The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutElfin Cove Reconnaissance Study Of Energy Requirements & Alternatives Appendix Elfin Clove 1983PROPERTY OF: Owe AUTTIO y Anchorage, Alaska 99501 RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX: ELFIN COVE JULY I983 A mmr ee MeV EG e ei ahie § avd dedd Gab yarns, { LIBRA PREPARED BY AiltS | ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY. N 3 4 : | | X | RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX: ELFIN COVE JULY I983 MR ar tm her E Vil isy Tadashi Sah ssa A, PREPARED BY Aint ul eed ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY__| KETCHIKAN VILLAGE SPECIFIC REPORT ELFIN COVE TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Part A - Conclusions and Recommendations ........+-+ eee 1 Part B - Demographic and Economic Conditions ...........-. 6 Part C - Community Meeting Report. ..... 2. eee ee eee eee 8 Part D - Existing Power and Heating Facilities ........... 9 Part E - Elfin Cove Energy Balance... .... 2.2 ee ee eee lO Part mn ' Energy Requirements Forecast. ...... ee eric Part G - Village Energy Resources Assessment ........+.-.. -950 H Part H - Energy Plan Descriptions and Assumptions. ......... 53 Part I - Economic Evaluation of Alternatives .........-. 5) 98 ATTACHMENTS 1 Alaska Power Authority 1983 Project Evaluation Procedure 2 Hydrologic Calculations for "Roy's Creek" Drainage at Elfin Cove 3 Manufacturers' Information page A_- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A.1 - General After an analysis of the information gathered from Elfin Cove, the re- commendations which are most appropriate to the existing village condi- tions and the wishes of village residents are as follows: Ne The construction of a micro-hydro (20 to 60 kW) plant has been found to be the most economical means of providing the village with electric power. The hydro plant would be installed in conjunction with a village-wide power distribution system. A diesel generator would be provided for peaking energy and backup for the hydro plant. The construction of a village-wide power system which would be pro- vided with diesel-generated electricity would, from an economic standpoint, be an improvement of the system now in existence. Users of electricity must now provide their own generators. The small generators used are tremendously inefficient producers of electricity. Usually gasoline powered, they are incapable of pro- ducing more than about 4 kWh of electricity for each gallon of fuel consumed. A more realistic figure, considering their operating conditions, would be 3 kWh/gal. A village-wide system would be able to make use of a more efficient diesel generator. It is ex- pected that a diesel in an Elfin Cove power system could produce about 6 kWh/gal if operated properly. Even this figure is low for diesel plants, most of which produce between 8 and 11 kWh per gal- lon, but most other systems are large enough to make use of units larger than 200 kW. It is not likely that wind energy could compete successfully against the available hydroelectric resource in Elfin Cove. The residents of Elfin Cove are unusually enthusiastic about help- ing their own community develop. During a visit to Elfin Cove by Acres' staff, much time was spent talking with local residents about "doing it themselves," especially with reference to the de- velopment of the hydroelectric plant and the village power distri- bution system. It is the opinion of Acres' staff that the resi- dents of Elfin Cove posess most of the skills necessary to succes - sfully install the relatively simple generation and distribution system examined in this report. They should be given some oppor- tunity to put their skills to work to help out their own community. page A.2 - Alternative Plan Descriptions A.2.1 - Base Case The base case studied for Elfin Cove assumes no change from current practice: if a user wants electric energy, they are responsible for generating it. Most homeowners have their own generators, usually about 3.5 kW gasoline units; commercial enterprises have either die- sel or gasoline generators. As new homes or businesses or public buildings are built, they each must include provisions for power generation. This results in the installation of excess generator capacity which cannot be used and the use of very inefficient smal] generator sets. This plan has been calculated to have a total net present worth of $2,231,840 (in 1983 dollars) for the period 1983 through 2034. A.2.2 - Alternative Plan "A" This plan examines the construction of the "typical" bush power system: a village-wide distribution system supplied with energy from a diesel generator. This arrangement has the advantage of freeing consumers from the task of operating and maintaining their own power plants. It allows them access to more efficient sources of power production and allows for the installation of less aggre- gate generating capacity (thus less capital cost) than in the case where each user must provide their own generators. This system was assumed to come into being in 1985, about as early as could be ex- pected if state funding is to be expected. This plan has been calculated to have a total net present worth of $1,855,630 (in 1983 dollars) for the period 1983 through 2034. A.2.3. - Alternative Plan "B" This plan examines the economics of the Elfin Cove power system as described under Plan "A" with a diesel generator, plus a small hydro plant. It should be noted that this plan does not eliminate the diesel or its fuel requirements. Instead, it allows the diesel to Operate at a lower power output and even to be shut down from time to time, thereby using less fuel. Initial examinations of the Elfin Cove area show that there are a number of arrangements which could provide a significant savings in diesel fuel, perhaps as much as 50 percent. ‘ Assuming the incorporation of simple hydro plant components and the availability of moderately skilled local labor, this plan has been calculated to have a total net present worth of $1,498,290 (in 1983 dollars) for the period 1983 through 2034. 2 page 3 Comparative costs of electrical energy produced by each of the alterna- tive plans available to Elfin Cove are shown on Table 1. Comparisions between the costs of electricity and thermal energy available in Elfin Cove are shown in Figure l. It is worth noting that the energy cost in $/kWh is not necessarily the cost which would be billed to the ultimate consumers. This figure, ex- pressed in 1983 dollars, does not take into account costs associated with the administration of the utility system, which could add as much as $0.10/kWh to the customers' costs. There was some discussion with Elfin Cove residents regarding local volunteer work to manage any util- ity system. While such an arrangement may not be workable in many other communities, it should be pointed out that many of the functions of a government are already done this way in Elfin Cove, so it may be possible that the administrative costs could be kept very low. Our costs also do not show the effect of the various subsidy and grant pro- grams which may be available. These programs are available only to the extent that the responsible government entities see them to be appro- priate and they may be discontinued at any time. COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED ELECTRICAL ENERGY PRICES IN ELFIN COVE TABLE 1 FOR BASE CASE PLANS AND ALTERNATIVES: 1983 TO 2002 VILLAGE -WIDE BASE CASE PLAN BASE CASE PLAN ALTERNATIVE "A" ALTERNATIVE "B" ENERGY RESIDENTIAL ENERGY COMMERCIAL ENERGY VILLAGE-WIDE ENERGY VILLAGE-WIDE ENERGY CONSUMP TION PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE YEAR (1,000 kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) 1983 6l 0.73 0.59 0.52 0.52 1984 69 0.79 0.54 0.52 0.52 1985 75 0.79 0.52 0.73 0.68 1986 84 0.79 0.51 0.69 0.63 1987 92 0.77 0.48 0.65 0.59 1988 99 0.78 1,12 0.64 0.56 1989 104 0.78 1.07 0.63 0.54 1990 112 0.79 1.03 0.62 0.52 1991 117 0.80 1.00 0.61 0.50 1992 123 0.83 0.97 0.60 0.50 1993 132 0.84 0.94 0.58 0.48 1994 1353 0.84 0.96 0.59 0.47 1995 135 0. 86 0.96 0.60 0.48 1996 136 0.86 0.97 0.61 0.49 1997 139 0.89 0.97 0.61 0.49 1998 141 0.89 0.99 0.62 0.49 1999 141 0.91 0.99 0.62 0.49 2000 141 0.93 1.00 0.64 0.50 2001 141 0.96 1.01 0.65 0.50 2002 141 0.98 1.01 0.65 0.50 Notes: 1. The energy consumption projections given in this table assume the presence of a central utility system. costs to individual power producers. of this report. The energy prices given in the "Base Case Plan" cost columns reflect For a detailed discussion of this topic, see Part F page 4 $/MILLION Btu 3 ° 50 0 -OO Ltt 1983 1988 1993 Is98 2003 ENERGY COSTS FOR ELFIN COVE 1983 - 2002 LEGEND RESIDENTIAL ELECTRICITY COSTS UNDER "BASE CASE" SESPREBEBRES)OMN COMMERCIAL ELECTRICITY COSTS UNDER "BASE CASE" — —— — — VILLAGE-WIDE ELECTRICITY COSTS UNDER "ALT A" VILLAGE-WIDE ELECTRICITY COSTS UNDER "ALT. B" x ~~~ COST OF HEAT FROM WOOD AT $150/CORD 9.9966 COST OF HEAT FROM OIL PAGE 6 B_- DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS B.1 - Location Elfin Cove is located approximately 65 nautical miles west of Juneau on the northern end of Chicagof Island. The village is sited in a small cove which protects it from the weather of the adjacent Gulf of Alaska. B.2 - Population Data obtained from the Community and Regional Affairs office in Juneau showed the following populations: 1979 . . . . . 49 residents 1980... . . 28 residents Further, C&RA data indicated that there were 13 "households" in Elfin Cove in 1980. Conversations with village residents raised some question of the valid- ity of these figures. The basic problem in identifying the "popula- tion" of Elfin Cove is that such a large percentage of its residents are active in the area's fishing industry and are only present during the fishing season: May to September. General numbers which those in- dividuals contacted in Elfin cove seemed to agree upon were that there were 29 "homes" in the village, most of which are occupied for most of the summer and only about 5 homes are occupied through the winter. It would appear that C&RA's data is valid if some consideration is made for the wildly fluctuating seasonality of the village population. Ad- ditional discussion of this phenomenon is included later in this report under the section dealing with energy use forecasts. B.3 - Economic Base The Elfin Cove economy has historically been dependent upon the fisher- jes industry, with most of the heads of households being involved with the harvest of salmon, bottomfish, and crab. With the declining health of the Alaska salmon industry, it is not likely that the contribution of the fisheries industry to the Elfin Cove economy will be an increas - ing one. Recently, there has been some activity in the village to attract some tourist trade. There is a small (4 bed) inn in the village, and some charter boat/fishing guide/hunting guide services are available. It is possible that the expansion of the tourist industry in Elfin Cove could mitigate the effect of the declining fishery harvests. It is also con- ceivable that the village could be increasingly attractive to weekend and holiday visitors from the Juneau area. PAGE 7 In addition to the fishery activities in the village, there are two general stores (one of which houses the Elfin Cove post office), an inn, a laundromat (which also has showers and a hot tub), a fish-buying scow, and a fuel depot. All of these businesses are closed outside of the fishing season, but one of the general stores has tenative plans to remain open on a year-round basis. One Elfin Cove resident has plans to construct a small machine shop there to provide services to the fishing fleet which operates in the area. An opening date for this machine shop is undetermined. There are no schools or government agency offices in Elfin Cove. B.4 - Local Government The residents of Elfin Cove are organized as a nonprofit corporation, the lowest form of recognized government in the state. All property owners, whether or not they maintain a residence in the village, are given voting rights in village elections and referenda. The corporation owns and maintains a small community building/telephone building as well as the one telephone in the village. B.5 - Transportation Elfin Cove is accessible only by boat and float-equipped aircraft. The surrounding terrain is so rugged as to make the construction of a land airstrip rather impractical. Regular air service to the village is provided by Channel Flying Service which operates out of Juneau, ap- proximately 45 minutes away by air. There are also a number of charter flying services in Juneau which provide service to Elfin Cove. Most goods are transported to the village by small freight vessels which can make the trip from Juneau in about 12 hours. For some of these boats, access to some of the dock facilities is dependent upon tide conditions. There are no roads in the village or surrounding area due to the rugged terrain. All businesses and most homes in the village are connected to a rather extensive boardwalk system. Access to homes away from "down- town" Elfin Cove is usually by small skiff. PAGE 8 C_- COMMUNITY MEETING REPORT Acres personnel James Landman and Wayne Dyok arrived in Elfin Cove in the afternoon of May 11, 1983. Some time on the llth and 12th was spent in informal discussions with a number of Elfin Cove residents ex- plaining the purpose of the study and trying to develop an understand- ing of the residents' opinions on energy use in the village. A "formal" meeting was advertised and held on the morning of May 13 on the boardwalk outside the telephone building. About 8 village resi- dents (a third of the population at that time of year), turned out for the meeting, which lasted nearly an hour. Messrs. Landman and Dyok explained the reconnaissance study process and what results could be expected by the village. They then began a two- way discussions with the village residents on a number of topics relat- ed to energy use in the village. Of most interest to Elfin Cove residents seemed to be the possibility of developing a utility system based on a micro-hydro plant in the vil- lage. There was an impression that such a system could provide "free" electricity, which would obviate the need for a bureaucratic structure to collect payment for the energy. The potential drawbacks to "free" energy were then the subject of some discussion. It was agreed that a key condition to having a central utility system in Elfin Cove was that its electricity be reasonably priced. Most homes now have individually owned and operated gasoline or diesel generating plants. Residents who have these plants do not consider them especially expensive to operate, but some mentioned that they would sometimes appreciate the convenience of a centrally operated utility system. Because of the close relationship Elfin Cove residents have with the sea, they are especially conscious of the tidal velocities in and out of their cove. A number of residents reported tidal velocities on the order of 8 - 12 knots. The idea of tidal power plants was raised re- peatedly during the study team's visit to the visit. A brief discus- sion of the impracticality of using the velocity of a tidal current (as opposed to having a storage basin to provide a large head of water) was given by Mr. Dyok whenever the issue arose. Due to Elfin Cove's proximity to the Gulf of Alaska, it could be ex- pected that exposed hilltops could experience significant winds and make the village a logical site for a wind turbine. Some interest was expressed in exploring the potential for wind energy developement in the village. An concern of a number of the people in Elfin Cove was that if a cen- tralized utility system was constructed, people who would otherwise not choose to live in the village would begin to move. there. PAGE 9 D_- EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIES Elfin Cove presently has no centralized generation facilities. People in the village who want or need electric power own individual generator sets. Homes were most commonly equipped with gasoline powered generat- ors of approximately 3.5 kW capacity. Some homeowners have small die- sel sets and one individual had a small wind generator. There were a number of homes which had small battery banks to operate lights and some small appliances (radios, clocks) when the generators were off- line. A single 60 kW generator was being installed to serve one gener- al store, the inn, and the laundromat/shower/hot tub facility. The general store/post office has its own generator (of unknown rating). Boat owners who need power to perform maintenance on their vessels must take their own generators to the docks A new telephone system was being installed which would apparently have an sattelite earth station. There was some concern over how much ener- gy the new system would require at the village telephone building and at the earth station site (which was located some distance away from the village). It was unknown whether the system would require its own generator(s) or if some centrally installed system could provide the required energy. Most homes are heated with wood, which is abundant in the area. Some woodstoves are equipped with heat exchangers to provide hot water in the homes. In addition to wood heat, some homes use oil stoves to pro- vide home heat, hot water, and cooking energy. PAGE 10 E - ELFIN COVE ENERGY BALANCE In Elfin Cove, most of the energy consumed goes toward powering the fishing vessels. A study of that end use is beyond the scope of this report, which addresses only the energy used for electricity and heat. Of these two categories, most of the energy used in Elfin Cove goes toward heating (both space heating and water heating). The use of electricity in the village is very minor. The development of the energy balance for Elfin Cove presented some difficulties for a number of reasons. First, because there is no cen- tral power generation system, there is no metering of either the fuel used to produce the electricity or of the electric energy consumed, our data on electricity uses are very rough estimates. Secondly, because the fuel dealer does not differentiate between diesel fuel sold to be used for transportation and fuel used for power generation or heating, the space heating requirements are estimates also. It is hoped that the review of this draft report by Elfin Cove residents will help to refine the data presented here. TABLE 2 ENERGY BALANCE FOR ELFIN COVE - 1983 (An Estimate of the Village's Energy Sources and Uses) FUEL ESTIMATED TYPICAL QUANTITY NET ENERGY TYPE COST END USES CONSUMED ANNUALLY (million Btu) WOOD (see note 1) HOME HEATING, 29 cords 174 WATER HEATING, 10 cords 60 COOK ING 2 cords 12 FUEL $1.39/gal TRANSPORTATION 22? 22? OIL HOME HEATING 1,600 gal 107 COMM'L HEATING 1,500 gal 100 POWER GEN. 6,000 gal 120 GASOLINE $1.50 TRANSPORTATION 22? 22? POWER GEN. 8,000 gal 82 PROPANE $0.45/1b COOKING 3,000 1b <5 Note 1. Individual Elfin Cove residents may apply different values to the time and effort used to harvest their own firewood. A value of $150 per cord was used to develop Figure 1 (in Part A). COVE ENERGY BALANCE - - 1983 2il MBtu FUEL OIL - 1,201 MBtu GASOLINE 1,000 MBtu WwoOoD 697 MBtu PROPANE <5. MBtu 198 MBtu 12 MBtu HOME HEATING 704 MBtu COMM'L. HTG 198. MBtu POWER GENERATION 1,792 MBtu WATER_HTG. 170 MBtu WASTED ENERGY 423 MBtu QSABLE HEAT 100 MBtu 98 MBtu @WASTED ENERGY ELECTRICITY 202 MBtu SABLE HEA 60 Mbt > 0 MBtu tWASTED HEAT * COOKING 1? MBtu USABLE ENERGY LL abeg PAGE F - ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST F.l - General The estimates provided here for future energy requirements in Elfin Cove are based on a number of assumptions regarding the future economic state of the village, population increases or decreases, and the sea- sonality of that population. Where it is possible, a discussion of the rationale upon which the various assumptions were based will be included. F.2 - Capital Projects Forecast F.2.1 - Known Future Capital Improvements (a) New telephone system (1983) (b) Machine shop (1988 ???) F.2.2 - Potential Future Capital Improvements (a) Community building (1985 ?7?) (b) School (1988 2???) (c) New lodge (or other expansion of tourist facilities) (1988 ???) F.2.3 - Economic Forecast Elfin Cove's raison d'etre is its role as a service port for fishing vessels operating in the nearby Gulf of Alaska waters. The recent declining health of the Alaska fishing industry may very well con- tinue into the future. If this is the case, the village could cease to exist without some other source of economic support. There is some likelihood that an effort to develop a tourist industry in the area could offset the loss of fishing jobs. No other sources of en- ployment in Elfin Cove are forseen. F.3 - Population Forecast As was mentioned before, figures provided by Community & Regional Af- fairs showed a drastic decrease in the village's population between 1970 and 1980. It is worth repeating that, due to the seasonality of the village's population, the validity of the C&RA numbers is dependent upon what time of year their surveys were taken. Unfortunately, this is not known. For purposes of this report, population forecasts will be based on the number of homes in the village and their occupancy in different times of the year. This is a reasonable approach, since our interest lies in the energy uses of individual homes (and businesses), rather than the energy consumed by each person in those homes. One local source told the visiting study team that there were presently 29 homes or apart- ments (dwelling units) in Elfin Cove. Another told us that of these, 12 PAGE 13 only about five had been used on a year-round basis recent years. It was reported that several years ago, as many as ten or twelve homes were used throughout the year. During the fishing season, the occupan- cy rate rises dramatically. Some Elfin Cove residents said that all of the homes were occupied in the summers; some said that an occupancy rate of about 75 percent was more realistic. Because of the wide swings in village population with the season, it was necessary to de- velop forecasts of households for both summer (May through September) and winter (October through April) seasons. It is the opinion of Acres' staff that the decline of the fishing in- dustry in Elfin Cove will be relatively slow and that any loss of vil- lage residents due to this decline will be made up for by an expanding tourism industry. We therefore assume a fairly slow growth in the village. TABLE 3 Projections of Number of Homes in Elfin Cove Homes Occupied Homes Occupied Total May - September October - April Year Homes Percent Number Percent Number 1983 29 85 % 25 17% 5 1984 31 87 27 16 5 1985 31 87 a7, 16 5 1986 32 88 28 19 6 1987 32 88 28 22 7 1988 32 88 28 22 7 1989 32 88 28 22 7 1990 33 91 30 21 7 1991 33 91 30 21 7 1992 34 91 31 21 7 1993 34 91 ol 24 8 1994 34 91 31 24 8 1995 34 91 31 24 8 1996 34 91 SE 24 8 1997 35 91 32 23 8 1998 35 91 32 23 8 1999 30 91 32 23 8 2000 35 91 32 23 8 2001 35 91 32 23 8 2002 35 91 32 23 8 page 14 F.4 - Electrical Energy Forecast The lack of a central generation system in Elfin Cove complicates the forecast of future electrical energy needs somewhat. The procedure used was to develop two forecasts: one projecting energy needs as if the present situation (individually supplied power) continued, the other assuming that a centralized system of some sort is installed. Elfin Cove residents presently practice a very high degree of electric energy conservation: they simply use very few electrical devices. Most homes use electricity for a few lights and perhaps a CB radio. Even though no television stations can be received in Elfin Cove, some homes have televisions, either for use with VCR's or with video games, a few other homes have washing machines. Even with no central utility, it can be expected that the per-household use of electric energy in Elfin Cove will increase in the future. This growth is expected to be very slow. If a centralized system is installed which makes electricity available at the flip of a switch, the increase in electricity use can be expect- ed to be much more rapid. This effect is to be expected regardless of the source of the electric power (diesel, hydro, wind, etc). There was some discussion by Elfin Cove residents about "free" electricity from a hydroelectric facility at the village. It is the opinion of Acres' staff that if there were no charge for electric energy in the village, so many uses would be found for the power that the small hydro poten- tial there would quickly be used up. Therefore, the load forecasts which assume the existence of a central utility also assume that a "reasonable" amount will be charged for the use of the electricity. A starting point in the electric energy forecast is an estimate of how much electricity will be used this year (1983). Without the metering capabilities of a central utility from which historic data could be gathered, this task becomes a bit of guesswork. The approach taken by Acres is to make estimates of how many homes have certain energy con- suming appliances. Knowing a "typical" appliance's energy consumption, we can estimate how much electricity a "typical" home will use. Our forecasts of appliance saturation are shown on the following page. TABLE 4 Market Penetration Levels of Various Appliances at Elfin Cove page 15 (Assuming NO Central Utility) ("Non-Random" and "On-Line" Appliances (note 1)) SATURATION Typical Annual Appliance Demand Energy Use 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 Lights (note 2) 400 W 2,500 kWh 1.0 1.0 1-0 1.0 0 Refrigerator 400 900 0.0 0.2 0.2 033 0.3 Freezer 400 900 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 Kitchen Appliance (note 3) 1,000 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Televisions 70 150 0.2 OS 0.7 0.7 0.7 ("Random" and "Occasional-Use" Appliances (note 4)) Appliance 1983 1987 1992 1997 003 Washing Machine 300 W 100 kWh 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 Oaz Clothes Iron 1,000 60 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Radio/Stereo 20 100 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 Sewing Machine 150 10 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Clock 2 20 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 1-0 Power Tools 750 300 0.9 1.0 Ae) 1.0 EA) Notes: I. Appliances termed "Non-Random" and "On-Line" are those appliances which are either in service at all times (refrigerators, freezers, etc) or are in use at fairly predictable times (kitchen appliances such as coffee pots, televisions, lights, etc). The energy use of appliances such as refrigerators which cycle on and off is calculated using an assumed load factor for those appliances Lights are all assumed to be 100 W, with 4 in use in the "typical" home. The generic “kitchen appliance" is assumed to be some commonly-used appliance such as a coffee pot, toaster, waffle iron, hot plate, etc. Appliances termed "Random" and "Occasional-Use" are those appliances which used so infrequently that predicting the time of day they are likely to be used is impractical or appliances which consume miniscule amounts of electricity. page Considering the data presented on Table 4 and the seasonal population of Elfin Cove, we may now develop residential electric energy use fore- casts for 20 years hence (to 2002), assuming that no central utility system will be installed in the village. These forecasts are presented on the following pages. The first set of tables (Table 5a through 5j) shows the assumptions used to develop the daily consumption patterns of a "typical" Elfin Cove home assuming that there will be no centralized utility available from which power will be available on demand. These residential load models are developed for both winter and summer conditions at 5-year intervals over the next 20 years, ending in 2003. The model assumes that virtually every home generator will be shut down at about 10:30 pm and not restarted until 6:00 am the following morning (It is presumed that freezers will be well enough insulated that their contents will not spoil under such conditions.). Following these load models is a projection of future residential elec- trical energy use on a village-wide basis. Using the summer and winter projections at 5-year intervals, linear interpolations are made for the intervening years. This data is presented on Table 6. 16 TABLE 5a RESIDENT "Typical" Residence: TAL_LOAD MODEL May - September 1983 (5 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) page 17 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = - 6:00 am (no load) 1 0 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 -45 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 0.8 - 03 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance L 1,000 0.8 800 0.5 -40 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 - 80 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 2.4 -10 television 1 70 0.2 14 2.0 - 03 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 freezer a 400 0.1 40 1.8 .07 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.8 800 1.0 -80 6:00 - 10:00 pm television 1 70 0.2 14 4.0 06 10:30 - mn (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 -00 Daily Use: 4.54 kWh Monthly Use: 136.20 Random Loads: _ 14.20 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 150.40 kWh page 18 TABLE 5b RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: October - April 1983 (7 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn - 6:00 am (no load) iL ow 1.0 Oo Ww 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 15 60 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 0.8 - 03 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance (7?) 1 1,000 0.8 800 0.5 -40 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 2.4 -10 television 1 70 0.2 14 2.0 - 03 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 222 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.8 800 1.0 - 80 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ IV 1 70 0.2 14 4.0 - 06 10:30 - m (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 135 -00 : Daily Use: 6.24 kWh Monthly Use: 187.20 Random Loads: _ 14.20 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 201.40 kWh page 19 TABLE Se RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: May - September 1988 (5 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mi - 6:00 am (no load) 1 ow 1.0 oW 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 5 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 7 400 0.2 80 1.0 .08 freezer 1 400 0.2 80 0.8 -06 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance (?) 1 1, 000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights iL 100 1.0 100 8.0 -80 refrigerator uu 400 0.2 80 3.2 26 freezer al 400 0.2 80 2.4 19 television 1 70 0.5 35 2.0 -O7 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 5 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator ZL 400 0.2 80 2.4 =19 . freezer 7 400 0.2 80 1.8 14 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance a 1, 000 0.9 900 1.0 -90 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ TV a 70 0.5 35 4.0 14 10:30 - mn (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 -00 Daily Use: 5.53 kWh Monthly Use: 165.90 Random Loads: 15.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 181.00 kWh Time of Pay mn =- 6:00 am 6:00 - 8:30 am 4:30 - 10:30 pm 5:00 - 6:00 pm 6:00 - 10:00 pm 10:30 - mn "Typical" Residence: TABLE 5d RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL October - April 1988 (7 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility page 20 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption (no load) 1 ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh lights 4 100 1.0 400 1.5 -60 refrigerator 1 400 0.2 80 1.0 . 08 freezer 1 400 0.2 80 0.8 - 06 kitchen appliance i 1, 000 0.9 900 0.5 45 lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.2 80 3.2 26 freezer L 400 0.2 80 2.4 19 television a 70 0.5 35 2.0 -07 lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator af 400 0.2 80 2.4 19 freezer L 400 0.2 80 1.8 14 kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 Vv 1 70 0.5 35 4.0 14 (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 - 00 Daily Use: 7.08 kWh Monthly Use: 212.40 Random Loads: _ 15.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 227.50 kWh page 21 TABLE 5e RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: May - September 1993 (5 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = - 6300 am (no load) 1 Ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator ZL 400 0.2 80 1.0 -08 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 100 8.0 -80 refrigerator ZL 400 0.2 80 Sie 26 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 television 1 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator 1 400 0.2 80 2.4 19 . freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 +22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ TV a 70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mn (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 15 - 00 Daily Use: 5.84 kWh Monthly Use: 175.20 Random Loads: _ 16.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 191.30 kWh as page 22 TABLE Sf RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: October - April 1993 (7 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day =~ ~=£Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation _ Per Home Operation Consumption mo - 6:00 am (no load) 1 Ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 Le -60 refrigerator i 400 0.2 80 1.0 - 08 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance i 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator i 400 0.2 80 3.2 26 freezer aL 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 television z 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator 1 400 0.2 80 2.4 old) freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 +22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance a 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ IV 1 70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mn (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 15 -00 Daily Use: 7.39 kWh Monthly Use: 221.70 Random Loads: _ 16.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 237.80 kWh "Typical" Residence: TABLE RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL May - September 1998 (5 months) (Assuming NO Central Utility) Units Per Power Demand page 23 Equivalent Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn - 6:00 am (no load) 1 Ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr 00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 1.0 12 freezer 1. 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance i 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 -80 refrigerator il, 400 0.3 120 3.2 -38 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 +29 television 1 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator i 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 ~22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 ‘70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mn (no load) id 0 1.0 0 1.5 - 00 Daily Use: 6.10 kWh Monthly Use: 183.00 Random Loads: 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 199.90 kWh "Typical" Residental Unit: TABLE Sh RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL (Assuming NO Central Utility) October - April 1998 (7 months) page 24 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn == 6:00 am (no load) 1 Ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 L.5 -60 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 1.0 12 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance i 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights z 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 3.2 38 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 +29 television 1 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator a 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 222 5:00 - 6:00 pm _— kitchen appliance 1 1, 000 0.9 900 1.0 90 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV Z 70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mn (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 LS .00 Daily Use: 7.65 kWh Monthly Use: 229.50 Random Loads: _ 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 246.40 kWh "Typical" Residence: TABLE 5i RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL (Assuming NO Central Utility) page 25 May - September 2003 (5 months) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = 6:00 am (no load) 1 Ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr 00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 1.0 old freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights i. 100 1.0 100 8.0 - 80 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 3.2 - 38 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 television 1 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 . freezer i 400 0.3 120 1.8 +22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1, 000 0.9 900 1.0 90 6:00 - 10:00 pm IV 1 70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mr (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 -00 Daily Use: 6.10 kWh Monthly Use: 183.00 Random Loads: _ 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 199.90 kWh "Typical" Residental Unit: TABLE 5j RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL (Assuming NO Central Utility) October - April 2003 (7 months) page 26 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = - 6:00 am (no load) i ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr -00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 1.5 -60 refrigerator i 400 0.3 120 1.0 12 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance L 1, 000 0.9 900 0.5 45 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 3.2 38 freezer l 400 0.3 120 2.4 -29 television 1 70 0.7 49 2.0 -10 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator 1 400 0.3 120 2.4 22 . freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 -22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 -90 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ TV 1 70 0.7 49 4.0 -20 10:30 - mn "(no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 . 00 Daily Use: 7.65 kWh Monthly Use: 229.50 Random Loads: _ 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 246.40 kWh Year 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TABL E 6 Forecasts of Residential Electric Energy Use (Assuming NO Central Utility) page 27 May to September October to April Total Homes kWh/home Total kWh Homes kWh/home Total kWh Annual kWh 25 15055 18,813 5 201.4 7,049 25 ,862 27 156.5 21,128 5 206.6 7,231 28 , 359 27 162.6 21,951 5 21758. 7,413 29 ,364 28 168.7 23,618 6 21751 9,118 32,736 28 174.9 24 486 7 222.3 10,893 35 5379 28 181.0 25 , 340 7 22759 11,148 36 , 488 28 183.1 25 ,034 7. 229.6 11,250 36 ,884 30 185.1 27,765 7 231.6 11,348 39,113 30 187.2 28,080 7 23357 11,451 39 ,531 31 189.2 29, 326 7 2357 11,549 40,875 31 191.3 29,652 8 237.8 13,317 42,969 31 193.0 29,915 8 239.5 13,412 43,327 31 194.7 30,179 8 241.2 13,507 43,686 31 196.5 30 , 458 8 243.0 13,608 44 ,066 32 198.2 313712 8 244.7 13/5703 45,415 32 199.9 31,984 8 246.4 13,798 45,782 32 199.9 31 , 984 8 246.4 13,798 45 ,782 32 199.9 31,984 8 246.4 13,798 45,782 32 199.9 31 ,984 8 246.4 13,798 45 ,782 32 199.9 31,984 8 246.4 13,798 45 ,782 page 28 The residential load models can be used to forecast peak residential power demand. For example, in the winter season of 1998, our "typical" home will have a peak power demand of 1,540 W (1.54 kW) during the time when dinner is likely to be prepared, 5:00 to 6:00 pm. Keeping in mind that not all households will be busy fixing dinner at that time, we will apply a “diversity factor" of 0.8 to the village as a whole to arrive at a peak residential demand in Elfin Cove during the winter of 1998: 1.54 kW/home x 8 homes x 0.8 = 9.9 kW By applying this technique, we calculated the residential loads in the other years as follows: YEAR SUMMER WINTER 1983 1.14 x 25 x 0.8 = 22.8 kW 1.32 x 5 x 0.8 = 5.3 kW 1988 1.36 x 28 x 0.8 = 30.5 1.46 x 7 x 0.8 = 8.2 1993 1.40 x 31 x 0.8 = 34.7 1.50 x 8 x 0.8 = 9.6 1998 1.44 x 32 x 0.8 = 36.9 1.54 x 8 x 0.8 = 9.9 2003 1.44 x 32 x 0.8 = 36.9 1.54 x 8 x 0.8 = 9.9 In addition to this residential load, the village will have to supply various commercial and community loads. These are estimated to be as follows: 1983 LOAD SUMMER LOAD WINTER LOAD ANNUAL kWh General Store 10 kW 1,800 kWh/mo 10 kW 1,440 kWh/mo 19,080 General Store 10 1,800 0 0 9,000 Inn 3 540 0 0 2,700 Laundromat 3 430 0 0 2,150 Telephone System 3 216 _3 216 2,590 TOTALS 29 kW 4,786 kWh/mo 13 kW 1,656 kWh/mo 35,522 1988 LOAD SUMMER LOAD WINTER LOAD ANNUAL kWh General Store 10 kW 1,800 kWh/mo 10 kW 1,440 kWh/mo 19,080 General Store 10 1,800 0 +0 9,000 Machine Shop 20 1,150 20 800 11,350 Inn 3 540 3 540 6,480 Laundromat 3 430 0 0 2,150 Telephone Syst. 3 216 3 216 2,592 Community Bldg. _2 30 me; 30 360 TOTALS: 51 kW 5,966 kWh/mo 38 kW 3,026 kWh/mo 51,012 page 29 1993, 1998, AND 2003 LOAD SUMMER LOAD WINTER LOAD ANNUAL kWh General Store 10 kW 1,800 kWh/mo 10 kW 1,440 kWh/mo 19,080 General Store 10 1,800 0 0 9,000 Machine Shop 20 1,150 20 800 11,350 School (note 1) 0 0 8 1,600 14,400 Inn 3 540 3 540 6,480 Lodge 3 540 0 0 2,700 Laundromat 3 430 0 0 2,150 Telephone Syst. 3 216 3 216 2,592 Community Bldg. 2 30 2 30 360 TOTALS: 54 kW 6,506 kWh/mo 46 4,626 kWh/mo 68,112 The likelihood of actually experiencing the peak loads shown (54 kW in the summer months in the table above, for example) is actually quite low. Again, a "diversity factor" is applied to these demands to pro- duce a village average load for the commercial/institutional sector. This time, the diversity factor selected will be 0.6. This will give peak loads of: YEAR SUMMER WINTER 1983 29 kW x 0.6 = 17.4 kW 13 kW x 0.6 = 7.8 kW 1988 51 x 0.6 = 30.6 38 x 0.6 = 22.8 1993 - 2003 54 x 0.6 = 32.4 46 x 0.6 = 27.6 To produce demand estimates of intermediate years, linear interpolation will be performed on these "snapshot" estimates. We are now in a position to provide a comprehensive forecast of the electrical energy needs of Elfin Cove for the 20-year scope of this study. The table on the following page shows this forecast. Note I. It is expected that the school will be in session for 9 months (September through May) even though it is listed in the table as an October-April load. The school's annual consumption shown is calculated as being 9 times its winter monthly use. TABLE 7 Electric Energy Consumption in Elfin Cove 1983 - 2003 (Assuming NO Central Utility) SUMMER WINTER Residential Commercial Total Residential Commercial Total YEAR | kW kWh kW kWh kW kWh kW kWh kW kWh kW kWh 1983 | 23 18,800] 17 23,900 40 42, 700 5 7,000 8 11,600] 13 18,600 1984 | 24 21,100 20 25,100 44 46 , 200 5 7,200] 11 13,500| 16 20,700 1985 | 26 22,000] 23 26,300 49 48,300|| 6 7,400] 14 15,400] 20 22,800 1986 | 27 23,600| 25 27,400 | 52 51,000|| 6 9,100] 17 17,400] 23 26,500 1987 | 29 24,500| 28 28,600 | 57 53,100|| 7 10,90| 20 19,300] 27 30,200 1988 | 30 25,300] 31 29,800 | 61 55,100{| 8 11,100] 23 21,200| 31 32,300 1989 | 31 25,600] 31 30,300 | 62 55,90|| 8 11,200| 24 24,100] 32 35,300 1990 | 32 27,800| 31 30,90 | 63 58,700|| 8 11,300] 25 27,000] 33 38,300 1991 | 33 28,100] 31 31,400 | 64 59,500]| 9 11,400] 26 29,800] ,35 41,200 1992 | 34 29,300] 32 32,000 | 66 61,300|| 9 11,500] 27 32,700] 36 44,200 1993 | 35 29,600| 32 32,500 | 67 62,100|| 10 13,300| 28 35,600] 38 48,900 1994 | 35 29,90] 32 32,500 | 67 62,400|| 10 13,400] 28 35,600] 38 49,000 1995 | 35 30,200] 32 32,500 | 67 62,700|| 10 13,500] 28 35,600] 38 49,100 1996 | 36 30,400] 32 32,500 | 68 62,90|| 10 13,600] 28 35,600] 38 49,200 1997 | 36 31,700| 32 32,500 | 68 64,200|| 10 13,700] 28 35,600| 38 49,300 1998 | 37 32,000| 32 32,500 69 64,500|| 10 13,800/ 28 35,600| 38 49,400 1999 | 37 32,000] 32 32,500 69 64,500]| 10 13,800] 28 35,600] 38 49,400 2000 | 37 32,000] 32 32,500 69 64,500]| 10 13,800] 28 35,600] 38 49,400 2001 | 37 32,000] 32 32,500 69 64,500|| 10 13,800] 28 35,600] 38 49,400 2002 | 37 32,000| 32 32,500 69 64,500|| 10 13,800] 28 35,600| 38 49,400 age 30 ANNUAL ENERGY USE ‘kWh 61,300 66, 900 71, 100 77, 500 83, 300 87, 400 91,200 97 ,000 100, 700 105, 500 111,000 111, 400 111, 800 112,100 113, 500 113,900 113,900 113,900 113,900 113,900 page 31 The procedure for developing load forecasts which assume that a cen- tralized utility system does exist in Elfin Cove is identical to that employed for the no-utility case. The differences between the scenar- jos come largely from the greater reliance on electrical appliances and the more rapid penetration of electric appliances in the household. The tables below show the greater rate of appliance use when electric- ity is available "on demand". TABLE 8 Market Penetration Levels of Various Appliances at Elfin Cove (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) ("Non-Random" and "On-Line" Appliances (see note 1)) Typical Annual Appliance Demand Energy Use 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 Lights (note 2) 400 W 2,500 kWh «=€6961.0 1.0 T.0 T.0 T.0 Refrigerator 400 900 0.0 0.4 O.7 O.9 0.9 Freezer 400 900 O27 O13 O15 O16 056 Kitchen Appliance (see note 3) 1,000 0.8 0.9 O.9 0.9 0.9 Electric Heaters 1,500 0.0 0.3 O.5 0.6 0.6 Televisions 70 150 0.2 0.6 O.9 O.9 0.9 Microwave Ovens 1,000 0.0 O.2 O.2 O.3 0.3 Notes: 1. Appliances termed “"Non-Random" and "On-Line" are those appliances which are either in service at all times (refrigerators, freezers, etc) or are in use at fairly predictable times (kitchen appliances such as coffee pots, televisions, lights, etc). The energy use of appliances such as refrigerators which cycle on and off is calculated using an assumed load factor for those appliances 2. Lights are all assumed to be 100 W, with 4 in use in the "typical" home. 3. The generic "kitchen appliance" is assumed to be some commonly-used appliance such as a coffee pot, toaster, waffle iron, hot plate, etc. 4. The "Random" loads are assumed to be the same as used in the non-utility forecasts. "Typical" Residence: TABLE 9a RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL May - September 1983 (5 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) page 32 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = - 6:00 am (no load) 1 0 1.0 oW 6.0 hr 00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 eS 245 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 0.8 - 03 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance (?) 1 1,000 0.8 800 0.5 -40 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 . 80 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 2.4 -10 television 1 70 0.2 14 2.0 - 03 4:30 - 10:30 pm _ lights 5 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 freezer 1 400 0.1 40 1.8 07 00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance i. 1,000 0.8 800 1.0 .80 6:00 - 10:00 pm television pe 70 0.2 14 4.0 06 10:30 — m (no load) 1 0 1.0 0 1.5 -00 Daily Use: 4.54 kWh Monthly Use: 136.20 Random Loads: 14.20 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 150.40 page 33 TABLE 9b RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: October - April 1983 (7 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn =- 6:00 am (no load) 1 ow 1.0 ow 6.0 hr - 00 kWh 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 1.5 60 freezer L 400 0.1 40 0.8 -03 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance (7?) 2 1,000 0.8 800 0.5 -40 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 freezer aL 400 0.1 40 2.4 -10 television 1 70 0.2 14 2.0 - 03 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 freezer 4 400 0.3 120 1.8 -22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.8 800 1.0 - 80 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ IV 1 70 0.2 14 4.0 - 06 10:30 = mn (no load) aL 0 1.0 0 1.5 -00 Daily Use: 6.39 Monthly Use: 191.70 Random Loads: 14.20 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 201.40 "Typical" Residence: (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) TABLE 9c RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL Units Per Power Demand May - September 1987 (5 months) Equivalent Power Demand Hours of page 34 Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Qperation Consumption mn - 6:00 am refrigerator 1 400 W 0.4 160 W 2.4 hr -38 kWh freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 22 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 LD 45 refrigerator a 400 0.4 160 1.0 16 freezer a 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1, 000 0.2 200 0.2 04 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 .80 refrigerator 1 400 0.4 160 3.2 51 freezer a 400 0.3 120 2.4 +29 television 1 70 0.6 42 2.0 - 08 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator 1 400 0.4 160 2.4 38 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 22 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1, 000 0.9 900 1.0 90 ® microwave oven 1 1,000 0.2 200 0.3 06 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 70 0.6 42 4.0 aa? 10:30 - mn refrigerator 1 400 0.4 160 0.6 -10 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.4 -05 Daily Use: 7.16 kWh Monthly Use: 218.70 Random Loads: 15.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 229.90 kWh "Typical" Residence: (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) TABLE 9d RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL October - April 1987 (7 months) page 35 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = 6:00 am refrigerator J 400 W 0.4 160 W 2.4 hr -38 kWh freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 22 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.3 450 2.0 -90 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 1.5 60 refrigerator 1 400 0.4 160 1.0 16 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.8 -10 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.3 450 0.6 27 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance al 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.2 200 0.2 04 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.4 160 3.2 ool freezer 1. 400 0.3 120 2.4 29 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.3 450 0.0 .00 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 15 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator iL. 400 0.4 160 2.4 38 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 1.8 -22 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.3 450 0.0 -00 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance L 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.2 200 0.3 06 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 25 10:30 - mn refrigerator iL 400 0.4 160 0.6 -10 freezer 1 400 0.3 120 0.4 -05 Daily Use: 10.01 kWh Monthly Use: 300.30 Random Loads: 15.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 315.40 kWh TABLE 9e page 36 RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: May - September 1993 (5 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) . Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn == 6:00 am refrigerator 1 400 W On 280 W 2.4 br -67 kWh freezer 1 400 0.5 200 1.8 36 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 1.0 28 freezer a 400 0.5 200 0.8 16 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1, 000 0.2 200 0.2 04 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights iL 100 1.0 100 8.0 -80 refrigerator 1 400 07 280 3.2 90 freezer 1 400 0.5 200 2.4 48 television iz 70 0.9 63 2.0 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1,80 refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 2.4 67 freezer 1 400 0.5 200 1.8 +36 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 -90 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.2 200 0.3 06 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 25 10:30 - mn refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 0.6 ol] freezer 1 400 0.5 200 0.4 -08 Daily Use: 9.01 kWh Monthly Use: 270.30 Random Loads: 16.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 286.40 kWh "Typical" Residence: (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) TABLE 9f RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL October - April 1993 (7 months) page 37 Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn = - 6:00 am refrigerator 1 400 W 0.7 280 W 2.4 hr -67 kWh freezer a 400 0.5 200 1.8 36 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 Loo - 60 refrigerator x 400 0.7 280 1.0 -28 freezer 1 400 0.5 200 0.8 -16 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.5 750 0.6 45 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance a 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.2 200 0.2 04 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 3.2 90 freezer 1 400 0.5 200 2.4 - 48 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.5 750 0.0 -00 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 2.4 67 freezer L 400 0.5 200 1.8 36 = electric heaters 1 1,500 0.5 750 0.0 -00 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 microwave oven 1 1, 000 0.2 200 0.3 - 06 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 2 70 0.9 63 4.0 ~25 10:30 - mn refrigerator 1 400 0.7 280 0.6 17 freezer 1 400 0.5 200 0.4 -08 Daily Use: 11.01 kWh Monthly Use: 330.30 Random Loads: _ 16.10 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 346.40 kWh TABLE 9g RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: page 38 May - September 1998 (5 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn - 6:00 am refrigerator 1 400 W 0.9 360 W 2.4 hr - 86 kWh freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 1.0 36 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.8 19 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.2 06 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 -80 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 3.2 1.15 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 2.4 58 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1.80 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 2.4 - 86 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 -90 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.3 09 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ TV ; 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 +25 10:30 - mn refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 0.6 eae freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.4 -10 Daily Use: 10.11 kWh Monthly Use: 303.30 Random Loads: _16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 320.20 kWh TABLE 9h page 39 RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residental Unit: October - April 1998 (7 months) ypi (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn == 6:00 am refrigerator 1 400 W 0.9 360 W 2.4 hr - 86 kWh freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 1.5 - 60 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 1.0 36 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.8 19 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.6 900 0.6 54 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.2 06 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 3.2 1.15 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 2.4 58 electric heaters x 1,500 0.6 900 0.0 -00 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 - 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm_ lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 2.4 - 86 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 2 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.6 900 0.0 - 00 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 9 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.3 -09 6:00 - 10:00 pm_ IV 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 2 10:30 - mn refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 0.6 22 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.4 -10 Daily Use: 12.20 kWh Monthly Use: 366.00 Random Loads: _ 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 382.90 kWh TABLE 9i RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL "Typical" Residence: page 40 May - September 2003 (5 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Equivalent Units Per Power Demand Power Demand Hours of Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn - 6:00 am refrigerator i 400 W 0.9 360 W 2.4 hr 86 kWh freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 3 100 1.0 300 1.5 45 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 1.0 36 freezer a 400 0.6 240 0.8 9 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.2 - 06 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 1 100 1.0 100 8.0 - 80 refrigerator a 400 0.9 360 3.2 1.15 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 2.4 58 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 3 100 1.0 300 6.0 1,80 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 2.4 - 86 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 5:00 - 6:00 pr kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.3 -09 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 ~25 10:30 -"mn refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 0.6 22 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.4 -10 Daily Use: 10.11 kWh Monthly Use: 303.30 Random Loads: 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 320.20 kWh "Typical" Residental Unit: RESIDENTIAL LOAD MODEL TABLE 9j Units Per Power Demand Equivalent October - April 2003 (7 months) (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) Power Demand Hours of page 41 Energy Time of Day Consuming Item(s) Home Per Unit Saturation Per Home Operation Consumption mn =— 6:00 am refrigerator a 400 W 0.9 360 W 2.4 hr 86 kWh freezer 1 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 6:00 - 8:30 am lights 4 100 1.0 400 15 -60 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 1.0 36 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.8 19 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.6 900 0.6 54 6:30 - 7:00 am kitchen appliance 1, 1,000 0.9 900 0.5 45 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.2 06 8:30 am - 4:30 pm lights 2 100 1.0 200 8.0 1.60 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 352 1.15 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 2.4 58 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.6 900 0.0 .00 television 1 70 0.9 63 2.0 13 4:30 - 10:30 pm lights 4 100 1.0 400 6.0 2.40 refrigerator 1 400 0.9 360 2.4 . 86 freezer Bt 400 0.6 240 1.8 43 electric heaters 1 1,500 0.6 900 0.0 .00 5:00 - 6:00 pm kitchen appliance 1 1,000 0.9 900 1.0 90 microwave oven 1 1,000 0.3 300 0.3 .09 6:00 - 10:00 pm TV 1 70 0.9 63 4.0 25 10:30 - mn refrigerator i 400 0.9 360 0.6 222 freezer 1 400 0.6 240 0.4 -10 Daily Use: 12.20 kWh Monthly Use: 366.00 Random Loads: _ 16.90 TOTAL MONTHLY USE: 382.90 kWh TABLE 10 Forecasts of Residential Electric Energy Use (Assuming the Existence of a Central Utility) page 42 May to September October to April Total Year Homes kWh/home Total kWh Homes kWh/home Total kWh Annual kWh 1983 25 150.4 18 ,800 5 201.4 7,049 25 ,849 1984 27 166.3 22,451 5 224.2 7,847 30 , 298 1985 27 182.2 24 ,597 5 247.0 8,645 33,242 1986 28 198.1 27 ,734 6 269.8 11,332 39 ,066 1987 28 214.0 29 ,960 7 292.6 14 ,337 44,297 1988 28 229.9 32,186 7 315.4 15,455 47 ,641 1989 28 241.2 33,768 7 321.6 15,758 49 526 1990 30 252.5 37 ,875 vi 327.8 16,062 53,937 1991 30 263.8 39 ,570 7 334.0 16,366 55,936 1992 31 275.1 42,641 7 340.2 16,670 59,311 1993 31 286.4 44,392 8 346.4 19,398 63,790 1994 31 293.2 45,446 8 353.7 19,807 65,253 1995 31 299.9 46 ,485 8 361.0 20 ,216 66,701 1996 31 306.7 47 ,539 8 368.3 20,625 68,164 1997 32 313.4 50,144 8 375.6 21 ,034 71,178 1998 32 320.2 51,232 8 382.9 21,442 72,674 1999 32 320.2 51,232 8 382.9 21,442 72,674 2000 32 320.2 51,232 8 382.9 21 , 442 72,674 2001 32 320'.2 51,232 8 382.9 21,442 72,674 2002 32 320.2 51,232 8 382.9 21,442 72,674 As in the case where there was no central utility, the residential load models are used to compute the peak residential power demand. These loads are as shown in the table below: TABLE 11 YEAR SUMMER WINTER 1983 1.14 x 25 x 0.8 = 22.8 kW 1.32 x5 x0.8 = 5.3 kW 1988 1.68 x 28 x 0.8 = 37.6 2.23 x 7 x 0.8 = 12.4 1993 1.88 x 31 x 0.8 = 46.2 2.73 x 8 x 0.8 = 17.5 1998 2.10 x 32 x 0.8 = 53.8 3.10 x 8 x 0.8 = 19.8 2003 2.10 x 32 x 0.8 = 53.8 3.10 x 8 x 0.8 = 19.8 It is expected that the commercial/institutional loads will not change from those estimated in the case where no utility system was available. It is believed that those customers will use electricity for the same end uses whether they have to generate their own power or buy it from a utility company. TABLE Electric Energy Consumption (Assuming the Existence 12 in Elfin Cove 1983 - 2003 of a Central Utility) SUMMER WINTER Residential | Commercial Residential Commercial Total YEAR | kW kWh | kW kWh kW kWh kW kW kW kWh 1983 | 23 18,800] 17 23,900 40 42,700 5 7,000 8 11,600] 13 18,600 1984 | 26 22,400} 20 25,100 46 47 , 500 6 7,800} 11 13,500} 17 21,300 1985 | 29 24,600! 23 26,300 52 50, 900 8 8,600} 14 15,400] 22 24,000 1986 | 32 27,700| 25 27,400 57 55,100 9 11,300} 17 17,400] 26 28,400 1987 | 35 30,000] 28 28,600 61 58,600]] 11 14,300] 20 19,300] 31 33,600 1988 | 38 32,200] 31 29,800 69 62,000]| 12 15,500|/ 23 21,200] 35 36,700 1989 | 40 33,800] 31 30,300 2 64,100|| 13 15,800] 24 24,100] 37 39,900 1990 | 41 37,900! 31 30,900 72 68,800|| 14 16,100] 25 27,000| 39 43,100 1991 | 43 39,600] 31 31,400 74 71,000]| 16 16,400] 26 29,800] 42 46,200 1992 | 44 42,600] 32 32,000 76 74,000|| 17 16,700| 27 32,700} 44 49,400 1993 | 46 44,400] 32 32,500 78 76,900|]| 18 19,400] 28 35,600] 46 55,000 1994 | 48 45,400] 32 32,500 80 77,900|| 18 19,800] 28 35,600] 46 55,400 1995 | 49 46,500] 32 32,500 al 79,000|| 19 20,200] 28 35,600| 47 55,800 1996 | 51 47,500] 32 32,500 83 a0,o00|| 19 20,600] 28 35,600] 47 56,200 1997 | 42 50,100] 32 32,500 84 82,600|| 20 21,000] 28 35,600| 48 56,600 | 1998 | 54 51,200| 32 32,500 86 83,700|| 20 21,400] 28 35,600| 48 57,000 1999 | 54 51,200| 32 32,500 86 83,700|| 20 21,400] 28 35,600| 48 57,000 2000 | 54 51,200| 32 32,500 86 83,700|| 20 21,400] 28 35,600| 48 57,000 2001 | 54 51,200] 32 32,500 86 83,700|| 20 21,400] 28 35,600| 48 57,000 2002 | 54 51,200] 32 32,500 86 83,700|| 20 21,400] 28 35,600| 48 57,000 page 43 ANNUAL ENERGY USE kh 61, 300 68, 800 74, 900 83, 800 92, 200 98, 700 104, 000 111,900 117, 200 123, 400 131,900 133,300 134, 800 136, 200 139, 200 140, 700 140, 700 140, 700 140, 700 140, 700 page 44 ion ELFIN COVE ENERGY USE FORECAST (NO UTILITY) 140 120 100 RESIDENTIAL 80 TOTAL 60 USE ANNUAL ENERGY USE (1000.X kWh) —COMMERCIAL 983 1988 1993 998 2002 lea ELFIN COVE ENERGY USE FORECAST 140 (WITH UTILITY) 120 100 RESIDENTIAL o °o TOTAL USE db fo) ANNUAL ENERGY USE (1000 X kWh) @ Oo 20 COMMERCIAL 1983 1988 S93 Is98 2002 ELFIN COVE POWER DEMAND FORECAST (NO UTILITY) RESIDENTIAL | DEMAND ANNUAL PEAK POWER DEMAND (kW) (983 Is8s ELFIN COVE POWER DEMAND FORECAST (WITH UTILITY) COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL DEMAND ANNUAL PEAK POWER DEMAND (kW) (983 1988 COMMERCIAL Page 45 TOTAL DEMAND 2002 TOTAL DEMAND 2002 page 46 F.5 - Thermal Energy Forecast As a result of the relatively mild weather in southeast Alaska and the fact that so few of the Elfin Cove homes are occupied through the win- ters, the amount of energy used to provide heat in the village is quite small. Acres' staff estimates that about 70 percent of all home space heat is provided by woodstoves (the rest being provided by oi] stoves). Those year-round residents who were asked, consistently identified wood use as 5 to 8 cords of wood per year, depending upon the severity of the winter. The comment was made by some that most of the wood is burned while still somewhat green, thereby diminishing the heat the woostoves can give off. A figure commonly used for the heat content of dry wood is about 17 million Btu per cord. If we can assume that the use of green wood will cut the amount of heat given off by 30 percent, this leaves about 12 million Btu per cord. A good wood stove can burn wood with about 50 percent efficiency, thus allowing each cord to put 6 mil- lion Btu of heat into the homes. This means that if a home uses 5 to 8 cords per year, its heat load is about 30 to 48 million Btu, a reason- able figure for a home in Southeast. Some wood is burned in the summer to “take the chill off", to heat water, or to cook food. It is esti- mated that this use is quite minor, possibly 10 percent of a home's an- nual need. It is assumed that those homes which are occupied only in the summer would use no more than 0.8 cords over the period of May through September. Keeping in mind that 30 percent of Elfin Cove's residential heat is presumed to come from oi], we can see that homes occupied year-round will use an average of 5.6 cords per home, with those homes occupied only in the summer using 0.56 cords per year. On an annual basis, the village's use of wood is: Number of Homes Cords Per Home Total Wood Used 5 homes year-round 5.6 per year 28 cords 24 homes summer only -56 per year 13 cords 41 cords Many of the wood stoves are equipped with heat exchangers used to pro- vide hot water in the homes. It is not possible in a study of this type to determine what proportion of the wood energy is used to heat water or to cook with. The figures given in the energy balance table in Section 2 represent arbitrary allocations of the energy. One resident, when asked by Acres' personnel for his personal valuation of a cord of wood delivered to his doorstep, quoted a figure of $500. He explained that this price made allowances for the nusisance of travelling to harvest the wood, the cost of his skiff, and his time away from things he would rather be doing. The price of $500/cord re- presents a price of about $83 per million Btu in heat delivered. By contrast, fuel oi] at $1.39 per gallon only costs about $30 per million Btu delivered (assuming 132,000 Btu/gallon and an oil stove efficiency of 35 percent). When asked why he didn't simply use oil instead of page 47 wood at $500 per cord, he explained that his family disliked the smell of the oi] stoves and did not wish to take the chance of oi] spills on their property like some other Elfin Cove residents have had. It is not likely that every homeowner would value wood at $500 per cord. They would most likely consider it to be less expensive than oil]. For purposes of this study, Acres will consider wood to cost $150 per cord, or $25 per million Btu delivered. Oil is assumed to carry about 30 percent of the residential heating load in Elfin Cove. This requires about 2,300 gallons (92 million Btu of delivered heat at 35% efficiency) of heating oil each year for the village. Oil also is used to provide heat in all of the non- residential buildings (the stores, the inn, laundromat, etc). This is expected to continue to be the case as new non-residential structures are added in the village. It is estimated that heating the commercial buildings in Elfin Cove presently requires 1,500 gallons (69 million Btu of delivered heat) of heating oil. As the number of non- residential buildings in the village increases and as more of those buildings are kept in operation throughout the winter, these heating demands will increase considerably. It is assumed that each new com- mercial building will require 2,000 gallons (92 million Btu of deliver- ed heat) of oil if it is kept open all winter. Buildings open only in the summer are assumed to require only 300 gallons (14 million Btu of delivered heat) of oil. Many homes in Elfin Cove are fairly old, and appear not to have been built with an emphasis on energy conservation. Some of the newer homes are build with the expense of heating taken into account. It will be assumed that all homes built after 1983 will be 25 percent more energy efficient than those now existing. Thus, all new homes will require no more than 36 million Btu per year (6 cords of wood). A forecast of the thermal energy needs of Elfin Cove is given in Table 13. page 48 TABLE 13 Thermal Energy Use in Elfin Cove 1983 - 2003 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL VILLAGE Number Energy Use (M Btu) Number Energy Use (M Btu) (M Btu) YEAR | Summer Winter | Summer Winter Total Summer Winter | Summer Winter Total Total 1983 24 5 115 240 355 3 2 69 184 253 608 1984 26 5 122 240 362 3 2 69 184 253 615 1985 26 5 122 240 362 3 2 69 184 253 615 1986 26 6 122 276 398 3 2 69 184 = 253 651 1987 25 7 118 312 430 3 2 69 184 9253 683 1988 25 7 118 312 430 2 5 55 460 515 945 1989 25 7 118 312 430 2 5 55 460 515 945 1990 26 7 122 312 9434 2 5 55 460 515 949 1991 26 7 122 312 434 2 5 55 460 515 949 1992 27 i 126 312 = 438 2 5 55 460 515 953 1993 26 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 ~—s«621 1,091 1994} 26 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 1995 26 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 1996 26 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 1997 27 8 126 348 474 3 6 69 552-621 1,095 1998 27 8 126 348 474 3 6 69 552 «621 1,095 1999 27 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 =621 1,091 2000 27 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 2001 27 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 2002 27 8 122 348 470 3 6 69 552 «621 1,091 Note: Structures identified as "Summer" are occupied only in the summer; those identified as "Winter" are in use throughout the year. The total of these two categories should yield the total number of residential or commercial buildings in the village in any given year. YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TABLE 14 page 49 SUMMARY OF THE TOTAL ENERGY NEEDS OF ELFIN COVE 1983 - 2002 ELECTRICAL ENERGY (kWh) (equiv. MBtu) 61, 300 68 , 800 74,900 83 ,800 92,200 98 ,700 104,000 111,900 117,200 123,400 131, 900 133,300 134, 800 136 ,200 139, 200 140 ,700 140,700 140 ,700 140,700 140 ,700 209 235 256 286 315 337 355 382 400 421 450 455 460 465 475 480 480 480 480 480 THERMAL ENERGY TOTALS (MBtu) (equiv. kWh) _(MBtu) (kWh) 608 178,195 817 239,495 615 180 ,246 850 249,046 615 180 , 246 871 255,146 651 190 ,797 937 274,597 683 200,176 998 292,376 945 276 ,964 1,282 375,664 945 276 , 964 1,300 380,964 949 278 ,136 14331) 13905036 949 278 136 1,349 395,336 953 279 ,308 1,374 402,708 1,091 319,754 1,541 451,654 1,091 319,754 1,546 453,054 1,091 319,754 1,551 454,554 1,091 319,754 1,556 455,954 1,095 320, 926 1,570 460,126 1,095 320 ,926 1,575 461,626 1,091 319,754 1,571 460,454 1,091 319,754 1,571 460,454 1,091 319,754 1,571 460,454 1,091 319,754 1,571 460,454 page 50 G - VILLAGE ENERGY RESOURCES ASSESSMENT This section briefly examines the sources of energy (both thermal and electrical) which are available to Elfin Cove to identify those tech- nologies which must be considered in the development of the future en- ergy plans for the village. 1. Coal. There is no practical means of providing coal to Elfin Cove for widespread use. There are no adequate storage areas or barge off-loading facilities. It is likely that the potential for water and air pollution from the burning of coal in the village would be objectionable to residents. No further consideration of this al- ternative is warranted. 2. Wood. Wood is abundant, with large areas of high-grade timber in the area. Land status precludes the harvest of timber on any ap- preciable scale since most land in the area is National Forest; with much of the rest being private property. Wood is widely used for home heating, a practice which will undoubtedly continue into the future. The use of wood as a fuel to produce electricity is impractical in Elfin Cove for reasons of limited storage and hand1- ing space. Additionally, the technologies needed for such a scheme on a small scale are undeveloped. No further consideration of this alternative is warranted. 3. Geothermal. There are no known geothermal resources in close prox- imity to Elfin Cove. No further consideration of this alternative is warranted. 4. Hydroelectric. Elfin Cove is located at the base of hills which range in elevation from sea level to more than 1,000 ft MSL. A number of small creeks are present in the area, making a sizable head available for the development of hydroelectric energy. There is widespread village support for the serious consideration of this alternative. The implementation of a hydroelectric system is ad- dressed as "Alternative B" later in this report. 5. Photovoltaic. This technology is presently too expensive to con- sider for Alaska utility use. 6. Wind. There is some possibility that the more exposed hilltops around Elfin Cove are subjected to fairly strong winds. The weath- er station in the village is much too sheltered to provide a good assessment of wind conditions in the area. The Alaska volume of the "Wind Energy Resource Atlas," places the northern Chicagoff Island in an area of “wind class 3", an area of relatively low wind energy potential. The Atlas notes that due to the terrain in the area and the distance to the nearest applicable weather station (Cape Spencer, 20 nm northwest) this estimate is subject to a good deal of uncertainty. In light of the good hydro resource available page 51 at Elfin Cove and the poor operating record that Alaska Wind energy installations have had, it does not seem productive to study this alternative further in this report. However, it may be aoorioriate to install equipment on an exposed ridgetop near the village to gather more detailed wind energy data. As more experience is gain- ed with wind turbines in Alaska, this resource could be reconsider- ed some years in the future. 7. Fuel Oil. This resource is available by barge and is presently used in the village to produce electricity and heat for the non- residential structures and some of the homes. Its use as a fuel for a village-wide diesel electric utility system is explored as "Alternative A" later in this report. Table 14 on the next page presents the results of the preliminary eval- uation of resources and technologies as applied to the community. Methods and criteria used in developing this table are covered in Section C of the Main Report. The results of this preliminary assessment are used as guidance in de- velopment of the plans evaluated in the later stages of the study. page 52 TABLE 14 VILLAGE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT FOR ELFIN COVE TECHNICAL COST RESOURCE FACTORS FACTORS FACTORS Nese Ne NNN pee a A ee Sl =a en ae = eS |S) So) & | S| a Se a ee eal aa ite | | || rica lies|| ae le TECHNOLOGY tar he |p| || ||) ae) | ec | || ||| ujtl|e 8% 28 2&8 € = Electric 1. Coal Fired Steam il 3} Tl o;/o};0};0}0}]0]0 2. Wood Fired Steam i 2} 1}o0}o0}0} 21;0}0} 0 3. Geothermal 2} 0] llolo 3/0 |g] 0 4. Diesel (base) * 4} 2} 2] 3/1 ]12 7} 2153] 4 5. Gas Turbine * 3} 2} 2}/90]0 ]0 7 0 | 22 6. Hydroelectric * 4}2}/2/1/3 1315 ]2 1/48] 2 7. Wind * 2}1/2]1}2]3 43] 2] 25 8. Photovoltaic * 2/1 /1 ])0/3 ] 3} 3] 11418 Heating 9. Diesel Waste Heat Recovery */ 3} 1) 2] 1] 1] 14 24 2 420 10. Electric Resistance *1 4/2] 2/4 4/0] 4] 2} 44 11. Passive Solar ey ST 1!) 32 4/3] 3] 2] 41 12. Wood *)1 512), 1] 3,4] 2] 77] 2 169 13. Coal *)/ 5/1} 0); 2} 3} 07 of] 1] 5 14. Oil (base) eS ta) Li say 1 7} 2472] 1 Other 15. Coal Gasification ey F242) Of OF 0} 0) 0} oO] 0 (16. Wood Gasification - Diesel] * 1} 1/1/2 )/'0] 0] 3] 0] 9 7. Biogas *) *1 3]; 2] 2)0]0] 3] 0/2 9 8. Waste Fired Boiler *1 *) 4) 1);0} 0/0] 0{/0)]0)0 19. Peat *) */ 4) 1/0/00] 040 0 0] 0 20. Binary Cycle Generator * 1}; 2} 2]}0/; 3] 3]; 9] 1 {50 Al. Conservation *) *1 5) 2] 2) 4} 4] 3] 9] 2 4100) 1 page 53 H - ENERGY PLAN DESCRIPTIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS H.1 - Base Case The base case plan, which could also be called the "do nothing" plan assumes that things in Elfin Cove will go on as they are now, with each user of electricity responsible for providing and operating their own generator. The cost of this arrangement will be the standard against which all other plans are to be compared. ° One village resident told visiting Acres' staff that their gasoline powered home generator could produce electricity for about 7 cents per kWh in fuel costs. When asked why they would want a central utility system if their home generation was so inexpensive, those homeowners replied that they desired the convenience of a utility system which could supply electricity on demand. Later investigation by Acres show- ed that under the best of conditions, small (3 to 5 kW) gasoline gener- ators are not capable of producing more than about 4 kWh per gallon of gasoline consumed. Under more normal home operating conditions, with less than full load on the generator, and less than optimum air and fuel temperatures a more reasonable figure would be about 3 kWh per gallon. With a fuel cost of $1.50 per gallon of gasoline, we can see that home-generated electricity in Elfin Cove now costs about 50 cents per kWh. This figure does not make allowances for the cost of the gen- erator or its maintenance. The assumptions used when examining this base case plan are as follows: * All homes will be equipped with their own gasoline powered generator of about 3.5 kW capacity. These generators will be assumed to cost $1,500 installed in Elfin Cove (data based on Alaska Industrial Hardware cost of $1,299 for a 3.5 kW Winco 305BH-1M plus an extra $200 for shipping to Elfin Cove). * The home generators will produce 3 kWh of electricity for each gal- lon of gasoline consumed. * Gasoline is assumed to cost $1.50 in 1983 and its cost will escal- late at an annual rate of 2.5 percent above the rate of inflation. * The home generators are expected to have lifetimes of 10 years, after which, they are to be replaced with identical units. * All non-residential structures will be furnished electricity with individual diesel generators. These generators will be assumed to have an initial cost of $1,000/kW including the costs of fuel stor- age facilities, generator building, power and control wiring. page 54 The diesel units will produce 6 kWh of electricity for each gallon of diesel fuel consumed. Diesel fuel is assumed to cost $1.39 in 1983 and its cost will es- callate at an annual rate of 2.5 percent above the rate of inflation. The diesel generators are expected to have lifetimes of 10 years, after which they are to be replaced with identical-units. Each home generator will require $50 of maintenance each year, with the labor done by the homeowner at "no cost"; the commercially oper- ated diesel sets will require $5,000 of maintenance, considering supplies and labor charges. No “major" overhaul work is anticipated as necessary for either type of unit over their lifetime. page H.2 - ALTERNATIVE PLAN "A" This alternative is only a simple step from the existing arrangement. Instead of each home having its own generator, users would buy energy from a village-wide power distribution system. This centralized system would use a diesel generator to produce electric power. There are at least two obvious advantages of such an arrangement: (1) The conveninece of having electricity available in the home at the flip of a switch and (2) more efficient use of fuel. Instead of producing only 3 kWh per gallon of gasoline, the diesels should be capable of generating about 6 kWh per gallon of diesel fuel. A less obvious ad- vantage is that less generator (and engine) capacity is needed under this arrangement than when each home has its own unit. If each home has a 3.5 kW unit, and there are 29 homes in the village, there is more than 100 kW of installed capacity. A centralized system would require a generator of about 75 kW capacity to meet the needs of the village for the next 10 years. In a departure from conventional utility planning practices, no reserve units will be provided. Since the ownership of individual generators is widespread in Elfin Cove, these units will be regarded as the "backup" for the system. In the event that the village generator breaks down, individual homeowners would be expected to start their own units until repairs could be made. The assumptions used when examining this alternative plan are as follows: * Beginning in 1985, the village will be supplied with energy from a centralized power system. In 1985, a 80 kW unit will be installed at a cost of $1,000 per kilowatt ($80,000) including fuel storage facilities, generator building, and control equipment. This unit will be assumed to have a lifetime of 10 years. In 1995 it will be replaced with a 90 kW unit at a cost of $1,000 per kilowatt ($90,000 in 1983 dollars). * The diesel unit will produce 6 kWh of energy with each gallon of diesel fuel consumed. Diesel fuel is assumed to cost $1.39 per gal- lon in 1983 and its cost will escallate at an annual rate of 2.5 percent greater than inflation. * A village-wide power distribution system will also be installed in 1985 at a cost of $70,000 including all home and business hookups and metering equipment. This system is expected to have a lifetime of 20 years, with a replacement in kind scheduled for 2005, which is beyond the horizion of this study. As new customers come on-line, their new hookups are estimated to cost $1,000 each in 1983 dollars. 55 page 56 * No waste heat equipment will be considered for the village because of its small size and the shutdown of many of the facilities for the winter. * Maintenance on the diesel unit will be assumed to cost $6,000 per year. It is further assumed that no "major" overhaul work will be required over the 10 year life of the unit. page H.3 - ALTERNATIVE PLAN "B" It is expected that the analysis of this plan will of considerable in- terest to the Elfin Cove residents. The basic power system will be identical to that described in Alternative "A" with the addition of a small hydroelectric plant installed near the mouth of "Roy's Creek". It is anticipated that a plant of 40 to 60 kW capacity could be easily installed there to make use of the 320 foot head which is developed as the creek comes down the hillside. The creek is a very small one, with flows on the order of only 1 to 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) being the norm. Nevertheless, this flow is adequate to generate 20 to 40 kW which shoud easily accomodate the village's needs except at times of daily peak demand (breakfast and dinner times) or at times of low water flow conditions. Then, the diesel unit would be started and run until the demand eases. This procedure should be accomplished automatically by means of a small computerized controller. It is expected that this type of an arrangement could save 60 percent of the village utility's diesel fuel requirements each year for its lifetime. The assumptions used when examining this alternative plan are as follows: * All assumptions regarding the cost and scheduling of the installa- tion of the diesel system are still used. * Assumptions regarding the village-wide distribution are retained. * In 1985 a 40 kW hydroelectric plant costing $200,000 is installed at "Roy's Creek". The plant will easily produce more energy than can be used in the village and it will be assumed to displace 60 percent of each year's fuel requirements. The hydro plant will be assumed to have a useful lifetime of 50 years and a term of financing of 35 years. * The maintenance of the hydro plant will cost $2,000 per year, assum- ing that local labor will be available to carry out all repair tasks. 57 page 58 I_- ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES TABLE 15 page 59 ESTIMATED FUEL COSTS FOR ELFIN COVE BASE CASE | RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL | RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL | COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL | TOTAL ENERGY ENERGY | FUEL USE X FUEL PRICE = FUEL COSTS | FUEL USE X FUEL PRICE = FUEL COSTS| FUEL COSTS | CONSUMPTION CONSUMPTION | (@ 3kWh/gal) | (@6kWh/gal ) | YEAR| (1,000 kWh) (1,000 kWh) | (1,000 gal) ($/gal) ($1,000) i (1,000 gal) _($/gal) ($1, 000) (1,000) | | 1983 | 26 36 | 9 1.50 13 | 6 1.39 | 21 1984 | 28 39 | 9 1.54 14 | 7 1.42 9 | 23 1985 | 29 42 | 10 1.58 15 | 7 1.46 10 | 25 1986 | 33 45 | ll 1.62 18 | 8 1.50 ll | 29 1987 | 35 48 | 12 1.66 19 | 8 1.53 12. «| 31 | | | 1988 | 36 51 | 12 1.70 20 | 9 1.57 13 | 33 1989 | 37 54 | 12 1.74 21 | 9 1.61 14 | 35 1990 | 39 58 | 13 1.78 23 | 10 1.65 16 | 39 1991 | 40 61 | 13 1.83 24 | 10 1.69 7 | 41 1992 | 4l 65 | 14 1.87 26 | n 1.74 19 | 45 | | | | 1993 | 43 68 | 14 1.92 28 | u 1.78 20 | 48 1994 | 43 68 | 14 1.97 28 | u 1.82 a1 | 49 1995 | 44 68 | 15 2.02 30 | aay 1.87 21 | 51 1996 | 44 68 | 15 2.07 30 | u 1.92 22 | 52 1997 | 45 68 | 15 2.12 32 | ul 1.96 22 | 54 lie | | | 1998 | 68 | 15 2.17 33 | ul 2.01 23 | 56 1999 | 68 | 15 2.23 34 | ay 2.06 23 | 57 2000 | 68 | 15 2.28 35 | ul 2.12 24 | 59 2001 | 68 | 15 2.34 36 | Bat 2:17 25 | 61 2002 | 46 68 | 15 2.40 37 | u 2.22 25 | 62 ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE BASE CASE TABLE 16a (COSTS OF RESIDENTIAL ELECTRICITY) page 60 | SYSTEM ADDITIONS AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES | ANNUAL O&M TOTAL FUEL TOTAL ELECTRIC | | costs + COSTS = FIXED + COSTS = COSTS + ENERGY = ENERGY | AMOUNT | costs INCURRED CONSUMPTION costs YEAR | DESCRIPTION ($1, 000) + ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1, 000) ($1,000) ($1,000) (1,000 kWh) ($/kWh) 1905 | *29 EXISTING UNITS @$1,500 44 | 5 1 | 6 B | 19 26 |. 1984 | *2 NEW UNITS 3 | 6 2 | 8 4 | 22 28 | .79 1985 | | 6 2 | 8 15 | 23 29 [79 1986 | *1 NEW UNIT 2) | 6 2 | 8 is | 26 33 | .79 1987 | | 6 2 | 8 19 | 27 35 | <7 | | | | 1988 | | 6 2 | 8 2 | 28 36 | .78 1989 | | 6 2 | 8 a | 29 37 | .78 1990 | *1 NEW UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 23 | 31 39 | .79 1991 | | 6 2 | 8 m4 | 32 40 | .80 1992 | *1 NEW UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 2% «| 34 41 | 83 | | | | 1993 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1983 UNITS 44 | 6 2 | 8 2 36 43 | .84 1994 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1984 UNITS 5 | 6 2 | 8 28 | 36 43 | .84 1995 | | 6 2 | 8 a | 38 44 | .86 1996 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1986 UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 | 38 44 | .86 1997 | *1 NEW UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 32s 40 45 | .89 | | | | | 1998 | | 6 2 | 8 3 «| 41 46 | .89 1999 | | 6 2 | 8 34 42 46 | .9 2000 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1990 UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 | 43 46 | .93 2001 | | 6 2 | 8 xO 44 46 | .96 2002 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1992 UNIT 2 | 6 2 | 8 37 45 46 | .98 TABLE 16b page 61 ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE BASE CASE (COSTS OF COMMERCIAL ELECTRICITY) | SYSTEM ADDITIONS AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES | ANNUAL O&M TOTAL FUEL TOTAL ELECTRIC | | costs + COSTS = FIXED + COSTS = COSTS + ENERGY = ENERGY | AMOUNT | costs INCURRED CONSUMPTION costs YEAR | DESCRIPTION ($1,000) | ($1,000) ($1, 000) ($1, 000) os ($1,000) (1,000 kWh) ($/kWh | | | 1983 | *EXISTING DIESEL UNIT 60 | 7 5 | Lb 8 | 21 36 | .59 1984 | | 7 5 | 12 a 21 39 | .54 1985 | | 7 5 | 12 io | 22 42 | .52 1986 | | 7 5 | 12 us| 23 45 | .51 1987 | | 7 5 | 12 12 | 24 50 | .48 | | | 1988 | *NEW UNITS IN SCHOOL, MACHINE 100 | 19 25 | 44 2 3 | 57 51 | 1.12 1989 | SHOP, AND LODGE | 19 25 | 44 4 «| 58 54 | 1.07 1990 | | 19 25 | 44 1 «| 60 58 | 1.03 1991 | | 19 25 | 44 vy | 61 61 | 1.00 1992 | | 19 25 | 44 io | 63 65 | .97 | | | | 1993 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1983 UNITS 60 | 19 25 | 44 2 | 64 68 | .94 1994 | | 19 25 | 44 a. s| 65 68 | 9% 1995 | . | 19 25 | 44 a. | 65 68 | .96 1996 | | 19 25 | 44 | 66 68 | .97 1997 | | 19 25 | 44 22 = | 66 68 | .97 | | | | 1998 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1988 UNITS 100 | 19 25 | 44 23 | 67 68 | .99 1999 | | 19 25 | 44 23 | 67 68 | .99 2000 | | 19 25 | 44 a | 68 68 | 1.00 2001 | | 19 25 | 44 2 | 69 68 | 1.01 2002 | | 19 25 | 44 | 69 68 | 1.01 TABLE l6éc page 62 ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "A" NET PRESENT WORTH CALACULATIONS | TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL | PRESENT | RES. COSTS + COMM'L COSTS = VILLAGE-WIDE coSTS | WORTH YEAR | ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) | 1983 | 19 21 40 | 38.65 1984 | 22 21 43 | 40.14 | 23 22 45 | 40.59 1986 | 26 23 49 | 42.70 1987 | 27 24 51 | 42.94 | | 1988 | 28 57 85 | 69.15 1989 | 29 58 87 | 68.38 1990 | 31 60 91 | 69.11 1991 | 32 61 93 | 68.23 1992 | 34 63 97 | 68.76 | 1993 | 36 64 100 | 68.49 1994 | 36 65 101 | 66.84 1995 | 38 65 103 | 65.86 1996 | 38 66 104 | 64.25 1997 | 40 66 106 | 63.27 | | 1998 | 4l 67 108 | 62.28 1999 | 42 67 109 | 60.73 2000 | 43 68 lll | 59.76 2001 | 44 69 113 | 58.78 2002 | 45 69 114 | 57.30 2003 - 2034 45 69 114 1,055.63 NET PRESENT WORTH OF THIS PLAN: 2,231.84 page 63 I.1 - Base Case I.1.1 - Social and Environmental Evaluation Because the individual generators are already in place, there is no possibility of local employment for either construction or op- eration work. As new homes are built with their own generators in place, the purchase of these units will not produce any em- ployment either. The construction of commercial buildings, if done by outside contractors, will undoubtedly employ the crews of those contractors to install the required generators. This al- ternative requires individual homeowners to become acquainted with the workings of their generator plants to a greater degree than would be the case in a centralized system. There are pres- ently no "repair shops" per se in Elfin Cove, so the reliability of each home's power system depends largely on the skills of its owner. Diesel and gasoline generators are relatively benign enviroment- ally. Internal combustion engines emit small quantities of car- bon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxides, sulfur dioxide, and unburned hydrocarbons. With the small population at Elfin Cove, there will not likely be any noticeable buildup of any of these pollutants. The engine lubricating oil must be changed periodic- ally and the waste oi] disposed of properly. In remote villages such as Elfin Cove, this can be a significant problem. Diesel and gasoline engines are significant sources of noise, but with adequate muffler systems, this problem can be minimized. In Elfin Cove, there have been incidents of fuel spills from the in- dividual generators and this is expected to continue to be a problem in the village. I.1.2 - Technical Evaluation The diesel and gasoline engines are typically the best understood means of producing electricity in bush villages today. Neverthe- less, these engines require frequent attention and regular main- tenance which can sometimes require highly skilled personnel. In the case of equipment in Elfin Cove, this could mean that a broken-down engine would have to wait for parts or skilled per- sonnel to arrive from Juneau or Anchorage. TABLE 1 page 64 ESTIMATED FUEL COSTS FOR ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "A" | VILLAGE-WIDE | DIESEL | ENERGY | FUEL x FUEL PRICE = FUEL COST | CONSUMPTION | CONSUMPTION ee (1,000 kWh) (1,000 gal) ($/gal) ($1,000) 1983 | 61 | 10 1.39 14 1984 | 69 | 12 1.42 16 1985 | 75 | 13 1.46 18 1986 | 84 | 14 1.50 21 1987 | 92 | 15 1.53 23 | | 1988 | 99 | 17 1.57 26 1989 | 104 | 17 1.61 28 1990 | 112 | 19 1.65 31 1991 | 117 | 20 1.69 33 1992 | 123 | 21 1.74 36 | | 1993 | 132 | 22 1.78 39 1994 | 133 | 22 1.82 40 1995 | 135 | 23 1.87 42 1996 | 136 | 23 1.92 44 1997 | 139 | 23 1.96 45 | | 1998 | 141 | 24 2.01 47 1999 | 141 | 24 2.06 48 2000 | 141 | 24 2.12 50 2001 | 141 | 24 2a17 51 2002 | 141 | 24 2.22 52 TABLE 18a ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "A" (COSTS OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERED BY VILLAGE-WIDE DIESEL SYSTEM) Page 65 | ANNUAL O&M TOTAL FUEL TOTAL ELECTRIC | SYSTEM ADDITIONS AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES | COSTS cosTs FIXED costs cosTs ENERGY ENERGY | AMOUNT | = COSTS + = INCURRED + CONSUMPTION = COSTS YEAR| DESCRIPTION ($1,000) | ($1, 000) an ($1,000) _ ($1, 000) ($1, 000) (1,000 kWh) ($/kWh) | | 1983 | *EXISTING GEN. EQUIP. 104 | 12 6 | 18 14 | 32 61 | 52 1984] *2 NEW HOME UNITS 3 | 13 7 | 20 1 «| 36 69 | -52 1985 | *NEW VILLAGE-WIDE UTILITY SYSTEM iso | 31 6 | 37 is | 55 75 | .B 1986 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 3 | 31 | 37 2 | 58 84 | 69 1987 | | 31 6 | 37 23 | 60 92 | 65 | | | | 1988 | | 31 | 37 a | 63 99 | 64 1989 | | 31 6 | 37 28 | 65 104 | 63 1990 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 3 | 32 6 | 38 a | 69 112 | +62 1991 | | 32 6 | 38 3 CO 71 7 | 61 1992 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 3 | 32 6 | 38 36CO| 74 123 | . 60 | | | | | 1993 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1983 EQUIPMENT 104 | 32 6 | 38 39 77 132 | -58 1994 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1984 UNITS 3 | 32 6 | 38 40 | 78 133 | 59 1995 | *UPRATING OF VILLAGE GENERATOR 90 | 33 6 | 39 42 | 81 135 | .60 1996 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1986 UNIT 3 | 33 6 | 39 “4 | 83 136 | -61 1997 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 3 | 34 | 40 | 85 139 | 61 | | | | | 1998 | | 34 | 40 47 | 87 141 | 62 1999 | | 34 | 40 48 | 88 141 | 62 2000 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1990 UNIT 3 | 34 6 | 40 so | 90 141 | 64 2001 | | 34 | 40 S| 91 141 | 65 2002 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1992 UNIT | 34 | 40 52 | 92 141 | 65 ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "A" TABLE 18b NET PRESENT WORTH CALACULATIONS | TOTAL | PRESENT | VILLAGE-wIDE cosTS | WORTH YEAR | ($1,000) | ($1, 000) | | 1983 | 32 | 30.92 1984 | 36 | 33.61 1985 | 55 | 49.60 1986 | 58 | 50.54 1987 | 60 | 50.52 | | 1988 | 63 | 51.25 1989 | 65 | 51.09 1990 | 69 | 52.40 1991 | 71 | 52.09 1992 | 74 | 52.46 | | 1993 | 77 | 52.74 1994 | 78 | 51.62 1995 | 81 | 51.79 1996 | 83 | 51.28 1997 | 85 | 50.74 | | 1998 | 87 | 50.17 1999 | 88 | 49.03 2000 | 90 | 48.46 2001 | 91 | 47.34 2002 | 92 | 46.24 2003 - 2034 92 881.74 NET PRESENT WORTH OF THIS PLAN: 1,855.63 page 66 page 67 1.2 - Alternative "A" I.1.1 - Social and Environmental Evaluation If this alternative were to be implemented, there would be some opportunity for the employment of Elfin Cove residents. In fact, this is to be encouraged so that costs may be held down and so that residents have a better understanding of how their power system in constructed. Such knowlege would be helpful when re- pairs are needed. This alternative could reduce the amount of pollutants in the Elfin Cove air, but this is not much of a problem in the village anyhow. A greater benefit would be from the elimination of a great number of noise sources. While it is true that a central diesel plant can be noisy, with proper siting and adequate muf- fler and building construction techniques, this should create no problem in the village. The likelihood of fuel spills from the individual generators would not necessarily decrease much because it is expected that these units will remain in place as backup units. In such cir- cumstances, they may receive less maintenance than they do now, causing the integrity of their fuel storage systems to deterior- ate. 1.2.2 - Technical Evaluation The construction of a centralized power system in Elfin Cove would go a long way toward providing residents with economical energy. The maintenance and operation of a diesel system is not particularly complicated and the availability of electricity at any time would be helpful to those residents who are unable, for whatever reason, to operate or repair their own units. TABLE 19 page 68 ESTIMATED FUEL COSTS FOR ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "“B" (Assuming 50 % Fuel Savings From Hydro Plant) | VILLAGE-WIDE | DIESEL | ENERGY | FUEL x FUEL PRICE = FUEL COST | CONSUMPTION | CONSUMPTION YEAR | (2,000 kWh) | (1,000 gal) ($/gal) ($1,000) | | 1983 | 61 | 10 1.39 14 1984 | 69 | 12 1.42 16 1985 | 75 | 6 1.46 9 1986 | 84 | 7 1.50 ll 1987 | 92 | 8 1.53 12 | 1988 | 99 | 8 1.57 13 1989 | 104 | 9 1561 14 1990 | 112 | 9 1.65 15 1991 | 117 | 10 1.69 16 1992 | 123 | 10 1.74 18 | | 1993 | 132 | ll 1.78 20 1994 | 133 | ll 1.82 20 1995 | 135 | ll 1.87 21 1996 | 136 | ne 1.92 22 1997 | 139 | 12 1.96 23 | | 1998 | 141 | 12 2.01 24 1999 | 141 | 12 2.06 24 2000 | 141 | 12 2.12 25 2001 | 141 | 12 Qe 25 2002 | 141 | 12 21522 26 TABLE 20a ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "B" (COSTS OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERED BY VILLAGE-WIDE DIESEL/HYDRO SYSTEM) page 69 | ANNUAL O&M TOTAL FUEL TOTAL ELECTRIC | SYSTEM ADDITIONS AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES | COSTS costs FIXED cosTS costs ENERGY ENERGY | AMOUNT | = COSTS = INCURRED + CONSUMPTION = COSTS YEAR | _ DESCRIPTION ($1,000) t ($1, 000) a ($1,000) _($1, 000) ($1, 000) (1,000 _kWh) ($/kWh) | 1983 | *EXISTING GEN. EQUIP. 104 | 12 6 | 18 a | 32 61 | 52 1984 | *2 NEW HOME UNITS 3) | 13 Ti 20 | 36 69 | 52 1985 | *NEW VILLAGE-WIDE DIESEL/HYDRO SYST. 350 | 37 5 | 42 9 | 51 75 | 68 1986 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP sel 37 Soot 42 ms)| 53 84 | 63 1987 | | 37 5 | 42 nee 54 92 | 59 | | | | | 1988 | | 37 5am | 42 13 | 55 99 | 56 1989 | | 37 Saami 42 4 «| 56 104 | +54 1990 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP set 38 Sail 43 | 58 112 | 52 1991 | 38 Saat 43 | 59 117 | 50 1992] *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 3 | 38 5 | 43 is | 61 123 | 50 | | | | 1993 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1983 EQUIPMENT 104 | 38 5 | 43 2 | 63 132 | 48 1994 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1984 UNITS x | 38 5 | 43 20 | 63 133 | 47 1995 | *UPRATING OF VILLAGE GENERATOR 90 | 39 Sol 44 | 65 135 | 48 1996 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1986 UNIT 3) | 39 San 44 22a | 66 136 | 49 1997 | *NEW HOME UNIT + SYSTEM HOOKUP 5 40 Sal 45 3 | 68 139 | 49 | | | | | 1998 | | 40 Saal 45 mu | 69 141 | +49 1999 | | 40 Sal 45 am | 69 141 | 249 2000 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1990 UNIT 31 | 40 Saat | 45 21] 70 141 | +50 2001 | | 40 Sia 45 2 | 70 141 | - 50 2002 | *REPLACEMENT OF 1992 UNIT Sail 40 Sait 45 26 | 7 141 | 50 page 70 TABLE 20b ESTIMATED COSTS OF ELFIN COVE ALTERNATIVE "B" NET PRESENT WORTH CALACULATIONS | TOTAL | PRESENT | VILLAGE-wiDE costs | WORTH YEAR | ($1, 000) | ($1, 000) | | 1983 | 32 | 30.92 1984 | 36 | 33.61 1985 | 51 | 46.00 1986 | 53 | 46.18 1987 | 54 | 45.47 | | 1988 | 55 | 44.74 1989 | 56 | 44.02 1990 | 58 | 44.05 1991 | 59 | 43.29 1992 | 61 | 43.24 | | 1993 | 63 | 43.15 1994 | 63 | 41.69 1995 | 65 | 41.56 1996 | 66 | 40.77 1997 | 68 | 40.59 | | 1998 | 69 | 39.79 1999 | 69 | 38.45 2000 | 70 | 37.69 2001 | 7 | 36.93 2002 | 7 | 35.68 2003 - 2034 71 680.47 NET PRESENT WORTH OF THIS PLAN: 1,498.29 page 71 1.3 - Alternative "B" I.1.1 - Social and Environmental Evaluation If this alternative were to be implemented, there would be some opportunity for the employment of Elfin Cove residents. In fact, this is to be encouraged so that costs may be held down and so that residents have a better understanding of how their power system in constructed. Such knowlege would be helpful when re- pairs are needed. This alternative could reduce the amount of pollutants in the Elfin Cove air, but this is not much of a problem in the village anyhow. A greater benefit would be from the elimination of a great number of noise sources. Hydroelectric plants are practic- ally silent, and when the diesel plant must be operated, its noise would go unnoticed by most residents. The development of any of the hydroelectric alternatives consid- ered (Roy's Creek, Roy's Creek plus Joe's Creek, raising the ele- vations of the lilly ponds, etc) would have virtually no effect on the environment in the area. There are no fish in any of those streams. Few, if any trees would have to be cut to provide a path for the penstock pipe and little or no land would be in- nundated. The implications of the use of Tongass National Forest land for the penstock "right-of-way" and intake would have to be examined. Elfin Cove residents told Acres' staff that US Forest Service personnel have been very accomodating to village use of the surrounding forest land. The scale of our proposed projects is so small that there would likely be no objection raised by USFS. The likelihood of fuel spills from the individual generators would not necessarily decrease much because it is expected that these units will remain in place as backup units. In such cir- cumstances, they may receive less maintenance than they do now, causing the integrity of their fuel storage systems to deterior- ate. 1.2.2 - Technical Evaluation The construction of a centralized power system in Elfin Cove would go a long way toward providing residents with economical energy. The maintenance and operation of a diesel system is not particularly complicated and the availability of electricity at any time would be helpful to those residents who are unable, for whatever reason, to operate or repair their own units. ATTACHMENT 1 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY 1983 PROJECT EVALUATION PROCEDURE ! Vucy §e arrent 2717 /¢3 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY PROJECT EVALUATION PROCEDURE The Power Authority's project evaluation procedure reflects the organization's purpose and philosophy. The Power Authority was established as an instrument of the State to intervene for the purpose of bringing to. fruition worthy projects that would otherwise be excluded from development by the constraints of financial markets. Most, if not all, Alaskan capital intensive power projects would be precluded from conventional financing due to the perception of added risk inherent in building projects in small, isolated Alaska communities. Thus, the Authority's approach to project evaluation does not consist, as some have recommended, of using market financial parameters to determine the ability of the project to generate sufficient sales to cover revenue requirements. Instead, the approach entails first assessing a project's "worthiness" apart from the constraints of financial markets, and, second, determining if there is the ability and political will to intervene to establish financing arrangements and terms that permit the project to be financed. To reiterate, the Authority's purpose is to intervene in financial markets to permit worthy projects to be developed. A project evaluation procedure that requires a project to pass a financing test using market conditions would preclude the Authority from acting in keeping with its purpose. The means that the Authority has adopted to assess a project's worthiness are consistent with traditional federal evaluation methods for. public water resource projects. The goal is to maximize net economic benefits from the state's perspective, tempered by environmental, socioeconomic and public preference constraints. The method attempts to identify the real economic resource costs of all options under study; the magnitude of these costs are independent of the entity that finances and implements the options. The Authority's project evaluation procedure has evolved since 1979 and continues to undergo refinement. Some desired characteristics of the procedures are: 1. Consistency from one study and market area to another. 2. Equity in the treatment of alternatives. 3. Practicality, given data limitations. 4. Responsiveness to statutory direction. In general terms, the procedure entails (1) forecasting end use requirements on the basis of assumptions regarding economic activity and energy cost trends; (2) formulating various alternative plans to satisfy the forecasted requirements; (3) estimating the capital, operation, maintenance and fuel costs of each plan over its life cycle; (4) discounting the cost of each plan to a common point in time; (5) comparing the total discounted costs of each plan and determining Project Evaluation Procedure Page 2 the preferred plan; (6) evaluating the preferred plan's cost of power under a variety of financing arrangements in relation to anticipated power costs without the plan; and (7) identifying those financing arrangements which result in acceptable power costs. Forecasting Future Requirements. A planning period is first adopted to define the period of time over which forecasts are developed and energy plans are formulated. The length of the planning period is limited by the practical difficulties of forecasting far into the future. A period of 20 years from the present is normally adopted. End use requirements (space heating, water heating, lights and appliances, and industrial processes) are forecast over the planning period for each of three sectors (residential, commercial/government, and manufacturing). The end use requirement forecasts are initially developed irrespective of the form of energy being used to energize the end use. The forecast for each end use reflects a range of economic activity/population forecasts and a range of overall energy prices. With respect to the former, economic base analysis founded on discreet developmental events is used as the basis of forecasting rather than simple trend projections, whenever possible. With regard to the latter, the end use forecasts reflect situations both where energy prices, overall, rise faster than general prices and where energy prices, overall, rise at a rate in keeping with general price levels. (It can be expected that the actual energy costs of the preferred plan will eventually be shown to fall within that range.) An intermediate forecast is used as the basis for the initial planning steps. - For each end use where more than one energy form is available to energize that end use, a mode split analysis is performed. This is accomplished in the course of the following initial screening of alternatives: 1. All reasonable alternative means of providing each end use are identified. 2. The per unit cost of energy is determined for each alternative using the Power Authority's economic evaluation parameters. 3. The amount of energy (or the amount of energy savings) that can be provided by each alternative is estimated. 4. | For each end use, cost curves are developed showing relative cost, over time, of providing the,end use by each of the reasonable alternatives. 5. The lowest cost means, or combination of means of providing each end use is identified. This determines the mode split after due consideration of the existing mode split and lag time for substitution of energy forms. The results also serve as a tool for formulating energy plans, which is the next step in the analysis. Project Evaluation Procedure Page 3 The forecasts address both energy and peak load requirements. Plan Formulation. The first step in formulating energy plans is identifying and screening all reasonable energy supply and conservation options. These include structural and non-structural alternatives and alternatives that provide intermittent as well as firm energy. This is accomplished in the course of the previous step in the analysis. Existing energy generation facilities and conservation practices are also evaluated for their performance, operation and maintenance costs, condition and remaining economic life. Given the menu of options available, the relative cost and mode split information developed in the course of forecasting energy requirements, and any additional comparative analysis of the options, two or more energy plans are formulated. Each plan must, with a consistent level of reliability, meet the forecasted energy and peak load requirements over the planning period. Whether plans are formulated to meet electrical energy requirements only, or both electrical and thermal requirements, depends upon the results of the mode split analysis. If it is shown that thermal needs should be met to a significant extent by electrical energy, then plans are formulated to meet both thermal and electrical requirements. If it is shown, on the other hand, that electricity should not play a significant part in providing thermal needs, then the bounds of the study are_limited to electrical energy requirements only. One plan is termed the “base case plan"; this plan is developed assuming a continuation of existing practice in the study area and is used as a common yard stick for comparison of the other plans. If opportunities exist, a plan is formulated to improve the base case plan by increasing its efficiency or by other means. One or more additional plans are formulated incorporating various combinations of options with the objective of identifying the lowest cost plan that is environmentally and socially acceptable. The sequence and timing of plan components are optimized as an integral part of plan formulation. This is accomplished by a systematic testing of different sequences and project timing in search of the sequence and timing that results in the lowest present value of plan costs. Project Evaluation Procedure Page 4 Discussion: 1. The Authority initially confined the forecasting to electrical energy requirements only. There are two problems with this approach. First, electrical energy supply plans often have associated with them certain amounts of waste heat suitable for space, water or process heating. In such cases, a forecast of thermal energy requirements is needed to determine the possibility of effectively utilizing this heat. Second, in forecasting electrical energy alone, the analyst is either explicitly or implicitly assuming a certain mode split in those end uses where more than just electrical energy can provide that end use. It is necessary to make the analysis of mode split explicit, and to do so requires a forecast of end use requirements rather than simply electrical energy needs. ao In amplification of the procedure for mode split determination, the goal is to determine, based on full economic cost of alternatives and rational economic behavior, the lowest cost way of providing the end use. Estimating Project Costs. ‘Alt costs for all projects are estimated with reference to a base year and -in terms of the base year price levels. Costs incurred in future years reflect relative price changes only. Capital cost estimates are “overnight" estimates. Capital costs (in the year they are incurred) are added to annual operation and maintenance costs and any fuel costs to give the total yearly cost of a plan. The series of yearly costs is discounted to a common point in time, typically the first year of the planning period. Discussion: 1. A constant dollar approach has been adopted in the economic analysis to keep from having to forecast a long term inflation rate that would always serve as source of dispute, and to ease the computational burden. As reported by the Water and Energy Task Force of the U.S. Water Resources Council in their December 1981 report entitled “Evaluating Hydropower Benefits," the critical element in an analytical approach is the “use of consistent assumptions about interest rates and future prices." The Task Force endorses either "life-cycle analysis" (which includes inflation) or “inflation free analysis". The Power Authority's approach is specifically cited by the Task Force as an example of the latter. Project Evaluation Procedure Page 5 2. Life cycle analysis dictates, state statute requires, and the long term planning horizon of a state government suggests that the relative plan costs be compared over the economic life of the projects under consideration. When hydroelectric and steam plant projects are being addressed, the economic evaluation period exceeds the 20 (or sometimes 30) year planning horizon. Yet, it is inappropriate to forecast load growth or escalation trends beyond the limits of the planning period. Also, project economic lives differ for varying types of facilities. These problems are handled by addressing costs throughout the economic evaluation period, but by assuming no load growth or cost escalation beyond the planning period. Facilities are replaced throughout the economic analysis period as dictated by their economic lives. Salvage values are included in the final year of the period as necessary. The economic evaluation period extends to the year that the longest lived project (that is added during the planning period) reaches the end of its economic life. For instance, if a hydroelectric project with a 50-year economic life is added in the tenth year of the planning period, the economic evaluation period would be 60 years in duration. Plan Comparison. Plans are compared in terms of total net benefits. Net benefits are equal to the gross benefits associated with a plan, less plan cost. The benéfits are defined as the discounted total cost of the base case plan, supplemented by any subsidiary benefits of a particular plan (see discussion). The plan offering the greatest net benefits is the preferred plan from an economic perspective. A benefit/cost ratio can also be used as an indicator of a plan's cost effectiveness. Discussion: 1. In the event a plan provides a beneficial output other than that specifically being addressed in the study, incremental costs required to realize that benefit are subtracted from the benefit in each year, and these annual subsidiary net benefits are discounted to the common base date. 2. Consider the following hypothetical example: All cost and benefit figures are the sum of annual amounts discounted to the base date. Project Evaluation Procedure Page 6 Plan Base Plan Plan Base Plan Plan Case A B Case Evaluation - benefits: 100 cost: 100 net benefits: 0 benefit/cost ratio: A Evaluation - benefits: 100 cost: 120 net benefits: 110 benefit/cost ratio: B Evaluation - benefits: 100 cost: 90 net benefits: 115 Cost 100 120 90 1 + 10 = 110 - 120 = -10 110/120 = 0.92 + 15 = 115 - 90 = 25 benefit/cost ratio: 115/90 = 1.28 Subsidiary Net Benefit 10 15 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Analysis Parameters for the 1983 Fiscal Year Economic Analysis Inflation Rate - 0% Real Discount Rate - 3.5% Real Oi] Distillate Escalation Rate 2.5% - First 20 years 0% - Thereafter Cost of Power Analysis Inflation Rate -7.0% Project Debt to Equity Ratio - 1:0 Cost of Debt - 12.0% Economic Life and Term of Financing Gasification Equipment Waste Heat Recapture Equipment Under 5 MW Qver 5 MW Solar, Wind Turbines, Geothermal and Organic Rankine Cycle Turbines Diesel Generation* Units under 300 KW Units over 300 KW Gas Turbines Combined Cycle Turbines Steam Turbines (Including Coal and Wood-fired pater) Under 10 MW Over 10 MW Hydroelectric Projects Economic Life Term of Financing Transmission Systems Transmission Lines w/ Wood Poles Transmission Lines w/ Steel Towers Submarine Cables Oil Filled Solid Dielectric *Diesel Reserve Units will have longer life depending on use. 10 years 10 years 20 years 15 years 10 years 20 years 20 years 30 years . 20 years 30 years 50 years 35 years 30 years 40 years 30 years 20 years economic life is by unit and not total plant capacity. - ~ i KA Lsl> Also this oe Inflation Rate For the purpose of the economic analysis there is assumed to be no inflation. Recommendation: The inflation rate should therefore remain at 0%. Discount Rate As previously indicated in the Analysis Parameters of FY 82 the historic inflation free cost of money to the utility industry appears to be approximately 3.0%. Currently national and local economists and financial experts estimate the overall real discount rate to be in the range of 3% to 4% with a likelihood that the real cost of money for utilities is increasing slightly due to the increasing size and cost of electric generation projects currently being undertaken. It is also acknowledged that historically the real cost of money in Alaska contains an "Alaska factor" and is therefore somewhat higher than in the rest of the nation. However, the discount rate is also intended reflect the state opportunity cost of money and reflect long term trends. Recommendation: In regards to the above analysis and review, the Discount Rate should be set at 3.5%. Escalation Rate Based upon a composite research of Energy Consulting Companies, national and local economists, and Investment Brokerage Firms, the forecast of distillate fuels (diesel and fuel oi1) are expected to increase at an average real rate of 2.5% per annum for the period from 1982 to 2001. Beyond the year 2001 further increases in fuel are assumed to be zero. This assumption is based upon the belief that although additional increases are expected they are too speculative to quantify. . Recommendation: The escalation rate for diesel and fuel oil be set at 2.5% per annum for the first 20 years of the economic analysis. Thereafter, further increases in the rate are assumed to be zero. Inflation Rate For the 1983 Fiscal Year, national and local economists along with Financial Institutions and Energy consulting Firms forecast the National inflation rate between 6 and 8 percent. Recommendation: The inflation rate should be set at 7% per year. Debt to Equity Ratio At the present time and under legislation currently in effect it is difficult to estimate the extent of debt financing for future Power Authority projects. It is also common utility practice to debt finance capital intensive projects. i Recommendation: In spite of the Power Authority's legislation, the debt to equity ratio for power project financing should remain at 1:0. Cost of Debt Cost of Debt is largely determined by the interest rate identified by statute for loans from the Power Project Loan fund. That interest rate is equal to the average weekly yield of municipal revenue bonds for the previous 12 month period as determined from the Weekly Bond Buyers 30 year index of revenue bonds. This average is currently approximately 13%. It is anticipated that the average will decrease only slowly during the 1983 fiscal year. Recommendation: Because of the anticipated slow decrease in the weekly revenue bond index it is recommended that the cost of debt be set at 12% to reflect current long term tax exempt rates with a decreasing participation of the Rural Electrification Administration in providing federal low interest financing. : Economic Life and Term of Loan Although in certain instances economic lives of up to 100 years may be warranted for hydroelectric projects, both the State Division of Budget and Management and F.E.R.C. recommend the use of 50 year economic lives for new hydroelectric projects. As a result the economic life of a new hydroelectric project is set at 50 years and the term of financing at 35 years. For all other alternative generation sources, the economic life and the term for which financing can be obtained is assumed to be the same even though they vary for each alternative. The following economic lives and loan terms should be used for various power project alternatives. Economic Life and Term of Financing Gasification Equipment 10 years Waste Heat Recapture Equipment Under 5 MW 10 years Over 5 MW 20 years Solar, Wind Turbines, Geothermal and Organic Rankine Cycle Turbines 15 years Diesel Generation* Units under 300 KW 10 years Units over 300 KW 20 years Gas Turbines 20 years Combined Cycle Turbines 30 years Steam Turbines (Including Coal * and -Wood-fired Boilers} Onder 10 MW 20 years Over 10 MW 30 years Hydroelectric Projects Economic Life 50 years Term of Financing 35 years Transmission Systems Transmission Lines w/ Wood Poles 30 years . Transmission Lines w/ Steel Towers 40 years Submarine Cables Oil Filled 30 years Solid Dielectric 20 years *Diesel Reserve Units will have longer life depending on use. economic life is by unit and not total plant capacity. . Also this Inflation Rate Or. Scott Goldsmith Lash Gak Or. David Reaume Economic Consultant Lehman Brothers, Kohn Loeb Or. Bradford Tuck University of Alaska Donald MacFayden Salomon Brothers Peter W. Sugg URS/Cloverdale & Colpitts- Gary Anderson, Stanford Research Institute Or. Mike Scott Battelle Pacific N.W. Lab. Mr. Thomas Thurber Data Resources, Inc. Victor A. Perry III Bechtel Corp. William L. Randall The First Boston Corp. Wm. Micheal McHugh Applied Economics Associates Fredric J. Prager 6.0% 7.0% 5.0 - 6.0% 6.0% 6 - 8% 6.0 - 7.0% 7.0% 5.0 - 7.0% 625% 5.0% 7.0 - 8.0% 7.0 - 8.0% Smith, Barney, Harris Upnam & Company John Delrocali Whartan Econometric Fotcasting Asso. Michael G. Moroney Peat, Marwick & Mitchell, Inc. Exxon Corp. 5.0 - 6.0% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% REFERENCE Discount Rate Fuel Escalation Rate 3.0% 2.3% 3.0% 2.6% 3.0 - 3.5% 2.8% 3.5% 2.65% 4.0% 3.0 - 4.0% 4.04% 4.0% 4.0 - 4.08% 3.0% 3.0% 2.7% 3.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.5% 3.5% 3.0 - 3.5% 3.5% 3.0 - 3.5% 4.0% 2.5% 3.5% 2.3% 3.0% 2.5% 3.0% - 4.0%° 2.0% ATTACHMENT 2 HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS FOR "ROY'S CREEK" DRAINAGE AT ELFIN COVE Note: The data upon which the following calculations are based were taken from US Geological Survey records for gaging stations some considerable distance from Elfin Cove. The results of these calculations should be interpreted in light of the considerable error which may result from terrain modification of local meteorologic conditions. Southeast Alaska is characterized by extremely rugged terrain which can produce widely varying micro- climates across relatively small distances. The authors provide this information to make the reader aware of the limitations under which this data may be used. REV.1 FORM NO. 152 JOB NUMBER FILE NUMBER sHeeT__/ or 4 sy LD pate] JUZ&> APP DATE Calculations ACRES SUBJECT: ROY) ceeee Dr hen trnel flrs = O10) 3/2» pit Boe > 0.072 (yal (0.49 i 2 Schr C 7 —.677 ~.469 @ haw fan ~ 374 (08C0)) 7743) Gy” eso 40) > 3974 (4,32) (.31%6) V) (0103) (.07) = 0.497 ° ae pe 6 Wee, fl Q = 997 Cmatrna ert ah ag gee 240578 = 937 (359) C47) (jas) (0/8) (.0%8) = /83 + @ WhanDe.q = 102 (043° *) aa 2467 = 162 (44a) (1.32) C.o/ss) > TE Ge ; Pay 7 - © Man Gor = //153 Ge) eae eee ete 2153 (47) (C/je2) Cos) (C034) = /,80 Pe - © Mea = 288 UOECHON (4a os esa ate Q 2,88 (2.33) Caer) (oce) (1) (3.90) (>4 5.20 : pire 00477 (04 (0) 77°C 43°") 22¢°7" 9 50 = (of7? (3.79) (446) (850) (283) - 203 tt @ Wee. phy : 000/23 o6(e))"” 93°” 226° * asol/* ovo Ce) (46) G84) (218s) = [th Le GS-2 +0/8/ ars ah = 00/29 (.o8(s0))/” 43 35. 650 240 = .oo/27 ( 22.4) (498) (0%) (92.3) (2.67) once ‘ = 0569 ( ./2(y/0))?* 43°77” 950 O7M ha Jus = 0569 (iss) (434) (49.97) Meo~ Lye © 3.83 @ 77h OtQ = 126 Crs(yoh?” .43°" 240 ap aay teak | (412) ¢.3¢6) <a @ Pram por & WT the us i (3 7 ores AC) ~/6?7 REV. 1 FORM NO. 152 JOB NUMBER Calculations FILE NUMBER SUBJECT: SHEET @& or 4 BY Us DATE JJUCLE APP DATE @ Whar Wau Q > das ( tite) 4s ae 240° °°? > 403 (8 08) (aia) (939) (796) 2 ies & - 207 1S CD Pra. do Q = /2./ (.y6yo\y” 043" O20. 6290777” = 2.1 (6.4/) (42) (1.36) Cos) = 1,24 gO2r 237 ~.47 ® 2-Yeor fekQ= (29 1/10°7* 43°7° 957~7" Q50°777 = 12,4 (390) (,4¢7) (301) (o#) > 23zF @ FQ2l4¢e bes: .407G/0o)™ 43/7" ge sag tS? = 459 (9,03) (3%) (1) (069) = 08 _ @ 302 libhasre = 43.8 not! af 11? ese” 2907 **? = 438 (Joos) (363) 7) Corr) (o4e) = 14 = _00000/0 2 /10°°" 4x 8s0%?? = yooooso2 (7/08) (.4/2\ (4590) . ; ‘ 7 TES (29 FOW2 Aemnn be = 00000261 (/10") 93°" 220? @50”” = . 0000026) (164) ¢ 42>) (7et ) (2090) = 32 eas _ a 5% Crceatdones @> 273 (0) (47°77) [FP 2q0°!7/ = .373 (703) (.440\ Ci) (462) > FB GD [5 Io Ckeerdiner& = PO 07 4x7 240°°°8 4 = 170 (Jol) (433) (64) > 48 (D GOT. Exemdtrs Gs .0039/ 170?” 437° PR" Eso - 0037 (ps) (.423) U) (7) « LF 76 339) @/ aso” 69 6S FoF ce0eArely 0000 6/8 wo? 43° ve ye .00008/8 (Jur) (.49) (7; ) /44 = 0, F ED 95% Crectectinad = .00001T yo? 430? a5 2027718" B50 he = ,oooo/r (jac) (388) (8%) (1) (252) re REV. 1 FORM NO. 152 Calculations ACHES SUBJECT: Rey's Creek Flow Duration Corve NOTE: Q (Discharge in ft?/sec ) Oo 20 40 60 Percent oC ene This CES curve jis JOB NUMBER FILE NUMBER SHEET 3 or 4 BY DATE APP DATE duration based upon extra pol ation of regional regres sion anal ysis. should he Extreme cavtron used 1A inter pre ting resulds. 80 100 Flow Exceeded REV.1 FORM NO. 152 ft/sec ) (in Mean Monthly Flow Un JOB NUMBER Calculations FILE NUMBER SUBJECT: sHeeT___4 BY APP R oy's Creek Anavel Hyd to 57s pA NOTE: Anaval Hydro grep ks based Upon extrapolation a regi ona régresston analysés. Values ain, be subject 4, large errors, Mean Aaavel @ ow (2.65 Ft fe) Month ‘ Note: ATTACHMENT 3 MANUFACTURERS' INFORMATION Acres American Incorporated has included information regarding hydraulic turbines and plastic piping systems only as examples of existing and available micro-hydro plant components. The suitability of any of these components for use in a specific micro-hydro plant at any site is not addressed. Acres does not represent any manufacturer and does not endorse any of the manufacturers' products described in this attachment. Acres American assumes no responsiblity for the use of the in- formation presented and hereby expressly disclaims all liability in regard to such use. EPENDASBLE - TURBINES LTD. f 4OQ4AA DawundAawe DA DA rew samo IT an we nance een Mini hydro pelton turbines 5 inch mini hydro propellor Various turbine runners The recent shortage of fossil fuel in North America has created a climate in which the small independent power source is becoming increasingly desirable to a large group of isolated communities and businesses. Until now, however, only expensive, imported units have been available. But no longer. Now Dependable Turbines can offer efficient, economical hydroelectric power systems to meet the needs of farms, ranches, resorts, mining and logging camps, and similar small users of power. ¢ Dependable Turbines is a Canadian company that not only manufactures its own hydroelectric systems, but has also designed many technological improvements to make its products among the most modern and efficient independent power sources available today. ADVANTAGES OFA HYDROELECTRIC POWER INSTALLATION ¢ Hydroelectric turbines are pollution-free, quiet and unobtrusive to the surrounding environment. ¢ Almost any stream can be utilized to furnish your own electric power for lighting, cooking, heating and other uses. ¢ Turbines require no fuel but produce electricity by harnessing the kinetic energy of water. ¢ Once installed, hydro power soon pays for itself in fuel savings. ¢ The water turbine is a simple, efficient, reliable machine that requires little supervision and has avery low maintenance cost. The hydroelectric power system can be expected to have a very long life as compared to an internal combustion engine that must be overhauled and repaired regularly. Sy PLAN yas NING A HYDR iN iD | See ELECTRIC md POWER SYSTEM If you are planning a water-power installation in a remote area where your only other choice is a diesel or gasoline driven generator, your long-term savings may be huge. Once you determine your water source, you must then determine what components will be best suited for your hydroelectric requirements. To contain your water supply, you may have to erect adem. If you can get permission to build adam, its size and what materials you use will depend upon your : location. On the other hand, confining the flow of your water source to provide a reservoir may be as simple as building a small, tub- like concrete structure and letting the overflow spill back into the source, This diversion structure should be equipped with a trash rack, a grid-like protective barricade, to protect your system from floating trash. If you choose the diversion route over a full- fledged dam, you may need batteries if you want to store your water power. Whether you tap a spring or stream or have a low-head dam, you will need a means of stopping and controlling water flow for maintenance and management. Most Pelton-turbine inputs have a gate valve just ahead of the discharge nozzle. With sucha valve you can regulate the power to an approximate power and let the governor—if you use one— handle the fine tuning. Ideally, you'll also have a valve at the head of the penstock, since shutting off a high head of rushing water at the turbine must be done slowly to prevent a great impact on the penstock. DEPENDABLE TURBINES LTD. Hydroelectric power installations use either an impulse turbine ora reaction turbine. Pelton (impulse) turbines can be run with as little as 1.5 cubic feet per minute (CFM) of water, but they operate most efficiently with at least a 50-foot head. If you have a high water volume and a low head, your choice would likely be the reaction type, since it’s driven by the water’s mass rather than its velocity. Conversely, if you have a high head and low water volume, your choice would be a Pelton turbine since it uses the water’s high velocity rather than its mass. Turbines, however, are only part of the system: small alternators, deep-discharge batteries, solid- state invertors and Gemini converters are components in the sophisticated technology being used to update this ancient power source. Of course, this equipment still needs water: Before the installation of any hydroelectric system, you'll need to know the flow-rate and determine the “head” or difference in elevation between water source and turbine to estimate the power potential. These factors also largely determine what type of turbine you will use. Energy storage is another consideration. Dams were the rule in the past, and even now for large-scale hydroelectric plants. But for small, on-site installations, batteries offer many advantages. Another choice: AC or DC power generation. Which one you choose will affect the design of your system. Although a few turbines have been coupled to refrigeration compressors, and others drive pumps and machines directly, the application with the most potential is electric power. Listed below are several possibilities: AC DIRECT TO AC: Given unlimited finances and a license to use all the water they want, most water-power producers would like to produce direct AC. Such an installation requires a big enough turbine and generator, plus enough water, to handle peak loads. Peak-load capacities, plus a little margin, however, costs far more than sizing a plant for mean load. In a private plant, it means water reserve behind adam, headwater controls and perhaps a turbine and generator up to 4 or5 times as large as would be needed for mean load. In addition, a governor must be used to hold AC frequency. DC DIRECT TO DC: This system, as above, also works best from a - BREAKDOWN OF ATYPICAL ELECTRIC BILL (AVERAGE FAMILY OF FOUR) =: TYPICAL TYPICAL ITEM CONSUMPTION | cost -KWH- Range 200 $ 9.00 Refrigerator Freezer 300 10.20 (Frost Free) Water Heating 960 25.90 Automatic Washer 10 45 Clothes Dryer 150 3.75 Black & White TV 60 2.70 |* Lighting & Minor Appliances* 400 11.00 — 4 | Bi-monthly KWH Charge 2,080 $63.00 Service Charge 4.00 Total Bi-monthly $67.00 (Total Monthly $33.50) constant high-volume water source in order to avoid fluctuations in generated power. While suitable for DC tools and lights, its major drawback ina domestic application is the high cost and availability of DC- operated household appliances. DC TO BATTERIES TO DC: By storing generated energy in batteries, you compensate for uneven power consumption since energy is stored during low-usage periods. This system operates effectively on a low-water volume and eliminates the necessity of a dam or other high-volume water source. You can therefore size your plant for mean load and let the batteries handle the peaks. This can mean the difference between a smaller, efficient hydroelectric plant and the larger, more expensive installations required for the previous systems. This system produces DC power, and as mentioned above, may not be ideally suited for domestic applications. DC TO BATTERIES TO INVERTER TO AC: This system is the same as the one above, but with the addition of either a solid-state or motor-driven inverter. The purpose of the inverter is to change the DC battery power to AC. While some power may be lost in the process, this system is ideal asa domestic energy source. DC TO GEMINI CONVERTER TO AC: This installation is especially suited for users of existing commercial power. The Gemini Synchronous Inverter system as explained later, interfaces your generated power with the power from the utility, therefore eliminating the need for batteries. AVERAGE POWER CONSUMPTION OF HOME ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES TYPICAL MONTHLY ANNUAL APPLIANCE CONNECTED AVERAGE ° AVERAGE: LOAD (WATTS) KWH cost KWH [ cost + —_——— +— T 4 Dishwasher 1200 40 $ 1.00 480 | $ 12.00 Fan 75 8 -27 90 3.06 Kitchen Waste Disposer 375 2 .07 20 -68 Microwave Oven 1400 20 .90 240 10.80 Range — Apartment 9000 so 2.25 600 27.00 Range — House 12000 100 4.50 1200 54.00 Range — Self-Cleaning 12000 84 3.78 1010 45.45 + Oryer 4600 75 1.88 300 22.50 fron 1000 4 -14 50 1.70 psperebaanth: Washer — Automatic 350 5 .23 65 2.93 Washer — Wringer 250 4 .18 45 2.03 Freezer — Chest 3x40 120 3.00 1440 36.00 Freezer — Upright 340 120 3.00 1440 36.00 : i Freezer — Upright Frost-Free 375 131 3.28 1585 39.62 ae Refrigerator — Manual Defrost 400 60 2.70 720 32.40 Tae Refrigerator-Freezer — Automatic Defrost 800 120 4.08 1440 48.96 Refrigerator-Freezer — Frost-Free 900 150 5.10 1800 61.20 = F Hi-Fi or Stereo 150 na .38 125 4.25 et sg Radio 50 4 ae 50 1.70 ae Vs ae Television — colour 200 30 1.35 360 16.20 Television — Black and White 100 15 -68 180 8.10 +. WATER Water Heater — 30 Gallon 2000/1000 480 12.96 5800 156.60 HEATING Water Heater — 40 Gallon 3000/3000 540 14.58 6500 175.50 Water Heater — 60 Gallon 4500/1500 610 16.47 7300 197.10 Blanket — Single 135 7 .24 45 1.53 s : Blanket — Double 180 10 34 60 2.04 COMFORT: Heat Lamp 250 3 .10 30 1.02 * rye) ; Heater — Auxiliary 1000 50 1.70 300 10.20 Saar cs Heating Pad 65 1 :03 8 oF 4 Sun Lamp 400 4 14 48 1.63 Waterbed 400 100 i 2.50 1000 25.00 Hair Setter 600 2 07 29 -97 PERSONAL Hair Oryer — Bonnet Style 700 6 .20 67 279 pacistele iti ley Hair Oryer — Console 1100 9 31 106 3.60 z Coffee Percolator 600 6 -20 70 2.38 Fry Pan 1150 6 .20 70 2.38 Fryer (Deep Fat) 1250 5 17 60 2.04 Kettle 1500 22 75 265 9.00 Ai La betre Mixer 150 1 ‘03 7 124 Toaster Oven 1400 20 68 220 7.48 Toaster 1000 3 -10 35 1.20 Waffle Iron 1000 7 2 .07 24 -82 Block Heater 400 96 3.26 384 13.05 fol Uh getole) i Car Warmer 750 135 4.59 540 18.36 Lawnmower 1000 10 .34 50 1.70 +. 4 4 Clock 4 3 -10 35 1.20 Furnace Blower 250 50 1.70 350 11.90 Lamp, 100 Watt 100 9 31 108 3.67 Sewing Machine 100 1 .03 t2 .41 Vacuum Cleaner 500 3 -10 35 | 1.20 | *These costs do not include the $4.00 Bi-monthly service charge, and are furnished only as a guide. MEASURING YOUR POWER SOURCE Measuring Head You can use a surveyor’s transit or a level on a camera tripod to sight from peg top to peg top to measure head. Have helper mark pole dead on level of sight. Add up measurements (A, B, C, D, etc.) for total head. Before you invest in any water- power equipment, you have to measure your power source. You must know how much water you can deliver to the turbine and how high the water source is above the turbine. You must also know how long the penstock or feed-in pipe will be so you can calculate friction losses. MEASURING HEAD: You can use a@ surveyor’s transit or a pole and level to find the height of the water source above the turbine (see drawing). An alternate method of measuring head is to use a length of hose and a pressure gauge. Insert the hose into the stream and measure the resulting water pressure at the lower end with the gauge. Repeat this procedure, continuing downhill until you reach your proposed turbine location. Add up tne accumulated pressure readings to obtain your head. (0.433 pounds per square inch equal one foot). There’s a slight difference between impulse and reaction turbines. You measure to the point of entrance (or nozzle) of the Pelton turbine, and you measure to the surface of the water below the discharge of the low- head turbine. When measuring head elevation, you need not be concerned with horizontal distances and you do not necessarily have to travelina straight line. For heads of 25 feet or less, you must be extremely accurate. MEASURING HEAD LOSS: The third vital factor in estimating power is the friction or head loss in getting water from source to the turbine. If your source is far up a hill or mountain, you'll probably build the inlet pipe or penstock of plastic or aluminum pipe—light and easily assembled. If you are planning a low-level installation at the foot of adam, you'll still need some pipe, since it is common practice to locate the turbine as far down slope as possible to gain head. In either case, determine head loss from the above table and trim your potential power source accordingly. MEASURING FLOW RATE: It is important to know not only average stream flow, but also ‘ minimums and maximums to be expected. You'll need to estimate minimum flows to ensure that you will always have enough power, and you'll need maximum flows in order to design your system so that it will not create a danger during peak flooding. If you are familiar with your area, you may TURBINE INLET (FOR PELTON) be able to recall past conditions. If not, you may have to gather this sort of information from your neighbors or other sources. There are three methods of measuring flow rate: 1. TEMPORARY DAM, STOPWATCH AND BUCKET: The dam and bucket system is suited to a small flow such as a stream or spring. You build a box-like containment to catch all the water, and provide an outlet pipe to spill the entire flow into a container such as a five-gallon bucket. Time the period needed to fill the bucket, and you can easily figure the flow in cubic feet per minute. (One gallon is 0.1337 cu. ft.). 2. FLOAT AND STOPWATCH: The float method is useful when you can lay off 100 feet or more of a stream where the width and depth are fairly constant. The following drawings show you how to determine flow with this system. 3.TEMPORARY DAM AND WEIR GATE: The temporary dam and weir gate is, perhaps, most accurate. A board with a bevel- notched opening, or a weir, dams off the stream so all the water flows through the weir (see the drawing). Flow is determined from the table included with the drawings. Measuring flow with a float If stream is fairly consistent in width and depth, you can use this method. Mark board at one-foot intervals and place across stream; measure water depth at each mark and record. Then draw cross section to determine square footage by either averaging measurements or by subdividing into rectangle and two triangles and figuring area. Use weighted float that can be clearly seen, and multiply feet travelled by float in one minute by square feet of cross section. Multiply this figure by 0.83 for water flow in cu. ft./min. (The 0.83, or 35/6, is difference in flow rate between the water at the stream’s surface and the lower depths). ‘SUM OF A THROUGH L AVERAGE DEPTH = 12 wy DISTANCE FLOAT TRAVELS IN ONE MINUTE Measuring flow with a weir WEIR GATE DAM PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW OF STREAM TOP OF STAKE LEVEL WITH BOTTOM OF WEIR RULER PILE SUPPORT FOR OAM PACK MUD BEHIND DAM FOR WATERPROOFING STAKE WIOTH SHOULD ALLOW ENTIRE FLOW OF STREAM TO PASS THROUGH WEIR tr ‘a MIN. BEVEL PLANK Construct weir gate and determine height of water above stake as shown above. Figure flow from chart below. Construct weir gate and determine height of water above stake as shown above. Figure flow from chart below. Weir Measurement Table Table shows water flow (in cu. ft./min.) that will flow over a weir one inch wide and from Y% to 20% inches deep. Inches Ya Ya % Va % % % [_0.00 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.14 O19 0.26 0.32 0.40 047 055 064 0.73 0.82 0.92 1.02 113. +123 +#2135 #2146 #4158 1.70 182 1.95 2.07 2.21 234 248 261 276 290 3.05 3.20. 335 350 366 381 3.97 414 4.30 447. 464 481 4.98 5.15 5.33 5.51 5.69 5.87 6.06 6.25 6.44 662 682 7.01 7.21 7.40 7.60 7.80 801 8.21 842 863 8.83 9.05 9.26 947 9.69 9.91 10.13 10.35 10.57 10.80 11.02 11.25 1148 4.71 11.94 1217 12.41 10| 12.64 1288 13.12 1336 13.60 13.85 14.09 14.34 11| 14.59 14.84 15.09 15.34 1559 15.85 16.11 16.36 |_12| 16.62 16.88 17.15 17.41 17.67 17.94 18.21 18.47 13| 18.74 19.01 19.29 1956 19.84 20.11 20.39 20.67 14[ 20.95 21.23 21.51 21.80 22.08 22.37 22.65 22.94 15| 23.23 23.52 23.82 24.11 24.40 24.70 25.00 25.30 16 | 25.60 25.90 26.20 2650 2680 27.11 27.42 27.72 (47 | 28.03 28.34 28.65 28.97 29.28 2959 29.91 30.22 18 | 30.54 30.86 31.18 31.50 31.82 32.15 32.47 32.80 19| 3312 33.45 33.78 34.11 34.44 34.77 35.10 35.44 20| 35.77. 36.11. 36.45 36.78 37.12 37.46 37.80 38.15 Example of how to use weir table. Suppose depth of water above stake is 9% inches. Find 9 in the left- hand column and 3 in the top column. The value where they intersect is 11.48 cu. ft/min. That's only for a 1"-wide weir, however. You multiply this value by the width of your weir in inches to obtain water flow. ©} |] N/O)/ On) &}G |p| =| O} WATER FLOW AND HEAD LOSS WITH SMOOTH PIPE The table below shows pipe water flow and head loss in various sizes of pipes per 1000 feet of pipe using average PVC pipe. Higher head losses than 333 feet per 1000 feet, or 33%, result in decreasing power gain with the increasing water flow and head loss. [GalMin 23 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 405 450 495 540 585 630 675 900 1125] [CuFvSec 05 1 2 3 4 5S 6 7 7 9 1. 11:12 13 14 15 2 2: Pipe Size - Head Loss per 1000 Feet of Pipe ee ((_ 2" | 18 63 230 Maximum Head Loss (333 Feet) at 110 gal min or .24 Ft3/Sec 2%" | 6 21 75 161 274 a 2.9 30 64 110 166 234 312 = —s— ve 2 7 15 26 40 56 74 95 118 144 172 201 230 268 305 Oo“ 1 2 4 5 7 10 13 16 19 23 27 30 36 40 69 105 0 0 % ww % 1% 1% 2% 3 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 16 25 | teel pipe in fair condition will have about twice the head loss shown above. 7 =f . . S Handy tables you can use Heads of Water in Feet Corresponding to Certain Pressures in Pounds per Square Inch to calculate water power Sig 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 VOLUME: oO; = 2.3 4.6 6.9 g.2| 11.5] 13.9] 16.2] 185] 20.8 1 gal. = 0.1337 cu. ft. 10| 23.1] 25.4] 27.7] 30.0] 323; 346] 36.9] 39.3) 41.6] 43.9 1 cu. ft. = 7.48 gal. 20! 46.2| 48.5] 50.8] 53.1] 55.4] 57.7] 60.0] 62.4| 64.7] 67.0 1 acre ft. = 325,800 gal. 30| 69.3] 71.6] 73.9] 76.2} 78.5] 80.8} 83.1] 85.4| 87.8] 90.1 40| 924] 94.7} 97.0] 99.3 | 101.6 | 103.9 | 106.2 | 108.5 | 110.8 | 113.2 50 | 115.5 | 117.8 | 120.1 | 122.4 | 124.7 | 127.0 | 129.3 | 131.6 | 133.9 | 136.3 Oe aaren . eadeaih 60 | 138.6 | 140.9 | 143.2 | 145.5 | 147.8 | 150.1 | 152.4 | 154.7 | 157.0 | 159.3 dee pis tu 70 | 161.7 | 164.0 | 166.3 | 168.6 | 170.9 | 173.2 | 175.5 | 177.8 | 180.1 | 182.4 Pp = 0.7455 kw = 2547 Btuh 80 | 184.8 | 187.1 | 189.4 | 191.7 | 194.0 | 196.3 | 198.6 | 200.9 | 203.2 | 205.5 1 kwh = 3413 Btu = 1.3415 hp/hr. | 90| 207.9 | 210.2 | 212.5 | 214.8 | 217.1 | 219.4 | 221.7 | 224.0 | 226.3 | 228.6 FLOW QUANTITIES: PRESSURE (FOR COLUMNAR HEIGHTS) 1 cu. ft./sec. = 60 cu. ft./min. = 7.48 gal./sec = 448.8 gal./min. 1 foot of water = 0.433 Ib./sq. in. = 62.4 Ib./sq. ft. BASIC WATER POWER AVAILABLE: Theoretical Output in Kilowatts = SO (Does not consider wheel and ————————_—= om generator losses or pipe friction) Flow in cu ft/sec X head ft low in cu ft/sec X head it, 11.8 Flow in liters/sec X head in meters 102 5 inoh mini hydro propellor TYPES OF DEPENDABLE TURBINES PELTON We offer a full range of turbines with one piece runners and pitch diameters from 6.5 inoes to 30 inches. Also runners with detachable buckets to 60 inches, and capable of operating with nozzles up to 5 inches can be supplied for a variety of heads from 40 feet to 2000 feet or more. Runners and buckets are cast of stainless steel or manganese bronze and are machined and polished for maximum efficiency. Lz FRANCIS For equal power and head, the francis turbine requires a smaller space for its installation. It also has the advantage that highest efficiency is obtained near full load. Dependable Turbines Ltd. has adapted the horizontal shaft francis turbine for heads below 250 feet and outputs to 1000 H.P. All parts with the exception of the draft tube are above floor, thereby providing easy access for servicing and maintaining as well as simplifying foundation work. CLL, ay q SJ TURGO With a higher specific speed the turgo is capable of developing far more power than a pelton wheel of the same size. Turbines with pitch diameters of 10.5 to 36 inches are available with nozzle sizes up to 10 inches. Runners of ductile iron, stainless steel or manganese bronze can be supplied in housings with horizontal or vertical shafts for heads up to 800 feet. PROPELLOR For small outputs with heads below 50 feet Dependable Turbines Ltd. has developed 5 and 10 inch propellor turbines. These small, compact units are of a stacked configuration and consist of standard manufactured components. The unique construction provides the ability to gang one or more propellor sections together for use on various heads from 4 to 50 feet. Dependable Turbines Ltd. can supply complete turbine, generator and switch gear assemblies tailored to your specific site. Auxiliary equipment includes hydraulic power units, hydraulic governors, electronic governors, control panels, battery banks, solid state invertors, unitized power house assemblies and the various water control devices associated with hydroelectric turbines. HEAD IN METERS t PROPELLER 15 RANGE OF GENERATING CAPACITIES HIGHER CAPACITIES UPON REQUEST 20 30 4 60 80 100 150 200 250 300 400 500 600 800 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 4000 5000 KILOWATT OUTPUT HEAD IN FEET 1. Name and address. 2. Location of proposed installation. 3. Gross head (total vertical drop from head water to tail water level). 4. Quantity of water in cubic feet or cubic meters per second. 5. Generating capacity required. 6. Penstock diameter, length and type of material (include plan and profile if available). 7. Distance from proposed plant to area power is to be used. 8. Is the plant to be a manual or automatic operation? 9. Will the plant operate separately or in parallel with an existing system? 10. Any other information drawings or specifications which may assist us in developing a complete and adequate proposal. ; INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR SELECTION OF TYPE AND SIZE In order to prepare a quotationor proposal promptly it is important that as much information as possible accompany each inquiry. The following data should be included. REPRESENTATIVE: I S&S suooen onaprecs .10 E DI Oe VAN a / i pos (((\i W)) 24 UNITIZED POWER HOUSE ASSEMBLIES £1033 \ Oe 7 = < ve NE HYNES 2; 3) 7 ed o r ' fy = ; Tenet ie U Rens de oe eZ i Pees i ic | STANDARDIZED TURBINE GENERATOR | ! Ui t / I t 7 a 37 STANDARD COMPONENT - UNITIZED POWERHOUSE COST EFFECTIVE - PRACTICAL With the trend of increasing oil prices and high inflation, many hydroelectric sites previously considered uneconomical to develop are now being re-examined. A significant amount of hydropower can be developed at existing dams and irrigation systems as well as streams and rivers yet unharnassed. Dependable Turbines Ltd. has combined state of the art technology and standard off the shelf components into a wide range of turbine generator units and a unitized powerhouse assembly. This combination has reduced specialized manufacturing and on site construction costs. Other advantages include simplified site engineering, equipment specifying, purchasing, and faster deliveries, all of which contributes toa lower cost per kilowatt installation, shorter construction period, and an earlier return on investment. SELECTION OF TURBINE TYPE AND SIZE The design of water turbines cover an almost infinite number of combinations of head, speeds, and outputs. Dependable Turbines Ltd. has developed and continues to develop water turbines which operate efficiently under the various hydraulic conditions normally encountered in hydroelectric design. HEAD The head or total vertical drop from intake to nozzle or tail race is the first guide to the selection of the type of turbine best suited for a particular site. The net head is the gross head less head losses in the system. These head losses through the trash racks, intake, penstock friction, nozzle or draft tube outlet are generally calculated to arrive at the net effective head on the turbine. 21 inch turgo runner, housing, governor assembly, and hydraulic power unit during assembly. DEPENDABLE TURBINE TYPES Reaction - francis - propeller Impulse - pelton - turgo 6000 000 - 4000 3000 2800 2000 + 1500 + rH 1000 ~ 900 - = + 800 700 + ~~ 600 a > sas ® * 400 ~ ie o 3 w =z 300 = x 5 x 200 ste RL Id Olle 9} Jo 100 ° ~ % z : ath e 70 i mm oo = Ps srs x0 + 4 — S > 2 —T > > z & 10 it ~ ° * *9~eess sa8R8 8 S838 gee BF SPECIFIC SPEED The other primary factor in turbine design is flow. The flow available during a year is generally predicted from stream gauging station records. Most rivers and streams have excess water during floods and inadequate water during dry spells. This may be modified by providing upstream storage, or the flow may be regulated as would be the case with an irrigation system. Another method used in preliminary design to determine possible hydroelectric potential is to develop flow estimates. The estimates are generally based on watershed area, annual rainfall, rainfall distribution, percentages, and runoff coefficients and are useful in determining size and type of generating equipment during preliminary studies. These flow estimates should always be confirmed and ammended when precise stream flow data is obtained during the later stages of the study. Mini hydro pelton turbine TURBINE EFFICIENCIES AT VARIOUS LOADS & ul ° c wu a > & a o 40 | =F + 7. wu 30 }—++ +——t- 20 + + 10 F x | 0 | : - | | 10 20 40 50 6 8670) 80 90 = 100 PERCENTAGE OF FULL LOAD 80 = 75 FLOW DURATION CURVE 70 65 55 45 35 CUBIC FEET PER SEC. 25 NATURAL FLOW 15 13 CFS - ly REGULATED FLOW ‘0 ———— Cott ORS] 0 : 10 20430 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Z 8 PERCENT OF TIME With stream flow records or data obtained from flow estimates a flow duration curve can be developed and the annual output or value of energy calculated. With reservoir storage, flows can be regulated during the year to privide a more constant flow thereby reducing the installed capacity which would otherwise be necessary to take advantage of a higher seasonal flow. As water turbines are most efficient while operating ata specific design load, regulated flows generally have a higher annual energy value. If there is to bea wide variation in flows, then turbine type is an important consideration, particularly at lower heads where propellor turbines with adjustable blades or kaplan units are generally used. The chart indicates efficiencies normally attained for larger generation plants. Efficiencies usually decline with output and generally from 75% to 85% with outputs of below 2 megawatts. TYPES OF DEPENDABLE TURBINES PELTON We offer a full range of turbines with one piece runners and pitch diameters from 6.5 inoes to 30 inches, Also runners with detachable buckets to 60 inches, and capable of operating with nozzles up to 5 inches can be supplied for a variety of heads from 40 feet to 2000 feet or more. Runners and buckets are cast of stainless steel or manganese bronze and are machined and polished for maximum efficiency. FRANCIS For equal power and head, the francis turbine requires a smaller space for its installation. It also has the advantage that highest efficiency is obtained near full load. Dependable Turbines Ltd. has adapted the horizontal shaft francis turbine for heads below 250 feet-and outputs to 1000 H.P. All parts with the exception of the draft tube are above floor, thereby providing easy access for servicing and maintaining as well as simplifying foundation work. TURGO With a higher specific speed the turgo is capable of developing far more power than a pelton wheel of the same size. Turbines with pitch diameters of 10.5 to 36 inches are available with nozzle sizes up to 10 inches. Runners of ductile iron, stainless steel or manganese bronze can be supplied in housings with horizontal or vertical shafts for heads up to 800 feet. PROPELLOR For small outputs with heads below 50 feet Dependable Turbines Ltd. has developed 5 and 10 inch propellor turbines. These small, compact units are of a stacked configuration and consist of standard manufactured components. The unique construction provides the ability to gang one or more propellor sections together for use on various heads from 4 to 50 feet. Dependable Turbines Ltd. is committed to the development of efficient, low cost hydropower equipment and has standardized many of the turbine components. However, due to the almost infinite number of combinations of heads, speeds and outputs we welcome the opportunity to design and build a complete turbine generator package to suit any combination of site specifics. GOVERNORS Precise speed control is essential for hydro electric stations operating synchronous generators. Also for plants connected to the utility grid and capable of generating power in excess of local demand, or, for systems supplying power for remote farms communities and industry not connected to utility grids. Dependable Turbines Ltd. can supply governor systems capable of precise speed control as well as systems incorporating water control and water conserving apparatus. The combination of automatic deflector and spear value actuations on impulse turbines provide instantaneous speed control while keeping hydraulic pressure surges in the penstock within acceptable limits. For reaction turbines automatic wicker gate control and surge relief values can be supplied. In many cases hydroelectric plants connected to utility grids and which may not be under the control of the utility, use induction generators to eliminate the possibility of back feeding the utility lines during a planned shut down of the power line or a shut down due to an overload or fault. In this case a simple overspeed protection may be all that is required to prevent damage to the generating equipment when the station becomes isolated from the utility: power source or equipment failure within the station. Automatic start up can be supplied for a controlled start up when utility power is restored. Additional water control devices can also be incorporated into this system to match generator output to available flow. Various turbine runners GENERATORS AND SWITCH GEAR Synchronous and induction generators and generator control panels can be supplied with our standard turbine-generator package or can be manufactured to customer specifications. UNITIZED POWER HOUSE ASSEMBLY Dependable Turbines Ltd. has developed a unitized power house assembly which incorporates turbine, generator, generator panel and governor system in a sturdy all-weather steel enclosure. This type of construction has been shown to be cost effective and simplifies site engineering and construction. It can also be expanded to incorporate step up transformers and high voltage switch gear. Unit substations incorporating step up or step down transformers and high voltage switch gear can also be supplied for systems requiring high voltage transmission lines. TYPICAL UNITIZED POWERHOUSE ASSEMBLY Hydraulic power unit with accumulator and hand pump 1. Generator 6. Generator panel 2. Turbine & governor assembly 7. Checker plate flooring 3. Spear vaive assembly 8. Under floor race way 4. Hydraulic power unit 9. -beam sub frame 5. Accumulator (oil pressure storage) 10. Modular wail section 11. Root section (sliding) 12. Exhaust fan 13. Asbestos sheeting 14. Poly urethane insulated 15. Door (insulated and sheeted) 16. Electric heat 17. Thermostat (heating & ventilating) 18. Vent (louvered) 19. Shut down vaive L.1080 | ie EF —-—— INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR SELECTION OF TYPE AND SIZE ) ) In order to prepare a quotation or proposal promptly it is important that as much information as |__ LZ A] possible accompany each inquiry. The following data should be included. TNS. al Siete 4 Is proposed installation new or an addition to an existing plant? Will the plant operate separately or in parallel with an existing system? If it is to operate in l S \ parallel give the approximate installed capacity of the plant or system, its voltage and frequency. 10. Is the plant to be a manual or automatic operation? 11. Distance from proposed plant to area power is to be used. 12. Is the proposal to include unitized power house or unit substation assemblies? 13. Any other information drawings or specifications which may assist us in developing a complete and adequate proposal. 1. Name and address of firm, corporation or public utility. Ns 2. Elevation of plant above sea level. tate - 3. Location of proposed installation. - Tan 4. Quantity of water in cubic feet or cubic meters per second. ‘ 5. Gross head (total vertical drop from head water to tail water level). ) ENC 6. Penstock diameter, length and type of material (include plan and profile if available). 1023 7. Generating capacity required. 8. 9. a gt MIN AN Bi rf DEPENDABLE TURBINES 1244 Boundary Rd. Vancouver, B.C. V5K 4T6. }} SS MTOM Mf ERI G ILI ITI MESS Wz \ ya if Pre ay You Benefit With Unexcelled Pipe Qualities riscopipe 8600 gives optimum performance due to the unique advantages of a PE 3408 piping system. This is the first ultra-high molecular weight high density polyethylene pip— ing resin recom— mended by the Plastic Pipe Insti— tute for an 800 psi hydrostatic design stress rating at 73.4° Fahrenheit *Exceptional long-term service life at lower cost eQuality engineered for reliable performance at higher pressure ratings eSuperior environmental stress cracking resistance *Super toughness and fatigue strength *High impact strength Outstanding chemical and corrosion resistance «Superior abrasion resistance ¢Smooth interior for high flow Exceptional weatherability *Economical, reliable, leak-free butt fusion joining «Lightweight and flexible for easy installation *Excellent high/low temperature performance Super Strength Pipe For Super Service € ew Driscopipe 8600 Ultra-High Molecular Weight High Density (UHMWHD) Polyethylene Pipe is the most significant piping development for industrial applications ina decade. You benefit with this unexcelled, higher dedicated research and for an 800 psi hydrostatic performance Driscopipe development efforts. design stress rating at which offers an 73.4° Fahrenheit. exceptionally unique long- Extruded from Marlex® Itis aPE 3408... this means term, long service life M-8000, Driscopipe 8600 higher design pressure piping system at lower is the first and only ratings than PE 3406 for any costs. This outstanding UHMWHD polyethylene given size and wall thick— piping series is quality resin recommended by ness. engineered from Phillips the Plastic Pipe Institute Property Sapa ee ek nsity, gms/co ee Flow. (Condition F) oe 10. min: vironmental Stress Cracking Resistance (Condition C) Hrs. rRing ESCR, Hrs. trength= Ultimate; psi “Tests discontinsed Becaine of no failures and no indicatio ~-- stress crack initiation. ie iter & : Determined by Dynatech- Colora Thermoconductometer. Butt Fusion. The Joint With Integrity, Reliability utt fusionisa required, you realize cost- reliable saving advantages with method ofjoining Drisco- abutt fused system. pipe 8600. The easy to follow fusion Pioneéred and developed steps are outlined below, by Phillips, butt fusion or you may join Driscopipe joints are dependable, by mechanical devices, tough and leak-free. such as flanges or Since 3. Check line-up of pipe 4. Heat pipe ends with facer ends heater plate 5. Remove heater plate 6. Bring heated ends 7. Allow the joint to cool together with pressure Popular Size Applications 'D riscopipe , to transition fittings, from 8600 offersa mining slurries, waste complete piping system water, industrial, refinery from low pressure to 220 to petrochemical uses. psi, from % inch through Driscopipe is the 48-inch nominal sizes. innovative solution to your From tees, elbows, wyes, piping requirements. reducers, flange adapters McElroy Manufacturing Fusion Equipment nstall your readily available through performance- your Driscopipe proven Driscopipe Distributor or McElroy industrial piping system Manufacturing, Inc. with fusion equipment No. 2 CU combination fusion unit for No: 4 CU combination fusion unit for No. 8 CU combination fusion unit for butt and sidewall fusion — %” thru 2” butt and sidewall fusion — 1-1/8” thru 4” butt and sidewall fusion — 2” thru 8” (110 V) IPS (110 V) (120 V or 230 V) eo owe eS aw fo. 12 hydraulic fusion unit — 4” thru12” No. 18 hydraulic fusion unit — 6” thru 18” No. 24 hydraulic fusion unit — 8” thru 24” (self contained) _ (self contained) (self contained with truck, trailer and generator) n No. 36 hydraulic fusion unit — 12” thru No. 48 hydraulic fusion unit — 16” thru Segmented eibows may be made with 36” (self contained with truck, trailer 48" (self contained with truck, trailer optional mitered inserts. and generator) and generator) MoELROY wa nuracturine, INC. 833 N. Fulton/PO. Box 15580/918 836-8611/Tulsa, Okla. 74N2 Telex #492472 % murs Driscopipe” ~) Systems s - Installation ontents Shipping 7 7 a 7 LE Uy Handling_ et es eee eee 1 Storage iz ee ee Oe Joining Procedure SSS _3: Butt Fusion____ uf i 4. Sidewall Fusion : _._6) Compatibility Fusion. Heh eel, Stub End Fusion Ne Stub End Fusion with Holder. tT Stub End Fusion with Clamping Insert___ YS Mechanical Joining 10. Other Joining Methods_—_—___ 11. Bending Driscopipe ll. Installation Below Ground PL Trenching and Bed Preparation SSs—d.. Pipe Laying 14. Thermal Expansion and Contraction. SSSsi'?7F Fitting Installation. 16. Grouting. _16. Backfilling and Tamping____SSSd'. Inspection and Testing. SSSCSCSC<; CO*S:C Installation Above Ground____SSSSSSS—*d'*7; Thermal Expansion and Contraction PEE ie: Pipe Support __21 Anchoring 22. Slurry Applications 23. Installation Underwater. 24. Joining and Assembly 24. Anchoring and Weighting SSSSSSSS— Launching and Sinking__——SSSSSCSCS— +7. Intake and Outfall Diffusers__>= SY. Insert Renewal Installations. 29. Testing Polyethylene Pipelines__- CSO?“ Pressure Piping Systems____——CSCSCS—< O.=" Non-Pressure Piping Systems____— CSCS. Repairing Damaged Polyethylene Pipe _—_»_ 31. Permanent Repair 32. Mechanical Repair. -O0. Fitting Repair. 33. Underwater Repair 33. Miscellaneous Repair Methods__-_—— SS. Static Electricity 34) Installation Precautions For Fabricated Fittings______ 34. THIS DOCUMENT REPORTS ACCURATE AND RELIABLE INFORMATION TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, BUT OUR SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CANNOT BE GUARANTEED BECAUSE THE CONDITIONS OF USE ARE BEYOND OUR CONTROL. THE USER OF SUCH INFORMATION ASSUMES ALL RISK CONNECTED WITH THE USE THEREOF. PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE USE OF INFORMATION PRESENTED HEREIN AND HEREBY EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY IN REGARD TO SUCH USE. Photographs shown are typical Driscopipe installations i hipping Driscopipe is easy to ship, handle and store, due to its lightweight yet rugged characteristics. The normal method of shipment is by truck. Standard packaging for Driscopipe is shown in Chart 1.When hauling Driscopipe, care should betaken that it is not damaged nor surface cut by sharp projections from other equipment or from the truckbed itself. Chart 1. STANDARD PACKAGING FOR DRISCOPIPE INDUSTRIAL PIPE OFT FLOAT PIPE DESCRIPTION BUNDLE TRUCK LOAD BUNDLED TRUCKLOAD - LOOSE NOMINAL op. NUMBER OF LINEAR NUMBER OF LINEAR NUMBER OF LINEAR SIZE (INCHES) JOINTS FEET BUNDLES FEET JOINTS FEET a” 2.375 88 3,344 14 46,816 3” 3.500 48 1,824 14 25,536 4” 4.500 27 1,026 14 14,364 5” 5.563 15 570 14 7,980 6” 6.625 ll 418 14 5,852 7 7.125 ll 418 12 5,852 8” 8.625 8 304 12 3,648 Or 10.750 80 3,040 12” 12.750 59 2,242 14” 14.000 48 | 1,824 16” 16.000 35 1,330 18” 18.000 28 1,026 20” 20.000 20 760 22” 21.500 18 608 24” 24.000 16 608 28” 27.953 10 380 32” 31.496 9 342 36” 36.000. 6 228 42” 42.000 4 152 48” 47.244 4 152 NOTE: OBTAIN TRUCK LOAD WEIGHT BY MULTIPLYING LINEAR FEET TIMES PIPE WEIGHT PER FOOT. andling Driscopipe can be easily handled with fork lifts or cherrypickers. The joints should be handled near the middle with wide web slings and spreader bars. Rope slings also work well with straight lengths. Coils can be handled in a similar manner. The use of chains, end hooks or cable slings that may scar the pipe are not recommended. The following procedures should be observed when handling Driscopipe: « Always stack the heaviest series of pipe at the bottom. ¢ Protect the pipe from sharp edges when overhanging the bed of a truck or trailer by placing a smooth rounded protecting strip on the edge of the bed. ¢ Driscopipe has a very smooth inner and outer surface. The load should be anchored securely to prevent slippage Lengths of small-diameter, lightweight pipe can be unloaded manually. Driscopipe applications are normally handled by: * Unloading the pipe from the truck in a row along the side of the installation area and moving the fusion unit along the row of joints. ¢ Stacking the pipe beside the fusion unit and trailing the pipe out after fusion, then dragging the long length of pipe into place for installation. It is suggested that as the pipe is fused and moved through the fusion machine, additional joints of pipe should be placed in the moveable jaw side of the machine for each subsequent fusion. This prevents the hydraulic system of the machine from having to pull the previously fused long length. Dragging the pipe into place can be an economical method of installation, provided the pipe isn't damaged from sharp rocks or excessive abrasion created by pulling the pipe great distances. torage If the pipe must be stacked for storage, avoid excessive stacking heights. Out-of-roundness can be created in the lower rows of pipe, due to excessive stacking heights. The limitation on storage height is based on the weight on the bottom layer of pipe and will vary depending on the storage facilities, size and wall thickness of the pipe, and the temperature. Gen- eral recommendations for stacking heights developed by the Plastic Pipe Institute for polyolefin pipe are shown below: Chart 2. ALLOWABLE STACKING HEIGHTS FOR STORAGE OF POLYOLEFIN PIPE Number of Rows High Nominal Pipe Size for SDR's* for SDR's* over for SDR's* over (in.) 18 and under 18, up to 26 26, up to 32.5 4 45 26 14 6 31 17 10 8 24 13 10 17 10 12 13 14 12 16 11 18 10 20 9 22 8 24 7 28 6 32 - 36 - 40 - 48 I lwwereaaaane NMVNMYNMWWWW Sf LhUD OO Pipe Diameter NOTE: SDR = Standard Dimension Ratio = “Min. Wall Thickness Care should be taken that the pipe is stacked in straight rows. It is satisfactory to store black Driscopipe either inside or outside in direct sunlight as it will not be damaged in any way by long exposure to direct sunlight. However, the expansion and contraction caused by uneven heating by the sunlight may cause the pipe to bow if not restrained by racks. This does not damage the pipe but does reduce convenience of handling the pipe when taken out of storage for installation. When the pipe is laid directly on the ground, care should be taken to place the pipe on an area free of loose stones or sharp objects. This will avoid scarring or gouging the pipe. oining Procedure The butt fusion method is a highly efficient, economical method for joining Driscopipe. The butt fusion method of joining high density polyethylene pipe began shortly after the first commercial production of high density polyethylene in the mid-1950's by Phillips Petroleum Company. The modern day butt fusion joint is the same as the joint that was made on the first crude butt fusion equipment in 1956... only the fusion equipment has evolved to gain efficiency, reliability, and convenience. The many principles learned on that early equipment for making a successful joint are still in use today. Phillips Petroleum Company designed, developed and built many new models of butt fusion equipment from 1956 until the early 1970's. Since that time, Driscopipe personnel have guided this development by others. The extensive line of fusion equipment offered by McElroy Manufacturing, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma is one of the results of this long history of development. Phillips pioneered the idea and development of the butt fusion joining system... and has used it exclusively in every high density polyethylene piping system sold by Phillips since 1956... there are millions of these joints in service today. The butt fusion method is an uncomplicated, visual procedure with straight-forward instructions. No "timing cycles” are necessary. The visual procedure allows the operator to concentrate on his work, rather than a clock... visually he knows when the butt ends have melted to the degree required to fuse them together. Visually he observes and controls fusion pressure by observirg the amount and configuration of the fusion bead as it is formed. The principle of heat fusion is to heat two surfaces to a fusion temperature, then make contact between the two surfaces and allow the two surfaces to fuse together by application of pressure. The pressure causes flow of the melted materials which effects mixing and thus fusion. On cooling, the original interfaces are gone and the two parts are united. Nothing is added to, or changed chemically, between the two pieces being joined. The picture on page 4 shows across section of butt fused Driscopipe. Molten high density high molecular weight Driscopipe 8600 is very viscous and tough. During butt fusion of this material, the operator can apply relatively high pressure to form the butt fusion joint... with no danger of forcing the molten material from between the two ends of the joint. Lower fusion pressures are necessary with the softer, less viscous, high and medium density materials. When high pressure is applied to the higher melt flow material most of the molten material can be forced from the fusion joint. This produces a “cold joint" or poor fusion. Pressure control can be difficult, unless the fusion equipment is designed to compensate for the melt strength of the pipe being fused. The equipment discussed in this section can be regulated for the different melt strength materials. Compatibility fusion techniques should be used when polyethylenes of different melt indexes are fused together. Butt fusion joints may easily be cut out and re-done. This fact has a bearing on the quantity and quality of training necessary and favorably affects operator attitude toward quality in the field. These joints can be easily cut out and destructively tested in the field to check joining proficiency and equipment condition ... and at very little cost, since there is no coupling to destroy and throw away. In the course of butt fusion joining, the fusion operator is faced with a wide variety of job conditions. Changes in air temperature, material temperature, wind velocity, sun exposure, humidity, as well as condition of the terrain and the equipment... all influence the joining requirements. Estimating pre-heat timing cycles under different conditions, can become extremely confusing. Quality work under field conditions is more consistent with a straight-forward visual procedure offered by Driscopipe. Thus, the operator can consistently produce high quality joints. Butt fusion has successfully been accomplished in the rain with a canopy covering the fusion machine and operator, as well as in below freezing conditions. Fusion equipment is available for piping systems that range from 1/2 inch diameter tubing to 48-inch diameter pipe. Although the size range is great, the procedure and principle remain the same. You just heat Driscopipe, pressure it together, let it cool and forget it. Butt Fusion Butt fusion for Driscopipe Systems was pioneered and developed by Phillips Petroleum Company. Butt fusion techniques are recognized in the industry as cost effective joining systems of very high integrity and reliability. They do not require couplings, and joints are stronger than the pipe itself — in both tension and pressure conditions. There are seven joining steps — simple, visual procedures with straight- forward, uncomplicated instructions. 1. Clean pipe ends inside and outside with a clean rag to remove dirt, water, grease and other foreign materials. 2. Square (face) the pipe ends using facing tool of the fusion machine. 3. Check line-up of pipe-ends in fusion machine to see that pipe ends meet squarely and completely over the entire surface to be fused. This is commonly referred to as “adjusting high-low." It is advisable at this point to make sure the clamps are tight so that the pipe does not slip during the fusion process. THERMOMETER READINGS SURFACE TEMPERATURE COATED UNCOATED]} COATED UNCOATED DRISCOPIPE| PLATES PLATES PLATES PLATES 8600 500°F-525°F | 475°F-S00°F || 475°F-S00°F | 475°F-SO0°F 1000 400°F -425°F | 375°F-400°F ||375°F -400°F | 375°F-400°F Note: It is most important to maintain the proper temperature of the heater plate. Check it with a tempilstik or pyrometer for correct surface temperature. 4. Insert clean heater plate between aligned ends, and bring ends firmly in contact with plate, but DO NOT APPLY PRESSURE while achieving melt pattern. Allow pipe ends to heat and soften. Approximate softening depths are as follows: SIZE APPROXIMATE MELT BEAD 2” and below 1/16” 37-5” 1/8” 6” and larger 3/16” 5. Carefully move the pipe ends away from the heater plate and remove the plate. (If the softened material sticks to the heater plate, discontinue the joint. Clean heater plate, resquare pipe ends and start over.) Note: One pipe end usually moves away from the heater plate first. It is good practice to “bump” the plate away from the other side and then lift it out. Never drag or slide it over the melted pipe end. 6. Bring melted ends together rapidly. DO NOT SLAM. Apply enough pressure to form a double roll-back to the body of the pipe bead around the entire circumference of the pipe about 1/8” to 3/16” wide. Pressure is necessary to cause the heated material to flowtogether. + 7. Allow the joint to cool and solidify properly. This occurs when the bead feels hard and your finger can remain comfortably on the bead. Remove the pipe from the clamps and inspect the joint appearance. Sidewall Fusion Side fusion procedure for Driscopipe can be accomplished in the field using 2” through 8” McElroy fusion units and proper heater plate adapters. Where branch outlets are larger than 8” outside diameter, sidewall fusions must be accomp- lished in a fitting fabrication shop. Size,availability and pricing can be obtained through Phillips Driscopipe representatives The following nine steps should be observed during the sidewall fusion procedure: 1. Install fusion machine on the pipe (main). 2. Clean the pipe with a rag. Prepare surface of pipe (main) by roughing with 60 grit or coarser utility cloth. 3. Prepare the base of the branch by roughing with 60 grit or coarser utility cloth. 4. Align branch on the main and tighten clamp. 5. Check branch saddle for square alignment on main. 6. Retract moveable clamp, roll in and center heater plate with adapter between base of branch and main. 7. For all sizes, apply a strong firm continuous pressure until complete melt bead can be seen on main. Release pressure to light pressure. Continue heat soak cycle on branch and main. Watch base of branch for: MAIN SIZES HEAT SOAK CYCLE FITTING BASE BEAD 11/4” 1/16” Melt Bead a” 1/8” Melt Bead 3” and 1/8’-3/16” Melt Bead larger 8. Retract moveable clamp and cleanly remove heater plate. 9. Bring melted surfaces together rapidly. DO NOT SLAM. Apply continuous progressive pressure until proper fusion bead is formed. Maintain pressure until joint has cooled. (Until finger can remain comfortably on bead.) Compatibility Fusion Driscopipe 8600 and Driscopipe 1000 materials can be compatibly fused together and still maintain fusion joint integrity. Although the two materials have different melt characteristics, they can be properly fused using the procedure outlined below. Phillips Driscopipe sales and technical personnel are available to instruct and demonstrate the fusion procedure for joining Driscopipe. Compatibility butt fusion and sidewall fusion should be accomplished in the same manner as described before with the following exceptions: « To achieve proper melt pattern insert the heater plate and place a compatibility insulator between the heater plate and the Driscopipe 1000 material. After the Driscopipe 8600 achieves proper melt, then remove the insulator and bring the heater plate in contact with the Driscopipe 1000 material for proper melt. Continue heating both surfaces until proper melt develops. For manually operated fusion equipment, form a double roll-back bead as previously described in the fusion procedures. ¢ The fusion pressures for compatibility fusion of Driscopipe 1000 and 8600 on hydraulically operated equipment should be set at approximately 50% of the 8600 fusion pressures. The fusion pressure will depend on the fusion conditions involved to achieve the proper roll-back bead. ¢ The fusion temperature for compatibility fusion should be the one that is normally used to fuse Driscopipe 8600, 475°F- 500°F surface temperature. Note: The fabricated fittings furnished by Phillips Driscopipe are made (with few exceptions) from Driscopipe 8600 pipe material. Through the use of compatibility fusion these fittings can be fused into Driscopipe 1000 pipe installations. This same fusion method must be used with Driscopipe 8600 molded stub ends and Driscopipe 1000 pipe. Stub End Fusion There are several manufacturers of butt fusion equipment. The operating procedure for the machine should be furnished by the equipment supplier. There are two procedures for butt fusing Driscopipe 8600 Stub Ends using McElroy fusion equipment. The type of procedure is governed by the McElroy fusion unit and whether a Stub End Holder attachment or a Clamping Insert attachment is used. Both procedures are outlined as follows. Stub End Fusion with Holder There is a specific stub end holder with four moveable blocks and clamping screws to accommodate the full range of pipe sizes for each fusion unit. The stub end holder can be used in the moveable clamp or the fixed clamp. (Note: The entire fusion procedure can be simplified in most cases if the holder is clamped in the fixed jaw.) 1. Position the four moveable blocks on 6. Hold stub end in alignment with pipe face of holder so that clamping screws will and bring pipe into contact with stub end secure stub end flange O.D to hold in place. eet Susan i 2. Determine whether the stub end will be 7. Adjust clamping screws to hold stub clamped in the moveable or fixed jaws. end in aligned position and make minor Clamp pipe in the appropriate set of jaws and face off until jaws and facer stops bottom out. 8. Bring facer into position and face stub end until two or three revolutions of 3. Remove facer. material have been faced off. Bring the 4. Clamp stub end holder in opposite set directional control valve to neutral and of jaws. turn facer off. It is not possible to face stub end until facer stops bottom out. 5. Place stub end in holder (loosely) and bring pipe end to within 1/16” to 1/8” of 9. Double check and adjust alignment if necessary. 10. Complete the operation by using standard butt fusion procedures. Stub End Fusion with Clamping Insert Each size machine has a specific set of clamping inserts that can be installed in the fixed jaw or the moveable jaw. The pins must be screwed into the correct holes to adjust for each size stub end. These holes are stamped for each pipe size. The aluminum clamping inserts are made in two pieces and are installed in the machine as are pipe size inserts. The high/low adjustment is made in the same manner as used for straight pipe. Note: because the clamping inserts are an evolutionary development, certain machines must be slightly modified. A kit for such modification has been furnished with the new clamping inserts and must be installed on the machine. Please refer to instructions that were shipped with the clamping inserts. 8. Double check and adjust alignment ifnecessary 5. Place stub end into inserts, insuring that fitting is seated squarely against the face of the inserts. 1. Screw the pins tightly into the series of holes marked for pipe size to be fused. 2. Determine whether the stub end will be clamped in the moveable or fixed jaws. Clamp pipe in the appropriate set of jaws and face off until jaws and facer stops bottom out. 3. Remove facer 4. Install clamping inserts into the opposite set of jaws. f.U 6. Clamp fitting snugly and bring pipe end to fitting for checking alignment. It may be necessary to rotate the fitting to obtain a better high/low fit. Align pipe to fitting by tightening the appropriate clamps. 7. Bring facer into position* and face stub end until two or three revolutions of material have been faced off. Bring the directional control valve to neutral and turn facer off. It is not possible to face stub end until facer stops bottom out. 9. Complete the operation by using standard butt fusion procedures. “When facing the stub end in the moveable clamp with the |8-Inch Fusion Unit, the pivot shaft spacer must be moved to the left side of the facer. @. Loosen and remove facer lociang hook b. Lift up facer and slide spacer to left side of facer. C. Lower facer and secure locking hook. (Note: Spacer must be returned to tight side position for normal facing operations.) Mechanical Joining Mechanical joining to other piping materials — fittings, valves, tanks, pumps, etc. — may be accomplished with Driscopipe flange adapters or stub ends and metal back-up flanges. Flanges are also used to connect lengths of Driscopipe together when butt fusion is impractical. Flange Adapters and Stub Ends are pressure rated the same as the pipe. Flange adapters can be butt fused to the pipe as outlined in the butt fusion section. Stub Ends may be butt fused to pipe, utilizing either stub end holders or clamping inserts depending on the type fusion unit used. Detailed butt fusion instructions were outlined earlier. Figure 1 illustrates the flanged method for joining polyethylene pipe to itself or to steel pipe. Although steel is commonly used for the slip-on flanges, other materials are available from your local supplier. Gaskets may be used between the polyethylene flange adapters or stub ends, but it is not generally necessary. Sufficient torque should be applied evenly to the bolts to prevent leaks. After initial installation and tightening of flanged connections, it is a good practice to allow the connections to set for a period of time (usually a few hours). Then conduct a final tightening of the bolts. Please note the fabricated flange adapter and the molded stub end shown at right. Both types function equally well. The fabricated flange adapter is heat and pressure formed from Driscopipe 8600 pipe. It is longer than the stub end. The stub end is post machined from a molded part, thus providing smooth bore diameter flow characteristics. Both parts can be butt fused to Driscopipe 1000 or 8600 pipe. When calculating bolt length, please remember the flange face thickness of the fabricated flange adapter and the molded stub end are different. Consult the Driscopipe 8600 Fittings brochure for dimensions. Figure 1. DRISCOPIPE FLANGE STEEL PIPE WITH FLANGE ADAPTER OR STUB END. BOLTS _—— =o SECTION OF DRISCOPIPE BUTT FUSE oO FLANGE ADAPTER ORSTUB / END TO PIPE SLIP ON METAL FLANGE JOINING STEEL TO HDPE om 2- SLIP ON METAL FLANGES 2 — DRISCOPIPE FLANGE ADAPTERS OR STUB ENDS BUTT FUSE FLANGE ADAPTER OR STUB END BOLTS TOPIPE ON Teel Ted! 1 JOINING HDPE TO HDPE WITHOUT PERMANENT FUSION FLANGE ADAPTER MOLDED STUB END 10. Other Joining Methods Hot gas fusion welding has been used with some success with Driscopipe 1000 material for special fabrications, non-pressure applications, and for very low pressure repairs. It is not recommended for general use in joining Driscopipe 1000 nor for any use with Driscopipe 8600. Threading is not recommended for polyethylene materials. Solvent or epoxy cementing are unsatisfactory methods of joining Driscopipe. There is no known solvent cement available for proper joining of HDPE. Mechanical joining with bolt on wrap-around clamps is generally not recommended as a permanent long-term method of joining polyethylene unless the connection is stabilized in some manner. Due to the magnitude of thermal expansion and contraction of polyethylene materials and its creep characteristics under load, it can be difficult to maintain a permanent leak-proof seal with certain mechanical wrap- around clamps. However, in certain low pressure, or non-pressure, non-critical applications they have been used when it is not feasible to flange or fuse the sections together. Compression type couplings with internal stiffeners are available in some sizes and are generally satisfactory where temperature changes within the system are small. Heat shrinkable polyethylene sleeves may be used for non-pressure applications to achieve effective seals but are also subject to tension pull-out with thermal contraction of the pipe. Consideration must be given to pull-out forces caused by circumferential as well as longitudinal thermal contraction when certain mechanical joints are used. If necessary, provisions must be made for sealing as well as restraining to compensate for the axial loading due to expansion or contraction and/or pipe settlement. Bending Driscopipe Driscopipe may be cold-bent to a minimum radius of 20-40 times the pipe diameter as it is installed, thus eliminating the need for elbows for slight bends. The minimum bending radius that can be applied to the pipe without kinking it varies with the diameter and wall thickness ratio of the pipe. If adequate space is not available for the required radius, a fitting of the desired angle may be fused into the piping system to obtain the necessary change in direction. nstallation Below Ground This section sets out the general installation considerations and recommendations for below ground pipe. Although the requirements for installing plastic pipe are similar to that for rigid piping, there are some important differences. These differences arise due to the difference in basic physical properties, differences in joining techniques, differences in the effect of environmental conditions during installation, and differences in experience of installation. Recognition of these differences in piping design and installation procedures is essential to obtain the desired objective of a piping system that will provide long-term service. Information contained in this section along with the recommendations of the Plastics Pipe Institute (PPI), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and other Standards organizations provide pertinent facts relating to the installation of Driscopipe. We want to provide the engineer, purchaser, and contractor with essential information about the properties, advantages and cost saving benefits of polyethylene pipe. Trenching and Bed Preparation Since Driscopipe can be butt fused above ground in long lengths, narrow trench widths can be used to save on installation costs. Due to the ease of handling Driscopipe, it may be readily placed in the trench, thus necessitating a minimum amount of open trench. The length of open trench required should be such that bending and lowering of the pipe into the ditch does not exceed the minimum recommended bend radius, and result in kinking. The trench width will vary depending on its depth and type of soil. The bed width should be great enough to allow for adequate compaction around the pipe. Generally, a bed width one foot wider than the nominal pipe diameter is adequate. However, to reduce trenching costs, narrow trench and/or bed widths are possible for small diameter pipe. Normally the excavated material, if it is rock free and well broken up by the ditcher, will provide a suitable bedding material. The trench bottom should be relatively smooth and free of rock. When rocks, boulders, or large stones are encountered which may cause point loading on the pipe, they should be removed and the trench bottom padded using 4-6 inches of tamped bedding material below and on all sides of the pipe and fittings. The bedding should consist of a free flowing material such as gravel, sand, silty sand, or clayey sand that is free of stones or hard particles larger than % inch. For most pressurized systems, accurate levelling of trench bottoms is not necessary unless specified. For gravity flow systems the slope should be graded evenly as is done for other piping materials. If an unstable soil condition exists, such as mucky or sandy soils with poor bearing strength, the trench bottom should be undercut and filled to proper trench depth with a selected material of gravel or small crushed stone. 12. 19 Consider all precautions necessary to prevent trench cave-ins. No part of the country is immune to cave-ins. Trench failure is influenced by the presence of construction equipment near the edge of an excavation or adverse climatic conditions. OSHA and other regulatory agencies specify the maximum vertical height of unbraced trench which is permitted (usually 4 to 5 ft.) and the suggested angle of repose for the soil type involved. To protect the pipe from traffic loading and/or frost penetration, consideration should be given to establishing minimum earth cover requirements. Refer to the Driscopipe “Systems Design" brochure for load bearing capabilities. Generally, slight changes in direction of the pipe can be accommodated by field sweeping of the pipe in the ditch. If proper compaction is obtained, field sweeps do not require thrust blocks. Good soil compaction around fittings such as elbows or tees is usually sufficient. If thrust blocks are required, concrete encasement or concrete bearing surfaces set in undisturbed soil will provide adequate protection. The encasement or thrust block should be constructed of reinforced concrete and act as an anchor between pipe or fitting and the solid trench wall. Figure 2 illustrates various types of concrete blocking and encasement of fittings. Figure 2. “concrete strength to be 3000 psi Fitting Encasement Pipe Laying Driscopipe can be joined at ground level and lowered into the ditch. Care should be taken not to drop the pipe. Avoid excess stress or strain conditions during installation. Flanged connections should be used as necessary to facilitate handling pipe and fittings in and out of the fusion machine and installation in the ditch. This is particularly important at fabricated fitting junctures. The length of Driscopipe which can be pulled into position alongside the trench depends on the pipe size and field conditions. Generally, the maximum pulling length for smaller sizes is approximately 1,000 feet; for larger pipe about 500 feet. The maximum pulling force that can be applied to a pipe on level ground can be estimated using the following formula: F=SA Where: F = maximum pulling force (lbs) S = maximum allowable stress (1000-1500 psi) A= cross-sectional area of pipe wall (square inches) Cross-sectional area of pipe wall is: A=7(D-»vt Where: D = outside diameter (inches) t = minimum wall thickness (inches) When pulling pipe, either a pulling head or a suitable wraparound sleeve with rubber protective cover should be used to prevent the pulling cables from damaging the pipe. Never pull the pipe by the flanged end. Thermal Expansion and Contraction It is important that the expansion and contraction characteristics of Driscopipe be considered in the design and installation of most systems. Driscopipe expands and contracts at arate higher than that for rigid metal piping. The rate and resulting amount of stress is discussed in detail in the Driscopipe “Systems Design” brochure. Although the coefficient of thermal expansion and contraction for polyethylene is approximately 10 times greater than for steel or concrete, this material has the advantage of viscoelastic properties which make it quite adaptable to relaxing or adjusting with time to stresses imposed by thermal changes. 14. i | | | | 15. Direct buried Driscopipe applications will generally have ample.soil friction and interference to restrain movement of the pipe caused by the normal application temperature changes. Stresses induced by temperature change and resisted by soil containment do not damage the pipe. It is a good idea to make final tie-ins on a system at a temperature that is as close to operating temperature as possible. This is particularly true for insert renewal liner systems where there is no soil restraint. For summer time installations with two fixed connection points, a slightly longer length of Driscopipe may be required to compensate for contraction of the pipe in the cooler trench bottom. The snaking in the trench which naturally occurs with pipe diameters 4” and below is normally sufficient to compensate for any anticipated thermal contraction. This snaking is desirable but not absolutely necessary. Pipe above 4” generally has sufficient soil friction to resist movement. During a winter installation the exact length of pipe should be used. Pipe which is too short or not aligned must not be drawn up by the bolts of a flanged connection because of overstressing the stub end, flange adapter, and ultimately the valve, tank, etc. to which it is connected. When the backfill is soft or becomes fluid as in marshes or river bottoms the pipe may not be restrained by the backfill from movement caused by thermal expansion and contraction. Also, the stress induced in the pipe is transmitted to the end terminations. This can damage weak connections. If this possibility exists, adequate anchors should be installed just ahead of the termination to isolate and protect these connections. The calculated force induced by thermal change is the product of the stress in the pipe wall and the cross sectional area of the pipe wall. The length of pipe required to anchor the pipeline against this calculated force depends on the circumference of the pipe, the average contact pressure between the soil and the pipe and the coefficient of friction between the soil backfill and the pipe. The stress and the corresponding force developed by temperature change in a restrained pipeline are independent of the length and the burial conditions of the pipe. If pipe movement at the end sections cannot be tolerated, the pipe must be anchored mechanically to resist the thermal forces. Concrete blocks or other special anchors designed to fit the situation are usually used to transfer the thermal force into the soil adjacent to the pipe lay trench. Adequate frictional resistance must also be provided to transfer the force from the pipe into the concrete block. If the pipe is not anchored at the ends to resist movement, the end sections will expand or contract as the temperature changes. This change in length will extend into the burial trench to a point at which the frictional resistance of the backfill is equal to the thermal force. These movements must be considered in the design of such physical features as connections to pumps, catch basins, sewer manholes, etc. Once a line is installed and in service the temperature variation is usually small, occurring over an extended period of time, and is not likely to induce any significant stress into the pipe. Fitting Installation Driscopipe polyethylene flanged connections with metal back up flanges should be used to connect Driscopipe to metal fittings, valves, pumps or other piping materials. Where pipe or fittings are connected to rigid structures, movement or bending at that point should be prevented. Either well compacted fill should provide full support or a support pad should be constructed beneath the pipe and fitting. This pad, usually of reinforced concrete, should be fixed to a rigid structure and extend one pipe diameter or a minimum of 12” from the flanged joint. See figure 3 for suggested methods. It is recommended that the bolts in the flanged connection as well as the clamps in a support pad undergo one final retightening. This should be done after initial installation just before final backfill if it is a buried application. Surface connections can be observed while in operation. Particular attention should be given to the compaction achieved around the fittings, and extending several pipe diameters beyond the ends of the fitting. Compaction of 90% Proctor density or greater in these areas is recommended. Polyethylene pipe or fittings may be totally enclosed in concrete if required in the design. Reinforced concrete encasement can be used to raise pressure rating of fittings, stabilize heavy valves or fittings, and control thermal expansion or contraction. Grouting Pipe running through a manhole wall can be anchored by attaching a collar or side fused branch saddles to the pipe and encasing them in the wall of the manhole. Expandable rubber seals and grouting have proven successful in sealing an annulus between a casing pipe and polyethylene pipe when it enters a manhole. Grouting the annulus between the inner Driscopipe and an outer pipe is often done for several reasons. Continuous grouting, with NO VOIDS, can provide structural strength to the liner pipe both in the form of external hydrostatic collapse pressure and internal pressure capability. However, please realize that not a single void in the grouted annulus is allowed, or the higher pressure capability of the piping system is lost. In actual grouting procedures, it is extremely difficult to achieve avoid free annulus. Figure 3. 16. 17. Localized grouting can also be used at connections to manholes, and to stabilize movement of the liner pipe where break outs for laterals exist. Caution must be exercised during the grouting process to not exceed the collapse pressure of the polyethylene pipe. Careful consideration should be given to these two key points, especially in slip lining installations: (a) anchoring the polyethylene pipe within the casing pipe to eliminate expansion and contraction if this constitutes a problem and (b) sealing the annulus to prevent infiltration and/or contamination. Backfilling and Tamping The purpose of backfilling the trench is to provide firm, continuous support around the pipe. Achieving this proper soil backfill around the pipe is probably the most important aspect of a successful buried application. As stated in the bedding section, the material excavated from the trench can usually be used as the initial backfill if it is smooth, free of rocks, crumbles and breaks up easily. Economics usually dictate maximum reuse of the excavated material. Where trenches are located within roadways and are subject to vehicular traffic, cohesionless granular soils are generally specified. The best initial backfill material is sand. When loading conditions are severe, such as road crossings, sand should be used where the pipe is laid in low quality soils such as heavy gumbo or muck. Coarse sand will usually reach the required density during placement without compaction. Initial backfill should be placed in two phases. The first is up to or slightly above the spring line of the pipe. Then compact or flush with water to assure that the lower part of the pipe (haunches) is supported. Compaction of the soil around the pipe is accomplished by applying an external force to the individual layers of backfill as they are placed in the trench. Compacting brings the soil particles closer together and thus increases their density and shear strength. Compaction depends upon soil properties, moisture content, layer thickness, compactive effort and other factors. Compaction is usually applied by a mechanical tamper, vibrating plate or water flushing. Care should be «1sed while flushing to prevent the pipe from floating out of position in the trench. To keep the pipeline from floating or shifting, it can be internally filled with water prior to flushing until initial backfilling procedures are complete. This also assures that the horizontal diameter does not shorten excessively during compaction to the springline. The water flushing method of achieving compaction should only be used with “free draining” granular materials and a positive drainage outlet provided. In the second phase of initial backfill additional fill in 8-10” layers should be added and well compacted until about 6-12” above the top of the pipe. Larger diameter pipe requires the higher initial backfill. At this point the on-site material excavated from the trench can be used for final backfill to ground level. In a heavy traffic area, this excavated backfill of granular material should be compacted to a minimum of 90% to 95% density. Standard tests are available to determine the density of the compacted soil such as Standard Proctor Laboratory Test Procedure, ASTM D 698. Compaction is measured in terms of the dry density achieved in the field compared to the laboratory dry density determined on a sample of the same soil type when compacted under a given effort. The optimum moisture content (usually about 20%) at which maximum density is obtained can be estimated in the field by squeezing it in your hand. If it just holds together, it is near optimum moisture. Similarly a corner heel impression while walking probably indicates a soil density of 90%. A full heel print may indicate a density of 80%. And a full footprint may indicate a density of 70%. Tests conducted on Driscopipe at Utah State University by Dr. Reynold K. Watkins show that Driscopipe will not buckle under ordinary conditions if the backfill is compacted and ifit is in full contact with the pipe. A virtual failsafe installation can be assured if soil density is generally over 85% of Standard Proctor (AASHTO T-99) density. Additional information on Underground Installation is given in ASTM D 2321, Standard Recommended Practice for Underground Installation of Flexible Thermoplastic Sewer Pipe, ASTM D 2774, Underground Installation of Thermoplastic Pressure Piping, Plastic Pipe Institute Technical Report TR-31/9-79, and the Driscopipe ‘Systems Design” brochure. In order to locate the underground polyethylene pipe in the future, a copper or galvanized tracer wire should be laid next to the pipe during installation to later permit use of locating devices. The metal wire should not touch the pipe in case of lightning. Inspection and Testing After installation or a portion thereof is complete, the pipeline should be pressure tested in accordance with recommended practice. Refer to the “Testing Polyethylene Pipelines” section of this brochure for detailed testing recommendations. nstallation Above Ground Generally Driscopipe is installed below ground. However, there are many situations in which above ground piping has advantages. Some advantages are: 18. ¢ Slurry or mine tailing lines which are often relocated and can be rotated to distribute wear in the pipe. ¢ Environmental conditions: The toughness and flexibility of Driscopipe often allows installation through marshes and @ bogs as well as over frozen areas. ¢ Installations over solid rock or across water are sometimes the most economical methods of installation. ¢ Its lightweight and ease of assembly results in immediate availability of a temporary above ground pipe line. Thermal Expansion and Contraction Temperature changes both externally and internally should be considered in the design of an above ground Driscopipe application. Temperature changes cause all types of pipe to expand and contract. Chart 3 illustrates the amount of expansion and contraction to anticipate for Driscopipe during design and construction stages. These values are based on an empty pipe which is free to move. Generally, pipe laid over relatively smooth terrain and allowed to move freely in every direction will perform adequately. However, if large changes in temperature take place in short periods of time, movement of the pipe can concentrate in one area, and kinking can occur. By using proper anchors or restraints, the possibility of this occurrence can be minimized. Chart 3. @ LINEAR EXPANSION & CONTRACTION OF DRISCOPIPE sti +: areeet tt Ht 7 i pe: 3 3 t ; $ Sthioh 0 eS ny 3 a. ° a CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE, DEGREES F. tee 8 1 I cd i — : se ye Qn 3" qt grr 6” T" a” Q” 10” 1’ 1g" 3" 14” 19”. INCHES CHANGE INLENGTH PER 100 FEET OF PIPE . NOTE: EXPANSION OR CONTRACTION IS NOT A FUNCTION OF DIAMETER OR WALL THICKNESS 19. @ Normally if fluid flow is continuous, expansion and contraction of the line will be minimal after operating conditions are established. Driscopipe contains 2%% carbon black which protects it from the ultra-violet rays of the sun. Although the sun will not damage Driscopipe, the heat absorbed from the sun will greatly increase the amount of expansion and contraction that will take place. The sun alone can raise the surface temperature of an empty pipe 40-50° F. Protection from the sun is generally accomplished by covering with a foot of fill dirt on buried installations. For above ground installations, there is generally no economical means to protect large diameter pipe from the sun. The effect of daily and seasonal temperature changes should be anticipated for installation and operation conditions. One very good method of limiting expansion and contraction is to properly anchor the pipe at given intervals along its length. When expansion occurs it will, depending on the spacing, deflect laterally. Adequate space must be available to accommodate this curvature. When contraction occurs the pipe will tend to become taut between the anchor points. This does not damage the pipe because of polyethylene’s unique ability to stress relieve and relax with time. An approximation of the amount of lateral deflection as shown in the sketch below (neglecting soil-pipe friction) can be calculated as follows: Ay=L /.50aAT Where: Ay = lateral deflection, inches L = length of pipe between anchors, inches a = coefficient of thermal expansion, in/in/°F AT = change in temperature, °F FOR EXAMPLE: A pipeline installed on top of the ground in a straight condition and anchored at 50-foot intervals undergoes an increase in temperature of 50°F. Ay = 50 ft. x 12 in./ft. \/.50 x .00012 x S0°F Ay = 34 in. If installed in a straight condition, and the operating temperature decreases, the stresses produced by the temperature change will be absorbed by the pipe. Remember these calculations are only theoretical. Actual thermal movement will be less than the theoretical because of the pipe’s ability to undergo stress relaxation. As stated in the 20. 2l. “Systems Design” brochure, the actual measured stress has been estimated to be approximately one-half that of the calculated stress. The bending strain for the fixed end condition will be maximum at the anchor points. The distance between anchors can be related to the desired maximum strain by: =D VS6aST D/S6aAT a eeaG or L= a Where: e = strain. (usually 1% or less) D = pipe outside diameter, inches. a, AT and L are noted on page 20. As temperature decreases, Driscopipe becomes stronger. However, even at temperatures below freezing, Driscopipe is flexible. Should water inside Driscopipe freeze, the pipe does not burst and will resume its function upon thawing. Of course, the pipe should not be pressurized while it is frozen, nor heated externally with an open flame. Thawing should be allowed to occur naturally, by the use of chemicals, or by a heat source that will not damage the pipe, such as warm air or warm water (not steam). Low thermal conductivity values for Driscopipe slows the heat transfer and inhibits freezing. Pipe Support Following are recommendations for proper support of all types of above ground piping. « If temperature or weights of the pipe and fluid are excessive, continuous support is recommended. Installation above 100°F should have continuous support or shorter support spacing. For temperatures over 150°F continuous support is required. ¢ Supports which run underneath the pipe and do not grip it should cradle the pipe for a length equivalent to approximately %-1 pipe diameter and not less than 120° of the pipe diameter. The supports should be free of sharp edges. ¢ The support should be capable of restraining the pipe from lateral or longitudinal movement if so designed. If the pipeline is designed to move during expansion, the sliding supports should provide a guide without restraint in the direction of movement. * Pipe lines across bridges may require insulation to minimize thermal movement. ¢ Heavy fittings and metal flanged connections should be supported on either side. , Refer to the “Systems Design” brochure for proper spacing of pipe supports. Figure 4 illustrates some typical pipe hangers and supports for plastic piping. Figure 4. NN a 7 Anchoring Proper anchoring should be considered to prevent lateral displacement and movement at fittings. Anchors should be placed as close to an elbow as possible. If flanged connections are required, anchors can be attached to these flanges. However, it is important that bending does not occur between the pipe and the flange. Some typical anchors for polyethylene pipe are illustrated in Figure 5. Slurry Applications The toughness qualities and smooth inner surface that is resistant to abrasion make Driscopipe an excellent candidate for transporting slurries of all types. Typical slurry applications are dredging lines, coal or limestone slurry, wood chips, sand, mine tailings, and many others. Installation of slurry pipelines is generally above ground. This provides easy access to the lines if plugging occurs, and also permits rotation to distribute wear evenly around the inside diameter of the pipe. In order to rotate the slurry lines, they are often flanged every 3-4 pipe lengths. Evaluation of pipe wear over the first few months of use will determine when to rotate. Grade changes in slurry pipelines should be gradual. Exercise caution when slopes become excessive. Turbulence often increases abrasion. Drop boxes are often used to reduce turbulence. They are also used to relieve pressure buildup caused by surface gradients. Generally drop boxes are used on gravity lines, however, pressure lines can also empty into drop boxes. Design of the drop box should either allow the slurry to fall freely into the fluid in the bottom of the box or utilize a rubber liner on the wall opposite the inlet pipe. A typical drop box is shown below. Figure 6. It is difficult to predict wear characteristics that will be experienced using Driscopipe to transport slurries. Every application has somewhat different parameters, whether it be flow velocity solid concentration, particle size, and/or temperature. When transporting slurries with Driscopipe, minimum wear will be realized if velocity is minimized yet keep the solids suspended. A maximum of 12-15 feet per second is preferred. It is generally recommended that very sharp — abrasive solids such as bottom ash should not exceed 10 feet per second. A solid concentration below 25% by volume with particle size of \" or less is generally recommended. Temperatures as close to ambient as possible are preferred. Maximum wear and flow properties will be obtained if long radius elbows, sweep elbows, and molded stub ends are used in the installation. 22 Driscopipe, with its smooth inner surface, will withstand some sliding action of abrasive particles along the inside of the pipe. However, where the solids are in turbulence and the angle of impingement of the solid with the inner wall of the pipe is sharp or direct, polyethylene pipe will not wear well. For instance, in a dredging operation, the section of pipe directly off the pump may experience very high turbulence and vibration; hence excessive wear. nstallation Underwater This section discusses some of the different aspects to be considered in marine pipeline installations. Design engineering phases, such as selecting the proper size and wall thickness as well as critical buckling pressures are discussed in the “Systems Design” brochure. Concrete weight determinations will be discussed in this section. Driscopipe can be buried, rest on the bottom, or floated on the surface of lakes, rivers, marshes, or oceans. Its characteristics of flexibility, lightweight, inertness to salt water and chemicals, continuous pipeline due to butt fusion, and the ability to float even when full of water give polyethylene many advantages. Joining and Assembly Proper planning of all assembly and installation phases will help alleviate problems. Depending on site conditions, various procedures have been used to assemble the pipeline. Some common ones are: ¢ Fuse the pipe together on shore into continuous lengths, assemble the ballast weights to the pipe on shore after fusion and before the pipe is launched into the water. « Fuse the pipe together on shore and pull or push the pipe into the water as in the previous procedure, except assemble the weights to the pipe at some later time from a barge. ¢ All pipe can be fused on land in pre-determined lengths with flanged connections added to each end. The flanged ends are capped and the sections are launched onto the water to be later assembled on the water. Such floating lines are often used in dredging operations. Any pipe which is temporarily stored on a body of water should be protected from all forms of marine traffic as well as preventing wave actions from pushing the pipe against rocks or sharp objects that could damage the pipe. Anchoring and Weighting Since polyethylene pipe floats just under the surface even when full of water, it is necessary to add ballast weights in 98 order to sink the pipe and hold it on bottom. The most common form of weight is steel reinforced concrete, although other forms have been used. There are many companies that make the concrete weights whether in the factory or at the job site. These weights are generally round, rectangular, or square, and are clamped to the pipe using non-corrosive bolts, clamps, or straps. A compressible protective wrap around the pipe is advisable between the concrete weights and the pipe. It will protect the pipe surface and prevent the weights from sliding on the pipe. This protective wrapping of %”’ rubber sheet or similar material should extend beyond both edges of the concrete block weights. Acylindrical weight is commonly used on small diameter pipe; however, this configuration could allow the pipeline to roll on the bottom if subjected to currents. The rectangular or square weight is the most common type used. They are reinforced collars constructed in two halves to fit the pipe outside diameter, and usually incorporate lifting lugs built into the weights. In determining a pipe system's specific gravity or sink factor, the engineer should consider all variables to sufficiently provide the required stability under water. Items such as tides, condition of the bottom material and the possibility of air in the pipeline should be considered. Normally the weighted pipe is buried in a trench under water. However, it can lay on the bottom or be suspended (float) above the bottom with anchored tie lines. Under most conditions the pipe and weights will embed themselves in the soil or muck on the bottom. Driscopipe works well in extremely soft bottoms, in which little or no support is achieved, by adjusting the anchoring required. For operating conditions where the pipe will not always be liquid full, or where the product is lighter than water, check to determine whether or not the empty pipe (air inside) with attached weights will float during installation. If the pipe will not float, attach floats at each concrete weight before towing onto the surface of the water. Concrete weight requirements may be calculated by the following equation: w.= K DyVo — (Wp+Wp) o7 1-KD,/D. Where W, =concrete weight, lbs/ft. K =pipe system specific gravity. (sink factor) Dw = water density, lbs/cu. ft. V. = pipe outside volume (water displaced), cu. ft./ft. Wp = pipe weight, lbs/ft. Wp = product weight (pipe contents), lbs/ft. D, =concrete density, lbs/cu. ft. Chart 4 contains the concrete weights required for Driscopipe pipelines in fresh water for K=1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 and specific gravity of flowing product of 0.00 (gas), 1.00 (water), 1.10 and 1.20 (fluids heavier than water). To calculate neutral buoyancy useK= 1. Chart 4. CONCRETE WEIGHTS* (Dry weight in pounds per foot of pipeline) SPECIFIC GRAVITY. IF FLOWING PRODUCT. NOM. | SDR [0.00 1.00 10= J =-1.20 9.00] 100 [110 [120 ; 0.00 T 100 [110 T 120 SIZE K=Tl z K=12 : so Kel3 : LOW PRESSURE Fs a Z —06 *Eeor P17 [09 ioe [27 [19 7 11 45s = 09]. 148:[ 28] 16. [1 176 | 45 | 32] 19 Se =13 (203. “21 242 | 62 | 44 | 26 6 = 2.1} 32.3 734 385 [98 [-70-] 4.1 7 eA) Se le a pa 39S ; = 35 ei ba 02 [582 Om = 52 i 159_}..91 12 = 75 -223-] 12.65] ay = 31 = 2697152 =]5 16 =118 = [635.25 [1992 18 : 238 | 445~ : | [220 "295" |754.9 24 325 28 325 32.5 36 325 42. 32.5 48 325 61] 36 [-11- ati 6 ee EE) 2.8. 0s — 18 y 9.9 71 44 8 27. 44.8 48 08] = =-32 102 SOP OL 6 te 63.9 | 16.7] 12.0 72 10 25.3 = 68.9 Tele 13 = 49} scat 15.9 9.3. 2.6} * [986 7 aso 118.7 {114 20 25.3 239 25.8 “45 = 168 : 286°] 755.1] 320] 90 x 341 89.7" | 646 | 394 24 25.3 344 37. is 65 — 242 a 4il 79.3 | 46.1. | 129 x 491 129 | 930 | 568 ee = SDR1SS= ais 25 SBE = Oe = 06 | 05 = 1.0 |—0.7]- = 21] 1.6] - = 36] 26 = 55 |-4.0 = 78 | 56] = 132 [-95 = 205 | 148 = 28.9 | 208 = 343] 245 = 454 | 327 $75 | 41.4 03] 02] 02 ae 02 05] 04 cam . 1.0. | -08 63 [= 17 [12] 07 22 | 17 11.4 [29 | =20°[-12]~ 37 [28 246 [| 62 | 44] 25 80] 60 SDR83 0 =~ Me espate 28 ; TT 10ST 76 138] 107] NOTE: Where the concrete weight requirements is shown as a negative number, no weights are rerequired for that operating condition, e.g. specific gravity of the flowing product is 1.2 and K = 1.1. However, in order to sink the line into position, it must be filled with the heavier operating fluid, or weights must be added. “Calculations of weights are based on density of fresh water, Dy = 62.4 lb./ft3, and density of concrete, D. = 150 lb./ft3. 26. 27. The spacing of the concrete weights will depend on the size of the weight, and is normally limited to 10 to 15 feet apart. A conservative maximum spacing between weights may be obtained from Chart 5. This spacing is based on a maximum of one percent strain in the wall of the pipe due to deflection between weights and a maximum deflection of no more than 5% of the spacing. EXAMPLE: Install a 16” SDR 15.5 line across a fresh water lake to carry a brine solution with a density of 72.9 lbs/cu. ft. Weights shall be fabricated from 150 lbs/cu. ft. concrete. K =1.3, Dy =62.4, D, = 150 Vo = (7/4) (16)2/144 = 1.396 cu. ft./ft. Wp = 20.64 lbs./ft. Pipe inside diameter = 16 — 2 (1.032) = 13.936 in. Wp = (m/4) (13.936)2 (72.9)/144 = 77.22 lbs/ft. — (1.3) (62.4) (1.396) — (20.64 + 77.22) We 1 = (1.3) 2.4)/150 = 33.5 Ibs./ft. Maximum spacing of weights is 30.5’ (See Chart 5). Chart 5. MAXIMUM SPAN BETWEEN CONCRETE WEIGHTS FOR UNDERWATER DRISCOPIPE PIPELINES NOTE: Left of the dash line, span is limited by deflection = §% (strain is less than 1%). Right of the dash line, span is limited by strain = 1% (Deflection is less than 5%). MAXIMUM SPAN BETWEEN CONCRETE WEIGHTS (FEET) 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 2 32 36 40 44 48 PIPE OUTSIDE DIAMETER (INCHES) With weights 10 feet apart, each will weigh 10 x 33.5 = 335 lbs. If 400 lb. weights are available, spacing will be 400 + 33.5 = 11.94 ft. = 12 ft. If it is possible that air can get into the pipe, extra weight should be allowed, and the weight spacing shortened. Gas pipelines (specific gravity = 0.00) must be designed for underwater stability when full of gas at zero pressure and thus have a design K greater than 1.00. Therefore, the pipeline, with weights attached, will sink. In this situation, floats will always be required to float the pipeline onto the water. In general the pipe can deflect considerably between weights, with only a small resulting strain value which is well within the strength of the pipe. If a current is present, movement of the pipe itself is not harmful, however, any sharp rocks or objects it might contact may damage it. If waves or currents present a problem, the best solution is to trench and bury the weighted pipeline. Installation of the ballast weights to the pipe is usually accomplished on shore. Several weights can be installed at one time depending on manpower and work space. To minimize drag and aid movement of the weighted pipe into the water, a wooden or steel ramp can be fabricated at waters edge. Ballast weights may also be installed from a barge or raft to the pre-assembled pipe stored on the water. The pipe is lifted from the water onto the raft to install the weights. Launching and Sinking To allow the pipeline to float in the water until the sinking operation, it is necessary to install a bulkhead on each end of the pipeline to prevent water from entering the pipe. This is done with a flange assembly and metal blind flange. This provides an airtight seal, thus allowing the line to float. The pipeline is then moved into position for sinking by marine craft. The transition of the pipeline from land to water should be done in a trench before the sinking operation begins. It is important that this tench be adequate enough to protect the pipeline from damage by debris, ice, boat traffic, or wave action. The sinking operation is controlled by the addition of water to one end and the evacuation of the enclosed air through the opposite end. The addition of water to the pipeline at a controlled rate will ensure that the pipe lays in the trench or adjusts to the profile of the bottom. The rate of sinking should also be controlled to prevent an excessive bending radius. During the sinking, water must be prevented from running the full length of the pipe. This can be done by inducing a water pocket at the shore end, by lifting the off shore pipe above the 28. 29. water. Water is introduced into the pipeline closest to shore allowing it to sink. Once the pipe seeks an equilibrium, additional water can be added gradually to complete sinking the line. After the pipeline is installed on bottom or in the trench, a thorough inspection should be made of the pipe installation. All weights should be properly positioned, with the pipe positioned in the center of the trench, or within the right-of- way. As stated before, the trenched area where the pipe leaves the shore and enters the water, should be adequate to protect the pipe from damage. And where backfill is used, inspect for proper installation and required depth. It is better for a marine pipeline to be too long than too short. Never attempt to flange up a pipeline that is too short by drawing the bolts together, thus stretching the line. This places the flanged connection in severe tension and could cause eventual problems. Extra length can often be accommodated by snaking the pipe. Intake and Outfall Diffusers Phillips Driscopipe has the capability of providing special diffuser assemblies used in terminating outfall pipelines. Special sinking provisions are sometimes required, so that the vertical diffuser is exposed, yet is subject to as little damage from navigational hazards as possible. Your Phillips Driscopipe representative will be very glad to assist with diffuser design capability. nsert Renewal Installations Insert renewal, or slip lining, is an effective and economical method for rehabilitating a deteriorated pipeline. Installation is simple and fast with a minimum of interruption to the pipeline operation. The pipeline to be relined is cleaned of obstructions and debris. A closed circuit TV survey of the clean pipeline is recommended to locate connections and reveal existing defects. After a test run with the pulling head, the liner may be attached, pulled into place, and secured. The pulling head may be either a flexible, field fabricated type, or a rigid type made of steel that is bolted to the:end of the pipe. Installation procedures for insert renewal are found in ASTM F585 “Insertion of Flexible Polyethylene Pipe into Existing Sewers” and PPI bulletin, “Renewing Sewers with Polyolefin Pipe”. Refer to “Systems Design” brochure for proper insert renewal design. Maen esting Polyethylene Pipelines Driscopipe piping systems should be hydrostatically pressure tested before being put into service. Water is the preferred test medium. After all free air is removed from the test section, raise the pressure at a steady rate to the required pressure. The pressure in the section shall be measured as close as possible to the lowest point of the test section. Pressure Piping Systems The initial pressure test can be conducted before or after the line is backfilled. However, it is advisable to cover the pipe at intervals or particularly at curves to hold the pipe in place during pressure tests. Flanged connections may be left exposed for visual leak inspection. Test pressure should not exceed 1.5 times the rated operating pressure of the pipe or the lowest rated component in the system. The initial pressure test shall be applied and allowed to stand without makeup pressure for a sufficient time to allow for diametric expansion or pipe stretching to stabilize. This usually occurs within 2-3 hours. After this equilibrium period, the test section can be returned to the 1.5 times operating pressure, the pump turned off, anda final test pressure held for 1-3 hours. Remember that pressure drop will not only occur due to pressure expansion, but also due to fluctuations in temperature during the test. As the temperature increases, the gauge pressure will decrease. Allowable amounts of makeup water for expansion during pressure test is shown in Chart 6, taken from PPI Technical Report TR 31/9-79. If there are no visual leaks or significant pressure drops during the final test period, the pipeline passes the test. an Chart 6. ALLOWANCE FOR EXPANSION UNDER TEST PRESSURE* Allowance for Expansion Noiuinal (U.S. Gals./100 Feet of Pipe) Pipe Size (in) ' 1-Hour 2-Hour 3-Hour Test Test. Test 3 = ». 0.10 0.15 0.25 4 ee Be 1 O1BA- 0.25 0.40 216 oe 0.30 0.60 #= 0,90 8 Sis Sage 0,00) 10_ 1s ee S10 eee 0.75 Ege Spe ear z 1 = 1.0 2:0 3.0. 12 les like 2.3. Bes 3.4 “4 4 ieee MS 7 ee 14 2825 = a ee ‘16. ; Soy BL Dae eer Be 3.3: g 5.0 Ss 18. 22 Poise 4:3 : 65 Be : 20 2.8 eae? Fe in S.5ix = ‘ 8.0 - 22 3.5 LOe=3 : = 10.5 24 45 8.9F 13:3 ry 28° 5.5 g: Piles 16.8 Aas 32: ee 7.0 Be x 14d : 215 es = SOP O0eer a 18.0 : ine 27.0 Tee 3405 Pec touts? SO 22.0 . 33.0 Eavaran: 40s eo 15.0. some | 27.0, ; 43.0 *These allowances only apply to the test period and not to the initial expansion phase. 31. Non-Pressure Piping Systems Testing of non-pressure, gravity flow pipes whether above or below ground may be accomplished by closing all openings below the top of the section to be tested. For test purposes, provide a means to raise the water level to a height of at least 3-5 feet above the highest point in the line being tested. The water level only need be maintained long enough to determine there are no leaks. If impractical to raise water level as suggested, the line can be pressurized with low pressure water or air. Pressure normally should not exceed 5-10 psi over atime period of 5-10 minutes. epairing Damaged Polyethylene Pipe Hauling, unloading, stringing and installing Driscopipe should be done with the care necessary to prevent damage to the pipe. Since all plastics are softer than steel, poor handling can result in abrasions, cuts, gouges, punctures, etc. All pipe should be carefully examined before installation and damaged pipe removed. Damage that results in reduction of the wall thickness by more than approximately 10% should be cut out and discarded as it may impair long-term service life. Minor scuffing or scratching will have no adverse affect on the serviceability of Driscopipe. Damaged pipe may be repaired by any of the joining methods previously discussed. Butt fusion is preferable for all | applications where conditions permit. Some of the joining oO methods are not satisfactory for continuous pressure systems. | Kinks — Normally kinks do not impair the serviceability in low pressure applications. For high pressure applications, severe kinks should be cut out and the pipe re-joined by fusing. | Ovality — Out-of-roundness due to excess loading during shipment or storage will not hinder the serviceability of the pipe. The pipe should not be considered damaged unless the fusion machine clamps cannot successfully round out the section for a good fusion joint. Occasionally the pipe can be placed in an unstressed condition so that it will relax and | gradually round out. | Permanent Repair Repair after installation can be accomplished on small diameter pipe by removing a minimal amount of backfill, | cutting out the defect, move the pipe ends to one side and fuse flanged connections to each end. The flanges are then bolted together. It is preferable that the flanged connection be under | a slight compression when reconnected. The bolts should never be used to pull up a flanged joint. | 9 Repairing large diameter pipe which is not as flexible as smaller pipe can be accomplished with a flanged spool piece. The damaged section is removed, the butt fusion machine is lowered into the ditch to fuse flanged connections to each | open end, and the flanged spool assembly is bolted into place. The flanged spool must be precisely made to fit the resulting gap in the pipeline. Figure 7 illustrates these methods. SMALL DIAMETER LARGE DIAMETER 32. 33. Mechanical Repair A wrap-around-type repair clamp with integral gasket can be used but is not as permanent as a flanged or fused repair. This type of repair is principally used in buried applications because the compacted soil restrains the pipe from thermal movement and pull-out forces caused by internal pressure. A longer repair clamp generally provides greater sealing capability on the thermoplastic pipe. Aclamp length of 1%-2 times the nominal pipe diameter works best. Tighten the clamp evenly around the pipe which has been wiped clean of all foreign material. Afterwards, properly backfill and compact around and over the pipe before it is pressurized. Fitting Repair Repairing an installed fitting is normally accomplished by replacement with a new flanged fitting. Various attempts have been made to repair or join ultra high molecular weight Driscopipe using a common hot air melt welding gun. Driscopipe 8600 material does not lend itself to this form of repair, especially in trying to achieve a pressure tight repair or joint. Underwater Repair To accomplish underwater repair on a pipeline, the pipe ends must be floated or raised above the water so that a flange assembly can be fused to each end. The ends are then lowered into position on the bottom and bolted together underwater. Appropriate lifting equipment must be used to insure that the pipe does not kink and that the minimum bend radius is not exceeded. Normally it is not necessary to remove the weights before lifting, but extreme care should be exercised when lifting the pipe above the water level with weights attached. Miscellaneous Repair Methods Under certain situations, a thermofit heat shrink sleeve can be used to seal a puncture or leaking joint. Many types of sleeves are available, such as those fabricated by Raychem Corporation out of crosslinked polyethylene. The sleeves are coated on the inside with a special thixotropic sealant which when heated is forced into a puncture or joint to seal and encapsulate. tatic a Electricity Static electricity charges are generated on polyethylene pipe by friction, particularly during the handling of pipe in stor- age, shipping and installation. The flow of air or gas containing dust or scale will also build up significant static charges,as will the flow of dry materials through the pipe such as in the case of gravity flow grain chutes. These charges are a safety hazard, particularly in areas where there is leaking gas, or an explosive atmosphere. Plastic pipe is a non-conductor of electricity, and the static charge will remain in place until some grounding device comes close enough to allow it to discharge. The discharge of these static electric charges generally happens when workmen touch the pipe themselves, or upon application of mechanical tools to the pipe. The result of the discharge will vary from an insignificant physical shock to possible ignition of a flammable gas-air mixture. The most effective and simple method to minimize the hazard of the discharge is to apply a film of water to the work surface, to drain away the static electricity. A ground wire on the plastic pipe will only discharge from that point, since the plastic is a non-conductor. When workmen must enter a bellhole to hot tap a line or make emergency repairs to a damaged or leaking line, it is important that all safety precautions be observed. The exposed working surface of the polyethylene line should be doused with water before entering the area, and a wet cloth should be kept on the pipe to drain off static charge build up while working on the line. nstallation Precautions For Fabricated Fittings Driscopipe 8600 fabricated tees, elbows and wyes are made by butt fusing or sidewall fusing together special cut segments of Driscopipe 8600 pipe to obtain the desired fitting. The configuration of these fittings, and the fact that they are fabricated rather than molded, requires that certain precautions be taken when installing them into a piping system. There have been a few instances where fabricated fittings, after being fused to the pipe, have been damaged due to excessive strain imposed by improper handling. Driscopipe 8600 pipe and fittings are generally very tough and forgiving of mishandling due to the flexible nature of the material itself. However, the tensile strength of a polyethylene material is much less than steel and it will not support the excessive lifting and pulling forces that can be exerted by powered installation equipment. 34. For example, if, when installing a tee in the line, long lengths of pipe are fused to each of the three sides of the tee and it is then lifted up and out of the butt fusion unit without supporting the excess weight of the pipe hanging and being lifted at the same time, the tee might be torn apart. If the assembly of the tee into the piping system is done in the manner described, then precautions must be ‘taken to lift and support the pipe on ~all sides of the tee as it is removed’ * _ from the fusion unit and lowered to: ~ -the ground or into the ditch. The _fabricated tee (or elbow or wye) must “not be allowed to carry the weight of “the pipe that is butt fused to it. Distributed By - The installation procedures should provide the least possible amount of lifting and moving of the assembled pipe and fabricated fittings. If it becomes necessary to pull the assembly along side the ditch to properly position it, the é fabricated fitting should never be used as the point of attachment for the pulling line. The fusion joining of a fabricated tee and wye into a system becomes complicated because of the third side. It is not too difficult to keep strain off the fitting when fusing pipe to the running side of the tee and lifting and lowering this much of the assembly into position in a ditch. It is when sufficient pipe is added to the third (branch) side to permit the laying of pipe in this direction, that the assembly becomes very difficult to handle. Final handling and positioning of these assemblies requires extra handling equipment and additional precautions to prevent damage to the fabricated fitting. Recommended Alternate Method: The need for extra equipment and much of the possibility of damage can be eliminated by altering the method of installing the fabricated tee and wye to include the use of a flanged connection on the branch side. This will allow final positioning to take place before the branch side is connected. There will be some instances where it will prove very advantageous from an installation viewpoint to use flanged connections on two sides of a tee or wye and also on one side of the elbow. This allows the pipe to be laid from either direction, pushed or pulled into tight locations, rolled into the ditch, and generally handled © much easier and faster ... before the final connection is made at the tee, wye or elbow. From the standpoint of economy, speed and ease of installation, and to eliminate the occurrence of excessive installation stresses on fabricated fittings, it is recommended that flanged connections always be used on the branch side of tees and wyes and on one end of elbows. For further information contact: G_@ PHILLIPS DRISCOPIPE, INC. A SUBSIDIARY OF PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY CALIFORNIA, WATSONVILLE 95076 ¢ P.O. Box 508 « (408) 722-8166 KENTUCKY, WILLIAMSTOWN 41097 ¢ P.O. Box 49 + (606) 824-5065 OKLAHOMA, PRYOR 74361 » P.O. Box 69 (918) 825- 0364 SOUTH CAROLINA, LYMAN 29365 (Startex Plant) « P.O. Box 877 « (803) 439-3066 TEXAS, BROWNWOOD 76801 * P.O. Box 1060 « (915) 643-1666 OR: 6 } PHILLIPS EXTRUDED PRODUCTS LTD. i ¢ 7803F — 35th Street S.E., CALGARY, ALBERTA, CANADA T2C 1V3 « (403) 279-7471 ¢ 101 De Lauzon, BOUCHERVILLE, QUEBEC, CANADA J4B 1E7 : 4/81 = as