Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutElim Findings and Recommendations 1985ELI 003 Alaska Power Authority LTAD&Dy COPY Alaska Power Authority LIBRARY COPY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS "!Vim Hydroelectric Project The Power Authority received funding in 1980 for reconnaissance studies in 29 western Alaska villages. Elim was one of those communities included in the studies to determine energy require- ments and alternate energy sources. Elim is located on the south shore of the Seward Peninsula on Norton Sound and has a population of approximately 220. Commercial fishing is the mainstay of the village's economy. The community is dependent on diesel fuel for electricity and uses wood and fuel oil for space heating. Under the direction of the Alaska Power Authority (APA), a "Recon- naissance Study of Energy Requirements for Kaltag, Savoonga, White Mountain, and Elim" was produced by Holden and Associates in June 1981. The results of the economic analysis indicated that continu- ation of diesel generation with improved diesel conversion effi- ciency was the plan of choice; development of waste heat recovery was proposed, along with increased utilization of Elim's wood resources for space heating. Further investigation of selected nearby hydro sites was also recommended. In 1982, field studies of two potential hydroelectric sites, Peterson Creek and Qui kta l i k Creek, were conducted by Dowl Engi- neers. Quiktalik Creek and Peterson Creek are located 1.5 and 5 miles from Elim respectively. These sites were chosen for further study from a group screened for power, head and stream flow by the Alaska Corps of Engineers in 1981. In 1979, the Alaska Power Administration had also identified Peterson Creek as a potentially viable hydroelectric project to serve El im and possibly nearby Moses Point. Both sites are run-of-river with minimal or no storage at the diversion weir. The primary problem with hydro projects in the Elim area is the flat stream gradients that require long, relatively large diameter penstocks to develop enough head and, therefore, enough power. In Dowl 's report, the hydroelectric scenarios proved to have the highest present worth cost. Quiktalik Creek was eliminated on the basis of its estimated high project construction costs. Peterson Creek Hydroelectric Project was envisioned as a 68 KW project producing 200,000 KWH per year. Peterson Creek • s hydro- electric potential was based upon an estimated average annual flow of 2.8 cubic feet per second (cfs). This figure was base upon recorded stream flows of the Snake River and Crater Creek near Nome, the closest known gages with similar meterological exposure. Peterson Creek was found to be marginally uneconomic, with a benefit/cost ratio of 0.95 based on an estimated construction cost of 2.2 million dollars. 4700/DD06 For supplementary hydrology data, gages were placed at Peterson Creek and stream flow data was collected from June 1984 through September 1985. Results were compiled and analyzed, and determined to be statistically insignificant but supported previous study findings that Peterson Creek was uneconomi ca 1. Ninety percent of the stream flow occurs from May through October at a mean annua 1 flow of 3.1 cfs. This is an insufficient amount of water to produce enough power for the village to replace diesel generation and its associated costs, and to meet the debt service of the new construction. The reconmendation for the village of Elim is to continue diesel generation as the source of electrical energy. System efficiency is increased by the waste heat recovery system installed by the Power Authority in 1983. 4700/0006 Bibliography Small Hydroelectric Inventory of Villages Served by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, USOOE, Alaska Power Administration, 1979 Regiona 1 Inventory and Reconnaissance Study for Sma 11 Hydropower Projects in Northwest Alaska, Department of Army, Alaska District Corps of Engineers, Anchorage, 1981. Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Elim, Kaltag, Savoonga and White Mountain, for Alaska Power Author- ity by Holden and Associates, Juneau, 1981. Pre-Reconnaissance Report, Elim Hydroelectric Project, for Alaska Power Authority by Dowl Engineers, Anchorage, 1982. Bering Strait Energy Reconnaissance for Bering Strait REAA School District by Fryer: Pressley: .Elliott, Anchorage, 1980. 4700/0006 Alaska Power Authority LIBRARY COPY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Elim Hydroelectric Project The Power Authority received funding in 1980 for reconnaissance studies in 29 western Alaska villages. Elim was one of those communities included in the studies to determine energy require- ments and alternate energy sources. Elim is located on the south shore of the Seward Peninsula on Norton Sound and has a population of approximately 220. Commercial fishing is the mainstay of the village's economy. The community is dependent on diesel fuel for electricity and uses wood and fuel oil for space heating. Under the direction of the Alaska Power Authority (APA), a "Recon- naissance Study of Energy Requirements for Kaltag, Savoonga, White Mountain, and Elim 11 was produced by Holden and Associates in June 1981. The results of the economic analysis indicated that continu- ation of diesel generation with improved diesel conversion effi- ciency was the plan of choice; development of waste heat recovery was proposed, along with increased utilization of Elim's wood resources for space heating. Further investigation of selected nearby hydro sites was also recommended. In 1982, field studies of two potential hydroelectric sites, Peterson Creek and Quiktalik Creek, were conducted by Dowl Engi- neers. Quiktalik Creek and Peterson Creek are located 1.5 and 5 miles from Elim respectively. These sites were chosen for further study from a group screened for power, head and stream flow by the Alaska Corps of Engineers in 1981. In 1979, the Alaska Power Administration had also identified Peterson Creek as a potentially viable hydroelectric project to serve El im and possibly nearby Moses Point. Both sites are run-of-river with minimal or no storage at the diversion weir. The primary problem with hydro projects in the Elim area is the flat stream gradients that require long, relatively large diameter penstocks to develop enough head and, therefore, enough power. In Dowl 's report, the hydroelectric scenarios proved to have the highest present worth cost. Quiktalik Creek was eliminated on the basis of its estimated high project construction costs. Peterson Creek Hydroelectric Project was envisioned as a 68 KW project producing 200,000 KWH per year. Peterson Creek's hydro- electric potential was based upon an estimated average annual flow of 2.8 cubic feet per second (cfs). This figure was base upon recorded stream flows of the Snake River and Crater Creek near Nome, the closest known gages with similar meterological exposure. Peterson Creek was found to be marginally uneconomic, with a benefit/cost ratio of 0.95 based on an estimated construction cost of 2.2 million dollars. 4700/DD06 For supplementary hydrology data, gages were placed at Peterson Creek and stream flow data was collected from June 1984 through September 1985. Results were compiled and analyzed, and determined to be statistically insignificant but supported previous study findings that Peterson Creek was uneconomical. Ninety percent of the stream flow occurs from May through October at a mean annua 1 flow of 3.1 cfs. This is an insufficient amount of water to produce enough power for the village to replace diesel generation and its associated costs, and to meet the debt service of the new construction. The recoiTITlendation for the village of Elim is to continue diesel generation as the source of electrical energy. System efficiency is increased by the waste heat recovery system installed by the Power Authority in 1983. 4700/0006 Bibliography Small Hydroelectric Inventory of Villages Served by Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, USDOE, Alaska Power Administration, 1979 Regional Inventory and Reconnaissance Study for Sma 11 Hydropower Projects in Northwest Alaska, Department of Army, Alaska District Corps of Engineers, Anchorage, 1981. Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Elim, Kaltag, Savoonga and White Mountain, for Alaska Power Author- ity by Holden and Associates, Juneau, 1981. Pre-Reconnaissance Report, Elim Hydroelectric Project, for Alaska Power Authority by Dowl Engineers, Anchorage, 1982. Bering Strait Energy Reconnaissance for Bering Strait REAA School District by Fryer: Pressley: .Elliott, Anchorage, 1980. 4700/0006