Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTununak Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements & Alternatives 1982VIL-N 002 Tununak LTR? RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR ANIAK ATKA MEKORYUK CHEFORNAK NEWTOK CHIGNIK LAKE NIGHTMUTE COLD BAY NIKOLSKI FALSE PASS ST. GEORGE HOOPER BAY ST. MARYS IVANOF BAY ST. PAUL KOTLIK TOKSOOK BAY LOWER AND TUNUNAK UPPER KALSKAG PREPARED BY NORTHERN TECHNICAL SERVICES & VAN GULIK AND ASSOCIATES ANCHORAGE, ALASKA ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY — | TUNUNAK Northern Technical Services ‘Van Gulik and Associates Anchorace, Alaska July, 1982 1.0 Summary and Recommendations 2.0 Background 3.0 Village Meeting 4.0 Existing Heating and Electrical Power Generating Facilities 4.1 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances 4.2 Electrical Generation Facilities 4.3 Fuel Oil Usage 4.4 Electrical Energy Distribution 5.0 Energy Balance 6.0 Energy Forecasts 6.1 Population Projection 6.2 Capital Projects 6.3 Thermal Energy Projection 6.4 Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection 7.0 Energy Resource Assessment 8.0 Energy Plans 8.1 Base Case 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8.3 Alternate Plan B 9.0 Analysis of Alternatives and Recommendations Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS Review Letters and Replies Page Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Dieiil 8.2 8.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 9.3 LIST OF TABLES Energy Balance for 1982 Itemized Present Worth Analysis of the Base Case Estimated Heat Recovery Costs Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate Plan A Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate Plan B Summary of the Present Worth Analysis and Any Non-electric Benefits for Each Energy Plan Direct Power Generation Costs for Each Energy Plan Preference Ranking of Village Energy Plans and Associated Recommended Actions at 8.8 8.13 9.1 9.2 9.3 —— Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 2.1 Dee 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.1 Ses 6.2 6.3 LIST OF FIGURES Location Map Climatic Background Bulk Fuel Storage Capacities and Types of Heating Appliances Electrical Generation Facil:ties Fuel Oil Usage Electrical Generation Sector Energy Distribution Energy Flow Diagram Distribution of Total Useable Energy Population Projection Thermal Energy Projection Peak Demand and Electrical Energy Projection Appropriate Technology Ranking Diacram iii Page 202 2.3 4.3 4.4 4.5 6.5 7.4 1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The production of electricity is the focus of the Energy Reconnaissance Program. The study has focused on seeking potential alternatives to diesel powered electrical generators. Opportunities to reduce the cost of electrical generation, such as waste heat capture systems, were also detailed. A waste heat capture system utilizes a resource (thermal energy) which is currently wasted in diesel electric generation. The sale of otherwise wasted heat can provide additional income to the utility and thus be reflected in lower costs for generation of electricity. In Tununak a transmission line intertie plan was compared to the central generation base case and the base case scenario complemented by a waste heat capture system. Summary Statements Only those technologies that could be readily assimilated into Tununak were considered. 1. Fuel oil was found to be the major source of energy used in the village. Additional energy was supplied by wood and gasoline. Dre Significant amounts of energy are lost in the village due to: (1) inefficient combustion; (2) poor insulation and excessive air infiltration; and (3) wasted heat from diesel electric generation. 3. Forecasts shcw an inevitable increase in energy consumption in the village due to population growth. Additional construction unrelated to population size is anticipated and will impact energy consumption and demand. ae Energy resource baseline data is generally weak in the village. This weakens the accuracy of technological or economic predictions. However, the estimates relative to waste heat availability appear reasonably reliable. The feasibility of various technologies for electrical and thermal energy production was evaluated. Wind, hydro, peat, solar, geothermal, and coal were consid- ered as potential energy resources but are not viable as alternatives to fuel oil generated electricity. Waste heat recovery from the central power plant, and an intertie with the Toksook Bay power plant formed the basis of the energy alternative plans. The Base Case Plan was formulated based on the continual use of centrally generated electric power. A present worth analysis of each alternative plan was performed. General Recommendations 1. The supporting energy and resource data base should be strengthened. New technologies, and advances in old technologies, need demonstration projects to determine their feasibility in rural Alaska. Significant energy savings could be realized by a village-wide energy conservation and weatherization program. Lise Village Specific Recommendations 1. Waste heat recovery, from the existing central power plant, utilized for space heating in the village is economically feasible and attractive in the amount of fuel oil. saved. The installation of the waste heat recovery system is recommended. The transmission line intertie with Toksook Bay is feasible, but slightly less economically attractive as waste heat recovery. The following steps sfould be taken: a. Initiate a feasibility study of waste heat recovery from the anticipated central power plan. b. Investigate power plant operation for potential of improved diesel efficiency. Coe Initiate a feasibility study of the intertie line with Toksook Bay. 2.0 BACKGROUND Location Tununak is a Yupik village in the Calista region of the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. The village is located on the north coast of Nelson Island and is situated on a spit at the mouth of the Tununak River (Figure 2.1). Tununak is 6 miles northwest of Toksook Bay and 525 miles west of Anchorage. Population At the time of this study there were 298 residents of Tununak and 113 occupied dwellings. Census Year 1959 1950 1960 1980 Population 65 12 183 300 Climate The maritime climate of Tununak is influenced largely by the Bering Sea. Cool summers and harsh winters are characteristic of this area. Temperatures may vary between -25°F and 79°F (Figure 2.2). Winter ice pack and winds often promote severe winter conditions. The nearest wind recording station is Cape Romanzof, 90 miles north. Data from Cape Romanzof is used for reference. KEY | ge | ; ey \- KOTLIK | 5 Ls ne i SAINT MARYS i 7 5 KALSKAG 7, -. ipeas ey | ANIAK LOWER KALSKAG ee ee Senet gS NEWTOK ~ haha S rower oe Gan 4 : NIGHTMUTE wanaxne] : ery, ! 411 tuNuNAK ~,,. CHEFORNAK MEKORYUK 110 réKs00K say —_“S ; be i “ g> ea TOKSOOK BAY p | fo MEnoRyUR = eit TUNUNAK aa 1 on ts T HOOPER BAY i i | wo \ OMNOUDUN— i 4 CHIGNIK LAGOON b | = a CHIGNIK i ; : oe IVANOF BAY I; : i i = FALSE PASS I | i i ' i COLD BAY NIKOLSKI ATKA ST. PAUL ST. GEORGE fee e= cnicnix 14 a Sivanor eay 15 . 180 240 300 MILES Figure 2.1 LOCATION MAP ca Climatic Background san [rca man| ara mays sun | st | auc! ser | ocr| nov] ofc Light Conditions KNOTS 5s 38 8 ° 3 PERCENT. FREQUENCY s ° a \ T , hed ta ruses poo pet EE —e & PERCENT FREQUENCY & Precipitation 10 Wan mum monthiy reeiplaton rol Rea fee Temperature 3 8 8 8 DEGREES F 2500 Heating Degree. pays t oecnet oye o es 8S Growing Degree Days son ms DEGSEL DAYS e [an rea can aonToasl am Tan TauaT an Tot TravTore] Source: Department of Community and Regional Affairs, Community Profile Series. Figure 2.2 2.3 Economy The economy of Tununak is based chiefly on subsistence hunting, fishing, and trapping. There is very little cash income. Garments made from furs are used locally or sold to supplement income. Some villagers are skilled in ivory carving. Many women make grass baskets and other crafts for sale outside the village. As in many Alaskan villages, the school is the major employer with 17 positions. The post office employs 2 people and the village corporation employs 4 people. Four people work in the Native store and seven people are employed by the city. There are three privately-owned stores in Tununak. 2.4 3.0 VILLAGE VISIT The village meeting in Tanunak was held on Thursday, December 10 just prior to a regularly scheduled movie. Project personnel presented the purpose of the reconnaissance study to the approximately 45 residents in attendance. Mayor Mike Albert interpreted throughout the meeting. Interest was expressed in possible wind generation of electricity as a supplement to existing AVEC generation. A limited amount of wind data has been sent as yart of a BIA school project to Juneau. Winds are quite extreme in the area and gusts to 100 miles per hour are probable. Inquiries pertaining to possible hydroelectric sites and available coal resources received an enthusiastic response and produced much usable information. Conversation among the United Villages Board of Directors had at one time included utilizing Alakuchik Stream on the east side of Toksook Bay. Another site mentioned was the Kanaguk Stream - neither site is considered feasible by the Corps of Engineers. Along the shore of Nelson Island as well as several places inland, exposed outcroppings of coal are utilized by an increasing number of residents. Though not extensively used, the nearest one is about three miles from the village. Sed 4.0 EXISTING HEATING AND ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATING FACILITIES 4.1 4.3 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances Bulk fuel storage capacity within the village is listed, segregated by sector, in Figure 4.1. These capacities are based on actual tank sizes and on estimates where reliable data could not be obtained. The storage capacity of domestic fuel tanks and 55 gallon drums is not included in the bulk storage capacities. Also listed in Figure 4.1 are the types of heating and cooking appliances, segregated by sector, being used in the village. Electrical Generation Facilities The existing generating equipment installed in the village is listed in Figure 4.2. Comments on the operation of the generators are included. Fuel Oil Usage Figure 4.3 illustrates the use of fuel oil in the village. Consumption of fuel oil by sector for space heating is listed as a percentage of the total oil consumption. Similarly, the percentage of oil used for electrical power generation is shown. 4.4 The oil used for space heating is broken down to show the portion that actually heats building space, and that which is lost to waste. The electrical generation fuel oil is also separated into electrical energy and waste heat segments. Fuel oil consumption in the village was based on records, where avilable, and calculated estimates where no reliable records existed. Please refer to the Methodology section of the main report for an explanation of the estimating process. The fuel oil consumption for electrical power generation was based on an assumed central electrical power plant, with the generating equipment listed in Figure 4.2. Electrical Energy Distribution The energy flow through the electrical generation sector is depicted graphically on Figure 4.4. The "pie-chart" represents the total energy dedicated to. the generation of electrical power. Each sector in the village consumes a slice of the pie, as shown. 4.2 GF TUNUNAK/1982 BULK FUEL STORAGE CAPACITIES AND TYPES OF HEATING APPLIANCES SECTOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL SCHOOLS PUBLIC a FUEL. ‘OIL qa 194000 gal xz eo GASOLINE i 65000 gal TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE LEGEND: TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE 1 OIL-FIRED FORCED AIR FURNACE 2 OIL- FIRED BOILER WITH WATER/GLYCOL DISTRIBUTION a ORIP-TYPE OIL STOVE/FURNACE 4 wood STOVE 5 PROPANE CCOKRiiNG STOVES 6 WASTE HEAT FROM GENERATORS *DaY TANKS ANO FUEL DRUMS ARE NOT INCLUDED. Figure 4.1 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative High School BIA School ELECTRICAL GENERATION GENERATOR OUTPUT RATING “ TYPE OF ENGINE Allis-Chalmers #11000 Allis-Chalmers 3500 1800 RPM Cat 3304 C 1800 RPM John Deere Water Cooled TYPE OF GENERATOR Allis-Chalmers E2031M1324 Allis-Chalmers E2017M1309-1 KATO #75SX9E Figure 4.2 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION 120/240V 120/240V 120/240V FACILITIES - TunuNnaK COMMENTS ON OPERATION A single AVEC generator provides continuous power to the entire community. Generator provides backup power to the high school. Generator provides backup power to the BIA school. FUEL OIL USAGE TUNUNAK/ 1982 SECTOR END USE 100 30 Space Heat a 39% 70 60 Waste Heat 50 Percent 26% 40 30 Generator Waste Heat 20 10 Electricity 88. R Residential 33 % c Commercial 4% P Public 7 % S School 21 % E Electrical Power ° Generation 35 % 6 ESTIMATED FUEL OIL USE 119000 GAL = 16100x10 BTU Figure 4.3 4.5 ELECTRICAL GENERATION SECTOR ENERGY DISTRIBUTION TUNUNAK Residential 5 % Commercial 3% Public 3% School 8% Waste Heat 78% Generation Losses 3% TOTAL ENERGY 5630 x 10° BTU/YEAR TOTAL ELECTRIC POWER 367 MWH/YEAR Figure 4.4 4.6 5.0 ENERGY BALANCE The estimated energy consunption in Tununak during 1982 is listed in Table 5.1. Estimates of the different types of energy that will be consumed by the various sectors are based upon the 1980-81 fue. purchase records kept by the store, the school, and the local utility. Estimates based on the population, square iootage of residences and other buildings, and calculated energy usage factors, were used where data were incomplete. Wood use was estimated using the observations and discussions with wood users that occurred during the village visit. A representation of the flow of energy through the village is illustrated in Figure 5.1. In 1982 it is estimated that 24,173 MMBTU of fuel will enter Tununak in the form of gasoline, propane, wood and fuel oil. This fuel will be distributed to the various sectors and used for transportation, cooking, heating and electricity generation. The conversion of the fuel to its end use will result in 44% or 10,650 MMBTU of energy to be lost as heat. 51% of this waste heat could be recovered using conservation and waste heat recovery practices. The actual amount of energy used by each sector is listed in the last column of the diagram. The 1982 projected distribution of useable energy is shown in Figure 5.2. The distribution represents the quantity of energy that will be required by each sector (excluding transportation) for electric lights and appliances, water heating, space heating and cooking, and generation station service. Percentages listed in the figure can be multiplied by the useable energy of 8525 xX 10© Btus to determine the projected energy requirements for a particular end use in a given sector. These projected energy requirements do not include energy conversion losses and therefore represent the actual quantity of energy required for each end use. Died cS SECTOR RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE: TUNUNAK/1982 ENERGY BALANCE FUEL OIL GASOLINE PROPANE TOTAL ENERGY ELECTRICITY : GAL TU T - ri0® | % [ow 1108 BTU x 10° 100 COMMERCIAL Btu x 10° %e PUBLIC SCHOOLS ELECTRICAL GENERATION TRANSPORTATION *station service or distribution losses Tablé 5.1 118900 1249 200 foo 5000 5000 | 00 | e°s aanbi4 L's TUNUNAK/ 1982 (24173 eee (10650) WASTE HEAT NON - RECOVERABLE (5194) RECOVERABLE WASTE HEAT (5456) NOTE * NUMBERS IN ip BRACKETS ARE 10° POP: 298 HOUSEHOLDS: 113 13,100 HTG. DEGREE Days mice AMOUNT ENERGY BERODe er ELECTRICAL END USE TOTAL BY SECTOR CONVERSION ie DISTRIBUTION BY SECTOR USABLE ENERGY GASOLINE TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION (5000) UGE ETH cules (5000) PROPANE COOKING (100) RESIDENTIA RESIDENTIA wo9p SIDENTIAL axed (900) Cee (4481) pm (8390) (2100) HEATING/ Mate (301) COOKING EC a ——————| COMMERCIA\ eS (550) IAL 404 5 HEATING ae) (146) (673) 187 1249 (187) FUEL OIL POWER ney) POWER GEN. GENERATION ELECTRICAL (16073) GENERATORS (5630) (425) a | SCHOOL(S (2415) SCHOOL(s) HEATING? (1990) (s) (3310) cooriNc (190) PUBLIC PUBLIC (890) aie HEATING rr Thi TOTAL | TOA WASTE TOTAL | INPUT HEAT USARLE ENERGY ENERGY \ ) (18981) Btu's. WVYOVIG MO1S ADYANA DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL USABLE ENERGY * TUNUNAK/1982 END USE 100 E(3.5%)_ 90 EH (9.1%) 7 ace seecee < 80 7 oO z w = 70 2 H/C (40.08) uw o < 60 a re iz aoe E (1.78) | come H/C (4.78) Ww Sef % 40 P (2.28) WH (1.73%) 30 20 10F E (2.2%) PUBLIC o H/C (2.7%) END USE SUMMARY LIGHTS, REFRIGERATOR/FREEZERS, 12.4% VIDEO, AND OTHER ELECTRICAL USES WATER HEATING 16.3%: 69.1% SPACE HEATING, COOKING AND MISC. GENERATOR STATION SERVICE/ 2.2% TRANSMISSION LOSSES TOTAL USABLE ENERGY 8525 x 10° Btu ~— % DOES NOT INCLUDE ENERGY USED FOR TRANSPORTATION AND RECOVERABLE WASTE HEAT Fig. 5.2 eA 6.0 ENERGY FORECASTS 6.1 6.2 Population Projection The population of Tununak was forecast for the twenty year planning period based upon historical population trends, expected changes resu]ting from planned capital projects, and the villagers' projections of the growth of their own community. Historical data approximates an average annual growth rate of 2%. This rate is expected to continue and was utilized for the population projection. Historical and projected populations are listed below. Figure 6.1 illustrates the population projection over the 20 year planning period. a Historical Projected 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 65) 112°. 183 (---=" “300 363 445 543 Capital Projects Forecast Two major capital development projec!:s have been completed recently. These are construction of a 40' x 50' public building and 23 AVCP/HUD houses. These developments have been included in the base case scenario. Future projects discussed by the villagers were as follows: Road - There is a possibility of a road being constructed from Toksook Bay to Tununak. 6.3 Schools - The BIA School is to be transferred to the State. Energy - Many people are getting woodstoves due to the abundance of driftwood. Airport - The city is interested in a second runway. Seawall - The city has written a letter of intent to the Army Corps of Engineers concerning a 2300' seawall that is 7 feet high. Television - Planning to install television in 1983. Construction of the road would affect the cost estimate for the installation of the proposed power line between Toksook Bay and Tununak. The future of the BIA School is uncertain (February 1982), therefore, it has not been included in the energy forecasts. However, the computer programs developed for forecasting have a facility to include capital projects. When firm plans are established for specific developments the programs can be run to detail the effect on the peak demand, kilowatt hours generated and the effect on the thermal energy requirements of the community. Thermal Energy Projection Figure 6.2 presents the anticipated thermal energy consumption of Tununak during the forecast period. The thermal energy is provided by the combustion of fuel used for space heating. ne: 6.4 The projections were based on fuel use records and estimates of the h2ating requirements of the buildings. Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection Figure 6.3 presents the anticipated 2lectrical energy consumption of Tununak, by sector, during the forecast period. The projections were based on the existing electrical loads, consumption records, and estimates where accurate data were not available. Details of the estimation methods and calculations are included in the Methodology section of the main report. 6.3 THERMAL ENERGY ‘MMBTUD POPULATION 458 POPULATION PROJECTION TUNUNAK 425 482 375 358 - 325 328 1982 12828 A sowll dol, 4 41 1 1 1 A ah el, eerie 1 1984 1986 1988 19928 19s2 1984 1996 1998 YEAR Figure 6.1 THERMAL ENERGY PROJECTION TUNUNAK 18288 8222 6228 1982 [oe Lege eee oe pee 1984 1986 1988 1998 1992 1994 1996 1998 YEAR Figure 6.2 6.4 22228 2828 ELECTRICAL ENERGY ELECTRICAL ENERGY PEAK DEMAND (KW) TOTAL (MWH) BY SECTOR (MWH) PEAK DEMAND PROJECTION TUNUNAK 158 125 160 7 52 A, moive 1 1 L i rf i 5. Beaks 1 1982 1984 1986 1988 1998 1gg2 1994 199€ 1998 228828 YEAR ELECTRICAL ENERGY. PROJECTION TUNUNAK 728 628 - 588 - 482 3008 Senet iis r= 258 R 200 + ee SNL ee 15a + 2 ae es 103 F. Boag SS re at ee a Jd 1 1 oh al Dcepenties 1 pM cll Dahesh 1982 1984 1986 1388 1998 1992 1994 1995 1998 2222 YEAR G = Electrical Ceneration Sector C = Commercial P = Public S = Schools R = Residential Figure 6.3 6.5 7.0 ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Wind The persistent winds at Tununak may provide a rich energy resource. It is difficult to fully evaluate the potential of wind at Tununak due to the lack of recorded weather data. Wood Driftwood is used as fuel for space heat and s:eam baths. The cost of obtaining sufficient quantities of driftwood for power generation would be high. Therefore, the use of driftwood in Tununak is a potential fuel resource for power generation is not viable. Coal Coal was commonly used before the introduction of fuel oil. There are coal deposits nearby the village. Coal is dug from the cliffs and used directly as a fuel source. Peat The extensive drainage system and the unfavorable surface geology are not conducive to peat formation. Solar Passive solar heat may be considered viable only as a supplement to home heating. Geothermal Tununak has no geothermal potential. Hydro Tununak is in an area of low relief and low rainfall. There is no hydroelectric potential. Conservation Measures Waste Heat Capture The majority of the energy in the fuel oil burned in a diesel generator is lost as waste heat through the engine cooling water, exhaust gases, and radiant heat from the engine. Much of the waste heat can be reclaimed from the engine cooling water and exhaust gas by transferring the heat in heat exchangers to a secondary fluid, usually an antifreeze solution. This is then pumped to buildings and used in heaters for space heating. Alternate Plan A, detailed in Section 8.2 of this report, investigates the feasibility of waste heat recovery at Tununak. Conservation of Thermal Energy Energy conservation is the most cost effective method for reducing energy consumption and costs. Energy conservation includes the retro fitting or modifying of any existing heat process for the purpose of conserving energy. This can be done by increasing combustion efficiency, or by reducing heat losses. Villages in western Alaska can Nee benefit from energy conservation practices that relate primarily to weatherization and improved combustion efficiency. Technology Ranking Figure 7.1 presents a ranking cf the technologies that could be applied to the village. Each technology was examined on the basis of state-of-the-art quality of the technology, cost, reliability, resource, labor, and environmental impact. Please refer to the Methodology section of the main report for the ranking method. Val Technology State-of-the-Art Weatherization* Village of Tunanak Resource Environ- mental Impact Ranking Factor Diesel Power Waste Heat Recovery* Hydroelectric Power Wind Energy Conversion Systems Geothermal Energy Steam Power from local fuel,wood,coal,ect... Gasification of wood,coal or peat Generation via synchronous Induction* Electrical Load Management* * Energy Conservation Measures Note: 0 = worst case, 5 = best case Pigure 7.1 N/A Not Applicable 8.0 ENERGY PLAN 8.1 Base Case 8.1.1 General Description The base case plan for Tununak is to continue using the central diesel generating system. As the village grows additional generators are added to meet the increasing peak demand. Thermal energy usage has. been projected based upon the continuation of the present consumption rates. 8.1.2 Base Case Cost Analysis The estimated capital value of the existing central electric power plant was estimated to be $173,000. The plant value was amortized over a 20 year period. Additional generation capacity was added, in increments of 50 kw, as required by the growing peak demand. The cost of additional generation capacity was estimated to be $1650/kw. The cost of fuel oil was set at $9.56/MMBTU, based on a fuel cost of $1.29/gallon. Operation and maintenance expenses were estimated at 8¢/kwh. Table 8.1 presents the itemized present value analysis of the base case for the 20 year study period. The discounted 20 year present value was $2,351,100. 8.1 7°8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 1982 11.6 57.9 30.4 99.9 99.9 99.9 1992 11.6 105.3 42.8 159.7 159.7 118.8 1983 11.6 65.5 33.6 110.7 110.7 107.4 1993 11.6 110.5 43.8 165.9 165.9 119.9 NOTE: 1984 11.6 69.4 34.6 115.6 115.6 109.0 1994 11.6 116.0 44.8 172.4 172.4 120.9 TUNUNAK PLAN 1 BASE CASE 1985 11.6 73.3 35.7 120.6 120.6 110.4 1995 11.6 121.7 45.8 179.1 179.1 122.0 1986 11.6 77.4 36.7 125.8 125.8 111.7 1996 11.6 127.6 46.9 186.1 186.1 123.0 1987 11.6 81.7 37.8 131.0 131.0 113.0 1997 11.6 133.8 47.9 193.3 193.3 124.1 we ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.1 1988 11.6 86.1 38.8 136.4 136.4 114.3. 1998 11.6 140.3 48.9 200.8 200.8 125.1 1989 11.6 90.6 39.8 142.0 142.0 115.5 1999 11.6 147.0 50.0 208.6 208.6 126.2 1990 11.6 95.3 40.8 147.7 147.7 116.6 2000 11.6 154.0 51.0 216.6 216.6 127.2 1991 11.6 100.2 41.8 153.6 153.6 117.7 2001 11.6 161.3 52.1 225.0 225.0 128.3 TOTAL 232.0 2114.9 844.0 3190.9 3190.9 2351.1 8.1.3 Social and Environmer.tal Evaluation Base Case Plan Summary: Continuation of present diesel generation | 1) 2) Community Preference: The villagers of Tununak recognize that diesel generation is the only technolocically feasible way of generating electricity today. Therefore, their interests are in seeing the most efficient use of the system. Reliability of power supply is regarded as basic to the village's needs. Environmental Considerations: i) Air Quality: Exhausting combustion gases releases a small amount of pollutants to the local environment, but the impact is minimal. ii) Noise: The exhaust stacks from the generator produce a considerable amount of noise. The installation of more effective mufflers would reduce the noise level. iii) Water Quality: No impact. iv) Fish and Wildlife Impacts: No known impact. v) Terrestrial Inpacts: There is no impact on vegetation or soils. vi) Land Use and Ownership Status: All leases and permits are in place. 8.3 8.1.4 Base Case Technical Evaluation The continued operation of the central diesel electric power plant in Tununak is expected to have the following characteristics: 1. High Reliability. Diesel electric is a well proven well understood technology with a successful history in rural Alaska. Backup generation allows maintenance of the generators to be performed without a major interruption of electrical power. Occasional system downtime is expected for distribution system maintenance. Safety. A small risk is realized by the storage and handling of fuel oil. Normal risks associated with electrical power are also present. Availability. There are no indications that spare parts will become difficult to obtain in the future. The availability of fuel to the power plant depends on the reliability of transportation to the village. 8.4 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8.2.1 General Description The Alternate Plan A for Tununak is the installation of a waste heat recovery system installed at the existing central electi-ic power plant. It consists of the following features: 1. Jacket water heat recovery equipment installed on 150 KW and 75 KW generators. 2. A distribution system consisting of pumps, piping and valves to deliver the ethylene glycol heat transfer fluid to the heated buildings and return it to the power plant. 3. Heating equipment installed in school and PHS water system buildings, to provide space heating. 4. A control system that automatically regulates the supply of heat to the buildings, and rejects any Surplus waste heat to the engine radiators. 8.2.Z Alternate A Cost Analysis Table 8.2 presents the itemized, estimated cost to install the jacket water waste heat recovery system. 8.5 ESTIMATED HEAT RECOVERY COSTS Project Location Generators (kw) Estimated total kwh generated Generators equipped with heat recovery equipment CALCULATED VALUES Average Generation Rate Percent of On-Line Capacity Maximum Jacket Water Heat Recovery Percent Jacket Water Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Utilized MAJOR COST ITEMS 1. Main piping 400 feet x $120/ft. 2. Heat Recovery Equipment 3. Circulating Pumps 4. Heaters and Miscellaneous Hardware 5. Contingencies (30%) 6. Base Cost ; 7. Project Management (5%) 8. Engineering (10%) 9. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST 10. O & M COST 11. Recovery Efficiency Table 8.2 8.6 Tununak 150,150,75 366,000 kwh/yr 150,150,75 42 kw ____27% __6800 Btu/min ___ 448 «130x106 Btul = 130X106 BtuH 48,000 36,300 17,200 16,500 35,400 _ 153,500 7,700 15,300 _ 176,500 _ 1.90/MMBtu _* 308 Btu/kwh 8.2.3 The present worth of the heat recove-y system was estimated to be $176,500. The system value was amortized over a 10 year period. The cost of fuel oil normally used for space heating, which was offset by the captured waste heat, was $15.93/MMBTU, based on a fuel oil cost of $2.15/gallon. Operation and maintenance costs were calculated to be $1.90/MMBTU waste heat captured. Table 8.3 presents the itemized present value analysis of the plan, for the 70 year study period. The discounted net benefit of the system was $779,400. Social and Environmental Evaluation Alternate Plan A Summary: Waste heat capture from existing generators for sale to major consumers. 1) Community Preference: The villagers of Tununak recognize that the installation of waste heat will improve the efficiency of fuel use in the community. The sele of waste heit will help lessen the effect of rising fuel prices on the cost of electricity. Installation of the waste heat capture system will require local expertise and should provide a number of jobs during the construction phase. The system should operate with minimal maintenance although one part time person would be required until the system has been tested and initial minor problems have been solved. 8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS EXTRA COSTS BENEFITS NET BENEFITS DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS 1982 11.6 57.9 30.4 99.9 99.9 99.9 oosos oooon 1983 11.6 65.5 33.6 110.7 11057 107.4 oooow °° oOoOOwWw NOTE: TUNUNAK PLAN 2 ALTERNATE A 1984 1985 1986 11.6 11.6 11.6 69.4 73.3 77.4 34.6 35.7 36.7 115.6 120.6 125.8 115.6 120.6 125.8 109.0 110.4 111.7 1984 1985 1986 24.2 24.3 24.5 56.0 59.1 62.4 31.8 34.8 37.9 29.1 30.9 32.7 1987 11.6 81.7 37.8 131.0 131.0 113.0 1987 24.6 65.7 41.2 34.5 wee ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.3 1988 11.6 86.1 38.8 136.4 136.4 114.3 1988 24.7 69.2 44.5 36.2 1989 11.6 90.6 39.8 142.0 142.0 115.5 1989 24.8 72.8 48.0 37.9 1990 11.6 95..3 40.8 147.7 147.7 116.6 1990 24.9 76.5 51.6 39.5 1991 11.6 100.2 41.8 153.6 153.6 117.7 1991 25.0 80.3 55.3 41.2 6°8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS EXTRA COSTS BENEFITS NET BENEFITS DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS 1992 11.6 105.3 42.8 159.7 15927, 118.8 See se Nw Mw Onwrn 1993 11.6 11055 43.8 165.9 165.9 119.9 1993 2552 88.4 63.3 44.4 NOTE: Table 8.3 (continued) 1994 11.6 116.0 44.8 172.4 172.4 120.9 1994 25.3 92.7 67.4 45.9 ake TUNUNAK PLAN 2 ALTERNATE A 1995 11.6 121.7 45.8 179.1 179.1 122.0 1995 25.4 97.2 71.8 47.5 1996 11.6 127.6 46.9 186.1 186.1 123.0 1996 25.5) 101.8 76.4 49.0 1997 11.6 133.8 47.9 193.3 193.3 124.1 1997 25.6 106.7 81.1 50.5 ALL VALUES IN $1000's 1998 11.6 140.3 48.9 200.8 200.8 L251 1998 257 1ate7 86.0 52d 1999 11.6 147.0 50.0 208.6 208 .6 126.2 1999 25.8 117.0 91.2 53.6 2000 11.6 154.0 51.0 216.6 216.6 L272 2000 25.9 122.5 96.6 55.1 2001 11.6 161-3 52.1 225.0 225.0 128.3 2001 26.0 128.2 102.2 56.6 TOTAL 232.0 2114.9 844.0 3190.9 3190.9 235151 TOTAL 452.2 1592.6 1140.3 779.4 2) 8.2.4 Environmental Considerations: i) ii) Lisi) iv) vi) Air Quality: There will be a reduction in fuel consumption in the village and a resulting reduction in hydrocarbon, monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. Noise Levels: No impact. Water Quality: There would be a minor impact if a major leakage occurred in the coolant system. Fish and Wildlife Impacts: None. Terrestrial Impacts: Will be minimal during the installation of the distribution system and will be restricted to the village site. Land use and Ownership Status: It is assumed that the village will make the necessary arrangements for the right of way requirements for the distribution system. Alternate Plan A Technical Evaluation Operation of the waste heat recovery system in Tununak, in conjunction with the central power plant, is expected to conform to the following expectations: is Hi~h Reliability. The system utilizes simple, reliable components that are readily available "off the shelf" from a variety of sources. Safety. A well maintained system has a very low hazard potential. 8.10 3. Availability. All components needed are available immediately. The system is relatively easy to implement. 8.3 Alternate Plan B 8.3.1 General Description The Alternate Plan B for Tununak is the construction of an electrical transmission line from Toksook Bay to Tununak. The plan utilizes the Toksook Bay power plant to generate the combined needs of the two villages. Generation facilities at Tununak would be maintained in an operational state to provide backup or emergency power generation. Capital costs for both an underground cable and a conventional overhead line were analyzed. A 20 year cost analysis was performed on the cverhead line because the cost of the underground system was estimated to be slightly higher. The cost analysis was performed based on the assumption that no waste heat was captured at the Toksook Bay power plant. However, a waste heat recovery system could be installed under this plan. The system would produce similar non-electric benefits as those presented in the Alternate Plan A (Section 84:2). 8.3.2 Cost Analysis The estimated construction of the overhead transmission line between Toksook Bay and Tununak is itemized as follows: 8.11 Line Materials including wire, $ 77,000 poles, transforming, miscel- laneous hardware and shipping Equipment rental, transportation, 140,000 mobilization and demobilization Labor 233,000 Subtotal $450,000 Engineering 45,000 Project Management 22,500 Test and Energization 22,500 Contingency 90,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $630,000 Table 8.4 presents the itemized present value analysis for the 20 year period. The discounted net benefit is $4,644,100. The present value of the intertie must be compared with the most economically feasible alternative for both Toksook Bay and Tununak. In both of the villages, this is the Alternate A Plan, i.e. waste heat recovery from the central power plant. 8.3.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation 1) Community Preference: The possibility of an intertie was not discussed extensively while in the villages. 2) Environmental Considerations: i) Air Quality: No impact. 8.12 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST DIESEL - ELECTRIC » INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION . FUEL ” OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 1982 67.8 100.3 64.3 232.4 232.4 232.4 1992 67.8 162.9 79.9 309.7 309.7 230.4 TOKSOOK BAY-TUNUNAK INTERTIE 1983 67.8 105.4 65.8 239.9 239.0 232.0 4993) 67.8 169.8 81.5 319.1 319.1 230.5 NOTE: 1984 67.8 110.7 67.3 245.8 245.8 231 67 1994 67.8 VaT.SS 83.2 328.9 328.9 230.7 kk PLAN 3 ALTERNATE B 1985 67.8 116.2 68.8 252.9 252.9 231.4 1995 67.8 186.3 84.9 339.0 339.0 230.8 1986 67.8 121.9 70.4 260.1 260.1 231-51 1996 67.8 195.1 86.6 349.6 349.6 231.1 ALL VALUES IN Table 8. 4 1987 67.8 127.9 Teo 267.7 267.7 230.9 1997 67.8 204.4 88.3 360.6 360.6 231125 $1000's 1988 67.8 134.2 T30D 275.5 275-5 230.7 1998 67.8 214.0 90.2 3791.2 379.2 236.3 1989 67.8 140.7 75.0 283.6 283.6 230.6 1999 67.8 224.1 92.0 391.1 39154 236.6 1990 67.8 147.5 76.6 291.9 291.9 230.4 2000 67.8 234.7 93.9 403.5 403.5 237.0 1991 67.8 154.6 78.2 300.7 300.7 230.5 2001 67.8 245.7 95.7 416.5 416.5 237.5 TOTAL 1356.0 S2tso 1588.1 6217.6 6217.6 4644.1 8.3.4 ii) Noise Levels: No impact. iii) Water Quality: No impact. iv) Fish and Wildlife Impacts: No known impacts. v) Terrestrial Impacts: There is a proposal to construct a road between Toksook Bay and Tununak, construction of an intertie along the road would cause minimal impact to the terrestrial environment. vi) Land Use and Ownership Status: Permission would be sought from the relevant agencies and would be the responsibility of the utiTity.. Technical Evaluation The operation of the intertie transmission line is expected to conform with the following: 1. Reliability. The conventional construction method overhead line would be expected to have good reliability. Maintenance and repair due to weather damage would be required. Safety. Normal risks associated with the distribution of electrical power, such as shock hazard from downed lines, would exist. Availability. All components necessary for the intertie system are readily available. 8.14 9.0 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATI NS Table 9.1 summarizes the village plans, the associated Present worth analysis, and any non-electric benefits. Table 9.1 D AWN TUNUNAK [Base Case | Alternative A]Alternative Energy Source Diesel and Intertie Waste Heat Present Wort [$2,357,100] $2,351,100 | $4,644,100 NoneBLlectrical Benefits = |e es 3 9,400 ota [ $2,351, TOO] $1,571,700 | $4,047, 100 The evaluation of the intertie between Tununak and Toksook Bay must include the economic impact of the plan on both villages. In both villages, the Alternate Plan A waste heat recovery plan is more economical than the Base Case Plan. The Plan A present worths are listed below: Alternate Plan A Waste Heat. Recovery Present Worth Analysis Toksook Bay $ 1,796,700 Tununak 1,571,700 Total $ 3,368,400 The present value of the intertie, $4,644,100 is consider- ably higher than the combined present values of the Alternate A Plans in Toksook Bay and Tununak. If waste heat recovery in Toksook Bay is considered in combination with the intertie, the total cost of the intertie alternative in Toksook Bay is reduced from $4,644,100 to S51, $3,578,200. This total is still slightly higher than the combined Plan A totals of Toksook Bay and Tununak. The discounted net benefit of $1,065,900 is derived from Alternative A for Toksook Bay. This figure is conservative because the increased electrical load would increase waste heat availability. An expanded waste heat capture and distribution system has not been detailed and costed. Should the intertie option be taken to a feasibility study, field investigations should include a more detailed thermal load analysis of Toksook Bay to support planning an expanded waste heat system. Direct power generation costs, excluding administrative costs, are presented in Table 9.2 for each energy plan. Table 9.2 Energy Base case Alternative A Alternative B* Production Plan 1 Cost Plan 2 Cost Plan 3 Cost Year (kwh/yr. ) (¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) ’ e ° ° 1983 419,500 26.39 26.39 25.09 1984 433,000 26.70 19/35 25.07 1985 446,200 27.03 19.23 25.09 1986 459,200 27.40 19.14 257013 1987 472,100 27.75 19.02 25.02 1988 484,800 28.14 18.96 25.31 1989 497,500 28.54 18.89 24.44 1990 510,000 28.96 18.84 25.58 1991 522,600 29.30 18.81 25.76 1992 535,100 29.84 18.78 25 \619 5) 1993 547,700 30.29 18.372 26.16 1994 560,300 30.77. 18.74 26.39 1995 572,900 Bille2e 18.73 26.63 1996 585,600 S78 18.73 26.90 1997 598,500 32:30 18.75 27.18 1998 611,400 32.84 18.78 28.03 1999 624,400 33041 18.80 28.33 2000 637,600 33/597 18.82 28.65 2001 651,000 34.56 18.86 28.99 * Based on combined electrical demand of Toksook Bay and Tununak. 92 Table 9.3 presents the plans for the village, in rank of recommended preference. The recommended action appropriate to each alternative is listed as well. Table 9.3 Energy Plan Alternative Recommended Action Alternative A - Waste Heat Initiate a feasibility Capture study for waste heat recovery. Estimated cost of feasibilty study $12,000 - $15,000. ternative - Electrica nitiate a feasibility Intertie with Toksook Bay study for transmission line Central Power Plant, with intertie and waste heat Waste Heat Capture in Toksook capture with Toksook Bay. Retain Tununak Power Bay. Estimated cost of Plants as Backup study - $12,000 - $15,000 ase Case - Continue Investigate operation for Operation of Central potential of improved Power Plant generation efficiency. Estimate cost of study at $10,000 - $12,000 Additional Recommendations Weatherization No resource assessment or -building insulation feasibility study -building envelope indicated; immediate action infiltration required to bring Energy -improved combustion Audit and/or weatherization program to this community. Wind Power nitiate win ata acquisition program. 9.3 Reconnaissance studies are necessarily preliminary in nature, however, it is apparent that there is great potential for a waste heat capture system in Tununak. Sale of the waste heat will realize increased revenues to the utility which will decrease the cost of production for electricity. Currently (1981-82) electricity costs 48.27¢ per KWH based on $1.29 a gallon for fuel and includes distribution and overhead costs. The fuel is supplied by Chevron and barged to Tununak from the distribution center in Bethel. The computer model used in the reconnaissance study projected that the 1982-83 cost of production for electricity will be approximately 26.28¢ per KWH. The study suggested that a waste heat capture system would be installed, and become operational in 1983-84. It was assumed that the waste heat would replace fuel oil, which costs $2.15 per gallon, used for space heating. Based on this assumption, the cost of production for electricity would be reduced from 26.70¢ to 19.35¢ per KWH. Therefore it is recommended that a waste heat capture system be installed. The reconnaissance study estimates that the system has the potential to save up to 14,000 gallons of fuel oil in the first full year of operation. 9.4 APPENDIX. See Section 3.0 (Methodology) of the Main Report: RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR THE VILLAGES OF Aniak, Atka, Chefornak, Chignik Lake, Cold Bay, False Pass, Hooper Bay, Ivanof Bay, Kotlik, Lower and Upper Kalskag, Mekoryuk, Newtok, Nightmute, Nikolski, St. George, St. Marys, St. Paul, Toksook Bay, and Tununak. ‘i Ee rete w«a 5 ista Corportion 516 Denali Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) 279-5516 R ECEIvED APR 1 2 1982 ‘ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY April .9, 1982 Eric Yould Alaska Power Authority 334 West 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 RE: Letter of March 8, 1982 We have reviewed the draft document; by NORTEC of the energy reconnaissance report of tne Calista Region. Calista Corporation endorses th2 study that was done by NORTEC. Energy in the Calista Region is probably the most expensive item for the people. Oil and gas have to be transported in, therefore causing the cost of energy to. skyrocket in the villages. We would very much appreciate for Alaska Power Authority go on further and make recommendations to improve the energy programs within our region. However, please coordinate with Calista Corporation and A.V.C.P. Inc. on the reconnaissance studies that will be done in the future. Any questions please do not hesitate to call on us. Sincerely, CALISTA CORPORATION Al ee, President AR/ms Reply to Calista Corporation letter dated 4/9/82. Receipt of the letter and the point about further future coordination with A.V.C.P. Inc. is acknowledged.