Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFalse Pass Reconnaissance Study Of Energy Requirements & Alternatives-False Pass 1982 RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR ANIAK ATKA MEKORYUK CHEFORNAK NEWTOK CHIGNIK LAKE NIGHTMUTE COLD BAY NIKOLSKI FALSE PASS ST. GEORGE "HOOPER BAY ST. MARYS “IVANOF BAY ST. PAUL KOTLIK TOKSOOK BAY LOWER AND ; TUNUNAK UPPER KALSKAG PREPARED BY NORTHERN TECHNICAL SERVICES & VAN GULIK AND ASSOCIATES ANCHORAGE, ALASKA ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY FALSE PASS RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES A Report by Northern Technical Services van Gulik and Associates Anchorage, Alaska July, 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Summary and Recommendations 1.1 2.0 Background 2.1 3.0 Village Meeting Sion 4.0 Existing Heating and Electrical Power Generating Facilities 4.1 4.1 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances 4.1 4.2 Electrical Generation Facilities 4.1 4.3 Fuel Oil Usage 4.1 4.4 Electrical Energy Distribution 4.2 5.0 Energy Balance 5.1 6.0 Energy Forecasts 6.1 6.1 Population Projection 6.1 6.2 Capital Projects 6.1 6.3 Thermal Energy Projection 6.2 6.4 Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection 6.3 7.0 Energy Resource Assessment teal 8.0 Energy Plans 8. 8.1 Base Case 8. 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8. 8.3 Alternate Plan B 8. 9.0 Analysis of Alternatives and Recommendations 9.1 Appendix Review letters and replies LIST OF TABLES Page Table 5.1 Energy Balance for 1982 5.2 Table 8.1 Itemized Present Worth Analysis of the Base Case 8.3 Table 8.2 Estimated Heat Recovery Costs 8.7 Table 8.3 Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate PlanA 8.9 Table 8.4 Itemized Estimated Cost to Install a Hydroelectric System 8.13 Table 8.5 Itemized Present Worth Analysis of Alternate Plan B 8.15 Table 9.1 Summary of the Present Worth Analysis and Any Non-electric Benefits for Each Energy Plan 9.1 Table 9.2 Direct Power Generation Costs for Each Energy Plan 9.2 Table 9.3 Preference Ranking of Village Energy Plans and Associated Recommended Actions 9.3 ia Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 2.1 2.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Sel 5.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 LIST OF FIGURES Location Map Climatic Background Bulk Fuel Storage Capacities and Types of Heating Appliances Electrical Generation Facilities Fuel Oil Usage Electrical Generation Sector Energy Distribution Energy Flow Diagram Distribution of Total Useable Energy Population Projection Thermal Energy Projection Peak Demand and Electrical Energy Projection Appropriate Technology Ranking Diagram at Page 2.2 2.4 1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The production of electricity is the focus of the Energy Reconnaissance Program. This study has focused on seeking potential alternatives to diesel powered electrical generators. However, wher: there were opportunities to reduce the cost of electrical geieration, these were detailed. False Pass is one of a few vill.ges which does not have a central electrical generation facility. In order to establish a basis for comparison between energy plans a central generation system was designed and used as the base case. There is potential for a hydro electric generation station at False Pass and a plan to develop this resource was compared to the central generation base case and the base case scenario complemented by waste heat capture. Summary Statements Only those technologies that could be readily assimilated into False Pass were considered. 1. Fuel oil was found to be the major source of energy used in the village. Additional energy was supplied by wood and gasoline. ae Significant amounts of energy are lost in the village due to: (1) inefficient combustion; (2) poor insulation and excessive air infiltration; and (3) wasted heat from diesel electric generation. JG Forecasts show an inevitable increase in energy consumption in the village due to population growth. ek Energy resource baseline data is generally weak in the village. This weakens the accuracy of technological or economic predictions. However, the estimates relative to waste heat availability appear reasonably reliable. The feasibility of various technologies for electrical and thermal energy production were evaluated. Wind, coal, peat, geothermal, wood and solar were considered as potential energy resources but are not viable alternatives to fuel oil generated electricity. Waste heat capture from the anticipated central power plant and hydropower were the basis of the alternative energy plans. The Base Case Plan was formulated based on the anticipated use of centrally generated electric power. A present worth analysis of each alternative plan was performed. General Recommendations 1. The supporting energy and resource data base should be strengthened. New technologies, and advances in old technologies, need demonstration projects to determine their feasibility in rural Alaska. Significant energy savings could be realized by a village-wide energy conservation and weatherization program. Tae 1. Village Specific Recommendations The installation of the central diesel electric power station is recommended. This will provide a source of economical, reliable electric power for the village. Waste heat recovery from the anticipated central power plant, utilized for space heating in the village is marginally economically feasible. Further detailed analysis of feasibility should be done once the central power plant is operational. Hydroelectric power generation was considered but found to be economically unattractive. The following steps should be taken: a. Initiate design of a central power plant. b. Initiate feasibility study of waste heat recovery. is 2.0 BACKGROUND Introduction False Pass was established in 1918 by P. E. Harris Co. as a salmon fishing and processing site. The community has always been directly involved in the fishing industry. The P.E. Harris Cannery was purchased by Bristol Bay Native Corporation in 1975 and renamed Peter Pan Seafoods. The complex was sold after the processing plant burned in 1981. There is no indication from the present owners as to whether it will be rebuilt. False Pass receives barge service from three shipping companies, Western Pioneer Lines, Alaska Marine Shipping, and the Alaska Standard. Because of the weather, air travel is unpredictable year round. Charter flights are available from Peninsula Airways. The village consists of 16 wood frame houses. There is an average of 3.5 person per household. The ground is quite marshy so most homes are built on pilings. The older houses have little or no insulation. The cannery bunkhouse, mess hall, hotel, clinic and laundry now receive only intermittent use. The school, owned by the State, and the community building are the only public facilities. The school, serving 15 students, is a member of the Aleutian Region School District. Location The unincorporated village of False Pass lies on the east- ern side of Unimak Island overlooking the Isanotski Strait which connects the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea (Figure 2.1). False Pass is 635 miles southwest of Anchorage and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gue 2l KEY KOTLIK SAINT MARYS KALSKAG ANIAK LOWER KALSKAG NEWTOK NIGHTMUTE CHEFORNAK MEKORYUK TOKSOOK BAY TUNUNAK HOOPER BAY CHIGNIK LAGOON CHIGNIK IVANOF BAY FALSE PASS COLD BAY NIKOLSKI ATKA ST. PAUL ST. GEORGE 11 TunuNaK — 10 roxsoox say Q MEKoRYUK wQ> sa ! \~ pO NIGHTMUTE Joy fa Leucromash ST a 8 oes : } -. mavrion ae Ft SAINT mapys_2 oS Yh wausKag 3 - a8 Lower oe anak KALSKAG a aes SSivanor ev 15 — 60 120 180 240 300 MILES Figure 2.1 LOCATION MAP 35 miles west of Cold Bay. Unimak is: the largest and first island of the Aleutian Chain. Climate The island topography includes mountains rising to 10,000 feet, broad glacial valleys, low swampy areas, meandering streams and several active volcanoes, all within 25 miles of False Pass. The village is located on a flat beach and outwash plain of an unnamed stream wrich drains a broad glacial valley. Climatic data is not recorded routinely at False Pass, but records from neighboring Cold Bay are considered representative of the area (Figure 2.2). The maritime climate of False Pass is characterized by mild winters and cool summers. The mean summer temperature is 55°F and the mean winter ‘ temperature is 12°F. The temperature extremes are a maximum of 78° and a minimum of minus 13°F. Annual precipitation is approximately 33 inches. There are approximately 9,865 heating degree days at False Pass. Strong winds are common at False Pass. There may be considerable differences between wind speeds and direction at the village site and those at Cold Bay because of differences in topography. Local topography suggests the winds would be extremely gusty and turbulent, precluding their use for wind generated electricity. 2.3 Climatic Background —— Cold Bay data Pee ea gan level man! apa j may) gun | gut ! : ! AuGi sep! oct} Novi DEC ., Light Conditions & [_[emetudes Sereut! tavtvgne! Coe ee Sah ey | | If 1 i ! Fae | Flying Weather 1.000 tt ceiling /3 mites visibstity 109 Saar -| a {—- =e Bay ae om io 33 S380 i se “Sas t ek Lee a i [oc rresaanisas Winds Mean wind speed /prevasting direction Af (a | as Fc fame re 220 sse_| Sse | Sse | NW Se_| se_ e | SE} SSE | wom | SSE | NNW 5 i z 5 E35} E3 Sas Occurrence a 4 Precipitation 0 1 [| Maximum precipitation sy = sf—— a ed. g ! Growing Degree Days HE 21g | || peer UN eee oA EE jews JAN | FEB; MAR! APR | MAY) JUN | JUL AUG! SEP. OCT | NOV ec Source: Department of Community and Community Profile Series. Figure 2.2 na Regional Affairs, Population The population of False Pass has been related to the salmon canaery which is the economic mainstay of the village. ‘There were 170 seasonal employees in 1981. The growth rate is expected to decrease if the cannery is not rebuilt. lcensus Year 1920 1939 |1950 |1960 ne 1980 Population 59 88 42 Number of douses | Economy The village economy has always been based on the salmon industry and subsistence hunting and fishing. The village is located wholly within the Aleutian National Wildlife Refuge and wildlife is diverse and abundant. Several residents own commercial boats which are moored either at False Pass or King Cove. A few residents are engaged in the crabbing industry. The school employs two teachers. The post office and cannery store are combined to provide a permanent position for the store employees. The cannery also requires a year round caretaker. The 1978 census estimated the per capita income as $11,420. False Pass is associated with the Aleut Regional Corporation. The local profit making organization is the False Pass Corporation. 2.5 3.0 VILLAGE VISIT Poor weather condition delayed many attempts to reach the village of False Pass from Cold Bay. Weatiier conditions were favorable on December 1st and the fieid team was able to reach the village. Many attempts at radio and telephone communication prior to the visit were unsuccessful. The majority of the villagers were out hun:ing because of the improved weather. At a meetings with che villagers the Energy Reconnaissance Program was explained and discussions soon focused on the recent fire at the cannery (March 8, 1981). The villagers were concerned that there were no known plans to rebuild the cannery. At present there is no central electrical generation facility at False Pass. The villagers were hoping that such a facility would be installed in the near future. The majority of the villagers work at the canneries in Chignik, Kodiak and Bristol Bay; however many would prefer to work in the village. Although the Corps of Engineers has determined that hydropower is not feasible at False Pass, it appeared that there might be opportunities for a more restricted development just to supply the villagers' needs. Wind power is a source of interest in all villages althouah there are severe doubts about its reliability, especially in light of all the widely reported problems at Nelson Lagoon. Be 1 Several residents expressed interest in the State assistance programs for weatherization. Because of rapidly climbing costs of fuel oil for residential heating weatherization was seen as a necessary first step. 3.2 4.0 EXISTING HEATING AND ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATING FACILITIES 4.1 4.2 4.3 Bulk Fuel Storage and Heating Appliances Bulk fuel storage capacity within the village is listed, segregated by sector, in Figure 4.1. These capacities are based on actual tank sizes and on estimates where reliable data could not be obtained. The storage capacity of domestic fuel tanks and 55 gallon drums is not included in the bulk storage capacities. Also listed in Figure 4.1 are the types of heating and cooking appliances, segregated by sector, being used in the village. Electrical Generation Facilities The existing generating equipment installed in the village is listed in Figure 4.2. Comments on the operation of the generators are included. The anticipated generation equipment for a central power plant is also listed on Figure 4.2. Once the central power plant becomes operational the individual generators now used would be disconnected or used for back up. Fuel Oil Usage Figure 4.3 illustrates the use of fuel oil in the village. Consumption of fuel oil by sector for space heating is listed as a percentage of the total oil consumption. Similarly, the percentage of oil used for electrical power generation is shown. 4.1 4.4 The oil used for space heating is broken down to show the portion that actually heats building space, and that which is lost to waste. The electrical generation fuel oil is also separated into electrical energy and waste heat segments. Fuel oil consumption in the village was based on records, where avilable, and calculated estimates where no reliable records existed. Please refer to the main report for an explanation of the estimating process. The fuel oil consumption for electrical power generation was based on an anticipated central electrical power plant, with the generating equipment listed in Figure 4.2. Electrical Energy Distribution The energy flow through the electrical generation sector is depicted graphically on Figure 4.4. The “pie-chart" represents the total energy dedicated to the generation of electrical power. Each sector in the village consumes a slice of the pie, as shown. aise €°v FALSE PASS/1982 BULK FUEL STORAGE CAPACITIES AND TYPES OF HEATING APPLIANCES SECTOR ELECTRICAL RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL SCHOOLS PUBLIC GENERATION av FUEL Of < 275000 20000 Ss wn 45000 : ’ és er are ee ae LEGEND: TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE TYPE OF HEATING APPLIANCE ] OIL-FIRED FORCED AIR FURNACE 2 OIL- FIRED BOILER WITH WATER/GLYCOL DISTRIBUTION 3 ORIP-TYPE OIL STOVE/FURNACE 4 wood STOVE 5 PROPANE COOKING STOVES 6 WASTE HEAT FROM GENERATORS *DAY TANKS AND FUEL DRUMS ARE NOT INCLUDED. ** Anticipated central generation storage Figure 4.1 Village Residents Proposed Central Electricity Generation Facility ELECTRICAL GENERATION GENERATOR OUTPUT RATING FALSE PASS TYPE OF ENGINE Var ious TYPE OF GENERATOR Various Figure 4.2 FACILITIES ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION COMMENTS ON OPERATION 120/240V 120/240V ~——— Engine is in poor condition. School may get power from the Peter Pann Cannery in the near future. Central power system would replace individual generators. Those listed above would serve as indi- vidual emergency backup. Typical loperation would be a single 50 kW unit, with the 30 KW unit used at night. FUEL OIL USAGE FALSE PASS / 1982 SECTOR END USE Space Heat 100 90 39% 80 70 Waste Heat 263 30 Generator Waste Heat 20 10 Electricity R Residential 50 Cc Commercial 0 P Public 5 Ss School 10 E Electrical Power Generation 35 ESTIMATED FUEL OIL USE = 37200 GAL = 5020x10°BrU Figure 4.3 4.5 %o Lo %o So %o -LECTRICAL GENERATION SECTOR ENERGY DISTRIBUTION FALSE PASS P Residential 12 % Commercial 0% Public 2 %o School 3% Waste Heat 81% Generation Losses 2% TOTAL ENERGY 1740 x 10 BTU/YEAR TOTAL ELECTRIC POWER 351 MWH/YEAR Figure 4.4 4.6 5.0 ENERGY BALANCE The estimated energy consumption in False Pass during 1982 is listed in Table 5.1. Estimates of the different types of energy consumed by the various sectors are based upon the 1980-81 fuel purchase records kept by the cannery store and the school. Estimates based on the population, square footage of residences and other buildings, and calculated energy usage factors, were used where data were incomplete. Wood use was estimated using the observations and discussions with wood users that occurred during the village visit. The flow of energy through the village is illustrated in Figure 5.1. In 1982 it is estimated that 7,774 MMBTU of fuel will enter False Pass in the form of gasoline, wood and fuel oil. This fuel will be distributed to the various sectors and used for transportation, cooking, heating and electricity generation. The conversion of the fuel to its end use will result in 53% or 4,103 MMBTU of energy lost as heat. 53% of this waste heat could be recovered using conservation and waste heat recovery practices. The actual amount of energy used by each sector is listed in the last column of the diagram. The 1982 projected distribution of useable energy, if a central generation system is installed in the village, is shown in Figure 5.2. The distribution represents the quantity of energy that will be required by each sector (excluding transportation) for electric lights and appliances, water heating, space heating and cooking, and generation station service. Percentages listed in the figure can be multiplied by the useable energy of 12922 x 10® Btus to determine the projected energy requirements for a particular end use in a given sector. These projected energy requirements do not include energy conversion losses and therefore represent the actual quantity of energy required for each end use. Dat: cs VILLAGE: FALSE PASS/1982 ENERGY BALANCE FUEL OIL GASOLINE PROPANE —+ TOTAL ELECTRICITY etu BTU SECTOR GAL LBs. | secron | 10. biel ri08 x 108 x108 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL 0 0 0 108 54 203 6 SCHOOLS 205 20 368 | 10 ELECTRICAL GENERATION TRANSPORTATION *station service or distribution losses Table 5.1 aanbi4 ls FALSE PASS/1982 Pop: 60 HOUSEHOLDS: 16 9,865 HTG. DEGREE DAYS - a/ OucT r | eueL AMOUNT ENERGY PRooUC ELECTRICAL ENO USE TOTAL BY SECTOR CONVERSION DISTRIBUTION BY SECTOR USABLE ENERGY | G TRANSPORTATION ; TRANSPORTATION GASOLINE 1 Tan ame (750) ; a | PROPANE COOKING RESIDENTIA - 7 RESIDENTIAL wooo esipeNTiay HEATING £600) (2000) (2506) (1400) (2316) HEATING/ (1500) (216) COOKING ee | ~ (1000) | COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL HEATING -o- FUEL OIL POWER POWER GEN. (5024) GENERATION ELECTRICAL GENERATORS (1740) SCHOOL(S) SCHOOL(S) HEATING/ (368) (514) PUBLIC PUBLIC (203) = HEATING (270) TOTAL TOTAL INPUT USABLE ENERGY ENERGY RECOVERABLE (7774) WASTE HEAT (2177) (5849 WASTE HEAT NON - RECOVERABLE (1926) NOTE * , NUMBERS IN BRACKETS ARE 10© BTU'S. WVYOVIG MOlA ADYSANS DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL USABLE ENERGY FALSE PASS W/ CENTRAL GENERATION END USE BY SECTOR E(7.4%) 30 foe) °o “ °o oD °o H/C(65.6%) RESIDENTIAL on oO PERCENTAGE (%) » ° 30 PWR GEN —- SCHOOL PUBLIC H/C(5.5%) 0 END USE SUMMARY * INSTALLED P( 1.2%) E(2.0%) WH(0.9%) E(1.4%) E LIGHTS, REFRIGERATOR/FREEZERS, 10.8 % VIDEO, AND OTHER ELECTRICAL USES WH WATER HEATING 7.1% H/C SPACE HEATING, COOKING AND MISC. 80.8% P GENERATOR STATION SERVICE/ 1.2% TRANSMISSION LOSSES TOTAL USABLE ENERGY 3S 12922 x 108 Btu % DOES NOT INCLUDE ENERGY USED FOR T AND RECOVERABLE WASTE HEAT Fina q 9 RANSPORTATION 6.0 ENERGY FORECASTS 6.1 Population Projection The population of False Pass was forecast for the twenty year planning period based upon historical population trends, expected changes resulting from planned capital projects, and the villagers' projections of the growth of their community. Historical data from 1950 to 1980 approximates an average annual growth rate of 2%. Capital projects that would increase the current rate of growth are not planned at this time, therefore, a 2% growth rate was used in the projection. Historical and projected populations are listed below. Figure 6.1 illustrates the population projection over the 20 year planning period. Historical Projected 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 42 41 62 65 75 83 102 Capital Projects Forecast As far as can be determined, no major capital projects are imminent at False Pass. No details could be obtained over the future of the cannery site. Although the villagers would prefer to see the facility rebuilt, the owners are undecided. The State Department of Transportation proposes to repair the runway but this will not have an effect on 6.1 6.3 the electrical or thermal energy requirements of the community. Some potential capital projects mentioned during the village visit are as follows: Airport - The State Department of Transportation plans to repair the runway to its full 3900 length. Schools - The school plans to buy electrical power from the Peter Pan Cannery as soon as the cannery installs an additional generator. The school will then operate its current generator as backup. Cannery - Some of the cannery buildings burned in March 1981. Plans are indefinite as to whether or not these will be rebuilt and operated in the future. Current cannery plans are to install a 75 KW generator to service remaining cannery building needs and provide power for the school. Thermal Energy Projection Figure 6.2 presents the anticipated thermal energy consumption of False Pass during the forecast period. The thermal energy is provided by the combustion of fuel oil and wood. The projections were based on fuel usage records, and fuel use estimates, of the facilities in False Pass. Details of the estimation methods and calculations are included in the main report. 6.4 Electrical Energy and Peak Demand Projection Figure 6.3 presents the anticipated electrical enecgy consumption of False Pass, by sector, during the forecast period. The projections were based on the existing electrical loads, consumption records, and estimates where accurate data were not available. Details of the estimation methods and calculations are included in the main report. 6.3 THERMAL ENERGY (MMBTUD | POPULATION POPULATION PROJECTION FALSE PASS 188 rt 82+ 7B 62 i982 1984 1986 1988 1998 1992 1994 1996 1998 2228 YEAR j Figure 6.1 THERMAL ENERGY PROJECTION FALSE PASS 4220 3522 3222 2522 2e22 | 4 1 4 . 2 ak 1 4 ae 1 —" 1952 1954 198¢ 1992 igs2 1954 1996 19S 227 YEAR 1 oO w w Figure 6.2 6.4 ELECTRICAL ENERGY ELECTRICAL ENERGY BY SECTOR (MWH) PEAK DEMAND (KW) TOTAL (MWH) PEAK DEMAND PROJECTION FALSE PASS 78 62 by) 48 32 a Been ess eile 1962 1884 1986 1988 1838 1932 1994 18236 1888 2222 YEAR : ELECTRICAL ENERGY PROJECTION FALSE PASS 175 -— 158 L 125 - 182 —_—_ 7s L 4 125 128 L in Nose ee ‘ Tele Fo pememee* 2 | ase Pe ae a ae a eS Sok dane i Se i or Pa e 1s 1 1 hana 1 4 + dhaceemencl. 1 i allel amen icine 1932 1984 19286 19288 1932 1992 1994 1995 1998 2ce2 YEAR G Electrical Generation Sector C = Commercial P Public S = Schools R = Residential Figure 6.3 6.5 7.0 ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Wind False Pass is protected on the east and west sides by steep mountain ranges. It is suspected that these mountains cause turbulent, unsteady winds much of the year. Long term wind data must be gathered before the feasilibity of wind power in False Pass could be judged. Wood There are no trees at False Pass, but a small amount of driftwood is gathered by village residents for home heating. The use of driftwood for fuel in a central power station would require high gathering cost and would not be viable for power generation. Coal No coal deposits have been identified near False Pass. Transportation charges to bring in coal from Anchorage are high. Peat The Island of Unimak has large reserves of low quality peat. The peat is not considered fuel quality due to the high content of volcanic ash. 7o1 Geothermal A small warm spring is located 1 mile west of the village. The great distance from the hot springs and the unpredictable changes in a volcanic area make development of geothermal energy not feasible. Solar The sky has an average of 9/10 cloud cover every day of the year. The low occurrence of cloud free days and low intensity of radiation make even passive solar heating unfeasible. Hydropower Although precipitation sustains a number of small streams throughout the year, none of the streams have reasonable potential for adequate hydroelectric generation. A Corps of Engineers study completed in 1981 identified potential hydroelectric power sites in the vicinity of False Pass. Alternate Plan B investigates the potential for hydro power on the stream that is 3 miles west of the village. Conservation Measures Waste Heat Capture The majority of the energy in the fuel oil burned ina diesel generator is lost as waste heat through the engine cooling water, exhaust gases, and radiant heat from the engine. Much of the waste heat can be reclaimed from the engine cooling water and exhaust gas by transferring the heat in heat exchangers to a secondary fluid, usually an antifreeze solution. This is then pumped to buildings and used in heaters for space heating. Alternate Plan A, detailed in Section 8.2 of this report, investigates the feasibility of waste heat recovery at False Pass. Weatherization Homes and buildings built on the Alaska Peninsula in the past have in general been poorly insulated and weatherized. Heat loss from such buildings is high, in the forms of heat loss directly through the walls, floor, and ceiling, and by the cold air that enters around leaky doors and windows. Insulating and weatherizing a home can often cut the heating fuel requirement in half or more, and make the building more comfortable and liveable at the same time. The materials required are inexpensive, and the skills necessary for installation low. This work is perhaps the most effective way of reducing village energy usage. 7.3 Technology Ranking Figure 7.1 presents a ranking of the technologi2s that could be applied to the village. Each technology was examined on the basis of state-of-the-art quality of the technology, cost, reliability, resource, labor, and environmental impact. Please refer to the main report for the ranking methodology. 7.4 cig Village of False Pass Technology Environ- Ranking State-of-the-Art Cost bility Resource Labor mental Factor Impact Weatherization* 5 5 5 5 5 5 1.00 Diesel Power 5 4 4 4 4 4 0.87 Waste Heat Recovery* 5 4 4 4 4 4 0.87 Hydroelectric Power 5 1 4 3) 4 4 0.75 Wind Energy Conversion Systems 3 3 2 3 2 5 | 0.60 \ | Geothermal Energy 3 ¥. 1 it: 2 3 0.38 Steam Power from local F fuel,wood,coal,ect... N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A 0.00 Gasification of wood,coal or peat N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A 0.00 Generation via synchronous Induction* * 4 3 2 2 ] 4 0.57 Electrical Load Management* 1 4 0.68 * Energy Conservation Measures Note: 0 = worst case, 5 = best case Figure 7.1 N/A Not Applicable 8.0 S21 8.1.1 ENERGY PLAN Base Case General Description The base case plan for False Pass is to install a central electrical generation plant. A reconnaissance level study of the village indicated that the centralized power system should include the following components: Ws Two 50 KW diesel generators that would be used to meet the major power demands. A 30 KW diesel generator to be used for night and summer time lower demands and as backup. A central power distribution system operating at 7200 volts, single phase. This higher voltage would minimize distribution loses and voltage drop in the system through the use of step-up and step- down transformers. Single phase power of 120/240 volts would be provided to village residents. Watt meters at the service entrance of all power users in order to provide equitable billing for all consumers. A 12' X 20' building that would house the generators and electrica! equipment. 8.1 8.1.2 Base Case Cost Analysis The installation cost of the anticipated central electric power plant was estimated to be $364,000. The cost is itemized below: Generators and Equipment 64,600 Fuel Storage 3,500 Generator Building 120,000 Shipping 7,400 Labor 18,400 Equipment Rental 50,000 Subtotal 263,200 Engineering 25,200 Project Management 12,600 Test 12,600 Contingency 50,400 Total Estimated Cost $364,000 The plant value was amortized over a 20 year period. Additional generation capacity was added, in increments of 50 kw, as required by the growing peak demand. The cost of additional generation capacity was estimated to be $1650/kw. The cost of fuel oil was set at $9.63/MMBTU, ba3ed on a fuel cost of $1.30/gallon. Operation and maintenance expenses were estimated at 8¢/kwh. Table 8.1 presents the itemized present value analysis of the base case for the 20 year study period. The discounted 20 year present value was $1,012,400. 3.2 e° FALSE PASS PLAN 1 BASE CASE DIESEL - ELECTRIC 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991. INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 29.9 FUEL L739 18.9 HOG 20.9 22.0 Cine 24.4 25.6 26.9 28.2 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 8.5 8.7 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.7 959 10.1 10.4 10.6 TOTAL 50.8 52.0 5322 54.5 55.9 5/2 58.7 60.1 6le7 68.8 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST 50.8 52.0 53.2 54.5 55/39 5722 58.7 60.1 61.7 63.8 DISLUUNTED PLAN COST 50.8 50.5 5022 49.9 49.6 49.4 49.1 48.9 48.7 Scat: DIESEL - ELECTRIC 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 “TOTAL INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION 2959 29.9 29.9 2959 29.9 2519 29.9 29.9 29139 29/59 549.0 FUEL 29.6 31.0 32.6 34.1 35.8 SYeou) 39.3 41.2 a3 45.2 b97ES OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE LOz9 TT 11.4 11.6 11.9 1b 12.4 12.6 12:09 182 2559 TOTAL : 70.4 72.1 1339 15.7 1726 79.6 81.6 83.8 86.0 88.3 1361.8 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST 70.4 72.1 1309 Wheat 77.6 7926 81.6 83.8 86.0 88.3 1361.8 DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 52.4 52.1 51.8 515 51.3 STI 50.9 50.7 50.5 50.4 1012.4 1982-2034 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST 4360.0 TOTAL DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 2076.6 NOTE: *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's TOTAL PLAN COST 2076.6 Table 8.1 8a1).3 Social and Environmental Evaluation Base Case Plan Summary: Operation of anticipated central diesel generation 1) 2) Community Preference: At the time of the village visit there was no central generation system. The villagers are requesting that central generation be installed to reduce their cost of electricity and increase its availability and reliability. Central generation has been assumed as the base case. Environmental Considerations: i) Air Quality: Exhausting combustion gases releases a small amount of pollutants to the local environment, but the impact is minimal. ii) Noise: The exhaust stacks from the generator produce a considerable amount of noise. The installation of more effective mufflers would reduce the noise level. iii) Water Quality: No impact. iv) Fish and Wildlife Impacts: No known impact. v) Terrestrial Impacts: There is no impact on vegetation or soils. vi) Land Use and Ownership Status: All leases and permits are in place. 8.4 8.1.4 Base Case Technical Evaluation The anticipated operation of the cent1al diesel electric power plant in False Pass is expected to conform as follows: 1. High Reliability. Diesel electric is a well proven well understood technology with a successful history in rural Alaska. Backup generation allows maintenance operations on the generators to be performed without major power interruption. Occasional system downtime is expected for distribution system naintenance. Safety. A small risk is realized by the storace and handling of fuel oil. Normal risks associated with electrical power are also present. Availability. There are no indications that spare parts will become difficult to obtain in the future. The availability of fuel to the power plant depends on the reliability of transportation to the village. 8.5 8.2 Alternate Plan A 8.2.1 General Description The Alternate Plan A for False Pass is the installation of a waste heat recovery system installed at the anticipated central electric power plant, with the following features: 1. Jacket water heat recovery equipment installed on the two 50 KW generators. 2. A distribution system consisting of pumps, piping and valves to deliver the ethylene glycol heat transfer fluid to the heated buildings and return it to the power plant. 3. Heating equipment installed in the school and community center buildings, to provide space heating. 4. A control system that automatically regulates the supply of heat to the buildings, and rejects any surplus waste heat to the engine radiators. 8.2.2 Alternate A Cost Analysis Table 8.2 presents the itemized, estimated cost to install the jacket water heat recovery system. The installation cost of the heat recovery system was estimated to be $89,500. The system value was amortized over a 10 year period. 8.6 ESTIMATED HEAT RECOVERY COSTS Project Location Generators (kw) Estimated total kwh generated Generators equipped with heat recovery equipment CALCULATED VALUES Average Generation Rate Percent of On-Line Capacity Maximum Jacket Water Heat Recovery Percent Jacket Water Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Available Estimated Recovered Heat Utilized MAJOR COST ITEMS 1. Main piping 150 feet x $120/ft. 2. Heat Recovery Equipment 3. Circulating Pumps 4. Heaters and Miscellaneous Hardware 5. Contingencies (30%) 6. Base Cost 7. Project Management (5%) 8. Engineering (10%) 9. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST 10. O & M COST 11. Recovery Efficiency Table 8.2 8.7 ; False Pass ___50,50,30 103,000 kwh/yr 50,50 12 kw 24g __3300 Btu/min a 43% -085x10© BtuH -054xX106 BtuH 18,000 21,700 65,200 13,700 18,000 78,000 3,900 7,800 | 89,500 2.11/MMBtu 4593 Btu/kwh The cost of fuel oil normally used for space heating, which was offset by the captured waste heat, was set at $9.63/MMBTU, based on a fuel oil cost of $1.30/gallon. Operation and maintenance costs were calculated to be $2.11/MMBTU waste heat captured. Table 8.3 presents the itemized present value analysis of the plan, for the 20 year study period. The discounted net benefit of the system was $32,200. 8.2.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation Alternate Plan A Summary: Waste heat capture from anticipated central generators for sale to major consumers. 1) Community Preference: The villagers of False Pass recognize that the installation of waste heat in conjunction with a central power plant will improve the efficiency of fuel use in the community. Installation of the waste heat capture system will require local expertise and should provide a number of jobs during the construction phase. The system should operate with minimal maintenance although one part time person would be required until the system has been tested and initial minor problems have been solved. 8.8 DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMOPTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN COST NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS EXTRA COSTS BENEFITS NET BENEFITS DISCOUNTED: NET BENEFITS 1982 24.4 50.8 50.8 oooco~"~w eae oooon 1983 24.4 18.9 8.7 52.0 52.0 50.5 cCooco~w So ety & COOCOCOWw NOTE: 1984 24.4 19.9 950) 53.2 53.2 50.2 1984 11.6 9.6 -2.0 -1.8 FALSE PASS PLAN 2 ALTERNATE A 1985 24.4 20.9 O52 54.5 54.5 49.9 1985 11.6 10.1 -1.5 -1.3 1986 24.4 22.0 9.4 bdo 09 39 49.6 1986 11.6 10.6 -1.0 -0.9 1987 24.4 23.2 Saf Slice 57.2 49.4 1987 117 ATL -0.5 -0.4 *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.3 1988 24.4 24.4 979 58.7 58.7 49.1 1988 11.7 iy, 0.0 0.0 1989 24.4 25.6 LO 3 60.1 60.1 48.9 1989 Ly 1253 0.5 0.4 1990 24.4 26.9 10.4 61.7 61.7 48.7 1990 ey, 12.9 Tel 0.8 1991 Coro 28.2 10.6 68.8 68.8 SA! 1991 Ls 1350 1.7 t.3 oT’s DIESEL - ELECTRIC 1992 INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION 29/59) FUEL 29.6 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 10.9 TOTAL 70.4 TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST 70.4 DISCOUNTED PLAN COST 52.4 NON ELECTRIC BENEFITS 1992 EXTRA COSTS 11.8 BENEFITS 14.1 NET BENEFITS oa8 DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS Let TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST TOTAL DISCOUNTED PLAN COST TOTAL DISCOUNTED NET BENEFITS TOTAL PLAN COST 1993 1994 2939 29.9 31.0 32.6 1.1 11.4 Tdi 1309 diol! 1329 5221 51.8 1993 1994 11.8 11.9 14.8 155 3.0 3.6 Opi 230 1982-2034 4364.0 2076.6 143.2 1933.4 Table 8.3 (continued) FALSE PASS PLAN 2 ALTERNATE A 1995 29.9 34.1 11.6 157 15.7. 5125 1995 He9 16.2 4.3 2.9 1996 29-9 35.8 11.9 77.6 77.6 STs 1996 11.9 17.0 5.0 SIZ 1997 2909) 3755 12 od 79.6 79.6 SLL 1997 12.0 17.8 5.8 3.6 NOTE: 1998 29159 s 3953, 12.4 81.6 81.6 50.9 1998 12.0 18.6 6.6 4.0 *** ALL VALUES IN $1900's 1999 raoe) 41.2 12s0) 83.8 83.8 50.7 1999 1250 19.5 7.4 4.4 2000 29.9 43.1 229 86.0 86.0 5059 2000 digi 20.4 S23 4.7 2001 29).9 45.2 AS 32 88.3 88.3 50.4 2001 12s. 2.3 952 Dek TOTAL 549, 5977 rae 1361. 1361. 1012. OWnwoa @ TOTAL 212% 266. Don 32, MwWwWW 2) Environmental Considerations: i) if) iii) iv) vi) Air Quality: There will be a reduction in fuel consumption in the village resulting in reduced hydrocarbon, monoxides and nitrogen oxide emissions. i Noise Levels: No impact. Water Quality: There would be a minor impact if a major leakage occurred ‘in the coolant system. : Fish and Wildlife Impacts: None. Terrestrial Impacts: Will be: minimal during the installation of the distribution system and will be restricted to the: village site. Land use and Ownership Status: It is assumed that the village will make the necessary arrangements for the right of: way requirements for the distribution system. 8.2.4 Alternate Plan A Technical Evaluation Operation of the waste heat recovery system in False Pass, in conjunction with the central power plant, is expected to conform to the following expectations: 1. z High Reliability. The system utilizes simple, reliable components that are readily available off the shelf from a variety of sources. Safety. A well maintained systen has a very low hazard potential. 8.11 3. Availability. All components needed are available immediately. The system is relatively easy to implement. 8.3 Alternate B 8.3.1 General Description The Alternate Plan B for False Pzss is to install a 40 KW hydroelectric power plant on the stream that is 3 miles to the west of the village. This stream, identified as "Site 2 Low" in the Corps of Engineers report, has an estimated low flow of 4.5 CFS. The run-of-river project diverts streamflow through a penstock to a turbine-generator power plant. Major features of the plan include: ° A 40 KW turbine-generator power plant with a net head of 118 feet; A diversion structure; 2000 feet of 10 inch penstock; 16000 feet of 3-phase transmission line; A 3 mile access road. NOTE: See site no. 2 of the Corps of Engineers and Fish and Wildlife Service report "Hydroelectric Development Evaluation at False Pass, Alaska" April 1981. 8.3.2 Alternate B Cost Analysis Table 8.4 presents the itemized cost of installing a hydroelectric system in False Pass. The estimated initial capital cost of the hydro system was estimated to be $3,045,000 in 1982 dollars. 8.12 ESTIMATED HYDRO COSTS* Project Location ; False Pass Average Annual Flow (cfs) 4.5 cfs Total Head (ft) 130 ft Transmission Line Length (miles) 3 mi Road Length (miles) 3 mi CALCULATED VALUES Net Head ___.118 ft Generator Unit Rating (kw) 50 kw Energy Available @ 30% Plant Factor (kwh/yr) 131,000 kwh/yr Penstock Diameter (inches) 10 in MAJOR COST ITEMS 1. Power House 150,000 2. Turbines, Generators, Valves, & Switchgear 150,000 3. Diversion Structure (Earthfill dam) 655,000 4. Penstock (Buried) 2000 ft X $150/ft 300,000 5. Transmission Line 3 mi X $900000/m:. 270,000 6. Access Road 3 mi X $500000/mi 150,000 7. Mobilization and Demobilization 500,000 8. Base Cost 2,175,000 9. Contingencies (25%) 544,000 10. Project Management (5%) 109,000 11. Engineering (10%) 217,000 12. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST __ 3,045,000 * From Corps of Engineers Report "Hydroelectric Development Evaluation at False Pass, Alaska", October 1981. Table 8.4 JR Bs) The hydro project is planned for completion in 1984 and is expected to have a useful life of 50 years. In False Pass diesel generation will be required to supplement hydro during periods of low flow. Table 8.5 presents an itemized present worth analysis of the plan for the 20 and 50 year study periods. The discounted present worth of the plan is $2,200,700 and $4,351,000, respectively. 8.3.3 Social and Environmental Evaluation Alternate Plan Summary 1) Community Preference: Village interest is high for hydro electric power as the primary alternative to diesel. The low O&M and reliability of the system are important considreations. Also, there is the potential for excess power production which would be available for either local commercial developments or possibly resistance heating. Installation of a hydro facility would provide several jobs locally during the construction phase and a part time position for a person to operate and maintain the system. The community is strongly in favor of a feasibility study to determine an accurate cost and fully access the potential of the proposed installation, if the preliminary reconnaissance level study indicates that there is an economic basis for proceeding. 8.14 co . b ui DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION bye OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL HYDRO - ELECTRIC 3 INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST DISCOUNTED PLAN. COST 1982 24.4 17.9 8.5 50.8 ooo coo 50.8 50.8 1983 24.4 TS.) 8.7 52.0 ooo ooo 52.0 50.5 NOTE: FALSE af A3S ALTERNATE 1984 1985 24.4 24.4 19.9 4.6 920 2.0 bea2 Sled 0.0 118.3 0.0 5.4 0.0; | 123.7 53.2 | 154.8 50.2 141.6 B 15555 138.2 1987 156.3 134.8 **kk ALL VALUES IN $1000's Table 8.5 TS 7c 131.6 158.0 128.5 1990 24. 80; lis. 123. 159.0 125/510 ON wor Dw DIESEL - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION FUEL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL HYDRO - ELECTRIC INTEREST AND AMORTIZATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE TOTAL eo jw TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST Oo DISCOUNTED PLAN COST TOTAL YEARLY PLAN COST TOTAL DISCOUNTED PLAN COST TOTAL PLAN COST 1992 1993 29.9 29.9 9.2 10.0 3.4 3.6 42.5 43.5 118.3 1183 5.6 2-0 124.0 124.0 166.5 167.5 1239 12050 1982-2034 8869.1 4351.0 4351.0 1994 29/9 10.9 3.8 44.6 118.3 124.0 168.6 11353 FALSE PASS PLAN 3 ALTERNATE 1995 29.9 11.8 4.0 45.7 118.3 124.0 169.8 T1556 B 1996 29.9 ZBI 4.2 46.9 118.3 124.1 171.0 113.0 1997 29% 13% NmOeowo 42. 118. 124. 17223 110.6 NOTE: Table 8.5 (continued) 1998 1999 29.9 29.9 15.0 16.2 4.7 5.0 49.0 SLL 1U8 53.) 18). 3 Bey Dae! 124.1 124.1 3.7 | 175.2 108.3 106.0 *** ALL VALUES IN $1000's 2000 2959 750 5.2 52.6 118.3 124.1 176.7 103.8 2001 2929 18.8 52D 54.3 118.3 124.1 178.4 101.7 TOTAL 549.0 237.4 88.1 874.5 2011.9 95.6 2107.4 2981.9 2200.7 2) Environmental Considerations: i) ii) iii) iv) vi) Air Quality: There will be a slight improvement in air quality because the diesels will be relegated to a back up role. Noise: Levels will be almost eliminated except when the diesels are run for testing or when operating in their capacity as a backup to the hydro. Water Quality: No impact. Fish and Wildlife: The small diversion dam will not have an appreciable effect, although detailed investigation of stream use would have to be conducted during a possible feasibility study. Terrestrial Impacts: Will be associated with the road construction to the diversion dam site, the diversion dam construction (assumed to be rock crib type), the penstock route, powerhouse and transmission line to the village. Land Use and Land Ownership Status: The dam site is on land administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Either the village would expand its land selections to include the site and corridor or the necessary permission would have to be sought from Fish and Wildlife. 8.17 8.3.4 Alternate Plan B Technical Evaluation A hydro electric power plant operating in False Pass is expected to conform to the following: 1. Reliable. A possible power shortage could occur if a dry season causes low flow. 2. Safety. A well maintained systen will present little hazard to operators or village residents. 3. Availability. Construction would utilize conventional well established construction practices. Replacement parts would be difficult to obtain at the remote Alaska site. 8.18 9.0 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Table 9.1 summarizes the village plans, the associated present worth analysis, FALSE nergy Source Present Wort Non-Electrica Tota FALSE Energy Source Present Wort Non-Electrica ‘ota PASS Benefits PASS Benefits Table 9.1 Base Case 82-200 Alternative A Diese Diesel and Waste Heat Base Case [$2,076,600 FE [$2,076,000 “eae [$1,012,400 $32,700 582-2034 | Alternative A | Diesel and eee nehe and any non-electric benefits. ternative Hydro 7200, a ternative Hydro r , Direct power generation costs, excluding administrative costs, are presented in Table 9.2 for each energy plan. Table 9.2 Energy Base Case Alternative A Alternative B Production Plan 1 Cost Plan 2 Cost Plan 3 Cost Year (kwh/yr.) ( ¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) (¢/kwh ) 7 1962 106,100 47.88 47.88 47.88 1983 109,100 47.66 47.66 47.66 1984 112,000 47.50 49.29 47.50 1985 115,000 47.39 48.70 134.61 1986 117,900 47.41 48.26 131.89 1987 120,900 47.31 47.73 129.28 1988 123,800 47.42 47.42 126.90 1989 126,800 47.40 47.00 124.61 1990 129,800 47.53 46.69 122.50 1991 132,800 57.81 50.53 124.62 1992 135,800 51.84 50.14 122.61 1993 138,800 S295 49.78 120.68 1994 141,900 52.08 49.54 118.82 1995 145,000 S22 49.24 117.10 1996 148,200 53.36 48.99 115.38 1997 151,400 52.58 48.75 113.80 1998 154,600 52.78 48.51 172335 1999 157,900 53.07 48.39 110.96 2000 161,200 53535 48.20 109.62 2001 164,600 53.65 48.06 108.38 O52 Table 9.3 presents the plans for the village, in rank of recommended preference. The recommended ection appropriate to each alternative is listed as well. Table 9.3 Energy Plan Alternative = Recommended Action Base Case - Operation o Anticipated Central Power Plant Alternative A - Waste Heat Initiate a feasibility Capture study for waste heat recovery. Estimated cost of feasibilty study $12,000 - $15,000. Alternative B - Hydro This alternative is not Electric Power considered economically feasible. Additional Recommendations Weatherization No resource assessment or -building insulation feasibility study «building envelope indicated, immediate action infiltration required t:o bring Energy .improved combustion Audit and/or weatherization program to this community. 9.3 Reconnaissance studies are necessarily preliminary in nature, however, it is apparent that there is great potential for a waste heat capture system in False Pass. Sale of the waste heat will realize increased revenues to the utility which will decrease the cost of production for electricity. Currently (1981-82) electricity costs are estimated to be 47.88¢ per KWH based on $1.30 a gallon for fuel and assuming that a central generation and distribution system is installed. The fuel is supplied by Standard Oil and barged to False Pass from the distribution center in Seattle. The computer model used in the reconnaissance study projected that the 1982-83 cost of production for electricity will be approximately 47.88¢ per KWH. The study suggested that a waste heat capture system would be installed, and become operational in 1983-84. It was assumed that the waste heat would replace fuel oil, which costs $1.30 per gallon, used for space heating. Therefore it is recommended that a waste heat capture system be installed. The reconnaissance study estimates that the system has the potential to save up to 4,000 gallons of fuel oil in the first full year of operation. 9.4 APPENDIX. See Section 3.0 (Methodology) of the Main Report: RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR THE VILLAGES OF Aniak, Atka, Chefornak, Chignik Lake, Cold Bay, False Pass, Hooper Bay, Ivanof Bay, Kotlik, Lower and Upper Kalskag, Mekoryuk, Newtok, Nightmute, Nikolski, St. George, St. Marys, St. Paul, Toksook Bay, and Tununak. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 7002 ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99510 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF 38 1 NPAEN-PL-& MAR 19g REGE!VED APR ~ 2 3982 Mr. Eric Yould 334 West Sth Averue ALASKA POWER AUTHOAITY Anchorage, Alaske 9950] Dear Mr. Yould: Thank you for the opportunity to review your draft energy reconnaissance reports for FY 1582. In general, we found the reports to be comprehensive and potentially helpful in our planning studies for both hydropower ana boat harbors. We would appreciate copies of the final reports when they are available. We have limited our comments to the reports that considered the areas we are most familiar with; however, some of the ccmments may apply to the other reports as well. The attached pages list specific comments for various communities. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact Mr. Loran Baxter of my staff at 552-3461. Sincerely, 1 Inc} . A As stated Chief, Engineering Division Comments Atka: Page 7.1 is inconsistant. The lack of wind data is xseted in the first Paragraph,.then details of specific average annual wind speed versus height is given in the next paragraph. Then a comment that a site with wind in excess of 12 mph is a good site is followed by the statement that wind energy is expensive. We suggest that this be reworded for clarification. Page 7.3 - 7.4. The write-up under the heading “Assumptions" is contradictory. The statement is made that “Weather on the Aleutian Islands varies greatly from one island to the other..." but is preceded and followed by statements stating that weather on Amchitka is comparable to that on Shemya, and that Atka's weather is comparable to that on Adak. Page 8.7. Mobilization and Demobilization costs of $50,000 appear low. Chignik Lake: Pages 7.1 and 8.13. Location of hydropower site is inconsistant. Page 8.14. Average power of 114 kW assumes 100 percent efficiency. "Energy Available" is wrong based on 30 percent plant factor. Table 8.5. This table shows the hydropower project dispiacing all the diesel generation until 2000. However, the peak-demand projection on page 6.4 ranges between approximately 85 kW in 1982 to about 125 kW in 2000. Based on the streamflows shown on page 7.2 and the data presented on page 3.14, the hydropower system could not produce more than about 80 kW in December, 65 kW in January, 60 kW in February, and 50 kW in March. The peak demanas would likely fall during this period and not during the summer when most of the village moves to Chignik Lagoon. Page 9.1 . The feasibility cost estimate of $35,000 to $45,000, including streamgaging, appears low. Cold Bay: The hydropower potential for Cold Bay referenced from the Corps' 1980 reconnaissance study has been found to be overly optimistic; therefore, the data should not be used. 4: a Ce VA False Pass: we concur with their findings that hydropower does not appear feasible. Ivanof Bay: Table 8.5. The table shows the hydropower system will displace all diesel. Based upon load and streamflow assumptions, it would not. Page 8.15. Mobilization and Demobilization costs appear low. Page 9.1. The feasibility study cost estimate of $25,000 to $35,000, including streamgaging, appears low. Nikolski: The findings, as reported, agree with the results of the Corps' study. We feel that wind generation is the most promising alternative to diesel generation. The White Alice site may not be the most feasible location because of its distance from town. Although it is protected from corrosive salt spray because of its elevation, a wind energy conversion system may be affected by the other structures within the installation. The bluff between the runway and Sheep Creek may be a better site. The report neglected to mention if the WECS installed on the Chaluka Ranch has been repaired and placed in service and if it is performing satisfactorly. If a diesel enlargement were recommended to cope with substantial expansion of electrical demand, a salvaging of White Alice units could be pursued as an option if appropriate government channels can be identified. St. Paul: The reconnaissance study did not consider the impact of the proposed expansion of the fishing industry being considered by the local community. This could substantially alter the report findings. Galena: In a letter dated 9 June 1981 (copy previously furnished to your office), Ott Water Engineers stated that they felt that a storage project with a 100 to 300-foot dam may te feasible. The Corps will be taking a second look at this site this summer to determine if a feasibility study is warranted. Gustavus: The National Park Service has been directed to cooperate with the Corps of Engineers to determine the feasibility of hydroelectwic power on Falls Creek. An initial field trip and public meeting is tentativ#ly scheauled for mid-May. We will be installing a streamgage this summer. New Chenega: The study indicates that it would be possible to construct a hydropower system at the site above the San Juan fish hatchery. It is our understanding that San Juan Aquaculture is going to construct a new hydropower system at this site for their personal use. We suggest you call Mr. Mike Hall with R.w. Retherford Associates at 274-6551. He is involved with the proposed development. Reply to Department of the Army, Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, letter dated 3/31/82. Atka p. 7.1 (draft) Statements concerning wind resoures have been clarified. p. 7.3-7.4 (draft) Because of the lack of climatic data from the Aleutian Islands, it is necessary to extrapolate data from the nearest recording station. However, variability in the local climate means that all extrapolations are conservative. p. 8.7 (draft) Cost estimates for mobilization and demobilization have been adjusted to reflect Anchorage prices for equipment rather than those quoted from Adak. Chignik Lake p. 7.1 - 8.13 (draft) The distance has been corrected. 8.14 (draft) The energy available value has been corrected. Table 8.5 (draft) The table presented in the final report illustrates the use of diesel powered generators when there is a projected short fall. p. 9.1 The feasibility study estimates have been addressed especially in light of the comments from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service which are included above. Cold Bay The hydropower data was included as part of the resource assessment and was the determining factor for our not including an alternative plan which was based on hydro. False Pass No comment necessary. Ivanof Bay Table 8.5 The hydropower scenario calls for the construction of a small dam and creates a reservoir. Without extensive field work, it has not been possible to show that this would be inadequate to meet the estimated demand of the village. p. 8.15 Mobilization costs have been increased. p. 9.1 Feasibility study figures have been increased especially in light of the comments and requirements of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service which are included above. Nikolski The White Alice site was considered because excellent foundations exist and the site is removed from the influence of salt spray. The bluff between the runway and Sheep Creek has been reconsidered and discussed with representatives of the village. The result has been the suggestion that the bluff site is a viable alternative and marginally less costly to develop because of a shorter transmission distance. However, this is largely offset by anticipated foundation problems at the bluff site. WECS at the Chaluka Ranch was not in operation when the field team was in the village. The diesel set from the White Alice site was purchased by the utility; however, its condition was uncertain and the engine was being stored outside. St. Paul As the role of the National Marine Fisheries in the Pribilofs is curtailed, the future of the islands' economies is uncertain. The proposed boat harbor has not been funded, as yet, and no data was available which would enable predictions to be made as to its effect on the local economy and power requirements. Therefore a scenario including the possible development of such facilities was not included. United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN REPLY REFER TO: Western Alaska Ecological Services 733 W. 4th Avenue, Suite 101 WAES Anchorage, Alaska 99501 BEC (907) 271-4575 “CEIVED Mr. Eric P. Yould Executive Director ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY Alaska Power Authority 9 APR 334 West 5th Avenue 1982 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Yould: We have reviewed the Alaska Power Authority's (APA) Draft FY 1982 Energy Reconnaissance Reports. If the conclusions and recommendations stated in the individual reports become those of the APA, and if the APA undertakes feasi- bility studies-in fulfillment of the recommended alternatives, then the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) requests that the information and studies outlined below be made a part of the feasibility studies. Without current site-specific resource information and a more complete description of the proposed project, it is difficult to assess what impacts, if any, will occur to fish and wildlife resources and associated habitat. Information should be acquired and studies conducted to identify the fish and wildlife resources of the study area, identify adverse project impacts to those resources, assess alternatives to the proposed action and devise a mitigation plan that would prevent a net loss to fish and wildlife resources. Specific information to be collected and studies to be conducted which the FwWS feels are necessary to adequately assess potential impacts include the following: 1. Plans for construction activities and project features to minimize damage to fish, wildlife, and their habitats should be devised, e.g., erosion control, revegetation, transmission line siting, construction timing, siting the powerhouse, diversion weir, and penstock above salmon spawning habitat, etc. 2. Losses of fish and wildlife habitat should be held to a minimum, and measures to mitigate unavoidable losses and enhance resources should be devised. 36 If there is to be a diversion of water or if substantial water temperature fluctutations are imminent, then these factors should be addressed because of their possible influence on water quality and fish habitat. Aquatic data collection should at least include the following: Page 2 (a) Identification of species composition and distribution of resident and anadromous fish within and downstream of the pro- ject area. Standard sampling methods such as fyke netting and minnow trapping, as well as visual observation of spawning and/or redds, should be used. (bd) Surveying and mapping of fish spawning, rearing, and over- wintering habitat as defined in the FWS Instream Flow Techniques or similar guidelines. (c) Harvest levels and subsistence use data, if applicable. It should be incumbent upon the APA to document animal species within the project boundary. If it is determined that impacts to terrestrial mammals or bird habitat is imminent, the APA should gather habitat and population infor- mation in a manner consistent with the FWS' Habitat Evaluation Procedures. 4. Terrestrial data collection should include the following: (a) Verification of game and non-game species use and occurrence within the project area. 1. Mammals. ae Historical and current harvest levels and subsistence use data. be Site-specific wildlife observations, including wild- life sign, denning sites, feeding sites, migration routes, winter use areas, and calving areas. 2. Birds. Raptor nesting surveys within the project area. (b) Description of vegetation, cover typing, and areal extent of each type. The FWS requests that bald eagle surveys be undertaken. If nest sites are encountered, the APA should notify the FWS. The FWS seeks to maintain a 330-foot protective zone around all active and inactive nests. Compliance with provisions of the Bald Eagle Protecton Act is mandatory. We request that the following be accomplished during the course of the studies: l. During the period of project planning, the APA should consult with federal, state, and local agencies having an interest in the fish and wildlife resources of the project area, including the Fish and Wildlife Service, prior to preparing any environmental reports. 2. The APA shall investigate and document the possible presence of any endangered or threatened species in the project area. If endangered of threatened species are determined to be present, the FWS should be notified. Page 3 Ba The APA shall design and conduct at project cost, as soon as prac- ticable, preparatory studies in cooperation with the FWS and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. These studies shall include, but not be limited to, the above aquatic and terrestrial data. The studies shall also identify and evaluate general measures to avoid, offset, and/or reduce adverse project-caused impacts on fish and wildlife resources. Information from these fish and wildlife related studies shall be provided to the concerned state and federal resource agencies. Future correspondence on this, or other projects proposed by the APA should include a clear map, in sufficient detail to show the exact location of the project. This will enable the FWS to accurately determine whether or not Interior managed lands are involved. It is the desire of the FWS to work with the APA to resolve any concerns relating to fish, wildlife, and other resources. If it is determined that the project will result in resource impacts, the FWS will assist the APA in attempting to modify the project to alleviate or mitigate any adverse effects. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding our suggested feasibility studies. Sincerely, obet Leportn Field Supervisor Reply to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service letter, undated. Environmental work to fulfill the information requirements detailed by FWS is included in the estimates for feasibility studies. False Pass Corporation False Pass, AK 99583 March 29, 1982 TPCE Ics Pes Law| 5 1995 Alaska Power Authority ALASKA Poy 344 W. 5th Avenue, Second Floor ER AUT oa Anchorage, AK 99501 “TL Dear Ms. Dejong: In regard to the enérgy for reconnaissace study performed for False Pass by the Alaska Power Authority. We have the following recommendations. The minimum size diesel generator needed is a 75kw with a 100 kw standby. To include the needs of the Peter Pan Seafoods fish camp in the summer and the growing needs of the village. The present total generating capacity is about 80 kw at Peter Pan Seafoods. We also suggest that a 100,000 gallon fuel storage tank be put in the village. For security reasons, because the fuel storage tanks owned by Peter Pan Seafoods are very old and not reliable. Also, if possible, it would be cheaper to buy the fuel directly from Standard Oil. The enclosed signatures are people of the village who approve of the above recommendations. Sincerely, Gilda Shellikoff President The list below are people in Support of the enclosed recommendations. filo) Corrente Cyrdi Guyane Sob ALI KE, Bete Kfhid Maree Khofulere Dau KoohuBew Sophie ghidthsor thee lor Hae hee Tay. 5 ay ATO clin ye AC wvkhuv aN * x * ' MONA S | i a J you flof47 LO) - 8 eynte~ oe q Ph. Bhear 5 isege backer Teddi WhiekAZ Response to False Pass Corporation letter dated March 28, 1982. "Minimum size diesel generator needed is a 75 kw with a 100 kw standby. To include the needs of the Peter Pan Seafoods fish camp - the summer and the growing needs of the village." The estimated peak demand for the village of False Pass was 40 kw in 1982 rising zo 63 kw in 2001. During the study Peter Pan Seafoods were contacted on several occasions and the project team was told that there were no definite plans to reopen the fish processing plant. If reopened, the plant would operate on a seasonal basis and not provide a regular load to the generators. The project team decided that they would recommend the installation of a diesel set which would meet the villagers' present and growing demands. If the electrical load from Peter Pan is included, then the generators would be running very inefficiently for the majority of the year. This would necessitate the installation of oversized generators, shorter life span of the generators, increased operation and maintenance costs and an accelerated overhaul schedule. Therefore, we recommend that the village proceed to accomodate its own requirements because of the uncertainty over the future of the seafood processing plant. The recommendation is based on the "hidden costs" to the village if it does supply the power to a seasonal customer which has a high load. "We also suggest that a 100,000 gallon fuel storage tank be put in the village." Based on the total kwh requirements of the village, the village will need approximately 13,300 gals in 1982. Other fuel requirements are for residential use 18,500 gallons, public sector 2,000 gallons, and 3,800 for the school. Total fuel requirements are approximately 37,600 gallons. Therefore, we would recommend that 48,000 gallons of storage be installed for the village's requirements. The costs for the tanks have been included in the energy plans. A copy of your letter has been forwarded to the Department of Community Affairs (CRA) and the Department of Energy and Power Development (DEPD). CRA has responsibility for fuel storage programs in rural Alaska and DEPD is responsible for fuel use Management and planning.