HomeMy WebLinkAboutWind Energy Resource Development Program for Naknek-King Salmon 1982
RY COP
WIND ENERGY RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
FOR NAKNEK/KING SALMON
foal
Presented to
Alaska Power Administration
Juneau, Alaska
AeroVironment Inc.
145 VISTA AVENUE - PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91107 USA (213) 449-4392
cee
Six-Month Status Report
for
MONITORING AND APPRAISAL EVALUATION OF
WIND ENERGY POTENTIAL FOR ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION
IN THE BRISTOL BAY AREA
ABSTRACT
The Bristol Bay area of Alaska has been identified as a region that may have local
sites suitable for wind energy development. Studies conducted by AeroVironment Inc.
(AV) thus far in the Dillingham/Naknek-King Salmon area of Bristol Bay have validated
this assumption. Based upon data collected from September 1981 through March 1982, it
is concluded that a hill overlooking Naknek village is the most promising site for wind
energy development. The site is projected to have a mean annual wind speed greater than
14 mph near the ground. Because nearby site measurements indicate the increase in wind
speed with height to be substantially greater than that assumed with the standard power
law relation, projected wind energy availability estimates at Naknek Hill annually exceed 600 watts/m?.
Monthly power output values for three typical machine configurations have been
calculated for the data reported, with detailed analysis of power output characteristics in
relation to diurnal, daily, and annual variances of wind, and acceptance with the utility
grid to be the topic of the final analysis report.
Primary elements describing the scope of work for subsequent feasibility level
monitoring and evaluation of a utility-sized wind farm for Naknek are also reported. The
major tasks include plans for continued wind monitoring at Naknek Hill, technical analysis
for machine selection, field evaluation for wind turbine installation, and preparation for
wind turbine installation and operation. Also recommended are expanded site assessment
studies at other villages in the Bristol Bay area.
These proposed elements would constitute the second and final phase of the planned
technical evaluation of wind energy development potential in the Dillingham/Naknek-King
Salmon area. If current economic analysis by the Alaska Power Administration proves
positive, a wind turbine installatian can he cat in in -n-i-- 10%
te ee
PROPOSED NAKNEK/KING SALMON WIND FAPM
0
0
0
fe)
BACKGROUND
OBJECTIVES
APPROACH
RESULTS
BACKGROUND
APA PIONEERING DEVELOPMENT OF ALASKAN ALTERNATE
ENERGY SOURCES
DEMAND FOR ENERGY IN BRISTOL BAY AREA EXPECTED TO
GROW ANNUALLY AT 102
NAKNEK/KING SALMON AREA ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT HALF OF
POWER DEMAND IN BRISTOL BAY
POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR WIND FARM INSTALLATION AT
NAKNEK
POTENTIAL FOR WIND FARM INSTALLATION
WIND RESOURCE PROMISING -- 14 MPH ANNUAL AVERAGE AT
33 FT.
SITES CLOSE TO MAJOR LOADS
SUPPORT FROM NAKNEK ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION
KEY TECHNICAL/INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED
KEY TECHNICAL/ INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
WIND/DIESEL COST EFFECTIVENESS
MINIMIZE LIFE CYCLE COST
- SAVE FUEL (MONEY)
r INTEGRATE WIND/DIESEL
CONSTRAINTS
- HOW WELL WILL TRUBINES PERFORM IN ARCTIC
ENVIRONMENT?
- HOW MUCH TURBINE PENETRATION IS COMPATIBLE
WITH GRID?
- HOW MUCH TURBINE CAPACITY WILL SITE SUPPORT?
- HOW MUCH LAND CAN BE ACQUIRED/PERMITTED FOR
WIND?
LBS FUEL/BHP HR,
FUEL RATES FOR CUMMINS C220 110kW ENGINE
PERCENT ENGINE POWER
RELATIVE ENGINE WEAR FOR
CUMMINS C 220 100 kW ENGINE
50%
PERCENT ENGINE POWER
100%
~
PERFORMANCE OF WIND TURBINES
IN ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT
JAY CARTER -- MONTANA AND MINNESOTA INSTALLATION
ESI -- TEHACHAPI, CALIFORNIA
ENERTECH -- ALASKA
JACOBS -- ALASKA
OTHERS
WIND/DIESEL INTEGRATION CONSIDERATIONS
STEADY-STATE
o _- RECOMMEND DIESELS OPERATING ABOVE 50% RATED POWER
o WIND PENETRATION LESS THAN 50% MIN. LOAD COMPATIBLE
WITH GRID
o LOAD MATCHING IMPORTANT
UNSTEADY
o =—s RAMP - RATE OF DIESEL FAST ENOUGH TO PICK UP LOAD WHEN
WIND DIES
0 = ELECTRICAL STABILITY
ELEVATED AREAS IN NAKNEK
OBJECTIVES
DEVELOPMENT OF RELIABLE, COST-EFFECTIVE
UTILITY-SIZED WIND FARM AT NAKNEK/KING SALMON
FEASIBILITY EVALUATION
DESIGN CRITERIA
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS
PHASE |
PHASE I]
PHASE III
PHASE IV
APPROACH
SITE ASSESSMENT
DEMONSTRATION TURBINE
DEVELOPMENTAL WIND FARM
MATURE WIND FARM
DEMONSTRATION TURBINE
TASK 1 CONTINUED WIND MONITORING AT NAKNEK HILL
TASK 2. TECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR MACHINE SELECTION
TASK 3. FIELD EVALUATION FOR TURBINE INSTALLATION
TASK 4 — PREPARATION FOR WIND TURBINE INSTALLATION
Si=4
0 -
1. 2
1.3
2.0 -
2.
2.
1
2
Task
Continued Wind Monitorin,
at Naknek Hill
Continue Operation of Existing
Monitoring Station
Wind Shear and Turbulence
Measurements
Continued Analysis of
Historical Data
Technical Analysis for Machine
Selection
Technical Review of Currently
Available Wind Turbines
Recommendation of
Machine Selection
Field Evaluation for Wind urbine Installation
1982 1983 1984
o N D J F M A M J 3 A s oO
3.1 Procedures for Site Installation 3.2 Environmental Studies
4.0 - pesearation for Wind Turbine installation
4.1 Site Layout
4.2 Machine Installation Procedures
4.3 Support Facilities
4.4 Machine Performance Test
Plan
Milestones
Fall kite anemometer survey Aveun=— Second year of wind data recorded
Winter kite anemometer survey
Spring kite anemometer survey
Summer kite anemometer survey IL Site layout identified 16 Second year of wind data analysis at Naknek
7 Recommend machine to APA 12 8 APA to purchase machine 13 9 Permit procedures identified and filed 14
10 Environmental status identified 15
Installation procedures identified Support facilities designed
Performance test plan reviewed by APA
Test plan finalized - Phase Il comleted
Wind turbine and test center start up, spring 1983
Preliminary schedule for Phase II APA Study at Naknek Hill.
150
100
FEET
50
Jay Carter En Sciences | wesej ; i. Y estinghouse
50 200
Rated Power{kW)
Rated Speed(mph)
Rotor Diameter({feet)
Hub Height(feet)
Estimated average power output (in kW) and capacity factors per month for selected wind turbines.
JCE Model 25 Type ESI 54 Type NASA MOD-0A Type 25 kW Rated 50 kW Rated 200 kW Rated
Month I Ul Il I Il Il I il Wl
September 1981 | 8(.32)* | 13(.51)* -- 18(.36)* | 25(.50)* -- 84(.42)* | 112(.56)*
October 7(.27) 9(.37) 4(.15) | 15(.30) | 22(.44) | 10(.19)* | 54(.32) 90(.45) | 36(.18)
November 7(.27) | 10(.40) * | 16(.32) | 24(.48) * | 68(.34) | 100(.50)
December 3(.12) 4(.21)* . 9(.17)* | 14(.27)* * | 30(.15)* | 52(.26)*
January 1982 8(.32) | 110.45) 6(.22) | 18(.35) | 26(.51) | 15(.30) | 78(.39) | 108(.54) | 64(.32)
February 9(.36) 12(.48) 4(.16) 21(.41) 29(.58) 10(.20) | 88(.44) 120(.60) 38(.19)
March 10(.39) | 13(.52) 6(.22) | 22(.43) | 31(.61) | 12(.24) | 94(.47) | 122(.61) | 48(.24)
*based on less than 400 hours of data
I = Site 4, Naknek (using 1/7 power law)
Il = Site 4, Naknek (using 1.3 speed-up ratio) Ill = Site 9, Dillingham (using 1/7 power law)
~ PROPOSED SITE FOR DEMONSTRATION UNIT
CONCEPT OF DEVELOPMENTAL WIND FARM
LOW PENETRATION
(WANT DIESEL ABOVE 50% POWER)
UTILITY-SIZED (100 To 500 kW)
COMPOSED OF SMALL TURBINES (25 TO 100 kW)
MODEST LAND IMPACT (1 TO 10 ACRES)
ADJACENT TO DEMONSTRATION MACHINE (NAKNAK HILL)
l SBIRECTION oF NORTH NAKNAK HILL
TRANSMISSION
LINE. (~ % MI.)
®
_. EXISTING
DIESEL
GENERATOR
‘ NAKNAK LANDING STRIP
POWER (KW) 400
300
200
DAY BY DAY LOAD MATCHING
START: 19 FEB.
“DEMAND
AN A
"81
~ (MW)
ARTIST’S RENDERING OF WIND FARM COMPOSED
OF CARTER 25 kW TURBINES
Prevailing wind
———
ACCESS ROAD
iz
SERVICE
AREA 70° x 130
‘MONTH BY MONTH LOAD MATCHING
1500
SS ee ee 1977
SYSTEM ELECTRIC ENERC USE ~~
SaaS es P| | | manger beast wr || KW W TNT ARM tet Pi | | | Port | PT tS
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP ocT NOV OEc
1400
1300
1200
1000
| NL
700
600
300
200
ook
RESULTS
TE A MENT
NAKNEK RECOMMENDED FOR DEMONSTRATION TURBINE
JEMONSTRATION TURBINE
TO GAIN ARCTIC OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE WITH
25-100 kW WIND TURBINE
DEVELOPMENTAL WIND FARM
TO SHOW WIND/DIESEL SYSTEM COST EFFECTIVENESS