The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNational Hydroelectric Power Sources Power Market Assessment for AK 1981r --.., Alaska Energy Authority HYD LIBLUY COPY 060 • , NATIONAL HYDROELECTRIC POWER RESOURCES POWER MARKET ASSESSMENT FOR ALASKA .,. t I JULY 1980 ~ (UPDATED FEBRUARY 1981) . . u.s. Department of Energy Alaska Power Administration Juneau, Alaska - TITLE CHAPTER I CHAPTER II CHAPTER III CHAPTER IV CHAPTER V CHAPTER VI CHAPTER VII CHAPTER VIII CONTENTS INTROD-UCTION ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• S'UMMA.RY ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• POWER MARKET CONDITIONS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Regions•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southeast.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southcentral•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Interior•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Southwest••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Northwest •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• , • Arctic•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Electric Power Statistics •••••••••••••••••••• Transmission ••••.••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••. POWER REQUIREMENTS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• EXISTING, PLANNED, AND POTENTIAL PAGE NO. 1 3 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 10 10 11 HYDRO PROJECTS•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 ALTERNATIVE POWER COSTS••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l7 LOAD/RESOURCE COMPARISON •••••••• •••••••••••••••••• 19 CONSTRAINTS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23 APPEND: IX. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 25 NUMBER Figure 1 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Figures General MaP•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Tables Summary Listing of Hydropower Sites Under Construction, Planned by 1990 and Potential Projects by 2000 ••••••••••••••••••••• Hydropower Sites Existing, Under Construction, and Planned by 1990•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Comparison of Loads and Hydro Resources •••••••••• PAGE NO. 8 5 14 20 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION The National Hydroelectric Power Resources Study (National Hydropower Study) is being conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) pursuant to authorization by Congress in Section 167 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (PL94-5B7). The study objectives outlined by Congress in Section 167 include assessment of physical and economic potential, as well as analysis of social, environmental, and institutional aspects of potential hydroelectric development. The Department of Energy, through its power marketing administrations, is providing information on transmission and power market aspects of the study. The Corps provided an assessment of potentially feasible new hydroelec- tric projects in Alaska including estimates of power potential, likely costs, and a screening process to determine those projects which appeared to have relatively attractive economics. (The Corp's summary of 59 potential projects which passed the screening process is included in the Corps report, but not duplicated in this report.) The Alaska Power Administration (APA) Assessment added the additional consideration of power market and transmission aspects of hydro poten- tial identified by the Corps and, in general terms, estimates the portion that may be marketable by the year 2000. This is premised on estimates of power demand and alternative power costs, including trans- mission. Potential hydroelectric projects identified by the Corps are favorably located to provide power to the municipal power ~~rket areas of South- east, Southcentral, and Southwest Alaska, and the Fairbanks-Tanana Valley area. Further assessment of potentially feasible projects is presented for those four geographic regions. The APA assessment also includes a discussion of constraints to further utilization of the State's hydro resource. A general discussion of Alaska Power Administration history; summary of present power marketing programs; potential effects of additional power supplies on APA programs and practices; and effects of energy conserva- tion, are all included in a seperate summary report. 1 2 CHAPTER II • SUMMARY _ The Corps of Engineers Alaska work for the National Hydro Study produced a new inventory of 59 hydroelectric projects in Alaska for which the Corps considers there is some potential for economic feasibilty. This listing includes expansion of existing projects, as well as the projects now under construction and'in advanced planning stages. Criteria for the Corps study included: o Sites of 1 MW or larger potential o Preliminary design and cost estimates based on 1979 price levels. o Benefit cost ratio of 0.7 or higher, using a 50-year analysis and 7 1/8% discount rate to calculate energy cost. o Development not precluded by land designations such as National Parks, Monuments, Refugees, Wild and Scenic River or Wilderness. o Environmental factors recognized by other agencies. The Corps study does not include transmission costs. Presently developed hydroelectric projects in Alaska total 124 MW with an annual energy capability of approximately 611 GWR. Projects now under construction plus those that are in advanced planning stages or authorized may increase these totals to about 318 MW and 1,565 GWH per year by 1990. MW GWH Existing 124 611 Under Construction -1980 28 129 Planned by 1990 166 825 318 . 1,565 Data from previous Alaska Power Administration inventory studies was provided to·the Corps, and APA generally agrees that the Corps listing reflects potentially economical sites that may be available for devel- opment. Based on very rough estimates of transmission costs, and alternative costs of power for various regions of the State, APA estimates that the Corps listing also represents potentially viable projects from the view- point of power marketing. This is, of course dependent upon the timing and extent of future Alaskan power requirements. APA compared estimated future power requirements on a regional basis with the potential hydroelectric projects with the following results: o Electric power needs of the Southeast, Southcentral, Southwest and part of the Interior regions could be fully met by the identified hydropower sites with exceptions for scattered villages. 3 ·- o The Arctic~ Northwest and part of the Interior regions do not have hydropower potentials to meet any of their electric power needs, due to climate, terrain, and population distribution. APA also compared the energy costs of potential sites with costs of pro- viding energy from alternative sources. APA added transmission line costs to Corps costs to obtain total cost of power delivered to the market areas. This generally added about 10 percent to the total cost, but did not result in any of the Corps projects being dropped from consideration. A summary of the hydropower sites under construction, planned by 1990, and potential by the year 2000 from the Corps list is presented in Table 1. It was noted that because of the Nationally established criteria used by the Corps for Alaskan project evaluation, inaccuracies occured for several projects that have been studied previously. This is particularly true for the Chakachamna Project. The Corps results indicate a much cheaper cost of power for Chakachamna than the Susitna Project--a serious misrepresentation not supported by detailed studies of either project. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that the cost of energy for projects on the Corps list not be considered realistic unless verified by previous studies, 4 Table 1: Summary Listing of Hydropower Sites Under Construction~ Planned by 1990~ and Potential Projects by 2000 Region Southcentral Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Area Southeast Southwest Region Southcentral Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Area Southeast Southwest Under Construction Name Region Served Solomon Gulch Valdez None Green Lake Sitka None Subtotal MW 12 0 16 0 28 Planned by 1990 Name Bradley Lake Terror Lake Power Creek None Swan Lake Tyee Snettisham--Crater & Long Lake Dam Black Bear Dewey Lake Elva Region Served MW Kenai Peninsula 70 Kodiak 20 Cordova 7 Subtotoal 97 Ketchikan Petersburg/ Wrangell Lake Craig-Klawock Skagway Subtotal Dillingham Subtotal 0 22 20 27 5 1 82 1 166 Total of Sites Planned and Under Construction 202 5 65 0 64 0 TI9 GWh 322 128 26 476 0 85 114 143 22 3 m 8 825 980 Table 1 (continued): Hydropotentials With Energy Marketable by Year 2000 Region Name Area Served MW GWh Southcentral and Fairbanks-Tanana Area Browne Anch. & F·bks. 200 566 Chulitna Anch. & Fbks. 34 166 Keetna Anch. & Fbks. 74 324 Skwentna Anch. & Fbks. 98 490 Talkeetna Anch. & Fbks. 90 406 Watana Anch. & Fbks. 792 3,480 Devil Canyon Anch. & Fbks. 766 3,410 Yentna Anch. & Fbks. 219 960 Beluga, Upper Anch. & Fbks. 48 210 Coffee Anch. & Fbks. 37 160 Snow Anch. & Fbks. 63 278 Chakachamna Anch. & Fbks. 366 1,300 Subtotal 2,787 11, 7 50 Southeast Mahoney Ketchikan 14 56 Sweetheart Juneau 29 127 Takatz Sitka 20 97 Thomas Bay Petersburg/ Wrangell 50 217 Lake Dorothy Juneau 34 150 Dayebas Creek Haines 5 18 Subtotal 152 665 Southwest Kisaralik Bethel 30 131 Tazimina Dillingham/ Naknek 51 224 Grant Dillingham/ Naknek 3 13 Subtotal 84 368 Remainder of State 0 0 Total 3,023 12,783 6 CHAPTER III. POWER MARKET CONDITIONS This Chapter briefly describes the six regions of Alaska, and the existing generation and transmission systems. Electric power statistics data for each region are presented in Appendix A. Regions Figure 1 outlines the six major regions. They are Southeast, Southcentral, Interior, Southwest, Northwest, and Arctic. Southeast--This region stretches nearly 600 miles along the border of British Columbia. The terrain is typified by high mountains and small drainage basins that lead directly to the ocean. Heavy precipitation with high runoff rates contributes to the opportunity for numerous hydro developments throughout the entire region. The region has about 13 percent of the State's population located in the State capital in Juneau plus several of the States's centers of population, as well as many small villages. The prime industries are government, forest products, fishing, and tourism. Because of the steep terrain, glaciers, and many islands, there are no interconnecting highways. Consequently, trans- portation is dependent upon air travel and the Alaska State ferry system. Historically, electric generation for the larger communities has been furnished by local hydropower supplemented by diesel generation or all diesel. Most of the smaller towns are fully dependent upon diesel generation. Southcentral--This region is characterized generally by much lighter runoff, colder climatic conditions, and less steep topography than Southeast Alaska. These conditions result in hydropower sites located mainly on the large river systems. There are several very significant power potentials, such as on the Copper River and Susitna River. This area of the State contains approximately 57 percent of the population. Major industries are associated with oil and gas production around Cook Inlet, fishing, seafood processing, government, and trades. Most of the towns in the region are interconnnected with good highway and air trans- portation systems. The major portion of the electric generation in the Anchorage-Cook Inlet area is provided from natural gas. The area is interconnected with a power transmission system between Homer at the south end of the Kenai Peninsula to Talkeetna, north of Anchorage at the north end. Service in the Anchorage-cook Inlet area is provided by five separate utilities. Electric service to other isolated communities is provided by individual utilities, generally from diesel generation. The economy of the region has been typified by boom or bust situations, the latest of which was the construction of the Alaska pipeline which brought in a large influx of new jobs and population. The current economy has stabilized and is proceeding to grow again slowly. Anticipation of construction of the Alaska gas line may again produce significant numbers of jobs. 00 SOUTHWEST • Kl!iMALIK • t:llttN1' El.VA • EP~ INTERIOR e F"IRB"NKS • liUJWNE I \ I I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ALASKA POWER ADMINISTRATION (70<# ALASKA REGIONS POTENTIAL PAOJ EC TS MARKETABLE 1980-2000 NATIONAL HYDROPOWER STUDY Scale In miles 0 50 100 200 "x:l ...... OQ ~ t; (l) 1-' Interior--The Interior region is the largest of the six regions with an area about 204,000 square miles--approximately 35 percent of the area of the State. The topography is typified by expansive valleys and low rolling hills. Hydropower potentials only exist on the Yukon River system and its tributaries. There are no good sites north of the Alaska range due to lack of storage sites. The region has only a few other sites that could be physically developed in the entire Yukon basin. Most of the better sites on the mainstem river systems have been precluded by existing or pending Alaska Lands legislation. Roughly 20 percent of the State population lives in this region. Fairbanks constitutes the main population center in the region. The economic base is primarily government, the military, and the University of Alaska. Fairbanks also experienced rapid growth during the construction of the Alaska pipeline and a severe economic decline after the pipeline completion. Fairbanks is connected to the Anchorage area by a highway system and to the south 48 states through Canada by the Alaskan Highway. It is also served by several airlines and the Alaska Railroad which connects Fairbanks to seaports by two electric utilities from the coal-fired generation and oil-fired gas turbine generation. Outlying villages in this area are dependent upon diesel engine generation for their electrical needs. Southwest--The Southwest region is about 109,000 square miles in area. The region consists of major river drainage areas of Kuskokwim, Nushagak, and Kvichak, plus the western flank of the Alaska Peninsula, and the Aleutian Islands. Few good hydro potentials exist within reasonable transmission distances of the major population centers qf Bethel, Dillingham, and Naknek. Roughly 5 percent of the State's population lives in this region. The major portion of the economy is based on commercial fishing and fish processing, with government and recreation being other important industries. The streams and lakes in the region support the world's most productive red salmon fisheries. Recent exploration indicates potential for significant oil deposits in the Bristol Bay area; however, immediate development is being delayed for environmental reasons, primarily due to the huge quantities of bottom fish, shellfish, and the red salmon fishery. Currently, main population centers plus the numerous scattered villages are entirely dependent upon diesel generation for meeting electric energy needs. Northwest--This region is similar to the Interior region with the hydro potentials being generally limited to the mainstem systems. This region has roughly 3 percent of the population of the State. The major towns are Nome and Kotzebue. Primary industries in this region include commercial fishing, fur trapping, and government, with subsistance being the primary method of livelihood in the outlying areas. The primary transportation system year-round is by air, with the addition of water transportation in the short summer months. Electric power is furnished entirely by isolated diesel generation systems. Arctic--This region of Alaska is severly restricted on hydropower potentials due to lack of head, water supply, climate, and economical dam and reservoir sites. The area north of the Brooks Range has roughly 2 percent of the State's population. The largest industry, at the present time is 9 oil production at Prudhoe Bay. Oil and gas development, construction, and government services are other principal industries. Subsistence living constitutes the remainder of the economic livelihood for this region. Transportation is restricted to air travel for year-round basis and an occasional summer barge or ship during the late summer. Electric generation in the Barrow and Prudhoe Bay oil development area consists of fossil fuels. The outlying villages depend on diesel generation. Electric Power Statistics Appendix A contains statistics on the installed capacity and net generation in 1979 for major towns in the regions of Alaska. Data on industrial and national defense installations are also included. A breakdown of the net energy generated by the utilities, national defense, and industry, is also presented by the types of fuel used for each area of the State. Transmission Alaska's population is primarily urban, concentrated in a few principal cities and many smaller towns and villages. There are fairly extensive interconnected systems serving the population centers in the Anchorage- Cook Inlet and Fairbanks-Tanana Valley areas. Over 60 percent of the State's population is served by the interconnected transmission system in the Anchorage-Cook Inlet area. Five utilities, several industries, and two national defense installations are tied to this system. In the Fairbanks area, two utilities and three military bases are intertied. The rest of the State's power systems are isolated, with electric service usually limited to the immediate urban and suburban areas. There are small communities scattered throughout the State that have interties between local utilities, industries, and military b~ses. 10 CHAPTER IV. POWER REqUIREMENTS This Chapter includes APA's estimates of future Alaska power require- ments through year 2000, by geographic region. For purposes of this study, APA made a set of mid-range load forecasts through the year 2000, drawn from several sources. The main sources are~ 1. Upper Susitna River Project Power Market Analysis, APA, March 1979. 2. Chilkat River Basin Region Reconnaissance Assessment of Energy Alternatives, CH2M/Hill for Alaska Power Authority, February 1980. 3. Green Lake Project Evaluation Report, R. W. Beck for City of Sitka, June 1977. 4. Hydroelectric Potentials for Ten Southeast Alaska Towns, R. W. Retherford Associates for Alaska Power Authority, 1977. 5. Power Market Analysis for the towns of Juneau, Ketchikan, Metlakatla, Petersburg, and Wrangell, APA, 1979-1980. 6. Bristol Bay Energy and Electric Power Potential, R. w. Retherford Associates for APA, December 1979. 7. Energy Study for Barrow, R. W. Beck for APA, August 1977. 8. Electric Power Needs Assessment, Southcentral Alaska Water Resources Study (Level B), APA, March 1979. The projections include utility, self-supplied industry, and national defense needs. The summary totals are listed below by region: 1990 2000 Region MW GWh MW GWh Southcentral 1,442 5,640 2,541 10,560 Interior 600 1,364 675 2,072 Southeast 296 896 349 1,131 Southwest 108 252 134 358 Remainder of State 304 848 301 879 Total 2,800 9,000 4,000 15,000 The year 2000 energy requirement of 15,000 GWh is roughly a three-fold increase over estimated 1980 requirements, and would represent an aver- age growth of 6 percent per year for the 20-year period. 11 APA recognizes there is likelihood that actual requirements may be substantially higher or lower depending on pace of development of the Alaska economy and effectiveness of various energy conservation programs. Harza Engineering Company, in connection with the National Hydro Study, prepared three projections of future electric power demands. Year 2000 estimates of energy use excluding national defense and industrial use were: Projection 1--14.5 billion kWh; Projection 2--5.8 billion kWh; and Projection 3--7.5 billion kWh. Projection 1 of 14.5 billion kWh is very close to APA's estimate of 15 billion kWh. However, APA believes the projections underestimate Alaska power demands due to (1) omitting national defense and industrial needs and (2) the use of the 1972 OBERS population projections, which is generally recognized as being inappro- priate for Alaska conditions. 12 CHAPTER V. EXISTING, PLANNED, AND POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES This Chapter presents and discusses briefly the Alaska hydropower resource sites that are existing, under construction, planned, and potential for development by the year 2000. Table 2 lists the sites existing, under construction, and planned for development by 1990. Their location is shown in Figure 1. There are presently 124 MW of developed hydropower generation, and with the addition of the sites under construction, and planned, will total about 325 MW by the year 1990. Only the Snettisham and Eklutna Projects are Federally- owned. Two of the projects planned for construction· by 1990 have existing Federal authorizations, they are the Bradley Lake Project and the Snettisham Crater Lake and Long Lake Dam additions. For the listed sites under construction and planned, the national hydroelectric study criteria of 1 MW has been used as the minimum cutoff size. There are several other sites under active consideration throughout the State which are under this 1-MW size, but have not been included. The Corps identified 59 potential hydropower sites for Alaska. Hydropower sites from this basic list were tested for marketability by this assessment. The list is the result of the Corps screening of a much larger group of 477 potential sites in Alaska. Minor modifications to this list may be expected as Alaska lands legislation is clarified and more detailed analysis proceeds. This list was reviewed by APA and suggestions were incorporated by the Corps. The costs in mills per/kWh represented development costs at the site and did not include transmission line costs. 13 Table 2: Hydropower Sites--Existing, Under Construction, and Planned by 1990 Region Southcentral Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Area Southeast Southwest Region Southcentral Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Area Southeast Southwest Existing -1980 Name Copper Lake Eklutna None Gold Creek Annex Creek Upper Salmon Creek Dewey Lakes Pelican Creek Ketchikan Lakes Silvis Purple Lake Crystal Lake Blue Lake Region Served Anchorage Anchorage Subtotal Juneau Juneau Juneau Skagway Pelican Ketchikan Ketchikan Metlakatla Petersburg Sitka Snettisham--Long L. Juneau Subtotal None Total Existing Under Construction Name Region Served Solomon Gulch Valdez None Green Lake Sitka None Subtotal Under Construction 14 MW 15 30 45 1.6) 3.5) 2.8) 0.4 0.5 4. 2) 7.1) 3.0 3.0 6.0 46.7 78.8 0 123.8 MW 12 0 16 0 28 GWh 66 164 230 50 66 10 44 211 381 0 611 GWh 65 0 64 0 129 Planned by 1990 Region Name Region Served MW GWh Southcentral Bradley Lake Kenai Peninsula 70 322 Terror Lake Kodiak 20 128 Power Creek Cordova 7 26 Subtotal 97 476 Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Area None 0 0 Southeast Swan Lake Ketchikan 22 85 Tyee Petersburg/ Wrangell 20 114 Snettisham--Crater Lake and Long Lake Dam Juneau 27 143 Black Bear Craig-Klawock 5 22 Dewey Lake Skagway 1 3 Subtotal 75 367 Southwest Elva Dillingham 1 8 Subtotal Planned 166 825 Total of Existing, Planned, and Under Construction 324.8 1,591 15 16 CHAPTER VI. ALTERNATIVE POWER COSTS This chapter dicusses the comparison of costs of developing a selected group of potential hydropower sites with the cost of the likely alterna- tives. Corps costs were used for the selected hydro sites in addition to costs developed by APA to deliver the power to the power market area. These costs were then compared with the cost of alternative power at the pover market. Basically~ the Corps procedures screened the hydroelectric potentials larger than 1 MW against these criteria: physical potential, social impact, environmental impact, institutional aspects, and economic cri- teria. Costs of individual sites were estimated and rates derived to develop a benefit/cost ratio using Corps criteria. These sites were further screened by APA and the Corps and resulted in the selected group of sites presented in Table 3. APA then took the cost per kWh from Table 3 and added transmission costs to deliver the power to the market area. The market delivery point was considered to be either a city or a point on an interconnection between cities. Interconnections were assumed to exist in Southeast Alaska from Ketchikan to Skagway excluding Sitka. In the Southcentral region, an intertie was assumed to exist from Fairbanks to Anchorage to the Kenai Peninsula and from Anchorage to Glennallen and Valdez. Transmission line costs for some of the hydropower sites are included in more detailed studies along with other project costs. These detailed costs were used for comparison with costs of the alternatives wherever they were available. Where these detailed reports were not available, specific calculations of transmission costs were made to the nearest town or intertie. The costs per mile were calculated for the appro- priate size of transmission line and the total cost of the transmission system using the FY 1980 8-percent-interest rate and a 50-year project repayment period. Transmission costs were generally found to amount to less than 10 per- cent of the total project costs. The results were that none of the sites dropped out due to the addition of transmission costs. It appears the criteria of 0.7 benefit/cost ratio for screening sites is overly conservative for Alaska where the alternative is primarily fuel- oil based. APA has suggested to the Corps that a b/c ratio criteria of 0.5 to 0.55 be used. This is based on the assumption that the fuel com- ponent will increase at a rate of 3 percent above inflation (for 20 years) or (1.03)20 • 1.81 relative cost. (b/c = 1/1.81 m 0.55). Several additional potential sites would be available for further consideration under these criteria. 17 The following tabulation presents the cost of energy for the likely alternative generation: Region and Alternative Communities A~cessible to Railbelt Intertie Coal-Fired Steamplant Southeast and Isolated Gulf of Alaska Communities Diesel Engine Southwest Region Diesel Engine 18 ¢/kWh 5.9 9.3 13.1 Data Source Upper Susitna River Project Power Market Analysis, APA March 1979. Ketchikan Power Market Analysis, APA Septem- ber 1979; and 1980 fuel prices. Bristol Bay Energy and Electric Power Poten- tial, prepared for APA, December 1979. CHAPTER VII. LOAD/RESOURCE COMPARISON The purpose of this chapter is to compare the estimated power load with the potential hydroelectric resources on the Corps selected list and determine which of the powersites are marketable within the given time frame. The most economical projects were considered to come on-line first. Table 3 presents a tabulation of the power load and hydropower resources. The market for hydropower for the year 2000 is estimated to be the total requirement less existing and new generation expected to be on-line by 1990. This assumes natural gas and oil-fired generation will be displaced in as many cases as possible. The identified resources were taken from the Corps' list utilizing as many sites as were needed to fulfill the energy demands of the area. The Southeast region has an excess of economical powersites to meet their needs. The Southcentral and Interior regions have enough sites to meet 99 percent of the available market for hydropower, providing every site on the Corps' list is used. The Southwest region of the State has three sites that could meet all the regions energy needs, however, many of the isolated villages are beyond economical reach of transmission lines. The net result is that by the year 2000 there would still be 626 GWh energy demand Statewide that could not be met by hydropower. This is due primarily to isolated power loads being outside the reach of inter- connections or located in an entirely different part of the State from where the hydropower potentials exist. The following tabulation pre- sents the percent of the electric energy demand that could be met by hydropower in the year 2000. Area Percent Southeast Region 100 Southcentral Region and Fairbanks/Tanana River 99 Southwest Region 100 Remainder of State 0 Table 1 presents a list of the potential hydropower sites that would be required to meet the energy needs as outlined on Table 3. Their locations are shown on Figure 1. These are the sites that appear marketable by meeting the economics and size of the market criteria. The National Hydro Study was based on criteria standardized for use of computers on a nationwide basis and, therefore, some discrepancies between these studies and more detialed studies may be expected. This was noted particularly in the comparison of costs for the Chakachamna Project and Susitna Project. The Susitna Project has been studied in detail over the last 20 years and has consistently been more economical 19 N 0 Table 3: Comparison of Loads and Hydro Resources Power Rt'!quirement Existing & P1aruH'd Net Harket for Hydra National Hydra Study ArP.a (midrange) YeaJ:" 2000 !lydl'O by 1990 for Year 2000 Identified Resources MW GWh MW GWh MW <~Wh MW GWh ----- South.,ast 349 1,131 170 812 179 319 152 665* Southcentral & Iut»rior 3,216 12,632 154 771 3,062 ll J 861 2,787 11 J 750 Southwest 134 358 1 8 lJJ 350 84 368 Remainder of State 301 !!79 ------301 879 ------ 4,000 15,000 ill 1,591 3,675 13,409 3,023 12,783 " South»ast Alaska has several additional economical pl'ojects capable of meeting unforeset!n needs. .. ElWt~SS Hydro MW GWh -27 346* -275 -111 -49 -18 -301 -879 -652 ---:()'26 than the Chakachamna Project. It is felt the project costs included on the list should only be considered a general measure of acceptability, and not a measure of feasibility. All identified project costs should be verified by other studies. For clarity, the Southcentral-Fairbanks area potentials listed are not intended to be alternatives to the Watana or Devil Canyon sites of the Upper Susitna River Basin project now under active consideration by the State of Alaska. The unit costs of energy from the other alternative hydro sites are two to three times as high as costs for Watana and Devil Canyon. The plant factor criteria used by the Corps (based on their national guidelines) appears to APA to be too low for Alaska conditions. The low plant factors result in unrealistically high capacity for powerplants which make them unmarketable because of the broad-energy-intensive-peak demands that occur in Alaska. 21 22 CHAPTER VIII. CONSTRAINTS APA believes there are several major constraints to further hydroelectric development in Alaska. 1. Large investments needed for the new hydros. 2. Similarly large investment needed in transmission system to utilize the hydro. 3. High interest rates tend to favor alternatives with lowest initial investment cost. 4. Land use constraints now precludes over 90 percent of the potential, including a number of projects, both large and small, which are potentially more attractive than the remaining resource. 5. Federal assistance programs geared to existing dams and low- head projects are of little use in Alaska which has so few existing dams and where the best high head projects have yet to be developed. 23 24 APPENDIX 25 PRELIMINARY -1979 ENERGY AND POWER DATA -PR.ELIMWARY Type -Place SOUTHEAST Utility -Juneau Ketchikan Haines/Skagway Petersburg Wrangell Sitka Other Southeast Total Industrial -Total TOTAL SOUTHEAST SOUTH CENTRAL Utility -Anch/Cook Inlet Glennallen/Valdez Kodiak Island Other Southcentral Total National Defense -Anch. Area Kodiak Area Total Industrial -No. Kenai Valdu Other Total TOTAL SOuniCElmW. YUKON iit'Iiity -Fairbanks Area Other Yulcon Total National Defense -Fairbanks Area Other Yukon Total Industrial -Total TOTAL YUKON AllCI'IC-NOR'l'BVEST Utility -Barrow Kotzebue Nome Other Arctic:-NW Total National Defense -Barrow Other Arctic-N'Il Total Illdustt:lal -Total TOTAL ARCTIC-NORTHWEST SO'UTIM:ST Utility -Bethel Dillingham Naknek Other Southwest Total National Defense -Total TO'IAL SOU'I"RW'EST TOTAL ALASKA Utility National Defense Indust-rial Misc. (Not included above) TOTAL Installed Net Capacity Gene~ation (KW) (Mtffl) 73,282 141,134 29,623 84,800 6,905 12,521 7,150 21,546 7,745 13,994 14,600 49,872 17,430 32,060 156,735 355,926 67,125 223,860 664,299 17,746 25,903 9,585 717,533 49,726 6.000 55,726 24,980 40,000 48,705 113,685 886,944 280,331 14,801 295,132 17,000 9,625 86,625 16,825 398,582 5,1SO 4,825 5,880 10,256 26,111 6,190 198,800 231,101 8,400 2,900 1,550 11,802 24,652 56,150 80,802 1,220,163 204,691 396,435 45,575 1,866,864 305,265 661,191 2,030,604 41,264 60,520 17,998 2,150,386 133,878 22.526 156,404 94,620 54,750 226,658 376,028 2,682,818 443,736 20,389 464,125 181,247 26,006 207,253 37,853 709,231 10,200 10,432 14,398 13,265 48,295 8,000(e) 10,254 18,254 458,072 524,621 16,560 1,016 7,238 16,891 47,705 ll5, 936 163,641 3,066,437 497,847 1,177,218 94,500 4,836,002 APA 3/80 Ret Energy (GWh) -1979 Prelilninary Arctic REGIONS Southeast Southcentral Yukon Northwest Southwest ~ ~ UTILITIES Gas o.o 1,837.5 0.0 10.2 o.o 1,847.7 ou 86.5 120.7 152.8 38.1 47.7 445.8 Coal 0.0 0.0 311.3 0.0 0.0 311.3 86':'5 1,958.2 46'4.1 48.3 41:7 2,604.9 Hydro .lli.:.2. 192.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 456.1 Pulp (prchsd) 5.5 o.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 Total Region m:9 2,150.4 4'64.1" ""48."3 41:7 3,066.4 Gr 0.0 1,808.4 133.9 10.2 0.0 1,952.5 IC 86.5 120.7 18.3 38.1 47.7 311.3 ST 5.5 29.1 312.0 0.0 0.0 346.6 Total Thermal 9'2."0 1,958.2 4'64.T 48."3 47:7 2,610.3 NATIONAL DEFENSE Gas 133.8 0.0 8.() o.o 141.8 au 22.6 29.5 10.3 115.9 178.3 Coal o.o 177.7 0.0 a.o 177.7 Tou1 Ragion 156.4 2'0'7":3 110' 115.9 497.8 Gr 0.0 o.o 8.0 0.0 8.0 IC 0 •. 1 29.5 10.3 115.9 155.8 ST 156.4 177.7 0.0 o.o 334.1 Total Thermal 156.4 207.3 18.3 U5.9 497.9 " INDUSTRY* Gas 288.8 o.o 424.5 713.3 ou 92.6 20.1 33.3 240.5 Coal 0.0 17.5 0.0 17.5 381.4 3"7':'6 457.7 971.2 Pulp 300.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.5 Total Region To0:"5 381.4 37."6 457 .r· 1,271.7 GT 0.0 206.7 18.8 436.2 661.7 IC o.o 119.9 1.3 21.5 237.2 ST 300.5 54.8 17.5 0.0 372.8 To1:al Themal 300.5 381.4 37.6 457.7 1,271.7 · .. TOTAL Gas o.o 2,260.1 o.a 442.7 a.o o.o 2,702.8 Oil 86.5 235.8 202.5 81.6 163.7 94.5 864.6 Coal o.o o~o 506.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 506.5 ""'8'6.5 2,496.0 709.0 !24.'3 '"i63':7 "9'4"3' 4,073.9 Hydro .lli.:.2. 192.2 ......9.:.2. ......9.:.2. ......9.:.2. ......9.:.2. 456.1 Pulp 306.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 306.0 656.'5 2688.1 709.0 Si'4..3 T63.'7 94."5 4,836.0 Gr o.o 2,015.1 152.7 454.4 0.0 0.0 2,622.3 IC 86.5 240.6 49.1 69.9 163.7 94.5 704.3 ST 306.0 240.2 507.2 0.0 o.o o.o 1,053.4 Total Thermal 392.5 2,496.0 709.0 5'24':3 16'3.'7 94'3 4,379.9 * Industry is 1978 data-not much change in 1979 1a expected. June 1980 Southeast Anchorage-<:ook Inlet Fairbanks-Tanana Valley Rest of State Total State % of Total Capacity Total State 1956 (kW) Avg. Annual Grovth 1956-1979 GT • Gas Turbine ST • Steam Turbine -G • Gas-fired -0 • 011-flred -c • Coal-fired HYDRO 78,190 45,000 ------- 1.lJ,190 10.1% 50,005 4.0% Preliminary 1979 Utility Installed Capacity (kW) DIESEL 78,545 12.791 29,475 112,998 233,809 19.2% 19,738 11.4% GT-G GT-0 -------------- 589,208 2,800 -------197,356 41000 11800 593~ 201,956 795, 164 ___. 65.2% 0 --------- ST-G ST-C ------------- 14,500 --------------53,500 -------------- 14,500 53,500 L......-...-68,000-_J 5.6% 30,575 3.5% Sources: Energy Information Agency (DOE), utility contacts, Alaska Public Utilities Commlaslon % OF STATE TOTAL TOTAL 156,735 12.8% 664,299 54.4% 280,331 23.0% ____!_!h7 9 8 9. 7% 1,22o.m Tiilf% 100% 100,318 11.5%