HomeMy WebLinkAboutScammon Bay Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements & Alternatives 4-1981VIL-N Alaska Power Authority
005 LIBRARY COPY
Scam RECONNAISSANCE STUDY
OF
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES
FOR
SCAMMON BAY
Report Summary
April, 1981
by
Northern Technical Services
and
Van Gulik and Associates
Anchorage, Alaska
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY bate g :
RECONNAISSANCE STUDY
OF
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES
FOR
SCAMMON BAY
Report Summary
April, 1981
by
Northern Technical Services
and
Van Gulik and Associates
Anchorage,Alaska
ERRATUM
In the Introduction to this summary report, the second para- graph, first item on the first page should read as follows:
It was necessary to assume that the cost of diesel fuel would increase at a rate of 3.5% per year above the inflation rate.
Introduction
As you read this report, you will see that the results generally
favor energy conservation (including the use of waste heat from
diesel generators) with existing systems, as opposed to conver-
sion to renewable energy alternatives. These results do not
mean that renewable energy sources cannot be used in your com-
munity, but rather that, under the conditions and assumptions
used in the study, the alternatives appear to be at least as
expensive as diesel generation as well as somewhat higher in
risk. The above-mentioned conclusions are best estimates based
on reconnaissance work in your area. This work was essential to
predict the cost using other sources of energy. The conclusions
are based on past experience, present costs (of fuel, materials
and labor) and estimates of what might reasonably be expected to
occur in future years.
Some of the assumptions which had to be made in order to perform
the economic analysis of the ditferent alternatives include the
following:
* It was necessary to assume that the cost of diesel fuel
would increase at a rate of 3.5% per year.
* It was necessary to assume that the growth of the com-
munity's population would increase at roughly the same
rate that it has in past years and that the increase in
community energy consumption would follow that rate of
growth.
* It was necessary to assume that the costs associated
with maintenance and operation of an alternative energy
conversion system would be an integral part of the annual
cost.
It was necessary to base cost estimates on present
(state-of-the-art) technology since it is virtually
impossible to predict future technical advances in sys-
tems for the conversion of alternative energy resources
into useful electricity.
It was necessary to assume that most people would pre-
fer continuously available electricity and that they
would probably not be ready to accept the inconvenience
of intermittant power (for instance, doing without elec-
tricity when there was too little wind for their wind
generator to produce electricity.)
It was necessary to assume that most people would
prefer that a central "utility" provide them with elec-
tricity rather than installing and operating their own
system.
If any of the above assumptions prove to be inaccurate or if
their validity changes -- and this could easily happen in future
years as the costs of the existing systems continue to increase
-- alternatives which presently do not appear to be economically
or technically feasible may become real options. Some examples
of changes which could result in more favorable economics for
the use of energy alternatives include the following:
Fuel prices in the community could increase at faster
rate than that assumed in this investigation.
People in the community might decide to maintain and
operate alternative energy conversion systems themselves,
perhaps even trading their services within the community
for subsistance commodities rather than cash.
New inventions or improvements on present technology
might make the cost of using an alternative energy source
much less expensive than is presently indicated.
eee eee
What this report means, then, is that
* Energy conservation is certain to lead to some savings
of energy and money. Energy conservation measures will
continue to minimize costs in future years, no matter
what sources of heat and electric power are in use.
* There are some alternatives (presented in the summary,
next section) which appear to be worthy of further
investigation at this time.
* It will be necessary to continue to look for ways to
make the use of other alternative energy sources
practical.
It is important that you, the people who live in the community,
and others with an interest in the community and the region
(including government leaders and planners), read this report
with the previous points in mind. You are most familiar with
your region and can, with appropriate technical and financial
support, make the best
authors of this report
you will take the time
here and point out any
be assured that future
decisions tor your energy future. The
and the Alaska Power Authority hope that
to comment on the information presented
alternative ideas. In this way, we can
planning for energy projects will lead to
the best possible options for your community.
It should be noted that the information presented here is
extracted from a much more detailed report "Reconnaissance Study
of Energy Requirements and Alternatives for Togiak, Goodnews
Bay, Scammon Bay and Grayling" and that additional detailed
information is available.
The Community of Scammon Bay
Scammon Bay is an Eskimo community of about 232 people located
in the Yukon Delta on the east coast of Alaska approximately 140
miles northwest of Bethel. The community lies between the
Askinuk Mountains, to the south, and the Kun River, to the
north.
The community is accessible by air year round and has a 2,800
foot gravel airstrip and a nearby seaplane base. There are six
scheduled round trips from Bethel to Scammon each week. United
Barge Lines, Black Navigation, and the Northstar III all have
serviced the community in the summer months and bring in the
annual fuel and supply shipments. Privately owned fishing boats
allow the Scammon Bay residents to travel to fishing areas on
the Black River and the Yukon. Snow machines are the primary
mode of winter surface transportation.
The village economy is based upon commercial fishing and
experienced some set-backs in recent years:
The village has a vigorous economy based
on commercial fishing, but the past three
years, has been unable to generate funds due
to predominate southerly winds that drive the
fish off-shore and away from the Black
River set net sites. The village's fleet
is not mobile, and cannot easily venture
into the drift fisheries in the south mouth
of the Yukon River due to the size of their
boats. Many families that did not rely on
welfare in the past have now turned to
welfare. No other economic opportunity has
developed in the village to replace income
from fishing. (Ref. H. Sparck, Nunam-
Kitlutsitsti)
Other cash income in the village consists ot jobs with the city,
airport maintenance, the stores, the BIA school, and state high
school, plus assistance payments. The average annual household
income (for an average of 4.7 members to a household) in 1977
was $8,855. It is likely that the annual household income to be
reported in the 1980 census figures will reflect the recent
decline in fish catches. Subsistence hunting and fishing are
important to the local economy, as is the cottage industry
consisting of basket making and ivory carving.
The population of Scammon Bay has shown a steady growth in past
years with a recent increase in growth rate.
Scammon Bay Energy Use
The input energy and end use for Scammon Bay is shown in Table
1. The data presented in these charts are based on 1979 energy
consumption levels which is the last year tor which complete
data was available for this study. The major oil consumers in
the village are the Alaska Village Electrical Co-op, BIA school,
the residential and commercial buildings which use oil for
heating, and the new state high school. No data was available
on the new high school; it had just begun operations approxi-
mately one month prior to our reconnaissance visit. Both the
high school and the BIA school were generating electric power
because the AVEC system could not meet the demands of. both
schools. With present capacity, AVEC can serve only the village
and neither of the two schools. The AVEC plant is located
approximately 1000 feet from the high school and the BIA school.
This large distance precludes use of waste capture and distri-
bution as an alternative means of reducing energy consumption in
the village.
Other energy users include the city, primarily for building heat
and preheating the water supply system and a National Guard unit
which uses some small amounts of oil and electrical power.
ENERGY INPUT AND END USE FOR SCAMMON BAY
Numbers in parentheses () are (106 Btu)
| ENERGY
FORM DIESEL/ GASOLINE/
END #1 OIL AVGAS PROPANE ELECTRICITY
USE Gallons Gallons Pounds Kilowatt Hours
Conversion to Elec- 31,0001 67,1002
| tricity (4185.0) (229.0)
Residential and 34,700 10,0003 107,5004
small commercial (4684.5) (216.7) (366.7)
space and water
heating
(mnon-transportation)
Municipal and other 6,000 | 15,4004
public (810.0) (52.6)
(non-transportation)
Military 2,300 9004
(non-transportation) (310.5) (3.1)
Transportation 200 28,000
(27.0) (3500.0) Cs |
BIA School 29,000 78,5004
(non-transportation) (3915.0) (267.9)
L SaaS
NOTES:
l Gross generation from 31,000 gallons fuel oil was 269,300 Kwh for a conversion effi-
ciency of 22.0%
2 Power consumed by the utility for station service (lights,
system distribution losses > WwW Propane is used solely for cooking.
Net utility electrical sales in 1979 were 269,300 Kwh.
TABLE 1
fuel pumping, etc.) and
Propane is used in the village primarily for cooking. Gasoline
is used for snowmobiles and fishing boats. There is no evidence
that driftwood was used for home heating.
The energy consumption for home heating on a per household
basis, was approximately 680 gallons per year. This is equiva-
lent to the rate at which energy was consumed in the town of
Goodnews Bay for home heating and is below recently published
consumption figures for small Alaskan villages. In spite of
this apparent low consumption, there is room for improvement in
reduction of energy consumption in the village by means of
conservation measures.
The AVEC generators at Scammon Bay had an energy conversion
etficiency of 22.3%. Station service and distribution losses
amounted to approximately 25% of the gross power generated.
There was concern at the time of the reconnaissance visit that
there were problems within the distribution system. This
possibility is supported by both the inability to serve the
larger loads in the village and the apparent high distribution
losses in the system.
Waste heat can be recovered from the diesel generators providing
electrical power to the village, but the location of the gener-
ators relative to the large heat loads such as the schools,
forces the economics of a waste heat capture system to be
marginal. Building heating energy requirements can be reduced
by improved insulation in the building walls. One building
observed had no insulation in the ceiling. Improvement in com-
bustion conversion etticiency could also result in reduced oil
consumption.
Existing Power Facilities
All electricity in Scammon Bay is diesel generated. The commu-
nity's generating capacity is summarized in the following
table:
Tvs LLAGE OWNER NO. SIZE MAKE/MODEL VOLTAGE TOTAL
Scammon Bay AVEC 1 . 75 KATO 67SU9D (1200 120/240,198 125*
1 50 . KATO 40 sugD 120/240,18
BIA 1 35 60 |
H.S. : 1 100 NEWAGE-STAMFORD 120/240,18 100
KEY: * Generator to be changed to 100kw with engine speed increased to 1800 RPM.
Existing Heating Facilities
The largest consumers of fuel for space heating in the communi-
ty are the schools. The BIA school uses oil-fired boilers to
heat water for distribution to its building's circulating hot
water systems. Water for domestic use and showers is heated
through heat exchangers from the same boilers. The new state
high school, which has only recently come into use, has a
heating system which utilizes both oil-fired boilers and an oil
fueled hot air furnace. The same school has additional boilers
which use oil to heat domestic hot water.
These large consumers of oil for hot water heating systems are
prime candidates for receipt of waste or cogenerated heat from
power production.
Residential and other small buildings within the community are
generally heated with simple drip type 50-100,000 Btu oil burner
stoves. Heat output from these stoves is difficult to control;
the lowest settings generally provide more heat than is required
in the months with the fewest heating degree days when only
minimal heat is required. Many homes make use of oil-fired cook
stoves for space heating in addition to cooking and water
heating. Homes in this community generally have no means of
heat distribution other than radiation and convection from the
stove itself.
Summary of Existing Conditions
Scammon Bay is presently dependent upon fuel oil for both space
and water heating and electrical generation. In the past, resi-
dents of Scammon Bay used local willow brush for heating fuel,
and two residents had a windmill which supplied them with elec-
tricity before the advent of AVEC genration. Fuel is usually
delivered by barge and availability is sensitive to supply
disruptions. The community consumed a total of 103,100 gallons
of oil for space heating in the past year; 34,700 gallon of this
amount were used for residential and small commercial heating.
Homes are generally in need of weatherization which would lead
to a significant savings in fuel payments. 269,400 KWh of
electricity were generated here. Of this amount, 107,500 KWh
were for residential consumption and 94,800 KWh were for govern-
ment and school use. The peak system demand was about 75 KW
during 1979.
Electric bills cost the residents of Scammon Bay about 10% of
their annual household cash income, while heating fuel takes
about 13% of their income. Thus, the total household cash out-
lay for energy in Scammon Bay is presently 23% of the annual
cash income. :
Projects Which Will Influence Scammon Bay's Energy Needs
The Department of Housing and Urban Development has scheduled
twenty-four new housing unit starts for Federal FY 1981. The
forecast assumption was based on these units being occupied
during 1982.
Further, a new state high school has recently been completed.
Calendar year 1981 will be the first full year of operation.
POPULATION (Y)
240 7S FIGURE |, 7 va
SCAMMON BAY 7
7
200 +—
160 TT
CURVILINEAR PROJECTION
120 +—
80 —+— . - x X ACTUAL DATA, ISER & U. S. CENSUS
. ——— PROJECTION
40 4—
70 YEARS FROM 1930 (Xx)
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 YEAR
supply disruptions. The community consumed a total of 103,100
gallons of oil for space heating in the past year; 34,700 gallon
of this amount were used for residential and small commercial
heating. Homes are generally in need of weatherization which
would lead to a significant savings in fuel payments. 269,400
KWh of electricity were generated here. Of this amount, 107,500
KWh were for residential consumption and 94,800 KWh were for
government and school use. The peak system demand was aout 75
KW.
Electric bills cost the residents of Scammon Bay about 10% of
their annual household cash income, while heating fuel takes
about 13% of their income. Thus, the total household cash
outlay tor energy in Scammon Bay is presently 23% of the annual
cash income.
Community Meeting
At Scammon Bay it was appropriate to hold two community meet-—
ings, the first one being held with the Traditional Council.
Council members present were Teddy Sundown, Tom Tunutmoak,
Francis Agachak, Anna Kasayuli and Andrew Kasayuli. Anna
Kasayuli acted as translator. Project personnel had contacted
the Mayor, Homer Hunter, by telephone to notify him of the
pending visit and to request that the meeting be announced.
Further meeting notification consisted of calling on the CB just
prior to meeting.
The use of electric appliances was discussed and the problem of
the high cost of electricity and heating fuel was also
addressed. Appliance use ranged from minimal (refrigerator,
treezer, CB and lights) to fairly heavy (television, refri-
gerator, treezer, toaster, electric stove, microwave, electric
washer and electric dryer).
The council members generally supported the concept of a
hydroelectric plant at Scammon Bay. The Council indicated that
they would like to run such a plant themselves and that they
would hire someone to act as plant manager.
Francis Aguchak and his brother had a windmill a few years ago,
but they stopped using it after AVEC made reliable electricity
available at what was then a relatively low cost.
A second meeting consisted of presenting the energy reconnais-
sance concept to members of the community who had gathered at
the municipal office building. The response to the project was
quite favorable.
Alternative Energy Resources for Scammon Bay
Energy Conservation
Energy conservation is usually one of the most cost effective
methods for reducing energy consumption and costs. Energy
conservation herein means retro-fitting or modifying any
existing heat process. This can be done by increasing combus-
tion efficiency, or by reducing the losses from the heat using
process. Villages in western Alaska can benefit from the energy
conservation practices which relate primarily to weatherization
and improved combustion efficiency.
The homes in the study villages averaged 750 square feet in
size, were single story, built on piles, with exposed floors.
Some of them had skirts around the piling to reduce cold air
circulation under the building. If these buildings are occupied
by a family present during the day, then oil consumption is
typically on the order of 150 gallons per month in the colder
months, resulting in heating costs close to $300. The technology
to reduce energy consumption in these homes exists and could be
economically applied. The requirements are simple and there
should be no environmental or health impacts.
Generator Waste Heat
AVEC generation at Scammon Bay presently produces about 3,260 x
106 Btu/year waste heat. Of this amount, about 2,090 x 106
Btu/year are recoverable. This figure is comparable to the
2,340 x 106 Btu/year of heat delivered to the residential
sector (stove output) or the 2,350 x 106 Btu/year output from
the BIA school's boilers. Transmission
greater difficulties in distribution of
the other communities, but the resource
consideration.
Wind
Wind recordings nearest Scammon Bay are
military site which is located about 14
Bay. The two sites were separated from
distances here impose
waste heat than those at
is worthy of further
taken at Cape Romanzof
miles west of Scammon
one another by the Aski-
nuk Mountains. Winds recorded at Romanzof originate generally
from all directions, with a slight preference for the north-
easterly direction. Thus, Scammon Bay winds may experience a
somewhat higher wind regime. Mean winds recorded for Cape
Romanzof over the period from 1953-1970
Month Mph
January 16.7
February 17.0
March 14.7
April 15.3
May 11.7
June 9.7
July 9.1
August 10.7
September 12.3
October 13.2
November 15.7
December 16.3
Mean Annual 13.5
are as follows:
Local people confirm high winds and long durations. A small
windmill for private generation was operated successfully at
Scammon Bay prior to availability ot centralized (AVEC) genera-
tion. Based on interpretation of Cape Romanzof data, the wind
resource at Scammon Bay appears to be of sufficient magnitude and
duration to warrant further investigation as an alternative
source of energy for the community. Additional continuous data
recording for the specific site is indicated.
Hydro
The unnamed stream south of the village was assessed for power
potential. The drainage area above diversion dam is 1 square
mile.
U.S.G.S.
Coefficient Flow
Mean annual low monthly 0.2 cfs/mi2 0.2 cfs
Mean annual 1 1
Mean annual peak 10 10
At a point in town, draining an area of 2 sq. mi., the Alaska
Power Administration measured a discharge of 9 cfs on August 7,
1979. This converts to a unit runoff of 4.5 cfs/mi2, which
falls between the values read off the U.S.G.S. maps for mean
annual and mean annual peak flows. While this does little to
verify the computed flow values, it at least provides no reason
to reject them, since any August flow in this region is expected
to be somewhere between the mean annual and mean annual peak
flow.
The Administration also reports a local resident stating that the
lowest flows occur in July and highest flows occur in the fall
following fall rains. The low flow in July seems contrary to the
general flow relationships for the region and, in fact, this
information was apprarently ignored the hydroelectric potential
computations since they show July as having relatively high
potential. The report also states that the creek flows year
round and apparently has a high occurrence of springs in the
drainage resulting in relatively high flows during the winter
months. Based upon this information, it seems that an increase
in the mean annual low monthly and mean annual flow coefficients
is in order, however the magnitude is impossible to determine
without some winter stream flow data.
In July, 1980, the Corps of Engineers installed a Parshall Flume
on the stream as part of a separate study to evaluate the smald
hydroelectric power potential at Scammon Bay. The Corps has
correlated the measured flows to the dam site for the months of
July through October, 1980, and also reported estimates of mean
monthly flows for the remainder of the year. The mean annual
monthly flow for July and August was 2 cfs and for September and
October, 1.50 cfs. Since the flow was fairly uniform over this
period there apparently were no large or long-term rainfall
events that affected the mean for the month. Based on the Corps
estimates for the remainder ot the year, these values are
approximately equal to the mean annual flow. A comparison with
the above computed mean annual flow of 1 cfs leads support to
increasing the corresponding runoff coefficient. The Corps
estimated mean annual low monthly flow of 0.8 cfs is also higher
than the value computed by the regional analysis, as was expected
based on the report of springs in the area. The Corps estimate
of a mean annual peak flow of 10 cfs agrees with that found by
the regional analysis.
While the regional analysis shows good agreement with the pre-
liminary reports of the measured stream flow, further comparison
and conclusion about the applicability of the regional analysis
must await additional data reports.
Most recent information indicates little or no flow at Scammon
during the month of January. This stream has reasonably good
potential to provide power during the high flow months, but an
alternate source of power is required here for low flow months.
Solar
Solar incidence at Scammon Bay is concentrated in the summer
months. Although lacking in intensity, the daily solar input
from long summer daylight hours is considerable. Until annual
storage becomes technically and economically feasible, it is not
anticipated that solar energy will be competitive with other
energy sources for the production of power. However, housing
design can make use of passive solar input.
Energy Alternatives for Scammon Bay
The following is the only alternative plan that is proposed for
Scammon Bay.
Scammon Bay Alternative Plan
Scammon Bay has two near term available resources in close proxi-
mity to the village. These are a small hydro potential stream
‘and wind. The hydro potential has been analyzed by the Alaska
Power Administration and the Corps of Engineers. Based on infor-
mation received since the December, 1980 report by the Corps, an
energy scenario for this village has been developed which offers
a long-term plan for achieving some relief from high energy
costs.
The plan for Scammon Bay is to:
1. Install a 100 KW hydraulic turbine generator to be owned
and operated by the community.
2. Invest in modification of the electrical distribution to
a) permit the hydro and the diesel to operate in parallel,
b) allow the high school to deliver power to the BIA
school as well as to the utility grid, c) require the
schools to purchase hydro power from the community when
excess generation is available (at least six months
until the hydro generator can furnish all the necessary
power).
3. Encourage the high school to install waste heat capture
on the generators to provide at least a portion of the
heat load for the building.
Costs and Benefits of the Proposed Plan
Although the initial (capital) costs of the hydroelectric system
proposed for Scammon Bay are high, they are somewhat balanced by
the long project life (50 years assumed for financial analysis).
The addition of hydroelectric generation to Scammon Bay's present
system is expected to lead to a cost savings when compared to
continuation of present (diesel without hydroelectric) generation
practices.
Summary of Recommendations for Scammon Bay
Preterred Energy Alter-
native (in order of
earliest feasibility)
Recommended Resource Assessments
and Feasibility Studies
1. Energy conservation No resource assessment or feasibili-
- building insulation ty study indicated; immediate action
- building envelope required to bring Energy Audit and/
infiltration or weatherization program to this
« improved combustion community.
2. Hydroelectric with Confirm stream data (encourage Corps
diesel backup in low of Engineers to continue stream
tlow months gauging); develop elements of capi-
tal construction cost of project in
western Alaska; preliminary design
and detailed feasibility.
3. Waste heat capture at Can be implemented in conjunction
high school with hydroelectric alternative since
school generators would provide com-
munity backup and control BIA gener-
ation.
4. Wind energy conversion Installation of anemometers for
to be investigated at
later time for potential
to offset cost of stand-
by generation
necessary data (to confirm high vel-
ocities and consistent duration in
low flow hydro months).
PROPERTY OF; Alaska Power Authority 334 W. 5th Ave,