Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIntroduction to Small Wind Energy Systems in Alaska 1979Ww 0 z. LIBRARY Copy INTRODUCTION TO SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS IN ALASKA « BY NANCY NOBLE RICHARD VANDER HOEK STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF ENERGY AND POWER DEVELOPMENT PRINTING FUNDED BY WESTERN SOLAR UTILIZATION NETWORK INTRODUCTION TO SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS IN ALASKA BY NANCY NOBLE RICHARD VANDER HOEK STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF ENERGY AND POWER DEVELOPMENT PRINTING FUNDED BY WESTERN SOLAR UTILIZATION NETWORK INTRODUCTION TO SMALL WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS IN ALASKA PREPARED FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF ENERGY AND POWER DEVELOPMENT BY NANCY NOBLE RICHARD VANDER HOEK December 1979 IN CONJUCTION WITH THE ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION AND DATA CENTER FORWARD Among the most critial problems facing our nation are energy related. There may be disagreements over magnitude and solutions, but there is universal realization of the urgency of these energy problems. In rural Alaska the costs and shortages have been magnified to the point of being a crisis involving the survial of the communities themselves. In an effort to partially resolve the energy problems of rural Alaska and the state as a whole, the State Division of Energy and Power Development has developed a program of alternative energy planning and demonstration. Under this program the Division of Energy and Power Development is conducting, research in the field of wind energy. Our goal is to summarize the various factors affecting the development of wind energy in Alaska, and when technically and economically feasible demonstrate the viability of this renewable energy source as an alternative to fossil fuels. This report summarizes some of the key conditions a potential wind user should consider when deciding on a wind system. The report is designed to be used in conjunction with other guides available through the Division to give the potential user an introduction to wind energy systems. It is designed for wind systems on a small scale, (less than 10Kw) as these size ranges are the only tested commerically available systems on the market today. This report represents a guide and a progress report in a rapidly developing field of knowledge. The continuing Division of Energy and Power Development research and development effort will attempt to assist in evolving regional and national wind energy programs and eventually commercialization of proven economical systems for the benefit of all Alaskans. Donald R. Markle Energy Projects Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES KEY FINDINGS POTENTIAL DEMAND FOR WECS GUIDELINES FOR POTENTIAL SITES DESIGNING GUIDELINES FOR A WECS ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONCLUSIONS TABLE A - ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY TABLE B - ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION TABLE C - EXISTING WEC'S FOOTNOTES SPECIAL REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY eC. 2 am OR 23 25 35 36 43 49 51 52 53 "Ultimately we shall have to tap those intermittent but inexhaustible sources of power, the wind and the sunlight." INTRODUCTION The wind, a nonpolluting, inexhaustible and plentiful energy source, could provide a significant portion of the state of Alaska's energy needs in the future. Through careful site specific analysis, the prominent use of wind power can be achieved in situations where wind turbines are economically competitive with conventional systems. The presence of strong winds in some areas where the insular quality of small communities and homesteads is coupled with high cost of fossil fuels, manifests the opportunity to utilize wind as an alternative energy source. OBJECTIVES The specific research objectives of this report are to: ils Examine the potential demand for wind energy conversion systems (WECS) in Alaska. Illustrate potential areas of WECS applications in Alaska. Document guidelines for determining potential sites for installing wind energy systems. Document guidelines for designing a WECS for site specific application. Develop a criteria to analyze the economics of wind energy systems and fossil fuel systems applicable to Alaskan villages and homesteads. Evaluate the impact of wind and fossil fuel energy systems on Alaskan environment. KEY FINDINGS The independent nature of remote homesteads and communities enhances the potential of utilizing wind energy systems in Alaska. There is little available meteorological data that is applicable to site analysis of potential wind energy systems. Site specific examination of potential sites and energy needs are necessary to analyze the econonics of installing a wind energy systen in Alaska. All potentially environmental damaging aspects of wind and fossil fuel energy systems can be surmounted with the exception being that the energy sources for fossil fuel systems are non-renewable. "It is an i11 wind that blows no man profit."¢ Because fossil fuels are expensive and often difficult to transport to the bush, rural Alaskans are examining alternative energy systems that might supply their electrical demands. Frequently they are attracted to wind turbines that are capable of "translating a capricious and variable resource into reliable power that is economically competitive with energy produced by conventional systems."° Proof of this attraction to WECS is shown when examining the 258 applications to the 1979 Appropriate Technology Small Grants Program, a "grass roots program to foster small scale, innovative and locally n4 appropriate ideas on the use of alternative forms of energy." According to the Office of Small Scale Technology of the United States Department of Energy (DOE), Alaska had the highest per capital response in the nation -. 63.4 responses per 100,000 people, with Vermont being second with 28.5 responses per 100,000 people. Forty-seven of the Alaskan applications were requests for aid in developing wind energy systems for personal use (27), schools (4), villages (4), private businesses (9), telephone company (1), electric company (1), and city (1). Another energy program, the Rockwell International SWECS Field Evaluation Program, funded by the DOE advertised seeking potential sites for installation of two wind energy systens in the State of Alaska. Of the seventy-seven responses, fifty-three were from private individuals, seven from private businesses, seven from electric utility companies, three from telephone companies, and six from government related organizations including five village or cities and one United States Naval Station. The following quotations from wind energy experts and from present owners of WECS in Alaska further illustrate that Alaska is particularly well suited for utilizing wind energy systems. "There is a problem in people's understanding of what wind power is good for. The real justifications for it are remoteness and good winds, aside from a person being a tinkerer." "Our system provides continuously available 110V DC (for most appliances, lights, motors, etc.) and 12V DC (via a 12 V Battery charged by a DC converter) for electronic equipment. Although this area, (NW Interior Alaska), is considered a marginal wind area, we have had enough surplus electricity to hook our 2 neighbors (all of us own one room homes) for lights only." "Wind power is only economical in remote greas where you have the hight cost of bringing in lines." "I believe my small experiment has shown me that wind power, is my area could provide 100% of needed electrical power due to the constant, though somewhat gusty wind in our valley. I would welcome an ape to work on a as gonversion system shou the experience be offered. "The one key goal for all sizes of windmills is performance per unit cost. Wind power costs more now than coal, oi], gas etc., and right now there are only a few applications where it is economical. Those are the remote applications where you have to truck or ship in oil. There a wind system can be installed and have an economic potential to compete with a diesel generator. Other applications with this potential we see as being small loads dike repeater stations and home site installations." "We need simple and economic wind sys f@ms. If we go 100% wind it's too complex and expensive." "I see more potential for the development of small systems than large, and I base that on the fact that historically there have been very few large systems around the world that have operated successfully for extended periods of time. When you take a look at small systems, there have been dozens of des jgns that were quite durable and have worked quite well." Included with this paper is a map of Alaska which indicates area for potential WECS siting. The lines drawn on the map are not absolute definitions of good wind system areas because of the variances that must be allowed for individual caracteristics of systems and applications. Richard Van-der Hoek compiled the wind data (Table A) for sites located on the map from three sources at The Arctic Environmental Information and Date Center (AEIDC). The annual average wind speed composite with the surrounding geography determines the areas for potential good wind energy installations. In particular, open plains or shorelines, gaps or saddlebacks where funneling of a flow is good, well exposed ridges that are perpendicular or parallel to the air flow, or smooth, well rounded hills all indicate potential WECS sites. Mountainous terrain requires site specific analysis to determine areas of good wind potential, (see A Siting Handbook for Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems). In view of the limited time allotted for this report the wind data presented jis only a compilation of existing data. It came to our attention that extensive research and evaluation of wind data would begin soon at the University of Alaska as part of a research grant. Anyone interested in the information from that project might consider contacting Dr. Tunis Wentink at the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute (Fairbanks) or Dr. James Wise (AEIDC) in Anchorage. GUIDELINES FOR POTENTIAL SITES "Wind speed...is crucial to the economic viability of wind power...a one mile per hour increase in the annual wind speed may provide enough energy over a thirty year period to offset the cost and instal latiop,of a wind turbine generator. Careful site analysis will result in the placement of a WECS in the location best suited to utilize the optimum winds in an area. A Siting Handbook for Small Wind Energy Conversion Systems, written by Harry L. Wegley, Montie M. Orgill and Ron L. Drake of Battelle PNL should be consulted while analyzing potential WECS installation sites. It is not the intention of this paper to duplicate the information made available in that comprehensive guide to site selection based on geographic and anemologic data. The objective of this section is to complement that criteria through examination of site accessibility, security and distance from load center. The site selection should allow for the accessibility of some mode of transportation to facilitate the conveyance of the WECS hardware and equipment for its erection on the site. Similarly the site must be accessible to the people and their equipment for installation and future servicing of the WECS. The WECS site analysis should also include consideration for the security of the WECS and for inhabitants close to the WECS. In particular, the wind system should not be located in air traffic lanes, and should be clearly visible to possible air traffic. Locations that experience severe wind or storm conditions should analyze the site with considerations given to structural failures caused by storm situations. Possible structural reinforcements should be examined. The WECS should be separated a minimum of 150 feet from inhabited buildings and areas. However, the site selected should be close enough to the load center to minimize loss of energy through the lines. The wind energy system should also be located so that it is visible through a window while standing at the Control Panel. The prime site or several promising sites should be equipped with monitoring equipment before final selection is made. An anemometer can be purchased or rented from most WECS dealers and should be installed to collect a minimum of three months data to substantiate a site selection that was based on the field investigations. The State Division of Energy and Power Development is developing an anemoneter. loan program as well. In particular, the wind speed and direction should be noted to facilitate the selection of a particular wind system. DESIGNING GUIDELINE FOR A WECS "There is a glamorized image of wind power that people carry which is good in a way to promote the thing, but there's often too much glitter attached to the image that doesn't have much to do with the practical aspects. This whole thing is very basic and practical and your're dealing with a lot of hardware that costs a lot of money. After the money it takes maintenance; your've got to mind this little power company. There's a lot of careful, planning involved so the decisions are rational." Examination of the various wind generators and components on the market reveals that careful planning is necessary to chose a wind system that will supply an electrical demand. A local authorized dealer should be consulted for information about systems that are functioning well in the area. A modest consulting fee that he may charge for his knowledge of site and/or system selection can be more than compensated for if it prevents the selection of mismatched components, faulty second-hand components or a site with inadequate winds. The procedure for determining the components that comprise a WECS for a specific site essentially involves determining the electrical demand and choosing a potential WECS to supply that demand while not exceeding the limits of the wind power available. DETERMINING POWER REQUIRED If the user of electricity has previously been a customer of a utility company, the easiest means of determining the electricity required would be to consult previous monthly bills. These would give a total of Kwh's used in the past, and the average use could be adjusted according to an expected increase or decrease of electrical use. Frequently in Alaskan busi situations, a diesel generator has been the power source, if any electricity were available at all. The number of Kwh's needed is determined by totalling the Kwh's required by each piece of electrically operated equipment. If the manufacturer's specifications are not available, the list of average Kwh's used by common appliances, (Table B), may be used. Because the nature of wind flow limits the total amount of power per month, consumption should be carefully planned to maximize energy utilization. To facilitate this planning, the appliances demanding 10 hag electricity should be grouped into categories: 1) Those devices operating on DC, 2) those low power devices operating on AC, 3) those high power AC devices operating on continuous load and 4) those high power AC devices operating under intermittent load. 1) The first group includes appliances with universal motors or brush type motors that could operate on direct current without modification. The identification plate will reveal if the appliance is DC, AC-DC or AC only. Mixers, blenders, vacuum cleaners, commercial power tools, and sewing machines are some examples of appliances in this category. Also included are lighting fixtures. The expense of purchasing DC light fixtures (DC fluorescent ballasts are available to convert standard AC fluorescent lamps) is recompensed by the amount of power saved and light emitted. 2) The second group includes devices requiring less that 500 watts to operate and therefore would function with a lower cost, low power, high efficiency inverter working at or near its maximum efficiency level. Almost all appliances having a transformer or synchronous motor could be categorized here including television sets, tape recorders, stereos, record players, communications equipment and some kitchen appliances. 3) The devices that are high power AC continous loads comprise the third group. Here careful evaluation should be given to determine if these appliances could be most economically operated through the wind energy system. Items is this category would include refrigerators, freezers, and electric heating systems. Because of the large amounts of electrical power constantly demanded by these appliances, an examination of the total electrical system could reveal that it would be more 11 economical to operate these appliances from a different energy source. The refrigerator or freezer could be operated by liquid propane or natural gas or they could be a model similar to those found in recreational vehicles and operate on DC, thus saving the expense of a large inverter and consequent loss in total efficency. Electrical heat is usually impractical in rural Alaska where so many other choices are available. Other sources to consider would be predominently heating fuel, wood and coal which could serve the dual purpose of radiant heating and water heating. Solar heating is also feasible in most areas of Alaska. 4) The fourth group includes high power AC intermittent loads such as water pumps, shop tools and electric stoves. Most electric ranges require so much electrical power that for a household which depends solely on a wind energy system, one should cook with oil, liquid propane, natural gas, wood, coal or other energy source. If the waterpump has an external motor mounted at surface level, the AC motor could be replaced with a DC unit. The DC replacement would be more economical than the expense of a large inverter and subsequent energy loss due to the inefficiency of the inverter. If a deep submersible pump is in use, it may be impractical to substitute the AC motor. Under this circumstance, the high cost of a large inverter can be avoided by using a diesel or gas powered generator to pump water into a large holding tank. Similarly, if shop tools are unable to be converted to DC, they may be driven more economically by a diesel or gas generator. While operating the diesel or gas generator, a battery charger may be used to recharge the battery system to supplement the wind energy system. 12 The energy efficiency examination outlined above will reveal which appliances should be powered by a wind energy system and which, if any, appt tances could be more energy efficient if powered by another energy source. This examination also predetermines what components will comprise the WECS: if there is sufficient wind and an interruptible load, no batteries will be required; if AC is necessary, the inverter's size is relative. Being apprised of the quantity of electricity required, a scrutiny of WECS available will discern which has the potential of supplying that power. DETERMINING POWER POTENTIAL OF A WECS To determine the power potential of a WECS, the power available in the wind must be calculated and the inefficiencies of a wind system taken into account. The intention of the first section is to supply the reader with a simplified method of computing an estimate of expected energy production. The method outlined below extensively quotes A Guide to Commercially Available Wind Machines, prepared on April, 1978, by the Wind Systems Program, Rockwell International, at the Rocky Flats Plant. "The United States Department of Energy's Rocky Flats Plant, managed by Rockwell International has been designated as the lead agency in the country for the development and testing of small wecs."14 The second section takes into account losses of energy which occur in transmission, conversion and storage of energy. The first sources of wind speed information are the closest meteorlogical stations to the potential WECS site. Typically in Alaska these are airports which trend toward low wind velocity sites for 13 airplane safety. Terrain and height variance and the distance from the airport anemometer siting can invalidate the application of these averages directly to the WECS site. With three or four months min feium data collected a wind comparison can be made with a nearby meteorlogical station. Monthly average fluctuations at the WECS site can be predicted by studying the percentage of yearly wind speed fluctuations recorded at the meteorlogical station. For example, examination of the meteorlogical records may show that February's average wind speed is 40% greater than the wind speed in September. If wind speed data is recorded at the potential WECS site during the month of February, then the predicted average wind speeds for the month of September should be 40% less than the average recorded in February. By comparing month-by-month the known wind speed at the site to the wind speed recorded at a weather station nearby, a site specific yearly average of wind speed can be determined. "There are differences of opinion concerning the most accurate methods for predicting how much energy a wind machine will produce at a given site. The intention here is to provide a simplified method for translating the wind machine power data given in the manufacturer's descriptions into more explicit terms: Kw hours of production per year or month for a specific site."!5 The method described on page 8 through W in A Guide to Commercially Available Wind Machines yields a rough estimate of the expected energy production. "It is valuable because it combines a machine's power curve and the wind profile at the site in question to provide a tangible picture of how much electrical or mechanical power a machine will furnish. Accordingly, it shows how the machine could fit into an energy user's total source of fuer "16 14 This equation gives only an estimate of the power available at the blades. The inefficiencies of a WECS must also be calculated for each situation. A wind energy system can "lose" up to 25% of the energy generated by the wind machine before it is utilized, dependent upon what components comprise the wind system. Line Loss There is loss of energy in the lines that transport the electricity from the tower to the user of electricity. The amount of line loss experienced depends on the distance the energy is transmitted, the type of power transmitted (DC experiences more line loss than AC), and the size and type of wire used. To calculate resistance and line loss the interrelationship between different units of electrical measurement must be understood as expressed in Ohm's Law. Volts = watts/amps Amps = watts/volts Watts = amps x volts An ohm is a measurement of a material's electrical resistance to the flow of electricity. Copper and aluminum are two materials used to conduct electricity of which copper is more expensive but has less resistance. The larger the diameter of the electrical conductor, the greater the wire's capacity to carry current. The size of a wire is expressed in wire gauge as standardized by the American Wire Gauge Institute (AWG). The resistance of different wire gauges is indicated by the following chart: 27 15 Wire Gages: ohms/100ft. ohms/100ft. AWG wire size Copper Aluminum 4/0. (0000) 00525 00836 2/0 (00) 00843 .0133 1/0 (0) -0106 0168 1 .0134 .0211 2 -0169 0266 4 0269 0424 Voltage drop is a result of heat created by resistance to voltage through a conductor and is measured as: Voltage drop = amps x resistance Voltage drop is an important factor in the selection of the proper size wire. Economics dicates that the wire length be kept to a minimum. It may be less expensive to increase a tower's height than to extend the wire a horizontal length to achieve the same relative height and exposure to wind. Line loss should not be greater than 3% of the maximum voltage rating. Total resistance in the circuit equals resistance of selected wire gauge multiplied by the length of wire divided by the distance in which the resistance is expressed. For example, given a wind plant rated at 140 volts at 2000 watts output with the total wire distance from tower top to control panel of 800 feet and the AWG wire size is #2 Aluminum. Amps = watts/volts - = 2000/140 = 14.2 16 wire length Total resistance = distance in which resistance x resistance of is expressed wire = 800 ft. x .0269 ohms/100ft. 100 ft. = 8 x .0266 = 0.2128 Voltage Loss = amps x resistance = 14.2 x 0.2128 "= 3.022 . Percent of voltage loss = volts loss x 100 volts maximum = 3.022 volts x 100 140 volts = .022 x 100 = 2.2% This is within the 3% rule of thumb limit to line loss. In practice, total voltage line loss may not be eliminated, in fact, in. some systems, where a voltage regulator can compensate by increasing the 17 generator voltage, a higher value of voltage loss (57%) may be acceptable. Ideally, the loss should be at a minimum to prevent waste of hard to obtain energy. Inverter (DC to AC) If an electrical appliance is designed to operate from alternating current at 60 Hz, an inverter must be used to convert the nominal DC waveform from the battery storage system to AC at a particular voltage and frequency. There are three types of inverters designed to use with battery storage systems. Rotary inverter is available for outputs up to 2000 watts, but is not recommended for high power surges as for starting refrigerators or large motors. These inverters generally have excellent waveform output and voltage and frequency control, however they average efficency is 50-60%. The low voltage model are built in the 12, 24, 48 volt ranges with output of 115 volts AC 60Hz. Conversion is done by using a DC motor to drive an AC generator on a common shaft. Hence, maintenance is restricted to replacing the brush on the DC motor and commutator dressing every few years, They are an economical alternative to the higher priced inverters if only low power devices are operated with the 115 volts DC system. Their availability on the surplus market, and their rugged physical construction make them attractive for low-cost systems. The vibrator type inverter utilizes a small sealed vibrator assembly, driven by the DC input to commutate the waveform through a transformer-filter network into an AC signal at constant frequency. Maintenance is limited to replacement of the vibrator every 1000-1500 18 hours, and the efficiency is close to 75%. For low power applications, (up to 400 watts continuous), this inverter is an economical source of AC power in a 115 volts DC system. The two types of solid state inverters are more efficient and have more power and operational versatility then the other types of inverters. The square wave type is more common in low voltage inputs and is uncomplicated in design. In selecting a square wave inverter, particular attention should be given to the transformer-filter design and the peak voltage output. Efficiencies of these inverters are typically 80% and are slightly more costly than electromechanical devices. Sign wave inverters, with special modifications to monitor and control current, voltage, frequency and temperatures are available for higher power applications. Some of these models are 90% efficient and are capable of handling high starting surges of power, feature a demand _ load factor to turn on the inverter only when a load is on the AC line, and may be paired with a smaller inverter to power smaller devices such as lights, radio, etc, thus greater efficiencies are realized and less power is wasted. Although there are some inexpensive models on the market, the quality sine wave inverters with high power capacities, versatility and rigid specifications could well be a large percentage of the total cost of a wind energy systen. The decision to invert the energy produced as DC power to AC is influenced by quantity and kind of current needed, cost limitations and overload capabilities. Lights, brush type motors and many appliances specifically manufactured for DC (as found in recreational vehicles) could eliminate the need to convert power. The need for AC current for 19 a specific situation or the expense of replacing previously purchased appliances may necessitate the inclusion of an inverter in the WECS design. The choice of inverter is influenced by the amount of AC power required, and amount of energy used by the inverter and the surge capacity of the inverter. Batteries Because wind is a intermittent energy source, to use it effectively "requires (1) an interruptible load, (2) an energy storage system, (3) a standby source able to respond on demand. (1) pumping water for livestock, irrigation, driving refrigeration compressor for large thermal capacity cold storage plant (2) electrochemical storage batteries, flywheels, pumping water for later generation of electrical power through a hydraulic turbine (3) hydroelectric power dam, diesel generator, gas steam turbine 18 A battery system is most frequently used for storage of energy if needed because it is simple, is easily modularized, requires no special siting, has no significant environmental impact and can be instantly started. There are several commercially available battery storage systems designed for wind energy systems. 20 Batteries used for WECS are designed to withstand repeated deep cycling over a period of years. They have thicker plates than standard car or truck batteries, utilize glass fiber separators, have a greater cellular structural integrity and have a larger amount of reserve space between the bottom of the plates and the case. These special designs permit the batteries to furnish a fairly small amount of current over a long period of time. Batteries should be situated in a ventilated room with temperatures constant throughout the year and with enough area to permit the free circulation of air around them. A battery's efficiency drops as the temperature is reduced. A fully discharged battery with a specific gravity of 1.0 will freeze at temperatures slightly below 32°F, resulting in serious internal damage. At best, batteries should be kept in the house or basement or other building well insulated from the outside environment. Batteries should be set up off the floor in a rack such that the batteries are separated from the wall and each other by a few inches and are easily accessible for checking of electrolyte level and cleaning. A matched set of batteries installed with a wind system will not be fully active until it has passed a least 30 complete cycles. To prevent overcharging of the batteries, most well designed WECS include a voltage regulator to clamp the charge voltage at the proper level and reduce the current rate through the cells. Not discharging the battery system below 50% of capacity will increase the life expectancy of the cells. A hydrometer indicates the specific gravity of the electrolyte which indicates the state of charge. A device can be attached to a battery system which would prevent further 21 discharge by disconnecting the load or automatically starting and stopping a gas driven battery charger. Physical size and weight limitations of individual batteries usually require that several batteries of the same type be wired series-parallel (see Figure 1)!9 to increase the amount of energy storage. The batteries must be of the same size and have similar characteristics to insure that they will charge equally. Figure 1 + w | VS.Acb ser! * JS ALN. 12 Volts series-parallel 750 A.h. 12 Volts Towers Towers are usually the support structure upon which a WECS is mounted. Either a guyed or free-standing tower is applicable to most installations. Factors to consider in chosing a tower would be height, ability .to support the weight of the generator and the ability to withstand the wind velocity. The wind turbine should be placed as high as is economically feasible such that the blades can turn in undisturbed air. The generator should be a minimum of 50 feet above all obstacles within the 22 300 foot radius. As discussed earlier, the windplant should be placed as close to the battery system and control panel as possible. Good tower design and installation concentrates on building a structure able to support the vertical and horizontal loads from the generator itself and the structural load imposed by wind forces as illustrated by Figure 2. 20 Windplants should not be installed on home roofs because their structural loads could do serious damage to the roof. Also, noise can be transmitted into the structure if the plant is mounted on the roof or against a wood framed structure. A guyed tower is made from less raw material than a free-standing tower and is, therefore, slightly less expensive. However, the guyed tower requires more space because of the guy cables which radiate out on three 120° or five 75° radials to a horizontal distance from the tower base to the ground anchor of almost 80% of the tower height. A self-supporting tower is ideal in areas where space is at a premium, but because of the additional material needed to make it self-supporting under stress, it is more expensive than the guyed tower. The foundation of the tower should be designed by experts to insure safety in construction. Economic Determination To determine the monetary advantage of a wind or diesel system, the total cost of both systems over a similar time period should be calculated. The cost of components selected for the WECS should be totalled including calculations for replacing components with life expectancy less than the given period of time. Add to this computation 23 Figure 2- Sfructural load i posed by wind forces Centrifugal force Q@Blade thrust force tends to cause blade bending but is resisted by the stffness of the blades Tower thrust force combi wih lade rt Sea Rand tower bendi is reusted by the shifhess of the tower @)Tubular steel tower ()Foundation collar @Concrete foundation es Tee eres aes. overtum ‘tower Foundation framework 24 freight charges, if not already included, installation fee, and servicing costs, including the cost of lubricants and acid. At. this writing, low interest loans are available through the State of Alaska for installations of alternative energy equipment and tax credits are available from both the federal and state governments for households using alternative energy sources. The adjusted WECS cost should reflect the value of these. Current incentives for energy conservation are described in the packet brochures. <! Similarly computation for a diesel system of the same capacity should include the initial cost of the generator, freight charges, installation costs, including possible construction of outbuilding to house the generator, and servicing cost of fuel, pro-rated yearly for the given period of time. An analysis of these calculations may reveal that a combination of diesel and wind energy systems would be the most practical application for a specific site. For example, the intermittent use of a diesel generator could offset the expense of a battery storage system in areas that experience long calm periods. Or conversely, the use of the WECS when the wind power was available could be justified by the savings realized on the cost of fuel oil. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS "The object is to use as little energy as possible and dis tush the environment as little as we can." 25 The examination of the environmental impact of diesel and wind generators will be separated into three phases: fabrication, installation and operation. The effect upon the environment during the fabrication of both the diesel and wind energy systems is concerned with the manufacturing of steel and aluminum parts, and copper containing electrical components. Additional impact is associated with the blade construction of WECS if the blades are made of wood or fiberglass. The installation phase concerns itself with the impact during the construction and erection of the systems on the terrain, vegetation and possible siltation of nearby water. Some of the potential problem areas examined in the operation phase of diesel generators and wind generators include effect on radio and television transmissions, effect on aircraft traffic patterns, effect on flora and fauna, optimum utilization of land, air pollution, noise, waste heat, fuel source and disposition. of non-functioning systems. Materials Production Phase No toxic or unusual substances are involved in the production of wind or diesel systems. The majority of parts composite in either system are cast or formed in a factory. Raw materials include copper, aluminum, steel, synthetic plastics and rubber. Governmental control of factory enmissions limits the environmental impact of producing these parts. More steel is required for production of a wind energy system if a steel tower is used. In view of the current world supply of steel, the extra amount required is not prohibitive of using that energy system. 26 WECS may also require wood or fiberglass for construction of blades whereas a diesel system does not. Most of the wood blades are made of Sitka spruce, a renewable raw material. The amount of wood required for blade production is a small percentage of the total wood utilized by the wood industry. If fiberglass blades are used, there is also little impact on the environment because of the strict government controls on air and water pollution from fiberglass factories. Installation Phase The impact upon the environment due to installation of a generating system would increase as the size of the energy system installed increased. The environmental disturbances during the installation of wind energy and diesel generators would be minimal if conservation is practiced by the installer. Some destruction of vegetation and little change of wildlife habitat will occur, particularly in perma-frost area, during construction of a tower for a wind energy system or a shelter for a diesel system. If modification of the natural terrain is necessary to acheive maximum exposure to the wind for a WECS or if the chosen site is heavily forested, and requires clearing, there is great potential for environmental damage. In these instances, care would have to be taken to prevent soil erosion and water siltation by providing proper drainage and encouraging regrowth of vegetation on the disturbed soil as dictated by the particular situation. The complexity of the energy system installed would determine the size of the crew and amount of equipment needed at the site. The installation of a small WECS system can be complete in one to two weeks 27 by two or three men. Few power tools or large equipment is required. An increase of the size of a system would increase the number of people and the amount of equipment required to install it and prolong the time at the site, thereby increasing the impact on the immediate environment. Operation Phase Diesel generators do not interfere with radio or television transmissions. Metallic blades and wooden blades coated with metallic paint have been responsible for reflecting or diversifying transmission waves in previous installations. This problem can be avoided if consideration is given to the location of a WECS and to the choice of blade materials before installation. Diesel generators have no effect on the flight patterns of aircraft. Wind generator towers should be located away from aircraft landing areas. All towers are subject to Federal Aviation Administration regulations and should be reported to that administration to receive further information about marking and lighting the tower if necessary. The quantity of emmissions from a diesel generator used to ‘supply energy for individual homesteads would cause little damage to the plants in the area. In contemplation of a large fossil fuel energy system, research should be conducted to study the effect on plants in the area. Most of the environmental impact data available refers to plants found in the lower 48. There may be flora not covered in this research that would be harmed by the installation of a large fossil fuel generating 28 system in Alaska. One such study, "The Probable Damage to Artic Ecosystems Through the Air Pollution Effects on Lichens," examines the potential hazard to lichens from sulfurous emmissions. Most of the wildlife in the immediate area of a working diesel engine would relocate because of the noise. A silencer would reduce a percentage of the noise generated and would thus reduce the size of the immediate area evacuated by the animals. Wind generators have little impact on the flora or fauna in the immediate area. Land dwelling animal would feel little or no impact due to wind generation of energy. If terrain modification is required to install a WECS, some displacment or disorientation of smal] land animals may occur. There is concern about WECS interfering with migratory habits of birds if a tower is high enough and located within migratory flight patterns. Because it is economically undesirable to install small wind generator on towers taller than 100 feet, the chance of small WECS interfering with the birds' flight would be minimal. One potentially hazardous condition would be wind machines located atop ridges as high mountain ridges could cause migrant birds to lower their relative-to-ground altitude. If a situation seems particularly hazardous for migratory birds, Dr. Tunis Wentink has suggested, period the system could be shut-down to perform maintenance on the system during this time. Diesel generators present little threat of damaging property in the event of a failure to function. Structural failures of wind generators (The Smith-Putnam Windmill, Vermont 1948, the windmill installed in Ugashik in 1975 and the one in Nelson Lagoon in 1977) demonstrate the potential for personal and property damage. Careful site evaluation 29 should give consideration to locating the tower a ‘safe distance from buildings and areas frequently populated by people or animals. “Wind machines are very large in dimension in comparison to diesel “generators of the same rating. A diesel generator is compact and easily installed in an outbuilding. A WECS requires a tower of forty to sixty feet for a small system, plus area for the rotor diameter of twelve feet or more. If a wind system uses batteries for storage, there is need of additional space. In rural Alaska, concern for the optimum utilization of land has less significance than in urban applications. A WECS has little effect on the air quality around it. If a battery bank is used for a storage system, there is a possibility of toxic emmissions from the batteries. These emmissions would be slight, dissipating into the atmosphere, or they could be eliminated with the use of hydrogen caps on the batteries for inside storage. Any engine that burns fossil fuel contributes to air pollution, however, diesel generators produced since 1935 have met the emmission control standards set by the government for 1980. Hydro-carbons are the primary by-product of diesel generators of which 80-85% of these are not a hydrocarbon CO,. There is little cause for concern over these C0, molecules because they dissipate into the “atmosphere with few local problems. The level of nitrous oxides in the emmissions of a diesel generator are high in comparison to those emitted by a gasoline-fired engine. If a great quantity of diesel generators were operated in a close area, there would be reason to be concerned about the effect of these pollutants on the environment. Because there is not a heavy concentration of diesel generators in the Alaskan bush, the atmosphere around the generators is able to absorb these nitrous oxide molecules 30 without great environmental impact. However, in the event of heavy concentration of small diesel systems or the construction of a large plant, research should be conducted to determine the effect of heavy concentrations of nitrous oxides in that area. "The diesel engine even if 'perfect' and using a ‘perfect gas' is limited to less than 60% efficiency by the physical laws of thermodynamics. Since real diesel engines must use real gasses and real machinery, efficiencies of 33% are realistic. Typically 30% of the fuel supplied to a diesel-electric set is converted to electricity, 30% is transferred to cooling water, 30% is exhausted as hot gas and 10% is radiated directly from the engine block. "23 According to Robert W. Rutherford Associates, Consulting Engineers, in their study "Waste Heat Capture Study for State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Division of Energy and Power Development," diesel exhaust can range in temperature from 300°F to 600°F. Extended use of a diesel generator in a permafrost area could result in damage to the tundra as the heat generated by the diesel plant is transferred to the structure upon which the generator is situated. Installation in permafrost area should include considerations for insulating the pad the generator is mounted on to protect the tundra. In general it is felt that the heat exhausted by the generators in use in rural. Alaska poses little threat to the environment because of the small size and the small number of units in one area. The heat generated by a diesel engine could be beneficial to the homesteader as a preheater for the hot water system if the exhaust is piped through coils of tubes wrapped around or placed inside a water tight container. 31 Wind energy systems would contribute little to raise the temperature of the atmosphere surrounding them. Some types of batteries, if used, could radiate a small amount of heat, but not enough to warrant concern for the environment. Diesel generators are noisy unless equipped with silencers. Most diesels. are sold with a spark arrester (pepper pot) as the only type of muffling device on them. In the past year, there has been an increase in concern by people in the bush for silencing the diesel generating system. Mufflers, industrial silencers, residential silencers and critical residential silencers are now appearing on the price sheets as optional equipment for diesel generators. This equipment has been available for several years, but until recently was marketed exclusively for use on back-up equipment for hospitals and industries in event of power outages. The 4 Kw unit makes up 90% of the sales of diesel generators to the individual bush homesteads. This machine, in an open field at 50 feet gives off a sound measured at 80 decibels (dba). If located in a building at 50 feet the sound on the unopened side would reach 20 dba and 90 dbs on the opened side, through the door. A muffler would remove 30% of the noise. An industrial silencer would reduce the noise by 40-50%. A critical residential silencer would reduce the noise at 50 feet in an open field to 15 dba. This noise would be the mechanical noise of a working engine. That would be a 95% reduction in noise. These noise suppressing devices range in cost from $90.00 to $165.00 (1979 prices). The animals within sound range of the working diesel would probably relocate. As the noise generated by the diesel lessens due to the 32 effectiveness of a silencer, the number of animals dispaced would lessen and reduce the impact on the environment. WECS contribute little to the noise level in a given area. Wind is an inexhaustible source of fuel for wind energy systems, provided that the site specifics have proven the availability of wind. Fossil fuel is a nonrenewable resource. Eventually the world will deplete the supply of fossil fuel. How quickly we expend this supply is influenced by how successful we are in adapting alternative energy systems to our lifestyles, thus conserving fossil fuels. Fossil fuel also presents a threat to the environment in rural Alaska because of the great distances it must be transported to reach the remote homesteads and villages. Most of the fuel is transported by barge or airplane. In the event of an airplane mishap, there is potential for damage to the environment due to fire. If a barge has an accident while transporting fuel to the bush, there is a possibility of oil spillage in the water systems as well as the possibility of combustion upon impact and danger of fire. These situations would endanger the lives of land animals, water animals and vegetation in the immediate area. Both of the systems discussed are primarily made up of metals. If the defunct systems were not useful for spare parts, or other ingenious adaptations they would ultimately deteriorate with no harm to the environment. One exception to this would be the batteries if used for a storage system in a WECS. The battery acid would have to be nuetral ized and discarded carefully. In conclusion, due to government regulations, there is little impact on the environment in the fabrication of a diesel generator or a 33 wind generator. There is also little impact on the environment during the installation of either system if conservation methods are practiced by the installer. As the size of the systems installed increases, the impact also increases. Wind generators could potentially interfere with radio and television transmissions, endanger aircraft traffic and migratory birds. Careful site evaluation could minimize or eliminate these situations as well as minimize potential hazards due to structural failure. Diesel systems contribute to air pollution, but not significantly in the low density areas of rural Alaska. Careful installation could avoid problems in permafrost areas due to heat loss. Diesel generators are noisy unless optional equipment is purchased to silence them. Diesel generators need non-renewable fossil fuels to operate. To minimize the impact of this situation on the world's environment, conservation of consumption of this non-renewable fossil fuel should be practiced by implementing alternative energy sources whenever possible. 34 CONCLUSION Wind is a viable alternative energy source for remote Alaskan applications where the installation of utility grids is unfeasible. Co-generation with diesel in areas of low wind velocities increases the economic attraction to wind systems. Because wind energy is a developing concept, an exhaustive analysis of a case specific energy profile is necessary to insure the installation of a system that optimizes economics and performance. The results of ten responses to a WECS questionaire as summarized in Table C illustrate the broad spectrum of potential usage, cost and operating results of wind energy as utilized in Alaska. 35 LOCATION Anchorage Adak Alatna Aniak Amchi'tka Annette Annex Creek Atka Attu Barrow Barter Island Beaver Bethel Bettles Bog Delta ~ Broad Pass Candle Cape Decision Cape Hinchenbrook Cape Lisburne AFS AVERAGE ANNUAL MPH 6.4 15.1 6.4 21k 10.9 13. 12.2 1259 1.3 Tad. 9.3 1251 TAB ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY LE A % of year Wind 8 36 Blows -38 MPH 34.4 74.9 3741 82.7 62.6 63.4 75.3 70. 70. 44.3 63.7 % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows 7-28 4-31 MPH MPH 20. 50. St 64. 34. 40. 76. 80. LOCATION Cape Newenham Cape Romanzof Cape Sarichef Cape Spencer Cape St. Elias Central House Chicken Chitna Circle Circle Hot Springs Coal Creek Cold Bay Copper Center Cordova — Council Craig Crooked Creek Deering Dillingham Driftwood Bay Dutch Harbor Eagle f ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY (con't) AVERAGE % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows ANNUAL 8-38 7-28 MPH MPH MPH 413 63.6 13.5 68.7 15.8 44.7% between 14 and 36 MPH 19. 5.1 27.7 11.1 9.5 58.7 9.6 59.6 37 % of year Wind Blows 4-31 MPH 80. va es 14, 14. 36. 17. 12. 45. 46. 70. 62. af. 69. 46. ALASKAN AVERAGE ; Annual LOCATION MPH Eilson AFB Ss4 Eldred Rock Elim Elmendorf AFB 5.1 Fairbanks 4.9 Farewell 1321 Five Finger Light Flat Fort Yukon 7.6 Gambel] 18.3 Galena 4.5 Golovin Good Pastor Guard Island Gul kana 6.6 Gustavus 8.5 Haines S31 Healy Holy Cross Homer 8.1 WIND SUMMARY (con't) % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows 8-38 7-28 MPH MPH 13.4 18. 24. 20.2 18. 16. 46. 22.6 20. i 15. 16.8% between 13 and 31 MPH 38 % of year Wind Blows 4-31 -. MPH 62. ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY (con't) AVERAGE % of year % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows Wind Blows Annual 8-38 7-28 4-31 LOCATION MPH MPH MPH MPH Hot Springs 6. Hughes : S; Iliamna 10.2 Indian Mountain 6.2 34.7 Jack Wade 0 Juneau 8.5 48.1 Kenai 7.6 44.1 Lale 6.0 Kalskag ve Kanakanak 25. Kasilof a: King Salmon 10.6 32.2% between 13 and 31 MPH Ketchikan 4. Kodiak 9.8 29.9% between 13 and 31 MPH Kotzebue 12.8 69.9 Koyuk 12.5 Livengood 9, Lonely 9.9 Manley 5.2 Mary Island 14, McGrath 4.8 23.8 39 LOCATION Minchamina Moses Point Mountain Village Naknek King Salmon Nenana Nikolski No Grub Nome Northeast Cape Northway Nulato Ohogamute Oliktok Ophir Palmer Paxon Petersburg Pigot Pilgrim Springs Pilot Point ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY (con't) AVERAGE Annual MPH 6.8 12.1 asd See 5.8 16.3 TH 12.9 4.4 11.6 729 4.5 5.4 % of year % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows Wind Blows 8-38 7-28 4-31 MPH MPH MPH 40 42.9% between 13 and 31 MPH 34.5 79.5 61.8 44.3% between 13 and 31 MPH 6.8% between 13 and 31 MPH 41.4 5. 8. 28. LOCATION Platinum Point Hope Point Lay Port. Heiden Port Mollar Portage Radio Ville Black Rapids Richerdson Ruby Sand Point Savoonga Scotch Gap Sentinel Seward Shemya Shishmaref Sitka Skagway Skwentna ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY (con't) AVERAGE Annual MPH 18.3 12.2 14.8 10.2 10.7 18.5 7.9 11.8 4.7 % of year Wind Blows 8-38 MPH 77.7 58.4 81.4 41 % of year Wind Blows 7-28 MPH 39. 14, a3 oh. 35. 16. 10. Thy % of year Wind Blows. 4-31 MPH LOCATION Solomon Sparrevohn Stampede Stevens Village Stoney River St. Paul Island Stuyahok Summit Talkeetna Tanacross Tanana Tanalian Point Tatalina Teller Tenakee Tin City Tree Point Tyonek Umiat Umnak Unalakleet ALASKAN WIND SUMMARY (con't) AVERAGE % of year % of year % of year Wind Blows Wind Blows Wind Blows Annual 8-38 7-28 4-31 MPH MPH MPH MPH 32y 5.4 31.9 0. Ss Ze WH 86. ; ¥ 11.3 9. 4.9 5.4 8.3 39.1 6. 4.9 28.2 10.6 34.5% between 13 and 31 MPH 6. Tal 82.4 12. Te 6.9 38.8 Wa) 46.5% between 13 and 31 MPH 1241 66.6 42 LOCATION Valdez Yakataga Yakutat Wales Wainwright Wiseman Wrangell ALASKAN AVERAGE Annual MPH 5.6 767 8.1 2d 10. WIND SUMMARY (con't) % of year Wind Blows 8-38 MPH 20.2 47.2 43 % of year Wind Blows 7-28 MPH % of year Wind Blows 4-31 MPH TABLE B ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION Average ; Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost baby food warmer 3 times 3 kwh x = 165 watts per day blanket every night 19 kwh x = 150 watts blender 6 times RW = 385 watts per week broiler (portable) twice a 7 kwh x = 1140 watts week can opener 3 uses -03 kwh x = 100 watts per day carving knife twice a eK SX = 95 watts week clock every day 2 KW X = 2.5 watts clothes dryer 6 loads 83 kwh x = 4900 watts per week clothes washer 6 loads 9 kwh x = (automatic) per week 512 watts coffee maker once a day 5 * kwh: x = 600 watts corn popper _2 uses 1 kwh x = 575 watts per week curling iron once a day 50: RWIS AX = 40 watts deep fat fryer* 3 times 2 MSR = 1200 watts a month “xf Thermostatically controlled. Cost based on appliance estimated "On" time. ** Electric heating costs vary with each home. Many items affect an accurate estimate: size of home, type of system, amount of insulation, number of doors, windows, etc. KWH usage in northern Alaska would be higher. would be lower. 43 Usage in southern portions of Alaska ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Appliance and Average Typical wattage Use dishwasher 25 loads 1200 watts per month disposer every day 445 watts electric heating** egg cooker 5 times 550 watts per week fans window 2 hours 200 watts every day furance or 7 hours central air every day 270 watts floor polisher 4 hours 305 watts per month fondue/chaf ing once a dish* month 800 watts freezer (15 cu.ft.) manual defrost every day 341 watts frost-free every day 440 watts fry pan* 15 uses 1200 watts griddle* twice a 1200 watts week hair dryers soft bonnet twice a 400 watts week hard bonnet twice a 900 watts week hand held 5 times 600 watts per week 44 ~ Average Monthly Kilowatt-hour Use 30 kwh 3 kwh 1 kwh 14 ~— kwh 59 ~— kwh 1 kwh -4 kwh 100 ~— kwh 147s kwh 9 kwh 4 kwh 2 kwh 4 kwh 2 kwh Your average Cost per Kilowatt-hour Estimated Monthly Cost | ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly . Check Typical wattage . Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost i hair setter/curler 3 times 1 kwh x = 350 watts per week heating pad* 5 times .3 kwh x = 60 watts per month humidifier every day 14 kwh x ; = 177 watts ice cream freezer once per se akWne. 2X = 130 watts month ice crusher twice a -04 kwh x = 100 watts . week iron* 2 hours 5. kwh x = 1100 watts per week juicer once a day -05 kwh x = 90 watts knife sharpener once a week <01 — “kwh © xX = 40 watts lighting 108 kwh x = make-up mirror once. a day «1 = kwh: x = 20 watts microwave oven 20 minutes 16 kwh x = 1450 watts per day mixer : hand 3 times slay kwh :x = 80 watts stand twice a +2 kwh x = 150 watts week radio : 2 hours ee KW x = 25 watts every day range for a family 100 kwh x = 12,200 watts Of self-cleaning twice a 9 kwh x = process* a month roaster* once a Bi. eRWHe = 1425 watts month 45 ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per : Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost refrigerator (12 cu.ft.) manual defrost every day 61 kwh x = 241 watts frost-free every day 101. = =kwh x = 321 watts refrigerator/freezer (14 cu.ft.) manual defrost every day 95 kwh x = 326 watts frost-free every day 152 kwh sx = 615 watts sewing machine 4 hours 1 ee % = 75 watts per week shaver once a day 05 kwh x = 15 watts shaving. cream every day 3° WR OR = dispenser 60 watts slow cooker twice a 3. kwh x = 200 watts month stereo/hi-fi 2 hours 9 kwh x = 109 watts per day sun lamp 10 minutes Teas kwh x = 290 watts television black & white, 6 hours 29. kwh x = tube-type every day 160 watts : black & white, 6 hours 10 kwh x = : solid state every day faust 55 watts color, tube-type 6 hours 55 kwh x = 300 watts every day color, solid state 6 hours ee es = 200 watts every day toaster twice a 4 kwh x = 1400 watts day 46 ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost toothbrush every day 1 kwh x = 1.1 watts trash compactor 1/2 hour 4 kwh x = 400. watts every day vacuum cleaner 10 minutes 4 kwh x = 650 watts every day waffle iron* once a week 2. whe x = 1200 watts warming tray twice per 1 kwh x = 140 watts month water heater general use for clothes washer water pump 1000 watts workshop and hobby equipment * Thermostatically controlled. 350 gallons 350 per person for a family of 4 6 loads 108 per week 1/2 hour 15 every day ** Electric heating costs vary with each home. size of home, type of system, amount of insulation, number of doors, windows, etc. Usage in southern portions of Alaska KWH usage in northern Alaska would be higher. would be lower. 47 kwh x kwh x kwh x " Cost based on appliance estimated "On" time. Many items affect an accurate estimate: TABLE B ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost baby food warmer 3 times 3 kwh x = 165 watts per day blanket every night 19 kwh x = 150 watts blender 6 times 1 kwh x = 385 watts per week broiler (portable) twice a Fi. Neglae e = 1140 watts week can opener 3 uses -03 kwh x = 100 watts per day carving knife twice a 1 RW O® = 95 watts week clock every day 2 kwh x = 2.5 watts clothes dryer 6 loads 83 kwh x = 4900 watts per week clothes washer 6 loads 9 kwh x = (automatic) per week 512 watts coffee maker once a day 5 kwh x = 600 watts corn popper 2 uses | Sa & = 575 watts per week : curling iron once a day 63 x ~ 40 watts deep fat fryer* 3 times eo eh & = 1200 watts a month oe * Thermostatically controlled. Cost based on appliance estimated "On" time. ** Electric heating costs vary with each home. Many items affect an accurate estimate: size of home, type of system, amount of insulation, number of doors, windows, etc. KWH usage in northern Alaska would be higher. Usage in southern portions of Alaska would be lower. 44 Check Pils a pee ts eRe ee aes ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Appliance and Typical wattage dishwasher 1200 watts disposer 445 watts electric heating** egg cooker 550 watts fans window 200 watts furance or central air 270 watts floor polisher 305 watts fondue/chafing dish* 800 watts freezer (15 cu.ft.) manual defrost 341 watts frost-free 440 watts fry pan* 1200 watts griddle* 1200 watts hair dryers soft bonnet 400 watts hard bonnet 900 watts hand held 600 watts Average Monthly Average Kilowatt-hour Use Use 25 loads 305° kwh x per month every day 3 KX 5 times 1 kwh x per week 2 hours 14 kwh sx every day 7 hours 59 kwh x every day 4 hours Les nsx: per month once a «4 kwh x month every day 100 = kwh x every day 147, kwh_sx 15 uses 9 kwh x twice a 4 kwh x week twice a 2 kwh x week twice a 4 kwh x week 5 times 2 kwh x per week 45 Your average Cost per Kilowatt-hour —_. 7 " Estimated Monthly Cost || | ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost hair setter/curler 3 times 22 Ra = 350 watts per week heating pad* 5 times -3 kwh x = 60 watts per month humidifier every day 14 ~kwh x = 177 watts ice cream freezer once per aa kwh x = 130 watts month ice crusher twice a -04 kwh x = 100 watts week iron* 2 hours Bet Ree = 1100 watts per week juicer once a day -05): Rah ® = 90 watts knife sharpener once a week OTS: a eR = 40 watts Kc ae lighting 108 kwh x = make-up mirror once a day og RWS ® = 20 watts microwave oven 20 minutes 16 kwh x = 1450 watts per day mixer hand 3 times oh eS = 80 watts stand twice a st RK = 150 watts week radio 2 hours 2 kwh x = 25 watts every day range for a family 100 kwh x = 12,200 watts of 3 self-cleaning twice a So Rar & = process* a month roaster* once a $2. xX = 1425 watts month 46 ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Average Monthly Your average Estimated Appliance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost refrigerator (12 cu.ft.) manual defrost every day 61 kwh x = 241 watts frost-free every day 101. kwh x = 321 watts refrigerator/freezer (14 ouft.) ee manual defrost — every day 95 kwh x = 326 watts j frost-free every day 152 kwh x = 615 watts Bags aeee Rees sewing machine 4 hours 1 kwh x = 75 watts per week shaver once a day 05 kwh x = 15 watts shaving cream every day -03. kwh x = dispenser : 60 watts slow cooker twice a 3 kwh x = 200 watts month stereo/hi-fi 2 hours 9 kwh x = 109 watts per day sun lamp 10 minutes Je kwh =x = 290 watts television black & white, 6 hours 29 kwh x = tube-type every day ‘ 160 watts black & white, 6 hours 10 kwh x = solid state every day 55 watts color, tube-type 6 hours 65c. kwh: x = 300 watts every day color, solid state 6 hours 37 kwh =x = 200 watts every day toaster twice a 4 kwh x = 1400 watts day pe 47 ak workshop and hobby equipment Thermostatically controlled. Electric heating costs vary with each home. ENERGY LOAD CALCULATION (con't) Cost based on appliance estimated "On" time. Average } Monthly Your average Estimated Apptiance and Average Kilowatt-hour Cost per Monthly Check Typical wattage Use Use Kilowatt-hour Cost toothbrush every day 1 kwh = 1.1 watts trash compactor 1/2 hour 4 kwh = 400 watts every day vacuum cleaner 10 minutes 4 kwh = 650 watts every day waffle iron* once a week 2 ~~ kwh = 1200 watts warming tray twice per 1 kwh = 140 watts month water heater general use 350 gallons 350 ~~ kwh = per person for a family of 4 for clothes 6 loads 108 = kwh = washer per week water pump 1/2 hour 15 kwh = 1000 watts every day Many items affect an accurate estimate: size of home, type of system, amount of insulation, number of doors, windows, etc. KWH usage in northern Alaska would be higher. would be lower. 48 Usage in southern portions of Alaska Contact David Thayer Fish & Wildlife Box 20 101 East 12th Fairbanks, Ak. 99707 Fred Muhs University of Alaska Date Installed Not Complete 7/77 Rural Educational Affairs Kotzebue Extension Cente Box 297 Kotzebue, Alaska 99752 Kelly G. Carlisle SRA-Box 384-Y Anchorage, Alaska 99507 Everett Dreshner Box 25 Cantwell, Alaska 99729 Fred Goodwin Box 1265 Palmer, Alaska 99645 Jack Hodges RR4 Box 4485 Juneau, Alaska 99803 Dan & Joyce Denslow Ambler, Alaska 99786 r 1/79 7/79 7/79 9/78 1977 TABLE C EXISTING WEC'S System Cost 5Kw approx. $10,000.00 2 Kw Dunlite $40,140.00 12V/200 $ 1,250.00 Watt Winco 4Kw Dakota $10,583.75 Wind & Son 24V/1500Watt $12,528.00 Aero Power SL1500 400 Watt $200.00 Homebuilt 110V/2800 Watt $ 8,152.00 Jacobs 49 Function aux. heat source currently not functioning 50% household electricity currently not functioning household electricity experimental 3 households Ags 8 Date Contact Installed Steven Hennessy 78-79 Wasilla High School PO Box 1580 Wasilla, Alaska 99687 Name withheld 1973 Emil Remus 7/79 5100 Vi Street Anchorage, Alaska 99507 EXISTING WEC'S (con't) System Cost Model 750-14 $ 2,885.00 Sencenbaugh 24V Penwalt Corp. $ 8,100.00 1. 5Kw-2. 5Kw $ 7,050.00 Jacobs 50 "2 oo @ Function educational experiment power translator hobby interest ao » Ww 20. eve 22. 23; FOOTNOTES . JBS Haldane, Daedalus or Science and the Future Thomas Fuller "The Federal Wind Program," Wind Power Digest X II (Fall 1978) "Appropriate Technology," Energections, August 1979 Jim Bukey Dan Denslow Jim Sencenbaugh Kelly Carlisle Bob Thresher Mr. Thayer Don Mayer Wade Baker, "Wind Energy Prospecting," Wind Power Digest X IV (Winter 1979) Jim Secenbaugh A Guide to Commercially Available Wind Machines Ibid. Ibid. Jim Sencenbaugh, Sencenbaugh Wind Electric Marshall F. Merriam, Wind Energy for Human Needs dim Sencenbaugh, Sencenbaugh Wind Electric Energy Development Company "Incentives for Conservation in Alaska," Energections, August 1979 Lawrence Elliott Waste Heat Capture Study for State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Division of Energy and Power Development 51 oe ea John Noble Emil Remus Dr. James Wise Jim Towne Jerry Poirier Dr. Tunis Wentink Mark Newell Frank Simpson REFERENCES FABRICREATIONS (WECS INSTALLATIONS) 4-WIND OF ALASKA (WECS DEALER) AEIDC ALASKA MARINE & EQUIPMENT BATTERY DEALER UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ALASKA WIND ENERGY (WECS DEALER) 52 Alaska Regional Energy Resources nyanping prone (Phase 2)y Alternative Energy Resources Wind Vol. 3, Part 3, Chapter 5, Draft Report Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project (Phase 2), Alternative Energy Resources-Environmental Impacts, Vol. 3, Part3, Chapter 10, Draft Report. Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Division of Energy and Power Development, 1978 Community Energy Survey. Elridge, Frank R., Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Washington, D.C., June 9-11, 1975. Energy Development Company, Wind Turbine System. Environmental and Resource Assessments Branch, Division of Solar Energy, Energy Research and Development Administration. Solar Program Assessment: Environ- mental Factors Wind Energy Conversion, Washington, D.C., ‘ Evans, Michael, ed., Wind Power Digest Vols. 1-14. Indiana, Jester Press. Karniech, Theodore R. and Tompkins, Daryl M., An Analysis of the Economics of Current Small Wind Energy System, JBF Scientific Corporation, Arlington, Virginia. Merriam, Marshal F., Wind Ene for Human Needs, United States Energy Research and Development Mateztttion November 1974. NASA Lewis Research Center, Wind Energy Systems: A Non- ollutive Non- Depletable Energy, Public Information bee. December 1973. Ramakuman, R., Harnessing Wind Power _in Developing Countries, IECEC '75 RECORD Robert Rutherford Associates, Consulting Engineers, Waste Heat Capture Study for State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development Division of Energy and Power Development, June 1976 Savino, Joseph M., ed. Wind we Conversion Systems Workshop Proceeding, Washington, D.C., June 11-13, Sencenbaugh, James, Sencenbaugh Wind Electric ’Catalog 1078. The Wind Systems Program, A Guide to Commercially Available Wind Machine. Wegley, Harry L., Orgill, Montie M., Drake, Ron L., A Siting Handbook for Small_Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battelle, PacTfic Northwest Laboratories, 1978. Wentink, Jr., Tunis, Wind Potential of Alaska; Part II Wind Duration Curve Fits and Output Power Estimates for Typical Windmills, Energy Research and Development Administration, Division of Solar Energy, Federal Wind Program, 1976. 53 arty’