Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
St George Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements & Alternatives 7-1982
VIL-N 002 Se. 6 RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES PROPERTY OF: Alaska Power Authority S34 W. 5th Ave. norage, Alaska 99501 FOR ST. GEORGE ANIAK ATKA MEKORYUK CHEFORNAK NEWTOK CHIGNIK LAKE NIGHTMUTE COLD BAY NIKOLSK1 FALSE PASS ST. GEORGE HOOPER BAY ST. MARYS IVANOF BAY ST. PAUL KOTLIK TOKSOOK BAY LOWER AND TUNUNAK UPPER KALSKAG PREPARED BY NORTHERN TECHNICAL SERVICES & VAN GULIK AND ASSOCIATES ANCHORAGE, ALASKA | ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY | ST. GEORGE RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES A Report by Northern Technical Services van Gulik and Associates Anchorage, Alaska July, 1982 1.0 Summary and Recommendations 2.0 Background 3.0 Village Meeting 4.0 Existing Heating and Electrical Power Generating Facilities 4.1 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances 4.2 Electrical Generation Facilities 4.3 Fuel Oil Usage 4.4 Electrical Energy Distribution 5.0 Energy Balance 6.0 Energy Forecasts 6.1 Population Projection 6.2 Capital Projects 6.3 Thermal Energy Projection 6.4 Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection 7.0 Energy Resource Assessment 8.0 Energy Plans 8.1 Base Case 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8.3 Alternate Plan B 9.0 Analysis of Alternatives and Recommendations Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS Review Letters and Replies PP > PP oe ew we Nee ow DAANADA ee we ew ew Be oo ~_ . - c©oMoo oe ee Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 5.1 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 9.3 LIST OF TABLES Energy Balance for 1982 Itemized Present Worth Analysis of the Base Case Estimated Heat Recovery Costs Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate Plan A Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate Plan B Summary of the Present Worth Analysis and Any Non-electric Benefits for Each Energy Plan Direct Power Generation Costs for Each Energy Plan Preference Ranking of Village Energy Plans and Associated Recommended Actions ii 8.8 8.12 9.1 9.2 Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 2.1 4.4 5.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.1 LIST OF FIGURES Location Map Climatic Background Bulk Fuel Storage Capacities and Types of Heating Appliances Electrical Generation Facilities Fuel Oil Usage Electrical Generation Sector Energy Distribution Energy Flow Diagram Distribution of Total Useable Energy Population Projection Taermal Energy Projection Peak Demand and Electrical Energy Projection Appropriate Technology Ranking Diagram iii Page 2.2 2.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 5.3 6.4 7.3 1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ——$—— Eee} SUNS The production of electricity is the focus of the Energy Reconnaissance Program. The study has focused on seeking potential alternatives to diesel powered electrical generators. Opportunities to reduce the cost of electrical generation, such as waste heat capture systems, were also detailed. A waste heat capture system utilizes a resource (thermal energy) which is currently wasted in diesel electric generation. The sale of otherwise wasted heat can provide additional income to the utility and thus be reflected in lower costs for generation of electricity. In St. George a wind generation system was compared to the central generation base case and the base case scenario complemented by a waste heat capture system. Summary Statements Only those technologies that could be readily assimilated into St. George were considered. 1. Fuel oil was found to be the major source of energy used in the village. Additional energy was supplied by propane and gasoline. 2. Significant amounts of energy are lost in the village due to: (1) inefficient combustion; (2) poor insulation and excessive air infiltration; and (3) wasted heat from diesel electric generation. 3. Forecasts show an inevitable increase in energy consumption in the village due to population growth. Additional construction unrelated to population size is anticipated and will impact energy consumption and demand. tar Energy resource baseline data is generally weak in the village. This weakens the accuracy of technological Or economic predictions. However, the estimates relative to waste heat availability appear reasonably reliable. The feasibility of various technologies for electrical and thermal energy production was evaluated. Wood, peat, solar, geothermal, coal, and hydro were examined as potential energy resources and are not viable alternatives to fuel oil generated electricity. Waste heat recovery from the central power plant and wind power were the basis of the alternative energy Plans. The Base Case Plan was formulated based on the continual use of centrally generated electric power. A present worth analysis of each alternative plan was prepared. General Recommendations 1. The supporting energy and resource data base should be strengthened. New technologies, and advances in old technologies, need demonstration projects to determine their feasibility in rural Alaska. Significant energy savings could be realized by a village-wide energy conservation and weatherization program. 1.2 Village Specific Recommendations et Se commendations ts Wind energy proved to be economically unfeasible in the village. In addition, a history of frequent failures and unreliability in rural Alaska make this energy source unattractive. Waste heat recovery, from the existing NMFS central power plant, utilized for space heating in the village is economically feasible and attractive in the amount of fuel oil saved. The installation of the waste heat recovery system is recommended. The following steps should be taken: a. Initiate a feasibility study of waste heat recovery. b. Investigate the power plant operation for potential of improved diesel efficiency. P53 2.0 BACKGROUND Introduction St. George was founded in the late 1700's by Russian fur traders who brought Aleuts to the Pribilof Islands to conduct the fur seal harvest. The fur seal industry has historically been the basis of economic and political activity. In order to manage the fur seal harvest, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) became the sole administrator and operator of St. George Island. NMFS is currently turning over administration of the island to the community of St. George. The Aleut Corporation is the native corporation encompassing St. George while the Tanaqg Corporation is the local village corporation. St. George is accessible by sea year round. Peninsula Airlines provides transportation to St. George from St. Paul every two weeks. Location St. George is located on the northeast shore of St. George Island in the Pribilof Island group near the southeast Bering Sea Shelf. St. George is 40 miles south of St. Paul, 240 miles north of Dutch Harbor and 800 miles west of Anchorage (see Figure 2.1). Topography The topography of St. George Island includes volcanic flows and cores as well as several east-west faults. Ulakaia Hill, 2 miles south of the village, at 946 feet, is the highest point on the island. Much of the shoreline is volcanic cliffs edged by rocky beaches that serve as seal rookeries. 2.1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 KEY KOTLIK SAINT MARYS KALSKAG ANIAK LOWER KALSKAG NEWTOK NIGHTMUTE CHEFORNAK MEKORYUK TOKSOOK BAY TUNUNAK HOOPER BAY CHIGNIK LAGOON CHIGNIK IVANOF BAY FALSE PASS COLD BAY NIKOLSKI ATKA ST. PAUL ST. GEORGE pay 2S LOWER oot “~ aniox 4 mi SN Os of navrion *) = PEs SAINT MARYS 1 con Ty =. watsKag 3-2. KALSKAG LES cai 14 y “Tvanor ay 15 FALSE pass 16 ——— 180 240 300 MILES Figure 2.1 LOCATION MAP Climate Climate in St. George is directly influenced by the cold Bering Sea waters. Temperature extremes cange from 52°F to 24°F. Rain occurs year round but maximum precipitation per month is 5 inches. Snow has occurred during all months of the year but there is generally little accumulation. Weather conditions in St. Paul, the nearest weather observation station, are indicative of those in St. George. Background climatic information from St. Paul is summarized in Figure 2.2. Population Historica! population data is as follows: (Jones 1976) Census Year 1867 1880 1899 1950 1970 1980 a — Population 139 88 92 264 163 est 170 Population projections for the next 20 years are discussed and graphed in Section 6. Economy The federally controlled fur seal industry dominates the economy of St. George. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) employs 40 to 50 villagers during the seal harvest and processing period. NMFS also provides 15 full time jobs for maintenance of the sealing facilities. The school employs three teachers, two teachers aides and a janitor. The post office employs one part time post mistress and the Public Health Service clinic employs one part time health aide. Climatic Background ! 1 1 ! ! 1 | | san | ree | man | apa | may| sun | sur | auc! ser! ocr! nov! occ Light Conditions 7 oT woof! ing Weather <3 000 4: ceiling / 3 miles visibility e Sa VFR Conditions PERCENT FREQUENCY g TFR Conditions ° Winds Mean wind speed / prevailing direction i T e__[wneTwne | ww [ns | s | ssw nw | Nw] NNE] WHE, 2 g — x 8 — Wind >28 knot Favorable PERCENT. FREQUENCY o 3 3 Wind >7 knots PERCENT FREQUENCY 8 a Occurrence of calm ° Precipitation fe Maximum precipitation ; iMean precipitation { T_T Extreme maxime® | Jas | Feb MAR APR | MAY, JUN | JUL AUG | SEP 1 OCT | NOV | DEC ' ! : i Source: Department of Community and Regional Affairs, Community Profile Series. Figure 2.2 ea | 3.0 COMMUNITY MEETING Project personnel arrived in St. George on the evening of November 18, one day ahead of their scheduled visit. An attempt by Max Melavansky of the St. George Tanaq Corporation to reschedule a meeting immediately in the evening was unsuccessful so project personnel talked with several residents who were at the National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) building. Residents expressed concern over the discontinuation of the NMFS management of the island. Most felt “hat when management and services are stopped, fuel delivery, currently by NMFS barge, will be less reliable and fuel cost will increase drastically. Residents stated that most of the homes in St. George are not insulated but that NMP had blown cellulose insulation into some o£ the government buildings. Residents were not certain if vapor barriers were installed simultaneously with the insulation. Before leaving St. George on November 19, project personnel met with Max Melavansky (the remaining council members were attending a meeting in St. Paul). Mr. Melavansky stressed the need to increase the efficiency of the existing generating facility and/or employ alternative energy technologies to lessen the impact of the NMFS pull-out. The NMFS currently subsidizes 50% of the cost of electricity in St. George, maintains the power lines and city operations plants, and delivers (by barge) and sells home heating fuel to the residents. NMFS employs over 50% of the working population. 321 The city and village councils of St. George are considering the possibility of building a fish processing plant either in St. George or in Zapadni Bay on the western side of the island. The city would like the plant to be energy self-sufficient and perhaps provide additional power to St. George. Mr. Melavansky expressed the Tanaq Corporation's interest in using a wind generator to supplement the diesel generators. He stated that he thinks the average wind speed is high enough to render wind generation a feasible alternative. Project personnel inquired about possible hydroelectric sites. Mr. Melavansky informed them that there are two small streams on the southern side of the island but that the flow is seasonal and sometimes non-existent and that neither had sufficient head to make hydroelectric generation feasible. 4.0 EXISTING HEATING AND ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATING FACILITIES 4.1 4.2 4.3 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances Bulk fuel storage capacity within the village is listed, by sector, in Figure 4.1. These capacities are based on actual tank sizes and on estimates where reliable data could not be obtained. The storage capacity of domestic fuel tanks and 55 gallon drums is not included in the bulk storage capacities. Also listed in Figure 4.1 are the types of heating and cooking appliances, by sector, being used in the village. Electrical Generation Facilities The existing generating equipment installed in the village is listed in Figure 4.2. Comments on the Operation of the generators are included. Fuel Oil Usage Figure 4.3 illustrates the use of fuel oil in the village. Consumption of fuel oil by sector for space heating is listed as a percentage of the total oil consumption. Similarly, the percentage of oil used for electrical power generation is shown. The oil used for space heating is broken down to show the portion that actually heats building space, and that which is lost to waste. The electrical generation fuel oil is also separated into electrical energy and waste heat segments. Fuel oil consumption in the village was based on records, where available, and calculated estimates where no reliable records existed. Please refer to the Methodology section of the main report for an explanation of the estimating process. The fuel oil consumption for electrical power generation was based on the NMFS central electrical power plant, with the generating equipment listed in Figure 4.2. Electrical Energy Distribution The energy flow through the electrical generation sector is depicted graphically on Figure 4.4. The "pie-chart" represents the total energy dedicated to the generation of electrical power. Each sector in the village consumes a slice of the pie, as shown. 4.2 €°p ST. GEORGE/1982 BULK FUEL STORAGE CAPACITIES AND TYPES OF HEATING APPLIANCES SECTOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION SCHOOLS PUBLIC RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL FUEL OIL 300000 (GALS) GASOLINE STORAGE * 50000 TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE LEGEND: TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE 1 OIL-FIRED FORCED AIR FURNACE 2 OIL-FIRED BOILER WITH WATER/GLYCOL DISTRIBUTION o DRIP-TYPE OIL STOVE/FURNACE 4 WOOD STOVE 5 PROPANE COOKING STOVES 6 WASTE HEAT FROM GENERATORS *DaY TANKS AND FUEL ORUMS ARE NOT INCLUDED. Figure 4.1 ELECTRICAL GENERATION GENERATOR OUTPUT RATING TYPE OF ENGINE FACILITIES ELECTRICAL OISTRIBUTION COMMENTS ON OPERATION National Marine Fisheries Service 300 KW 100 Kw Fai rbanks-Morse Caterpillar ST. GEORGE TYPE OF GENERATOR Westinghouse EM Figure 4.2 220/480V 300 KW unit equipped with jacket water and exhaust heat recovery. Equipment repair is needed before generator can be used. All gen- erators are operated in parallel. Typical operation is two 100 KW units. FUEL OIL USAGE ST. GEORGE / 1982 SECTOR END USE Space Heat Waste Heat Percent 25% Generator Waste Heat Electricity 9% R Residential 28 % Cc Commercial 21 % P Public 6 % Ss School 7% E Electrical Power ° Generation 38% ESTIMATED FUEL OIL USE = 132000 GAL = 17800x10°Bru Figure 4.3 4.5 ELECTRICAL GENERATION SECTOR ENERGY DISTRIBUTION ST. GEORGE Residential Commercial “fo Public %o School fo Waste Heat 77 % Generation Losses 2% TOTAL ENERGY 6830 x 10° BTU/YEAR TOTAL ELECTRIC POWER 468 MWH/YEAR Figure 4.4 4.6 5.0 ENERGY BALANCE The estimated energy consumption in St. George during 1982 is listed in Table 5.1. Estimates of the different types of energy consumed by the various sectors are based upon the 1980-81 fuel purchase records kept by the store, the school, and at the power plant. Estimates based on the population, square footage of residences and other buildings, and calculated energy usage factors, were used where data were incomplete. The flow of energy through the village is illus:rated in Figure 5.1. In 1982 it is estimated that 19,303 MMBTU of fuel will enter St. George in the form of gasoline, propane and fuel oil. This fuel will be distributed to the various sectors and used for transportation, cooking, heating and electricity generation. The conversion of the ‘uel to its end use will result in 50% or 9,619 MMBTU of energy lost as heat. 56% of this waste heat could be recoverei using conservation and waste heat recovery practices. The actual amount of energy used by each sector is listed in the last column of the diagram. The 1982 projected distribution of useable ener jy is shown in Figure 5.2. The distribution represents the quantity of energy that will be required by each sector (excluding transportation) for electric lights and appliances, water heating, space heating and cooking, and generation station service. Percentages listed in the figure can be multiplied by the useable energy of 8448 x 106 3tus to determine the projected energy requirements for a particular end use in a given sector. These pr jected energy requirements do not include energy conversion losses and therefore represent the actual quantity of energy required for each end use. za°sS VILLAGE: ST. GEORGE/1982 ENERGY BALANCE WASTE TOTAL FUEL OIL GASOLINE PROPANE teat enenay aL ] RECOV- | SECTOR 1 a GAL BTU. | ves Bry ‘ory ERABLE | Bry % GAL Ble % MWH oye x10 x10 rio | Bie | tl? RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL 1470 | 734 2813 | 29 PUBLIC 431 | 215 741 8 { SCHOOLS 488 49 808 8 ELECTRICAL GENERATION 3 150 2 TRANSPORTATION 1244 13 132000 *station service or distribution losses Table 5.1 aanbiy G L POP: 175 HOUSEHOLOS: 39 10,200 HTG. DEGREE DAYS Fue AMOUNT ENERGY = RO. ELECTRICAL END USE TOTAL . @Y SECTOR CONVERSION WASTE HEAT =| DISTRIBUTION BY SECTOR USABLE ENERGY TRANSPORTATION : ATION = ‘| TRANSPORTATION - : TRANSPORTATION (1244) | le COOKING (294) | —_—— - 1 RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL J. 30; HEATING — (5264) Sanat HEATING/ COOKING pooeco oaeeeee | {652) (1990) Seaee COMMERCIAL MMERCIAL 2813) . HEATING (2200) (613) : (2813 (3670) sme (150) mere tee (VERY FUEL OIL POWER POWER GEN. ts! GENERATION ELECTRICAL foe GENERATORS —— (6830) i SCHOOL(S) SCHOOL(S) HEATING/ (202) (1220) COOKING . PUBLIC 435 PUBLIC | (649) (741) : HEATING (1080) ; | ; | TOTAL I WASTE | TOTAL | HEAT ' USABLE { | ENERGY G12) RECOVERABLE | WASTE HEAT | (5401) (15093) | [waste HEAT pace | NON - RECOVERABLE i (4218) NOTE * 7 ; pee ed NUMBERS IN BRACKETS ARE 10° BTu'S. MO13S ADYSNS Wvyovld DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL USABLE ENERGY*® ST. GEORGE/1982 END USE SECTOR | oy sector 100 E(7.88) 90 oul 4 WH (9.58) = 80 2 w 2 a ~- 70 2 H/C (29.28) w a oO 2 60 Kk Zz w 50 oO a4 a < oO lu 40 pd a. iu 5 26.08) 30 = H/C (26. oO PWR GEN P(1.88) E(0.98) SCHOOLS WH (0.33) 10 E(1.1%) PUBLIC H/C (7.78) oO END USE SUMMARY E LIGHTS, REFRIGERATOR/ FREEZERS, 17.1 % VIDEO, AND OTHER ELECTRICAL USES WH WATER HEATING 9.8 H/C SPACE HEATING, COOKING AND MISC. 71.3 % P GENERATOR STATION SERVICE/ 1.8 % TRANSMISSION LOSSES TOTAL USABLE ENERGY = 8448 x 10° Btu *% DOES NOT INCLUDE ENERGY USED FOR TRANSPORTATION AND RECOVERABLE WASTE HEAT Rtg 2522 6.0 ENERGY FORECASTS 6.1 6.2 6.3 Population Projection See ES OICCLLQN The population of St. George was forecast for the twenty year planning period based upon historical population trends, expected changes resulting from planned capital projects, and the villagers' Projections of the growth of their community. Historical data from 1960 to 1980 show a negative annual growth rate. No new capital projects are planned, but villagers state that some of the younger residents are returning to the village and that the population is stabilizing. A slow rate of increase is anticipated for the village and only a 1% annual growth rate was used in the projection. Historical and projected populations are listed below. Figure 6.1 illustrates the population projection over the 20 year planning period. _.._. Historical Projected aa 1960 1970 1980 1990 2009 2010 264 163 158 174 1y2 212 Capital Projects Forecast No known capital projects are planned in St. George. Thermal Energy Projection Plguve 6.. presents the anticipated thermal energy consumption of St. George during the forecast period. Go: The thermal energy is provided by the combustion of fuel for space heating. The projections were based on fuel use records and estimates of the heating require- ments of the buildings. Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection Figure 6.3 presents the anticipated electrical energy consumption of St. George, by sector, during the forecast period. The projections were based on records and estimates where accurate data was not available. Details of the estimation methods and calculations are included in the Methodology section of the main report. 6.2 POPULATION CMMBTUD THERMAL ENERGY POPULATION PROJECTION ST GEORGE 228 - -— Wa 210 f+ 288+ 19a + 1868 172 Danial. 1 1 1 1 idk L 1 4 Seminal 1 wi, 1 1 1 nila iss2 1984 1986 1988 1998 1992 1994 1995 1998 2902 YEAR Figure 6.1 THERMAL ENERGY PROJECTION ST GEORGE 1e222 I 222 + [ e222 ae nee —— L 7025 + b zee r b Sear -+ + : 4 - sol 4 ‘ x : | 1952 1994 1996 #1985 ep27 o @ to - 9 w : ~ o (D o - ‘oO aw wo ” © w@ nl YEAR Figure 6.2 ELECTRICAL ENERGY ELECTRICAL ENERGY PEAK DEMAND (KX) TOTAL (MWH) BY SECTOR (MWH) PEAK DEMAND PROJECTION ST GEORGE 146 138 128 112 1eg 1982 6223 ft 1884 1986 141 1 4 1988 61998 1932 YEAR 1984 1995 1998 28288 ELECTRICAL ENERGY PROJECTION ST GEORGE 558 - 523 + 452 328 1982 1984 1986 1988 1998 §=61992 YEAR 1994 1996 1998 28288 Electrical Generation Sector C = Commercial Public iS) Schools R= Figure 6.3 6.4 Residential 7.0 ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Wind The nearest recorded wind data for St. George is from St. Paul. Weather conditions at the islands are, however, practically identical. The inmean annual wind speed recorded at St. Paul is 14.9 kts. Although this speed is sufficient to render operation of a wind generator viable, wind speeds and direction vary constantly. The feasibility of wind power generation was examined in Alternate Plan B, discussed in Section 8.3. Wood, Coal, Peat, Geothermal, Hydro The resources necessary for generation by these methods are not available in St. George. Solar Passive solar heat may be considered viable only as a supplement to home heating. However, the poor weather conditions and short winter daylight hours preclude etfective use of passive solar systems. Conservation Measures Waste Heat Capture The majority of the energy in the fuel oil burned in a diesel generator is lost as waste heat through the engine cooling water, exhaust gases, and radiant heat from the 7.1 engine. Much of the heat can be reclaimed from the engine cooling water and exhaust gas by transferring the heat in heat exchangers to a secondary fluid, usually a glycol solution. This is then pumped to buildings and used in heaters for space heating. Alternate Plan A, detailed in Section 8.2 of this report, investigates the feasibility of waste heat recovery at St. George. Weatherization Homes and buildings built in the Pribilof Islands in the past have in general been poorly insulated and weatherized. Heat loss from such buildings is high, in the forms of heat loss directly through the walls, floor, and ceiling, and by the cold air that enters around leaky doors and windows. Insulating and weatherizing a home can often cut the heating fuel requirement in half or more, and make the building more comfortable and liveable at the same time. The materials required are inexpensive, and the skills necessary for installation low. This work is perhaps the most effective way of reducing village energy usage. Technology Ranking Figure 7.1 presents a ranking of the technologies that could be applied to the village. Each technology was examined on the basis of state-of-the-art quality of the technology, cost, reliability, resource, labor, and environmental impact. Please refer to the Methodology section of the main report for the ranking method. iii Village of St. George T : Technology Relia- { Environ- State-of-the-Art Cost ; bility | Resource Labor mental Impact Weatherization* i 5 5 5 5 5 5 1.00 Diesel Power 5 4 4 4 4 4 0.87 _| Waste Heat Recovery* 5 4 4 4 4 4 0.87 I - —_—_} ans Hydroelectric Power N/A N/A | N/A 0 N/A N/A 0.00 Wind Energy Conversion | systems 4 3 2 4 4 4 0.75 Geothermal Energy 1 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A 0.00 Steam Power from local fuel,wood,coal,ect... N/A N/A N/A | 0 N/A N/A 0.00 Gasificatio f wood,coal sis ry 2 a Dade ee ne N/A N/a N/a Q N/A N/A 0.00 Generation via synchronous Induction* I 4 3 3 1 4 0.58 Electrical Load Management* 2 2 2 : x : 0.68 Be eee eee eee eee * Energy Conservation Measures Note: 0 = worst case, 5 = best case Figure 7.1 N/A Not Applicable 8.0 ENERGY PLAN 8.1 Base Care 8.1.1 General Description The base case plan for St. George is to continue using the centralized diesel generating system. As the village grows additional generators are added as required by the increasing demand. Electrical energy usage has been projected based upon the continuation of present per capita consumption rates. 8.1.2 Base Case Cost Analysis The capital value of the existing ceitral electric power plant was estimated to be $706,000. The plant value wis amortized over a 20 year p2riod. Additional generat.on capacity was added, in increments of 50 kw, as required by the growing peak demaid. The cost of additional generation capacity was estimated to be $1650/kw. The cost of fuel oil was set at $9.33/MMBTU, based on a fuel cost of $1.26/gallon. Operation and maintenance expenses were estimated at 8¢/kwh. Table 8.1 presents the itemized pres2nt value analysis of the base case plan for the 20 year study veriod. The discounted 20 year present value was $2,794,100. 8.1 os ST GEORGE PLAN 1 BASE CASE DIESEL - ELECTRIC 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 FUEL 66.1 68.7 71.4 74,2 77.0 80.0 83.1 86.2 89.5 92.8 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 37.9 38.4 38.9 39.4 39.8 40.3 40.8 41.3 41.7 42.2 TOTAL 151.2 154.4 157.6 160.8 164.2 167.6 171.2 174.8 178.5 182.4 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN ‘COST 151.2 154.4 157.6 160.8 164.2 167.6 171.2 174.8 178.5 182.4 DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 151.2 149.9 148.5 147.2 145.9 144.6 143.3 142.1 140.9 139.8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2009 2001 TOTAL INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 47.3 946.0 FUEL ‘ 96.3 99.9 103.6 107.5 111.4 115.6 119.8 124.2 128.8 133.5 1929.6 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 42.7 43.2 43.6 44.1 44.6 45.1 45.5 46.0 46.5 47.0 848.9 TOTAL 186.3 190.4 194.6 198.9 203.3 207.9 212.7 217.5 222.6 227.8 3724.5 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST 186.3 190.4 194.6 198.9 203.3 207.9 212.7 217.5 222.6 227.8 3724.5 DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 138.6 137.5 136.5 135.4 134.4 133.5 132.5 131.6 130.7 129.9 2794.1 NOTE: *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.1 8.1.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation Base Case Plan Summary: Continuation of present diesel generation 1) 2) Community Preference: The villagers of St. George recognize that diesel generation is the only technologically feasible way of generating electricity today. Therefore, their interests are in seeing the most efficient use of the system. Reliability of power supply is regarded as basic to the village's needs. Environmental Considerations: i) Air Quality: Exhausting combustion gases releases a small amount of pollutants to the local environment, but the impact is minimal. ii) Noise: The exhaust stacks from the generator produce a considerable amount of noise. The installation of more effective mufflers would reduce the noise level. iii) Water Quality: No impact. iv) Fish and Wildlife Impacts: No known impact. v) Terrestrial Impacts: There is no impact on vegetation or soils. vi) Land Use and Ownership Status: All leases and permits are in place. 8.3 8.1.4 Base Case Technical Evaluation The continued operation of the central diesel electric power plant in St. George is expected to conform to the following: 1. High Reliability. Diesel electric is a well proven well understood technology with a successful history in rural Alaska. Backup generation allows maintenance of the generators to be performed without major interruption of electrical power. Occasional system downtime is expected for distribution system maintenance. Safety. A small risk is realized by the storage and handling of fuel oil. Normal risks associated with electrical power are also present. Availability. There are no indications that spare parts will become difficult to obtain in the future. The availability of fuel to the power plant depends on the reliability of transportation to the village. 8.4 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8.2.1 General Description The Alternate Plan A for St. George is the installation of a waste heat recovery system at the existing central electric power plant, with the following features: 1. Jacket water heat recovery equipment installed on the 300 KW and two 100 KW generators. 2. A distribution system consisting of pumps, piping and valves to deliver the ethylene glycol heat transfer fluid to the heated buildings and return it to the power plant. 3. Heating equipment installed in the following buildings: School NMFS Equipment Shed NMFS Heavy Equipment Garage NMFS Garage Buildings 4. A control system that automatically regulates the Supply of heat to the buildings, and rejects any surplus waste heat to the engine radiators. 8.2.2 Alternate A Cost Analysis Table 8.2 presents the itemized, estimated cost to install the jacket water heat recovery system. ESTIMATED HEAT RECOVERY COSTS Project Location Generators (kw) Estimated total kwh generated Generators equipped with heat recovery equipment CALCULATED VALUES Average Generation Rate Percent of On-Line Capacity Maximum Jacket Water Heat Recovery Percent Jacket Water Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Utilized MAJOR COST ITEMS 1. Main piping 900 feet x $120/ft. 2. Heat Recovery Equipment 3. Circulating Pumps 4. Heaters and Miscellaneous Hardware 5. Contingencies (30%) 6. Base Cost 7. Project Management (5%) 8. Engineering (10%) 9. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST 10. O & M COST 11. Recovery Efficiency Table 8.2 8.6 St. George 100,100,100,300 467,000 kwh/yr 100,100,300 53 kw 27% 10400 Btu/min 43% -270X106 BtuH .270X106 BtuH 108,000 37,500 19,600 25,500 57,200 247,800 12,400 24,800 285,000 1.69/MMBtu 5065 Btu/kwh The installaticn cost of the heat recovery system was estimated t> be $285,000. The system value was amortized over a 10 year period. The cost of fuel oil normally used for space heating, which was offset by the captured waste heat, was 310.74/MMBTU, based on a fuel oil cost of $1.45/gallon. Operation and maintenance costs were calculated to be $1.69/MMBTU waste feat captured, Tabie 8.3 presents the itemized present value analysis of the plan, for the 2C year study period. The discounted net benecit of the Systen was 3391,500. 8.2.3 Social and Environmental Evaluaticn Alternate Plan A Summary: Waste hect Capture from existing generators for sale to Major consumers. 1) Communi:y Prefecence: The villagers of St. George recognize that «he installation of waste heat will improve the efficiency of fuel use in the community. The sale of waste heat will help lessen the effect of rising fuel pric:s on the cost of electricity. Installation of the waste heat captur? system will require local expertise and should provide a number of jobs during the constrictio1 phase. The system should operate with minimal maintenance although one part time person would b»2 required until the system has been tested and -nitial minor problems have been solved. 8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS EXTRA COSTS BENEFITS NET BENEFITS DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS 1982 47.3 66.1 37.9 151.2 151.2 151.2 oooo~w oe oooon 1983 47.3 68.7 38.4 154.4 154.4 149.9 oooo"w . 8 « OOCOWw 1984 47.3 71.4 38.9 157.6 157.6 148.5 1984 37.6 50.9 13.3 12.2 ST GEORGE PLAN 2 ALTERNATE A Dwwn7whwre OoOWMUFNY OAM WH 160.8 147.2 1985 37.6 52.8 15.2 13.5 Dwmn fro PONNYO oe NMwWOWAD 164.2 145.9 1986 37.7 54.7 17.1 14.7 1987 47.3 80.0 40.3 167.6 167.6 144.6 1987 37.7 56.7 19.0 15.9 NOTE: *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.3 1988 47.3 83.1 40.8 171.2 171.2 143.3 1988 37.8 58.8 21.0 17.1 1989 47.3 86.2 41.3 174.8 174.8 142.1 1989 37.8 61.0 23.1 18.3 1999 47.3 89.5 41.7 178.5 178.5 140.9 1990 37.9 63.2 25.3 19.4 1991 47.3 92.8 42.2 182.4 182.4 139.8 1991 37.9 65.5 27.5 20.5 6°8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS EXTRA COSTS BENEFITS NET BENEFITS DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS 1992 47.3 96.3 42.7 186.3 186.3 138.6 1992 38.0 67.8 29.8 21.6 1993 47.3 99.9 43.2 190.4 190.4 137.5 1993 38.0 70.3 32.2 22.6 1994 47.3 103.6 43.6 194.6 194.6 136.5 1994 38.1 72.8 34.7 23.6 ST BERRSS ALTERNATE A 1995 47.3 107.5 44.1 198.9 198.9 135.4 1995 38.1 75.4 37.2 24.6 1996 47.3 111.4 44.6 203.3 203.3 134.4 1996 38.2 78:21 39.9 25.6 1997 47.3 11556 45.1 207.9 207.9 133.5 1997 38.2 80.8 42.6 26.6 NOTE: *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.3 (continued) 1998 47.3 119.8 45.5 212-7 212.7 132.5. 1998 38.3 83.7. 45.4 27.5 1999 47.3 124.2 46.0 227..5) 217.5 131.6 1999 38.3 86.7 48.4 28.4 2000 47. 128% 46. eens Dn Ow 222.6 130.7 2000 33.4 89.8 51.4 29.3 2001 47.3 133'.5 47.0 22/28 227.8 12979 2001 38.4 93.0 54.5 30.2 TOTA 946. 1929. 848. 3724. WO DO 3724.5 2794.1 TOTA 684. 1261. SITs 391. WM COW HF 2) 8.2.4 Environmental Considerations: i) ii) iii) iv) vi) Air Quality: There will be a reduction in fuel use in the village resulting in reduction of hydrocarbon, monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. Noise Levels: No impact. Water Quality: There would be a minor impact if a major leakage occurred in the coolant system. Fish and Wildlife Impacts: None. Terrestrial Impacts: Will be minimal during the installation of the distribution system and will be restricted to the village site. Land use and Ownership Status: It is assumed that the village will make the necessary arrangements for the right of way requirements for the distribution system. Alternate Plan A Technical Evaluation Operation of the waste heat recovery system in St. George, in conjunction with the central power plant, is expected to conform to the following expectations: 1. High Reliability. The system utilizes simple, reliable components that are readily available "off the shelf" from a variety of sources. Safety. A well maintained system has a very low hazard potential. 8.10 3. Availability. All components needed are available immediately. The systen is relatively easy to implement. 8.3 Alternate B 8.3.1 General Description The Alternate Plan B for St. George is the installation of individual 2 KW wind generators at 20 private residences. Each wind generator would be intertied with the electrical utility connection to the homes. 8.3.2 Alternate B Cost Analysis The estimated installation cost of each wind generator is $35,000. Included are the wind generator, tower, utility intertie, controls, wiring, labor, and shipping. Table 8.4 presents the itemized present value analysis for the 20 year period. The system cost was amoritized over 10 years. The operation and maintenance costs were estimated to be 5¢/KWH. The electricai power output of the wind generators was estimated to average 25% of the capacity rating. 8.3.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation Alternative Plan B Summary: Wind Turbine Generators 1) Community Preference: Although much interest was expressed by St. George residents, reservations were held about the reliability of wind-powered generators. ; 8o11 GT: -8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL ' WIND GENERATION INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST ‘ 1982 47.3 66.1 37.9 151.2 ooo ooo 151.2 151.2 1983 47.3 68.7 38.4 154.4 ooo eiret ooo 154.4 149.9 NOTE: 1984 47.3 58.5 31.9 137.7 237.3 223.6 kkk ST GEORGE PLAN 3 ALTERNATE B 1985 1986 1987 47.3 47.3 47.3 61.0 63.5 66.1 Ba03 32.8 33.3 140.6 143.6 146.7 82.1 82.1 8251 175 17.5 14.5 99.6 99.6 99.6 ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.4 1988 47.3 68.8 33.8 149.9 1990 47.3 74.5 34.7 156.5 1991 47. rhs 35. 159. WONrM Fw 82. 17. 99. our 259.5 198.9 co . bh Ww DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL ° WIND GENERATION INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 1992 80.5 35 ay 163.5 82. 17. 99. Hore 263.1 195.7 1993 47.3 83.7 36.2 167.1 82. 17. 99, Hore 266.7 192.7 NOTE: 1994 47.3 87.0 36.6 170.9 270.5 189.7 ST GEORGE PLAN 3 ALTERNATE 8 1995 47.3 90.4 37.1 174.8 274.4 186.8 1996 47.3 93.9 37.6 178.8 1997 47. Di. 38. 182. WOODW 82. 17. 99. Dore 282.5 181.3 ***k ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.4 (continued) 1998 47.3 101.4 38.5 187.2 286.8 178.7 1999 47.3 105.3 39.0 191.6 2000 47.3 109.4 39.5 196.2 2001 47.3 113. 40. 200. oon 82. Lvs 99; anne 300.5 171.3 TOTAL 946. 1633. 722, 3307. ONOO 1477, 315; 1792. 1 fr 5100.0 3818.8 2) 8.3.4 Environmental Considerations: i) Air Quality: No impact. ii) Noise Levels: Low. iii) Water Quality: No impact. iv) Fish and Wildlife Impacts: No impact. v) Terrestrial Impacts: Minimal. vi) Land use and Ownership Status: Permission from the NMFS would be required before the project could proceed. Alternate A Technical Evaluation The operation of the wind generator system at St. George is expected to conform with the following: 1. Low Reliability. Past experience with wind generation systems in Alaska has shown that reliability and survivability in the extreme Alaska weather conditions is low. The current state of the technology has not advanced sufficiently to expecte better performance at this time. The intermittent nature of the wind requires full diesel backup to be on-line, in parallel, with the wind generator. Safety. Potential hazards exist from tower collapse, blow down, or thrown blade. Availability. All components of the system available off the shelf. 8.14 9.0 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Sn erence enarpie nee eee Table 9.1 summarizes the village plans, the associated present worth analysis, and any non-electric benefits. Table 9.1 ST. GEORGE Energy Source Base Case | Alternative A] Diese Diesel and | $2,794, 100 iat ss ad Present Wort Electrica Direct power generation costs, excluding administrative costs, are presented in Table 9.2 for each energy plan. Table 9.2 nergy Base Case ternative A Alternative B Production Plan 1 Cost Plan 2 Cost Plan 3 Cost between (kwh/yr.) (¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) ’ ° Fi e 1983 479,500 32.20 32.20 32.20 1984 485,700 32.45 29.71 48.86 1985 491,900 32.69 26.60 48.83 1986 498,000 32.97 29.54 48.84 1987 504,000 33.25 29.48 48.87 1988 510,000 33.57 29.45 48.92 1989 515,900 33.88 29.40 48.98 1990 521,800 34.21 29.36 49,08 1991 527,800 34.56 29.35 49.17 1992 533,600 34.91 29.33 49.31 1993 539,500 35.29 29.32 49.43 1994 545,400 35.68 29.32 49.60 1995 551,300 36.08 29.33 49.77 1996 557,300 36.48 29.32 49.96 1997 563,200 36.91 29.35 50.16 1998 569,200 37.37 29.39 50.39 1999 575,100 37.82 29.40 50.63 2000 581,200 38.30 29.46 50.88 2001 587,200 38.79 29.51 Stsc3 —_—_—_—_____—_—————————ee > ee Table 9.3 presents the plans for the village, in rank of recommended preference. The recommended action appropriate to each alternative is listed as well. Table 9.3 Energy Plan Alternative Recommended Action Alternative A - Waste Heat Initiate a feasibility Capture study for waste heat recovery. Estimated cost of feasibilty study $12,000 - $15,000. Base Case - Continued Investigate operation for Operation of Central potential of improved Power Plant generation efficiency. Estimated cost of study at $10,000 - $12,000 Alternative B — Wind Not economically or tech-— Power nically feasible. Additional Recommendations Weatherization No resource assessment or -building insulation feasibility study -building envelope indicated; immediate action infiltration required to bring Energy -improved combustion Audit and/or weatherization program to this community. 9.2 Reconnaissance studies are necessarily preliminary in nature, however, it is apparent that there is great potential for a waste heat capture system in St. George. Sale of the waste heat will realize increased revenues to the utility which will decrease the cost of production for electricity. Currently (1981-82) electricity costs 14¢ per KWH based on $1.26 a gallon for fuel and includes distribution and overhead costs. However, this cost is subsidized by National Marine Fisheries and the estimated true cost of electricity is approximately 48¢ per KWH. The fuel is supplied by National Marine Fisheries and barged to St. George from the distribution center in Seattle. The computer model used in the reconnaissance study projected that the 1982-83 cost of production for electricity will be approximately 31.95¢ per KWH. The study suggested that a waste heat capture system would be installed, and become operational in 1983-84. It was assumed that the waste heat would replace fuel oil, which costs $1.45 per gallon, used for space heating. Based on this assumption, the cost of production for electricity would be reduced from 32.45¢ to 29.71¢ per KWH. Therefore it is recommended that a waste heat capture system be installed. The reconnaissance study estimates that the system has the potential to save up to 9,000 gallons of fuel oil in the first full year of operation. 9.3 APPENDIX. See Section 3.0 (Methodology) of the Main Report: RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR THE VILLAGES OF Aniak, Atka, Chefornak, Chignik Lake, Cold Bay, False Pass, Hooper Bay, Ivanof Bay, Kotlik, Lower and Upper Kalskag, Mekoryuk, Newtok, Nightmute, Nikolski, St. George, St. Marys, St. Paul, Toksook Bay, and Tununak. PROPERTY OF: Alaska Power Authority 334 W. 5th Ave. Anchorage, Alaska 99501