The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEnergy Study for Barrow Alaska 1977BAR 001 c.2 ENERGY STUDY FOR nLASKA EN BARROW, ALASKA FOR UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR Alaska Power Administration P.O. BOX 50 JUNEAU, ALASKA 99802 BY R. W. Beck AND ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ORLANDO, FLORIDA DENVER, COLORADO COLUMBUS, NEBRASKA WELLESLEY, MASSACHUSETTS PHOENIX, ARIZONA INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA a PLANNING DESIGN RATES ANALYSES _ EVALUATIONS MANAGEMENT TELEPHONE 303-292-0270 ° FILE NO. R. W. Beck AND Associates ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS SEATTLE, WASHINGTON DENVER, COLORADO. 400 PRUDENTIAL PLAZA PHOENIX, ARIZONA DENVER, COLORADO 80265 CRO LORDS COLUMBUS, NEBRASKA WELLESLEY, MASSACHUSETTS INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA CC~1524-UF1-QX August 18, 1977 Mr. Robert J. Cross Administrator U. S. Department of the Interior Alaska Power Administration P. O. Box 50 Juneau, Alaska 99802 Dear Mr. Cross: We are transmitting herewith our report entitled "Energy Study for Barrow, Alaska." This report presents (1) the results of a study to estimate energy consumption for the Barrow area through the year 2000, and (2) alter- natives for supplying that energy. We gratefully acknowledge the cooperation and assistance extended to us by the staff of The Alaska Power Administration, The Bureau of Mines, representatives of the Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc., The North Slope Borough, The Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, and several of the native corporations. Respectfully submitted, R. W. BECK AND ASSOCIATES ENERGY STUDY for BARROW, ALASKA For United States Department of Interior Alaska Power Administration P. 0. Box 50 Juneau, Alaska 99802 The technical material and data contained in this study were prepared under the supervision and direction of the under- signed: Al P.° oes t A ty i fy oy, A Cf LP 7: 49th kD C. O'Brien . cece ce sens nc ee eooneey Kennet Associate and Assistant Manager Central Design Office Ah anga EC Ayeitr rge E. Zeier Senior Engineer iy | Ree | Pete elie XA J. Steve Miller ¢ Environmental Planner TABLE OF CONTENTS ENERGY STUDY for BARROW, ALASKA for United States Department of Interior Alaska Power Administration P.O. Box 50 Juneau, Alaska 99082 Section Page Number Section and Subsection Titles Number Letter of Transmittal Engineering Certificate Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures aE Summary and Conclusions I-l Future Energy Requirements I-1 Electricity Consumption I-1 Gas Consumption I-2 Alternative Energy Supply System I-2 Alternatives Using Electric Heating I-4 Wind I-4 Il Introduction II-1 DEL Existing Utility Facilities III-1 Historical Energy Use in Barrow III-1 Utility Facilities III-3 Fuel Source III-3 Gas Transmission Line System III-3 Gas Distribution Systems IlI-5 Electric Generating Facilities ILI-5 Electrical Distribution System ILI-14 Water and Sewer Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section Page Number Section and Subsection Titles Number IV Description of Socio-Economic/Community Factors Iv-1 General Iv-1 Population Iv-1 Housing Iv-3 Employment Iv-4 Income Iv-9 Socio-Cultural Factors IV-11 North Slope Borough Iv-12 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation IV-14 Native Village Cerporations IV-16 Naval Arctic Research Laboratory IV-16 Potential External Developments Iv-17 Natural Gas Pipeline IV-17 North Slope Haul Road IV-17 Development of the National Petroleum Iv-18 Reserve in Alaska Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil/Gas Iv-19 Udall Bill (H.R. 39) . Vv Energy Consumption V-1 General v-1 Review of Historical Energy Requirements v-1 Natural Gas - Barrow V-1 Natural Gas — NARL v-4 Electric Energy - Barrow vV-4 Electric Energy - NARL V-12 Methods of Projection V-12 Results of Analysis -- Projection of Future V-15 Energy Requirements Electrical Energy Projection -- Barrow v-15 Natural Gas Projection -- Barrow V-15 Total Natural Gas Projection V-22 Effect of Development of the National Petroleum V-26 Reserve in Alaska Exploration V-26 Development V-26 VI Energy Resources VI-1 Coal VI-2 oil VI-5 ‘TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section Page Number Section and Subsection Titles Number Natural Gas VI-7 Wind VI-10 VIl Alternatives to Meet Energy Requirements VII-1 Alternatives Using Coal VII-6 Alternatives Using Oil VII-6 Alternatives Using Natural Gas VII-7 Alternatives Using Wind VII-8 Requirement for Additional Generation VII-11 Estimated Remaining Life of Gas Reserves VII-11 Appendices A Review of Assumptions for Synthesized Projection A-1 Model Consumer Electrical Load Saturation A-1 Number of Residential Accounts A-1 Number of Commercial Accounts A-3 Non-Residential Additions to Utility A-3 Systems Due to Future Construction Commercial Energy Consumption per Account-Year A-4 Computer Analyses A-7 B Assumptions and Criteria for Cost Comparison of B-1 Alternatives Cc Preliminary Cost Estimates for Alternate Energy c-1 Utilization Systems Table Number 10 ll 12 13) LIST OF TABLES Title Electric Generating Facilities for Barrow, Alaska Population Estimates -- Barrow, Alaska Total Residences -- Barrow, Alaska Labor Force Characteristics, North Slope Borough Barrow-North Slope Division, Alaska Personal Income By Major Sources 1970-1974 (Thousands of Dollars) Summary of Historical Natural Gas Con- sumption (MCF) in Barrow, Alaska Summary of Historical Sales - Natural Gas Barrow, Alaska Summary of Historical Natural Gas Consumption in Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, Alaska (MCF) Summary of Historical Natural Gas Consumption in Barrow and NARL from the South Barrow Gas Field Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption, Barrow, Alaska (By month in kWh) Summary of Historical Sales - Electric Barrow, Alaska Summary of Historical Electric Capacity Requirements, Barrow, Alaska Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption and Calculated Demand, Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, Alaska Page Number IlI-15 Iv-1 Iv-5 Iv-7 Iv-10 V-2 v-3 v-6 V-9 v-10 V-13 Table Number 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Title Summary of Projected Electric Energy and Capacity Requirements Summary of Annual Barrow Area Natural Gas Requirements - Low Projection Summary of Annual Barrow Area Natural Gas Requirements - High Projection Coal Analyses from Deposits Along the Kuk River Near Wainwright, Alaska Summary of Coal Mining Costs at Three Sites Near Wainwright, Alaska Summary of Basic Reservoir Parameters -- South Barrow Gas Field Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4, Alaska Well No. 14 -- Report of Analysis Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for Coal Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for oil Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for Natural Gas Alternate Energy Utilization System for Wind 1977 Assumed Energy and Capacity Re- quirements of Individual Residences, Barrow, Alaska Synthesized Electric Energy Projection, Barrow, Alaska Page Number V-16 V-23 V-24 VI-4 VI-6 VI-8 VI-9 VII-2 VII-3 VII-4 VII-5 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table Page Number Title Number A-3 Synthesized Natural Gas Projection, A-9 Barrow, Alaska Figure Number 10 ll-a 11-b LIST OF FIGURES Title Geographic Location Map -- Energy Study for Barrow, Alaska Barrow and Vicinity Gas Fields in Barrow Natural Gas Distribution System for Barrow, Alaska Utilities Distribution Gas Lines -- Map G-l Utilities Distribution Gas Lines -- Map G-2 Utilities Distribution Gas Lines -- Map G-3 Typical Gas Distribution Line in Residential Area and Typical Overhead Street Crossing in Gas Distribution System (photographs) Heat Rate vs Load -- Solar Saturn Gas Turbine Heat Rate vs Load -- Solar Centaur Gas Turbine GS-4000 Heat Rate vs Load -- Reciprocating Engine Generator Sets Electrical One-Line Diagram -- Barrow, Alaska Utilities Distribution, Electrical -- Map E-1 Utilities Distribution, Electrical -- Map E-2 Page Number TI=3 II-4 III-4 III-6 III-7 III-8 III-9 III-10 Litely III-12 III-13 III-16 III-17 III-18 Figure Number ll-c 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Title Utilities Distribution, Electrical -- Map E-3 Population Estimates -- Barrow, Alaska Individuals per Residence -- Barrow, Historical and Projected Electric Energy Consumption -- Barrow, Alaska Historical and Projected Gas Con- sumption -- Barrow, Alaska Historical and Projected Electric Energy Consumption -- NARL, Alaska Historical and Projected Gas Consumption -- NARL, Alaska Total Barrow and NARL Natural Gas Con- sumption Coal Locations and Assumed Transmission Line Routes for Mine-Mouth Coal-Fired Power Plants Assumed Operating Criteria for Wind Turbine Generator 100-kW Experimental Wind Turbine Generator Future Generating Capacity Requirements Page Number III-19 Iv-2 Iv-8 V-17 v-19 v-20 vV-21 V-25 VI-3 VII-9 VII-10 VII-12 SECTION I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Barrow, Alaska presently uses natural gas from the South Barrow Gas Field to meet the community's energy needs. Virtually all electricity for Barrow is generated by gas turbine generators using natural gas as fuel. Space heating requirements are met with individual building heating systems using natural gas supplied by a community distribution system. The distribution system has been deemed to be in poor condition and in need of replacement. The cost of replacing this system has been estimated to be in excess of $7 million. Based on the projected gas consumption for the area, it was estimated that the South Barrow Gas Field reserves would be depleted in less than 10 years. Prior to making such a large expenditure of money in light of the limited reserves, it was con- sidered desirable to explore other possible alternatives for meeting Barrow's energy needs. The Alaska Power Administration was authorized to make a contract study to identify and assess those alternatives. After the study was initiated, a new gas field potential was announced east of the South Barrow Gas Field, thereby substantially improving the future energy outlook for Barrow. Future Energy Requirements As a first step in executing the study, future energy consumption for the Barrow area was projected. Consumption for the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL) was included in this projection, since NARL also uses gas from the South Barrow Gas Field. These energy con- sumption estimates are summarized below. Electricity Consumption Barrow NARL Total Energy Peak Energy Peak Energy Peak (MWh ) (kW) (MWh) (kW) (MWh ) (kW) Historical 1975 6,396 1,160 9,056 1,579 15,452 2,739 1976 8,317 1,455 9,504 Ou 17,821 35126 Projected 1980 11,700 2,180 11,238 2,000 22,938 4,180 1990 25,080 4,680 15,583 2,780 40,663 7,460 2000 37,179 6,930 19,906 3,550 57,085 10,480 I-2 Gas Consumption Barrow NARL Total (MCF) (MCF) (MCF) Historical 1975 384,580 412,556 T9714 136 1976 446,852 382,574 829,426 Projected 1980 537,000 537,000 1,074,000 1990 824,000 757,000 1,581,000 2000 1,110,000 975,000 2,085,000 Cumulative gas consumption for the Barrow area (including NARL) was estimated to be 36.3 billion cubic feet through the year 2000 and 51 billion cubic feet through the year 2006. These estimates include gas used to generate electricity. Gas consumption due to future exploration and development of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska could amount to as much as an additional 9.1 billion cubic feet. Remaining reserves in the South Barrow Gas Field plus those in the potential new discovery have been estimated by some at approximately 75 billion cubic feet of natural gas. Based on these estimates a com- parison of reserve and demand figures indicate the natural gas reserves for Barrow could exceed the projected demands to the year 2000 by a very substantial margin. Estimates of future consumption must be qualified by noting that a very limited historical data base existed for making such pre- dictions. Further, the future lifestyle and economic conditions for the Barrow area may significantly affect energy consumption. Alternative Energy Supply Systems Coal, oil, gas and wind were investigated as possible energy resources for Barrow. A total of nineteen energy supply schemes using these four resources were evaluated. The following list describes the alternative with the lowest evaluated cost for each of the fossil fuel energy resources: Coal Power Plant Type and coal-fired steam power Location plant in Barrow Space Heating Type individual coal heating systems Total Annual Cost $1,854, 100 Annual Fuel Consumption 23,900 tpy 4Rased on present natural gas cost of $0. 324/10° Btu. bincludes $400,000/yr credit for existing facilities. Oil gas turbine power plant in Barrow w/ topping plant individual oil heating systems $2,063,000 76,000 bbl/yr CBased on estimated true production cost of natural gas of $1.50/10° Btu. Natural Gas gas turbine power plant in Barrow individual natural gas heating systems $1,091,8004»> to $1,628, 000»¢ 456,000 MCF/yr c=r 1-4 The natural gas alternative has the lowest evaluated cost of the alternatives using fossil fuels, thus indicating that this resource should be used for at least the next 30-year period. While the coal and oil energy supply systems were found to be as reliable and technically feasible as the natural gas alternative, they were determined to be considerably less convenient and less desirable from an environmental standpoint. Alternatives Using Electric Heating Schemes which assumed the use of electric heating were found to be uniformly unattractive from a cost standpoint. In addition, fuel consumption was nearly three times as high as compared to direct combustion of a fuel for heating purposes. Wind Due to the intermittent nature of the wind, it can be used as a resource to reduce fuel consumption but cannot be considered as a source of firm power. As a result of the high initial cost of wind turbine generator equipment, the unit cost of energy generated by wind was found to be considerably higher than energy generated by any of the three fossil fuels. SECTION II INTRODUCTION Natural gas for heating purposes is supplied to the Barrow residential community by an above-grade distribution system which was installed in 1964-1965. The system was constructed using a variety of non-standard materials and construction methods and is reported to have numerous leaks and to be in generally poor condition. A number of surveys and appraisals have been made which indicate that the distribution system should be rehabilitated or replaced.1,2 The U.S. Department of the Interior has determined that re- placement is the preferred alternative at an estimated cost in excess of $7 million. The source of natural gas for all residents and facilities in the Barrow area, including the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL) and a DEW-Line radar site, is the South Barrow Gas Field. The gas is used as a fuel for the generation of electricity and for building heating systems. Based on projected gas consumption and estimated reserves in the South Barrow Gas Field, it was estimated that gas should be available from this source for another eight to ten years. In order to determine if the expenditure of funds for a new gas distribution system could be justified in light of the limited reserves, the Department of the Interior requested the Alaska Power Administration to estimate future energy requirements for the Barrow area and evaluate alternative energy resources which could be used to meet those requirements. This report was prepared under a con- tract with the Alaska Power Administration to satisfy the Department of the Interior's request. Funds for the study were provided by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Subsequent to the initiation of this study, a new gas field was announced approximately 6 miles east of the South Barrow Gas Field. The study plan was modified to include consideration of the new field. lpureau of Indian Affairs (Planning Support Group), Report No. 244. 2system Evaluation and Construction Recommendations by Kelly Pittelko Fritz and Forssen, dated November 15, 1974. II-2 The city of Barrow is located on the northern coast of Alaska approximately 8 miles southwest of Point Barrow, the northernmost point in the state. Figure 1 shows the geographic location of the city. A map of the Barrow-Browerville area is shown in Figure 2. Barrow has a population of approximately 2200 people. The Naval Arctic Research Laboratory and a DEW-Line radar site are located in the same vicinity. There are no highways linking Barrow to other parts of the state. Therefore, goods and materials are transported by airplane, ship, or barge. Air trans- portation is provided by Wien-Alaska Airlines on a daily scheduled basis and by various charter airlines. “The history of the Barrow area, its environmental setting, and present problems and issues are discussed in detail in sev- eral of the reports referenced in the bibliography and are therefore not covered in this report except as they relate to the energy study. 28 a RIVER Pf Grew mer E> Paariowar PETROLEUM RESERVE IN BEAUFORT ALASKA CHUKCHI TRANS-ALASKA SEA PIPELINE KOTZEBUE¢ KOTIEBUE SOUND Pp FNinsucy Sn ine FAIRBANKS SCALE IN MILES FIGURE | GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION MAP nO OECEI® ROSOCISTES) ENERGY STUDY FOR BARROW, ALASKA AUGUST 1977 SECTION III EXISTING UTILITY FACILITIES Historical Energy Use in Barrow Anthropologists indicate that Eskimos have lived in the Arctic for at least 8000 years. During most of this time, their sources of fuel were oil from sea mammals, pitch, and coal. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) established a school in Barrow in 1918. From approximately that date until 1954, the major energy source used by the government facilities and residents of the village was coal mined at Meade River (see Figure 1). Barrow is located within the boundaries of the Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4 (recently renamed the "National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska" by the U.S. Congress). This reserve was established in 1923 by executive order of President Warren G. Harding, and includes ap- proximately 35,000 square miles on the North Slope. An exploration program for the reserve, initiated in 1944 and lasting until 1953, led to the discovery of two gas fields and three oil fields. Only one of these fields, the South Barrow Gas Field, has been produced to date. In 1947, the U.S. Navy established the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL) northeast of Barrow at the site of the base camp for the oil exploration program. In 1949, a gas transmission line was installed between the gas field and NARL. The diesel-electric generators and building heating systems at NARL were at that time converted to use gas. In 1953, BIA built a second school with a heating system which used stove oil instead of coal, since oil was relatively inexpensive at the time and easier to use. During this period, two 50-kW diesel- electric generator units provided electricity to the BIA schools and the Public Health Service (PHS) hospital. Following the conversion of the Navy base to gas, the federal agencies in Barrow, consisting of BIA, PHS, the U.S. Weather Bureau, and the National Bureau of Standards, requested permission to use gas. Approval was granted, and in 1958 a 4-inch gas transmission line was installed between the South Barrow Gas Field and Barrow. The line was constructed primarily of drill stem, oil field tubing and other mis- cellaneous pipe connected with "Rollagrip" type couplings, and was operated at 80 psig. A 250-kW diesel-electric generator was installed to provide electricity to the federal facilities, and a gas distri- bution system was constructed to serve the federal agency buildings. III-2 In 1962, the BIA began to improve the utilities which were avail- able to the government agencies by constructing a separate building to house a water distillation and treatment plant, a sewage treatment plant and the existing gas-fired electric generators. In 1959, the City of Barrow petitioned the U.S. Congress for permission to purchase gas from the Navy. Approval was granted in 1962, and the gas distribu- tion system was installed in 1964-1965 by Barrow Utilities, Inc., (BUI) a non-profit utility corporation organized under the Alaska Cooperative Corporation Act. This corporation was subsequently renamed Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc., (BUECI). At the request of the City of Barrow, an electric distribution system was installed in 1963 by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) of Fairbanks, thus making electricity available to the residents for the first time. BIA installed a 450-kW gas-fired electric generator in 1964 and assumed responsibility for operation and maintenance of the central utilities. In 1965, BUI purchased the assets of GVEA in Barrow and became the sole distributor of electricity and gas for the Barrow private sector. Gas was purchased from the Navy and electricity was purchased from BIA. Subsequently, BUI assumed the responsibility for operating and maintaining the BIA utility facilities on a cost- reimbursement basis. In 1968, BIA added two 750-kW gas turbine-electric generators to accommodate the growing electrical load. At approximately the same time, a new 6-inch gas transmission line was installed from the gas field to Barrow to replace the original 4-inch line. In June 1975, an agreement was reached between BUI and BIA whereby BUI was to operate and maintain the BIA facilities at no cost to the government except for major repairs. ! On September 10, 1975, in anticipation of phasing the BIA out of the utility business in Barrow, a tri-party agreement was entered into by BIA, the North Slope Borough, and BUECI. The general terms of the agreement are as follows:2 1. BUECI will agree to a voluntary foreclosure for the cancellation of all debts owed to BIA (these debts were the result of unrepaid loans made by BIA to BUECI when the utility was going into business). lgureau of Indian Affairs (Planning Support Group), A Report for the Justification of the Federal Government to Upgrade the Gas Pipeline Distribution System in Barrow, Alaska (Billings, Montana), Report No. 244. 2Bureau of Indian Affairs (Planning Support Group), Report No. 244. III-3 2. BIA will upgrade the gas distribution system in Barrow. Bs Once the gas distribution system has been upgraded, BIA will transfer the entire utility to the North Slope Borough, which will in turn contract with BUECI for the operation of the facilities. Subsequent to the signing of the tri-party agreement, the North Slope Borough purchased a new 2500-kW gas turbine generator to meet increasing electrical loads. The new turbine can operate with either gas or fuel oil and is presently operational. Utility Facilities Fuel Source The primary energy source for the Barrow area is natural gas produced from the South Barrow Gas Field, which is described in detail in Section VI. The location of the field is shown in Figure 3. A small amount of oil is kept for emergency standby fuel. In addition, the power plant at NARL usually burns oil in one of its four gas turbine-generators. The oil used by the village is normally delivered by the BIA ship North Star III during its annual summer visit to Barrow. Oil for NARL is delivered by military barge. Gas Transmission Line System Natural gas is supplied to the Barrow area via a 6-inch pipeline approximately 5 miles in length and having 74 expansion loops. All joints are welded and the line is supported on wooden posts. This line is reported to be well engineered and in good condition. Gas is supplied to NARL and the DEW-Line radar station by a 4-inch pipeline which was constructed in 1949. The line has welded joints and is supported on 55-gallon drum halves. It was reported to be in good condition, but portions are covered with snow during the winter. This poses a hazard to heavy equipment operators in the NARL/South Barrow Gas Field area. The natural gas transmission line routes to Barrow and NARL are shown in Figure 3. = SS Sige R.W. BECK & ASSOCIATES ‘ § . GAS FIELDS *- “ef 5 AUGUST 1977 \\IN BARROW AREA “kt)= III-5 Gas Distribution Systems As noted previously, the gas distribution system was installed in Barrow during the winter of 1964-1965. Figures 4 and 5 represent this existing system. In order to make gas available to the residents of Barrow at the earliest possible date, a variety of non-standard materials and construction methods were employed. Piping is sup- ported in most locations on 55-gallon drum halves, approximately 18 inches above the ground. Wooden arches support the piping where it crosses over roads. The initial intent was to convert eventually to an underground distribution system. However, tests in the field indicated that an underground system would be unsuitable for Barrow. Figure 6 is representative of the general deterioration of the dis- tribution system, which is reported to have numerous leaks and to be in very poor condition overall. A number of reports have been written regarding these circumstances. The majority of these are summarized in a report prepared in 1975 by the Bureau of Indian Affairs entitled A Report for the Justification of the Federal 3 Government to Upgrade the Gas Pipeline Distribution System in Barrow. The distribution system is also a hazard to automobiles and snow- mobiles due to its proximity to vehicular traffic routes and its elevation above the ground. A new distribution system has been proposed as a part of the tri-party agreement described above. A design has been developed by the Corps of Engineers to provide a gas tight (all welded) system and, to the greatest extent possible, to protect the gas piping system from external physical damage. Reserve system capacity has been included to accommodate future loads. While not planned as a part of the new distribution system, additional metering facilities would also be desirable for use in determining energy consumption. Electric Generating Facilities Electric generating facilities for Barrow are listed in Table 1. Heat rate curves for these units are shown in Figures 7, 8 and 9. The condition of the electric generating facilities was not assessed as a part of this study. However, a report from the Utility Manager for the North Slope Borough indicated that some equipment was in need of repair, including the two 750 kW gas turbine-generators and the 450 kW emergency diesel engine- generator set. 3gureau of Indian Affairs (Planning Support Group), Report No. 244. 6°GAS TRANSMISSION LINE FROw SOUTH BARROW GAS FIELD 200 Psi6 OROWERVILLE Gare STATION 20 PSG Y : 20 PSIG 2 2 ROWER BUECI OFFICE (0L0 BLA OF FICE) 2300Kw Tso Kw 7s0 «w a PARKER 430 «w oes Bonouce Seevice "Nationals US WEATHER BuNE Ay ser ans ceria soLan sarurm sovam sarunn peta wun mecipnocaring poten Scour MOSPITAL Sune OF YOMAL GUARD ARMORY i URBINE INE Pee de aed GENERATOR GENERATOR GENERATOR jee HERATOR OEM QUONSET BUILDING LEGEND 200 PSIG - OPERATING PRESSURE (TYPICAL) © - FLOW METER leven naam FIGURE 4 NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOR BARROW, ALASKA AW BECK @ ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 Ti Fe PISA OGROOK st. BARROW UTILITIES, INC. UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFIARS GAS LINES. FIGURE 5a as oooh ue ae AS NIdHO UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION BARROW UTILITIES, INC BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFIARS 2 8 OVERHEAD PIPE -——O-—o — CROSSING GURED PIPE GAS LINES a < = > S z 2. > FIGURE 5b : Hits SEAM Ae FIGURE 6 TYPICAL GAS DISTRIBUTION LINE IN RESIDENTIAL AREA TYPICAL OVERHEAD STREET CROSSING IN GAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM R. W. BECK & ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 > x= =x 2 ° a Ww n <= ao =x = x ~ = - a = =< [4 e < WW x AIR INLET TEMP. - 10°F ALTITUDE —- SEA LEVEL 2 H20 INLET PRESSURE LOSS 6" H20 EXHAUST PRESSURE LOSS SOLAR BULLETIN 757 B/575 J HHV/LHVE= I. R.W. BECK & ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 400 LOAD-Kw FIGURE 7 HEAT RATE VS LOAD SOLAR SATURN GAS TURBINE AIR INLET TEMP. - 10°F ALTITUDE -SEA LEVEL 2" HeO INLET PRESSURE LOSS 4" H20 EXHAUST PRESSURE LOSS SOLAR BULLETIN 756B/975 HHV/LHV= 1.11 ow 2 °o 8 S x =z 2 °o a Ww yn <= a x = =x ~ =) be ao rs < it - < WwW <x : 8 2000 FIGURE 8 HEAT RATE VS LOAD SOLAR CENTAUR GAS TURBINE GS-4000 R.W. BECK & ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 EMERGENCY GENERATOR 250 KW- DIESEL UNIT NO. 4 NL 450 KW-GAS > x x z oO a WwW nn < ao x = x ~ ) Ee a Ww e <= « - =< Ww = EMERGENCY GENERATOR 450 kw- DIESEL FIGURE 9 HEAT RATE VS LOAD RECIPROCATING ENGINE GENERATOR SETS R.W. BECK & ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 ILI-14 On small, isolated utility systems, it is normal to calculate firm capacity as the capacity available assuming the largest generator is out of service. Based on the equipment listed in Table 1, a firm capacity of 2650 kW is indicated. However, due to the needed equipment repairs noted above, the actual firm capacity may be somewhat less than this figure. Electrical Distribution System All of the Barrow generating facilities have an output voltage of 2400 volts, except the Solar Centaur gas turbine, which operates at 4160 volts. A pad-mounted step-down trans- former outside the generator building allows the Centaur to be connected to the 2400-volt bus. Four feeders serve loads from this bus. The loads served are indicated on the system one- line diagram presented in Figure 10. Figure 11 shows the dis- tribution system layout. These two figures indicate the radial nature of the Barrow electric distribution system. There are no provisions at this time for connecting any of the major feeders together to facilitate system maintenance or reduce the length of an outage resulting from distribution line failure. A limiting feature of the distribution system is that the entire residential area of Barrow and Browerville is fed from a single circuit breaker. BUECL personnel have indicated that, in general, standard REA construction procedures have been adhered to. There is no need for special power line hardware despite the severe arctic cold, because there is little precipitation in Barrow to inter- fere with the operation of moveable parts. The only non-standard construction practice followed in Barrow is the method of setting poles. After a pole is set in place, water is poured into the hole and allowed to freeze. The ice will remain permanently frozen and hold the pole securely. No frost jacking occurs if the butts of the poles are installed 7 to 8 feet deep. Apparently, the most severe problem existing in the distri- bution system has to do with the distributor feeder line that serves the major commercial and residential areas. According to BUECI personnel, a section of the line out of the power plant has a No, 2 or smaller conductor. This section of line causes a high level of voltage drop under heavy load conditions. Generally, during normal operation, a fault on a distribu- tion feeder line removes the generator from the line before any line protective device operates. A condition such as this nor- mally exists because the operating characteristics of the fuses Year Installed 1958 1964 1968 1968 1968 1976 TABLE 1 Electric Generating Facilities for Barrow, Alaska SPO Caterpiller Reciprocating Engine-Generator Set Caterpiller Reciprocating Engine-Generator Set Caterpiller Reciprocating Engine-Generator Set Solar - Saturn Gas Turbine Generator Set Solar - Saturn Gas Turbine Generator Set Solar - Centaur Gas Turbine Generator Set Nominal Rating - kW 250 450 450 750 750 2500 Fuel Diesel Oil Diesel Oil Gas Gas Gas Natural Gas/ Diesel Oil Remarks Emergency Use Only Emergency Use Only Exhaust Duct to Waste Heat Boiler Exhaust Duct to Waste Heat Boiler GUST Le: APARTMENT = HOSPITAL | VILLAGE FEEDER PUBLIC HEALTH 2400V VILLAGE EMERGENCY FEEDER avy SERVICE FEEDER ' STATION FEEDER PHS OUPLEX N.C. — —_ — — BUECI OFFICE # #2 PHS, ovo HOSPITAL FIGURE 10 4160/2400V > SCHOOL FEEDER MULT! PURPOSE BUILDING ELECTRICAL ONE LINE DIAGRAM R.W. BECK @ ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 BARROW, ALASKA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL N.C. HVAT [4 | Yan VICINITY MAP. BARROW UTILITIES, INC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFIARS ELECTRICAL FIGURE Ila NACHIK ST. > 7. oe “to K Pik GRAPIIC SCALE 20 by 09 wo wo yo BARROW UTILITIES, INC UTIUTIES DISTRIBUTION pers oe BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFIARS ELECTRICAL eA ok GAAPHIC SCALE 200 90 wo 9 ao BARROW UTILITIES, INC. UTILITIES BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFIARS ELECTRICAL FIGURE Ile IL1I-20 used throughout the system have not been coordinated with the operating characteristics of the circuit breakers which protect the generator. Coordination would enhance system reliability. Water and Sewer Facilities Water. A central water treatment plant, located in the Barrow Utility Building, is presently being expanded to provide additional water treatment capacity. The plant draws raw water from the Isatkoak Lagoon. Treatment includes flash distillation of the water to reduce the dissolved solids content, a process which consumes a large amount of energy. Water is piped from the central treatment plant to a few of the federal facilities. A truck delivers water from the plant to most of the remainder of the community, although some residents obtain water by cutting and collecting ice from the nearby fresh- water lake. Sewage. A sewage treatment plant located in the Utility Building treats sewage from the PHS compound and BIA facilities. Certain other buildings, such as the Top-of-the-World Hotel and the North Slope Office Building, have self-contained sewage- treatment facilities. The remainder of the community relies on chemical toilets or honey buckets. Sewage from these sources is collected in a truck and disposed of untreated at a site adjacent to the NARL sewage incinerator, which is presently inoperative. SECTION IV DESCRIPTION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC/ COMMUNITY FACTORS General The demand for natural gas and electricity in Barrow depends upon a number of economic factors, such as population growth, con- struction activity, nature of the local economy, and village life- style. Present uncertainty as to the village lifestyle which will prevail in the future makes forecasting a speculative venture. In addition, major resource-related activity outside the area could affect energy consumption. Section IV considers these and other factors in terms of how they may affect demand, and, to the extent allowed by available data, projects them through 2000. Population Several estimates of population growth have been published for the Barrow area. From these data, two population growth pro- jections were developed. One reflects a low growth rate, the other, a relatively high growth rate. The low growth rate projection generally is based on the lowest estimates encountered. The high growth rate projection was judged to be the highest rate compatible with other growth trends in the Barrow area, but does not reflect the highest estimates. The high and low population estimates are presented in Table 2 and are displayed graphically in Figure 12. It should be noted, however, that each of these projections assumes a slightly different population area. The low-growth fore- cast includes only that population in the immediate Barrow area, and, accordingly, excludes personnel associated with the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL) and the U.S. Coast Guard. The high-growth forecast includes not only the city of Barrow proper, but the geographic area within a 10-mile radius of the center of Barrow. This area includes NARL, located four miles northeast of the city. This geographic base difference, in combination with some disagreement among estimates, is the reason for the dif- ference in estimates of historical population for the 1970-1976 period. Both estimates begin in 1970 and extend on a yearly basis through 1990. Estimates for the year 2000 are also shown. The projections assume a linear growth pattern which follows the trend established in the source data. Iv-1 TABLE 2 Population Estimates -- Barrow, Alaska Low-Growth Rate® High-Growth Rate? Year Estimate Source of Data Estimate Source of Data 1970 1918 1 2164 7 1971 1939 2257 7 1972 1960 2350 7 1973 1981 2 2467 7 1974 1977 3 2583 7 1975 1977 4 2700 7 1976 2092 5 2800 " 1977 2144 6 2900 7 1978 2204 6 3000 7 1979 2264 6 3100 7 1980 2324 6 3200 7 1981 2381 3320 7 1982 2440 3340 7 1983 2496 3560 q 1984 2554 3680 7 1985 2611 3800 7 1986 2668 3900 7 1987 2726 4000 7 1988 2783 4100 7 1989 2841 4200 7 1990 2900 4300 7 2000 3600 5300 4Includes immediate Barrow area only. bincludes population within 10-mile radius of Barrow. Sources: 1. 1970 U.S. Census Bureau Count. 2. 1973 U.S. Census Bureau Count. 3. Borough Planning Staff count, plus actual count of oil industry, as quoted in Department of the Navy, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Re- serves, Draft EIS, Evaluation of Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 4, Washington, D.C., 1977. 4. North Slope Borough Population Estimate, 1975. 5. North Slope Borough Population Estimate, 1977. 6. Figures from Alaska International Academy, 1974, as quoted in Draft EIS, Evaluation of Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 4. (186 individuals were subtracted from yearly population estimates to account for personnel associated with NARL and U.S. Coast Guard). 7. John Graham and Company, Regional Master Plan, Barrow Region, Alaska (Seattle, Washington, 1973). 130970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 YEAR (1) INDICATES IMMEDIATE FIGURE !2 BARROW AREA ONLY POPULATION ESTIMATES (2) INDICATES POPULATION a ae one BARROW, ALASKA 10 MILE RADIUS OF BARROW N LV=-3 For the period for 1977 to 2000, the low estimate projects a population growth of 68 percent, while the high estimate predicts an 83 percent increase. In order to support these kinds of growth patterns, it will be necessary that the Barrow economy continue to improve and that more full-time, higher paying jobs become available. Figure 12 shows the range between the high and low popula- tion growth estimates to be ever widening. In 1982, for example, the upper population limit is 41 percent higher than the lower estimate. By 1990, this difference has increased to nearly 50 percent. This figure remains essentially constant through 2000, although total number differences continue to rise. In addition to the gradual continuous growth projected herein, there are a number of major factors, both within and ex- ternal to Barrow, that could substantially affect growth. Further, because the Likelihood of development is not yet known, population projections must be interpreted as approximate guidelines. Housing Much of the housing in Barrow is overcrowded, due principally to a combination of large families and extremely high, housing costs. Most residences are in need of major repairs. According to one report, the apparently high vacancy rate in the North Slope Borough is due_in part to the deteriorated condition of much of the housing. The future of residential construction is uncertain in Barrow, due mainly to a potential slowdown in the North Slope Borough's Capital Improvements Program. This program in part establishes the schedule for the major portion of residential construction in Barrow. Although the schedule originally called for construction starts for 164 apartments or houses between now and 1982-1983, financial problems associated with an inability to issue general obligation bonds may force postponement of the program. However, for the purposes of this study, it was assumed that construction would proceed on schedule. Loohn Graham and Company, Regional Master Plan: Barrow Region, Alaska, (Seattle, Washington, 1973). Department of the Navy, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Continuing Exploration and Evaluation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4. Iv-4 Table 3 shows the total estimated number of residences in Barrow through the year 2000. By 1983, again assuming no slow- down in proposed construction, it can be seen that there would be a total of 660 residences in the immediate Barrow area (in- cluding Browerville). Based on conversations with personnel at the North Slope Borough, it is believed that most of the planned new units (to be built during the period 1978-1982) will be multiple-residence facilities. Table 3 indicates the ratio of individuals per residence. For the years 1974 through 1983, these ratios were calculated by dividing the high growth rate and low growth rate population estimates by the number of residences planned for construction by the North Slope Borough. It can be seen that the average number of individuals per dwelling unit will decrease considerably through 1983, reaching an apparent lower limit of 3.8 to 5.4 (depending upon which population forecast is used). Figure 13 graphically depicts this trend. Total residences for the years 1984 through 2000 were esti- mated by dividing the low and high population estimates shown in Table 2 by assumed constant values of 3.8 and 5.4 individuals per residence, respectively. The number of residences in Barrow is expected to range between 763 and 796 by 1990, and between 900 and 1000 by the year 2000. Employment Employment affects gas and electric load growth in two ways. First, availability of jobs will usually encourage in-migration and tends to discourage existing residents from leaving the area, thus increasing the population. Second, increased employment levels results in increased personal income, which in turn encourages energy consumption. Little information was available with respect to employment characteristics within the immediate Barrow area. Complete em- ployment characteristics could not be found for any period of time. However, some employment data was available for the North Slope Borough and this was used in establishing certain trends and employment levels. It was assumed that these basic data would, to an extent, describe the Barrow job situation. Table 4 shows Borough employment by type for the period 1970 through 1975. Of particular interest is the growth in federal, state and local government jobs. For example, total government jobs grew from 165 to 790, an increase of over 375 percent. These increases were basically related to the formation and activity of TABLE 3 Total Residences -- Barrow, Alaska Individuals Per Residence’’* Total Low-Growth High-Growth Year Residences Estimate Estimate 1974 350° 5.6 7.4 1975 4004 4.9 6.8 1976 4104 S:t 6.8 1977 459a 4.7 6.3 1978 4954 4.5 6.1 1979 572% 3.9 5.4 1980 5884 3.9) Se4 1981 6174 3.8 5.4 1982 6414 3.8 5.4 1983 6604 3.8 5.4 1984 672 - 681 3.8 5.4 1985 687 - 704 3.8 5.4 1986 702 - 722 3.8 5.4 1987 717 - 741 3.8 5.4 1988 732 - 759 3.8 5.4 1989 748 - 778 3.8 5.4 1990 763 - 796 3.8 5.4 2000 900 - 1000 3.8 5.4 4various North Slope Borough personnel to J.S. Miller, R.W. Beck & Associates, private communication. bcalculated 1974-1983 values, based on low and high population forecasts. (See Table 2). ©1984-2000 values were assumed to remain constant. S-AI IvV-7 TABLE 4 Labor Force Characteristics, North Slope Borough 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 LOTS: Total Civilian Resident Labor force (annual average) 893 822 867 974 1414 1893 Total unemployment® 99 113 102 97 115 114 Percent of labor force 11.0 13.7 11.8 9.9 8.1 6. Range 6.1- 7.2- 7.3- 6.2- 5.5- 4. 18.8 21.3 18.5 13.4 10.4 9 Total. employment 794 709 765 877 1299. 1779 Total Number Employed (by industry) 977 848 913 1052 1450 1997 Mining 280 119 117 103 290 261 Contract construction 173 137, 104 70 119 380 Manufacturing * 0 0 0 0 * Transportation, communica- tions, and public utilities 86 80 95 168 145 185 Trade * m * * * 129 Finance, insurance and real estate * * * * * 56 Service 142 150 175 187 96 196 Miscellaneous O 0 0 0 0 * Government 165 282 334 395 641 790 Federal 128 168 173 17k 283 265 State and local 37 114 161 224 358 525 4poes not include those who are unemployable because of physical handicaps, those whose unemployment benefits have been exhausted, or those who were never covered by unemployment benefits. *Withheld to comply with disclosure regulations. Source: Employment Security Division, Research and Analysis Section, Alaska Labor Force kstimates by Industry and Area (1970-1975) (Juneau, Alaska). == }-—+—-—+— I SS Stele | _| Low popuation | | GROWTH RATE ESTIMAT nn WwW oO z WwW S n WW x Oo e 2 ° eK < a 2 a oO a wu ° 2 - =z a 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 i982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 YEAR FIGURE 13 INDIVIDUALS PER RESIDENCE Se BARROW, ALASKA Iv-8 the North Slope Borough, which presently has some 250 permanent and 150 part-time employees, with a total annual payroll of approximately $8 million. The North Slope Borough was officially incorporated July 1, 1972, and a home rule charter was adopted on April 30, 1974. Because of its area-wide powers and duties as a first-class? borough, many service-oriented government jobs were created. In addition to the mandatory responsibilities for education, taxation and assessment, and planning and zoning, as of April 30, 1974 the Borough's responsibilities were increased to include sewage treatment, health services and hospital facilities, utilities, water treatment, airport and aviation facilities, waste disposal systems, law entorcement, and housing and urban renewal. The rapid increase in numbers of government employees referred to earlier thus correlates directly with the formation of the Borough, and the subsequent growth in Borough authority. There appears to be little or no correlation between total population numbers for Barrow and government employee numbers. For example, between 1974 and 1975, when total government jobs rose by 149, the low population estimate remained constant. This is due to the nature of the labor force as well as to the Barrow economy. There are so many unemployed residents that in-migration for many jobs (particularly those requiring unskilled or semi-skilled labor) is unnecessary. Although direct employment by government agencies has in- creased substantially (and therefore stimulated the economy) over the past several years, it may be assumed that the ratio of government employees to total population will reach an upper limit. As this occurs, the rate of economic growth in Barrow may, to some extent, be expected to decrease. In spite of the increase in employment generated by the North Slope Borough, un- employment continues to be one of the most serious problems facing the residents and economy of Barrow. Although published census data show that Borough unemployment ranged from 4.1 to 9.5 percent in 1975,° a conservative estimate for Barrow is in the range of 10 to 12 percent .> According to the Alaska State Depart- ment of Labor, the Barrow unemployment rate reached 12.3 percent in 1971-1972. 3class designation refers to the powers and responsibilities of a given borough. 4alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Industry and Area, 1970-1975. Unpublished information provided by the North Slope Borough. alaska Department of Labor, Workforce Summary 1972, Barrow Labor Area. Iv-9 Income The real meaning of Barrow's chronic unemployment can only be understood in terms of the local economy. That is, because of the limited employment base (with essentially no industry and very little true commerce), few new jobs or businesses ever develop, except in association with government activity. Because little or no basic (export-related) economic activity occurs, the com- munity realizes very little income other than payments to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) from the Alaska Native Fund’ and Borough income, which is related primarily to taxation authority rather than ongoing economic activity. Without a self-sustaining flow of goods and services, and associated revenues, the economic balance necessary for increased employment will be extremely slow in developing. If the Borough's Capital Improvement Program proceeds on schedule, skilled labor will probably be imported, in lieu of training and utilizing un- skilled local workers, thereby foregoing the opportunities to reduce unemployment. Very little information is available on income characteris— tics in Barrow. Income studies by the University of Alaska and the Borough Planning Department are underway, but have not yet been completed. The 1970 Census of Population, published in 1972, indicates that average household income within the Borough area was $9400. A 1974 study by Dupere & Associates estimates median family income for Barrow to be $8560.8 The Bureau of Economic Analysis shows personal income and per capita income (Borough) for the period 1970-1974 to have increased rapidly. This can be seen in Table 5, which shows per capita income to have risen by over 40 percent between 1972 and 1974. To some extent, however, this is misleading. After 1973, personal income levels include a significant amount of non-dollar credits that reflect disburse- ments to the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. Such credits actually represent only an increased share worth in the Regional Corporation. True (disposable) income is therefore substantially less than might be inferred.9 7Until 1991, when the individual can elect to sell his shares, relatively little direct cash income to the native from this fund can take place. 8pupere and Associates, North Slope Borough - Manpower Develop- ment and Community Survey Reports (Juneau, Alaska, July 1974), Table X. %kenneth 0. Price, State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development, private communication. TABLE 5 Barrow-North Slope Division, Alaska Personal Income By Major Sources 1970-1974 (Thousands of Dollars) Item 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 By Type Wage and Salary Disbursements® 36,182 28,417 23,531 211578 33,862 Other Labor Income 1,256 1,044 948 958 1,198 Proprietors Income 4l 60 38 114 122 Nonfarm 4) 60 38 114 122 By Industry Non fa: 37,479 29,521 24,517 22,650 35,182 Private 34,497 25,966 20,174 17,292 27,710 Mining 17,330 11,655 (Dd) (D) (D) Contract Construction 10,843 8,052 4,948 21637 9,982 Wholesale and Retail Trade 232 243 505 (D) 571 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (L) (L) aay (dD) 1,011 Transp., Comm. + Public Utilities (D) (D) (dD) 3,850 35233 Services (D) (D) (D) 4,203 2,424 Other Industries 992 821 Laat 1,391 (D) Government. 2,982 3,555 4,343 5,358 Tenia Federal Civilian 1,473 1,753 1,991 2,379 2,176 Federal, Military 828 888 926 1,068 1,130 State and Local 681 914 1,426 1,911 4,166 Derivation of Personal Income by Place of Residence Total Labor and Proprietors Income by Place of Work 37,479 29,521 24,517 22,650 35,182 Minus Personal Contributions for Social Insurance by Place of Work 1,390 1,465 1,633 1,636 2,731 Net Labor and Proprietors Income by Place of Work 36,089 28,056 22,884 21,014 32,451 Plus Residence Adjustment -29,837 -22,200 -16,894 -14,969 -23,698 Net Labor and Proprietors Income by Place of Residence Si goe 5,856 5,990 6,045 8,753 Plus Dividends, Interest, and Rent 181 209 208 253 322 Plus Transfer Payments 1,033 1,312 1,405 7,148 4,460 Personal Income by Place of Residence 7,466 T5a7¢. 7,603 13,446 13,935: Per Capita Income 2,789 2,618 2,816 4,743 33975 Total Population (Thousands) Bel 2.8 217 2.8 3.4 “Primary Source for private nonfarm wages: ES-202 covered wages - Alaska Employment Security Division. b(L) Less than $50,000. Data are included in totals. (D) Not shown to avoid disclosure of confidential information. Data are included in totals. Source: Regional Economics Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis. OI-AI Iv-11 According to the University of Alaska's Institute of Social, Economic and Government Research, the Alaska Relative Price Index may grow by about 40 percent between 1974 and 1982.10 Tf the rate of inflation for Barrow parallels the statewide estimate, family income would be in the neighborhood of $9930 in 1977, and $11,980 in 1982. On the other hand, some unpublished Borough estimates suggest that family income levels could currently be as high as $10,000 to $12,000. The Borough's Overall Economic Development Program (due to be completed in summer, 1977) will contain an inventory and analysis of key community factors. At that time, it seems likely that Barrow income/employment estimates may be somewhat revised. Tourism represents one of Barrow's few forms of true com- merce, and it is growing rapidly. According to Wien Airlines, Barrow's tourist volume over the past several seasons has grown at a rate of 10 to 15 percent per year. Two-thirds to three- fourths of these tourists are on day trips, while the remainder stay at least one night. To date, there has been little or no published research on the economic value to Barrow of a vistor- day. However, the value of an overnight vistor-day for Barrow May approach $100.11 Socio-Cultural Factors The Barrow villager is faced with the dilemma of integrating new, rapidly changing attitudes with deeply ingrained old ways. In many respects, this problem has been brought about by rapid economic change from a subsistence economy to a partial cash eco- nomy. Although the Eskimo culture and subsistence ways are im- portant in the daily lives of many Barrow residents, it is clear that improvements in the standard of living are also considered to be important. The Eskimo is sharply aware of higher standards of living and knows what conveniences he wants, but is limited by low income and high costs. The villagers have demonstrated adaptability by selectively incorporating new technology, as evidenced by the use of firearms, all-terrain vehicles, outboard motors, and snow machines, to improve their subsistence lifestyle. 10yniversity of Alaska, Institute of Social, Economic and Govern- ment Research, Alaska: Review of Business and Economic Conditions, vol. 13, no. 1, Jan. 1976. 1, Hopkin, Economist, Bureau of Land Management, Anchorage, Alaska, to J.S. Miller, R.W. Beck and Associates, private communication. Iv-12 It is likely that many middle-aged and older residents will remain in the Barrow area, and, to the extent possible, will continue to accept the old ways. For many such individuals, melted ice for drinking water, and a "honey bucket" sewage disposal sys- tem will continue to be acceptable. However, dissatisfaction with existing conditions could very easily lead to rising out- migration, particularly among younger Eskimos. If such a popu- lation shift away from Barrow does occur (and if birth rates con- tinue to decline), the population estimates on Table 2 may prove to be too high. It would seem likely that a significant dependence on sub- sistence hunting, fishing, and food gathering will continue. While many villagers may continue to favor this relatively casual, day-to-day life style, it also seems certain that increasing num- bers will be forced to participate in (or accept) a cash economy system. The extent to which this may mean dissatisfaction with living standards and consequent out-migration is not known. However, it is a potentially serious problem for Barrow. If, for example, the people leaving Barrow are replaced to some extent by outsiders, the native culture would be adversely impacted. North Slope Borough As previously mentioned, the North Slope Borough, incorpor- ated in 1972, is a first class borough with authority similar to that of many county governments. It is responsible for taxation and assessment, planning and zoning duties, education, housing and urban renewal, and a host of other community functions. The Borough's base for property tax revenues is centered primarily in the Prudhoe Bay area. Perhaps 90 percent of property tax revenues have come from this single area.l2 The Borough has also established and is implementing a Capital Improvements Pro- gram (CIP). With regard to the Barrow area, this program in part calls for construction of additional housing units, a new elemen- tary school, a school district warehouse, a Barrow Public safety building, a new health center, and improvement of roads, foot paths, and utility distribution in several areas (notably in Block "A"). The CIP is scheduled to extend through 1983-1984. The North Slope Borough has been unable to finance the CIP from property tax revenues, and has been forced to sell approxi- mately $34 million worth of general obligation bonds in the last three years, forcing capital debt (per capita) to unusually high conversations with personnel at the Borough's Tax Assessment Office. Iv-13 levels. Further, there are plans to sell an additional $60 mil- lion worth of bonds within a 13-month period, beginning in mid- 1977.13 However, the revenue-raising ability of the Borough has been impaired by a law passed by the state legislature in 1973, whereby no local government may raise more than $1500 in property tax revenue per capita. This law effectively limits the total value of bonds which can be issued at a favorable interest rate. Since the majority of CIP projects are dependent upon future funding by this means, this situation, if unchanged, could sub- stantially slow the proposed implementation schedule. The Borough estimates that at present, only three to five million dollars is immediately available for the Capital Improve- ments Program. In all likelihood, this. amount would be entirely spent by next year (1978), leaving the remainder of the program unfunded. Until normal bond sales can be resumed, the Borough apparently can either (1) sell bonds at an unfavorable interest rate or (2) attempt to market less attractive low interest-high risk bonds.14 In either case, it seems probable that full imple- mentation of the CIP will be delayed considerably. Since the pace of the CIP has a major effect on the Barrow economy, creating jobs and income for many natives, a potential slowdown is very significant. The impacts associated with a lengthened CIP schedule may not all be adverse, however. For example, although implementation of the CIP would provide a some- what higher standard of living for some (and would be of unques- tioned usefulness to the community), it is felt that under the proposed six-year schedule, many necessary job skills could not be developed locally. To an extent, this would necessitate bringing in outside laborers and craftsmen. If the CIP time frame were expanded, perhaps by 10 to 15 years, disruption to the cul- ture and lifestyle of the Barrow native would be minimized. Local residents could be trained and employed on a full-time basis. At this time, no one can say what the CIP development rate will be, and estimates range from six years (as originally pro- posed) to 25 years. It should be noted that the residential growth forecasts (Table 3) assumed a rapid Capital Improvements Program schedule. To the extent that such development is delayed, the growth estimates presented will vary. 13personal communication with North Slope Borough Planning Person- nel, l4conversation with John Dupere, North Slope Borough. TV-14 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation In addition to the activities of the North Slope Borough, the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, created under the prodvi- sions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, has become a major influence in the Barrow area. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, enacted on December 18, 1971, granted ownership to Alaska natives of lands owned and occupied by the original peoples of Alaska, and directed that payments be made to those same people for lands they had lost and could not recover. In order to insure equit- able distribution of this money, as well as proper selection and management of deeded lands, Congress provided for the creation of regional corporations. In addition, village business corporations were established. Congress established in the United States Treasury an Alaskan Native Fund, and set up the following sche- dule of payments from the fund: (1) $12.5 million during the fiscal year in which the Act became effective; (2) $50 million during the second fiscal year; (3) $70 million for each of years three through five; (4) $40 million during the sixth year; and (5) $30 million for each of the next five fiscal years. These funds were to be distributed quarterly during the fiscal year among the regional corporations on the basis of numbers of natives enrolled in each region. Section 7(j) of the Act provided that during the first five years following its enactment, the corporations shall redistri- bute 10 percent of money received from the Fund among shareholders. As of June 30, 1976, the ASRC had received $13,922,164. The Act also established, under the provisions of Section 7(i), that 70 percent of all revenues received by each of the twelve corporations from "timber resources and subsurface estate" shall be divided annually among all corporations. The ASRC is currently a co-defendant with six other regional corporations in a suit which alleges that exploration and lease option revenues, as re- lated to the "subsurface estate", are distributable under the terms of 7(i).15 The status of the suit is not known. However, 15the Corporation has executed agreements with major oil companies that (1) enable the oil companies to conduct surface exploratory work on lands subject to selection by the Corporation and (2) grant those companies contractual options to acquire oil and gas leases. As a result of these agreements, the Corporation received $4.9 million during the year ended June 30, 1974. (From ASRC 1976 Share- holders Report, Note 8). Iv-15 it is possible that an unfavorable court settlement could adverse- ly affect corporation finances, and accordingly, community growth. Also, according to the terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Alaska natives who enrolled with the Department of the Interior became the initial shareholders of the regional corporations, with each enrolled native receiving 100 shares of stock. Although the stock carries the right to vote and receive dividends, it cannot be sold (except under unusual circumstances) until December 18, 1991. The Corporation wholly owns several subsidiary corporations: Tundra Tours, Inc.; Inupiat Builders, Inc.; Eskimos, Inc.; Arctic Slope Regional Construction, Inc.; and Arctic Technical Services, Inc. Tundra Tours, Inc. is the oldest of the subsidiaries, and has been involved principally with construction and operation of the Top-of-the-World Hotel in Barrow. Originally begun as an equal share venture with Ukpiagvik Inupiat Corporation of Barrow, the hotel-restaurant is now wholly owned by Tundra Tours. In addition, Tundra Tours has provided food and maintenance services to construction camps along the Trans-Alaska Pipeline route, and is reportedly developing a new tourist package for promoting Arctic visits. It is not known exactly what Tundra Tours' plans for expan- sion and future operation are. However, in speaking with Nelson Ahvakana, head of Tundra Tours, it was learned that institutional food and maintenance services would continue to be strongly pro- moted. The remaining subsidiary corporations are involved in a variety of activities including construction and remodeling (Inupiat Builders), equipment repair and maintenance, and con- struction (Eskimos, Inc.), scientific planning and analysis (Arctic Technical Services), and contruction-related activities within the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (Arctic Slope Regional Construction). As noted previously, there is presently little private business activity in Barrow. The future involvement of the native corporations in private business ventures could be a major factor in developing and maintaining a balanced economy. Iv-16 Native Village Corporations In addition to creating the regional corporations, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act also created village business corporations. Eight such corporations exist in the North Slope area. They are as follows: Corporation : Location 1. Kuukpik Nuiqsut 2. Nunamiut Anaktuvuk Pass 3. Tigava Point Hope 4. Olgoonik Wainwright 5. Ukpeagvik Inupiat Barrow 6. Atkasook Barrow Te Cully Point Lay 8. Kaktovik Kaktovik Information regarding future plans for these corporations was not available. However, it may be assumed that they will participate in and encourage business activities and thus have a beneficial impact on the economy in such areas as employment and income. Naval Arctic Research Laboratory The Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL), which is oper- ated by the University of Alaska, employs 53 persons. I.T.T,, the NARL maintenance contractor, employs an additional 78 persons. The employment levels do not include temporary scientific per- sonnel, whose pumbers may vary from between 20 and 40 (winter) to 170 (summer). Some of the personnel working at NARL are resi- dents of Barrow, and thus bring some cash income to the Barrow area. It is not believed that NARL will significantly increase its level of activity in the forseeable future. Accordingly, few new jobs are expected.17 16pepartment of the Navy, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Continuing Exploration and Evaluation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4 (Washington, D.C., 1977), p. 425. 174, Brunhardt, NARL, to G. Zeier, R.W. Beck and Associates, per- sonal communication, April 20, 1977. IvV-17 Potential External Developments Natural Gas Pipeline To date, three proposals have been made for transporting Prudhoe Bay natural gas to the lower 48 states. These proposals were prepared by Alaska Arctic Gas Pipeline Company, El Paso Alaska Company, and the Alcan Pipeline Company. The Arctic Gas Pipeline Company proposes a gas route which would run east from Prudhoe Bay, following the Beaufort Sea, then enter Canada and turn south. The other two proposals both call for pipelines crossing the North Slope Borough in a southerly direction, more or less following the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline. Congress has passed the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976, which sets forth procedures and a time frame for de- termining the best route. Essentially, it seeks to solicit the comments and opinions of concerned agencies or groups, then directs the President to issue a decision not later than Septem- ber 1, 1977. The Borough had an opportunity to submit its comments on route selection between May 1 and July 1, 1977. Based upon the minimal impacts to Barrow associated with the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline, it is not anticipated that the proposed gas pipeline would produce significant socio-economic or cultural impacts. It is noted that between 1974 and 1976, the Prudhoe Bay/ Deadhorse population grew from 927 to 5531. During the same period, the Barrow population increased only 2.5 percent. 18 North Slope Haul Road Prior to construction of the pipeline haul road, an agree- ment was reached between the State of Alaska and Alyeska Company. This agreement provided that the state would obtain necessary construction permits and Alyeska would build the road at its own expense, turning it over to the state following completion of the pipeline. However, it is not known whether the haul road will eventually be open for general public use. 18 From "Population Counts - North Slope Borough" as quoted in "North Slope Borough, Alaska - General Information and Economic Factors," 1976. IV-18 Until the Alaska Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission can determine the various impacts associated with public haul road usage, the Governor has adopted an interim policy regulating haul road use. Briefly, this policy provides that the haul road will be available only for mining and industrial activities, and that those who use the road must pay for such use. The issue of the public haul road is important to the Borough, since unrestricted access could have adverse effects upon the wildlife of the region. In turn, this would have negative effects on the subsistence food~gathering activities of local Eskimo popu- lations, permanently affecting their culture. However, because of the distance separating Barrow from the haul road, it is not be- lieved that significant subsistence-related impacts will occur locally. Development of the National Petroleum Reserve In Alaska As of June 1, 1977 the U.S. Department of the Interior assumed responsibility for managing the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPRA). The reserve was previously under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Navy and was called Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4. The following initial tasks are to be performed by the Department of Interior: 1. Complete an exploration program in order to make an accurate estimate of the reserves. a Prepare a report for Congress making recommenda- tions with respect to the value, best use, and appropriate designation of the lands within NPRA. The report is to include inputs from members of the Arctic Slope native community. Development and production are prohibited except to provide natural gas to the Barrow area. The proposed exploratory drilling within NPRA is expected to create short-term impacts on local population levels, numbers of workers, and the economy. It has been estimated that the maximum number of workers would be 560 in winter and 300 in summer, and that perhaps 90 percent would come from outside the Iv-19 petroleum reserve area. It is expected that most workers will have minimum contact with commercial establishments. Therefore, secondary impacts (e.g. within trade and service areas) are ex- pected to be very small. Although the majority of wages earned by outsiders will probably leave the regional economy, some por- tion will be spent locally and will, to some extent, benefit the local Barrow economy. However, any such benefit will tend to be temporary and minimal, due in part to a low economic multiplier.19 Perhaps the biggest economic boost to Barrow that could be derived from exploration of NPRA may have to do with Arctic Slope Regional Construction, Inc., a subsidiary of the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. Since Arctic Slope Regional Construction has acquired subcontracts related to the exploration program, the corporation shareholders should benefit financially from the pro- ject. The level of economic activity associated with development of the petroleum reserve is not known, nor is the time frame for such development. However, it is reasonable to assume that the reserve will ultimately be developed and the Arctic Slope native community will provide an input to the management plan for de- velopment of the reserve. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil/Gas The development of offshore oil and gas could significantly affect the Barrow economy. The North Slope Borough is located adjacent to three proposed offshore oil and gas lease sale areas. One sale area, the Beaufort Sea, is located within the Borough. The timing and detailed plans for the development of OCS oil and gas are not known. Therefore, no conclusions can be drawn with respect to future impacts for the Barrow area. Udall Bill (H.R. 39) In addition to awarding Alaskan natives $962 million in cash (along with some 44 million acres), the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act directed the Interior Department to designate up 19 Department of the Navy, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, pp. 584-590. IV-20 to 80 million acres as potential national parks and wildlife areas.29 With such lands scheduled to be turned over to the Bureau of Land Management for multiple use development in 1978, Represen- tative Morris Udall has proposed legislation that would add more than 30 million acres to the original "withdrawal" package. Since some of the proposed withdrawals would fall above the Brooks Range (roughly along an east-west corridor), no roads or other transportation corridors could be constructed through the area. Only the North Slope Haul Road would serve as a north- south land passage. 205.5. Congress, Public Law 92-203, Sec. 17(d)(2)A. SECTION V ENERGY CONSUMPTION General This section presents historical energy consumption data and projects gas and electric consumption based on the assumptions which have been made with respect to future growth for the Barrow area. While the methods used to project future energy consumption are considered to be appropriate, the results must be qualified by noting that the available historical data base was very limited. Further, such factors as future economic conditions, local gov- ernmental policy decisions, and the rate at which increased energy consumption will be assimilated into the village lifestyle will have an effect on future energy consumption but are not well de- fined at the present time. Review of Historical Energy Requirements Natural Gas - Barrow The historical consumption of natural gas which has been delivered to the City of Barrow from the South Barrow Gas Field is summarized in Table 6. Substantial increases in total natural gas consumption (in excess of 10 percent per year) have occurred in the period 1974 through 1976. The total annual gas consumption in Barrow since 1971 has increased more than 52 percent. This rapid increase appears to be primarily related to the development of the North Slope Borough, as well as expanded health services and school facilities. In 1974, BUECI began to keep monthly records of gas sales by category. In the process of developing reporting procedures, a number of different formats have been tried with respect to the accounts that are included in each category. Therefore, consistent monthly operating reports were not available until 1975. The total gas sales as indicated by BUECI operating reports are shown in Table 7. A comparison of this table with Table 6 (total Barrow gas consumption) indicates that 28.6 percent of the total gas delivered to Barrow in 1975, and 35 percent of the total in 1976, remains unaccounted for in the BUECI operating reports. It was assumed for purposes of this study that the difference was consumed by the electric generating facilities and that actual losses were minimal. A971 January 31,064 February 28,999 March 31,057 April 26,654 May 21,148 June 16,341 July 16,228 August 17,431 September 18,622 October 26,052 November 28,457 December 31,671 Annual Total 293,723 % Increase from Previous Year a Average Annual Rate of In- crease Since 1971 (4%) a “Prom natural gas systems report TABLE 6 Summary of Historical Natural Gas Consumption (MCF) to Barrow, Alaska® 1972 1973 33,473 33,936 31,971 w,615 34,055 34,824 28,872 27,590 24,482 22,953 19,055 18,550 16,683 17,618 17,687 19,592 21,662 19,792 24,750 24,956 30, 380 28,236 30,777 32,197 313,847 310,859 6.85 0.95 6.85 2.88 as prepared monthly by ITT. 1974 1975 1976 33,456 42,947 43,866 33,997 33,808 44,498 34,150 36,234 45,740 30,431 32,019 39,286 24,818 28,332 34,668 19,660 20,669 27,010 17,681 20,612 25,056 19,034 23,066 25,3339 24,099 25,890 29,721 33,161 go, 33 40,070 34,695 41,294 40,845 39,297 444379 50,753 344,277 384,580 446,852 10.75 Wb. 71 16.19 5.44 6.97 8.75 These figures include gas used for electrical generation. ca 1975 January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Average MCF/Account~Mo. 1976 January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Average MCF/Account-Mo. 4Ffrom BUECI's Customer Sales and Operating Summary. brhere is an apparent error in the December 1976 Customer Sales and Operating Summary report. TABLE 7 Summary of Historical Sales - Natural Gas Barrow, Alaska® Residential Commercial P.H.S. & School Sales Sales Sales Accounts (MCF) Accounts (MCF) Accounts (MCF) 359 11,483 57 5,915 2 11,110 359 11,991 57 6,903 2 13,119 359 8,365 58 3,359 2 9,801 359 11,300 58 6,965 2 8,754 359 8,147 58 5,504 2 8,990 359 3,557 58 3,198 2 5,943 359 4,284 58 2,963 2 5,832 359 5,091 58 2,720 2 6,291 359 55791 58 3,828 2 6,243 364 6,271 46 5,777 2 8,283 364 14,139 46 4,896 2 9,689 396 11,750 55 15,302 2 9,060 102, 168 69,329 103,115 23.5 104 4,296 396 9,379 55 7,862 2 9,288 396 8,830 55 5,568 2 10,128 396 17,244 a2 9,133 2 10,610 396 11,663 55 8,752 2 9,654 396 8,630 55 4,828 2 9,716 396 4,641 55 3,873 2 7,574 394 4,350 53: 3,190 2 6,520 384 4,176 54 4,719 2 6,033 390 5,122 56 2,508 2 7,221 399 6,822 55 6,167 2 9,715 402 10,920 61 10,517 2 9,351 41s 12,002 61 11,424" 2 12,292 103,779 78,541 108, 102 21.8 117 4,504 using the average cost per MCF for commercial sales from November 1976 ($1.5127/MCF). The value shown is approximated Total Sales Accounts 418 418 419 419 419 419 41g 419 419 412 412 453 453 453 453 453 453 453 449 440 448 456 465 477 Sales (MCF) 28,508 32,013 23,524 27,019 22,640 12,698 13,079 14,102 15,863 20,330 28,724 36,113 274,612 54.4 26,529 24,525 36,987 30,069 23,174 16,088 14,060 14,928 14,851 22,704 30,789 35,718 290,422 53.3 £-A v-4 In order to allow a more comprehensive evaluation of total gas consumption in the future, it is recommended that flow meters be installed in the gas lines supplying each of the two 750-kW Solar Saturn gas turbines. The records from these meters will be useful in monitoring generating equipment performance. Record keeping would also be simplified and accountability established by the installation of additional gas metering at the North Slope Borough School. Further examination of Table 7 will reveal that, of the total gas consumption accounted for by BUECI's monthly operating reports in 1976, residential customers represent approximately 36 percent of sales, the commercial sector represents 25 percent, and the Public Health Service and schools represent 37 percent. The sales pattern was essentially the same in 1975. Natural Gas - NARL Table 8 shows the gas consumption at NARL, including the gas consumed by the electric power generating facilities. In the past few years, these facilities have consistently comprised 46 percent of the total gas consumption at NARL (while heating, cooking and NARL operation consume the remainder). There is no apparent pattern to the total consumption of gas at NARL. It should be noted that NARL operates one electric generator on fuel oil in order to conserve natural gas, and therefore the gas consumption at NARL (Table 8) is not necessarily indicative of total fuel requirements. The presently inoperable sewage incinerator plant appears to have been used sporadically, if at all. This plant could have a significant impact on the gas consumption at NARL if it were to begin a normal operating schedule. The total annual Barrow and NARL gas consumption is sum— marized in Table 9. Electric Energy - Barrow Total monthly electric energy consumption for the period from 1973 to 1976 is summarized in Table 10, while monthly sales of electric energy for 1975 and 1976 are summarized in Table 11. Total electric energy requirements have nearly doubled since 1973, with the most substantial growth occurring in the last two years. This growth is tabulated below: January February March April May June July August September October November December Total January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Power Plant. 12,618 11, 383 12,489 11,725 10, 867 9,787 9,746 9,902 9,794 10,791 11, 369 12,119 132,589 15,877 14,697 16,606 16,056 15,599 14,243 14,689 14,711 14,723 16,819 16,370 16,775 187, 165 1971 Other Uses 22,733 22,115, 22,545 19, 066 13,973 10,504 9,224 10,283 10,776 15,857 20,720 21,411 199, 208 1974 25,655 25, 764 27,230 23,423 18, 000 11,996 9,651 8,988 11,674 20,695 23,624 24,891 231,593 TABLE 8 Summary of Historical Natura) Gas Consumption in Naval Arctic Total 35,351 33,498 35,034 30,791 24, 840 20,291 18,970 20, 185 20,570 26,647 32, 089 33,530 331,797 41,532 40,461 43, 836 39, 481 33,599 26, 239 24, 340 23,699 26, 397 37,514 39,994 41, 666 418, 758 Research Laboratories, Alaska (McFr)® Power Plant 12, 396 11,926 12, 766 10,000 10, 902 10, 109 10,073 11,537 13,474> 14,518 15,088 15,599 148, 387 16,623 15,048 16,820 15,915 15,982 14,491 14,480 14,568 14,973 16,492 16, 406 17, 387 189,185 4From Natural Gas System Report as prepared monthly by ITT. 1972 Other Uses 23,010 22,050 24,233 21,942 17,824 12,638 10,163 10,311 12,466 15,050 20, 205 21,289 211,179 1975 27,059 22,445 23,733 21,436 17,330 11,441 10,453 11,520 13,866 17,952 21,773 23,899 222,907 Total 35,405 33,975 36,999 31,942 28,726 22,747 20,236 21,847 25,940 29,568 35,293 36, 888 359,566 43,682 37,493 40,553 37,351 33,312 25,932 24,933 26,088 28, 839 34,444 38,179 41, 286 412,556 Power Plant 15,752 14,350 15,643 15,194 15,204 14,223 14,504 14,768 14,252 15,442 15,538 15,946 180,816 17,033 16,420 17,954 16,915 16,673 5,676 6,005 12,734 15,351 17,372 17,230 16,281 175,644 brour 350 kW gas/oil fired Cleveland Marine generator sets in the NARL power house were placed on standby. turbine power plant, housing four 750 kW Saturn turbine generator sets (dual fuel) was placed in service. Fuel for NARL incinerator plant is reported beginning with this month. 1973 Other Uses 23,658 22,551 27,301 20,676 15,232 11,270 10,060 10,496 11,408 15,256 19,419 24,069 Total 39,410 36,901 42,944 35,870 30,436 25,493 24,564 25,264 25,660 30,698 34,957¢ 40,015 211,396 = 392,212 1976 23,407 24,052 23,792 19,290 15,147 10,901 9,858 9,820 11,554 17,079 18, 606 40,440 40,472 41,746 36,205 31,820 16,577 15,863 22,554 26,905 34,451 35,836 23,423 39,705 206,930 382,574 The new NARL S-A vV-6 TABLE 9 Summary of Historical Natural Gas Consumption in Barrow and Year 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 NARL From the South Barrow Gas Field Total Gas Delivered to®* Increased from Barrow NARL Annual Previous Year (Mcr)> (MCF)¢ (MCF) (2) 293,723 331,797 625,520 -- 313,847 359, 566 673,413 7.66 310,859 392,212 703,071 4.40 344,277 418,758 763,035 8.53 384,580 412,556 797,136 4.47 446,852 382,574 829,426 4.05 @The values shown include the gas consumed by the electric power generating facilities. brrom Table 6. “From Table 8. TABLE 10 Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption® Barrow, Alaska (By month in kWh) Bureau Public Barrow of Indian Health Weather National Total As % of Utilities Affairs Service Bureau Guard kWh Annual 1973 January 199,649 157,422 60,000 11,349 1,180 429,600 9.53 February 169,239 160,060 52,800 10,521 980 393,600 8.73 March 192,682 162,913 53,600 9,725 1,080 420,000 9.31 April 167,174 147, 862 54,400 6,454 910 376,800 8.36 May 140,879 143,215 51,200 4,626 880 340,800 7.56 June 129,507 110,541 45,600 6,472 680 292,800 6.49 July 138,689 89,824 42,400 2,111 576 273,600 6.07 August 157,610 144,140 50,407 7,209 634 360,000 7.98 September 138, 780 127,419 43,200 6,691 710 316,800 7.03 October 178,280 150, 356 51,200 5,604 960 386,400 8.57 November 227,890 172,068 60,000 6,902 1,140 468,000 10. 38 December 231, 833 155, 880 58,400 3,877 1,210 451,200 10.01 Annual kWh 2,072,212 1,721, 700 623,207 81,541 10,940 4,509,600 100.00 {as % of total) 45.95 38.18 13.82 1,81 0.24 100.00 1974 January 226,394 115,533 65,600 4,093 1,180 412,800 8.70 February 241,292 114,420 50,400 5,548 1,140 412,800 8.70 March 223,990 167,754 59,200 6,056 1,000 458,000 9.66 April 200,600 145,062 57,600 5,948 1,190 410,400 8.65 May 148,198 148,633 48,000 5,409 160 350,400 7.39 June 144,013 126,616 48,000 4,901 150 323,680 6.82 July 132,759 92,005 48,800 4,636 200 278,400 5.87 August 160,168 87,354 49,600 5,048 230 302,400 6.38 September 166,200 135,813 44,800 4,577 210 351.600 _ 7.41 October 272,104 126,549 64, 800 6,438 509 470,400 9.92 November 285,181 115,158 59,200 5,568 493 465,600 9.82 December 311,490 127,490 60,800 5,858 762 506,400 10.68 Annual kWh 2,512, 389 1,502, 387 656,800 64,080 7,224 4,742,880 100.00 (as % of total) 52.97 31.68 13.85 1.35 0.15 100.00 4From BUECI records. Represents a breakdown of total electric generation, l-A 1975 January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual kWh (as % of total) 1976 January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual kWh (as % of total) @From BUECI Records. Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption ® TABLE 10 (cont'd) Barrow, Alaska (By month in kWh) BIA Public All Barrow Sta. Pwr. Health Weather National Other Total As % of Utilities & Office Service Bureau Guard Categories kWh Annual 341,482 66,000 73,600 6,521 1,860 122,537 612,000 9.51 278,937 64,200 49,600 5,743 2,149 106,371 507,000 7.93 291,631 66,600 70,400 6,717 2,281 110,171 547,800 8.56 274,802 58,841 55,200 5,967 1,790 113,400 510,000 7.97 240,666 70,251 55,200 5,562 1,470 116,451 489,600 7.65 189,085 61,528 44,000 11,522 776 72,289 379,200 5.93 201,248 59,738 51,200 11,400 294 77,520 401,400 6.28 233,059 67,125 48,800 11,183 510 91,123 451,800 7.06 239,339 62,148 48,800 13,195 1,010 98,708 463,200 7.24 328,542 72,022 60,800 17,863 1,780 120,793 601,800 9.41 399,871 78,875 64,800 21,553 1,620 125,081 691,800 10.82 460,533 74,591 64,800 25,362 1,530 113,984 740, 800 11.58 3,479,195 801,919 687,200 142,588 17,070 1,268,428 6,396,400 100.00 54.39 12.54 10.74 2.23 0.27 19.83 100.00 456, 184 79,245 68,000 26,336 1,610 133,225 764,600 9.19 415,575 66,481 59,200 26,900 1,560 114,284 684 ,000 8.22 583,269 68,084 64,000 19,957 1,590 500 737,400 8.87 502,401 76, 333 59,200 20,146 1,420 500 660,000 7.94 458,117 76,792 55,200 17,741 1,250 500 609,600 7.33 426,004 70,736 47,200 14,110 650 500 559,200 6.72 427,318 69,520 51,200 12,612 450 500 561,600 6.75 458,686 67,123 48,000 12,935 840 2,816 590,400 7.10 518,633 62,860 52,800 17,097 1,390 3,020 655,800 7.88 605,453 66,497 59, 200 16,750 1,620 2,000 751,520 9.04 648, 269 64,166 64,000 18,470 1,600 3,661 800, 166 9.62 750,419 100,715 63, 200 21,516 1,558 | 15,392 942,800 W134 6,250, 328 868,552 691, 200 224,570 15,538 266,898 8,317,086 100.00 75.15 10.44 8.31 2.70 0.19 3.21 100.00 Represents a breakdown of the total electric generation. 8-A 1975 January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Average kWH/Account-Mo. % of Total Sales 1976 January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Average kWh/Account-Mo. % of Total Sales Summary of Historical Sales - Electric TABLE 11 Barrow, Alaska? Residential Commercial _ Street Lights PWS. & School Total Sales Accounts kwh Accounts kWh Accounts kWh Accounts kWh Accounts Sales (kWh) 377 114,244 58 101,419 70 4,900 2 138,400 437 408,963 377 125,020 60 135,785 70 4,900 2 149,451 439 415,150 377 85,840 59 89,620 70 4,900 2 173,319 436 353,679 377 113,455 59 104,072 70 4,900 2 161,369 436 > 383,796 377 87,535 59 123,402 70 4,900 2 165,018 436 ° 380,855 377 48,414 59 63, 342 70 4,900 2 109,600 438 > 226,256 377 68, 856 59 79,964 71 4,970 2 123,200 436 > 276,990 377 81,242 59 104,090 7 4,970 2 134,400 436 ? 324,702 377 100,943 59 108,936 71 4,970 2 142,990 438 > 357,839 365 93,035 54 110,980 72 5,040 2 175,200 421 384,255 365 185,989 54 140,695 72 5,040 2 180,800 421 512,524 408 136, 430 63 191,953 72 5,040 2 250,400 473 583,823 1,241,003 1,354,258 59,430 1,954,147 4,608,838 274 1,929 70 81,423 877 26.9 29.4 1.3 42.4 100 408 118,248 63 135,573 72 5,040 2 190,400 473 451,261 408 111,976 63 173,640 72 5,040 2 164,000 473 454,656 408 185,053 63 188,542 72 5,040 2 179,200 473 557,835 408 150, 344 63 211,661 72 5,040 2 164,800 473 531,845 408 106, 747 63 145,193 72 5,040 2 155,200 473 412,180 408 70, 108 63 151,796 72 5,040 2 123,200 473 350,144 406 97,131 63 148,459 72 5,040 2 118,400 471 369,030 402 84,942 66 164,644 72 5,040 2 129,596 470 384,222 404 95,516 69 109,845 72 5,040 2 148,000 475 358,401 420 95,449 70 216,305 72 5,040 2 164,800 “492 481,594 413 153,430 72 122,070 72 5,040 2 168,000 487 448,540 422 172, 390 71 178,587 72 5,040 2 202,815 495 558,832 1,441, 334 1,948, 315 60,480 1,908,411 5,358,540 293 2,469 70 79,517 935 26.9 36.4 1.1 35.6 100 *From BUECI Consumer Sales and Operating Revenue Summary. bohe number of street lights was deducted from those found in the BUECI Consumer Sales and Operating Revenue summary in order that the total number of accounts would have a consistant basis. vV-10 TABLE 12 Summary of Historical Electric Capacity Requirements Barrow, Alaska 1973 Demand? % of Annual Peak KW January 661 February 624 March 622 April 597 May 564 June 574 July 491 August 512 September 551 October 700 November 770 December 838 Annual Peak 838 Annual Load Factor 61.4% 78.88 74.46 74.22 71.24 67.30 68.50 58.59 61.10 65.75 83.53 91.89 100.00 100.00 1975 Demand?’¢ % of Annual Peak KW January 970 February 930 March 895 April 830 May 800 June 720 July 690 August 800 September 885 October 1,021 November 1,120 December 1,160 Annual Peak 1,160 Annual Load Factor 62.9% 83.62 80.17 77.16 71.55 68.97 62.07 59.48 68.97 76.29 88.02 96.55 100.00 100.00 *From BUECI Documents. b From Preliminary Report - Electric Utilit Electric Coop. Inc. - Addition to Power Plant dated April 26, 1976 and prepared by Robert W. Retherford Associates. “From Loren Douglas. 1974 Demand® KW % of Annual Peak 796 81.22 830 84.69 720 73.47 700 71.43 680 69.39 520 53.06 498 50.82 592 60.41 700 71.43 849 86.63 900 91.84 980 100.00 980 100.00 55.2% 1976 Demand? >® KW % of Annual Peak 1,185 81.44 1,260 86.60 1,220 83.85 1,140 78.35 1,055 12.51 1,023 70.31 990 68.04 1,078 74.09 1,215 83.51 1,250 85.91 1,375 94.50 1,455 100.00 1,455 100.00 65.3% System - Barrow Utility and v-11 Total Electric Energy Growth Total Energy Consumed % Growth from Year (kWh) Previous Year 1973 4,509,600 -- 1974 4,742,880 $.2 1975 6,396,400 34.9 1976 8,317,086 30.0 Because only two years of historical sales are available, only the growth between 1975 and 1976 can be traced (Table 11). A review of Table 11 indicates that the average commercial-account electric consumption increased 28 percent during that year, and the average residential-account consumption increased 6.9 percent. In 1976, the residential sector accounted for 27 percent of the total sales, as reported in the BUECI Sales and Operating Revenue Summary, while the commercial sector accounted for 36 percent and the Public Health Service and schools accounted for 36 percent. A comparison of Tables 10 and 11 indicates a large block of electric energy consumption that is unaccounted for in the BUECI operating reports. It is assumed that this energy is consumed by BUECI as it performs other utility functions such as sewage and water treatment. The unaccounted for electric energy in 1975 was 1,787,562 kWh (27 percent of total electric energy consumption) and in 1976 was 2,958,546 kWh (35.6 percent of total electric energy consumption), an increase of 66 percent. Table 12 summarizes the historical electrical capacity re- quirements and annual load factor of the Barrow load. The growth of the annual peak demand is tabulated below. Peak Demand Growth % Growth from Year Peak Demand Previous Year 1973) 838 kW -- 1974 990 kW 18.1 1975 1160 kW 17.2 1976 1450 kW 25.4 V-12 Electric Energy — NARL Four years of historical electrical energy consumption data are presented in Table 13. Methods of Projection It was recognized at the start of this study that because each of the utility functions served by BUECI is small, the addition of a single large load could significantly affect any projection of gas or electric energy requirements. Since it was felt that the historical growth of gas and electric energy usage might be associated with other economic activity in the Barrow area, an effort was made to utilize a statistical technique called multiple regression analysis, which is explained briefly in Appendix A. For several reasons, it was found that this technique could not be used. In lieu of using multiple regression as a projection tool, two other projection techniques were employed to develop boundary cases for expected growth. The first method to be used is a more traditional trend line approach, which involves fitting a line to a graph of the historical data. In this study, a computer program was utilized to make the best fit based upon a least-squares method. Total annual values of gas deliveries and electric energy genera- tion were used for the computerized projections. The second method used was a synthesis process whereby projec- tions were made based on the recent historical data. Average historical data such as number of accounts and energy consumption per account were developed and presented in expanded tables so that the development of the projection could be more easily traced. In the future, the tables can be updated by using new assumptions based on the number of accounts and/or energy consumption per account. The residential consumption of gas and electricity is depen- dent upon the population, the relative affluence of that popula- tion and the average number of people living in a single dwelling unit. For the cases that are developed for both gas and electri- city, it was necessary to make several assumptions, which are listed below. More details are available in Appendix A and Section IV. 1. Population per residential account will decrease over time (see Table 3 in Section IV). v-13 TABLE 13 Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption and Calculated Demand Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, Alaska Energy Demand Monthly Monthly Monthly kWh Peak Day Calculated Mo. Peak As Load 1973 kWh? As % of Annual kwh? Peak? % of Annual Factor (%) January 762,480 9.30 26,330 1,374 97.97 74.73 February 684, 380 8.34 25,410 1,323 94.36 76.95 March 794,730 9.69 26,930 1,403 100.00 76.16 April 688, 360 8.39 23,820 1,241 88.45 77.06 May 629,210 7.67 26,080 1,358 96.84 62.30 June 571,350 6.97 20,200 1,052 75.01 75.43 July 578,085 7.05 21,210 1,105 78.76 70.34 August 625,900 7.63 21,635 1,127 80.34 74.66 September 609, 320 7.43 22,820 1,189 84.74 73520 October 700,190 8.54 25,540 1,330 94.84 70.75 November 769,990 9.39 26,820 1,397 99.59 76.56 December 787,030 9.60 26, 700 1,391 99.15 76.07 Annual kWh = 8,201,025 100.00 Annual Peak = 1,403 Annual L.F. = 66.75 1974 January 684,450 7.96 28,210 1,469 95.66 62.61 February 763,105 8.88 28,760 1,498 97.52 75.81 March 845,220 9.83 28,900 1,505 98.00 75.47 April 790,540 9.20 27,490 1,432 93.22 76.69 May 701,254 8.16 26,620 1, 386 90.27 67.98 June 596,726 6.94 21,840 1,138 74.06 72.86 July 610, 160 7.10 20,490 1,067 69.48 76.85 August 603,820 7.02 20,990 1,093 71.18 74.24 September 526,220 6.12 24,440 1,273 82.88 57.42 October 819,200 9.53 28,440 1,481 96.44 74.33 November 823,080 9.58 29,490 1,536 100.00 74.43 December 831, 550 9.67 28, 240 1,471 95.76 75.99 Annual kWh = 8,595,325 100.00 Annual Peak = 1,536 Annual L.F. = 63.88 a Data provided by NARL. break demand data were not available. At the suggestion of Lt. Brunhardt of NARL, the peak demand was calculated in the following manner: Peak demand = Peak day kWh , } 95 24 V-14 TABLE 13 (cont'd) Summary of Historical Electric Energy Consumption and Calculated Demand Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, Alaska Energy Demand Monthly Monthly Monthly kWh Peak Day Calculated Mo. Peak As Load 1975, kWh As % of Annual kWh Peak % of Annual Factor (%) January 849,990 9.39 28,580 1,498 94.26 76.75 February 783,305 8.65 28,945 1,508 95.47 77.32 March 838,840 9.26 27,735 1,445 91.47 78.05 April 781,765 8.63 28, 180 1,468 92.94 73.98 May 726,855 8.03 24,850 1,294 81.96 75.48 June 628,485 6.94 22,560 1,175 74.41 74.29 July 737,840 8.15 20,280 1,056 66.89 93.89 August 511,694 5.65 21,830 1,137 72.00 60.49 September 687,055 7.59 25,905 1,349 85.44 70.73 October 809,110 8.93 28,500 1,484 94.00 73.26 November 798,890 8.82 28,670 1,493 94.56 74.31 December 901,850 9.96 30, 320 1,579 100.00 76.76 Annual kWh = 9,055,679 100.00 Annual Peak = 1,579 Annual L.F. = 65.46 1976 January 886,655 9.33 30,495 1,588 95.03 75.03 February 890,174 9.37 31,225 1,626 97.30 81.45 March 923,805 9.72 31,230 1,627 97.32 76.34 April 842,310 8.86 30,430 1,585 94.83 73.81 May 779,475 8.20 27,250 1,419 84.92 73.82 June 629,520 6.62 22, 885 1,192 71.32 73.35 July 588,558 6.19 20,540 1,070 64.01 73.95 August 608,220 6.40 21,210 1,105 66.10 74.00 September 684,415 7.20 25,620 1,334 79.84 71.24 October 850,550 8.95 29,890 1,557 93.14 73.43 November 861,910 9.07 30,120 1,569 93.86 76.31 December 957,925 10.08 32,090 1,671 100,00 77.04 Annual kWh = 9,503,517 100.00 Annual Peak = 1,671 Annual L.F. - 64.91 V-15 rl Electrical energy per residential account will in- crease over time (see Table Al in Appendix A). 3. Natural gas consumption per residential account will remain constant. 4. Construction projects planned by the North Slope Borough and other entities would be added to the synthesis models at the annual consump- tion indicated in Appendix A. 5. All other accounts would be added to the synthesis model at the average consumption-per-account value. Although trend-line analysis has the advantages of simplicity and traditional acceptance, the synthesis process is based upon assumptions which are presumably more sensitive to the end use of energy. Results of Analysis -- Projection of Future Energy Requirements Electrical Energy Projection -- Barrow Table 14 summarizes what are considered to be the most rea- sonable highest and lowest projections with respect to total annual electric energy consumption and calculated peak electric demands for the entire study period. Figure 14 is a graphic representation of the projected electric energy requirements. The highest projection (1) is a logarithmic projection which was calculated by the time-line/trend-fit method. In this projection, the annual rate of growth decreases over time. The lowest projection (2) was derived by the synthesis method. It is felt that these projections represent a reasonable range of possible electric energy requirements. Additional details for each of these projections may be found in Appendix A. The firm capacity of the electric utility plant is the sum of the rated capacity of each machine minus the capacity of the largest unit. Barrow's present firm capacity, therefore, is 2650 kW. This value can be used when examining Table 14 to de- termine approximately when additional capacity should be added. Natural Gas Projection -- Barrow Natural gas requirements were projected using the methods described under "Methods of Projection" with one additional input. Since the electric generation facilities at Barrow are presently gas-fired, the projected electric energy requirements TABLE 14 Summary of Projected Electric Energy and Capacity Requirements Barrow NARL Synthesized Method Trend Fit Method Trend Fit Method Projected Energy Calculated Projected Energy Calculated Projected Energy Calculated Requirements Peak Demand® Requirements Peak Demand# Requirements Peak Demand? Year (MH) (kW) (iH) (kW) (MH) (kW) 1977 8,955 1,670 8,038 1,500 9,930 1,770 1978 9,543 1,780 9,259 1,730 10, 366 1,850 1979 10,480 1,960 10,480 1,960 10,802 1,930 1980 10,989 2,050 11,700 2,180 11,238 2,000 1981 11,633 2,170 12,919 2,410 11,673 2,080 1982 12,333 2,300 14,138 2,640 12,109 2,160 1983 12,971 2,420 15,356 2,860 12,544 2,240 1984 13,727 2,560 16,574 3,090 12,978 2,310 1985 14,476 2,700 17,791 3,320 13,413 2,390 1986 15,167 2,830 19,007 3,550 13,847 2,470 1987 15,911 2,970 20,223 3,770 14,282 2,550 1990 18,567 3,460 25,080 4,680 15,583 2,780 2000 24,929 4,650 37,179 6,930 19,906 3,550 8calculated at an average annual load factor of 61.2%. (Based on 1973-76 data). bcalculated at a projected average annual load factor of 642. 91-A fil ELECTRIC ENERGY CONSUMPTIO ASKA' t Appendix A. AND PROJE: i - | BARROW, AL ~HISTORICA Synthesized production from Table A2, eee ee : ! 7 ~--4+-+ o =” a $ 3 3 ® a § e s . 3 o a v 3” a 3 ” iu S © ° a = a 2 +- Consumption in kWh = -1,83106Z10 + 2.413895E9 X LN (YEAR) (901 * HMM) NOILAGNNSNOD ADWINZ 1419373 MOUVE W101 vV-18 were included in the synthesized gas-consumption calculation at an average heat rate of 20,000 Btu/kWh and heat content of gas at 1000 Btu/cu ft. The electric energy requirements as projected by the curve-fitting method were also converted to a gas requirement in order to ascertain that the gas projection was indeed reasonable. Figure 15 is a graphic summary of the Barrow natural gas projections for the study period. When the entire period of this study is considered, the logarithmic curve-fit projects a higher level of gas consumption than does the synthesized approach. It should be noted that the two projections cross one another in 1985. Until that time, the synthesized approach predicts a higher level of annual consumption than does the curve-fit model. A straight-line projection which represents a constant annual growth rate of approximately 8.4 percent is also indicated on Figure 15. This line approximates the gas consumption growth that would occur if the 1976 annual compound rate of growth (Table 6) were to continue. The growth rates that have been projected herein are substantially lower than recent historical growth rates. This does not appear to be inconsistent because the large growth rates of the last two years have been the result of the addition of a new store, the North Slope Borough facilities and other new buildings to a system that was previously very small. Now that these additions have been made to the system, the base consumption is larger, and therefore, the large growth rates of recent years are not expected to continue. Electric Energy Projection ~- NARL Figure 16 summarizes the two curve-fit projections made for future NARL electric energy requirements. Although NARL is not expected to grow appreciably in population, it is probable that electrical use saturation will increase over time. The major purpose of this projection is to provide a check as to the reasonableness of the natural gas projection. The lower projection on Figure 16 was judged to be the most likely to follow the same general pattern as actual load growth. The straight line projection represents a constant annual. growth rate of approximately 5.1 percent. Natural Gas Projection -~ NARL The historical and projected natural gas consumption at NARL are presented in Figure 17. Examination of the historical gas use of NARL shown on this figure indicates that gas consumption at NARL is not growing in a predictable manner. It should be noted, however, that natural gas consumption at NARL is not indicative of the total Btu input to the NARL system. There are at least two controllable gas loads that could cause large devia- tions from any projected growth pattern. [AE AR EE LRT NN A Nee ea NO RRR See Exponential least squares curve fit. Consumption in MCF = 5,393666E-64 X EXP (8.027992E-2 X YEAR) Logarithmic least squares curve fit. Consumption in MCF = TOTAL BARROW GAS CONSUMPTION (MCF x 105) -4.322433E8 + 5.701334E7 X LN (YEAR) (3) Snythesized gas requirements from Table A3, Appendix A. HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED » GAS CONSUMPTION : BARROW, ALASKA “1980 1984 ~=~—S=«98B 1992 YEAR FIGURE 15 | : iz a 2 * xz = =< z $ Ee a = > a 2 ° 3 > ° « w z w 2. « & Oo w = w =i « < = a < E ° & we pet Exponential least squares curve fit. Consumption in MWH = 3.562561E-39 X EXP (4.94382E-2 X YEAR) _“— Consumption in MWH = - 6.535288E6 + 8.62423E3 X LN (YEAR) (2) Logarithmic least squares curve fit, t | FIGURE 16 | HISTORICAL AND PROJEGTED, ELECTRIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION NARL, ALASKA | | ea [idl 1984 1988 YEAR | Consumption in MCF = 1.54895E-45 X EXP (0.05880927 X YEAR) -- (2) Logarithmic least squares curve fit. ~? Consumption in MCF = -3.300424E8 + 4.354974E7 X LN (YEAR) 8 o £ “ § z Q - a 2 2 a z ° ° a « < z - <q - ° = Sys FIGURE 17 | HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED GAS CONSUMPTION ~ | NARL,ALASKA | 1984 i988 YEAR V-22 NARL usually burns oil in one of its gas turbine-generators. Therefore, total natural gas consumption can be changed by con- trolling the amount of electric energy generated by the oil- fueled unit. The sewage incinerator plant, because of its intermittent operation, has not used gas in a manner that is at all predictable. However, if this plant were to begin normal operation, it would consume a considerable amount of gas. It is not known what the typical annual gas consumption would be if the plant were used on a regular basis. The logarithmic least-squares curve-fit (curve (2) on Figure 16) is used throughout the remainder of this report as projected gas consumption for NARL. Because the operating mode for the electric generating plant and incinerator plant is not certain, increased consumption at NARL is projected even though NARL is not expected to grow appreciably. No attempt was made to synthesize a projection for NARL. Rather, the curve-fitting models were used. The straight line projection, or constant annual rate of growth, is shown for reference only. This projection represents constant annual growth rate of approximately 6.1 percent. Total Natural Gas Projection Tables 15 and 16 summarize the total natural gas requirements of the Barrow and NARL service areas. It is believed that, for short-term planning (through 1985), the total gas requirement figures from Table 15 should be used and that after 1985, the figures from Table 16 should be used. The total projections from Tables 15 and 16 are represented graphically on Figure 18. This combination results in the highest total gas consumption for the period of the study and, therefore, results in the most conserva- tive energy estimate. This recommendation is based on the following assumptions: 1. The synthesized case is more responsive in early years to planned changes that have already been formulated. For the later years of the study, plans are less definite. ae The trend-line case represents an approximation of average or typical growth over a longer period of time. 36 For planning, a conservative approach should be taken. TABLE 15 V-23 Summary of Annual Barrow Area Natural Gas Requirements ~— Low Projection Barrow® Year MCF 4 of Total 1977 507,000 51.8 1978 529,000 51.8 1979 567,000 52.4 1980 583,000 52.1 1981 603,000 51.9 1982 623,000 51.7 1983 644,000 51.6 1984 662,000 51.4 1985 680,000 51.2 1986 696,000 51.0 1987 719,000 51.9 1990 786,000 50.9 2000 957,000 49.5 *From Table A-3 in Appendix A. NARL MCF % of Total Total 471,000 48.2 978,000 493,000 48.2 1,022,000 515,000 47.6 1,082,000 537,000 47.9 1,120,000 559,000 48.1 1,162,000 581,000 48.3 1,204,000 603,000 48.4 1,247,000 625,000 48.6 1,287,000 647,000 48.8 1,327,000 669,000 49.0 1,365,000 691,000 49.0 1,410,000 757,000 49.1 1,543,000 975,000 50.5 1,932,000 Year 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1990 2000 TABLE 16 V-24 Summary of Annual Barrow Area Natural Gas Requirements - High Projection Barrow MCF % of Total 450,000 48.9 479,000 49.3 508,000 49.7 537,000 50.0 565,000 50.3 594,000 50.6 623,000 50.8 652,000 51.1 680,000 51.2 709,000 O15. 738,000 51.6 824,000 52.1 1,110,000 53.2 NARL MCF 4 of Total Total 471,000 SLL 921,000 493,000 50.7 972,000 515,000 50.3 1,023,000 537,000 50.0 1,074,000 559,000 49.7 1,124,000 581,000 49.4 1,175,000 603,000 49.2 1,226,000 625,000 48.9 1,277,000 647,000 48.8 1,327,000 669,000 48.5 1, 378,000 691,000 48.4 1,429,000 757,000 47.9 1,581,000 975,000 46.8 2,085,000 TOTAL GAS CONSUMPTION (MCF x 1000) 8 o— a a 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 = a a 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 i998 rr YEAR V-26 Effect of Development of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Energy consumption resulting from exploration and development of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska was not included in the total energy consumption projections made in this section, primarily as a result of the lack of a well-defined program for NPRA at this time. However, preliminary estimates were made of cumulative and peak energy consumption impacts. Exploration On February 25, 1977, the Navy issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) concerning the continuing exploration of the reserve. Based on the program outlined in the DEIS, Barrow will be the primary base for exploration of the northwest part of NPRA.. NARL was proposed as the likely location for personnel working on the project to stay while in the Barrow area. The DEIS projects that the maximum number of people working on the entire exploration program within NPRA will be 560 in the winter and 300 in the summer. According to the DEIS, this is approximately the level of project workers involved in the current exploration program. Therefore, little change in population is expected. Further, since the DEIS indicates that minimal contact with the Barrow commercial community will occur, it is expected that the impact, if any, to the Barrow economy will be small. This leads to the conclusion that there will be no sub- stantial increases in energy consumption in the Barrow area as a result of the exploration program. It is not known whether the Department of the Interior will follow the exploration plan outlined in the Navy's DEIS. According to a report issued by the Federal Energy Administration, the level of effort expended in the exploration program will be generally proportional to the size of the petroleum reserves discovered during the initial exploratory drilling work. Development Public Law 94-258 specifically prohibits general development and production of petroleum reserves within NPRA without Congressional action. It is reasonable to assume that reserves within NPRA will be developed at some time in the future. However, the initial date of, development, rate of development and methods are not known at this time. V-27 Development and production will be affected by some or all of the following factors: i Congressional decisions and actions related to NPRA a Leasing/sale methods (none have been selected) Sid Report to Congress from the Department of the Interior (required by PL94-258), including inputs from the North Slope native community 4. Extent and location of reserves a Price of ofl 6. Inputs received during the Environmental Impact Statement process The relationship of development of NPRA to energy consumption in the Barrow area will also be affected by business plans of the North Slope Borough and the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and proximity of the development to Barrow. This last factor is perhaps the single most important one with respect to energy consumption. Given the fact that variations in the above factors would produce a virtually endless list of possible energy consumption scenarios for consideration, only two such cases are considered to be instructive at this point in time. Case I - Development is so limited or is so far from Barrow that there is no effect on Barrow energy consumption. Case II - Development and production of a major field occurs immediately adjacent to Barrow so that the entire impact of the activity is sustained by Barrow. Ac- cording to a report prepared by the FEA, the smallest oil reserve which could be economically developed at this point in time would yield approximately 500 million barrels. This report further assumes that the largest reserve or group of reserves which would occur in one general area would yield approximately three billion barrels. The report predicts the peak number of people which would be imported into the North Slope Borough would be 500 people for the 500 million barrel case and 2400 people for the three billion barrel case. v-28 As an upper limit, the population increase in the Prudhoe Bay area due to the development and production of the reserves at that location was approximately 5500 people in 1976. It was assumed that energy requirements for drilling operations and other development and production activities would be met by importing fuels. It was further assumed that no major subsidiary industrial development would occur in Barrow which would use Barrow energy resources. Therefore, the primary energy requirements for Barrow would result from the increased population and attendant secondary effects. It was also assumed that the field would be developed over a 15-year period. Based on data contained in the FEA report and experience at Prudhoe Bay, population increases brought about by NPRA development were projected as follows: 500 x 10© 3.x 102 Prudhoe Barrel Barrel Bay Field Field Case Peak increase in population -- 500 2,400 5,500 Barrow area Residual population increase during production years, Barrow area 70 528 1,210 Based on these estimates the following energy consumption values arising from development of NPRA were calculated: 500 x 10° 3 x 10? Prudhoe: Bay Peak Year Barrel Field Barrel Field Case Electricity Annual consumption, kWh 1,975,000 9,486,000 21,818,000 Peak demand, kW 350 1,700 3,900 Natural gas, MCF 91,000 434,000 1,000,000 30 Year Total Electricity, kWh 15,267,000 92,300,000 212,290,000 Natural gas, MCF (included gas required for generation of elec- tricity) 703,000 4,223,000 9,113,000 SECTION VI ENERGY RESOURCES Barrow is located within NPRA, which, until very recently, was under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Navy. In 1976, the U.S. Congress passed a law (Public Law 94-258) transferring jurisdiction of the reserve to the Department of Interior effective June 1, 1977, and requiring the Department to commence exploration of NPRA so that an accurate estimate of petroleum reserves can be made. This is the same law which renamed the reserve, which formerly was called Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4. In addition, PL94-258 requires the Department of Interior to conduct a study and make recommendations with respect to the values of and best use for the lands contained in the reserve. The study task force is to include members of the Arctic Slope native community. Development and production of the reserves is prohibited without specific action of the Congress except as provided for in Subsection (e) of Section 104 of the law, which states: (e) Until the reserve is transferred to the jurisdic- tion of the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to develop and continue opera- tion of the South Barrow gas field, or such other fields as may be necessary, to supply gas at reason- able and equitable rates to the native village of Barrow, and other communities and installations at or near Point Barrow, Alaska, and to installations of the Department of Defense and other agencies of the United States located at or near Point Barrow, Alaska. After such transfer, the Secretary of the Interior shall take such actions as may be necessary to continue such service to such village, communi- ties, installations, and agencies at reasonable and equitable rates. Although some exploration took place while the reserve was under the jurisdiction of the Navy, relatively little is known about the extent and location of petroleum within the reserve. Estimates of the reserves vary widely. However, there is ample evidence to indicate the possible existence of substantial quantities of coal, oil and gas. VI-2 The subsurface mineral rights within the reserve are owned by the federal government. However, based on provisions contained in Public Law 94-258 and the demonstrated ability of the residents of the Barrow area to acquire fuel for heating and power generation at a relatively low cost, it has been assumed that mineral rights could be acquired without cost for any of the energy sources with- in NPRA. Therefore, fuel costs are assumed at present levels or at the cost of production and delivery. For fuel resources near Barrow, the cost of similar fuels in other parts of the United States or on the world market are not applicable for the Barrow study unless the resources near Barrow can be developed, produced and transported outside at current prices, thus creating potential external demand. Since it is not econo- mically feasible at the present time to market any of the fuel re- sources under consideration outside the Barrow area, there is no external demand on the Barrow resources. Thus, it is necessary to estimate fuel costs on a local basis. Coal Coal is a relatively abundant potential energy resource in northwest Alaska. Surface outcrops occur at Meade River and also along the Kuk River near Wainwright. The location of these coal deposits is shown in Figure 19. According to Barrow residents, coal was available from a mine at Meade River at a cost of approximately $40 per ton in the 1940's. However, the relatively low volume of coal mined in combination with the transportation equipment available at that time lead to the conclusion that this information would not serve to predict the cost of coal in the immediate future. A preliminary study to determine the cost of mining and transporting coal was prepared by the Bureau of Mines in early 1977. Coal in locations referred to as Areas 2, 3 and 4 near Wainwright was selected as having the lowest mined cost based on the least amount of overburden. An analysis of coal from these areas is shown in Table 17. The cost estimates pre- pared by the Bureau of Mines assume the coal has a higher heating au R.G. Bottge, Coal as an Energy Source for Barrow, Alaska (Juneau, Alaska: U.S. Bureau of Mines, no date). = 7 oe tr COAL DEPOSIT : man + ae oe * BARROWAsgES fT +e" wer ue nt bream sath cee SCALE IN MILES COAL LOCATIONS AND ASSUMED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES : FOR a MINE MOUTH COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS \ hs yw: b Ei * R. W. BECK & ASSOC : TABLE 17 Coal Analyses from Deposits Along the Kuk River Near Wainwright, Alaska Proximate Percent Ultimate Percent Calorific Ash Agglom- Condi- Volatile Fixed Hydro- Nitro- Value, Fusion erating Mine Area tion® Moisture Matter Carbon Ash Sulfur _gen Carbon gen Oxygen Btu Temp .> Index Area No. 2 c-61133 a 25.7 30.0 42.3 2.0 0.3 6.6 54.6 1.2 35.4 9,470 2,320 IDT NAb 2 - 40.4 57.0 2.6 0.4 5.0 73.5 1.5 17.0 12,750 2,420 ST 3 - 41.5 58.5 - 0.4 5.2 75.5 1.5 4175 13,100 2,810 FT C-61134 1 24.3 30.8 42.5 2.4 0.2 6.5 55.1 1.2 34.6 9,510 2,570 IDT NAb 2 - 40.6 56.3 3.1 0.3 5.0 72.9 1.6 17.1 12,560 2,710 ST 3 - 41.9 58.1 - 0.3 5.2 75.2 1.6 17.7 12,970 2,750 FT Area Wo. 3 C-61135 1 26.7 29.1 41.9 2.3 0.2 6.6 53.4 0.9 36.6 9,230 2,080 IDT NAb 2 - 39.7 57.2 3.1 0.3 4.9 72.8 1.3 17.6 12,590 2,200 ST 3 - 41.0 59.0 - 0.3 5.1 75.1 1.3 18,2 13,000 2,650 FT Area No. 4 Ash Air Dry Soften. Loss ,% Temp. Bottom Bed _ 19.3 32.0 45.7 3.0 0.3 5.7 57.0 1.2 32.8 9,570 10.6 - 2 - 39.6 56.7 3.7 0.4 4.5 70.6 1.5 19.3 11,850 = = 3 - 41.1 58.9 - 0.4 4.6 73.3 1.6 20.1 12,310 - - Top Bed 1 18.9 Mel 43.4 3.6 0.4 5.8 58.1 1.1 31.0 9,850 10.5 - 2 = 42.0 53.6 4.4 0.5 4.5 71.6 1.4 17.6 12,140 - = = 3 - 44.0 56.0 - 0.5 4.7 74.9 1.5 18.4 12,700 - - rn & a = Sample as received; 2 = dried at 105 C; 3 = moisture and ash-free. bipr = In Source: itial beformation Temperature; ST=Softening Temperature; FT = Fluid Temperature. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 4150 (6). VI-5 value of 9000 Btu/lb (or between 2.5 and 9.8 percent lower than the samples shown in the table). A summary of estimated costs for mining and transporting coal from these three areas is shown in Table 18. This summary indicates that the lowest mining cost was $9.86/ton ($0.55/10® Btu) for a 49,000 ton-per-year (tpy) mine and $6.56/ton ($0.36/10© Btu) for a 143,000 tpy mine. Transportation from Area 2, 3 or 4 to Barrow was estimated at $40.00/ton ($2.22/10° Btu). The report notes that it was necessary to make a number of assumptions which have a substantial effect on the estimated cost. It was therefore suggested that they should be considered as a “first appraisal" of mining and transpor- tation costs. No estimate of reserves was made. However, it is assumed for this study that the coal supply is large enough to last beyond the useful life of power plant and heating facilities con- structed to use the coal. O41 Oil seeps have been observed on the ground at a number of locations within 50 miles of Barrow, although no oil was found during the development of the South Barrow Gas Field. However, South Barrow No. 14, the most recent well drilled in the Barrow area, hit both oil and gas. Well No. 14 is in a different struc- ture from the South Barrow Gas Field. Oil was encountered at a depth of approximately 2200 ft. The producing horizon was mea- sured to be 55 feet, with an areal extent estimated at 8800 acres. Preliminary estimates by the Bureau of Mines indicate that the structure could possibly contain 100 million barrels of oil.2 The approximate location of the Well No. 14 field is shown in Figure 3. An analysis of the oil has not been made available to date. The sulfur content of the oil produced at Prudhoe Bay is approximately one percent. However, it has been suggested that, since the wells at Prudhoe Bay are 8000 to 10,000 feet deep, oil from Well No. 14 may not necessarily be similar with respect to sulfur content or other characteristics. No cost information was available for producing oil from the field in the quantities required by Barrow. Therefore an “order of magnitude" estimate was developed based on this estimate, which assumed the cost of crude oil to be $1.00/million Btu at 2p Pp. Blaska, Petroleum Engineer, U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines, to K.C. O'Brien, R.W. Beck and Associates, correspondence, March 8, 1977. Coal Consumption -- 49,000 tons per year Mining cost, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Strip mining Strip mining -- drilling and blasting Underground Total cost delivered to Wainwright, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Strip mining -- ripping Strip mining -- drilling and blasting Underground Total cost delivered to Barrow, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Strip mining -- ripping Strip mining -- drilling and blasting Underground Coal Consumption -- 143,000 tons per year Mining cost, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Open pit -- ripping Open pit -- drilling and blasting Underground Total cost delivered to Wainwright, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Open pit -- ripping Open pit -- drilling and blasting Underground Total cost delivered to Barrow, $/short ton ($/MM Btu) Open pit -- ripping Open pit -- drilling and blasting Underground VI-6 TABLE 18 Summary of Coal Mining Costs at Three Sites Near Wainwright, Alaska Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 12.71 (0.71) 13.96 (0.78) 9.86 (0.55) 19.74 (1.10) 23.02 (1.28) 14.66 (0.81) 23.47. (1.30) 23.47 (1.30) 23547 C330) 24.31 (1.35) 26.61 (1.48) 23.30 (1.29) 31.40 (1.74) S575 Ch 98) 28.16 (1.56) 34.83 (1.94) 35.86 (1.99) 36.62 (2.03) 42.17- (2.93) 53.96 (3.00) 49.86 (2.77) 59.74 (3.32) 63.02 (3.50) 54.66 (3.04) 63.47 (3.53) 63.47 (3.53). 63.47 (3.53) 9.84 (0.55) 11.16 (0.62) 6.56 (0.36) 16.64 (0.92) 17.84 (0.99) 9.72 (0.54) 16.23 (0.90) 16.23 (0.90) 16.23 (0.90) 20.04 (1.11) 22.28 (1.24) 18.29 (1.02) 26.83 (1.49) 29.03 (1.61) 21.58 ¢1.20) 26.35 (1.46) 27.34 (1.52) 28.00 (1.56) 49.84 (2.77) 51.16 (2.82) 46.56 (2.58) 56.64 (3.14) 57.84 (3.21) 49.72 (2.76) $6.23 (3.12) 56.23 (3.12) 56.23 (3.12) Source: R.G. Bottge, (no date). Coal as Energy Source for Barrow, Alaska. Juneau, Alaska: U.S. Bureau of Mines. VI-7 the well head. It was assumed that the cost of oil processed in a topping plant would be $1.50/million Btu, excluding capital costs. The cost of imported oil to BUECI for use as gas turbine fuel has been approximately $1.31 per gallon. This is equivalent to $9.17 per million Btu. Natural Gas Natural gas is presently the primary source of energy in the Barrow area. The gas comes from the South Barrow Gas Field, the location of which is shown in Figure 3. Several reports have been written on the status of this field. Ome of the most recent of these is Reservoir Engineering and Geologic Study of the South Barrow Gas Field, prepared by H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc.> A summary of reservoir parameters taken from this report is presented in Table 19. The report indicates that the South Barrow Gas Field will supply gas at an increase in demand rate of 5.5 percent per year through 1986 without additional wells. The higher heating value of the gas varies from 1008 to 1012 Btu/std cu ft. Reserves are estimated at 15.8 billion cubic feet as of the end of 1976. South Barrow Well No. 14 is a recent discovery, announced by the U.S. Navy in February 1977. The well was drilled by the Navy's operator in the area, Husky Oil NPR Operations Incorporated. This well is in a separate accumulation from those in the existing, producing South Barrow Field. Data on the gas from Well No. 14 are shown in Table 20. In their announcement of its discovery, the Navy stated, "in terms of supplying Barrow and the Naval Arctic Research Lab, it is significant." The announcement further stated, "it is not something we'd build a commercial line to export..., but it will help insure a continued gas supply for the Barrow area." The U.S. Geological Survey is sufficiently optimistic from these indications to conduct further exploration in the area. They hope that sufficient reserves will be found to satisfy Barrow's future energy needs. Their immediate exploration program includes the drilling this winter of two confirmation wells near the original discovery well, and a wildcat well on another seismic prospect to the north. 3H. Gruy and Associates, Reservoir Engineering and Geologic Study of the South Barrow Gas Field, Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 14, Alaska (Houston, Texas 1976). VI-8 TABLE 19 Summary of Basic Reservoir Parameters -- South Barrow Gas Field Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4, Alaska General Formation Names i Basal Unconformity Sand Barrow Gas Sands Formation Ages Basal Cretaceous Jurassic Lithology Sand Reservoir Properties Average Porosity (Log Analysis) 16% Average Connate Water Saturation (Log Analysis) 52-% Average Permeability to Gas 5 md Datum -2250 Feet Original Reservoir Pressure 1102 PSIA Reservoir Temperature 63 F Original Reservoir Gas Gravity (Air = 1.0) 0.564 Gas Compressibility Factor 0.839 Original Gas in Place 298.2 MCF/AF Productive Area and Sand Volumes Productive Area Proved by Development 1100 Acres Estimated Productive Area 3500 Acres Average Productive Sand Thickness 30.9 Feet Total Estimated Productive Sand Volume 108,000 AF Gas Initially In Place and Estimated Reserves Original Gas in Place (Performance) 32.0 BCF Estimated Ultimate Recovery 25.2 BCF Cumulative Production to 7/1/76 9.1 BCF Estimates Gas Reserve as of 7/1/76 16.1 BCF Source: H.J. Gruy and Associates, Reservoir Engineering and Geologic Study of the South Barrow Gas Field, Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4, Alaska (Houston, Texas, 1976), Table 1. VI-9 TABLE 20 Well No. 14 REPORT OF ANALYSIS F.S. - 14935 M.S. - N-63976 H- 0.00 OBS. PRES. - 64.2 CAL.PRES. - 63.6 STATE -— ALASKA COUNTY - NORTH SLOPE FIELD - BARROW S. WELL NAME - SOUTH BARROW NO. 14 LOCATION - SEC. 25, T22N, R17W OWNER - U.S. NAVY DATED COMPLETED - NOT GIVEN DATE SAMPLED - 02/12/77 SAMPLED BY - U.S.B.M. NAME OF PRODUCING FORMATION - MESO-BARROW DEPTH IN FEET - 1950 THICKNESS IN FEET - 150 SHUT IN WELLHEAD PRES. PSIG - NOT GIVEN OPEN FLOW, MCF/D - NOT GIVEN CHECK OF DATA: THE WELL DATA ARE ACCURATE, ( )WITHOUT CORRECTION, ( JAS CORRECTED ABOVE. REMARKS: ANALYSIS: METHANE 96.8% NORMAL PENTANE 0.0% OXYGEN 0.0% ETHANE 0.3% ISOPENTANE 0.1% ARGON TRACE PROPANE 0.1% CYCLOPENTANE TRACE HYDROGEN 0.0% NORMAL BUTANE 0.2% HEXANES PLUS 0.1% H2S * 0.0% ISOBUTANE 0.1% NITROGEN 2.4% co2 0.0% SPECIFIC GRAV 0.576 HELIUM 0.05% TOTAL 100.10% CALCULATED GROSS BTU/CU.FT., DRY AT 60 DEG. F AND 30 IN. MERCURY - 1008 *DUE TO THE ABSORPTION OF H2S DURING SAMPLING, THE REPORTED RESULTS MAY NOT BE RELIABLE VI-10 In March 1977, the Bureau of Mines derived preliminary estimates of reserves based upon discussions held with the operator of the South Barrow Gas Field and others. The Bureau of Mines estimates the structure could possibly contain 60 billion cubic feet of gas and 100 million barrels of oil. Results of the planned exploration efforts will provide more definite conclusions for gas reserves in the area. However, for purposes of this study, gas reserves in the new field were assumed to be 60 billion cubic feet. At the present time, gas is being purchased by BUECI at a cost of 32.4 cents per MCF, or approximately $0.324/million Btu. This cost covers only a portion of the actual cost of producing gas from the South Barrow Gas Field. There is evidence that under Public Law 94-258, discussed previously, gas will continue to be supplied to Barrow non-government users at less than the production cost.499 However, in order to place all fuels on an equivalent basis, an order of magnitude estimate was prepared to reflect a non-subsidized total production cost for the Well No. 14 field. This estimate indicated a total production cost, including amortized capital costs, on the order of $1.50/million Btu. Wind Wind as a source of energy is attractive because it is free and is not depleted or consumed with use. The mean wind speed in Barrow is 10.6 knots at an elevation of 31 to 39 feet.© Power producedby the wind is not suitable for meeting capacity (demand) requirements, since the wind speed (or lack thereof) at any given time cannot be accurately predicted. However, power produced by the wind can be used to displace energy requirements and thus save fuel, operating, and maintenance costs. Alaska Industry, August 1976, pp. 27-28. 5 U.S. Congress, House, Development of Certain National Petroleum Reserves: Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 49, 94th Congress, 2nd session, 1976, Report 94-942, pp. 21-23. 6p, Wentink, Jr., "Summary of Alaska Wind Power and its Possible Applications," in Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge (Washington, D.C.: The Mitic Corporation), pp. 121-129. SECTION VIL ALTERNATIVES TO MEET ENERGY REQUIREMENTS A total of nineteen alternate cases were selected for eval- uation for the four energy resources discussed in Section VI. Of this group, nine were selected as being representative of the sig- nificant alternatives available to Barrow and are reviewed in this section. Descriptions, annual costs, and fuel consumption for these alternatives are summarized in Tables 21 through 24. Details concerning the remaining alternatives may be found in Appendix C. The alternatives were evaluated on a preliminary basis with respect to cost, fuel consumption, technical feasibility, and environmental considerations. In order to put the alternatives on an equivalent basis for comparison in this study, it was assumed that each alternative must supply enough energy to meet Barrow's requirements (excluding NARL) for 1976. The evaluation included capital construction and fuel costs. Operating and maintenance costs were excluded, as was the cost of converting individual residences and buildings to allow use of a heating fuel other than natural gas. The criteria and as- sumptions used to develop the cost estimates are listed in Appendix B. Preliminary cost estimates for each of the cases are included in Appendix C. Estimated costs for individual system components are based on what are considered to be reasonable price levels for construction completed in 1976, but should be considered as preliminary, since detailed cost estimates for individual components were not prepared in most cases. No consideration or credit was given for the possibility that certain costs might be covered by grants or subsi- dized in some other fashion. Cost indices for Barrow were developed using the following sources: I. Contractors experienced in Alaskan construction. 2% Cost indices used by Appraisal Company of Alaska in their appraisal report. 15, B. Manning, Appraisal of Barrow Utilities, Inc. Property at Barrow, Alaska and the Bureau of Indian Affairs Property Associated with Utilities at Barrow, Alaska, prepared for Bureau of Indian Affairs (Contract No. E00C14201139) (Anchorage: Appraisal Company of Alaska, 1974). TABLE 21 Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for Coal Item Mine Location Power Plant Type Power Plant Location Electric Transmission Line Requirements Electric Distribution System Requirements Space Heating Type and Conversion Require- ments Total Annual Cost Based on 1976 Energy Consumption Requirements Total Annual Fuel Con- sumed Based on 1976 Energy Consumption Requirements c-1 Area 2-4 near Wainwright steam power plant Barrow none normal elec. + elec. htg. new system (all electric) $8,434,100 67,000 tpy Case Number C-2 Area 2-4 near Wainwright steam power plant Barrow none normal elec. load w/o htg. new system (coal) $1,854,100 23,900 tpy VII-2 TABLE 22 Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for Oil Case Number Item o-1 0-2 0-3 0-4 Oil Well Location Well No. 14 Well No. 14 Well No. 14 Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location Barrow Barrow none none Power Plant Type Power Plant Location Electric Transmission Line Requirements Oil Transmission Line Requirements Electric Distribution System Requirements Oil Distribution System Requirements Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements Total Annual Cost Based on 1976 Energy Consumption Requirements Total Annual Fuel Consumed Based on 1976 Energy Con- sumption Requirements gas turbine generator Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + elec. htg.) normal elec. + elec. htg. none new system (all electric) $4,524,000 236,000 bbl/yr gas turbine generator Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + oil htg..) normal elec. load w/o htg. for heating new oil system or convert existing system $2,063,000 76,000 bb1/yr steam power plant Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + elec. htg.) normal elec. + elec. htg. none new system (all electric) $6,511,000 21,200 bbl/yr steam power plant Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + oil htg.) normal elec. load w/o htg. for heating new oil system or convert existing system $2,095,000 71,800 bbl/yr €-1IA TABLE 23 Alternate Energy Utilization Systems for Natural Gas Item Case Number VII-4 G-1 G-2 Gas Field Location Power Plant Type Power Plant Location Electric Transmission Line Requirements Gas Transmission Line Requirements Electric Distribution System Requirements Gas Distribution System Requirements Space Heating Type and Conversion Re- quirements Total Annual Cost Based on 1976 Energy Con- sumption Requirements Total Annual Fuel Consumed Based on 1976 Energy Con- sumption Requirements South Barrow + Well No. 14 Gas turbine generator Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + elec. htg.) normal elec. + elec. htg. none new system (all electric) $2,524,100 @ $0.324 (or $4,194,000 @ $1.50/10° Btu) 1,420,000 MCF/yr South Barrow + Well No. 14 Gas turbine generator Barrow none 10 miles (normal elec. + gas htg.) normal elec. load w/o htg. for heating gas -- no modifications $1,491,800 @ $0.324 (or $2,028,000 @ $1.50/10® Btu) 456,000 MCF/yr VII-5 TABLE 24 Alternate Energy Utilization System for Wind® Location Barrow Power Plant Type Wind Turbine Generator Maximum Generator Output 1000 kW Electric Transmission Line None Requirements Estimated Annual Capacity 0.25 Factor Total Annual Cost>»¢ $420, 000 Total Annual Generation 2,190,000 kWh Unit Cost of Displacement $0. 19/kWh Energy Comparative Cost of Energy Generated by Gas Turbine Generator© Incremental Fuel Fuel Cost Energy Cost Gas $0.324/108 Btu $0.0065/kWh Gas $1.50/10° Btu $0.03/kWh Oil $9.17/10° Btu $0. 183/kWh 4a wind turbine generator is not suitable for meeting Barrow's firm capacity requirements. Therefore this alternative is evaluated as a source of displacement energy. bpoes not include incremental operating and maintenance costs. See Appendix B and C for cost estimate details. Ckquivalent to $1.31 per gallon. VII-6 3. Construction cost for installation of the new 2500 kW gas turbine generator. 4. Corps of Engineers (Omaha) estimates. Alternatives Using Coal The alternatives using coal shown on Table 21 assume coal is transported from Wainwright to Barrow. These alternatives were considered better from a reliability standpoint than alternatives which assumed the power plant was located near Wainwright because the latter would make electric service to Barrow dependent on a relatively long transmission line in a harsh environment. Alter- native Case C-l1 assumes that heating is provided by an "all-electric" system, while C-2 assumes that coal is used to provide heat in the in- dividual buildings. It can be seen that the total annual cost for Case C-1 is $8,434,100, in comparison to $1,854,100 for Case C-2, thus making the all-electric case unattractive from an economic standpoint. The large differential in cost between the two cases is due primarily to the fact that a 24,000-kW power plant would be required for the "all-electric" case, while a 3000-kW plant would suffice for Case C-2. In addition, the fuel consumption would be nearly three times as great for the "all-electric" case. While the annual cost of Case C-2 is in the same general range as costs for some of the oil and gas cases, costs for distributing the heating coal in Barrow and the cost of converting the existing heating systems from gas to coal were not included. These costs can be expected to be considerable. Alternative C-2 is considered to be technically feasible and as reliable as the present system, but it is considerably less convenient. With respect to environmental considerations, coal samples from the Wainwright area show a sulfur level of less than 0.5 percent, which indicates that scrubbers would not be required for SO) emission control. However, SO emissions would increase in comparison to the emissions resulting from the use of natural gas. An increase in particulate emissions to the atmosphere would also occur. The mining and transport of coal from Wainwright to Barrow could be expected to cause negative environmental impacts to the terrain in comparison to the continued use of natural gas. Alternatives Using Oil Table 22 presents a comparison of four cases which assume the use of oil to meet Barrow's energy requirements. Cases O-1 and 0-2 assume the use of a topping plant to provide a middle-distillate APPENDIX A REVIEW OF ASSUMPTIONS FOR SYNTHESIZED PROJECTION MODEL Consumer Electrical Load Saturation In the summary of historical data, Table 10 indicated that for 1976, the annual electric energy consumed by a residential account was approximately 3516 kWh. Table A-l is an assumed mode of operation based upon estimates” made concerning the use of ap- pliances and electrical conveniences in Barrow. The calculated annual value of energy is shown to be 3533 kWh, which closely approximates the historical data. The saturation (level of annual electric energy use per account) in Alaska was 9323 kWh per residential account in 1974.2 For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that as the econ- omic conditions in Barrow improve, the residential consumer would tend to use more electric energy so that eventually, the saturation in Barrow might approach a saturation typical of the remainder of the state. For the synthesized case for electric energy consumption, it was assumed that electrical saturation would double between 1977 and 1990 and that saturation would increase by one percent per year thereafter. It was further assumed that electric energy con- sumed per account in all new residences would be higher in 1977 than in the residences existing prior to 1977. The added con- venience of more adequate wiring and more built-in electric appliances will probably cause the increase in electric energy consumption suggested above. An estimated consumption which is 10 percent greater than the energy consumed by 75 percent of the existing homes was assumed as the 1977 electric consumption rate for new homes. Number of Residential Accounts The number of residential accounts is a sum of those accounts considered to be old accounts and new accounts. The old accounts are the average number of accounts for 1976 for either the gas or electric projections. The new accounts are based upon the incre- mental changes inferred in Table 3 (Section IV). lpersonnel at North Slope Borough Housing Authority to J.S. Miller, R.W. Beck and Associates, personal communication, May 10, 1977. 2u.s. Department of Interior, Alaska Power Administration, Alaska Electric Power Statistics, 1960-1975, 4th ed. (Juneau, Alaska, 1976), p. 44. TABLE A~1 1977 Assumed Energy and Capacity Requirements of Individual Residences, Barrow, Alaska Annual kWh/Appliance Percent of Homes in Homes Existing which Appliance Prior to 1977 is Found 25 75 Appliance Refrigerator 1137 1137 Freezer 0 1195 Television 0 500 Stereo 0 109 Radio 86 86 Lights 900 900 Washing Machine 0 76 2123 4003 New Homes Annual kWh Consumed by 75% of Homes Estimated Annual kWh Consumed by New Homes 4In Watts. +10% Annual kWh Weighted Average 4137 896 375 82 86 900 57 3533 4003 400 4403? Typical Capacity . a Requirement 325 325 300 110 70 300 290 bit is assumed that these values will double by the year 1990 (see page A-l). Number of Commercial Accounts The number of commercial accounts is based upon the assump- tion that increased commercial activity will result as the popu- lation of Barrow grows. A ratio of historical commercial activity to population was used to calculate an assumed incremental in- crease and that increment was in turn added to the number of ac- counts from the previous year to yield the total projected number of commercial accounts. Non-Residential Additions to Utility Systems Due to Future Construction The annual electric energy and natural gas requirements were estimated for projects that have been planned by the North Slope Borough. The requirements for the new Arctic Slope office were estimated as well. The timing of the additions was based upon information available from the North Slope Borough. 2 In addition to the planned projects, it was assumed that population growth would create a need for additional health ser- vice and school facilities. Estimated energy requirements for those facilities are the same as those made for the planned additions. A number of planning reports for the Barrow area mention the desirability of extending utilities such as domestic water and sewer service directly to the residential community in a utility system. The installation of such a system would require energy for heating and operation. In addition it is likely that the availability of such services in a residence would result in increased use, causing additional energy consumption. The U.S. Public Health Service in- dicated that such a system was in the very early planning stages but that no definite answer could be given with respect to whether such a system would be built within the foreseeable future. There- fore, no attempt was made to predict energy consumption for an ex- tended utility system. The assumptions made for estimating future energy rquirements are listed on the following pages. 3North Slope Borough, Capital Improvements Program (Barrow, Alaska, 1977). Commercial Energy Consumption per Account-Year The commercial energy per account-year is calculated as described below: Definitions: N = Number of commercial accounts for given year. M = Energy per account-year for previous year. NEW = Energy per account-year attributable to a change due to aforementioned specific changes. Formula: Energy/Account-year = (N-1)(M) + NEW N Assumptions For Estimating Future Gas and Electric Energy Requirements Commercial Additions (Planned) 1. Arctic Slope Office Year Added 1978 Space 10,000 sq. ft. Electric Energy 70,000 kWh/yr. Natural Gas ; 2,750 MCF/yr. 2. Equipment Storage Structure Year Added 1979 Space 4,000 sq. ft. Electric Energy 20,000 kWh/yr. Natural Gas 965 MCF/yr. 2. Barrow Public Safety Building Year Added 1982 Space 10,000 sq. ft. Electric Energy 70,000 kWh/yr. Natural Gas 2,750 MCF/yr. Commercial Additions (Planned) (continued) 4. Airport Terminal Building Year Added Space Electric Energy Natural Gas Public Health Service Additions l. Barrow Health Center Year Added Space Electric Energy Natural Gas Additional Space Year Added (1 each year shown) Area Electric Energy Natural Gas School Additions 1. Complete Vo-tech School Year Completed Additional Electric Energy Additional Natural Gas School District Warehouse Year Added Area Electric Energy Natural Gas Barrow Elementary School Year Added Area Electric Energy Natural Gas 1983 5,000 45,000 1,375 1979 5,000 45,000 Loy > SG Lt. kWh/yr. MCF/yr. ed.) ft. kWh/yr. MCF/yr. 1984, 1990, 2000 5,000 45,000 1,375 1980 32,000 1983 5,000 22,000 1,280 1983 6,000 28,000 1,650 sq. ft. kWh/yr. MCF/yr. kWh/yr. sq. ft. kWh/yr. MCF/yr. sq. ft. kWh/yr. MCF/yr. School Additions (continued) 4. Additional Space (all cases)* Year Added Space Electric Energy Natural Gas Se Additional Space* Year Added Space Electric Energy Natural Gas *Assumed addition. 1990 5,000 sq. ft. 28,000 kWh/yr. 1,650 MCF/yr. 2000 10,000 sq. ft. 56,000 kWh/yr. 3,300 MCF/yr. Computer Analyses It was originally thought that multiple-regression analysis could be used to obtain the projections that were presented in Section 5. Multiple~regression analysis is a method of projecting one quantity (dependent variable) based upon projections of several other quantities (independent variables). The quantities to be used as independent variables were the numerical descriptions of the social and economic growth that has taken place in Barrow (see Section IV). However, for several reasons, it was found that this technique could not be used. In some instances, the independent variables did not have a common historical data base, or had a different data base from the dependent variable. In addition, only four to six years of historical data were available for the depen- dent variables. Thus, the data base was too small to be statisti- cally significant for a multiple-regression model. Attempts to forecast independent variables (e.g. commercial sales) were hampered by the fact that, in most cases, only two data points (two years of sales data) exist. Again, the data base is too small for reliable projection. Another problem that compounds regression forecasting by category is that there has been no consistent record keeping method for any substantial period of time; therefore, different categories do not always include the same accounts. Since multiple-regresstion analysis was not feasible, an R.W. Beck and Associates computer program (TRNDFIT), which is available in the Denver Office computer library, was used to perform the least-squares trend-fit analysis which resulted in some of the pro- jections. The trend equations are presented in notes on Figures 14 through 17. Accountet Residential - Old Residential - New Commercial Street Lights Public Mealth Service Schools Kin per Account - Yeor Residentiel - O1d* Residential - Commercial Street Lights Public Health Service Schools Wh per Year Residential - O14 Residential - Bev Commercial Street Lights Public Health Service Schools Unaceownted for” Totel kh Compound Rate of Growth Sivee 1977 (2) Syothesized Electric Ene: Projection TABLE A-2 Barrow, Alegks 1977 1978 1979 1989 1981 1982 1983 1964 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 a“ es 162 178 207 ay 250 262 277 n Py 75 ” 9 wo 82 oo 86 a 7 106 103 106 ud 6 us tray 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 3,933 3,726 3,931 4,373 4,612 4,065 5,131 5,412 4,403 4,644 4,898 5,450 3,748 6,063 6,995 6,745 30, 000 0,48 30,407 30,407 30,902 31,074 “31,074 31,074 me 66 sa Bes oe 864 oe B64 706, 952 ‘723,062 784,540 620,705 858,537 878,102 896,113 2,207,208 1,217,208 1,217, 1,249,211 1,273,211 2,271,211 2,271,281 1,448,530 1,611,710 1,792,930 2,103,710 2,218,920 213,747 793,476 1,128,150 1,668,365 2,160,000 2,341,339 2,402,153 2,672,364 69,984 88,992 93,312 104,544 706, 952 723,062 902,419 020,705 96,113 1,207,201 2,217,201 4,269,211 1,249,211 2,272,211 2,132,997 2,321,147 3, 909 4,031,171 4,864,201 6,951,621 9,488,992 10,421,326 10,925,456 11,517,632 12,118,646 12,751,466 13,293,355 13,697,718 - 6.01 7.90 6.87 6.50 6.25 6.07 5.61 3.65 6.01 9.83 4.84 5.42 5.22 5.22 4.25 4.35 Crowth Since Previous 7.63 Year (2) “See Table A-l. Mueld constant at 33 percent of total kh. See Section V, “Electric Energy — Barrow,” for discuseion of unaccounted for category. 410 292 87 123 5,709 7,Als u,076 064 918,580 1,271,212 2, 340,690 2,077,580 2,703,436 106,272 918,580 2,272,241 35,071, 107 14,468,878 3.30 4.25 904,513 1,271,211 5,332,343 15,235,265 410 353 14 1,053, 366 1,299,211 1,053, 366 1,299,211 6,167, 596 17,621, 703 410 490 16 ise 1,409,590 1,355,211 3,531,330 4,766,230 3,677, 664 136,312 1, 409, 390 1,355,211 8,010, 44) Synthesized Natural Gas Projection Barrow, ore TABLE A-3 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1962 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1990 2000 Accounts: Residential ~ Old 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 397 Residential - New 62 98 ws 191 220 244 263 27> 290 ws 320 6 503 Commercial 62 64 66 68 70 7 3 75 7 76 80 85 107 Public Health Service and Schools 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 MCF/Account-Year Residential - Old 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 264 Residential - New 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 179 Commercial 1,404 1,425 1,418 1,418 1,418 1,437 1,436 1,436 1,436 1,4% 1,436 1,436 1,436 Public Health Service and Schools 55,000 55,000 55,688 55,688 55,688 55,688 56,328 37,153 57,153 57,153 57,153 57,153 57,153 MCF/Year Residential - Old 104,808 104,808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 104, 808 Residential - New 11,098 17,542 31,325 34, 189 43,676 47,077 49,225 51,910 54,595 57,280 65,514 90,037 Commercial 87,0468 91,200 93,588 96,424 102,027 104, 828 107, 700 110,572 112,008 114, 860 122,060 153, 652 Public Health Service and Schools 110,000 110,000 111,376 111,376 112,656 114, 06 114, 6 114, We 115, 682 117,332 122,008 Electric Generation® 179,028 189, 780 208,427 242,373 255,029 265,067 277,954 289,778 304, 705 352,44 457,740 maccomteoe 15,215 15,876 16,995 17,483 18, 688 19,311 19,652 20,398 20,891 21,567 23,571 28, 708 Total 307,197 529, 206 566,519 582,789 622,948 643,709 661,758 679,948 696, 386 781,922 785,719 956,953 Compound Rate of Growth Since 1977 (%) - 4.04 5.69 4.74 4.43 4.20 4.05 3.87 3.73 3.59 3.55 3.42 2.80 Growth Since Previous Year (2) 13.50 4. 7.05 2.87 3.52 3.26 3.33 2.80 2.75 2.42 3.24 9.29% 21.79% ®gased on Synthesized Electric Energy Projection (Table A-2). and the heat content for gas of 1000 Btu/CF. bueld constant at 3 percent of total MCF. Gas requirement for electric generation based on an average heat rate of 20,000 Btu/kWh APPENDIX B ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA FOR COST COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Energy Study for Barrow, Alaska June 1977 Energy Consumption for Barrow -- 1976 1. Electricity a. Total generation 8,317,086 kWh b. Average hourly load 8,317,086 kWh 8,760 hrs Gs Peak load (measured) 1455 kW Gas a. Total consumed 446,852 MCF Total sales (heating) -290,422 MCF Amount allocated to power generation 156,430 MCF b. Ratio of peak to aver- age (heating -- calculated) 0.5 Cc. Peak gas consumption (heating) 290,422 MCF/yr 8760 hr/yr x 0.5 = 66.3 MCF/hr d. Equivalent electrical energy required (1) Assumptions (a) Gas heating system has efficiency of 70 percent (b) Electrical heating system has efficiency of 95 percent (including distribution losses) = 949 kW (2) Annual equivalent electrical energy 290,422 MCF = 290,422 x 10° Btu 3413 Btu = 1 kWh 290,422 x 10° Btu/yr x 0.7 x 1 -95 3413 Btu (3) Peak equivalent electrical requirements 66.3 x 10° Btu/hr x 0.7 x _1 x 1 kWh = 14,314 kW 1 .95 3413 Btu B. Power Plant Requirements? ds Fuel heating cases a. Peak electrical load 1,455 kW b. Use 2 each 1500 kW power plants for all fuels 2. All electrical cases a. Peak electrical load Electrical 1,455 kw Heating 14,314 kW Total 15,769 kW b. Use 3 each 8000-kW gas turbine generators or steam power plant units Cc. Higher Heating Values for Fuels 1. Coal: 9000 Btu/1b or 18,000,000 Btu/ton 26 Oil: 142,860 Btu/gallon (1 BBl = 42 gallons) or 6,000,000 Btu/BB1 a Gas: 1000 Btu/std cu ft or 1,000,000 Btu/MCF x 1 kWh = 62.7 x 10° kWh/yr b assume power plant will meet peak demand with largest unit out of service. Ds Net Plant Heat Rate for Power Plants ae Gas turbine generator (using refined oil or natural gas) 20,000 Btu/kWh 5 Steam power plant (using coal or oil) 17,000 Btu/kWh E. Fuel Costs 1. Coal a. At mine for low consumption $0.55/10° Btu b. At mine for high consumption 0.36 Cc. Delivered in Barrow, low con- sumption Zeus d. Delivered in Barrow, high con- sumption 2.58 2. oil a. Crude oil ' 1.00/10© Bru b. Refined at topping plant 4-50 Cx Refined at remote location and delivered to Barrow (@$1.32/gallon) 9.17 3. Gas a. Current price $0. 324/10° Btu b. Cost including amortized capital costs 1.50 4. Wind 0.00/10° Btu Ei Annual Capital Cost Factor 1. Current interest rates Current interest rate range 6 to 7 percent for municipal (tax free) revenue bonds Current interest rate range 5 to 8 percent for REA loans INot including capital cost of topping plant. G. 1 2. Annual capital cost factor Assume 7 percent interest rate for 30 years on all facilities Level debt service factor 0.0805 Assume 2 percent for insurance, interim replacement, administrative and general costs = 0.02 TOTAL 0.105 Use 0.1 or 10 percent Capital costs! ae Oil-fired steam power plant $ 500/kW 2. Coal-fired steam power plant 550/kW 3. Gas turbine generator 200/kW 4. Wind turbine generator 1,400/kW 5. Topping plant a. Plant sized to produce distillate oil for gas turbine generators. Residual oil used for heating $ 450,000 b. Plant sized to produce distillate oil for gas turbine generators in "all electric" system $1,500,000 6. Gas transmission line a. Three-inch -- sized to carry gas for heating only $ 82,000 b. Four-inch — sized to carry gas for heating plus gas turbine generators $101,000 Cc. Six-inch -- sized to carry gas for gas turbine generators in "all electric" system $146,000 7. Oil transmission line -- two-inch line selected as minimum size. Adequate for all oil transmission requirements $116,000 Costs based on 1977 cost in "lower 48". 1 10. ll. 12. 1. 6. 7. Electric transmission line and substation a. Sized to carry present electrical load 1) Transmission line 2) Substation b. Sized for "all electric" system 1) Transmission line 2) Step-down substation Gas distribution system in Barrow Oil distribution system in Barrow Electric distribution system in Barrow a. Electric only b. Electric heating plus electrical Space heating conversion costs Assumed Cost Indecies for Construction Costs Gas turbine power plant a. Near Barrow b. Remote Wind turbine generator Steam power plant a. Near Barrow b. Remote Pipeline/electric transmission systems a. Near Barrow b. Remote Electric/gas/oil distribution systems in Barrow Heating system conversion costs Topping plant “Lower 48" cost index = 1.0. B-5 $ 24,000/mile 304,000 ea § 41,000/mile 703,000 ea $1,900,000 $1,500,000 Base 100,000 Not included ew oo 3.0 nS oo ne oo 4.0 N.A. 3.0 APPENDIX C PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES FOR ALTERNATE ENERGY UTILIZATION SYSTEMS The preliminary cost estimates contained in this Appendix were prepared using the assumptions and criteria stated in Appendix B. A typical capital cost is calculated as follows: (quantity or size) x (unit cost in “lower 48") x cost index in Barrow* cost index in "lower 48" = Total Capital Cost in Barrow The annual capital cost factor was assumed to be 0.1, or 10 percent of the total capital cost. The annual cost of fuel to generate electric energy for a given case was calculated as follows: (kilowatt hours consumed) x (power plant net heat rate) x (unit cost of fuel) = Total Annual Cost of Fuel to Generate Electricity The annual cost of fuel for heating for a given case was calculated in the following manner: (heat energy consumed) x (unit cost of fuel in heat energy units) = Annual Cost of Fuel for Heating *See Assumed Cost Indices for Construction Costs in Appendix B. ALTERNATE ENERGY UTILUZATION SYSTEM FOR COAL DESCRIPTION: Case No.: Mine Location: Power Plant Type: Power Plant Location: Electric Transmission Line Requirements: Electric Distribution System Requirements: Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Fuel Consumption: # c-1 Area 2-4 near Wainwright Steam power plant Barrow None Normal electric load plus electric heating All electric -- new electric heating system required 67,100 tpy COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000-kW x $550/kW x 4aF> = $52,800,000 Transmission System Requirements: none Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 each x 100,000/ea x 4AF = 400,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $53,200,000 x Fuel Cost: 71 x 106 x Total Estimated Annual Cost * $53,200,000 0.1 = 5,320,000 17,000 Btu x $2.58/106 Btu = 3,114,100 kwh 8,434,100 @ Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. ALTERNATE ENERGY UPLLIZATION SYSTEM FOR COAL DESCRIPTION: Case No.: Mine Location: Power Plant Type: Power Plant Location: Electric Transmission Line Requirements: Electric Distribution System Requirements: Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Fuel Consumption: # COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: c-2 Area 2-4 near Wainwright Steam power plant Barrow None Normal electric load without heating Coal -- installation of new coal heating system required 23,900 tpy 3,000 kW x $550/kW x 4AFD = Transmission System Requirements: Distribution System Requirements: Coal -- Distribution system for coal heating not included Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $6,600,000 x 0.1 Fuel Cost: @ 8.3 x 106 kwh $6,600,000 $6,600,000 660,000 x 17,000 Btu/kWh x $2.77/106 Btu = 390,800 290,000 x 10® Btu x $2.77/106 Btu = Total Estimated Annual Cost 4 * Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. 803,300 —$ 1,854,100 ALTERNATE ENERGY UTILIZATION $1 DESCRIPTION: Case No.: Mine Location: Power Plant Type: Power Plant Location: Electric Transmission Line Requirements: Electric Distribution System Requirements: Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Fuel Consumption: # COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: c-3 Area 2-4 near Wainwright Steam power plant Mine EM_FOR COAL 106 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Normal electric load plus electric heating All electric -- new electric heating system required 67,100 tpy 24,000-kW x $550/kW x SAF? Transmission System Requirements: Electric T-Line - 106 miles x $41,000/mile x 5AF = Substation 1 each x $703,000/each x 4AF - Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 each x $100,000/each x 4AF = Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $66,000,000 $21,730,000 2,812,000 $ 400,000 $90,942,000 $90,942,000 x 0.1 = Fuel Cost: # 71 x 106 kWh x 17,000 Btu x $0.36 kWh 106 Btu Total Estimated Annual Cost # 4 Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. 9,094,200 $434,500 $9,528,700 ALTERNATE ED RIPTION: Case No.: Mine Location: Power Plant Type: Power Plant Location: Electric Transmission Line Requirements: Electric Distribution System Requirements: Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Area 2-4 near Wainwright Steam power plant Mine 106 miles -- normal electric load without heating Normal electric load without heating Coal -- installation of new coal heating system required Fuel Consumption: 23,900 tpy COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $550/kW x 5AFD = $ 8,250,000 Transmission System Requirements: Electric T-Line 106 miles x $24,000/mile x SAF = 12,720,000 Substation l each x $304,000/ea x 4AF = 1,216,000 Distribution System Requirements: Coal -- Distribution cost for coal heating not included = Total Estimated Capital Costs $22,186,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $22,186,000 x 0.1 = $2,218,600 Fuel Cost: # 8.3 x 106 kwh x 17,000 Btu x $0.55/106 = 77,600 kWh 290,000 x 106 Btu x $2.77/106 Btu = 803,300 Toral Estiinated Annual Cost? $3,099,500 . Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. SYSTEM_FOR OL. Case No.: o-1 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Barrow Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: None Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Electric -- New electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 4 236,700 bbl/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000 kW x $200/kW x 3ar> . $14,400,000 Topping Plant: 1 ea x $1,500,000/ea x 3AF + 4,500,000 Transmission System Requirements: oil 10 miles x $116,000/mile x 4AF = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 each x $100,000/ea x 4AF = 400,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $23,940,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $23,940,000 x 0.1 2,394,000 Fuel Cost:4 . ls 10° kWh x 20,000 Btu x $1.50/10° Btu = 2,130.000 kWh Total Estimated Annual Cost® $ 4,524,000 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. FOK OTL Case No.: 0-2 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Barrow Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus oil heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Oil -- new oil heating systems required; or convert existi . Fuel Consumption: 4 Soh aoe siake 76,000 bbl/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000kW x $200/kW x 3ar? = $1,800,000 Topping Plant: lea x $450,000 x 3AF = 1,350,000 Transmission System Requirements: oil 10 miles x $116,000/mile x 4AF = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: oil 1 each x $1,500,000/ea x 4AF 6,000,000 $13,790,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $13,790,000 x 0.1 = 1,379,000 Fuel Cost:4 8.3 x 10° kWh x 20,000 Btu/kWh x $1.50/10° Btu = 249,000 290,000 x 106 Btu x $1.50/106 Beu = 435,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost* 2,063,000 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. po enact ae Se DESCRIPTION: Case No.: o-3 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: None Power Plant Type: Steam power plant Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: None Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Electric -- new electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 4 201,200 bb1/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000 kW x $500/kW x ar? = $48,000,000 Transmission System Requirements: oil 10 miles x $116,000/mile x 4AF 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 ea x $100,000/ea x 4AF = 400 ,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $53,040,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: 53,040,000 x 0.1 = 5,304,000 Fuel Cost:4 . 71 x 10° kWh x 17,000 Btu x $1.00/10° Btu = 1,207,000 kWh Total Estimated Annual Cost? $6,511,000 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. ee em ALTERNATE ENERGY UTLLIZATION SYSTEM FOR OL Case Now: 0-4 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: None Power Plant Type: Steam power plant Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus oil heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: 0il -- new oil heating system required or convert existing system 71,800 bb1/yr Fuel Consumption: 4 COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $500/kW x are = $6,000,000 Transmission System Requirements: Oil 10 miles x $116,000/mi. x 4AF = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: oil 1 ea x $1,500,000 x 4AF = 6,000,000 ’ $16,640,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs a eee Annual Capital Cost: $16,640,000 x 0.1 = 1,664,000 Fuel Cost:4 2 8.3 x 106 kWh x 17,000 Btu/kwh x $1.00/10° Btu = 141,100 290,000 x 106 Btu x $1.00/108 Btu = 290,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost®* $2,095,100 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. ALCERNATE ENERGY UTILIZATION SYSTEM FOR O11, Case No.: O-5 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Well No. 14 Electric Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles - normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Transmission Line Requirements: None Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: None Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Electric - new electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 4 ae 236,700 bbl/yr. COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000-kW x $200/kW x 3 AFD = $14,400,000 Topping Plant: lea x $1,500,000/ea x 3AF = 4,500,000 Transmission System Requirements: Electric T-line 10 miles x $41,000/mile x 4AF = 1,640,000 Substation 1 each x $703,000/ea x 4AF = 2,812,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric leach x $100,000/ea x 4AF = 400,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs 235722000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $23,752,000 x 0.1 = 2,375,200 Fuel Cost: * 71 x 106 kWh x 20,000 Btu/kWh x $1.50/106 Bru = 2,130,000 (Losses in topping plant not included.) $4,505,200 Total Estimated Annual Cost® * Based on 1974 enersy consumption requirement. wh AF = Coat index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. E Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Cas turbine generator Power Plant Locatioa: Well No. 14 Electric Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load without heating Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- for oil heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Oil -- new oil heating systems required or convert existing system. Fuel Consumption: @ 76,000 bbl/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $200/kW x 3AFD = $1,800,000 Topping plant: lea x $450,000/ea x 3AF = 1,350,000 4 Transmission System Requirements: Electric T-line 10 miles x $24,000/mile x 4 + 960,000 Substation leach x $304,000/ea x 4AF = 1,216,000 Oil 10 miles x $116,000/mile x 4AF = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: Oil leach x $1,500,000/ea x 4AF = 6,000,000 $15,966,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $15,966,000 x 0.1 1,596,600 Fuel Cost: 2 8.3. x 106 kWh x 20,000 Beu/kWh x $1.50/10 Bru = 249,000 290,000 x 10° Bru x $1.50/106 Bru = 435,000 Losses in topping plant not included l 0 Total Estimated Annual Cost* 2028028 f 2 Based on 1976 caerzy consumption requirement. BL b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B._ FOR_OLL ATILIZATION $ DESCRIPTION: Case No 0-7 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: none Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Electric -- new electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 2 236,700 bbl/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000-kW x $200/kW x 3AF> = $14,400,000 Topping Plant: lea x $1,500,000/ea x 3AF = 4,500,000 Transmission System Requirements: oil 10 miles x $116,000/mile x4 = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric lea x $100,000/ea x 4AF = 400,000 $23,940,000 Total Fstimated Capital Costs Annual Costs. Annual Capital Cost: $23,940,000 x 0.1 = 2,394,000 Fuel Cost: * 71 x 106 kWh x 20,000 Btu x $1.50 = 2,130,000 kWh 10° Bru Total Estimated Annual Cost* $ 4,524,000 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. a b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. N SYSTEM FOR OLI. DESCRIPTION: Case No.: 0-8 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Oil Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -~ normal electric load plus o1l heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric heating load without heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requir :rents: Oil -- new oil heating system required or convert Asti Fuel Consumption: 4 ea oe maaae _ 16,000 bbi/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $200/kW x 3 AF? o $1,800 ,000 Topping Plant: 1 ea x $450,000/ea x 3AF = 1,350,000 Transuission System Requirements: oil 10 miles X $116,000/mile x 4AF = 4,640,000 Distribution System Requirements: oil 1 each x $1,500,000/ea x 4AF = 6,000,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $13,790,000 Annual Costs. Annual Capital Cost: $13,790,000 x 0.1 = 1,379,000 Fuel Cost:? 8.3 x 106 x 20,000 Btu/kWwh x $1.50/10® Btu = 249,000 290,000 x 10° Bru x $1.50/10® Btu 435,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost® __ $2,063,000 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. DESCRIPTION: Case No.: 0-9 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: None Power Plant Type: Steam Power Plant Power Plant Location: Well No. 14 Electric Transmission Line Requirements 10 miles -- normal electric load plus electric Oil Transmission Line RequirenestLye None Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: None Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Electric -- new electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 4 7 201,200 bbl/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000 kW x $500/kW x 4aF> = $48,000 ,000 Transmission System Requirements: Electric T-line 10 miles x $41,000/mile x 4AF = 1,640,000 Substation 1 ea x $703,000/ea x 4AF = 2,812,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 each x $100,000 ea x 4AF = 400,000 52,852,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $52,852,000 x 0.1 = 5,285,200 Fuel Cost:4 71:36 10° kWh x 17,000 Btu x $1.00/10° Btu = 1,207,000 kWh Total Estimated Annual Cost® seat a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. RUY_UTILUZATTON SYS Case No.: 0-10 Oil Well Location: Well No. 14 Topping Plant Location: None Power Plant Type: Steam power plant Power Plant Location: Well No. 14 Electric Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load without heating Oil Transmission Line Requirements : 10 miles -- oil heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Oil Distribution System Requirements: For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Oil -- new oil heating system required, or convert existing system 71,800 bbl/yr Fuel Consumption: 4 COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $500/kW x 4aFo = $6,000,000 Transmission System Requirements: oil 10 miles x $116,000/mi x 4AF = 4,640,000 Electric T-line 10 miles x $24,000/mi x 4AF = 960,000 Substation 1 each x $304,000ea x 4AF = 1,216,000 Distribution System Requirements: Oil 1 each x $1,500,000 x 4AF = 6,000 ,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $18,816,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $18,816,000 x 0.1 = 1,881,600 Fuel Cost:? 3 8.3 x 10 kWh x 17,000 Btu x $1.00/10® Btu = 141,100 kWh 290,000 x 10© Btu x $1.00/10 Btu 290,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost® $2,312,700 a Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cose index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. AM SGY UTLLIZATISN SVS DESCRIPTION: Case No.: cl Gas Field Location: South Barrow plus Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line None Requirements: Gas Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Gas Distribution System Requirements : None Space Heating Type and Convers Ton) Baquizemants: Electric - new electric heating system required Fuel Consumption: 4 1,420,000 MCF/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000 kW x $200/kW x 3ar> = $14,400,000 Transmission System Requirements: Gas 10 miles x $146,000/mile x 4AF = 5,840,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electrical 1 each x $1,900,000/ea x 4AF 400 ,000 $20,640,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $20,640,000 x 0.1 = 2,064,000 Fuel Coge: = 71 x 10° kWh x 20,000 Btu x $0.324 = 460,100 6 kWh (Or 71 x 10° kW x 20,000 Btu x $1.50 = 2,130,000 kWh Total Estimated Annual Cosc® 2'95282100/(€ 190-328 Cor $4,194,000 @ $1.50/106 Btu) 4 Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. ALTERNY GY UTILIZATION EM_FOR GAS DESCRIPTION: Case No.: G-2 Gas Field Location: South Barrow plus Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: Barrow Electric Transmission Line Requirements: None Gas Transmission Line Requirements: 10 miles -- normal electric load plus gas heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Gas Distribution System Requirements : For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Gas -- no modifications required Fuel Consumption: @ 456,000 MCF/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $200/kW x 3AFP = $1,800,000 Transmission System Requirements: Gas 10 miles x $101,000/mile x 4AF = 4,040,000 Distribution System Requirements: Gas 1 each x $1,900,000/ea x 4AF = 7,600,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs £13 2205000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $13,440,000 x 0.1 = 1,344,000 Fuel Cost: 4 8.3 x 10° kWh x 20,000 Btu x $0.324/10° Bru = 53,800 kwh 290,000 x 10° Btu x $0.324/10® Btu = 94,000 (Or 147,800 x 1.50 = 0.324 684,000) Total Estimated Annual Cost® $1,491,800 @ $0,324 ui (Or $2,028,000 @ $1.50/10® Btu) don 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AY = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix B. ALTERNATE E CRIPTION: Case No.: G3 Gas Field Location: South Barrow plus Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: South Barrow Gas Field Electric Transmission Line Requirements: 5 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Gas Transmission Line Requirements: 5 miles -- normal electric load plus electric heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load plus electric heating Gas Distribution System Requirements : None Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: None Fuel Consumption: # 1,420,000 MCF/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 24,000 kW x $200/kW x 3are a $14,400,000 Transmission System Requirements: Gas 5 miles x $146,000/mile x 4AF = 2,920,000 Electric T-line 5 miles x $ 41,000/mile x 4AF = 820,000 Substation l each x $703,000/ea x 4AF = 2,812,000 Distribution System Requirements: Electric 1 each x $100,000/ea x 4AF = 400,000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $21,352,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: 2,135,200 Fuel Cost: 4 62.7 x 106 kWh 8.3 Wr * 106 kwh x 20,000 pee x $0.324/10 Btu = 460,100 or (71.0 x 106 kwh x 20,000 ae x $1.50/10® Btu = 2,130,000 Total Estimated Annual Cost $ 2,595 .300. . Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. (or $ 4,265,200 b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Anpendix B. @’$1.30/10® Beu) Gas Field Location: South Barrow plus Well No. 14 Power Plant Type: Gas turbine generator Power Plant Location: South Barrow Gas Field Electric Transmission Line Requirements: 5 miles -- normal electric load without heating Gas Transmission Line Requirements: 5 miles -~ normal electric load plus gas heating; 5 miles -- gas heating Electric Distribution System Requirements: Normal electric load without heating Gas Distribution System Requirements : For heating Space Heating Type and Conversion Requirements: Gag -- no modifications required Fuel Consumption: ? 456,000 MCF/yr COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: 3,000 kW x $200/kW x 3AF? = $1,800,000 Transmission System Requirements: Gas 5 miles x $101,000/mile x 4AF = 2,020,000 5 miles x $ 82,000/mile x 4AF = 1,640,000 Electric T-line 5 miles x $24,000/mile x 4AF = 480,000 Substation l each x $304,000/ea x 4AF = 1,216,000 Distribution System Requirements: . Gas 1 each x $1,900,000/ea x GAF = 7,600 000 Total Estimated Capital Costs $14,756,000 Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: $14,756,000 x 0.1 = 1,475,600 Fuel Cost: 4 8.3 x 106 kWh x 20,000 Btu/kWh x $0.324/106 Btu = 53,800 290,000 x 106 Btu x $0.824/10° Btu = 94,000 (Or 147,800 s 1.50 = 0.324 684,000) Total Estimated Angauat Cost $1,623,400 ‘(Or $2,159,600 @ $1.50/10© Btu) * Based on 1976 energy consumption requirement. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. See Appendix bh. ALTERNATE ENERGY UTILIZATION SYSTEM FOR WIN DESCRIPTION: Case No.: Power Plant Type: Maximum Generator Output: Electric Transmission Line Requirements: Fuel Consumption: Annual Capacity Factor: COST ESTIMATE: Capital Costs Power Plant: Transmission System: Distribution System: Total Estimated Capital Costs Annual Costs Annual Capital Cost: Annual Fuel Cost: Total Estimated Annual Cost wW-1 Wind Turbine Generator® 1000 kW None None 0.25 $1400/kW x 1000 kW x 3 ar? $4,200,000 x 0.1 = Unit Cost of Displacement Energy $420, 000/ ear = $4,200,000 None None $4, 200 ( 420,000 $ 420,000 1000 kW x 8760 hrs/yr x 0.25 capacity factor ~ $0.19/kWh Comparative Cost of Energy Generated by Gas Turbine Generator® a. Gas @ $0.324/10° Bru $0.324 x 20,000 Btu = $0.0065/kWh 106 Btu kWh b. Gas @ $1.50/10° Btu $1.50 x 20,000 Btu = $0.03/kWh 106 Btu kWh c. Oil @ $9.17/10© Beu $9.17. x 20,000 Btu_ = $0.183/kWh 10° Bru kWh 4, wind turbine generator is not suitable for meeting Barrow's firm capacity requirements. Therefore, this alternative is evaluated as a source of dis- placement energy. b AF = Cost index adjustment factor. COperating and maintenance costs not included. See Appendix B. BIBLIOGRAPHY Alaska Consultants, Inc. 1976. North Slope Borough: Issues Overview. Anchorage, Alaska. Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development. (no date). The Alaskan Economy: Year-End Performance Report, 1976. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1975. Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Industry and Area, 1973. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1975. Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Industry and Area, 1974. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1976. Alaska Labor Force Estimates by Industry and Area, 1975. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1975. Alaska Statistical Quarterly: 4th Quarter 1975. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1976. Characteristics of the In- sured Unemployed in Alaska: 4th Quarter 1976. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1975. Current Population Estimates by Census Divisions. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Department of Labor. 1977. Labor Market Information Directory. Juneau, Alaska. Alaska Industry, August 1976, pp. 27-28. Alaska Review of Business and Economic Conditions, vol. 13, no. l, January 1976, "Alaska's Growth to 1990: Economic Modelling and Policy Analysis for a Rapidly Changing Northern Frontier Region." College, Alaska: University of Alaska, Institute of Social, Economic and Government Research. Alaska State Housing Authority. 1970. City of Barrow Comprehen- sive Development Plan. Anchorage, Alaska. The Arctic Institute of North America. 1974. The Alaskan Arctic Coast: A Background Study of Available Knowledge. Prepared for Department of the Army, Alaska District, Corps of Engi- neers (contract No. DACW85-74-C-0029). Anchorage, Alaska. Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. 1975. Share Owners' Report. Barrow, Alaska. Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. 1976. Shareholders’ Report. Barrow, Alaska. Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and State of Alaska, Division of Economic Enterprise. 1974. "Barrow: An Alaskan Com- munity Profile." Barrow, Alaska, Atkasook Utilities System. 1976. "Barrow Land Use Amendment" (handwritten list). February 28, 1977. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. January 27, 1977. "Electric Power One-Line Diagram" (drawing). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. "Financial Data, Gas and Electric" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. 1977. "Installed Capacity Data (kW)" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. 1977. "Market Data, Electric" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. "Market Data, Gas" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. March 7, 1977. "Monthly Load Data" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. January 27, 1977. "Natural Gas Distribution System" (drawing). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. 1977. ''Power Plant Use Data" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. March 8, 1977. "Record and Estimated Demand Natural Gas Consumption (MSCF)" (table). Barrow, Alaska. Blasko, D.P. 1977. Preliminary Report: South Barrow Gasfield. Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Bureau of Mines. Blasko, D.P., U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines, to K.C. O'Brien, R.W. Beck and Associates, Denver, Colorado, correspondence, March 8, 1977. Bottge, R.G. (no date). Coal As An Energy Source for Barrow, Alaska. Juneau, Alaska: Bureau of Mines. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Branch of Plant Design and Construction). 1974. Barrow Utility Study. Albuquerque, New Mexico. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Plant Management Engineering Center). 1971. Feasibility Study for Transfer/Sale of B.I.A. Owned Utility Systems. Denver, Colorado. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Planning Support Group). 1976. A Report for the Justification of the Federal Government to Upgrade the Gas Pipeline Distribution System in Barrow, Alaska. Billings, Montana, Report No. 244. Butterfield, O.R. 1966. "Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4: Barrow Gas Field." Department of the Navy, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves. 1977. Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Continuing Exploration and Evaluation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4. Washington, D.C. Dupere and Associates, Inc. 1974. North Slope Borough Manpower Development and Community Survey Reports. Juneau, Alaska. Dupere and Associates, Inc. 1973. North Slope Borough Reconnais— sance Study: An Inventory of the Borough and its Communities. Juneau, Alaska. Federal Energy Administration, Strategic Petroleum Reserve Office. 1976. The Exploration, Development, and Production of Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 4. FEA/S-76/330, prepared for the Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Fischer, J. 1975. "The Past and the Future of Wind Energy in Denmark." In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 162-166. Washing- ton, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc. 1976. Reservoir Engineering and Geologic Study of the South Barrow Gas Field, Naval Petro- leum Reserve No. 4, Alaska. Houston, Texas. Hewitt V. Lounsbury and Associates, and Ralph R. Stengano and Associates. 1974, Feasibility Study: Coal Mining for Power Generating, Wainwright, Alaska. Anchorage, Alaska. IH Solar (Division of International Harvester). 1975. Solar Centaur Gas Turbine Generator Set GS-4000. San Diego, California. IH Solar (Division of International Harvester). 1975. Solar Saturn Gas Turbine Continuous Duty Generator Set. San Diego, California. Investigation and Evaluation of Gas Distribution System of Barrow Utilities, Inc. (No date.) John Graham and Company. 1973. Regional Master Plan: Barrow Region, Alaska. Prepared for Barrow Intergovernmental Coordinating Committee under contract with Western Divi- sion, Naval Facilities Engineering Command. Seattle. Kelly Pittelko Fritz and Forssen. 1974. System Evaluation and Construction Recommendations. Prepared for Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, Inc. Anchorage, Alaska. Killen, R. 1975. "G.E. Systems Studies of Large-Scale WECS." In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conver- sion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 37-45. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. Ljungstrom, G. 1975. "Swedish Wind Energy Program: A Three-Year R&D Plan, 1975-1977."" In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 140-148. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. Long, G.W., Department of Interior, Alaska Power Administration, Juneau, Alaska, to K.C. O'Brien, R.W. Beck and Associates, Denver, Colorado, correspondence, March 28, 1977. Lotker, M. 1975. "Northeast Utilities’ Participation in the Kaman/NASA Wind Power Program."" In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 59-68. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. Manning, J.B. 1974. Appraisal of Barrow Utilities, Inc. Property at Barrow, Alaska and the Bureau of Indian Affairs Property Associated with Utilities at Barrow, Alaska. Prepared for Bureau of Indian Affairs (Contract No. E00C14201139). Anchorage, Alaska: Appraisal Company of Alaska. Meier, R.C. 1975. "Concept Selection, Optimization and Preli- minary Design of Large Wind Generators." In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 46-58. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. Morgan, G.W., and Lopez, G. 1972. Engineering Studies for Barrow, Alaska of (1) Emergency Natural Gas Intertie between the City of Barrow and NARL; (2) Emergency Electrical Power Intertie between City of Barrow and NARL. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Plant Design and Construction. The Naval Arctic Research Laboratory, Barrow, Alaska. (No date.) North Slope Borough. 1976. Barrow, Alaska Federal Aid Secondary Highway Request. Barrow, Alaska. North Slope Borough. (No date.) Budget Document, Ordinance 77-73, FY 1977-78. Barrow, Alaska. North Slope Borough. 1977. Capital Improvements Program. Barrow, Alaska. North Slope Borough, Alaska: General Information and Economic Factors, July, 1976. Pipeline and Gas Journal, July, 1974, pp. 44-58. Rice, E.F.; Saroff, J.R.; and Fuller, W.B. 1964. The Barrow Community Development Study. Prepared for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. College, Alaska: The University of Alaska. Robert Retherford Associates, Consulting Engineers. 1976. Preliminary Report: Electric Utility System, Barrow Utility and Electric Coop., Inc. -- Addition to Power Plant: Prepared for North Slope Borough. Anchorage, Alaska. University of Alaska, Institute of Social, Economic and Govern- ment Research. 1976. Electric Power in Alaska, 1976-1995. Prepared for the House Finance Committee, 9th Legislature, Second session, State of Alaska. Anchorage, Alaska. U.S. Congress, House. Laws of the 92nd Congress, First Session, Public Law 92-203; December 18, 1971: An Act to Provide for the Settlement of Certain Land Claims of Alaska Natives, and for Other Purposes. U.S. Congress, House. Development of Certain National Petroleum Reserves: Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 49, 94th Congress, 2nd session, 1976, Report 94-942. U.S. Congress, House. Laws of the 94th Congress, Second Session, Public Law 94-258; April 5, 1976: Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976. U.S. Department of the Interior, Alaska Power Administration. 1976. Alaska Electric Power Statistics, 1960-1975. Juneau, Alaska. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1974. 1972 OBERS Projections: Regional Economic Activity in the U.S., Series E. Popula- tion, vol. 6, Non-SMSA Portions of BEA Economic Areas. Washington, D.C., p. 177. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1974, 1972 OBERS Projections: Regional Economic Activity in the U.S., Series E. Popula- tion, vol. 5, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Washington, D.C., p. 19. Wentink, T., Jr. 1975. “Summary of Alaska Wind Power and Its Possible Applications." In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conversion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 121-129. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. Westh, H.C. 1975. "A Comparison of Wind Turbine Generators." In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Wind Energy Conver- sion Systems, ed. F.R. Eldridge, pp. 156-161. Washington, D.C.: The Mitre Corporation. VII-7 cut for a gas turbine power plant. Cases 0-3 and 0-4 assume crude oil is burned directly in a conventional steam power plant. The two "all-electric" cases, 0-1 and 0-3, can be discounted from further consideration due to the high annual cost in addition to the fact that fuel consumption is about three times as high as for the other cases. The two remaining cases, which assume oil is burned directly for heating, are roughly equivalent on an annual cost basis. Costs for converting residential heating systems to use oil were not included. It was assumed that a piped distribution system would be used to deliver oil to residences. However, it is just as likely that delivery would be by truck, thus making the system somewhat less con- venient than the present natural gas system. Case 0-2 assumes that a middle-distillate cut is used in a gas turbine power plant and the remaining products from the crude oil are recombined and used for heating. This arrangement avoids the residual oil disposal problem which would occur if middle-distillate products were used for heating. One method for disposing of residual oil pro- ducts would be to re-inject them into the ground with pumps. It is possible that the topping plant could also produce a naphtha cut, which would have a low octane but could be used in motor vehicles. The alternatives using a topping plant are considered to be tech- nologically feasible, although operating and maintenance problems could be expected to increase as a result of the added equipment. Cases 0-1 through 0-4, locate the plant equipment in the Barrow area and are considered to be preferable from a reliability stand- point to alternatives which locate the equipment out in the field. Case 0-4, which assumes crude oil is burned directly to generate electricity and provide heating, might present a safety hazard, since crude oil often contains light oil fractions which are highly volatile and can burn or explode readily. The use of oil would result in higher atmospheric emissions of particulates and SO) than the use of natural gas. However, it is expected that all atmospheric emission regulations applying to the area could be met. Alternatives Using Natural Gas Table 23 presents information for two cases which assume the use of natural gas. Both cases locate the gas turbine power plant in Barrow, which is considered to be the best location from a re- liability standpoint. The "all-electric" case, G-l is not attractive VII-8 from an economic or fuel-consumption standpoint in comparison to Case G-2, which generally represents the system in Barrow as it now exists (assuming the replacement of the gas distribution system). Case G-2 has the lowest annual cost of all cases considered, using the current fuel price of $0.324/MCF. If capital costs are modified for this case to reflect the fact that some of the facilities presently exist (not including individual heating systems), the total annual cost would be reduced by approximately $400,000. Therefore, this case represents the most economical alternative in comparison to all other cases for all fuels considered, even at a natural gas cost of $1.50/MCF. The addition of the cost of converting individual heating systems to use coal, oil, or electricity to the cost of the other cases would further reinforce this conclusion. With respect to environmental considerations, it is anticipated that continued development of the present system will have the least environmental impact of all fossil-fuel alternatives evaluated, in terms of air and water emissions and ground surface disturbance. Alternatives Using Wind The wind turbine generator case cannot be evaluated on the same basis as the other alternatives because it cannot be considered as a firm source of power for capacity purposes. However, wind turbine generators may be used to displace energy generated by an alternate source. A typical performance curve for a wind turbine generator is shown in Figure 20. This figure also shows a wind speed/duration curve for a mean wind speed of 10 mph (roughly equivalent to the mean wind speed in Barrow). These two curves, when combined, result in a calculated capacity factor of about 0.25. Table 24 compares the cost of energy generated by a wind turbine generator to the incremental fuel cost savings for electricity generated by the existing power plant. Incremental operating and maintenance costs were omitted but were not expected to be significant. The comparison shows that a wind turbine generator is not economically attractive for energy displacement’ for the Barrow area. While most existing wind turbine generators are considered to be experimental, this method of generation is considered to be feasible from a technological standpoint. However, a considerable amount of research is presently being conducted to improve the technology and to reduce capital costs. A wind turbine generator is attractive from an environmental standpoint, since it consumes no fuel. Figure 21 shows a typical design for a 100-kW wind turbine generator. GENERATOR OUTPUT =|000KW FOR ALL WIND SPEEDS MINIMUM ABOVE 20 MPH LOAD OPERATING CONDITION / WIND SPEED = 7 MPH GENERATOR OUTPUT — KW 10 20 WIND SPEED— MPH WIND SPEED VS GENERATOR OUTPUT MINIMUM LOAD OPERATING CONDITION WIND SPEED =7 MPH > a = ' a Ww 20 a nn oa = = > 1000 =62000)3=— 3000S 4000.)Ss 5000. Ss &000-—S— 7000S 8000_-=—s 3000 HOURS WIND SPEED- DURATION CURVE FOR MEAN WIND SPEED OF IOMPH FIGURE 20 ASSUMED OPERATING CRITERIA FOR WIND TURBINE GENERATOR R. W. BECK & ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 37.5M (125 FT.) FIGURE 21 1\OOKW EXPERIMENTAL WIND TURBINE GENERATOR R. W. BECK @& ASSOCIATES AUGUST 1977 VII-11 Requirement for Additional Generation Having determined that Barrow's future requirements for heat and electricity should be provided for by extending and expanding the existing utilities in generally the same manner as has been done in the past, a determination was made of when new generating facilities would be required. It was assumed that the new gas turbine generators would be Solar Centaur units with a nominal rating of 2500 kW each. It was further assumed that all existing generating facilities will remain in service or will be replaced with units of equivalent capacity. The requirement for new generation is shown graphically in Figure 22. It can be seen that two additional generating units will be required before the year 2000, with one being required in 1982 and one in 1993. Estimated Remaining Life of Gas Reserves As of the end of 1976, the remaining recoverable gas reserves are estimated to be 15.8 billion cubic feet for the South Barrow Gas Field and an estimated potential of 60 billion cubic feet for the Well No. 14 gas field. Assuming a gas consumption rate based on the greatest estimated consumption rate of each year as shown in Table 16, total gas consumption by Barrow and NARL for the period 1977-2000 would be 36.3 billion cubic feet. Using the same assumed gas consumption rate over a 30-year period (estimated useful life for a steel pipe gas distribution system) ,2 it is estimated that total consumption would amount to 51 billion cubic feet. If the development of NPRA occurs in a manner similar to the Prudhoe Bay case outlined in Section V, an additional 9.1 billion cubic feet of natural gas would be consumed. Therefore, the estimated life of the gas reserves exceeds the useful life of the proposed distribution system, assuming the system is constructed in the near future. It is clear that it will be necessary to reassess the adequacy of these reserves well in advance of the estimated deple- tion date. In this regard, two recommendations are made. First, the validity of the results of an energy study for Barrow is greatly dependent on the validity of the assumptions made with respect to 2Internal Revenue Service, Bulletin F, "Depreciation Rates". ADD 2500kw_ GENERATOR FIRM CAPACITY PEAK DEMAND ADD 2500KW GENERATOR FIRM CAPACITY = TOTAL SYSTEM CAPACITY WITH LARGEST UNIT OUT OF SERVICE = x 1 = oO « « < a ig o aw > = o <= a <q Oo = « x oa z =z oa z <z = Ww a x =< Ww a PRESENT FIRM CAPACITY 0 1977 1980 1985 1990 1995 FIGURE 22 FUTURE GENERATING CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS R.W. BECK & ASSOCIATES JUNE 1977 VII-13 energy resource reserves and locations. Therefore, the exploration program called for by Public Law 94-258 should include a detailed investigation of the area immediately surrounding Barrow. Second, economic studies prepared on the basis of'a low-cost fuel source such as exists for Barrow do not adequately identify the importance of conserving a nonrenewable energy resource. Therefore, it must be pointed out that energy conservation is the best method of insuring the existence of an adequate fuel supply in the future. Waste heat utilization, adequate insulation and other energy conservation measures should be utilized to the maximum extent possible.