholic Church and School
Coffman Engineers, Inc.
Appendix C
AWEDTG Field Data Sheets
Page 1 of 4
ALASKA WOOD ENERGY DEVELOPMENT TASK GROUP (AWEDTG)
PRE-FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT FIELD DATA SHEET
APPLICANT:
Eligibility:
(check one)
□Local government □State agency □Federal agency □School/School District
□Federally Recognized Tribe □Regional ANCSA Corp.□Village ANCSA Corp.
□Not-for-profit organization □Private Entity that can demonstrate a Public Benefit
□Other (describe):
Contact Name:
Mailing Address:
City:
State: AK Zip Code: 99
Office phone: (907) Cell phone: ( )
Fax: (907)
Email:
Facility Identification/Name: Holy Name School and Church
Facility Contact Person: Larry Jackson
Facility Contact Telephone: (907) ( )
Facility Contact Email:
SCHOOL/FACILITY INFORMATION (complete separate Field Data Sheet for each building)
SCHOOL FACILITY (Name: _________________________________________________________________________________ )
School Type:
(check all that apply)
[ ] Pre-School
[ ] Elementary
[ ] Middle School
[ ] Junior High
[ ] High School
[ ] Campus
[ ] Student Housing
[ ] Pool
[ ] Gymnasium
[ ] Other (describe):
Size of facility (sq. ft. heated): Year built/age:
Number of floors: Year(s) renovated:
Number of bldgs.: Next renovation:
# of Students: Has en energy audit been conducted?: If Yes, when? *
OTHER FACILITY (Name: ___________________________________________________________________________________ )
Type:
[ ] Health Clinic
[ ] Public Safety Bldg.
[ ] Community Center
[ ] Water Plant
[ ] Washeteria
[ ] Public Housing
[ ] Multi-Purpose Bldg
[ ] District Energy System
[ ] Other (list):
Size of Facility (sq. ft. heated) 32,000 Year built/age:
Number of floors: 2 Year(s) renovated:
Number of bldgs.: 1 Next renovation:
Frequency of Usage: Daily # of Occupants
Has an energy audit been conducted? If Yes, when? *
* If an Energy Audit has been conducted, please provide a copy.
21,600
2
1
1965
Holy Name School
Holy Name Church
Church
1985
Larry Jackson
Church
No
75
200 Sunday, 10 weekdays
(907) 617-4542
Info@akforestenterprises.com
na
unknown
no
na
unknown
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Holy Name Catholic Church and School
433 Jackson St.
Ketchikan
901
907-225-2400
247-0041
see below
Holy Name Church
16,000 SF
Page 2 of 4
HEATING SYSTEM INFORMATION
CONFIGURATION (check all that apply)
□Heat plant in one location: □ on ground level □ below ground level □ mezzanine □ roof □ at least 1 exterior wall
□Different heating plants in different locations: How many? _______________ What level(s)? _________________________
□Individual room-by-room heating systems (space heaters)
□Is boiler room accessible to delivery trucks? □ Yes □ No
HEAT DELIVERY (check all that apply)
□Hot water: □ baseboard □ radiant heat floor □ cabinet heaters □ air handlers □ radiators □ other: ___________________
□Steam: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
□Forced/ducted air
□Electric heat: □ resistance □ boiler □ heat pump(s)
□Space heaters
HEAT GENERATION (check all that apply) Heating capacity Annual Fuel
(Btuh / kWh) Consumption | Cost__
□Hot water boiler:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Steam boiler:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Warm air furnace:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Electric resistance:□baseboard □duct coils ____________ ______________|________
□Heat pumps:□air source □ground source □ sea water ____________ ______________|________
□Space heaters:□woodstove □ Toyo/Monitor □ other: _________________ ____________ ______________|________
TEMPERATURE CONTROLS (type of system; check all that apply)
□Thermostats on individual devices/appliances; no central control system
□Pneumatic control system Manufacturer: __________________________ Approx. Age: __________
□Direct digital control system Manufacturer: __________________________ Approx. Age: __________
Record Name Plate data for boilers (use separate sheet if necessary):
Describe locations of different parts of the heating system and what building areas are served:
Describe age and general condition of existing equipment:
Who performs boiler maintenance? __________________________________ Describe any current maintenance issues:
Where is piping or ducting routed through the building? (tunnels, utilidors, crawlspace, above false ceiling, attic, etc.):
Describe on-site fuel storage: Number of tanks, size of tanks, location(s) of tanks, condition, spill containment, etc.:
If this fuel is also used for other purposes, please describe:
School
Classroom Ventilation only
Mostly baseboard, Unit heaters in Gym, convectors in Halls, AHU for Classroom ventilation
1,000,000
See Photo
Boiler room on lower level, exterior wall. Piping is looped through three circuits to individual terminal units. AHU is for classroom ventilation
only
Older equipment is operational but past its expected lifespan. Parts are hard to obtain for repairs
Volunteer for routine work, local
P&H contractor for larger issues Parts are hard to obtain
Above false ceiling and though walls
Two 300-gallon tanks indoors, no spill containment, no nameplate. Good condition
54
Pneumatic t-stats for classroom BB
$11,3604,800 gal/yr
x x x
x
x
x x x
x
x
x x
x
x
Progress Oil Boiler: 1,000,000 BTU/hr output. Manufactured in 1964.
Fuel only used for oil boiler.
$2.50/gal
Page 3 of 4
DOMESTIC HOT WATER
USES OF DOMESTIC HOT WATER TYPE OF SYSTEM
Check all that apply: Check all that apply:
□Lavatories □Direct-fired, single tank
□Kitchen □Direct fired, multiple tanks
□Showers □Indirect , using heating boiler with separate storage tank
□Laundry □Hot water generator with separate storage tank
□Water treatment □Other: ____________________________________________
□Other: ________________________________
What fuels are used to generate hot water? (Check all that apply): □ natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil
Describe location of water heater(s): ________________________________________________________________________________________
Describe on-site fuel storage: number of tanks, size of tanks, location(s) of tanks, condition, spill containment, etc.:
BUILDING ENVELOPE
Wall type (stick frame, masonry, SIP, etc.): ____________________________________________ Insulation Value: _______
Windows: □ single
pane
□ double pane □ other: ____________________________________________________________
Arc
tic entry(s): □ none
□ at main entrance only □ at multiple entrances □ at all entrancesDrawings available: □ architectural □ mechanical □ electrical
Outside Air/Air Exchange: □ HRV □ CO2 Sensor
ELECTRICAL
Utility company that serves the building or community: __________________________________________________________
Type of grid: □ building stand-alone □ village/community power □ railbelt grid
Energy source: □ hydropower □ diesel generator(s) □ Other: ____________________________________________________________
Electricity rate per kWh: _________ Demand charge: ______________
Electrical energy phase(s) available: □ single phase □ 3-phase
Back-up generator on site: □ Yes □ No If Yes, provide output capacity: ________________________________________
Are there spare circuits in MDP and/or electrical panel?: □ Yes □ No
Record MDP and electrical panel name plate information:
WOOD FUEL INFORMATION
Wood pellet cost delivered to facility $_________/ton Viable fuel source? Yes No
Wood chip cost delivered to facility $_________/ton Viable fuel source? Yes No
Cord wood cost delivered to facility $_________/cord Viable fuel source? Yes No
Distance to nearest wood pellet and wood chip suppliers?_______________________________________________________
Can logs or wood fuel be stockpiled on site or at a nearby facility?_________________________________________________
Who manages local forests? Village Native Corp, Regional Native Corp, State of Alaska, Forest Service, BLM, USF&WS, Other:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
See Photo
Located in boiler room
See Boiler info
Stick R-16
Masonry R-10
R-Roof type: _____________________________________________________ Insulation Value: _______ 24
Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU)
3-phase is available but school is currently supplied with single
phase 120/240v power
See photos
Prince Rupert, BC, Canada (same source as KTN Airport)
A pellet bin could be installed on site
School
Upper level stick frame, Lower level masonry
where underground
Wood truss with Batt Insulation
Very limited
$0.0942
x
x
x
Amtrol indirect hot water heater. 41 gal.
R-24
x
x
x
xx
x
x
x
x
350
NA
NA
Page 4 of 4
FACILITY SITE CONSIDERATIONS
Is there good access to site for delivery vehicles (trucks, chip vans, etc)?
Are there any significant site constraints? (Playgrounds, other buildings, wetlands, underground utilities, etc.)?
What are local soil conditions? Permafrost issues?
Is the building in proximity to other buildings with biomass potential? If so, Which ones and How close?
Can building accommodate a biomass boiler inside, or would an addition for a new boiler be necessary? Where would addition go?
Where would potential boiler plant or addition utilities (water/sewer/power/etc.) come from?
If necessary, can piping be run underground from a central plant to the building? Where would piping enter boiler room?
OTHER INFORMATION
Provide any other information that will help describe the space heating and domestic hot water systems, such as
Is heat distribution system looping or branching?
For baseboard hydronic heat, what is the diameter of the copper tubing? Size of fins? Number of fins per lineal foot?
Any other energy using systems (kitchen equipment, lab equipment, pool etc)? Fuel or energy source?
Any systems that could be added to the boiler system?
Are heating fuel records available?
PICTURE / VIDEO CHECKLIST
Exterior
Main entry
Building elevations
Several near boiler room and where potential addition/wood storage and/or exterior piping may enter the building
Access road to building and to boiler room
Power poles serving building
Electrical service entry
Emergency generator
Interior
Boilers, pumps, domestic water heaters, heat exchangers – all mechanical equipment in boiler room and in other parts of the building.
Boiler room piping at boiler and around boiler room
Piping around domestic water heater
MDP and/or electrical panels in or around boiler room
Pictures of available circuits in MDP or electrical panel (open door).
Picture of circuit card of electrical panel
Picture of equipment used to heat room in the building (i.e. baseboard fin tube, unit heaters, unit ventilators, air handler, fan coil)
Pictures of any other major mechanical equipment
Pictures of equipment using fuel not part of heating or domestic hot water system (kitchen equip., lab equip., pool, etc.)
Pictures of building plans (site plan, architectural floor plan, mechanical plan, boiler room plan, electrical power plan)
Yes
School
No
Rocky
School and church abut each other
There is room on site for a new boiler building. No room inside the facility for biomass boiler.
KPU and city water/sewer are available in the adjacent street if the existing utility tie-ins don't work for the new boiler building
Piping could be trenched from a central boiler to the school. Piping would enter the boiler room at the exterior wall
Two parallel loops with individual branches on each loop.
Baseboards are 3/4" tube, 60 Fin/Ft with varying fin size. Most are 4"x4"
School has a small food warming kitchen with electric stove/range.
There are no other systems to add to the boiler, unless you can figure out how to get light from hot
water......
Fuel records have been requested. (Anna Marie Mestas, Holy Parish Business Manager (907) 617-6212
Page 2 of 4
HEATING SYSTEM INFORMATION
CONFIGURATION (check all that apply)
□Heat plant in one location: □ on ground level □ below ground level □ mezzanine □ roof □ at least 1 exterior wall
□Different heating plants in different locations: How many? _______________ What level(s)? _________________________
□Individual room-by-room heating systems (space heaters)
□Is boiler room accessible to delivery trucks? □ Yes □ No
HEAT DELIVERY (check all that apply)
□Hot water: □ baseboard □ radiant heat floor □ cabinet heaters □ air handlers □ radiators □ other: ___________________
□Steam: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
□Forced/ducted air
□Electric heat: □ resistance □ boiler □ heat pump(s)
□Space heaters
HEAT GENERATION (check all that apply) Heating capacity Annual Fuel
(Btuh / kWh) Consumption | Cost__
□Hot water boiler:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Steam boiler:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Warm air furnace:□natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil ____________ ______________|________
□Electric resistance:□baseboard □duct coils ____________ ______________|________
□Heat pumps:□air source □ground source □ sea water ____________ ______________|________
□Space heaters:□woodstove □ Toyo/Monitor □ other: _________________ ____________ ______________|________
TEMPERATURE CONTROLS (type of system; check all that apply)
□Thermostats on individual devices/appliances; no central control system
□Pneumatic control system Manufacturer: __________________________ Approx. Age: __________
□Direct digital control system Manufacturer: __________________________ Approx. Age: __________
Record Name Plate data for boilers (use separate sheet if necessary):
Describe locations of different parts of the heating system and what building areas are served:
Describe age and general condition of existing equipment:
Who performs boiler maintenance? __________________________________ Describe any current maintenance issues:
Where is piping or ducting routed through the building? (tunnels, utilidors, crawlspace, above false ceiling, attic, etc.):
Describe on-site fuel storage: Number of tanks, size of tanks, location(s) of tanks, condition, spill containment, etc.:
If this fuel is also used for other purposes, please describe:
Church
Kitchen Make up only
Mostly Baseboard, convectors in halls, AHU for Kitchen Make up only
625,000
except interlock on Kitchen AHU and Kitchen hood
See Photo
Boiler room on lower level, exterior wall. Piping is looped through three circuits to individual terminal units. AHU is for Kitchen
Make up only
Older equipment is operational but at its expected lifespan.
Volunteer for routine work, P&H
contractor for larger issues
Above false ceiling and through walls
500 gallon tank outside boiler room, no spill containment, good condition
3,700 gal $2.50/gal
X X X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X X
X
Fuel is only used for oil boiler.
Weil Mclain Model BL-976-S-W,
624,000 BTU/hr
Page 3 of 4
DOMESTIC HOT WATER
USES OF DOMESTIC HOT WATER TYPE OF SYSTEM
Check all that apply: Check all that apply:
□Lavatories □Direct-fired, single tank
□Kitchen □Direct fired, multiple tanks
□Showers □Indirect , using heating boiler with separate storage tank
□Laundry □Hot water generator with separate storage tank
□Water treatment □Other: ____________________________________________
□Other: ________________________________
What fuels are used to generate hot water? (Check all that apply): □ natural gas □ propane □ electric □ #1 fuel oil □ #2 fuel oil
Describe location of water heater(s): ________________________________________________________________________________________
Describe on-site fuel storage: number of tanks, size of tanks, location(s) of tanks, condition, spill containment, etc.:
BUILDING ENVELOPE
Wall type (stick frame, masonry, SIP, etc.): ____________________________________________ Insulation Value: _______
Roof type: ______________________________________________________________________ Insulation Value: _______
Windows: □ single pane □ double pane □ other: ____________________________________________________________
Arctic entry(s): □ none □ at main entrance only □ at multiple entrances □ at all entrances
Drawings available: □ architectural □ mechanical □ electrical
Outside Air/Air Exchange: □ HRV □ CO2 Sensor
ELECTRICAL
Utility company that serves the building or community: __________________________________________________________
Type of grid: □ building stand-alone □ village/community power □ railbelt grid
Energy source: □ hydropower □ diesel generator(s) □ Other: ____________________________________________________________
Electricity rate per kWh: _________ Demand charge: ______________
Electrical energy phase(s) available: □ single phase □ 3-phase
Back-up generator on site: □ Yes □ No If Yes, provide output capacity: ________________________________________
Are there spare circuits in MDP and/or electrical panel?: □ Yes □ No
Record MDP and electrical panel name plate information:
WOOD FUEL INFORMATION
Wood pellet cost delivered to facility $_________/ton Viable fuel source? Yes No
Wood chip cost delivered to facility $_________/ton Viable fuel source? Yes No
Cord wood cost delivered to facility $_________/cord Viable fuel source? Yes No
Distance to nearest wood pellet and wood chip suppliers?_______________________________________________________
Can logs or wood fuel be stockpiled on site or at a nearby facility?_________________________________________________
Who manages local forests? Village Native Corp, Regional Native Corp, State of Alaska, Forest Service, BLM, USF&WS, Other:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Church
See Photo
WH-1 in boiler room, electric WH in store room by Kitchen, Electric WH in Jan closet by
Rest rooms
See boiler info
Upper level stick frame, lower level masonry
where underground Stick, R-16
Masonry, R-10
Roof, R-24
3-phase is available but school is currently supplied with single
phase 120/240v power
Very Limited
See Photos
Prince Rupert, BC, Canada, same as KTN airport
A pellet bin could be installed on site
$0.0942
wood frame with Batt Insulation
Ketchikan Public Utility (KPU)
Amtrol indirect hot
water heater. 41 gal.x
x
X
X X
X
X
X X X
X
X X
X
X
350
NA
NA
Page 4 of 4
FACILITY SITE CONSIDERATIONS
Is there good access to site for delivery vehicles (trucks, chip vans, etc)?
Are there any significant site constraints? (Playgrounds, other buildings, wetlands, underground utilities, etc.)?
What are local soil conditions? Permafrost issues?
Is the building in proximity to other buildings with biomass potential? If so, Which ones and How close?
Can building accommodate a biomass boiler inside, or would an addition for a new boiler be necessary? Where would addition go?
Where would potential boiler plant or addition utilities (water/sewer/power/etc.) come from?
If necessary, can piping be run underground from a central plant to the building? Where would piping enter boiler room?
OTHER INFORMATION
Provide any other information that will help describe the space heating and domestic hot water systems, such as
Is heat distribution system looping or branching?
For baseboard hydronic heat, what is the diameter of the copper tubing? Size of fins? Number of fins per lineal foot?
Any other energy using systems (kitchen equipment, lab equipment, pool etc)? Fuel or energy source?
Any systems that could be added to the boiler system?
Are heating fuel records available?
PICTURE / VIDEO CHECKLIST
Exterior
Main entry
Building elevations
Several near boiler room and where potential addition/wood storage and/or exterior piping may enter the building
Access road to building and to boiler room
Power poles serving building
Electrical service entry
Emergency generator
Interior
Boilers, pumps, domestic water heaters, heat exchangers – all mechanical equipment in boiler room and in other parts of the building.
Boiler room piping at boiler and around boiler room
Piping around domestic water heater
MDP and/or electrical panels in or around boiler room
Pictures of available circuits in MDP or electrical panel (open door).
Picture of circuit card of electrical panel
Picture of equipment used to heat room in the building (i.e. baseboard fin tube, unit heaters, unit ventilators, air handler, fan coil)
Pictures of any other major mechanical equipment
Pictures of equipment using fuel not part of heating or domestic hot water system (kitchen equip., lab equip., pool, etc.)
Pictures of building plans (site plan, architectural floor plan, mechanical plan, boiler room plan, electrical power plan)
Church
Yes
No
Rocky
School and church abut each other
There is room onsite for a new boiler building. No room inside the facility for biomass boiler
KPU and city water are available in the adjacent street if the existing utility tie-ins don't work for the new boiler building
Piping could be trenched from a central boiler to the church. Piping would enter the boiler room at the exterior wall.
Three parallel loops with individual branches on each loop
Baseboards are 3/4" tube, 60 Fin/Ft with varying fin size. Most are 4"x4"
Church has small commercial-style kitchen with propane stove/range. The commercial exhaust hoods are
interlocked to a make up air AHU with HW preheat coils
There are no other systems that could be added to the boiler except converting the two small electric water
heaters to indirect-fired HW generators
Fuel records have been requested, Anna Marie Mestas, Holy Name Parish Business Manager (907) 617-6212