The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTidal Power Plant at Whittier AK 1977 PROPOSAL TIDAL POWER PLANT AT WHITTIER, ALASKA ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY Prepared for: LIBRARY COPIES ERDA Washington, DC 20545 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE!! Prepared by: Bernard Le Mehaute, D. Se. Frank B. Chmelik, Ph. D. Tetra Tech Proposal P-1749B February 1977 L INTRODUCTION 1. A number of schemes to harness the tides at Cook Inlet, Alaska have already been proposed (E. M. Wilson and M. C. Swales, 1970). All follow conventional lines of thinking. Additional investigations are presently being done under ERDA sponsorship. At the time this pro- posal is being prepared, the results and conclusions of the more re- cent investigations are not available. Tidal power presents a number of advantages of other sources of power. First, it is non-depletable; tidal power plants have a very long lifetime and require a small maintenance cost. They are non- polluting thermally, similar to hydroelectric power, since the energy which is recovered is the one which would eventually have been dissipated by friction. Finally, tidal power is probably the most dependable source of energy as its output depends upon the trajectories of celestial bodies which can be predicted centuries ahead. . However, in order to take full advantage of these characteristics, one must economically solve the following problems: 1. The head varies continuously with the moon's cycle while the ; demand follows a daily cycle. In order to alleviate this pro- blem, tidal power has to be harnessed either in parallel with other sources of energy or with pump storage, or again by constructing a dual pool system in order to obtain a guaranteed power supply and match power supply to the demand cycle. The head is relatively low. Therefore, the energy density is small, thus resulting in relatively bulky turbomachinery and large power plants. Tidal power exists in large quantity but very often, as in the case of Alaska, at a long distance from traditional centers of major consumption. By the grace of nature, Alaska presents tidal phenomena which could be advantageous in alleviating some of the problems previously de- scribed. The schemes which can be devised will: 3. 4. Provide energy continuously according to demand without resorting to pump storage, two pools, or alternate energy sources. The system will be very flexible and adapt pro- duction to the demand cycle even during peakloads, regardless of the tidal time.. It will guarantee provision of a large part of the total harnessable power. Permit operations under a larger average and relatively more constant head than in the single or two pool systems. This will increase the amount of energy available and decrease the cost per kw of the machinery and power plant. Make use of the energy locally as the adaptability of the power supply may permit us to install capital-intensive installations with the guarantee of obtaining the full use of processing plants without being subjected to unwanted energy supply fluctuations. . Provide power for the local area (southcentral Raibelt Area and Susitna River) where power requirements are increasing at.14% per annum. The issue of utilization of energy - may be addressed to another office of ERDA. It has been judged preferable to present two separate pro- posals keeping in mind that the first proposal, the present one, is addressed to the production of energy exclusively. The second one (summarized herewith as Appendix III) is addressed to the use of that energy. It has to be borne in mind that production and utilization are complementary. I. 2. The tidal cycle at Passage Canal (Prince Williams Sound) is prac- tically in complete opposition of phase (180°) with the tidal cycle in Turnagain Arm (Cook Inlet) (Figure 1). There is an unusually large elevation of the mid-water level within Cook Inlet. The two embay- ments are only 10 miles apart; separated by a wide, flat valley and a ridge called Portage Pass. Therefore, Prince Williams Sound could be considered as a low pool of practically infinite capacity. The construction of a channel between the two embayments will allow us to devise several schemes all giving more power and flexibility to any load cycle, regardless of the tidal time, than concepts based on tidal fluctuation within Cook Inlet only. First of all, tidal energy can be extracted from both directions. The construction of a dike sluice system within upper Cook Inlet will provide a high pool filled at every high tide. This high pool will be emptied towards lower Cook Inlet when the tide is low within Cook Inlet and towards Prince Williams Sound when the tide is high in Cook Inlet. At this time it happens that the tide is always low at Prince Williams Sound. A dual electrically connected power plant system go provides energy continuously or at demand regardless of the tidal cycle. This is achieved without pump storage, other energy sources, or a two-pool system. The possibility of using the two power plants alternatively (or at times in parallel) considerably enhances the amount of energy which can be produced since the turbines operate under a larger head than 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Figure 1 in the schemes based on only one tidal cycle. Even the two pool system gives less average head on the turbines, since when the high pool level decreases, the low pool level rises. In contrast, the level within Prince Williams Sound seems to remain relatively low during this time. _ This rationale should lead to a cost per kw of installed power (or per kwh of produced energy) not only cheaper than other tidal power installations, but competitive with other energy sources. Tetra Tech would like to propose to ERDA to investigate the schemes and various alternatives based on the construction of a channel linking Turnagain Arm and Passage Canal. I. TIDAL DIFFERENCES The NOAA tide tables for Cordova (Prince Williams Sound) and Anchor- age (Cook Inlet) for January, February, and March 1976 are presented herewith in Appendix I (Tables I. 1 and I.2.). A cursory look at these tables immediately indicates the phase dif- ference between the two tidal cycles. The tidal differences at Whittier (with respect to Cordova) and Sunrise inside Turnagain Arm (with respect to Anchorage) are also shown (Tables 1.3. andI.4.). Using these Tables, a plot of the diurnal tides at Sunrise and Whittier has been calculated for the period of January 1 to January 11, 1977 (Figure 2) based on the master stations at Cordova and Anchorage. The most significant results appear in Table l. In order to evaluate the exact amount of power available, it is neces- sary to relate the tidal elevations on both sides of Portage Pass as shown on Figure 2 with respect to a common datum. Unfortunately, the data which would permit us to obtain this information is not avail- able. The tidal gage elevations with respect to a common sea level datum, or geodetic netwark, are not givenin the tidal tables. From personal communication with Mr. Jim Hubbard of the Tide and Water Level Branch of NOAA, it was learned that, last summer, a geodetic survey party has made the necessary measurements which eventually will permit us to relate the tidal benchmarks at Anchorage to a common geodetic network. But a similar survey for the master station at Cordova has never been done, nor for any of the sub- stations which are needed: Sunrise and Whittier. The Tidal Tables give only the local tidal elevation with respect to the local mean lower low water (MLLW) and the local differences between MLLW and local MSL (Mean Sea Level). One knows (from mathematical modeling done at Tetra Tech) that the mean sea level is higher in upper 40 Ref:NOAA Tide table 1977 Anchorage pp 124 Cordova ppli6é Corrections pp 178-179 30 20 3 © 7 4 f ! mor UN WL WR RA A A ya DA at ! I Woy! ' My yt My AN IW yt a ae iyi ul TA | it | \l ATMA Wi! Vy \ yA uy My rol vile yt \ rly iy \! : F 4 : y ul ul UW | il il \ 0 "yoy 1 1 1 i 1 ’ Sunrise. Turnagain Arm ———-— Whilttler -10 Ist 2nd 3rd 4th Sth Time 6 th 7th 8B th 9th lOth FIGURE |. Times and heights of high and low water. Sunrise vs. Whittler Alaska. January, 1977 | TABLE 1 TIDAL DIFFERENCES: SUNRISE AND WHITTIER Whittier, Passage Canal Ref: CORDOVA Difference Range Mean Time _ Height Mean Diurnal Tidal hr. min. fel. ft. ft. Level HW. Lw. HW. LW. ft. -0.04 +0.02 -0.2 +0.1 9.8 12.3 6.4 Sunrise, Turnagain Arm Difference Range Mean Time Height Mean Diurnal Tidal hr. min. ft. ft. ft. Level HW. LW. HW. LW. ft. +0. 31 +111 4.0 -0.2 30. 3 33.3 17.1 Cook Inlet than it is at the entrance. The MSL at Turnagain Arm should be higher than at Passage Canal. Figure 2 is designed in assuming that the MLLW is the same on both sides of Portage Pass. This assumption gives an elevation of the MSL (Mean Sea Level) at Sunrise about 10 feet above the MSL at Whittier. This leads toa maximum head from Turnagain Arm to Passage Canal of about 34 feet. In the other direction, the head reaches 14 feet. The following determinations of power availability and energy supply are also based on this assumption. It would be particularly interesting at this time to comment upon the tidal phenomenology which leads to these characteristics and particularly on the time differences. It would appear a priori that this phase difference is due to: 1. The resonating effect within Cook Inlet. (A resonator system is always behind exitation. At resonance, the phase difference is 1/4 ). Inthis case, the exitation is the tidal motion at the entrance of Cook Inlet. ; 2. The time necessary for the tide to propagate within Cook Inlet. Appropriate mathematical models should permit us to obtain quanti- tative information leading to thorough understanding of the tidal mechanisms leading to such peculiarity. Ill. THE CHANNEL CHARACTERISTICS III. 1. Location The Tetra Tech scheme would necessitate the construction of a large canal linking the water of Turnagain Arm (Cook Inlet) and those of the Passage Canal near Whittier (Prince Williams Sound) Figure 3. The channel starts within Turnagain Arm where dredging will have to be done across the mud flats. It will be continued by digging Portage Valley to Portage Lake. This very flat, wide valley presents no special problems other than the ones due to the large amount of sedi- ment to be displaced. Portage Lake will become brackish. Therefore, the glaciers ice which reach the lake may be subjected to earlier melting. This should cause no major engineering problems. The main cost to bear may be at Portage Pass which is narrow but reaches an elevation of about 600 feet above sea level so requiring a large amount of excavation in rocks. Beyond Portage Pass, the Channel will follow a short sedimentary valley between steep rocky banks. The total length of the channel connecting the two embayments is 10 miles. The power plant can be built at any location along this channel but in order to minimize the volume of excavation, it will be advantageous to locate it towards Whittier. Ill.2. Design and Head Loss The sizing of this channel is determined by: \ 1. The scheme which is adopted. 2. The area of the tidal pool in Cook Inlet which is determined by the location of the dikes. 10 Il Sunrj|se —aT TT! | , & TURNAGAIN =~ canMen Ry \ LAKE \ X XY Portage wy (\ *. oe \ Ne Xv » 0, \ oN Vp YN Moraine 7 3 é . s PORTA ~ a LAKE é . PORTAGE PASS 5 IO MILES — Figure 3: 3. The guaranteed power which is required. 4. The head loss. 5. The cost and the difficulty of excavation. In order to minimize the head loss, the channel will have to be large and deep. For example, let us consider a 30 feet deep channel. By analogy, with existing projects, it is assumed that the economic velo- city is V = 7.5 ft/sec. The Chezy Formula yields: < u 8 bo = ao 2 n is the Manning coefficient (typically equal to 0.02 for excavated and dredged channel) R_ is the hydraulic radius (approximately equal to water depth d ) S is the energy slope approximately equal to = » where L is the total channel length ( L= 11 miles ) Then one finds S = aso and AH*7 feet. The total discharge capacity Q is proportional to width W ( Q=VDW). Therefore, a 30 feet deep channel which has a width of 1/2 miles will carry approximately 700,000 st? /sec. This channel would then be analogous to the largest rivers of the world. Eventhough such project seems to present a considerable amount of dredging and excavation, it is noticed that, everything being equal, such features are not unusual in hydropower practice. For example, if one compared this channel to the artificial channel which has been excavated along the Rhone River (France) between Donzere and Mondragon, one can establish the following comparison (Figures 4 and 5): 12 FI Figure 5: Donzere-Mondragon Donzere Mondragon Whittier Canal Width (feet) 450 -250 3,000 Depth (feet) 30 30 Discharge Q £t3/sec 45.000 700,000 Velocity (ft/sec) 5 - a Pa) Length (miles) 17 10 (plus dredging the mud flats) Head on the power between 27 and 16 feet (after plant (H ft) 60 head loss deduction) Excavation (below water level) 7 8 cu. yds. 3. 10 2. 10 Therefore, it is easily verified that the amount of excavation is in pro- portion to the power QH Ill. 3. Construction The large amount of excavation may be justified by the power avail- ability. However, it will still be a major engineering feat. Conven- tional methods could be used but considerable savings may be gained by using unconventional dredging and excavation techniques as have been considered in the past (Project Plowshare). The environmental problems associated with the project will also have to be justified by the pressing need for energy. The hardest part is Portage Pass. Portage Valley can easily and economically be excavated by hydraulic means. Once a breach has - been established between Turnagain Arm and Passage Canal, the hydraulic head is sufficient to create a controlled erosion process in the Valley which will carry all the material to Passage Canal at no cost. Passage Canalis 600 feet deep and would be the natural place to dispose the material. The erosion process can be continuously controlled by a system of gates or stop logs between the two -vater 15 embayments. This method of construction will save a considerable amount of dredging, excavation and transport. Nevertheless, the excavation of the cristaline metamorphic rocks at Portage Pass will have to be done by explosions. 16 © Donzére Channel Lower Dam Power Plant © Mondragon SCALE 5 : 10 km. SS Figure 4 Vs THE DIFFERENT SCHEMES The construction of the channel allows us to devise a large variety of potentially viable schemes. Eventhough it would appear that the elec- trically connected two power plant system offers the most energy and flexibility at minimum cost, it is worth considering all the options. These are schematically represented in the series under Figure 6. IV. 1. Channel Without a Dike (Figure 6, Solution 1) The tidal power plant could eventually use reversible turbines of the Rance type and tidal power could be extracted from both directions. In this case, there is no need for dikes inside Cook Inlet. Such con- cept could be built by phases over a long period of time by slowly enlarging the channel and adding turbines as needed. But the power is dependent upon tidal time since there is no pool reservoir. The project has to be combined with pump-storage systems so that the power is available whenever it is needed. IV.2. Dike - Channel - One Fower Plant (Figure 6) Combined with a dike in Cook Inlet creating a high pool which is filled at high tides, the power can always be made available either con- tinuously or at peak time upon demand. The system is then very flexible and adapted to the daily demand cycle. Figure 7 illustrates the potential head between the two embayments. The maximum amount of power which could be extracted is a function of area of the basin (i.e. , the location of the dike) and the head loss in the channel. Four locations are considered: a. The first one is between Bird Foint and Snipers Point near 17 8T- | Power ~=—4Plont \ / ~——~ 30 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Fioure 6. Scheme 1} Emptying Filling n a 2 vu 9 a x Tide at Cook Inlet Tide at Whittier Not to scale Figure 7 b. Sunrise (Figure 6, Solution 2a). The dike will be built in re- latively shallow water. The total area of the basin would then be about 30 square miles. As the level decreases, the mud flats will surface leaving a relatively small amount of water behind the dike. For the sake of calculation, itis assumed that the volume of water to be discharged in one tidal cycle is 10 feet deep, and averages 30 x 0.7 = 31 square miles between high and low levels. Therefore, the volume of water to be discharged during approximately 10 hours is: 7.56 x 10? £3 (ise., 2.1 10° £t?/sec). (It is assumed that the basin is filled during the remaining 2 hours of the tidal cycle as shown in Figure 7). If one assumes a maximum head loss in the channel of 7 feet, the average head is 19 feet. Then the average power is 350,000 kw insuring a production of 3 x 10? kwh/year. If the dike is built between Rainblow and Gull Point (Figure 6, Solution 2b), the basin area is approximately 70 square miles. Therefore, all things being equal, all the previous numbers have to be multiplied by the ratio a =2.3 . In particular, the discharge through the channel will average about 4. 8. 10° ft? / sec. Such a discharge necessitates in order to limit the head loss across section of about 30°'x 2,000 sq. ft. This seems to be feasible but the cost of excavation beyond that value may well be considered too high. Then the maximum power production will be 800. 000 kw. There is a high probability that much more can be obtained, but it is important to notice that there is a limitation to the power supply which is reached not so much because of the size of the pool which can be created within Cook Inlet, but rather by the maximum channel conveyance which is economically feasible. 20 Figure 6, Scheme 2a 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA 22 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Figure 6,.’ ‘ie me 2b re d. If now one considered two dikes, By and B;, built around Fire Island as was previously considered by Wilson (Figure 6, Solution 2c; Figure 8), one finds that the basin area is about 330 square miles (i.e. , all the numbers found in Section 2a should be multiplied by a factor of 11. The power average 3.85 x 10° kw and the energy 3.3, 1010 kwh/year or 33,000 Gwh/year. This could be compared to an energy of 12,500 Gwh/year found by Wilson based on the construction of the same dikes. Therefore, the additional cost of the channel should be justified by the near tripling of the power production and the added flexibility of the present power scheme. If instead of dikes By and B3, one built dikes By and Bs (Figure 6, Solution 2c; Figure 8) even more Power is made available as the pool also includes Knik Arm, In fact, referring to Section 3, it seems that one is limited by the size of the channel which can be economically excavated between the mountaineous river banks. Therefore, the guaranteed power is not limited in the case of dikes By and B, or Bi and B; by the amount of potential energy which is stored in the pool but by the conveyance of the channel as previously pointed out. A dike between West Foreland and East Foreland or between Nikishka and Kustatan nearby has also been Proposed (Figure 6, Solution 2d). The tidal pool would then cover more than 1,000 square miles insuring a power supply near 10" kw and a pro- duction close to 9, 10/0 kwh/year. However, before such project can be considered, one has to make sure that such an amount will not cut the tidal resonance short. Also, the channel Conveyenes limits the power which can be extracted from this pool. Because of the limit created by the channel, the following solutions will also be considered: 23 ¥Z 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Figure 6, Scheme 2c Ossessio CHICKALOON BAY Figure 8 25 92 Figure 6, Scheme 2c 1 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA £2 Figure 6, Scheme 2d Lf 30 “60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Iv. 3. Dike - Channel - Two Power Plants (Figure 6, Solution 3c, 3c!) When the tide is high in Cook Inlet, the power can be obtained from the power plant at Whittier as seen in the previous section. But when the tide in Cook Inlet is low and in Frince Williams Sound is high, the energy will rather be obtained by discharging the water from the high pool towards Cook Inlet instead of Frince Williams Sound. This scheme would require two power plants instead of one. The second power plant which may actually be the main power plant will be built in the dike within Cook Inlet. (It is pointed out that such a plant will not be subjected to the head loss due to the channel). Figure 9 illustrates such a concept. Therefore, it would seem that the creation of a large pool such as created by the dikes By and Bo or By and B, is justified by the amount of power which is created by discharging the high pool towards Cook Inlet. But the channel and the tidal power plants at Whittier offer the complementary advantage of guaranteeing a minimum power avail- ability at any time under a relatively larger head than in previously considered schemes. The head acting on the turbines either at Whittier or at Fire Island alternately, averages 24 feet due to the dual effect of discharging to- wards the low tide within Cook Inlet and the fact that the head is not subjected to any channel head loss during part of the cycle. Sub- sequently, an additional billion of kwh/year could be produced. of course, the two plants will be connected electrically and the transition from one to the other will be done progressively. During this transition phase, the head loss in the channel will decrease to a zero value, so adding an additional head of 7 feet, on the power plant at Whittier. The right balance between the use of the two plants would come from an optimization calculation, taking into account the excavating cost, 28 62 Figure 6, Scheme 3c 60 Miles GULF OF ALASKA Oc Figure 6, Scheme 3c " 0 30 60 Miles “GULF OF ALASKA COAL, FORESTRY WASTES, OR OTHER / SOURCES OF CARBON (C) HYDROGENATION PLANT HYDROCARBON FUELS® Cx Hzx, 2>1 ELECTROLYSIS PLANT 99% POWER 2» NH,, AMMONIA* NH,NO,, AMMONIUM NITRATE HNO,, NITRIC ACID REFORMING PLANT TIDAL POWER| HYDROELECTRIC * POWER PLANT 1% POWER CRYOGENIC PLANT “THE PROCESS MAY BE BIASED TO FAVOR PRODUCTION OF EITHER AMMONIA OR HYDROCARBON FUELS co, He ——~— TRACES Figure 11-1, TIDAL-POWER-DRIVEN CHEMICAL PLANT shortages. Although other hydrocarbon fuels could and have been used in ammonia and fertilizer production, commercial processes mot using hydrocarbon feed would extend the availability of domestic fossil fuel resources and ensure an adequate supply of fertilizer to the agriculture industry. Apoendix A gives a brief analysis of ammonia production from tidal energy. Alaska has a developed coal mining industry and proven resources in the Cook Inlet area. Therefore, hydrogenation of ecw) produced coal or gaseous hydrocarbon fuels could be considered to convert the hydrogen to an alternate energy form. Appendix B gives a short discussion of possible hydrogenation processes. Forestry wastes are another potential source of carbon for a tidal-energy-powered synthetic fuels plant at Cook Inlet. The costs of converting tidal energy into chemical feedstocks and transporting these products to refineries and chemical processing plants in the U.S. may be higher than the chemical process tech- nologies in commercial use today. However, because tidal energy is an infinitely renewable energy resource, the economics of this energy alternative should be evaluated under the economic scenario in which petroleum resources are expected to decrease and prices increase rapidly over the next 30 to 50 years. WORK STATEMENT : Current studies being supported by ERDA to define available sources of tidal energy should be complemented with investigations on how to use these renewable energy sources. Specifically, Tetra Tech proposes to perform the following studies to support tidal energy development: 1. Review in detail the various alternatives for using the mechanical power produced from tidal energy. This investi- gation will include detailed investigations of: @ Acyclic DC generators and conventional AC generators for production of supporting electrical energy. e Electrolytic hydrogen production. @ The shipping and storage of hydrogen either in the liquid or gaseous state or as metal hydrides. e The use of hydrogen as a chemical feedstock for the production of ammonia and ammonia compounds. e The hydrogenation of coal, forestry wastes,’ or other carbonaceous resources into synthetic gaseous or liquid hydrocarbon fuels. . e Other options, such as the use of the electric power product to manufacture aluminum and the use of ammonia as a fuel source. 2. Place primary emphasis on the technical and economic feasibility of producing ammonia compounds and/or hydrocarbon fuels at the tidal-energy-source site. Included will be a sensitivity analysis to identify the elements that most affect the product cost. 3. Two scenarios will be developed to evaluate the total project economics of the tidal-energy conversion. The near-term economic feasibility case will be based on relatively conventional power-plant cost-analysis procedures and involve 25 to 30 years advanced planning. The long-term economic scenario will be developed based on projected petroleum resource extinction dates in 30 to 50 years and coal resource extinction in 100 to 150 years. (These extinction dates are not, in themselves, of primary concern.) The end point of petroleum and coal exponential depletion rate can be used to mathematically define the long-term exponential in- crease in the costs of fossil fuel resources. This long-term economic scenario will include consideration of the capital demands for other competing energy conversion schemes on a nationwide basis. The above work requirements can be broken into four tasks: e Task 1 -- Electricity Generation and Production of Hydrogen - Electricity generation and transmission - Electrolytic hydrogen production - Hydrogen shipping and storage - Sensitivity analysis e Task 2 -- Conceptual Process Designs - Hydrogenation processes - Ammonia synthesis - Process configurations for hydrogenation and ammonia synthesis - Sensitivity analysis e Task 3 -- Plant Economics - Near-term cost of production - Long-term economic scenario - Long-term economic evaluation - Sensitivity analysis e Task 4 - Final Report The final report will detail the results of the overall research effort and a methodology for evaluating the long-term effects of developing renewable energy resources, such as tidal energy. APPENDIX A AMMONIA PRODUCTION PLANT ANALYSIS ie Primary Products: The electrolysis and air liquefaction plants (Figure III-1) produce significant volumes of hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen and traces of helium and carbon dioxide. Hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen elements can be combined to form several marketable * compounds: NH, NH,NO3, and HNO... A proper balancing of the production rates from the electrolysis plant and the air lique- faction plant can result in a maximum yield of ammonia products, a helium by-product, and a small amount of methane (CO, + 4H, + 2 2 CH, + 2H,0). 2. Fundamental Process: Two moles of electrolyzed water and one mole of liquefied air can be combined in the following manner: 3.76 1.76 Rae AMSAT AMR MeM A ane electrolyzed liquefied ammonium free water air nitrate nitrogen Additional hydrogen and oxygen from the electrolysis process can be combined with the free nitrogen. The following products may result: No + 3H, > 2NH, No + Ho + 303 > 2HNO, To properly balance the Ho and 05 in producing these products, the overall reaction is: 8No bull 18H, > 905 i 10NH, ha 6HNO, Thus, for every mole of free nitrogen produced, 2% moles of electrolyzed water are required to produce 25 moles of ammonia and 3/4 moles of nitric acid. The balanced production of hydrogen and oxygen required to fully use the free nitrogen becomes: Mole Ratio to No Moles zl Ny 1 “sz? = 0.88 H,/%0 2 see 2/02 a ; 7 5 y NH, ; a a a HNO 3 Cues M273 3 4 . = The overall process will then require: 4 moles electrolyzed water and 1 mole of liquefied air (3,78 No 05) to produce: 1 mole NH,NO 4°°3 1 mole NH, and 2/3 mole HNO, 3. Process Energy Balance: The energy requirement for the production of nitrogen com- pounds is determined primarily by the energy demand of the electrolysis process, as illustrated below. Hydrogen production from water by electrolysis: For a production rate of: Wy 7 13.44 x 10° scr/day 0.56 x 10° scF/hr The electrical power demand is about: e = 70 x 10° WwW Ho The energy demand per volume produced becomes: w, = 125 W hr/SCF = E Ho/ “Hp Ho E = 125 KWhr/1000 SCF H Ho / 2 Oxygen liquefaction from air at STP is: Eo = 0.700 kWhr/lb-mole of air 2 8.53 kWhr/1000 SCF of O 2 Energy split: Because 4 moles of water must be electrolyzed for every mole of air liquefied to produce the given ratio of products, the energy allocation becomes: from air 4E, +E, =E He 05 T E, = £(125) + 4.26 = 504 kWhr/1000 SCF of Ny Ey, Ey, z < 18 (5 = 0.868 T T The above indicates that almost all of the energy required by the ammonia process plant is for the electrolytic production of hydrogen and oxygen. For the ammonia process plant, a cryogenic unit consuming 1 percent of the total-rated electrical generation capacity would be sufficient to produce the nitrogen for the ammonia, ammonium nitrate and nitric acid products. 4. Yield Rates: Every 1,000 SCF of hydrogen produced in electrolysis repre- sents: 1000 SCF il 359 SCF/mole ~ 2:78 moles H, The ratio of the final products per unit of hydrogen is: Mole Ratio Moles Per Pounds Per to Hy 1000 SCF 1000 SCF of of Hy Ho Ho nt 2.78 5.56 NH,NO, % 0.696 55.7 NH3 y 0.696 11.8 HNO, 1/6 0.464 29.2 A bank of 10 Lurgi electrolyzers will require 700 Mw to 6 produce 134.4x10° SCF of hydrogen per stream day. Therefore, the 700 Mw ammonia plant will produce: 6 7.46x10° lbs = 3730 tons NH,NO, 1.58x10° 1bs = 790 tons NH, 3.91x10° ibs = 1960 tons HNO, Weight is given in short tons, which equal 2,000 lbs. A total of 6,480 tons of nitrogen-based compounds can be produced per stream day (2.33x10° tons/year). 5. Economics: The cost of the products from the tidal-power-driven ammonia plant is dependent on the cost of the electric energy needed for the electrolyzers. Preliminary calculations indicate that the NH, NH, NO3, and HNO, products produced by this plant may be economically competitive in the near future. As the supply of natural gas decreases, the price of the gas and the cost of ammonia-based fertilizers will increase sub- stantially. This should result in a favorable economic environ- ment for the infinitely renewable tidal energy resource. Further- more, the production of ammonia products from tidal energy con- serves natural gas for higher priority users, such as residential heating. The example of 700-Mw tidal power plant will produce 6 134.4x10° SCF of hydrogen per day, which offsets the 67.2x10° SCF of natural gas demand per day. APPENDIX B CONVERSION OF COAL TO SYNTHETIC FUELS Extensive research is being conducted on coal gasification which, like coal liquefaction, gives a clean, environmentally acceptable fuel. There are, however, several compelling advantages in considering liquefaction ahead of gasification for a commercial demonstration: Liquefaction requires less chemical transformation and hydrogenation. Bituminous and subbituminous coal, such as that found in Alaskan coal deposits goes from CHy 9 only to CH, 4 in becoming liquid, but all the way to CHy in becoming methane for high-Btu pipeline gas. Thus, producing cil produced by liquefaction should inherently be less expensive because of the reduced hydrogen requirement. The process conditions for liquefaction are relatively mild compared to the severe thermal conditions needed for gasification. Liquefaction therefore can make more use of relatively conventional, proven equipment. The energy conversion efficiency of liquefaction is about 78 percent vs. about 60 percent for gasification. Synthetic crude oil is more easily stored. Gas storage is limited largely to underground reservoirs. Synthetic crude oil is a more concentrated energy form than gas and is more economical to transport through pipelines for great distances. e Liquefaction plants have much smaller water requirements and water pollution problems than gasification plants. LIQUEFACTION BY HYDROGENATION The liquefaction of coal by hydrogenation was essentially developed by one company, I. G. Farben. Hydrogenation is a simple concept: It raises the hydrogen/carbon ratio, removes all heteroatoms, and liquefies the coal substance from heavy bitumen to LPG so it can be separated from the solid ash. Two problems associated with catalyst use in coal liquefaction are the need to develop sulfur-resistant Yee att catalysts and catalyst life; heavy polymers and coke soon coat the catalyst surface and make it inactive. Research on catalyst life has led to more effective catalysts and the development of novel systems for handling the catalysts, particularly in the liquid-phase ebullating bed. As a result of this research, heavier and con- taminated feedstocks can be handled. The better catalysts have brought ae a reduction in the pressure level required for hydrogenation. It is now considered adequate for hydrogen pressure to be between 1,500 and 3,000 psi (100 to 200 atm), as compared with the earlier 5,000 to 10,000 psi. This allows the use of larger individual vessel sizes with higher _ capacities. The new reactor configurations and catalyst systems have also ea the possibility of direct processing of coal over effective catalysts. The ebullating bed is used in the H-Coal process, and at least two fixed-bed systems are being researched. The new catalysts also use hydrogen more efficiently. Total hydrogen requirements have been reduced by as much as 35 to 45 percent. Also, there are more effective methods for disposing of the coal residues (ash and impurities), such as fluid-bed coking. Figure III-2 is a general flow diagram of coal liquefaction units. It excludes low-temperature carbonization, which could be con- sidered in place of liquid-phase hydrotreatment. The end product desired will affect the emphasis placed on specific blocks by the individual process developer. For example, in the basic I.G. Farben process, step one conditions were suf- ficiently severe and eliminated the separation step, thereby simplifying the process. If the liquid-phase hydrotreatment is at minimum severity, as in the solvent refining of coal, the main output will be in liquid, nondistillable form. Therefore, the separation step is essential and can be accomplished either by mechanical or solvent precipitation. The hydrogen input is then used for the catalytic hydrocracking of the deashed liquid, as in the H-Oil process. Increased hydrogen input in the first step can be achieved by: 1) the use of donor solvent derived either from the catalytic hydrocracker or from a separate solvent hydrogenation step; or 2) higher pressures or temperatures. In either case, the dis- tillable fraction may be of sufficient size to consider vacuum LIQUID PHASE HYDROTREATMENT INITIAL SEPARATION CATALYTIC real ING HYDROCRACK inch RESIDUE TO H, Figure 11-2, COAL LIQUEFACTION PROCESS HYDROFINING LIGHT DISTILLATE PRODUCT distillation in place of mechanical or solvent deashing. It is then a matter of choice whether it is worthwhile to treat the remainder by catalytic or thermal cracking. For the former, deashing will still be needed. Even more effective hydrogen input can be obtained if the initial coal treatment occurs in the presence of a good catalyst. There are several competing methods in use. For example, the H-Coal process uses an ebullating bed, while the Synthoil process uses a fixed bed. Work is underway using molten zinc halide as a catalyst. “Although still in the experimental stage, the initial results suggest a quite unique approach to catalysis; the system is homogeneous in that the melt and coal form a single phase. If the initial hydrotreatment is fairly severe, the amount of residue becomes smaller and less important. Thermal cracking or coking will suffice to recover any potential liquid from this stream. Additionally, in all cases, a catalytic hydrofining step for final reduction of sulfur and nitrogen is required. Table III-l lists processes that have been developed for coal liquefaction and several that are currently being résearched. GASIFICATION BY HYDROGENATION In hydrogasification the carbon in the organic solids is reacted with a stream of hydrogen-rich gas to form methane: c+ 2H, > CH, (exothermic) PAST CURRENT FUTURE - TABLE III-1 COAL HYDROGENATION PROCESSES FOR LIQUID PRODUCTS Bergius I. G. Farben 27 Commercial Trains Pott-Broche Extraction Pilot Plant U.S. Bureau of Mines Plant, Louisiana, Mo. Union Carbide Plant, Institute, W. Va. Zinc Halide Conoco Coal Development Co., W. Va. Solvent Refined Coal Gulf Oil Corp., Tacoma, Wash. Catalytic Coal Liquefaction Gulf Research and Development Co. H-Coal Hydrocarbon Research, Inc., Trenton, N.J. Solvent-Refined Coal Southern Service Inc., Wilsonville, Ala. Intermediate Hydrogenation University of Utah H-Coal Project, Catlettsburg, Ky. Future Commercial YEAR 1939-42 1935-45 1940-45 1950-53 1948-53 1968-70 1976- 1967-76 1965- 1974- 1969-76 (1980) (1985) The coal particles devolatilize in the reactor unit upon contact with the evolved hot gases. The hydrogenation of coal is affected by the activity of the char produced by devolatilization. It is possible that the primary solid-phase product of the initial coal devolatilization is a highly active intermediate product. This intermediate product is involved in two competing reactions: the polymerization among the components of the active intermediate product itself to form an ceeioe char; and the carbon/hydrogen reaction to form methane. Once the inactive char is formed, it is relatively inert to reaction with hydrogen. To depress the polymerization of the active intermediate product, good contact of the freshly formed fen the hydrogen-rich gas stream is necessary. The reactivity of the particular coal or char used will have a significant effect on the product gas quality and the reactor design. The effluent gas from the gasification units contains solid dust particles, tar, and soot that must be removed by cyclone sepa- rators, electrostatic precipitators, or wet scrubbers before it is further processed. The last step in coal gasification is methanation. In this step, conversion of excess carbon monoxide and hydrogen into methane to achieve a higher heating value of pipeline quality gas takes place: CO + 3H, + CH, + H5O (exothermic) 2 4 2 The availability of a large source of hydrogen will eliminate the need for a shift converter in which the hydrogen/carbon monoxide ratio of the synthesis gas must be adjusted to about 3 to 1 before the methanation step. The main reaction taking place in the shift converter is: CH + HO > CO, + Hp (exothermic) The degree of methanation varies considerably and depends on the type of process used in the gasification step. In hydrogasification reactors, above 90 percent conversion to methane is achieved (as compared to 70 percent or less in other gasification reactors). The difference results from feeding the raw coal into a more thermally regulated hydrogenating atmosphere where the volatile compounds are converted directly to methane rather than feeding the raw coal into a severe pyrolitic atmosphere of a synthesis gas generator where all the hydrocarbons are decomposed entirely almost to carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Tide at Cook Inlet Tide at Whittier Headloss "a Filling Plant No.l Whitti Plant No.2 Cook Inlet Not to scale Plant No.| Whittier Head Headloss Figure 9 relative head loss and different tidal and load cycles. This present scheme would provide much more power and still allow us to limit the excavation of the channel to a level whichis feasible. With the dikes By and B, the total power could then average 4. 86 kw, and the energy which can be obtained then reaches more than 4 billion kwh/year. IV. 4. Modification of Tidal Amplitude Some concern may be expressed about the modification of the tide in Cook Inlet due to the extraction discharge and energy towards Prince Williams Sound. Cook Inlet is a widely open embayment, i.e. , it has a very low "'Q.' The resonance is non-selective and has a low response factor. The tidal amplitude at the entrance is approximately 14 feet and it is 25 feet at Anchorage. Therefore, the response coefficient is 1.8. A large part of the amplification factor is due to the funneling effect and energy concentration in a narrower channel. This effect exists regardless whether the embayment is resonating or not. Furthermore, the discharge towards Prince Williams Sound which is 6 Scheme 2c reaches a maximum of say 2. 10 st? /sec but is still very small as compared to the discharge entering Cook Inlet which could be evaluated to 7. 1028£t?/sec. The problem of tide modification will need to be looked upon, but it does not appear that it will be significant in most of the proposed schemes. However, a dike built between Kustatan and Nikishba may have a significant impact. 32 Vv. ECONOMIC EVALUATION It would be presumptious, at this time, to present a cost per kw of installed power or per kwh since such evaluation requires data which is not available. It is realized that the power which is made available in Scheme 2c is 3.85 x 10° ew which corresponds roughly to the power of 4 nuclear power plants which could be built at a cost of near 4 billion dollars. The cost of the channel has to be justified by the increase of energy that it provides as compared to other schemes and the value of a guaranteed power. Scheme 2c allows us to triple the energy supply compared to the Wilson Scheme (see Appendix II). One has seen that the power supply at Whittier is limited by the amount of excavation which can be done between the steep rocky slopes bordering the proposed channel location. It is not possible at this time to present an accurate estimate of the channel costs vs. con- veyance. For the sake of simplicity, let us consider a one square foot stream tube carrying a discharge of 7.5 st? / sec. Such a stream tube will permit us to obtain an average power pgQH . H is the average head of 19 feet in the one plant solution and 24 feet in the two plant solution. Therefore, the power obtained per unit stream tube is 12kw in one case and 15kw inthe other. The volume of excavation under free surface for one stream tube is 2000 cubic yards over a 10 mile distance. If one multiplies by 1. 5 to account for the above free surface excavation, one finds a volume of excavation of 250 cubic yards/kw in one case and about 200 in the other case. The cost of excavation should take into account the fact that unconventional (hydraulic or nuclear) methods could be used, but even if one takes a $3. 00/cubic yards average, (Figure 10), Dodge Manual, 1976, one finds that the channel cost will range from $750 to $600/kw. This 33 ua EARTHWORK (Taken from the 1976 Dodge Manual for Building Construction Pricing and Scheduling) ra OUTPUT | UNIT COSTS 4 DESCRIPTION PER E CREW bay | UNIT | LABOR | MATERIAL TOTAL ee SITE GRADING *® TEARTN EXCAVATION, AVERAGE SOIL ON MINIMUM OF 5 acr Tr QUIPMENT SHOwN &S MATERIA Oste UT AND FILL+ /MAX HAUL OF S00! TT [ £0 | 350] cu YO 0.54 0.77 Leal £0 400} cy yo 0,47 | 0,64 £0 | 520 | Cu YO 0.36 0.50 0286 RAPER : —£0| 720] Cu vO 0.26 0.42 0.68 1SCY Eo | 1000 | cu yO 0.18 0.32 0.50 BALANCED CUT ANO FILLe wW71000* HAUL RUBBER TIRED SCRAPER ONLY 10 CY T Lael £0] 600] CU YO 0.31 0-66 0.97 1S CY 1 Lael EO} 850] CU YO 0.22 0.45 0.67 20 CY T Lael £0) 1050| CU YO SCRAPER WITH DOZER PUSHING 10 CY T Lael £0] 550 is CY 1 Lael EO} 800 “20 cY T LAel ©O| 9 TRACTOR SCRAPER ONLY tae w30 1 LAel £O 600 T Lael £0 80 BND LOAD A LOADER. HAULING NOT INCLUDED. OPEN SITE T CY LOADER (EARTH) wel £0 650 U YO 0.29 16 2 CY LOADER (EARTH) 1 UAel €O| 1100 Y TEARTH) TK. 0 00 UD 0 18 1 CY LOADER (CLAY) 450 = Y LOADER (CLAY) 6 | 20 | 3 CY LOADER (CLAY) with Pow HOVEL | a1 | 376 CY SHOVEL (CLAY) Y SHOVEL (CLAY) Hi 2 CY SHOVEL (CLAY) zo + F0D |_| 25% TO LABOR & MATPL SUS TULARE | | 100% TO LABUR & MATPL |_| a NGe D 0 KD | | wITH CUT & FILL LIMITED TO 6" UNCONGESTEDs MODERATE CONGESTION» ADD SO% TO L4802 & MATL AELVY-CUON ~ 1 MILE ROUND TRIP 8 CY 3 MILE ROUND TRIP 34 6 cY —Te tr 6 MILE ROUND TRIP —s~tY_ 8 cY — Te ty HEAVY TRAFFIC, AOD S0%-1008 Figure 10 AH (Taken from the 1976 Doige Manual for Building Construction Pricing and Scheduli= ASBESTOS WORKER BRICKLAYER CARPENTER CEMENT MASON ELECTRICIAN GLAZIER LABORER LATHER OILER OPER ENG--HOISTING OPER ENG--EXCAV PAINTER PIPEFITTER PLASTERER - PLUMBER REINFORCING IRONWK ROOFER SHEET METAL wORKER STRUCTURAL IRONWK TEAMSTER TILE SETTER ALBANY NEw YORK 122 16.36 15.06 0.96 12.95 13.22 0.98 12.25 12.90 0.95 12.95 12.90 3.00 15.14 16.03 0.96 10.70 12.64 0.85 11.25 10.30 1.09 11.82 12.61 9.96 11.42 11.30 1.01 12.26 13.82 0.69 12.246 13.33 9.92 10.87 11.98 0.91 16.65 16.16 9.91 12.95 12.53 1.03 14.65 16.15 0.91 12.20 13.59 0.90 12.468 12.66 1.00 16.64 15.72 9.93 12.20 13.55 0.90 12.52 10.60 1.20 11.70 12.21 0.96 WATERPROOFER 12.48 12.39 1.01 AVERAGE LABOR ADJUSTMENT 0.96 AVERAGE MATERIAL ADJUSTMENT 1.15 ATLANTA GEORGIA TRADE RATES ASBESTOS wORKER BRICKLAYER CARPENTER CEMENT MASON ELECTRICIAN GLAZIER LABORER LATHER OILER OPER ENG=--NOISTING OPER ENG--EXCAV PAINTER PIPEFITTER PLASTERER PLUMBER REINFORCING IRONWK ROOFER SHEET METAL WORKER STRUCTURAL IRONWK TEAMSTER TILE SETTER 303 11.76 15.06 0.78 11.18 13.22 0.85 10.67 12.90 0.83 10.76 12.90 9.83 15.60 16.03 0.97 11.13 12.64 0.88 7.46 10.30 0.72 11.11 12.61 0.88 6.34 11.30 0.74 11.25 13.62 0.81 10.85 13.33 0.81 11.75 11.98 9.98 13.26 16.16 9.82 11.21 12.53 0.89 13.26 16.15 0.82 10.75 13.59 0.79 8.41 12.46 0.68 12.78 15.72 0.81 10.75 13.55 0.79 7.58 10.40 0.73 11.82 12.21 0.97 WATERPROOFER 8.41 12.39 0.68 AVERAGE LABOR ADJUSTMENT 0.82 AVERAGE MATERIAL ADJUSTMENT 0.90 ALBURQUERQUE NEw MEXICO 671 14.6) 15.06 0.98 10.95 13.22 0.83 12.10 12.90 0.96 9.13 12.90 0.71 13.39 16.03 0.84 9.08 12.646 0.72 6.91 10.30 0.67 10.07 12.61 0.80 8.27 11.30 0.73 9.58 13.82 0.69 9.14 13.33 0.69 8.56 11.98 0.71 146.92 16.16 0.92 10.03 12.53 0.80 14.92 16.15 0.92 11.62 13.59 0.85 7.90 12.66 0.63 14,467 15.72 0.92 11.62 13.55 0.86 8.77 10.40 0,84 8.51 12.21 0.70 7.90 12.39 0.64 35 AMARILLO TEXAS 791 12.57 15.06 0.86 10.00 13.22 0.76 9.48 12.90 0.73 8.66 12.90 0.67 11.78 16.03 0.73 7.14 12.64 0.56 S.44 10.30 0.53 5.85 12.61 0.46 8.5% 11.30 0.76 10.12 13.82 0.73 9.53 13.33 0.72 8.42 11.98 0.70 12.17 16.16 0.75 9.37 12.53 0.75 12.17 16.15 0.75 10.70 13.59 0.79 6.73 12.66 0.56 12.22 15.72 0.78 10.70 13655 0.79 8.19 10.40 0.79 9.36 12.21 0.77 6.73 12.39 0.56 BALTIMORE MARYLAND 212 12.05 15.06 0.80 12.37 13.22 0.94 12.06 12.90 0.93 11.92 12.90 0.92 16.04 16.03 0.88 16.23 12.66 1.13 8.36 10.30 0.81 11.06 12.61 0.88 9.63 11.30 0.85 13.89 13.82 1.01 12.66 13.33 0.95 11.36 11.98 0.95 14.06 16.16 0.87 11.06 12.53 0.88 14.06 16.15 0.87 13.06 13.59 0.96 9.30 12.66 0.75 13.92 15.72 0.89 13.04 13.55 0.96 11.06 10.40 1.06 9.91 12.21 0.81 9.30 12.39 0.75 ANCHORAGE ALASKA 995 20.1R 15.06 1,3« 19.28 13.22 1.4¢ 17.96 12.92 1.3¢ 17.66 12.95 1.3% 23.05 16.03 1. 15.9] 12.66 1.2¢ 16.29 10639 1.5é 19.73 12.61 1.5 17.55 41.39 2 19.30 13.82 1 19.30 13.33 1 16.55 11.98 1 22.27 16616 1 18.95 12.53 1 22.27 16.15 1 19.36 13.59 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18.49 12.46 BILLINGS MONTANA 591 13.469 15.04 0.9 10.85 13.22 0.81 9.80 12.90 0.71 8.83 12.99 0.6 11.89 16.03 0.7! 9223 12.66 0.7 8.48 10.30 0.8 9.26 12.61 0.7 10.11 11.30 0.8 11.40 13.62 0.8 10.746 13.33 0.8 8.75 11.98 0.7 12.82 16.16 0.7 8.89 12.53 0.7 12.82 16.15 0.7 12.72 13.59 0.9 6.15 12.46 0.6 11.82 15.72 0.7 12.72 13.55 0.9 8.846 10.40 0 11.36 12.21 0 8.15 12.39 0 has to be added to the cost of the power plants and the dike(s) and sluice gates. Now considering the fact that the channel permits us to triple the energy supply, it would seem that its cost may be justified. Then a billion dollar channel will insure a guaranteed power supply of 1.500.000 kw as compared to say a billion dollar 1.000.000 kw nuclear plant. The possibility of combining the two power plants allow the generation of the maximum energy for a given area of basin since the plants will operate alternately under the largest head. Also, it should permit us to reduce the channel size to feasible dimensions and limit the dredging in Turnagain Arm. The use of natural hydraulic power to erode and transport the material may permit considerable savings on the cost of the excavation. It is recommended that ERDA's sponsorship of this proposal be con- sidered on the following basis: 1. The proposed schemes based on the construction of a channel between Turnagain Arm and Passage Canal offer considerable advantages (higher head, more power, flexibility of exploitation) than the schemes based on only one tidal cycle. 2. The cost appears, a priori, compatible with other sources of energy, eventhough the numbers which are presented herewith need to be substantiated by much deeper analysis and field measurements. 3. The energy production is adaptable to any load cycle regardless of the tidal time cycle, and provides a large guaranteed power. 4. Tidal energy is thermally non-polluting (thermal pollution is the ultimate limit to energy production development from other sources). 5. The energy can be used in Alaska because of the development of the Southcentral Railbelt, Alaska) and the possibility of developing locally new industries as shown on Appendix III. 36 The rapidly accelerating demands for energy and the obvious danger explicit in dependency on non-domestic sources will eventually create an atmosphere of society acceptance of projects of this magnitude and their environmental consequences. It should be noted that the potential long term environmental impact (per kw) may be relatively less than for other power sources. The construction of the channel offers a great number of advantages. The maximum amount of power available at any given time (guaranteed power) has as its practical limitation, the size of the channel between Cook Inlet and Prince Williams Sound. Also, the relatively larger average and less variable head will allow a savings on the cost of the power plants. The calculated values presented in this proposal are preliminary but clearly demonstrate that the proposed project is worthy of considerations. The conclusions reached in the study may lead to a unique plan for tidal power in Alaska with implications of importance for other areas. A contribution to Project Independence would be made in terms of a source of energy at once environmentally safe and never to be depleted. 37 VI. PROPOSED APPROACH In view of the uncertainities on the tidal datum, and the general lack of information which would permit us to establish potential schemes on a sound basis. It is proposed to carry out the investigation into two phases. Phase 1 is essentially aimed at accumulating all the data which is absolutely essential for establishing an engineering scheme and cost estimate. In particular, it is essential to establish accurately the tidal differences between the two embayments which are considered and the difficulties which may be encountered in dredging and excava- ting the channel across Portage Pass. The cost of Phase 1 is included in this proposal. It will last a year and will be managed from our office in Anchorage with the support of the Pasadena office. Phase 2 is aimed at establishing different engineering schemes and cost estimates. It will be managed in our Pasadena office with the support of our office in Anchorage. 38 VII. WORK STATEMENT Tetra Tech will: Phase l 3. 5. Assemble and review all the pertinent material in view of establishing a tidal power plant scheme based on the con- struction of a channel between Turnagain Arm and Passage Canal. Conduct a field study of the considered location. Members of the investigating team will include a civil engineer, hydraulic engineer, a geotechnician from Pasadena, an oceanographer and engineering technician from the Tetra Tech office in Anchorage. Install tidal gages at Whittier (Passage Canal), Sunrise (Turnagain Arm), and Fire Island (Cook Inlet). Conduct a field survey to link the new tidal gages with the one at Anchorage in order to establish a common tidal datum and establish the exact tidal differences between the two bodies of water. Tidal information will be obtained and analyzed over a period of an annual cycle. Conduct a shallow seismic survey within Portage Valley in view of establishing the thickness of the sediment layer. Sample sediment load at three locations, measure the currents over a tidal cycle, and examine the problems created by sedimentation transport within Turnagain Arm along the channel route and dredge areas and evaluate the possibility of dredging the channel by control erosion and transport. 39 10. ll. 12. Establish a mathematical model for Cook Inlet and Turnagain Arm in view of determining the influence of the channel and 2 the dike, and area of sluice gates on the tidal amplitude. Examine the problems created by glaciers and determine its thickness. Identify the petrology of Porter Ridge and evaluate its influence on construction cost. Identify possible advantages drawn from the schemes by incorporating roadways and locks into the structures. (The channel itself may be used for shipping). Revise conclusions on the schemes which have been presented in this proposal and make recommendations for further investigations. Write three interim progress reports, a final report, and make four presentations to ERDA personnel. 40 VIII. COST ESTIMATE OEP ARTMENT OF CEFENSE CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT) Foo Apereved Budget Dweou Neo 22-R100 MO. Of 9066s This form ia for f cost required and (si) su! hen (i) subms tution for the scing date (see > wane oF ovvence Tetra Tech, Inc. mown OF vice sOOMED 630 North Rosemead Blvd. Pasadena, California 91107 Toray errend est costd | once *, DIRECT MATERIAL ‘Tromize om Eaninit A) . @uecn sso Saare . SUBCOMTRACTED IF EUS (2) vOUe ST amOemO COMMERCIAL ITEMS 73) imTERONVISOmaL TRANOF ERS (At other thon cot) TOTAL DIRECT MATERIAL Ed beset) 2. (Reve MATERIAL OVERHEAD 2 2, OIMECT LABOR (Spectr) enior echnicial Statt moplovee Fringe Benefits © 26% TOTAL DIRECT LABOR 4. LABOR OVERHEAD (Spec itv Devertment or Coot Comer) U/ Overhead Divisional G&A/B&P 8. TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD TOTAL TRAVEL 6. COMSULTANTS (Identity - pwoece - rere) TOTAL CONSULTANTS TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERNEAD 11, GEMERAL AMO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE (Rove % of cect clomem Mee.10 (Corporate TOTAL ESTIMATED COST 176, 029 4. FEE OR PROFIT 117,603 1. Total ESTIMATED COST AnD rex OR ProprT | 193,032 Th Tetra Tech Proposal No. P-1749B eecordence with the Instructions te Offerers and the Footnotes which follow. wanatuae X l wae OF Fim - NX O“tE OF SUOMISSION TETRA TECH, INC. 28 January 1977 DD... 633-4 se propecal le submitted fer use 1a Connection mth and in response to (Deeenbe RFP, ate.) end reflects our dest estimates as of this dete. in Tveeo Name OmO TITRE Cc. I. Sampson, Treasurer 41 EXHIBIT A - SUPPORTING SCHEDULE (Specify. ITEM OLSCRIPTION (5. Jtrips LA/Ancnorage © 5350/trio, © trios LA/San Francisco @ sslvtrio, | trip Anchorage/LA © ss5u/trio, + trios LA/ WDC © S5564/trip, | trio Anchorage/ WDC © $490/triD 00 trips to various sites - 20 @ 5150, 20 @ $30 & 20 @ S00 Total Item 7a Il wore mace ls nesaed, use blank sheets) moewre D EST COST (a) COST EL HO “ er Diem - Anchorage 50 days 5 56,5aa Francisco 4 davs @ 345, LA > days © 940, Washington, D.C. [5 days © 358 Boat rentals - 10 davs @ $200/dav and 5 days ©@ Computer rental-- CDC 0000 - | hour 1 WAVE Tre Oe WISSION PERE: CONTRACT OR @- mame nO s0OAESS OF a ATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANO SPACE ADMINISTRATION OR THE ATOMIC EMERG cep any me few ortvoun sccounrs OM RECORDS IN COMMECTION WITH ANY OTHER GOVERNMENT ec BACT wiTmim Tee PAST TWELVE MONTHS? MO (If yee. isently below.) OPPICE ano INOIVIOU SE we TEU EP mone NUMER ER ENSIOm DCAA 3452 E. Foothill Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91107 (213) 796-0471 TWICE VOU REQUIRE THE USE OF ANY GOVERNMENT PROPERTY IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS PROPOSED CONTRACT! Ove TEI we (il yee, seontity ona separate meee) DO YOU REQUIRE GOVERNMENT CONTRACT FINANCING TO FOmm TwiS PROPOSED CONTRACT? Bl ves CC) x0 tree Tw BO YOU NOW MOLD ANY CONTRACT (or, Oo rou have ony ndopenaenity linaneed (IR & D) prey CALLEO FOR BY THIS PROPOSED CONTRACT! Ove =o Tm Tue COST PRINCIPLES SET FORT 1m ASPR SECTION AV (See J-407 2 (6) (21)* jentsty.): (Cl) sovancaravwenrs J) emoenasssavueurs OR TF) cusaanrecove FOR THE Sam OM SIMILAR CORK (it yee, tdmaty) OES THis COST SUMMARY CONFO Gee <0 tt ne, eastern ono sopermte pase) INSTRUCTIONS TO OF FERORS 1. The purpose of this form ts te provide « standard format by When ettechment of PoOrting COs! oF pricing date to fu which we Government « summery of in- 1s imprectic: the dete will be specifically idenulied curred and estumated cost (an erting intermatien) described (with schedules as appropriate), and mede aveu fe lor éetailed review ond aneiyais. Pree a to the Coatrecung Officer or his representsuve upoe request of ® contract resulting from this propose! the offeror shell, under the conditions stated in ASPR 3-807.3. be required to 4. The formats for the ‘Coat Eiements” and the “Proposed sudeut a Certificate of Curreat Cost of Pricing Date (see ASPR Contract Esumate” ere not intended as rigid requirements. 807.3(@) and 3-607.4). These may de presented in different format with the prior ap- 1 of the Contrecting Officer if required for more effecuve ficient presentation. la ell other reepects this form ell 2. Ae pert of the specific wnlormauion required by this form, the Olfleroe must eubmit with this form, and clearly identify 8 such. be completed ead eubmilted without change. a which 18 verifiable and [ec- ed wh ASPR 3-607.3(e)). In addition. form any informauon reasonably requir- ameting proc: including tne judgmental (actors epplied @ wethematcal pricing or other methods used in the estimate including thee documents and other 10m of this propose! offeror, uf selected for te the Contracting Officer, or his euther- ezemine, for the purpose of used in prejecung from known date, end uation of such cost or pricing dst! ». weed by offeror in his proposed nd projections used therews. This price. raght may be exerc: in Connection with aay segetisuons . prior te coatrect award. ry and ideatify um this col- ettachmeant in which ermation supporting or ether wise relating te the specific cost element mey de found FOOTNOTES Uo En this column those necessery end reesonable costs LY Indicate the rat winch in We judgment of the ollerer Propecty be incurred Where agreement hee been reached with Government me tn the elticient periormance of the contrect. When any of the resentatives on the use of forward pricing retee, describe the costs in this column heve dready been incurred (0... on @ nature of the egreament Provide the method of computetian letter contract of change order). describe them on an attached and epplic ation of your everneed eense, inciuding cost used and promde en eppropnate expiene- supporting schedule. Identily all sales and tranelers betwoan breskdown and showing irends and bud, ry date 2 necoe your plants, divisions, of ergenizetions under « common com sary to provide « desis ler eveluation of the reesonebloness tol, which ore included et ether then the lower of coat to Un Of proposed rates. original translerer or current market price. : A! It the total royalty cost entered here ie in excees of 3350 2/ When spece in eddition te that aveiladie in Exhbut Ais Provide on @ separate page (or on DD Form 763, Royelty 04 neceesary and identify in Report) the following Information on eech separate item of which miormetion royelty e¢ license lee: name and eddress of licensec dete of eupporting the @ecilic cost clement may be loud No stand Ncenee agreement: patent numbers, peient application cena! ard format is prescribed however, the coet or pricing date must numbers, of other basiz on which the royalty ie payebla: brief be eccuraie, complete and current, and the judgment lectors deecrpaen, inciuding any peri or model numbers of eech core used In projecting [ram the dete to the estimates muet be stated tem or component on which the reyalty te payedla per in eullicient of royalty writ unit price ef comrect tem number of uuta: and tote: lar arount ef reyeltion or In addition, if mpecitically requested by the contracting offices Invoice prices: the reason for use of overheed retes which de 2 capy of the current license egreement and identification of Pert significantly trom emerenced rates (reduced volume, « epplicable claime of specitic patents shall be pronded Plenned mayor rearrangement, otc. er justification tor an ir creases in lebor rates (anticipated je and salary increases, A/ Provide « liet of principal items sithin eoch category tr ete.) Identily and explain eny co jencies which areincluded dicating known of antic@eted source, qentity, unit pricy im the proposed price, such e@ anticipated © { rejects and carpetition jained, and beasts of eatadliahing source avd dolective work, of enticipsiod technical dilficalticn reacenableness of cost. 42 APPENDIX 1 CORDOVA, ALASKA, 1976 TIMES AND HEIGHTS OF HIGH AND LOW WATERS JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH TIME HT. TIME HT. TIME AT. TIME HT. TIME HT. TIME HT. DAY DAY DAY DAY DAY DAY HM. FT. Hm. FT. HM. FT. HM. OFT. HM. OFT. HM. FT. 1 0021 12.0 16 0003 11.4 1 0118 12.7° 16 0043 13.6 1 0064 12.7 16 0012 14.2 th ose) a2) F 0525 «353 SU CCBS2 202M «6330.5 M0632 1.2 TU 0616 -1.2 1151 14.5 1128 1420 1259 1305 1243 14.5 1286 12.8 1229 1420 1824-119 1805-16 1917 -0-8 1859-128 1848 -0.1 1833-122 2 0102 12.3 17 0038 12.1 2 0146 12.8 17 O119 14.2 2 0110 12.9 17 0048 14.8 F 0624 2.9 SA 0605 2.7 goss ot) TU 071B -0.2 «TU 0704 «019M OO702 =1.9 1232 1423 1210 14.4 1331 13:0 1326 14.3 1318 12.5 1318 1328 1903-127 1843-129 1949-023 1938-114 1317003 1913-027 3 0139 12.5 18 0112 12.8 3 0211 12.7 18 0155 14.6 30135 12.9 18 0126 15.1 sh o7ae '319 SU o6si 2:1 TU 0807 2.0 wv 0806 -0.5 W 0739 «0.8 «TH 0748-221 13111329 1251 14.5 1405 12.4 14n) 135 1345 12.0 1401 301 1940-122 1922-119 2021 0.8 2019 -0.8 1347 0.9 1955 0.1 & 0213 12.4 19 0147 13.3 4 0239 12.5 19 0233 14.5 4 0200 12.8 19 0205 14.9 su 0749 3.0 M0736 107 § 9232 '3:3 th 0856 -0.8 TH 0815 0.9 F 0837 -1.8 1349 13:2 1334 1422 14371115 1457 12.4 141§ 1124 1448 1221 2019 -0.6 2003-125 2053 1.3 2103 0-6 2018 1.7 2042122 S 0248 12.2 20 0224 13.6 5 0306 12.2 20 0314 14.1 5 0224 12.8 20 0268 14.2 5 oes) ot] TU (0823 «1.40 TH «0925 «2.4 =F 0948 0.0 F 0853 122 SA 0929 1-1 424 1204 1419 13:5 1511 10:6 1551 11.1 1448 10.6 1543 1029 2056 0.2 2045-018 2i27 22 2150129 2050 2.5 2130223 6 0321 11.9 21 0301 13.6 6 0335 11.8 21 0402 13.4 6 0250 12.1 21 0333 13.1 TU 0917 3.4 0914 13 § Oa td) SA 1047-058 «= SA. 09330126 «= SU«*N0ZE~0.2 1503 11.8 1506 1225 1551925 1700 9.7 152598 165197 2133-112 2127012 2202 3:2 2242 3.2 2125 3:4 2223315 7 0356 11.6 22 0346 13.5 7 0411 11.6 22 0503 12.5 7 0322 11.6 22 0436 11.9 7 0356 Mg Ecole tre) SA 11000 Sad. SUCC1TS6 «113 SU C1018 2-2 NTS OB 1541 1023 1602 1172 164785 s«dB3S BLD 1610 8:7 1822, 9.1 2210 2.2 2212-115 2264 412 2368 4.3 2207 4.2 233348 8 0434 11.3 23 0436 13.1 8 0457 10.9 23 0621 11.8 8 0402 11.0 23 0585 10.9 wo St 3:2 SF 111 ils © su 3203-313 «131618 RW116 02:5 TU 1246104 1634923 W714 929 1816718 2012 9.0 1726 8.0 1950 9.2 2249° 312 2308 2.7 2334511 2300 5.0 9 0524 11.0 24 0536 12.7 9 0604 10.7 24 0111 5.0 9 0502 10.5 24 0087 4.8 F 1153 3:8 SA 3221 1.8 5 oss Std) Tu 0743 1150 TUC«1228—« 2560 OO72S10.8 175384 184791 2008 7:9 1438-123 1916 7.9 1406126 2338 412 2127916 2059 9.8 10 0619 10.9 25 0007 3.9 10 0054 5.6 25 O241 4.8 10 OO14 $.5 25 0239 4.8 8 sas Sts) SU 0ss9 «1225 «= TU O721:«10.8 «= 08591167 W 0627 10.3 TH 0843 10.6 1330821 1341126 1435224 1544 0.8 1345203 1513123 2020 9.1 2123 8.5 2223 10.4 2061 8.5 2153 10:5 11 0037 4.9 28 0126 4.6 11 0220 «$45 26 0350 4.1 «=: 1714S S43 2S 0336 3.8 Su 0720 11.1 4 0800 12.5 1 o235 1923 FH 1000 12:1 TH 0756 10:6 F 0944 11.0 1415 320 1459-120 1536 1.4 1632 0-2 145615 1602 1.0 2081 8.3 2139 9.6 2216 9.5 2309 11.2 2134926 2238 11.2 12 0166 §.3 27 0246 4.7 12 0328 4.8 27 0440 3.2 —'12_—«O0303-—« 3-27 0424 28 A oB1s 11.6 TU 0907 12:8 TH 0934 12 F 1060 12-5 # 0906 11:4 SA 1035 11.3 1520221 1600 0.2 1422 1709 -0.2 1547 0.5 1641 0.7 2187 8.9 2240 10.4 2259 10 2348 (11.9 2216 10.7 2310 11.8 130257 $.2 28 0385 4.2 13 0619 3.7 28 0521 2.4 13 0358 2.9 28 0502 18 TU 0911 12.0 M1008 13.2 2 988 3rd SA 1133 :1228) = SA :1005«12.3 SU 1117107 1606 1.1 1648-05 1703 -0:7 1745-074 1630 -0-3 Is 0:6 2248 97 2328 11:2 2336 11.6 2257 12:0 2339 12.2 14 0982 4.7 29. 0648 3.6 14 0508 «2.6 «29 OO1G 12.4 140447 1.8 29 OSE OAS 4 08ee eT e foss 1318 SA V112«1307« SU 0887 1:7) SUC C1086 13.0 MUNRO 1648 0.0 1730-120 174) -115 2112.9 112-120 1746 0.6 2328 10:5 1817-024 2335 13.2 15 0442 4.0 30 0009 11.9 15 0009 12.6 15 0837 -0.1 30 0007 12.6 Th 1048 1323 F 0533 3:0 SU 0551 1.4 M1143 «13-7 TU 0607 0.3 1728-09 11461327 1187 1423 1751-123 1228 11.9 1BOT 12.2 1820 1.9 1816 0.8 ; 31 0042 12.4 31 0034 12.8 SA 0613 2.5 W 0642-021 12231307 1259 (11:8 1843-121 18461.) Table 1: TIMF MERIDIAN 150° W. 0000 IS MIDNIGHT. 1200 IS NOON, eta aa a2 ee taeee row uureu Te MEAN TOWER LOM WATER. °YZLVA AO U3MOT NYS SI HITHA ALITVION 3HL 40 SLUVHD NO SONTONNOS JO WALVGO 3HL WONS CINOXIZY IBV SIWSTIK . °M eOSL NVIGIU3K WIL 2 eTqeL troe £70- $708 g7t 6762 mae -no N owe oo e tere e-g- £°2 nN Nn acvc- aawts NAwo wees eevee eee B°s- 2°57 nN x a cee n wenRunm wenem woonn N n AQAQ MAAN wa-M~ n wets mao ann Moro Mar ais x oes naaae Te sag wnnn avan tee *ld °1H eset w2el 9290 6500 e2st es2t 1090 ooo 6rlt O22L 2£s0 BSE2 ridt frit 60S0 z2e2 veal ool ver Ovz2 dyst lol 690 9vlz Srvl 2160 8920 2£02 leet 2s20 oElo 681 e021 1290 9000 elt tvOt $0SO 6922 isgt £760 ZL90 Lrlz vost S80 $20 2502 6LSt LL80 9920 $002 SEvL 0£40 020 BLéL {SEL 0s90 z210 feet goct 190 0v00 *WoH 3WIL A le s°2e fl 6°0- oc atte gt rte woth 6262 “20° 1°62 ns Ot? 82 0°82 tk 8792 vs 279 a tng 872 - kt ee 4-26 92 ft 92 ory £72 HL = §70L $2 f° ez ere aA 2°92 2 «£6 972 972 NL 6 °S2 2 tts o°sz 271 wo Lae zz OES 9792 £70 ns l° 62 t2 SE 0782 17 0= Ys O°0e 02 «12 1°62 070 a -§t0e 6th 6" 62 £70 KL 9°0F Bt 0 ctor “70 A toe at oro v7 0c ire Ml 6°62 SL Pt o- “14 ava “1H HOUVH grit Oz2L stso SEZ OOLL LELt o0so 90t2 OLsL Zeal slvo 122 vist 160 Leco OLLZ Bort £80 6220 esét fez 6790 6010 lest O2LL gtso vez 2e“t “tol trv0 ££22 Erol 2t60 cov0 Ort2 Zoot £980 6200 0012 v2Sb 9280 gsz0 9202 Osrl £sL0 8220 is6L Birt 14210 4510 ZU6L dvel 0020 6210 eet BLEeL £90 oolo “wrH 3WIL Wx aya awto on-o 1” ete ee oo veee eevee osee 088 B's? 2°87 2-3 x nN NIN NEON ON HMRKO BONO RONMM COLD RAWN H—am “ ee ee CRRN MNOwW— wwowo: ™ ao eee N min ONNA H--OnN +n0 tN mim mim MRKON MNRKN TANNIN mmm wTLOD ANAND TOLVY LFNRM ORR aMaw min t “1H S¥3LYN MOT ONY HSIH 430 SLHOI3H ONY S3WIL 60RL Erzt 6090 8200 zect 9021 Orso isez tsoL v2ul v0S0 60€2 cool seot 8LrO 9122 vOSl ££60 BLEO L012 Osel 4080 0020 ec6l 922 £€90 0f00 Stet SOUL (2so zocz ELzt gooL 62¥0 9512 z29l 8160 Svto 9012 Stst 9e80 SOf0 B10z zsrl 4820 9220 ecél Bort 0220 S¥lO 6rel yZ2EL tv90 SOLO “wh 3WIL “NOON SI OOZL “LHOINGIW SI 0000 2 “=F RP ava z72z£ sogt LL BERL €°0¢ 2090 g°2- £200 6°0£ ozZt ns ocf estt 62 6°82 6250 Stl- geez 1°62 SESL Ys (°§ $0LL 82 S°L2 2590 070. tszz USL OPEL ao oUtL' ytot 12 -8°S2OL¥O 971 “usiz £752) tv HL o°6 0260 92 L'¥2 oze0 Uf. 162 -. 2t92 2yeL A POL. $080 $2 8°22". 0020 6°C- 626t f°v2 e22t fl 276 B190 “v2 9°22 £200 “ete LBL Ww o9TSZ SOLE £2 9°L BLSO Lof2 S082 £°2 gtuzt Ms £742 yLOl 22 ‘07S sE80 e°sz g0zz ~ ott ofgl ys 2°82) «=$£60 12 6°Z 0070 6°92 ez1z rl (ssl 3 9°62 £060 02 ree 9260 z782 9902 s°t gist” HL o°oe LEeso 6L €°0 ws20 7 2762 2102 ek ver A 2°0f 1080 Bt vl0- 9220 oroe Leet U2) Ele Ml ttoe 1ez0 at O°t- Lslo y°OE LO6L e°2 Orel W862 020 9t 9'l- L210 ‘la ocWTH aya TH GWIL auynuesa 926. “WASYTY “39VYOHINY MoN— e-aMm anon ONOEM ane : -enn ” wn0o mune NAMO NANO ” wee Nr nun Nw 6 c 8 2 8 s 8 N we n N vee 22% o “ne wen wrrO OO 2 s 2 -2AGM ao -oo 8 we ‘THIS NHAO0 ne totem cee ” a-o- mm ” noo- mm mo-e m= NAM or) CLeNN BDwWOY LMANR LAM MEN NNR 7 ee ° avo nm a t “1H Sz8l vOeL 9e90 2s00 Srl v22l £090 e100 foct Orit v2s0 62£2 SL9t OsoL ver0 stzz dist lv60 9f£0 9212 ttyl vtso 6120 0002 iszt £590 tv00 zret veLt 2rso OLez elt scot 6970 6022 Ovgt $760 070 9UL2 isst £060 9200 1£02 90st 7280 $920 976L e2rt 97L0 9020 vO6L Ovel 6020 L210 (2st dszt 2£90 £00 6Elt wizt 9550 4000 wrk SWIL vs ls as Sz ys v2 ava font eed eee N n eete N n eves MOTO MRR BOON MRMO WME gown pee srs°o Sen N nao cee N Nann eee. nN cree N NAAM n aN N ce ee eeee Nn TN N 1m " y $s 4 z ? 9 s £ £ Z t s £ 8 \ 92 £ 6 0 g t 6 o 6 t 0 t oO o 2 mn 1M Mane mom om 1m eNwo COMO M-MM WONM wOHOM YR HnRow on t “iH auvanye ava L POSTION DIFFERENCES RANGES PACE Time Height De oe toe | bore Tigh | tow | High | tow | M7] uenat | eve! woter woter woter woter 7 | hd Cm | A m| feat | feet | fect | feet | feat ALASKA—Cont inued Prince William Sound—Continued n. YW. on CORDOVA, p.116 fime meridian, 150°¥. . 1653| Windy Bay, Hawkins Island——---——--— | 60 34/145 58) -0 07) 0 0.4 #004 9.4 12,1) 6.3 “1654| Comfort Cove, Port Gravine —-| 60 43/146 05] -0 15] -0 05} -0.6| 0.4 9.9 11.8 6.2 Hinchinbrook Island 1655 Johnstone Point-——-------——- | 60 29/146 37| -0 06) +0 bal 0.7} 0.0 9.4 11.8} 6.2 1657 Port Etches-—-—--——--—--——- | 60 20146 33] -0 08} +0 -1.2) -O.4 9.Q901..4 5.8 Nontegue Island 1659 Patton Bay-------—--—-———— ——--- | 59 54/147 26] -0 11] -O O4| -2.2) 0.0 7,910.2 5.3 1662 Macleod Harbor----------——-—---=—. | 59 53 |147 46] -O 32] -O 15) -1.3} 0. 8,8112.0} 5.8 1663 Henning Bay-- —————--——--— | 59 57/147 41} -0 07} -O 04) -0.9) 0. | 11.5) 6.0 1665 Fort Chalmers— 60 14/147 14} +0 04] 40 08 -0.7] 0.4 9.3 LL, 6.1 1666 | Gibbon Anchorage, Green Island 60 16]147 26| -O 20] -O0 OS} -0.7/ -O. 9.5; 11.5} 6,2 1667 | Latouche, Latouche Island-— 60 03/147 54] -O 04} -0 Ol) -0.9 o a 11.5} 6.0 1669 | Sawmill! Bay, Evans Island 60 03}148 04) -O 02] +0 O04) -1.1) +0. 6.ALL.Y 5.9 1671] Snug Harbor, Knight Island 60 14/147 43| -0 08] -0 03] -0.7 oq 9.412.7 6.1 1672 | Port Audrey, Knight Island 60 20/147 46] 0 03] 0 00] -0.3| 40.2) 9.6/12.1] 6.4 1673 | Smith Island an ———————=.| 60 32 1147 29] 0 04] O03) -0.7) 0. 9.4 11,8} 6.1 1678 | Snug Corner Cove, Port Fidalgo————— | 60 44/146 39} -O 06 -0 05} -0.5 word 9.5| 12.0} 6.2 1676 | Landlocked-Bay, Port Fidaligos 60 $1]146.32] -0 11| -0 07] -0.6/ 0.0 9.5° 11.9) 6.2 Yaldez dra eee ee tem e 1. : 1677 Ellamar, Tatttiek Narrows———-——— | 60 54 [146 42 -O 28} -0 23) -0.5 | 40.1) 9.5/11.9] 6.2 1678 Rocky Pol nt—————-——-———---+--—= | 60 57/146 46 | -0 04) 0 03) -0.4 40.1| 9.6)/12,1) 6.3 1679 Jack Bay - 61 02/146 38] -0 05} -O 02] 0.4) +0.) 9.612.1| 6.3 1681 Valdez, Port. Yaldez————wenn | 2 08/146 21] -0 11} -Q 03] -0.4| 0.0 9.7) 12,0) 6.3 1683 | Jackson Cove, Glecier. 4gtand~—eee—— 60 33 bee 141-0 09 | -0 01] -0.5 |] 40.1) 9.5/11.9] 6.2 1685 | Naked Island, McPherson Pessage-~mer—j 60 40/147 24 | -0 17] -0 07] 40.6] 0.0) 9.5 1.8] 6.1 1686 | Kings Bay, Port Nellie Juan——————. | 60 32/148 28| 0 00| +40 10) -0.5| +0.) 9.5) 11.9) 6.2 1687 |Culross Bay, Wells Passage—————-s.| 60 44/148 11] -0 14} 0 00) -0.3 | 40.1) 9.7) 12.1) 6.3 1688 | Long Bay Entrance, ——— 60 42/148 16 | +0 04] +0 10} -0.8/] 0.0} 9.3) 11.6) 6.1 > 1689 | Whittier, Passage Canal 60 67|148 40 | =O 04] 40 02} -0.2 | +0.1) 9.8/12.3| 6.4 1690 | Applegate Island -——————--—— -———~ | 60 38 [148 10} 0.00] +0 07/ -0.5 | 40.1) 9.5) 11.9] 6.2 1691 |Eshamy Bay, Knight Island Passage——- |60 27 [147 59 | +0 02 | +0 05} -0.3 | +0.1) 9.7/12.1] 6.4 1693 | Chenega Isiand, Oangerous Passage——~-| 60 20/148 09} 0 00} +0 07} -0.8 | +0,1) 9.9 11.6] 6.2 1695 |Hogg Bay, Fort Balnbridgene-———-——— | 60 04 |148 12 | +O 11} -0 02] -1.8| 0.0] 8.3) 10.6] 5.5 Kenai Peninsula, outer.coast . |. |. 1697 |Day Harbor ————-_ /60 O1 lao 03 | 0 10 | -0 O21] -1.9 | 0.0} 8.2)10.5/ 5.5 1699 |Seward, Resurrection Bay: 60 06 149 27 |-0 09 1-0 01] -1.9 |-0.1) 8.3/10.5] 5.4 1701 |Camp Cove, Alalik Bay-—: 59 42/149 45 | -O 11 | -O 06| -1.8 |-0.1| 8.4/10.7) 5.5 1703 |Two Arm Bay ..}59 40 250 06 | -O 18 }-O 06 | -1.5 |-0.1) 8.7/11.0] 5.7 1705 | Chance Cove (Lagoon ) meme 39 294150 19 | 0 08 | 0 CO} -1.4 | 0.0) 8711.0} 5.7 1707 |Beauty Bay, Nuka Bay: ~|59 32 150 38 | 40 04 | 40 13| -2.0 | 0.0] 9.2) 22.4] 5.9 1709 |Nuke Passage: 59 24150 40 | 40 03 | 40 11} -0.9 | 0.0] 9.2)11.5) 6.0 1711 |Tekoma Cove, Port Dick §9 15 Aso 59 | +0 15 | 40 17] -0.3 | 0.0] 9.8/12.1} 6.3 1713 |Picnic Harbor, Rocky Bay----—-----=" /59 15 26 | +0 18 | 40 20] 40.4 | 0,0/10.5) 12.7) 6.6 Cook Inlet on SELDOVIA, p.120 ‘1715 |Ushagat Island, Barren Islands------ |58 57 182 16 |-0 07 |-O 09 FO.77 0.77) 11.4) 13.7) 7.2 1717 |Port Chatham-—---------------------- [59 13 |151 44 |-0 20 |-O 30 0.80 (°0.94/ 12.0) 14.3} 7.5 1719 |Port Graham-----—-——--------—-------- [59 21151 50 | 0 00 1-0 101 -1.2 | -0,2/14.4/16.5) 8.6 1721 |SELDOVIA, Kachemak* Bay——-—--------- [59 26 151 43 Dally predictions 15,4)17.8) 9.3 1722 |Homer, Kachemak Bay- 4 38 151 27 |-0 09 \3 06 | 40.3 | 0.0/15.7/18.1] 9.5 1723 ICape Niniichik — Ol 251 43 140 42 |+0 °s | +106 $40.3116.5119,1 110.2 Ratio. Table 3: Tidal Differences and Other Constants 60 Table 4: Tidal Differences and Other Constants ALASKA—Continued Cook Inlet—Continued a. w. on SELDOVIA, 9.120 filme agridton, 150°F. 1724} Nintichik-—— 60 03/152 40] +0 42) 40 59] 42.4) 40.2! 26.71 29.1) 10.0 1725} Kenal River entrance 60 33/151 17} 41 53] +2 13} 42.9) 40.6 17.7) 20.7) 11.0 1726 | Kenal CIty Pler 60 33 A521 14 41 $5/ +2 50] 42.1] 0.0/17.5/29.6 {10.4 1727} Nikiskt ——-—= | 60 €1 AED 26) 42 26) 42 43] 2.27] 01,311 17.9] 20.7/11.2 1728 | East Foreland €0 45/152 25/ +3 38] +2 53! 43.2] +0,6/ 18.0] 21.0] 11.2 on ANCHORAGE, p.129 1729} Fire Istand 61 10/150 12] -0 28] -0 29) 90.93] 0.93) 24.4] 27.0/14.2 21731) Sunrise, Turnagain Armt———--————= | 60 54/149 26| +0 31| 42 11] #4.0{ -0.4 30.3) 33.3/17.2 1733 | ANCHORAGE, Knik Arm 61 14/149 54 Oally predictions 26.1) 29.0/15.3 1735 | Eklutna, Knik Arm TT | ST P8249 22) 42 20] egy | ey | cpl cp} cb pencrina ales on SELDOVIA, p.120 1737 | North Foreland ~ 62 03/151 10} 43 48] +4 O1/ (*1,1940.2)/ 18.3] 21.0/22.5 2738 | Or lft River Terminal———-——-—-—-—= | 60 34152 08} 41 40] 41 59] *1,02/ 1,25) 15 18,1] 9.7 1739} Tuxedn! Channel —— 60 09/152 38140 40] +0 48] -1.1] 40.3) 14.0/16.6] 8.9 1740 | Snug Harbor teen 6 06 AS2 34} 41 O5{ +1 10} -2.1] +0,1/13.2]15.7| 8.3 1741} 11 lemna Bay———-— aap | 89 37/2153 35} +40 13} 40 11) °0.81/¢0.87) 12,3/14.5] 7.5 1742 | Nordyke Island,“ kal thes! pay 59 11/154 05] +0 11/ +0 17] -2,6] -0,1/12.9}25.2] 8.0 Kodiak and-¥¥opnak Talk 2 on KODIAK, 128 1743 #0 39] 40.48) 42.8] 40.4 9.0/12.3/ 5.9 1745 “40 32] 40 42) 42.8] 40.4 9.0/12-3] 5.9 1747 +0 33) 40 39] 42.7] 40.4) 8.9 a 5.8 1749 +0 16] +0 #2.6) 40.9 8.9/12.24 5.8 1751} Mermot Island +0 22] 40 10] 41.2] 40.2] 7.7] 9.8] 4.9 1753} Izhut Bay——————> 40 16/ +0 24) 40.4) 40.1) 6.9] 8.9] 4.5 2755 | Kazakot Bay, Marmot Bay-——~————=——— +0 08|_+0-99] 40.9] 40.3) 7.2! 9.4/ 4.9 1737 | Fox Bay, Whale Island-——-—== =~ 40 27] 40-40] 41.5) 40.3) 7.8/10.0] 5.2 1789 | Kizhuyek Bay: 40 10/ 40 14] 42.2) 40.1) 7.6/ 9.6] 4.9 2761 | Kizhuyak Polnt————__-_---___ 40 09) 40 12] 40.9! 40.2] 7.3] 9.4] 4.8 1763 | Quzinkle, Spruce Isiand-—--——-— ~O Ol) -0 OL} 40.5; 40.1) 7.0] 9.1) 4.6 1765} Spruce Island (north si 40 06| 40 11! 40.7] 40.2 7:1) 9:2 4.7 1767 Dally predictions 6.6] 8.5] 4.3 1769 20 07| -0 03/ +0.2/ 40.2) 6.7] 8.7] 4.4 iv7 #0 04] 40 O1/ 40.3] 40.1] 6.8/ 8.8] 4.5 1773 - 70 23) 017) 0.0] 0.0} 6.6] 8.4] 4.3 17TS | Port Hobroa, Sitkal Idak “fsland 20 14] 0 03} 0.0} 40.2) 6.4] 6.3] a4 2777 | Three Saints Bay—————————____. | | 20 18] -O 10) 40.2) 40.2) 6.5] 8.3] 4.4 1779} Jap Bay: SaaaneEP annem? “0 13! -0 06] 0.0] +0.2 ro 8.2] 4.4 2780] Sitkinak Lagoon———————-————______. | “0 16] +0 0.7) #0.5 5.6 7.5/ 4.2 1781} Lazy Bay, Alltak Bay———————_——. #0 02] 40 18/°2.41/°1.41) 9.3/12.7] 6.2 1783 | Moser Bay (Trap Polnt)———-——--—_—- #0 13] 40 52) °2.39/°1.39) 9.2/12.6] 6.2 1785] Olga Bay (A. P. A. Cannery)——————- +3 48] +4 16] °0.14/°0.24! 1.0] 1.4] 0.6 on SELDOVIA, p.120 Oyak Bay ; 1787 Uyak -O 15] -0 06) °0.78 |°0.78/ 11.3/23.8] 7.3 1789 Larsen Bay-——————————-——________. -0 13} 0 08 ~4.2) 0.4 21.2)13.7] 7.2 17912, Mining Camp-—————--—————--____. “0 36{ -0 15} -3.9/ 0.0 12.5/13.9]°7.3 1793 Zechar Bay-———-———-—---——--____. “0 08 -0 05/0. 78/°0.78/12.3/13.8] 7.3 Ogantk Bay 1798 Village {slands————————---___. -O 14] -0 07/°0,82/°0.81] 11.7/14.4] 7.5 1797 Northeast Arm——————_______ -O 11} ~O 06] °0, 78} °0.78| 12.4/13.9] 7.3 1799 Uganik Pessage——--—---------_- | §7 48/153 18! -0 06] -0 03| °0.82|¢0.82 11.9/14.8] 7.6 1801} Viekoda Bay-———-———---__-______ | 57 541153 10] -0 101 -© al *0.81 °0.81j 11.6] 14.4] 7.6 TA bore frequently occurs In Turnagain Arm Just after low water. Under favorable conditions It Is sald to reach a height of 6 feet, TBecause of the shoal condition of the upper part of Knik Arm, the channel off Eklutna becomes practically a nontidal stream during the period when the helght of the tide at Anchorage Is less than 15 feet above mean lower low water. “Ratio. If ratio is accompanied by @ Correction multiply the heights of high and low waters et the reference station by the ratio and then apply the correction. APPENDIX II APPENDIX II POSSIBLE BARRAGE SITES PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED In choosing a barrage site, an economic balance must be struck between the cost of barrage construction in which length and depth of water are important, and the energy which may be generated in which the reservoir area and tidal amplitude (including any modification through barraging) are concerned. Aninspection of Figure 6- will reveal a number of sites which deserve examination: 1. Between the Weést and Ea'st Forelands, at Kustatan - Nikishka, a length of 9.8 mitéd with"d maximum water depth around 60 fathoms (site A on Fig: hye This would 6% an immense scheme inpounding 1200 square miles ‘of 8éa and since the remaining unbarraged inlet would be very. near to the’ resonant length, (about 140 miles), the mean tidal: ariplitude inight be of the order of 30 ft. The annual, fully- developed “output 6f such a scheme would be vast, certainly of the order of 7, 066°Gwh or about 7% of the entire electrical energy productién ‘itive U.S. in 1970. Although such an output is very large for ¥ SinBie Scheme, the engineering difficulties do not seem insuperable ia the light of advances recently made in SiS. ce : * ND hydraulic engineering. i ‘Rae acd wratc tt 7 ++ The fundamentai questions to°be answered before serious study of this site is made are what might happen to the tidal amplitude at the site and how could such huge blocks of unregulated energy be stored and integrated into the U.S. supply network. Because of the scale of these problems, this site has not been considered . further in this paper. A series of potential barrage sites are shown in Fig. 4. The barrage lines By: By and B, represent alternative sites by which a reservoir created in Turnagain Arm could be exploited (By and B,)- This could also be achieved using combined reservoirs created in Turnagain Arm and Knik Arm (By and Bo). In either alternative the power station would be installed in barrage B,, The lines By and B3 are the only feasible way in which Turnagain Arm could be used as the inlet becomes extremely shallow in the upper reaches, 3. Two alternative sites in Knik Arm, C and D, are attractive with very high velocities exist at mid tide through this channel, Site D at the entrance to the Arm would require a longer bar- rage but is sited in shallower. water approximately 70 ft. deep, the depth required for a turbine caisson unit, From these Possibilities, three sites, B } 2nd Bo, By and D were examined more closely.and a preliminary energy analysis including estimates of the.probable number of units and the refilling sluice area, required were made. The figures presented in Table 2 might vary-by up to 10% following a more rigorous economic analysis, but are sufficiently accurate for comparison, Table 2 High water Low water Mean Tide Energy area area range per annum Site Reference square miles square miles ft. GWh By and Bo - 460 230 24.5 18,600 By and B, 330 175 24,5 12,500 & D i 120 . 47 24.5 6,000 The mean tidal range assumed in these calculations is approxi- mately equal to the mean range at Anchorage, No reduction of 64 tidal amplitude is assumed as the inlet is longer than the resonant length. Naturally the energy would decrease or increase witha change in mean tidal amplitude. E.M. Wilson and M.C. Swales, Tidal Power, Plemium, 1972. 65 CHICKALOON BAY hh APPENDIX It 67 APPENDIX III INTRODUCTION ERDA, through various contracted studies, is surveying the potential of tidal energy to contribute to U.S. energy demand. Attractive tidal energy sources in many locations are being studied. Cook Inlet, Alaska and Passamaquoddy, in the Bay of Fundy, are relatively remote from the high-energy demand regions of the United States. However, the physical characteristics of the channels in the Cook Inlet region of Alaska offer a large potential source of tidal energy. Power plants could harness this energy, using appropriately located dikes, through hori- zontal-axis hydraulic turbine-electric generators capable of producing in excess of 75,000 GWhr per year, which is about 7 percent of the total electric energy produced in the United States in 1970. This region's potential for producing electric energy could be enhanced by the availability of hydroelectric power in this mountainous state. The engineering problem of using the energy produced by a tidal energy plant at Cook Inlet is how to convert the potential electric energy to an alternative energy form or to an energy-intensive chemical product, which could be easily transported and competitively marketed. Background Tetra Tech hydrological and marine engineering experts have been studying the potential of tidal energy at Cook Inlet. [In an effort to: provide an energy generation and conversion total system, Tetra Tech's chemical engineers have made preliminary investigations of the probability of converting the tidal-gener- ated electrical power to hydrogen and/or chemical feedstocks. Either AC or acyclic DC generators may be used to convert tidal energy to fundamental electrical energy. This energy could then be transmitted by high-voltage lines or supercooled DC cables to high-electrical energy demand regions in the western United States. However, such long-distance direct electricity transmission from Alaska through Canada to northwestern United States is a formi- dable technical and economic challenge and raised political problems. Thus, alternative methods of transporting or using tidal energy produced at a remote site, such as the Cook Inlet, must be considered. One alternative to direct transmission of electricity is to use relatively low-voltage DC power to manufacture hydrogen by com- mercially available electrolysis processes. The hydrogen pro- duced could be stored and transported. Unfortunately, large quantities of hydrogen are not easily stored or easily transported over long distances. Because of its low density, pressurized gaseous hydrogen requires large container volumes, as compared with methane, and is uneconomical for pipeline transport, assuming that long-distance pipeline transport of Hy is technically feasible. Hydrogen liquefaction is energy-intensive and occurs at extremely low temperatures (-253°C). Liquefied hydrogen requires large pressure vessels and special cryogenic support systems; it is probably not adaptable to large-scale commercial handling and transportation systems. Reacting hydrogen with metals to form metal hydrides also might be considered, but this would require special high-density containers and handling systems. Another possible use of the manufactured hydrogen would be as a feedstock for on-site production of coal-based synthetic fuels or ammonia (Figure III-1). Hydrogen in either form is much easier to handle and transport by conventional methods and is in an im- mediately usable form. If the hydrogen were converted to ammonia, part of the tidal- power-produced electrical energy could be used to power a cryo- genic plant for air liquefaction. Nitrogen could then be separated and combined with the electrolytically produced hydrogen to yield ammonia (NH3) or other ammonia based products. Ammonia, a funda- mental feedstock for fertilizers, is currently produced in large quantities by using hydrogen stripped from methane (CH, + 2 H.,O + 4 2 4H, + co,)- The primary source of methane is natural gas; domestic reserves are being rapidly depleted. Since natural gas is a pri- mary heat source for residential homeowners, industrial users will experience the initial natural gas cutbacks in the event of