Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNorthwest Alaska Coal Resources Assessment Conclusions & Recommendations, June 1981Alaska Energy Authority LIBRARY COPY NORTHWEST ALASKA COAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JUNE 9, 1981 800 Cordova, Suite 101 N Dames & Moore Anchorage, Alaska 99501 ve (907) 279-0673 v¥ 4 | Telex: 090-25227 Cable address: DAMEMORE June 9, 1981 RECEIVED JSUN- 9 198k Mr. Brent Petrie ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY Alaska Power Authority 333 West 4th Avenue, Suite 31 Anchorage, AK 99501 Conclusions and Recommendations Northwest Alaska Coal Resources Assessment Dear Brent, Our Phase II analysis of the project has rendered conclusions regarding coal utilization in the Northwest Alaska study area. These apply directly to the price of energy (whether electricity or space heat) to the consumer. Briefly the conclusions are: 1. The cost of transporting coal has significant impact on energy cost to the user. The best approach is to deliver coal by a 500-ton barge, which can be beached and off-loaded by a front-end loader. 2. The quality of coal has a significant impact on consumer cost. Hence, Chicago Creek's 6500 Btu/lb resource is more expensive to the study area as a whole than the resources of the Cape Lisburne to Pt. Lay region, which have indicated values of 10,000 Btu/lb or higher. 3. The cost of mining has relatively little impact on consumer cost if a single mine furnishes coal for the whole study area. 4. Power plant capital and operating costs have significant impact, and currently only Nome, Kotzebue, Unalakleet, and perhaps Selawik could justify coal-fired village plants. Du The cost of transmission lines has significant impact on the price of electricity to consumers. In summary, we find that any coal resource that meets the following cri- teria is worthy of further evaluation: l. Heat value of 10,000 Btu/1b. 2s Reserves sufficient to supply 60,000-100,000 tons per year for 20 years. Mr. Brent Petrie June Page Dames & Moore . Alaska Power Authority S& oo Bl 71 2 3. Surface minable. 4. Barge accessible--either coastal or riverine, or within about 20 approximately $80 to $208 per ton, depending on transportation distance. miles of such access. According to our analysis, coal from such a resource could be mined and shipped by tug and barge to the majority of villages in the study area for This translates into the equivalent of delivering diesel fuel to a village for $0.52 to $1 proposal to you last August should proceed at once. -36 per gallon. The average diesel price today is about $1.50 per gallon. Obviously, Phase III and subsequent phases of this study as outlined in our We recommend the potential coal resource areas presented in Table 1 be examined in order of importance. Table 1 Recommended Areas for Further Exploration Exploration Priority Area(a) ie Pt. Lay (Areas 2A, B, C) Upper Kukpowruk River 2. Deadfall Syncline (Area 6) About 30 miles south of Pt. Lay, along Cape Beaufort By Pt. Lay (Area 1B) Lower Kukpowruk River 4. Corwin-Thetis (Area 8) (a) Lower Cape Beaufort cliffs about 80 miles southwest of Pt. Lay Comments High thickness of total coal (especially Area 2C with 20-foot bed) and relatively low dips (6- 20 degrees) make stripping ra- tios favorable. Coal up to 15 feet thick drilled in low-dip area within 20 feet of surface. Drilling data avail- able. Total coal is 18 feet, but with dips of 30-40 degrees; unfavor- able stripping ratios. Corwin least desirable because of very high dips; with max dip of 24 degrees at Thetis area, stripping ratio unfavorable be- cause of low total coal _ thick- ness recorded (10 feet). Refer to Plate I of the Phase I report, Volume II. Mr. Brent Petrie - Dames & Moore Alaska Power Authority roe iN June 9, 1981 +e Page 3 The target for exploration should be delineation of the 2 million-ton reserve, and beyond. The number of drill holes per unit area should be dictated by industry-accepted densities for proving reserves, by logistics, and by the number of core samples required to get a sound idea of coal quality. Because 2 million tons is such a relatively small reserve, delineation should not require a major undertaking. Given decent weather and proper planning--and considering the site(s)--we expect such work could be accom- plished within a month or so. Subsequent to delineation of reserves, data acquisition and analysis of site-specific development schemes are warranted to verify the conclusions of our broad-based study, including mine, road, and port concepts. If I may be of further assistance, please call. Sincerely, AMES 2 MOORE & Paul W. Neff Associate PWN/cbm Anbiee (>) frevig Mission Buckland Elin Gelavin Kiana 3) - Kivel Naat Kotzebue Kayuk Noat ak Name Noorvik(>) i] “nt Hape nt & ‘Selontkes) Shaktool ik : Sitmerel - Shungnak* ) feller. Unalaklest Wales — White Mountain TOTAL Subtotal 4 Kat zebue~ Kabuk Regican FOR ALL TAALE 4-5 SUMMARY OF COST OF CGAL AND ELECTRICITY COMMUNETIES IN Scenario & THE STUDY AREA Sesnaria 5 $/KHH LeFDKOF ATF “a4 eS 448 Q.85-49F 146 1.88472 197 A34-465°190 O.B+- 72 150 BF -F7 415 B46 3.94 193 Grttaly 124 AGSL33 208 SF 96 132 0.45 -47 166 Ode SS 134 Orbs -S¥ 77 LSS 443 40 0.47 - 36 148 ODEN 2B OS -7AMN18 0769-207 168 0.66-#5 150 O.2F.353 207 144 499 133 t/To TASATIIFG — Total Aarual Energy Cost ati} ($4g00)<2) oi sos BI2-9F7 rea 462 Aye 2 384 9S? 452 sas’ ABE 7S BBE FRE F837 5 305 427 SOD GAG S45 3yS8e Za0H S33 €06 att oes BE WR SF2- 67 Gt sos” 433- YEE 44> SB} A3G- SOF 898-1079 3S SST 386 6D 42% “Kee S582 Cos $/Kilit OSE AIS 287 trGS4 I? 267 0.84496 1414 148 L402 FRG eae 4. 7F 332 GBEACF 198 0.82 -97 165 23+ R0F 273 G4. #6 150 tAP-ASTIES 0-4. 93 180. Or 84-29 292 G:4@.$¥ 166 G.$. 63 206 1.45 A277 278 0-50.59 195 ABPAZE IES OVE -76 178 © mars 267 QPTP? 250 Ore--9F 364 AB T029 $/tant t } “Total Annual Energy Cast ($1000) (23 433- SSA as ver Be ¥E6 ie sa/ Br TRO _ 8 Sts he svs HS ee, 348- EIS .. 48 7S a68- SSS 58s S235" Ser 47s. > STH 424 SF F i 6S 724 $29 G26 $83- SYO aLy tGTSS} FISS CR costs per tan are expressed in 10,000 Btu per pound coal equivalents. + costs are adjusted by this factor: (2) cest tonnage demand. (communities in the Katzebue-Kabuk Aegion. wcet ‘Dames & Moore 10, 0008tu/ib foetus per KWH x KHH demand plus apace heat coal coat per tan x space heat 2a Boe xf Rhere Bed OF, ol 3/.313.0Q%: PUGH Phaup Fehler Dewees tf fered Tor erga nye om 4 2.1 Kotze alone 4 FB 4 93 57 2.2 Kianaabesed power plant gerving Rs : Kiana, Noorvik, and Selawik 192 2324 2, SPO 2.3 Ambler-based power plant serving ; Ambler, Shungnek, and Kobuk 362 25009 2,147 Lecal 3.1. Kiana alone 322 E22—- 3.2 Ambler alone 282 ~i- 3.3 Nootvik slone 101 Bje SY" 3.4 Selawik alone 115 SAR 5°90) 3.3 Sthungnak slone BS BIT Seo SH 3.6 Kobuk alone / 4115 “He HO 3.7 Kotzebue alone = tt ORO 199 An2ah 99 35° Cast per KWH x KWH demand plus space heat cor] cost per ton x space heat tonnage demand. T: Beant Petese SR. Php tin. FEELIN? ben, Dorerstas F Mis ond hae 1 Ww 5 TABLE 4-5 ad SUMMARY OF COSTS GF COAL AND ELECTRICITY S = = 8 FOR SCENARIOS 7, 2 & 3 (THE KOTZEBUE-KOBUK REGIGNS) \ / fotal ee Electricity Direot Heat. Energy Cost (1) mari6/Déseription _ af KH $ffoo ($7000) - 3} Recional ed en ee ee werd ft “Hey wtvik alonec ' Prot S°3 ; BI SIS lawik slone | Bett» 4? 54 5% ingnak alone } BL SY BS BES S22- Sop nuk alone | 260 3/9 411° - ~ABts 470 tzebue alone heenmaty rth ORO 191 Aan 99 3S (WH x KWH demand plus space heat coal cost per ton x space heat tonnage demare. Te: Beak Pehere Fron: Kee vin. Febtin> . Jopiis ¢- A1ond SUMMARY UF COST: FOR SCENARIOS 1, 2h | flectricity Direct Heat griptign SARWH $/Ton 1 ana-based power plent OekO OFS 190 3B593E 12, 0D ‘zebue-based power plant 8-5) 0.66 209 1965 ILITF ‘ional trebue alone pommmneBett ©. XO 197 ana-based power plant serving { ana, Noorvik, and Selewik | 87890696 152 bler-baged power plant serving ' ; Be bler, Shungnak, and Kobuk +9 470 362 azeeg 4/77 | (ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY = . \ June 10, 1981 Dr. Ross Schaff State Geologist Alaska Division of Geology & Gee Geophysical Surveys 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Dear Ross: Enclosed is a copy of a letter report we have just received from Dames and Moore on their final phase of the Northwest Alaska Coal Study. © The fi- nal draft report is not yet printed but should be available by June 30. We have worked closely with Dames and Moore staff in the last few weeks and are in concurrence with, thefr recommendations. - In general, we found the access costs for smal] mines to service small demands at single-willages to be prohibitive. However, given the sparse data of some occurrences near certain villages, a-helicopter reconnaissance with a geologist may be helpful to verify rumored occurrences. . can pro- vide such targets in our final recommendations. ae G : -In the meantime,the top priority for drilling assessment. of reserves _ ‘ ‘are those: fourcareas ‘outl ined.on page 2 of Mr. Hef's letter. We wish to. : tay in ‘close consultation with your agency on this:4ssue so we may pro- s Lee ceed with follow-up phases in a timely manner. Se Sincerely, Eric P. Yould Executive Director cc: Gil Eakins, DGGS, Fairbanks Jeff Haynes, Deputy Coomissioner, DR Paul feff,: ~Damescand Moore Enclosure: “As: “stated CONCUR: | BNP: : -RAM EPY Proj. Cede: File Code: ot .0/ | ee ERE NEY