The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutKotzebue District Heat & Coal Utilization Detailed Feasibility Study, 1981-1982 PROPERTY OF: 334 W. 5th Ave. ae arctic slope technical services Incorporated 420 “L” Street, Suite 406 » Anchorage, Alaska 99501 * 907/276-0517 Alaska Power Authority Anchorage, Alaska 99501 * barrow * copenhagen ¢ denver * houston * oslo * seattle «washington, d.c. KTZ 003 DATE ISSUED TO HIGHSMITH 42.225 PRINTED INU.S.A. MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT No. 3 _ KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT & COAL UTILIZATION DETAILED FEASIBILITY STUDY ' FEBRUARY 1982 i ’ JOINT VENTURE VECO, INC., RALPH STEFANO & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND ARCTIC SLOPE TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. (ASTS) March 8, 1982 Mr. Eric P. Yould, Executive Director Alaska Power Authority . 333 W. Fourth Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Attention: Patty Dejong, Project Manager Reference: Contract for Detailed Feasibility Study for the City of Kotzebue, Alaska -- District Heat and Coal Utilization Dear Ms. Dejong = Enclosed are three copies of monthly progress Report No. 3 — entitled "Kotzebue District Heat and CoatUtilization--Detatlea Feasibility Study". The report was prepared under our contract and covers the period through 28 February 1982, and represents the completion of Phase I of the contract. In accordance with referenced contract this also constitutes our payment request for the Project Status Report, i.e., billing from January 31, 1982 through February 28, 1982. A copy of our invoice is attached. Your prompt processing of this payment request is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding this report please contact me. Sincerely, ARCTIC SLOPE TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. DT Phe orris (Jack) Turner, P.E. MJT: cm Enclosure TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ccccccccccccccsccccccceeseccscescccscccccccoecesn IL WORK ACCOMPLISHED ..cccceccccccccccccscccccccccccsccscccesn 2 o To Date o Meetings Held SCHEGULE cccocccccvccccccccrcvcvccccvccccecccscccvcccecene 3 TASK 14.0 -- Phase I Report TASK 1.0 =—— Literature REVIEW cccccsccscocccscvccccol—l TASK 2.0 —— Gite Reconnaissance ...cccrvecvecvecsccvcsrl TASK 3.0 —-- Energy Balance .cccccccccccvcccvcccccccednl TASK 4.0 -- Forecast Year 2002 oo s.cSteseec oc ccc ccc ee ofa Se TASK 5.0 -- Technology Profiles ..cccccccccccccvece edb TASK 6.0 -- Evaluation of Technology Profiles ......6-1l APPENDICES’ « « «sic 010 00.0. 8 100 sic 6 6 sig ewescedolne seo cece sis sA—1 SUMMARY Project Report No. 3 summarizes the activities of the Joint Venture (VECO, Stefano and ASTS) and our subcontractors from February 1, 1982 through February 28 , 1982 on the Kotzebue District Heat and Coal Utilization Detailed Feasibility Study. Work began on November 19, 1981 in anticipation of successful contract negotiations between the Power Authority and this Joint Venture and its subcontractors. The work plan originally proposed by the Joint Venture was acceptable to the Alaska Power Authority with few exceptions. Most noteworthy was a reduction of effort on wind and hydropower studies with associated increase in the coal utilization area. Also, the Contract was modified to include an additional preliminary evaluation on the geothermal resources and associated plant facilities required to evaluate this resource. Since the work plan and schedule ofs¢activities follow= SASK efforts, each monthly report will provide input to APA based on the TASK item outlined in our Contract. Without the benefit of the actual cost of the coal delivered to Kotzebue, we have assumed for Phase I and II of our study efforts a value of $100/ton. ° WORK ACCOMPLISHED To Date: As of February 28th, TASKS 1 thru 6 activities were completed. This Reporting Period: Work effort in February consisted of completion of Task 5 "Technology Profiles"; Task 6 "Evaluation of Technical Profiles"; and review revisions to Tasks 1 thru 5 all of which are included with Task 6 herein under Task 14 - Phase I report. Additionally work was underway on Task 7 "Description of Alternative Plans" and Task 8 "Cost Estimation". Task 7 and 8 work effort will be included in Monthly Report No. 4. Meetings held were: o February 4 -- Discussed with Patty=Bejang (APA), resul&of recent Kotzebue field trip. o February 12 & 25 -- Joint Venture partners held checkpoint meetings to review Contract questions and work effort on Tasks 1 through 6 of Contract Scope of Work and the Feasiblilty Study Evaluation (Phase 2) Task 7 "Decription of Alternative", and Task 8. "Cost Estimation". SCHEDULE Attached hereto depicts: (1) overall schedule and (2) progress to date. ITY OF KOTIFNUE P ISTRICT NAT AND COAL UTILIZATION EASIBILITY STUDY ‘TASK 1 Literature Review TASK 2 Site Reconnaissance TASK. 3 Energy Balance ‘TASK 4 Forecast Year 2002 TASK §S Technology Profiles TAsK 6 Evaluation Technical Profiles TASK 7 Description of Alternativeb TASK 8 Cost Estimation TASK 9 | Environmental Evaluation TASK 10 = Pian Evaluation “TASK 11 Public, Preterenced TASK 12 Data Collection Requirements and Costs TASK 13— Work & Permitting fchedules TASK 14 Phase I Report TASK 15 Draft Final keport TASK 16 Final Report + March. 5.1982. . ' -1 0 i 2 3 #4§ 5:6 7 © 98 10 JX 12 13 16 15 fe -17 1 DECEMBER 198) JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH aR 7 oe 4 1b 18 28 SL @ iS e2 29 $ 12 19 2 5 12,19 26 2 #9 16 23 30 7 3} NS IS | | | | | gee 2 Ee TTL AT mr are we 7) LEGEND Scheduled "4 Completed B * barrow A S * copenhagen arctic slope ¢ denver technical services * houston Incorporated *oslo * seattle 420 L” Street, Suite 406 * Anchorage, Alaska 99501 - 907/276-0517 © washington, d.c. PHASE I - PROGRESS REPORT KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT & COAL UTILIZATION DETAILED FEASIBILITY STUDY MARCH 10, 1981 Prepared by Joint Venture Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc. VECO, and Ralph Stefano. & Associates REF: Alaska Power Authority, Professional Service Contract: AS44-56-010 PHASE I TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDICES .cccecccccccccccer cose ccssseseseseseseseeseses i TABLE OF BASIC DATA wccccccccccccccvccccccccvccsccccccces§ Li FORWARD ..cccccccccccccsssccccccccsccsscesssccssesssccess ll TASK 1 Review Results Previous Alternative Energy Resources - Investigations for Kotzebue ........ 1-l TASK 2 Site Reconnaissance cocecccccccccccccsscccccccce onl TASK 3 Energy Balance .oseccccecccsveccecssccccccveseee ml TASK 4 FOLKeCASE ceeeseeeveveccerecceeevescsvcccececeees 4-1 TASK 5 Technology profileS ..ccecccvcccccccccsccccccces SmL TASK 6 Evaluation of Techology ProfileS ......eeeseceee 6-1 APPENDICES PAGE Agenda for Meeting with KDHWG ...ccccccccccscccscccccccccce AmL Summary of Meetings in Kotzebue January 18,20, and 21, 1982 ..ccecvecocsevccrcevercveces Bri February 1, 2, and: 3, 1982 sc. ccccccccccccccecccccocccce Boa References to studies done (by Retherford) for KEA ....... C-l KEA Copies of Electrical Output to Kotzebue 1966 through: 1962) 2s cists c c's vloicic civic cloleic's's oe vices ccicicice + ce), Dal Letter of January 21, 1982 from Don Fiscus, KEA, reference Coal Gasification Concerns, et. al. ....ee00- E-l Public Meeting AMNNOUNCEMENE cecvcccccvevescccreccvccscsccccsecscsecseccccccs Fol Spey | BEE MGA 215 o «60:00 c 01010 0lclc|oi vicisielels sell elelesleis wreieiclesioret- Eee Detail AGENdA\ ccs. cissciericcswcccvcvcevecvoncccceceosee ce Fed Agenciés and Organizations Contacted 2c ccc ccc cc ccc csc cece Gel Agencies and Organizations Responses settee eee eeeeeeeeree Hn, eS -— = Location: Latitude Longitude Temperatures: Mean temperature TABLE OF BASIC DATA KOTZEBUE February Mean temperature July Design temperature; 97.5% Degree days per year (base 65°F) Population 1981: Number of households 1981: Heat values: Propane Gasoline Kerosone Fuel oil Fuel oil Conversion 1 kWh 1 gallon (jet fuel) #1 #2 factors: of water Lia 66° 52'N LE2° 3874 —4.3°F 52.9°F -36°F 16,151°F days 2,625 660 92 ,500=Btu/gallon 120,000 Btu/gallon 132,000 Btu/gallon 136,000 Btu/gallon 138,500 Btu/gallon 3,418 Btu 8.3453 lbs. of water Q FOR EWORD INTRODUCTION Since 1973 the world has been watching skyrocketing prices on energy in general and on petroleum products, such as heating oil and diesel fuel, in particular. Many Alaskan communities rely almost entirely on oil for covering their electrical power and space heating needs, and even though Alaska possesses some of the world's largest oil reserves, the inhabitants of these communi- ties have felt the ever rising energy prices very heavily on their community and private budgets. Kotzebue is no exception in that respect. Space heating is provided by heating oil and electrical power is produced by diesel generators owned and operated by Kotzebue Electric Association. With its approximately 690 residence and 2,500 inhabitants, Kotzebue is one of the largest communities in Northwest Alaska. > = It is located on the Baldwin Peninsula, 26 miles North of the Arctic Circle and without overland connecting routes to Fairbanks and Anchorage. Goods and materials are shipped into the community during the three months when the Kotzebue Sound is free of ice. Heavy barges, however, cannot reach Kotzebue, and their shipments must be lightered to shore, thus increasing the transportation costs of these goods. Kotzebue is a regional air transportation center with regularly scheduled major airline and bush flights. Recent studies have assessed power generation alternatives for Kotzebue and have focused on the feasibility of using the region's coal resources for space heating and electrical power generation. Another investigation has addressed the potential for geothermal district heating for Kotzeyue. Preliminary interpreta- tion of these reports indicated the need for a more detailed investigation to assess the technical and economic feasibility of coal-fired co-generation of electricity and heat with district heat distribution system, this Detailed Feasibility Study addresses these concerns. OBJECTIVES Existing projections of heat and electric consumption for Kotzebue have been refined and the technical and economic feasibility of meeting some or all of these needs through co- generation is being assessed. The primary energy resource to be considered for co-generation is coal, used either for coal-fired steam generation or for gasified coal generation. The cost and desirability of coal-fired co-generation has been —~ <_< compared to: pen eee aa isl ees tee ° central diesel generation of electricity with waste heat capture and district heating ° hydropower generation of electricity combined with feasible space heating ° windpower generation of electricity combined with feasible space heating ° geothermal district heating combined with feasible power generation ° other probable combination of electrical power generation and space heating, ° Conservation In the course of this study unrealistic alternatives have been eliminated. The most likely alternativejare measured against the base case of continued reliance on imported fuel oil. This will insure, that the optimum concept ¥s are recommended to the Alaska Power Authority at the conclusion of this study. During the study, a major emphasis is being given to the benefits likely to arise from energy conservation measures and possible increased conversion efficiency e.gsby waste heat utilization, and increased energy ———— in the homes. After evaluations with respect to economic, environmental and technical desirability of the various alternative plans, the feasibility report will present under Phase III recommendations on further works to be carried out, e.g. suggested method and concepts to be pursued in execution of the preferred plan. Close communications with the municipal governmen 5 Fegignal corporation, the village leaders and the village persons them- selves has been pursued in order to insure that their thoughts, concerns, and desires have taken into account to the maximum extent possible. Three specific work phases are being undertaken, i.e.: ° Phase I - "Feasibility Analysis" where existing data and alternative energy concepts have been analyized. ° Phase II - "Feasibility Study Analysis" where the usable alternative energy concepts are looked at in depth with a more detailed cost analysis of each feasible plan. ° Phase III - "Report and Recommendations" where the study conclusions are presented, a review by others is to take place and appropriate revisions to this Detailed Feasibility Study takes place prior to publishing of the final report. Authorization This work was carried out under contract (Alaska Power Authority Contract) AS 44.56.010 with VECO, Ralph Stefano & Associates, and Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc., a Joint Venture of Alaskan firms. Acknowledgements We acknowledge and appreciate the valuable assistance and advice offered by the people of: Kotzebue Alaska Power Authority rae > Ss - te - +e p Kotzebue City officials and Council Kotzebue District Heat Work Group NANA Corporation Maniilag Association Arctic Lighterage This Report Covers Phase I of the Detailed Feasibility Study only. Subsequent reports will include Phase II and III work efforts as well. TASK 1 - Review Results Previous Alternative Energy Resources Investigations for Kotzebue 1.0 General Task 1 has been a review of previous investigation of alternative energy resources for Kotzebue to determine whether all feasible power project alternatives have been examined sufficiently to justify limiting this feasibility study to those alternatives analyzed in Task 5. Lea Overview Past studies and existing data reviewed were: ° Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue, Robert W. Retherford Consulting Engineers, June, 1980. ° Kotzebue Geothermal Project, _ Zmergy _Systems, Tie. October, 1980. ° Kotzebue Geothermal Project, Energy . Systems, Inc., January 1981. ° Assessment of Coal Resources of Northwest Alaska, (Vols. I & II), Dames and Moore, December, 1980. ° Assessment of the Feasibility of Utilization of the Coal Resources of Northwestern Alaska for Space Heating and Electricity, (Draft), Dames and Moore, June, 1981. ° District Central Heating System, Wainwright, Feasibility Study, Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc., 1980. ° Power Requirement Study, (Draft), Robert W. Retherford and Associates, October, 1980. ° Financial Forecast, (Draft), Robert W. Retherford and Associates, October, 1980. ° Construction Work Plan, (Draft), Robert W. Retherford and Associates, October, 1980. T= ° Kotzebue Electric Association, Supply Substation Data for 1968 through 1981. Based on our review, it is noted that significant numbers of recent studies and reports exist. While some of this information is quite preliminary, other data is quite detailed. We judge from this that all practical energy sources have been studied. It should, however, be noted that without detailed cost estimate provided for in TASK 8, that the question if these alternatives have been sufficiently studied--cannot categorically be answered at this time. For example, the Retherford report noted hydro- electric potential as the most promising, yet very little work will be done on that portion of this Contract work until we get to TASK 8, which is scheduled for March 1982. Since many of these alternatives are extremely closely based on the study of costs per kWh that an over preferable scheme cannot at this time be judged. A minimum comparable level ofg¢study and cost estimate for each apprarant usable alternative will be provided under Task 10 - "Plan Evaluation". 1.3 ENERGY FORECASTS 1.3.1 General Energy Review and Analysis Forecasts of the projected energy requirements for the city of Kotzebue had been performed by Robert W. Retherford Associates, Dames and Moore, and Louis Berger and Associates, Inc.1 The results of these forecasts are presented in Table 1.1. 1 the information from Louis Berger and Associates has been requested, however, it has not been received in time for this evaluation. Some preliminary data has been taken from Energy Systems Report for use in this review. 2 TABLE 1.1 ELECTRICAL AND HEATING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY OF KOTZEUBE ELECTRICAL (energy in 1 x 10 11 Btu) RETHERFORD (1) ames & MOORE (2-3) jours BERGER (5) 1980 0.403 0.292 0537 1985 0.708 0.299 N/A 1990 1.101 0.302 N/A 1995 1.743 0.305 N/A 2000 2.756 0.308 N/A SPACE HEATING (energy in 1 x 10 11 Btu) =~ _ & RETHERFORD DAMES & MOORE (2/4) LOUIS BERGER ‘°) 1980 0.91 1.179 O72 1985 ---- 1.241 N/A 1990 ---- 1.266 N/A 1995 ---- 1.293 N/A 2000 ---- 1.327 N/A’ (1) Converted from MWh to Btu (2) Converted from diesel fuel (130,952 Btu/gal) (3) Conversion efficiency = 18.6% (4) Direct combustion with conversion efficiency = 50% (5) Data obtained from Energy Systems, Inc. Report on Kotzebue Geothermal Project, Oct. 1980 to the Alaska Power Authority. = S An examination of Table 1.1 indicated that Retherford and Associates show an increase in the demand for electridl energy of about 10 percent per year. Dames and Moore project a demand for electrical energy over the next 20 at a growth rate of 0.3 percent per year. Furthermore, they project a growth rate for space heating at 0.6 percent per year. The values presented by both Retherford and Associates and Dames and Moore appear to be at the two extreme ends of the spectrum, i.e.: o Retherford's projections were based on KEA projected power requirements of 10 percent per year for 10 to 15 years and this rate was assumed for the additional 5 to 10 years. Furthermore, they assumed that the Air Force base would be tied into the system by 1985 and this would add an additional 1750 MWH of power to the Kotzebue requirements. A system loss of 11 percent was included. Retherford also estimated the residential heat load using the following assumptions: (2) heating degree-days of 16,039; 2) a standard 30 x 30 x 12.5 ft. building; (3) R-ll insulation (U = 0.09) four walls of 2" x 4" construction on 16" centers; (4) unheated attic with 4 inches of insulation; (5) 2 - 24" x 40" windows; and (6) two air changes per hour. Based on these assumptions, the residential heat load for 1980 was esimated to be 0.91 x 10 1! Btu. o Dames and Moore stated that their energy projections for Kotzebue through the year 2000 were based on a combi- nation of actual data and reasonable assumptions. These assumptions were: (1) energy patterns would remain constant over the entire study period; (2) electrical generation and space heating requirements were based on projected diesel oil consumption; and (3) population growth was used as a basis for projecting energy demand in the residential and educational sectors. Dames and Moore did not present what all their assumptions were, nor did they present a methodology as to how they arrived at their projected values for electrical and space heating energy requirements. Furthermore, they did not attempt to explain why they project nearly a zero energy growth rate for both electrical and space heating requirements over the next 20 years. Population statistics alone indicate an approximate growth rate of 5.3 percent per year, and KEA projects an increase in demand for electrical energy over the next 10 to 15 years at_a 10 percent per year rate. Therefore, without further data or information and the methodology used in formu- lating these energy projections, these projections appear to be more conservative than the known information would suggest. —_~ on = - = - oe In Retherford's description of Kotzebue and its current electrical generating capacity, certain statements were made which we, at this point in time, have not confirmed; these are: Ch) (2) (3) Basis for the Air Force tieing into the Kotzebue electrical system} ), The growth rate presented in the text as 4 percent per year does not conform to the data presented. An evalua- tion of the data indicates an annual growth rate of 5.3 percent per year. The system load factor of 0.63. Based on the defini- tion of load factor and data presented, a_minimum value of 53 percent appears to be more reasonable. min VS. ant \oad Lech Lie siee COAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTRICAL ENERGY In analyzing the quantity of coal required to satisfy the stated energy requirements, the coals from the Kallarichuk River, Kubuk River, and Chicago Creek were used as potential sources. The Kallarichuk coal is a good grade bituminus type that has a heating value of 9200 to 10,500 Btu/lb. The Kobuk River coal is ranked as a high volatile "C" bituminus coal with a heating value about 10,700 But/lb. The coal from Chicago Creek mine is lignite that has a heating value approximately 6500 Btu/lb. Using the energy forecasts presented in Table 1.1 for Retherford, Dames & Moore, and Louis Berger, the coal equivalents are pre- sented in Table 1.2. It should be noted that the heating value for both the Kallarichuk and Kobuk River coals will be the same at 10,000 Btu/lb. in the analysis and comparison. Furthermore, since Retherford, Dames & Moore and Louis Berger all have different system factors, an accurate comparison cannot be directly made. Ss. _ An examination of these coal requirements for electrical power generation show that Retherford indicated that abouty 20,000 tons would be required (no year specified), whereas, Dames and Moore indicated that about 9,482 tons would be required. The low value for Dames and Moore is a direct result of their energy forecasts showing a nearly zero growth electrical power over the next 20 years. 1-6 TABLE 1.2 os COAL DEMAND FORECAST ee We \ COAL DEMAND FORECAST - € FOR THE CITY OF KOTZEBUE x NX! = we oe “ FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION ~~ oN a i ce (ni KALLARICHUK & KOBUK RIVER COAL (1) (1) (2) 3) (4) RETHER FORD DAMES & MOORE(2) Lours BERGER(2) (COAL EQUIVALENTS IN SHORT TONS) 1980 ——— 5,840 7,400 1985 naoen 5,980 <nme 1990 ——— 6,040 a 1995 ——— 6,100 a 2000 ———~ 6,160 ance CHICAGO CREEK coaL'3) 1980 8,994 “11,396 1985 9,209 ~asn 1990 9,301 — 1995 9,394 = 2000 9,486 a Heating value = 10,000 Btu/lb System efficiency - 25% reported by Dames & Moore. Heating Value = 6500 Btu/lb Retherford did not indicate during what time frame & used coal with a heating value of 6,800 Btu/lb. This value was corrected for 6500 Btu/lb coal. Shaw Leth ech d (BO OOO Woe 1.3.3 COAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPACE HEATING It is assumed that the same coals used in the determination of the coal requirements for electrical generation will be used in the evaluation and analysis for space heating. Using the energy forecasts presented in Table 1.1., the coal equivalents for space heating by direct combustion to produce warm air is presented in Table 1.3. An examination of Table 1.3 indicates that in 1980 (using Chicago Creek coal) Dames & Moore believes that the Kotzebue community would require 18,000 tons of coal, whereas Retherford and Louis Berger believe that only 14,000 tons and 11,100 tons respectfully would be required. However, Dames and Moore show that only 20,300 tons of Chicago Creek coal would be required in the year 2000, which is the result of a nearly zero an energy growth rate over the twenty year period. 1-8 1980 1985 1990 1995. ~ 2000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 (1) (2) (3) TABLE 1.3 COAL DEMAND FORECAST for the CITY of KOTZEBUE for SPACE HEATING(1) --- DIRECT FIRED RETHERFORD DAMES & MOORE LOUIS BERGER KALLARICHUK & KOBUK RIVER coaL(2) (\o,c°o @ TS Av) (Coal equivalents in short tons) 9,100 11,790 eons 12,410 nae 12,660 sone 12,930 aoe 13,210 cHIcAGo crEEK coa(3) (4 5°° Hr /\v.).- &- 14,014 18,157 ---- 19,111 ---- 19,496 ---- 19,912 oe 20,343 iit ( leo i NasedA on 7,200 11,088 teent aprrett Cr Energy forecasts from Table 1 Heating value equal to 10,000 Btu/1b Heating value equal to 6,500 Btu/1b 9 p De ten | \ory Xe hen, 1.4 WASTE HEAT RECOVERY Waste heat recovery systems will recover the heat used to cool the diesel engine or the exhaust steam from a steam turbine to provide district space heating or perform additional work. The quantities of coal required for space heating and electrical generation Snow in Table 1.3 appear to not reflect a realistic estimate Aue the quantity of coal required by the city of Kotzebue because this table does not take into account waste heat recovery. The more common practice would be to generate the electricity using a coal-fired boiler and a steam turbine. By recovering the waste heat from the turbine exhaust, hot water district heating for the city could be accomplished. Using this technique would substantially lower the coal requirements presented in Table 1.3. Consequently, this analysis will be further discussed in Phase II of the program. The chosen scenarios by Retherford Assoc¢ates_ did not take waste heat utilization into account. Retherford indicated that this was not done because it would allow for a valid comparison between the diesel base case and the coal utilization case. By (elimi- nating. the waste heat recovery from the diesel case and the energy recovery from the coal case is not comparing the two scenarios fairly since in each case the quantity of fuel would be reduced and therefore the unit cost would be reduced. The heat recovery from each scenario is not equal, hence, “an invalid comparison between the two scenarios exists. Dames and Moore did not ewen address the issue of heat recovery. Retherford did, however, estimate that 317,000 gallons of diesel fuel could be saved annually by using waste heat recovery from the diesel generators and that 23-46 trillion Btu per year were available as waste heat. If 23-46 trillion Btu/year were available from waste heat using diesel generation, it would appear that it would be more cost effective to continue to use 1-10 diesel fuel and pay the higher fuel costs than to use coal as the primary energy source. This could satisfy the heating needs for the entire city with plenty in reserve. (In other words, we ~~ cannot substantiate that this is a realistic figure.) . \\us t> be costed ont “~ \uoe care \ prey sus os we2 \no A ‘ep Tt, \ Ju, = 5 (od tan pF eT anna. SD WM | wo" btw Jn. Se egress Caz) THllss = lo'™ SF 23-46 X10? BTUs On ediets Er n dion oon VYees nat avoowst Lo re ep «hp ee Z Rie WS SUT lop ses ‘ Lh Fens ality a wr \\ AaB suc oat tilaDow,, Ly re) COAL RESOURCES The Retherford study identified four coal provinces within the Kotzebue area for possible development. These areas are: (1) Chicago Creek; (2) Corwin Bluff; (3) Point Hope; and (4) Kobuk River. Of these identified areas the Chicago Creek coal was investigated for coal utilization. These coal provinces would merit further attention and analysis in terms of environmental issues. Dames and Moore's Phase II feasibility study indicated that such a' coal gasification system is beyond current state of the art. Such a discrepancy would need further study. The Dames & Moore's Phase I study was to determine existing fuel utilization rates and patterns by villages within the study area, and identify coal resources in northwest Alaska that may be suitable substitutes for petroleum-based fuels in village elec- trical and heating applications. Kotzebue was not included as one of the communities in the Dames & Moore's study area and was not addressed in this report. The following@-Dames_ & Moore reBert conclusions were reached: o Shortfalls in fuel supply have occurred in many of the villages in the study area. o Total annual petroleum consumption by 27 villages within the study area in 1979-1980 was approximately 5.2 million gallons or an equivalent of more than 100,000 52-gallon drums. Of this quantity, 3.2 million gallons were used for heating and 2.0 million gallons for electricity generation. o The general attitude among consumers seems positive toward , finding an alternative fuel source for the area that will / / \o ~w? \yore 8 wr provide adequate, reliable heat and power. ere WH 6 . Wy pnr® wot \ : Ri v 1-12 Additionally, Dames & Moore's evaluation of coal resources in the study area was believed to have the greatest potential for devel- opment as fuel sources for the villages were ranked according to their overall suitability as target for future exploration the following report determinations were made: o Of the 49 occurrences investigated, 36 were considered suitable candidates for the conduct of additional exploration work, ranging from spot checking of previously identified localities to more extensive mapping programs. o There is very little hard data (either quantitative or qualitative) on the coal occurrences within the study area. What information is accessible is either outdated or does not specifically address itself to coal resources. Consequently, the total coal resource base of norhtwestern Alaska is unknown, and by and large remains virtually unexplored. ean =. = = © Nearly all of the coals occurring within the project area are of lignitic to bituminius grade and are of Mississippian, Cretaceous, or Tertiary age--the majority appearing to fall into the two later age groups. Mississippian are generally bituminous to semianthracitic in grade Cretaceous coals are mostly subbitumious to bituminous, and Tertiary coals are primarily lignitic. _ Given the data generated through the report Task 2 jinvestigation, several coal occurrences are believed to warrant further investi- gation. The most promising occurrences are divided into three categories according to their apparent relative potential Cate- gory I includes those occurrences that have a measured section of at least 10 feet total thickness, generally have indicated resource estimates, and generally have analytical data available. Category II have either measured sections or occurs as float, some have indicated resource estimates, and some have anlytical J=13 en data. Category III usually occurs only as float; where measured sections are identified, aggregate thickness is generally less than 4 feet; and generally no anlytical data is available. (Table 2). The Dames & Moore study in Phase I was to develop criteria regarding power plant or space heating fuel requirements from a quality (Btu) and quantity (annual tons of coal) standpoint, aSelect coal prospects which, based on available data, meet these criteria, Develop alternative transportation modes from supply to demand points, Develop the alternative supply/demand scenarios relevant to villages or region, and assess their feasibility and practicability in light of socio-strategic and technical consi- derations. Select those areas known or believed to contain coal resources in which a reconnaissance drilling program would be worthwhile. The following report conclusions are: Dames and Moore concluded that it Pee neces ERR ae to supply the space heat needs for the majority of the study area with coal. Electrical power can also be economically supplied by coal in the larger communities of Kotzebue, Nome, Unalakleet, and possibly Selawik. Dames and Moore further determined that any coal resource that met the following criteria was worthy of further evaluation. 1) Heat val¥e of 10,000 Btu/lb.; 2) Reserves sufficient to supply 60,000 to 100,000 tons per year for 20 years; 3) Surface mineable; and Barge accessible -- either coastal or riverine, or within about 20 miles of such access. 1-14 According to Dames and Moore's 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 approximately $80 to $208 per ton, depending on transportation distance. The principal factors which supported this statement 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 energy content of (ts) coal has a significant impact on consumer cost. An example is that 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 Point 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 cogk. 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. 5. The cost of transmission lines has significant impact on the price of electricity to consumers. ; 6. The extent of the actual coal resource base is speculative. The following recommendation regarding the coal resources of this study area were stated by Dames and Moore. Coal Occurrences: Those coal occurrences which are at or within 30 miles of the coast, are mineable by surface methods, and which have a heat value of at least 10,000 Btu should be explored. These areas are presented below. 7 ee L=15 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. This report in draft form was also reviewed by ASTS in September, 1981. Included are the comments that Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) submitted to Eric P. Yould, Executive Director of Alaska Power Authority which address the coal resources, i.e.: 1. Cost figures for underground mined coal appears erroneous in that labor cost per manshift seemingly has been added to labor cost per ton. % 2. The local communities may have objectives other than reduction of the cost of energy that they would like to see implemented with such a program. For example, a number of small scale coal mineg~could_ provide greater employment opportunities for local residents than one large scale mine. The tradeoffs associated with these and other possible alternatives should be condsidered and similarly the villages may consider coal mining activity to have adverse impacts (i.e., influx of non-resident laborers, environmental problems, and conflicts with subsistence resources and activities). A multi-objective approach to the issue should be evaluated. 3. The energy demands of communities in northwest Alaska represents one possible market for coal. The energy demands of potential industrial complexes in Noatak and other mineralized areas represents an even larger energy load which is currently beyond the scope of this Feasibility Study. 1-16 It should be noted that this report was reviewed in draft form only. 1.6 ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES the following alternative technologies have been reviewed in the reported documents: Geothermal, Wind Systems, Hydropower, and Coal Gasification. Each of these technologies is presented in the following paragraphs. 1.6.1 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY POTENTIAL A review of existing literature relevant to the geothermal potential of the Kotzebue area has been initiated. Existing data includes reports prepared by Energy Systems, Inc., and Robert W. Retherford Associates for the Alaska State Division of Energy and Power Development and the Alaska Power Authority. . & Based on a recorded bottom-hole temperature of 162°F (72°C) at 6,300 feet in a hydrocarbon exploration well drilled by Chevron approximately 15 miles south of Kotzebue, Retherford Associates (1980) concluded that utilization of a low-grade geothermal resources for district space heating is conceivable. However, it was recognized that additional geologic exploration would be required to determine whether sufficient water temperatures and flow rates exist in the subsurface near Kotzebue to allow any development to proceed. Additional work on geothermal feasibility concluded that based on existing information, the projected costs for development of a geothermal district heating system were too high (Energy Systems, Inc. 1981). However, the geologic data used to support this conclusion were limited. The geologic data consisted primarily of the results of geological and geophysical well logging, drill- 7 qa 7 wwe YY Wr stem tests, test water chemistry, and temperature surveys within two Chevron hydrocarbon exploration wells, the Nimiuk Point #1 and the Cape Espenberg #1. The regional geothermal gradient established from these two wells indicates an abnormally high geothermal gradient for the Tertiary sedimentary rocks overlying probable Cretaceous volcanics and probable middle Paleozoic metamorphics. Interpretation of reflection seismic data supplied by Chevron indicated only 2,000' of Quaternary and Tertiary sediments overlying the less permeable volcanics and metamorphics in the Kotzebue area. This interpretation is not consistent with older gravity mapping completed by the United States Geological Survey. The gravity interpretation, however, is known to be in error in the prediction of depth to bedrock at Cape Espenberg #1. The thickness of the permeable sedimentary column in the Kotzebue area is critical in determining if the regional geothermal gradient can develop sufficiently _ha=- waters in adeqmate reservoir rocks near the district heating center. However, additional data are required to determine if localized hot spots of even higher geothermal gradient may be present. The nearest known hot springs occur in the Seward Peninsula at Serpentine Springs (65°51' N, 164°42' W) and at Pilgrim Hot Springs (65°06' N, 164°55'" W). The previous wells were not drilled to determine geothermal potential, and therefore may not be indicative of the maximum geothermal gradients in the area, consequently, based on a preliminary analysis of the existing data base, several recommendations for future work efforts appear feasible, at this stage of our review stage; they are: Due to the critical nature of interpretations of sedimentary rock thickness in the Kotzebue area, the available seismic data should be reanalyzed to confirm the suggested 2,000' column thickness 1-18 reported in earlier reports. An analysis of remote sensing imagery (including existing standard and infrared photography) and regional geology could be initiated to determine if there are any localities near Kotzebue which may produce an even higher geothermal gradient than that reported in the hydrocarbon exploration wells. Additionally, it apprears that agFeasibilityy a-* if Study, with adequate detail, within our contract frame work, i not be possible. 1.6.2 WIND SYSTEMS The information presented on wind power potential, available wind systems, costs and power production appear to be all outdated. For example, resource typing information on Kotzebue has been available since December 1980 which accurately gives wind power density data. Manufacturers have taken considerable strides in making their hardware more reliable and much experience has recently been gained in Alaska with wind generators. While these may be more appropriate for the villages, an _update willsibe provided in our study for the Kotzebue area. 1.6.3 BUCKLAND HYDROPOWER FACILITY (Reference Retherford - Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue As noted above, costs will be uniformly addressed under TASK 8 of our study. From a review standpoint then, the Buckland site, as represented, appears to be a feasible alternative based on acceptance of costs and hydrology parameters noted. We do have the following preliminary concerns: 1) Potentially high environmental and technical problems associated with large shallow reservoir. 1-19 2) Long exposed transmission line makes firm power questionable. 3) Overall estimate appears low (see also Section 1.8) 1.6.4 COAL GASIFICATION Retherford, and Dames and Moore indicate that gasification technology and equipment are still in the development stage. This is not the case. Luigi, Winkler, Texaco, etc., all have had coal gasification plants operating successfully around the world for Many years. These plants are also being operated on a variety of coal types. There is a tremendous amount of O & M, economic, and technical data available to accurately assess above ground coal gasification as a viable alternative for an energy source to produce electricity. Furthermore, Retherford indicates that in the operation of a coal gasification facility less problems are. encountered than in a steam plant. Operation of a gasification facility requires less skilled personnel with lower maintenance requirements. In addi- tion, the emissions from the facility are estimated to be less harmful than from a steam plant. These statements reflect a total misunderstanding of above ground coal gasification facilities(on)” currently defined by DOE. These facilities including all of the ancillary equipment, are highly complex, requiring skilled personnel to operate them. Maintenance costs are higher and the environmental pollution could easily be greater. Furthermore, Retherford stated that these plants have less problems than a steam plant, which is highly unlikely. In addition, there seems to be an inconsistency in the statement about coal gasification being in the development stage and the figures showing cost of power using steam generation and SNG from coal. These figures show costs being about equal; however, if coal gasification were in the development stage, usually one would consider then that these costs would be considerably higher. 1-20 1.7 ENERGY CONSERVATION The existing reports do not refer to energy conservation, e.g. increased insulation of existing structures by retrofit, weatherization, etc., even though it has proven to be a very cost effective way to save energy. According to the reviewed reports, the energy demand for heating purposes in the Kotzebue area is presently approximately two to four times the demand for electrical power. Although buildings in Kotzebue seem to be of a rather good standard with respect to insulation (Energy Systems, Inc.: Kotzebue Geothermal Project), they probably do not meet today's requirements of economical insulation, as well as an option like heat capture from ventilation air has not been considered. Application of features like increased stpsulation thicknesses, weatherization, heat capture from ventilation air, etc. will reduce the energy demand for heating purposes considerably and a schedule of improvements listing improvements and their effects will therefore be established under other TASK efforts of our study. At present, approximately 5,000 people live in the Kotzebue area, half in the City of Kotzebue and half in the surrounding villages. This balanace will change toward the year 2000, as the population in Kotzebue is expected to more than double, while the population of the villages is expected to remain fairly constant. Even with double as many people in Kotzebue itself as in the villages, it is considered very important that optimal measures are taken to conserve energy throughout the entire area. 1-21 Having a central heat producing unit will, compared to individual furnaces, make the community more vulnerable to failures and break downs. However, energy conservation, e.g. by means of increased insulation and weatherization will to a certain extent help relieve the problems caused by a failure in a central heat producing unit. A short shutdown will hardly be felt, a longer lasting shutdown can be met with less effort and inconvenience. T=2:2 1.8 ECONOMIC EVALUATION The review of cost information and economic evaluations as presented within prior studies, primarily, the assessment of power generation alternatives for Kotzebue (Retherford Asso- ciates, June 1980) appear as though they may have underestimated major important construction and economic costs. These costs are associated with the development of the coal resource, construc- tion of the steam plant and the construction of the Buckland River hydroelectric project. Some of the areas of conservative construction estimating appear in the coal mining development and operating costs, steam plant auxiliaries and civil costs, and the Buckland River hydroelectric structures and improvements, access road and bridges and general transmission plant costs. Economic evaluation criteria such as the 8% inflation from 1980 to 1984, 4% from 1984 on; diesel fuel cost inflations of 10% from 1980 to 1984, 6% from 1984 on; 9% construction costs; 7% permanent rates; and construction time tables appear as being conservative. An example of the above is that diesel fuel costs have escalgted approximately 25% between 1980 and 1981, construction inflation from 10 to 15%, and permanent rates currently exist in the 13% area for Alaskan bonds. This review is only an initial overview of other previous work and upon further development of our study in Task 8 these costs along with other alternate energy sources will be presented within our overall economic evaluation of alternatives. Tentatively, it would appear that the new economic evaluation (other parameters as stated in the reports reviewed) will probably result in a totally different cost ratio appraisment between the diesel, hydro and coal fired alternatives with diesel moving into the lead with only a 2.6 incremental increase over normal inflationary aspects. 1=23 The continued efforts of this study will enable a much more defined and accurate economic evaluation to take place upon finalizing locations and schematic details of alternatives. 1-24 TASK 2.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE Site Reconnaissance conducted during January and February 1982; subtask accomplishments were: aio 2.2 Preparation work for the site reconnaissance was done in late December 1981 and reconfirmed in early January 1982. Agency contacts were: 0.0 0 OC Of 0110-20 City of Kotzebue -- Mr. Gene Moore, City Manager Kotzebue District Heat Work Group (KDHWG) (basically the City Council) -- Royal Harris (Mayor); Gene Moore (City Manager); Allen Upichsaun, Paul Harris, and Joe Squicciarini (all members of the City Council) Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) -- Mr. Don Fiscus Alaska Power Administration U.S. Corps of Engineers State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Puklic Facilities State of Alaska, Public Utilities Commission United States Department of Interior University of Alaska Alaska Center for the Environment State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development Division of Community Planning, Department of Community and Regional Affairs University of Alaska, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center University of Alaska, Institute of Social and Economic Research 2-1 2.3 2.4 o United States Department of Interior; Bureau of Mines, Alaska Field Operations Center o Rural Community Action Program o NANA Development Corporation, Inc. o Maniilaq Association Meetings with Kotzebue City Manager, KDHWG, and KEA, Maniilaq Association, Arctic Lighterage, NANA Corporation, and local Energy Auditors were very productive. We appreciated the time and insight given us by the various individuals in attendance. Considerable time was spent in discussions of getting the coal from the source to Kotzebue, which is not currently a part of this Feasibility Study effort. It is obvious that the people of Kotzebue are very interested in the overall coal resource and facilities for handling and use of same. —_ - = - a " Included herein as appendixes are: a. Agenda for meeting with KDHWG b. Summary of meetings in Kotzebue, i.e.: o January 18, 20, and 21, 1982. o February 1, 2, and 3, 1982. c. References to studies done (by Retherford) for KEA d. KEA copies of electrical output to Kotzebue 1968 through 1981. e. Letter of January 21, 1982 from Don Fiscus, KEA, reference Coal Gasification Concerns, et. al. 2-2 £. Public meeting+) o Announcement o Summary Agenda o Detail Agenda g- Agencies and Organizations contacted. h. Agencies and Organizations responses. 1)Because of severe winter storm on January 19, 1982 meeting rescheduled for mid April 1982. r 2.5 Inventory of Existing Conditions This work effort consisted of: ° literature review ° discussion and data collection from: (1) City Manager and City Council (2) KDHWG (3) KEA (4) NANA (5) Maniilag (6) Arctic Lighterage (7) Kotzebue Energy Auditors ° physical site investigation of buildings, et. al. The results of this inventory are presented in Tasks 3 and 4 of this report. = - = = = 7 _ 2-4 TASK 3.0 ENERGY ‘ANCE The total Kotzebue community energy balance is herein depicted graphically in figures 3.1 and 3.2 and further tabulated in Table 3.1. A summary of this energy balance follows: eS 7 Input: wo scan \ 109 106 coe Gallons Btu/year kWh/year _%_ Propane 8,500 0.786 6 .230 6.1 Gasoline 400,000 48.000 14.064 8.3 Gasoline aviation 670,000 80.400 23.557 1368 Kerosene aviation 500,000 66.000 19.338 11.4 Fuel #1 1,282,000 174.352 51.085 30.0 Fuel #2 (heating) 310,600 43.018 12.604 7.4 Fuel #2 (electric) 987,200 136.722 40.059 23.5 Fuel #2 USAF 225,900 31.287 9.167 $.5 Total energy input “500.565. 70.106 200.0 — 10°Btu 10°kwh Electric Energy ~ 37.046 10.855= o Lighting ee ee a eee 13,471 x 10© Btu, 3,946,800 kWh © Appliances 17,287 x 10© Btu, 5,065,300 kWh o Space heating 6,118 x 10© Btu, 1,792,600 kWh o Street Lighting 170 x 10° Btu, 40,800 kWh Space Heating 145.284 42.568 Hot Water 3.759 1.101 Heating cold water supply 3.264 956 Cooking 638 -187 Ground Transportation 14.400 4.221 Aviation 29.280 8.579 U.S. Air Force (electric energy 9.518 2787 Total energy directly utilized - — 243.189 71.254 3-1 109 Btu/year 106 kWh/year Total energy direct utilized 243.189 71.254 Total recovered waste energy 12.508 3.665 o Space heating 5,580 x 10© Btu o Hot water 148 x 108 Btu o Heating water supply 6,780 x 10° Btu Total energy usage 255.697 74.919 109 Btu/year 106 kWh/year $ Total energy input 580.565 170.104 100.0 Direct energy utilized 243.189 71.254 41.9 Direct waste energy 337.736 98.850 38.1 Recoverable waste energy 74.662 21.876 12.9 Recovered waste energy 12.508 3.665 2.1 Total energy utilized 255.697 74.919 44.0 (direct + recovered waste) Total waste energy 325)/.196 95.185 56.0 (direct - recovered waste) " ' For computing the energy balance, the fol¥owing data and conversion factors were used: Propane 92,500 Btu/gallon Gasoline 120,000 Btu/gallon Kerosene (jet fuel) 132,000 Btu/gallon Fuel Oil #1 136,000 Btu/gallon Fuel Oil #2 138,500 Btu/gallon 1 kWh 3,413 BTU 3-2 WASTE TOTAL 56% INPUT. 100% Gasoline Gasoline Aviation Kerosene Aviation Propane Fuel #1 Heating Fuel #2 Electricity Fuel #2 USAF FIGURE 3.1 ENERGY BALANCE FOR ALL DELIVERED ENERGY 3-3 2.1% RECOVERED WASTE TRANSPORT ELECTRICITY AND HEATING OUTPUT TOTAL 44% WASTE TOTAL 45.1% = % = 3 2% = |) RECOVERED WASTE | s 3 oa a ba RF INPUT 100% Propane mmm) 2% Fuel #1 45.2% _~ Heating FIGURE 3.2 ENERGY BALANCE, ELECTRICAL AND SPACE HEAT ENERGY TABLE 3.1 ENERGY BALANCE-KOTZEBUE : page 2 of 2 PRODUCT INPUTS TOTAL INPUT CONVERSION END USE END USE ENERGY (10° BTU) (10° BTU) KWH (10° BTU) RESIDENTIAL be a ee 227.18 LIGHTS FUEL OW #2 1,506,400 GAL. (208,636) 231,100 GAL.(32,007) COMMERCIAL -INCLOG.APTS. . 481,390 GAL. (66,673) PUBLIC-INCLG.CITY 53,300 GAL. (7,382) 67,940 GAL.(9,410) errr FAA. 71,800 GAL. (9,939) SCHOOL NON-ELECTRICAL 109,600 GAL. (15,180) ENERGY 310,600 GAL. aCeetae (43,010) 201,000 GAL. (27,838) AIR FORCE 900 GAL. (31,287 ieaatainus 226 GAL. (31,287) ELECTRICITY a SCHOOL Ree. 1 987,200 GAL. 61,670 GAL. (11,311) (138,800 eeeneernicecemeetietnneetesonmasennssoaiif i owe ’ HOSPITAL Te APPLIANCES SPACE HEATING LIGHTS: APPLIANCES SPACE HEATING COMMERCIAL APPLIANCES a 27.1% SUBTOTAL END USE ENERGY KWH (10°BTU) — 27.1% IGHTS | STREET LIGHTS APPLIANCES SPACE HEATING 78 LIGH (2,068) APPLIANCES __ (366) SPACE HEATING (eee —— ee 708% SPACE HEATING (9,883) HOT WATER N/A 1 (10,626) voe SPACE HEATING (18,262) ae HOT WATER N/A (1,225) N/A TOTAL END i 19854, USE ENERGY| '9°54-800 USAGE |] WASTE HEAT INPUT | TOTAL WASTE HEAT | RECOVERABLE W.H. | RECOVERED & UNRECOVERED END USE (108 Btu) (0% atu) (10% atu) W.H. (108 BTU) ib O% HOSPITAL (8,351) NON-ELEC. —{ 0% SCHOOL (4,554) (37,240) UNRECOVERED L | FAA. (7,245) (8,780) COLD/HOT WATER 40% HOSPITAL (6,662) oe (48,032) SCHOOL (8,246) PUBLIC (5,362) (1,011) SPACE HEATING COMMERCIAL (48, RESIDENTIAL (23,336) AL END USE ENERGY END USE ENERGY KWH (10® BTU) KWH (10° BTU) 30.4% LIGHTS 1,076,440 STREET LIGHTS a APPLIANCES (4,363) SPACE HEATING (4,354) WASTE HEAT INPUT TOTAL WASTE HEAT | RECOVERABLE W.H. | RECOVERED & UNRECOVERED WH. (108 Btu) (108 Bru) (108 Btu) (10% Btu) 69.6% AIR FORCE (21,769) (21,769) 40% (8,708) (8,708) UNRECOVERED ee eneiiver es eee a Se Se a ee oe TABLE 3.1 wa ENERGY BALANCE-KOTZEBUE pagel of 2 TOTAL INPUT END USF ENERGY TOTAL END USE a el re PRODUCT PROPANE 35,900 GAL. (3,320) GASOLINE-REGULAR 400,000 GAL. (48,000) (44,796) & UNLEADED ’ AVIATION (29,280) GASOLINE-AVIATION 670,000 GAL. (80,400) WASTE HEAT INPUT |TOTAL WASTE HEAT| RECOVERABLE W.H.|RECOVERED &UNRECOVERED W.H. END USE (108 BTU) (10° BTU) (108 BTU) (117,120 ) (0) N/A KEROSENE-AVIATION 500,000 GAL (66,000) JET FUEL (150,720) (33,600) RESIDENTIAL _— ae SPACE HEATING (65,367) 692,000 GAL. ( 04,112) [> = HOT WATER (511) COMMERCIAL: INCLDG. APTS. 0x SPACE HEATING (39,866) 428,000 GAL, (58,208) | 9207 = HOT WATER (880) ee 4 352). ee Bess ee PUBLIC-INCLG.CITY —IJ70% SPACE HEATING (6,156) 100,000 GAL. (18,600) | te i ee COLD/HOT WATER (3,264)/ (100) eee re HOSPITAL 70% SPACE HEATING FUEL OIL #1 1,000 GAL. (136) HOT WATER 1,282,000 GAL. F.A.A. 70% SPACE HEATING (5,657) 61,000 GAL. (8,296) HOT WATER (150) DSAGE IWASTE HEAT INPUT [TOTAL WASTEHEAT |RECOVERABLE W.H.|RECOVERED & UNRECOVERED W.H.) END USE (108 BTU) (10 Btu) (10° BTU) (10®stu) 30% F.A.A. (2,489) 30%] HOSPITAL (41) ay (16,205) UNRECOVERED = 30% PUBLIC (4,080) (52,306) (20,922) ng COMMERCIAL (17,462) (1746) SPACE HEATING |+&-—————430% | RESIDENTIAL| (28,234) (2823) SPACE HEATING (148) HOT WATER TASK 4 FORECAST YEAR 2002 4.1 Past Population Trends Kotzebue's population has grown steadily since the turn of the century. U.S Census figures for 1909 indicate a total population of 193. Through the following decades (see Table 4.1) up until 1940 the population increased at a rate of about 2.2% per annum (p.a.) showing a gradual acceleration toward the end of this period. During the years of rapid expansion characterizing the post-World War II period the population doubled twice, increasing from 372 in 1939 to 1,290 in 1960. Between 1960 and 1980 the growth rate remained stable at a more moderate 2.3% p.a. The U. S. Census figure for 1980 shows a total population of 2,054. Several population estimates undertaken since 1970, however, consistently indicate a larger population than the Census. Thus, for example, the Kotzebue Land Use Plan (1976) estimated the 1976 population to be around 2,000, while City of Kotzebue statistics and figures used by the Alaska State Revenue Sharing Program point to 2,431 people in that year. The latter sources indicate an annual growth rate between 1970 and 1979 of around 4.2% (as _opposed-- to the 2% p.a.-between 1970 and—1980 implied by the Census figures). In a report for the Alaska Power Authority entitled "Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue," Robert W. Retherford Associates estimated the 1979 population to be around 2,500. In the 1981 Kotzebue Land Use Plan the City Planning Commission accepted the 1980 population to be 2,544, this figure, in turn, being based on estimates by Quadra Engineering in connection with the "Water and Sewer Expansion Study" (1981). In an October 1981 analysis of the various population estimates, the City of Kotzebue recognized the 1981 population to be 2,847. 4-1 | Table 4.1 PAST POPULATION TRENDS KOTZEBUE 1909-1981 Year Population (1) (2) (3) (4) (E})) (6) (7) 1981 2,847 1980 2,054 4,293 2,544 1979 2,526 @2,500 1978 2,526 1977 2,431 1976 2,431 @2,000 1975 2,125 1974 2,125 1973 2,125 1972 1,957 1971 1,875 ab peceeetl ead => 1970 1,696 1,696 1960 1,290 1950 623 51939 mil 377-2 ili ee ee ie 1929 291 1920 230 1909 193 Source: (1) U.S. Census (2) Alaska State Revenue Sharing Program (3) City of Kotzebue, October 1981 (4) Indian Health Service (5) City of Kotzebue Planning Commission; Quadra Engineering (6) Robert W. Retherford Associates (7) Alaska Consultants, Inc. 4-2 y i 4.2 Present Population As can be seen, there is considerable disagreement on the size of the present population of Kotzebue. However, among consultants and the City alike there seems to be general agreement that the U.S. Census figures are too low. Short of undertaking a comprehensive survey - which is outside the scope of this study - there is no way of accurately and authoritatively determining which figures are correct. The City of Kotzebue currently has plans for a survey in the spring of 1982. Meanwhile, as mentioned above, the City Planning Commission is using the estimate developed by Quadra Engineering (ref. "Kotzebue Water and Sewer Expansion Study", January 1981), since this estimate generally is considered to be based on the most exhaustive analysis to date. It is therefore proposed that for the purposes of the present study the same estimate be used. Thus, the 1980 population is assumed to be 2,544. —_ =. :_=— = a _ 4.3 Population Projection Ovet the last decade a number of population-=projections have been made for Kotzebue. The most recent (and, therefore, more rele- vant) ones include a 1980 estimate by Quadra Engineering (ref. "Kotzebue Water and Sewer Expansion Study", 1981) resulting in a year 2000 population of 4,000. This projection has been accepted by the City of Kotzebue Planning Commission as being "the best available." A review by this Consultant confirms this. The pro- jection, which forecasts the population to the year 2000, generally continues the level of growth seen in the '60s and '70s with an average annual growth rate of about 2.3 percent. This projection seems to adequately reflect two likelv opposing -- and to a certain extent mutually neutralizing -- factors that may influence Kotzebue's population growth in the next 20 years: a slowing down of migration from outlying villages due to improved 4-3 \ facilities and housing, on the one hand, and an increase in economic activity resulting from accelerating exploration for, and possible development of, natural resources in Northwest Alaska, on the other. It is therefore proposed that for the purposes of this study, the energy consumption forecast be based on Quadra Engineering's pro- jection. Thus, the year 2000 population is expected to be around 4,000, increasing to 4,200 in 2002. It should be noted that this projection does not allow for the possibility that petroleum may be discovered in large commercial quantities so early in the planning period, that major develop- ment will occur in time to significantly impact the year 2002 population of Kotzebue. If indeed a major oil discovery were made in the Kotzebue region soon after the scheduled offshore lease sales in 1985, and if the development phase were to start immediatsly following this, cthe population forecast -- and thereby also the energy needs forecast -- should be revi ed accordinaly. _To~attempt to _develop -a-likely scenario for _the discovery and development of natural resources in the Kotzebue area at this time, and to project the resultant population increase, is irrelevant considering the uncertainties involved. It seems probable that commercial quantities will be discovered in the region. However, it also seems probable that decades could pass before this happens and development starts, possibly toward the very end of the planning period. 4-4 4.4 Present and Future Household Size In order to establish the future number of residential energy consumers, it is necessary to estimate the number of households. As was the case for the current total population, there are also widely divergent opinions on the present number of persons per household, or per housing unit: 1970 Census data indicate about 4.8 persons per household. The 1980 Census showed 2.9 persons per household, which is generally thought to be too low. In the same year (1980) the Leslie Foundation through the Mauneluk Association determined the average household size in the City of Kotzebue to be 4.25, while a survey by Quadra Engineering and CETA indicated 4.88 persons per household. In order to resolve the apparent conflict and arrive at a specific figure, Quadra Engineering in the Sewer and Water Extension Study used the average of 4.25 and 4.88 -- i.e. 4.5. A household size of 4.5, however, is relatively high when compared to the state average, which according to the 1980 census was 2.5, and to other cities of similar size and population composition, such as Nome or Barrow where household size estimates indicate _between-- 3. 4.and 4.0 persons per residential unit. New information provided by two State energy auditors, who visited 80 homes in Kotzebue during the period November 1981 - January 1982 indicates about 3.8 persons per residential unit. Thus, for lack of better information, the 1980 average household size in Kotzebue is taken to be 4.0. Y However, as a result of declining birth rates and anticipated construction of additional housing units, the average number of persons per household is expected to decline gradually at least until the year 2000. 4-5 i Based upon a review of regional trends and relevant projections made for other similar-sized communities with a comparable racial mix, indications are that within the planning period the average household size will approach the current state average. For purposes of this study, therefore, it is assumed that Kotzebue's overall average household size will gradually decline from 4.0 in 1980 to approximately 3.0 in 2002. Thus, based on the projected increase in total population, the number of households will increase from approximately 636 in 1980 to about 1400 in 2002, corresponding to an annual rate of increase in residential consumers of around 3.6%. Table 4.2 Population Projection NO. OF PERSONS = YEAR POPULATION HOUSEHOLES-. - PER HOUSEHOLD= 1980 2,544 636 approx. 4.0 1981 2,625 660 approx. 3.9 1985 2,850 760 approx. 3.8 99 ON 3,200 ._ 900 _ approx. 3.6 1995, Ww 37600 -=-S— 1,100 “-"~--approx. 3.3 2000 4,000 1,300 approx. 3.1 2002 4,200 1,400 approx. 3.0~ Growth rate of population: 2.3%/year Growth rate of households: 3.6%/year The projection of population and households can also be seen in Figure 4.1 4-6 4000 3000 | 2000 _..1000 FIGURE 4.1 PROJECTION OF POPULATION AND SIZE OF HOUSEHOLDS ss 4-7 __ HOUSEHOLD CAPITAS PER A} 4.5 Light and Appliances Kotzebue Electric Association has provided a breakdown of the electric power usage in the community. The breakdown was for the first eleven months of 1981, but for the purpose of this study, we have assumed that the percentage division is the same for the whole year. Table 4.3 Breakdown of electric power usage in 1981 103kwh % Residential homes 2,541 202) Small commercial (< 50 kVA) 4,012 SSeS Large commercial (> 50 kVA) 3,635 30.2 Public 531 4.4 Street Lighting 50 0.4 KEA office and plant use 86 0.7 Total accounted =O sSSt 90 Total unaccounted (linelosses etc.) 1,192 9.9 Total generated 12,047 100.0 Line losses, etc. amount. ‘to'-1,192 x 103 kwh- out of a total of 12,047 x 103 kwh equivalent to 9.9% or approximatelv 10%; the latter number will be used in the following calculations. A portion of the homes in Kotzebue have | electrical hot water heaters, the consumption of which must be subtracted from above figures to arrive at "light and appliances", because heating of hot water is computed as a separate item later. Since it has not been possible to visit each single house in order to determine their electrical appliances, information gathered by two local energy auditors as well as information from Kotzebue Electric Association was used for assumption of the 4-8 basis in calculating the power consumed by electrical hot water heaters. The two energy auditors have visited 80 homes in Kotzebue, of which 20 had electric hot water heaters or 25%. Information from KEA indicates that about 10 - 15% of the consumers have electric hot water heaters, which seems to be a more realistic figure, while the information from the energy auditors may not represent an average cross section of the homes. For the purpose of this study, it is therefore assumed that approximately 15% or 100 households have electrical hot water heaters in their homes. If it is assumed that all major hot water users, i.e. hospital, schools, etc., do not use electricity for hot water heating and that the persons in the homes with electrical hot water heaters use more hot water than the average person, e.g. 5 gallons per day per person, the electrical power for heating hot water can be calculated as follows: —_~ = _=— - - =_ 100 households of 4 persons each using 5 gallons per day 100 x 4 x 5 x 365 = 730,000 gallons per year “Assuming .a mean temperature-raise of 100°F {from-32° to approxi- mately 132°F) this quantity corresponds to: —730,000 x 8,345 x 100 = 179,000 kwh/year = - ' 179 x 103 x 100 = 1.5% 12,047 x 103 Kotzebue Electric Association has also provided the totals of electrical power generated for the years 1968 through 1981. Using above estimated figures, i.e. 10% for losses and 1.5% for hot water heating, in conjunction with-column 2 and 5 of Table 4.1: Past Population Trends, following figures are arrived at: 4-9 j Table 4.4 Power Generation at KEA, 1968-1981 Information fran KEA Light and appliances Total generation Peakload load Total 103 per capita Year 10 kwh x Factor) kwh 1 kWh 1968 3,353 761 0.50 2,967 _ 1969 3,590 784 0.52 3,177 -- 1970 4,180 969 0.49 3,699 2,181 1971 4,797 1,041 0.53 4,245 2,264 1972 5,019 1,008 0.57 4,442 2,270 1973 5,211 1,030 0.58 4,612 2,170 1974 5,711 1,200 0.54 5,054 2,378 1975 6 ,822 1,400 0.56 6,037 2,841 1976 7,881 1,568 0.57 6,975 2,869 1977 8,979 1,859 0.55 7,946 3,269 1978 10,610 1,948 0.62 9,390 3,717 1979 10,980 2,032 0.62 9,717 3,847 1980 11,154 2,105 0.60 9,871 3,880 1981 12,047 2,150 0.64 10,676 4,067 2) —- = 1) Total generation less 11.5% for losseS and hot water heating. 2) 2,625 persons estimated. 3) The loadfactor is computed on base of total generation total generation = load. £ ° ~~ ws TRGB SEs peakioaa ~ 108d fact —— Taking the whole period 1970-1981 as a whole gives an annual rise in electrical consumption for "light and appliances" at (4,067/2.181)1/11 -1 = 0.058 or approximately 6% per year per capita. In "Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue" Robert W. Retherford Associates have estimated an annual per consumer rise of 3% from 1980 to year 2000. If consumer is set equal to or proportional to household, this translates into a per capita rise of 5% per year, based on assumptions on household sizes previously made. 4-10 It is anticipated, however, that the per capita consumption will not continue to grow at this rate throughout the whole planning period, wherefore growth rates of 5% and 4% for 1980-1990 and 1990-2002, respectively, are suggested. This leads to the following per capita and total consumptions by also including Table 4.2: Population Projection. The forecast of electrical energy demand for light and appliances can be seen in Table 4.5. As there is presently no (major) electrical consumption for industrial processes or alike, and as there seems to be no such plans, the forecast for light and appliances includes all elec- trical energy demand except heating of hot water and line losses. In the years from 1968 to 1981 the loadfactor for the powerplant has increased from 0.50 to 0.64 as it can be seen in Table 4.4. However, this increase of the loadfactor cannot continue in the planning period, because a reasonable limit for the loadfactor is 0.60 - 0.65. Therefore, in this study, the forecast for peakload is based on a loadfactor of 0.60 for the whole planning period. Table 4.5 ~° =~ —= — Light and Appliances, Forecast 2002 Light & appliances, Light & appliances, Peakload 2) Year «--_per-capita, kwh-_. total, 10° —kwh i. kw 1980 3,880 9,871 2,105 3) 1981 4,067 10,676 2,150 3) 1985 4,952 14,113 3,000 1990 6,320 20,224 _ 4,500 1995 7,689 ~ 27,680 - 6,000 2000 9,335 36,420 8,000 2002 10,119 42,500 9,000 1) Does not include lineloss etc., which is approximately 10% of total generation. 2) Peakload is computed for a loadfactor 0.60 and with due consideration to line losses by dividing with 0.90. light and appliances - 0.90 x 365 x 24 x 0.60 _= Peakload 3) Information from KEA 4-11 The per capita and total consumptions are shown in Figures 4.2 and 4.3 \ 4-12 PROJECTED RECORDED FIGURE 4.2 ft le kWh per CAPITA per YEAR LIGHT AND APPLIANCES | 10° kWh per. YEAR 50 40 i RECORDED FIGURE 4.3 _. LIGHT AND APPLIANCES kWh per YEAR PROJECTED 4-14 4.6 Space heating The forecast for space heating demand until 2002 is based on a theoretical calculation of the actual space heating demand in 1981. The space heating demand for an individual building is a function of the actual ground area and the format and height of the building and the actual quality and grade of insulation. 4.6.1 Site Reconnaissance By a site reconnaissance in the town, all buildings have been classified by a visual judgement and some buildings were measured on site. In addition to the visual classification, information from two local energy auditors, who had visited 80 individual homes in the town, was used. 4.6.2 Basic Data for Calculations: =... = From a calculation of a well-insulated one story building with floor area of 960 sq.ft., the basic heatloss per square feet is -comiputed. ~~ — ee = Besides this calculation, information from the two energy auditors has been used as a help to figure out the most correct basic heatloss per square foot. : As mentioned above, heatloss not only depends upon floor area and insulation, it also depends on the format of the individual building; therefore, a conformation factor, i.e. total surface divided by floor area, is figured out. 4-15 _insulation factor of 1.00. - The various examples are as follows: HEATLOSS FLOOR CONF. ( Btu/h ) HEATLOSS x 3.00 (sq.ft.) FACTOR h °F sq.ft. CONF. FACTOR Calculation 960 3.06 0.252 0.247 Energy Auditors 1008 3.04 0.198 0-195 Energy Auditors 864 3.11 0.277 0.267 Energy Auditors 960 3.06 0.232 0.227 Energy Auditors 864 Sold 0.280 0.270 Average 0.241 These figures were based on information taken in homes that are well-insulated; however, a lot of houses have a very poor insula- tion. In consequence of that, all houses are given an insulation factor ranging from 1.00 for well insulated ho -es to 2.00 for old houses with poor or no insulation. 4.6.3 Calculation of heatloss: _Based on the above, the calculations are made out from a basic heatloss on 0.24 —_____Btu_ including heatloss for venti- h x °F x sq.ft. lation, for a house with a conformation factor of 3.00 and an The actual floor area of the individual buildings is then measured on an aerial map of Kotzebue, and the total surface is figured out on basis of the actual heig'+ of building. ~ The heatloss is then figured out as follows: floor area x conf. factor x insulation factor x 0.24/3 = (___BTU___) heatloss atlos = 4-16 In Table 4.6 the total heatloss for all houses in town is summarized. The houses are very roughly divided into four groups: Residential: Single residential houses. FAA: All buildings south of the airport. School & hospital: Buildings within two blocks where school and hospital are located. Public & commercial: Public buildings, offices, apartment buildings, churches, stores, etc. Warehouses: Warehouses in connection to commercial buildings, hangars in the airport, etc. TABLE 4.6 it | Calculation of space heating demand, 1981 ; Floor area Heatloss Heatloss Heat Demand Floor area ; BIU ; BIU 106 BIU per capita Group sq.ft. hex. °F %Sq.! £C. h x °F YEAR sq.ft Residential 476 ,407 0.43 204 ,003 79,076 181 FAA 29 ,680 0.40 11,8900 4,609 i). School & Hosp. 216 ,998 0.36 77,485 30,035 83 Public & Cammerce 253,625 0.36 87,192 33,798 ) 222) Warehouses 93 ,625 0.35 33,202 12,870 ) TOTAL 1,070,335 0.385 2) 413,772 160 ,388 408 1) average 4-17 The annual demand is based on 16,151 degree day °F p.a. in Kotzebue (Cold Climate Utility Delivery Design Manual). The total annual space heating demand is a little higher than the total output figur out in the energy balance, but in the above calculations, neatpatn from light, cooking and people is not taken into consideration. 4.6.4 Forecast to Year 2002 The forecast to year 2002 is based upon an evaluation of popula- tion, household size, size of residences and quality of these. It is assumed that in the following years, a part of the old small houses will be ‘replaced by newer and larger homes and the area per capita in residential houses will then increase. How- ever,. it is also assumed that when the number of capitas per household is decreasing, there will be a need for smaller homes -- mostly for the very young and elderly people. The result will be a growth in fence per capita from 181 in 1981 to approixmately 240 in 2002, while the flooyarea per household will be almost the same in 2002 as in 1981. For school, hospital and commercial buildings, it is assumed that there will be a very small increase of area per capita. These assumptions are based upon the actual home sizes and flooyéreas per capita, and also based upon information about the trends of home sizes in Greenland in the last ten years. In Figure 4.4 the projection of floorarea per capita can be seen. / 4-18 _ sq.ft. per CAPITA 250} - a et td aed re tss0] Jt eee 7 see “ “COMMERCIAL AND : PUBLIC. JT be com sto iu J) ft _ SCHOOL AND _ HOSPITAL 1980 FIGURE 4.4 aii "ss FLOORAREA per CAPITA. | PROJECTION po pei 4-19 In Table 4.7, it appears that the resulting heatloss per sq. ft. ranges as an average from 4 Btu ae ns F e366. ft. for residential buildings to Btu pe hexdeo ne xis qemititls for commercial, etc. A part of this heatloss can, especially in the residential houses, be decreased down by improved insulation of existing buildings as well as replacement of old houses with new well insulated houses in the following years. In order to show the effect of improved insulation of existing buildings and efficient insulation of new buildings, two fore- casts for space heating demand is computed, a low forecast and a high forecast. For the low forecast it is assumed that an improved insulation of the existing buildings will be carried out as well as the new buildings are supposed to be very well insulated. For the high forecast there is assumed no improvements of insula- tion in the existing buildings and less insulation is anticipated in the new buildings. The heatloss per sq.ft. used as basis in the two forecast can be seen in Table 4.7 4-20 TABLE 4.7 Heatloss per sq.ft., Forecast 2002 BTU h x °F x sq.ft. Calculation Low Forecast High forecast 1981 1) 2) rE) 2) Residential 0.43 0.35 0.30 0.43 0.35 FAA 0.40 0.33 0.30 0.40 0.35 School & Hospital 0.36 0.32 0.30 0.36 0.35 Commercial, etc. 0.35 0.33 0.30 0.35 0.35 1) Value used for area equal to existing buildings in 1981. 2) Value used for additional new buildings. The forecast for area of buildings for the years until 2002 can then be seen in Table 4.8 and and in Figure 4.5. TABLE 4.8 Total Floor area, Forecast 2002 (sq. ft.) ‘ SCHOOL & PUBLIC, COM YEAR RESIDENT FAA HOSPITAL AND WAREHOUSE TOTAL 1981 476,407 29,680 216,988 347,250 1,070,335 1985 547,000 32,000 240,000 408,000 1,227,000 1990 659,000 35,000 288 ,000 464,000 1,446,000 1995 792,000 40,000 330,000 526,000 1,688,000 2000 936,000 44,000 392,000 592,000 1,964,000 2002 1,008,000 46,000 420,000 630,000 2,094,000 The forecast for space heating demand for the years until 2002 can be seen in table 4.9 and 4.10 and in Figure 4.6. 4-21 Sqetit. 10° Btu 2D 2.0 — se .«** FLOORAREA we (sq. ft.) 1.5 nw“ —t _ — - oor = os _ = ea en 1 2-057 _ a _—. SPACE HEAT HIGH PROJECTION —-—~— DEMAND eee, CCB tt . a ee h:X{ °F jb OS ge See i) Se De pee oe ' LOW PROJECTION > FIGURE 4.5 TOTAL FLOORAREA AND SPACE HEAT DEMAND. a PROJECTION 4-22 Table 4.9 Space Heating Demand, Low Forecast to 2002 Floor Heatloss Heatloss Space heat YEAR area demand Btu 103__ Btu 10°Btu/ 10°kWh/ 106sq.ft. h x °F x sq.ft. hx (°F year year 1981 1.07 0.39 414 160 47 1985 1.23 0.37 454 180 53 1990 1.45 0.35 509 200 59 1995 1.69 0.34 571 220 64 2000 1.96 0.33 641 250 73 2002 2.09 0.32 671 260 76 Table 4.10 Space Heating Demand, High Forecast To 2002 Floor Heatloss Heatloss Space heat YEAR area demand Btu 103 __Btu 10°Btu/ 10®kwh/ : 10®sq.ft. hx °S x‘eq-f£G; nx -F year year 1981 1.07 0.39 414 160 47 1985 1.23 0.38 471 180 54 1990 1.45 0.38 548 210 62 1995 1.69 0.37 633 250 72 2000 1.96 0.37 730 280 83 2002 2.09 0.37 780 300 89 4-23 100 ___.SPACE_ HEATING DEMAND per YEAR._ HIGH PROJECTION 1980 FIGURE 4.6 PROJECTION 4-24 4.7 Hot Water The hospital and the school are the two largest hot water consumers in the community today. The hospital's total consumption of potable water is 4,200,000 gallons per year, of which roughly estimated 35% or 1,470,000 gallons are used as hot water. The school's total consumption of potable water is 4,450,000 gallons per year, of which again roughly estimated 20% or 890,000 gallons are used as hot water. The hospital's and the school's hot water consumption is, for the purpose of this study, anticipated to grow proportionally with the population. At present a lot of residences have no hot water heaters, and hot water must be heated on stoves. That will, of course, limit the usage of hot water, but gradually the usage of hot water will increase when more new houses, with an easy access to hot water, are built. ’ Therefore, the per capita consumption for residential, commercial —< and public use additional to the above two large consumers is estimated at 5 gallons per day, compared to approximately 10 - 15 gallons per day in a fully developed community with reasonable inexpensive access to eneray. Toward the end of this study's planning period, the per capital consumption of hot water in Kotzebue is anticipated to reach this level, i.e. 15 gallons per day. Tables 4.11 and 4.12 show the hot water consumption of the above described—three sectors: mide Com ens asi pve seety TS 4-25 YEAR 1981 1985 1990 1995 2000 2002 Year 1981 1985 1990 1995 2000 2002 Hospital 103 gal/year 1,500 1,600 . 1,800 2,000 2,300 2,400 TABLE 4.11 Consumption of hot water, residential, commercial, and public Gallons per capita per day 5 nel: 14 5 Table 4.12 Total Hot Water Consumption Forecast 2002 School 103gal/year 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,400 1,500 use 103 gallons per year 4,800 6,300 9,400 14,500 20,500 23,000 Residential, comm. and public 103 gal/year 4,800 6,300 9,400 14,500 20,500 23,000 Total. 103 gal/year 7,200 8,900 12,300 17,700 24,200 26,900 The total consumption of hot water per year is converted to Btu and kwh per year by using a temperature rise of 100°F, i.e. from 32°F to approximately 132°F and not taking into consideration any conversion losses at all. The heat demand for heating hot water can then be seen in Table 4.13 and in Figure 4.7 4-26 Year 1981 1985 1990 1995 2000 2002 Table 4.13 Heat Demand for Heating Hot Water Forecast 2002 103 gal/year 7,200 8,900 12,300 17,700 24,200 26,900 109 Btu/year 4-27 6.0 7.4 10.3 14.8 20.2 225 103 kWh/year {1980 “FIGURE 4.7 "HOT WATER, HEAT DEMAND per YEAR. PROJECTION 4-28 4.8 Industrial Processes No industrial production is taking place in Kotzebue right now, and for the purpose of this study is not expected to do so within the planning period 1982-2002. However, some energy is used for heating the cold watersupply to prevent it from freezing in the supply lines as well as in storage tanks and that has been considered an industrial process thus being the only one. The city has informed that potable water leaves the water treatment plant at a temperature of 40-42°F and returns from the circulation at a temperature close to 32°F. At the watersource, the raw water is heated by boilers before it is pumped to the treatment plant. The present total water consumption in the community is approximately 200,000 gallons per day, but since the water is circulating and thus losing energy continuously, an exact amount of -heat to be added cannot be found based on consumption. However, from information received from the water treatment plant in Kotzebue, we know that in 1981, approximately 30,000 gallons of fuel was used for heating the cold water supply. Furthermore, from information received from KEA, we have estimated that approximately 6,780 million Btu recovered waste heat is used to heat the city's potable water. Assuming that the 30,000 gallons fuel are converted at 80% efficiency, it gives that a total of 6,780 + 3,264 = 10,044 x 106 Btu per year. 2.9 x 10°kwh per year are used to heat the cold water supply presently. The present consumption of fresh water corresponds to 200,000/2,625 = 76 gallons per day per person. "Cold Climate Utilities Delivery, Design Manual" by the Water Pollution Control 4-29 Directorate, 1979, recommends a design figure of 120 gallons per day per person in "communities totally serviced by a piped water distribution and sewage collection system". However, in a lot of northern communities, it is difficult to get adequate amounts of potable water. Therefore, when the population is growing, it can be necessary to limit the consumption of potable water. For the purpose of this study, it is assumed that the per capita consumption of potable water is constant through the planning period. In Table 4.14 and in Figure 4.8, the energy demand for heating cold water supply can be seen. Table 4.14 Potable Water Consumption and Heat Demand For Freeze Protection Forecast 2002 Gal per gallons Total Total energy per year Year cap per day - day 106 gal/yr 109 Btu/yr 106 kWh/yr 1981 76 200,000 as 10.0 3.0 1985 76 ; 220,000 — 80 11.2 1990 76 240,000 88 19.3 1995 76 270,000 99 14.0 2000 76 300,000 110 15.4 . 2002 76 320,000 ality) 16.4 4.8 4-30 do? ptu; 10° kwh a aa _ per YEAR] per YEAR ! Pea ts: {het tC i “FIGURE 4.8 “ i. 4 Nt och we hese hia sith ce =f + Nec at COLD WATER SUPPLY. HEAT DEMAND per YEAR. PROJECTION 4.9 Summary The following Figure 4.9 shows a summary of the total projected energy demand for Kotzebue to year 2002. 10 Btu per YEAR 500 450 400 ~250 —-200 150 100 kWh per YEAR 160 140 120 i 100 bo a 7 SPACE HEATING oe t steer “LIGHT AND APPLIANCE! FIGURE 4.9 TOTAL ENERGY DEMAND, ELECTRICAL AND HEATING. PROJECTION 4-33 TASK 5 -- TECHNOLOGY PROFILES Technology Profiles (see Task 5.0 Table of Contents) have been prepared for all viable alternatives known to our firms. These profiles are oriented toward (1) electrical generation and (2) space heating utilizing when practicable co-generation techniques. The "pure" power generation and space heating technologies are included, because a combination of two or more of these might be the most favorable solution to the power and heating needs of Kotzebue. Each technical or resource profile has been made such that it can stand by itself. Each profile, as applicable, contains, as a minimum, a General DeScription; Performance Characteristics; Costs; Special Requirements’ and Impacts; and a Summary. All profiles are in turn evaluated in accordance with the matrix outlined in Section 6 herein. 5.6 Bred, 5.8 5.9 5.10 Sielals Biek2 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK 5.0 General .ccccccccccccvcccccvessrecsecces Diesel-Electric Generating Units (Base Case) ... Steam-Electric Generating Units ........ Cogeneration SySteMS ..ccceccccvcccsccvee Coal Gasification Combined Cycle ....... weer eene Old Fashion Coal Gasification by the "Kopper - Totzek" Method ceveccccccceccsecesevcvee Solar Energy wecccccccccvvccvccvesesvece Heat Pumps -- Individual Space Heating . Coal Fired Low Pressure District Heat .. Hydropower -- Buckland Site .........ee- Wind Turbine Electrical Generators ..... Geothermal Technology ..cccccscccccccecs Peat Technology cccccccccccvesecccvcccee Solid Fuel Stoves and Furnaces .......e.- Electrical Energy Conservation ........- Thermal Energy Conservation .....eeeeeee Organic Rankine Cycle ..ccccccccccccccce Heat Pump System - District Heating .... eoreeocee ee eeeeee 5-44 5-49 S57 5-60 5-64 5-67 5-74 5-83 5=95 SOs 5-107 5-114 5-118 5.0 GENERAL 5.0.1 Electrical Generation -- General Description Technology profiles are provided for the most likely systems possible for the Kotzebue area. Since diesel electric generation currently is the power source for Kotzebue, it will be taken as the base case; the other alternatives are addressed under separate topic headings herein. 5.0.2 District Heating -- General Description By district heating is understood a collective heating system, supplying energy for space heating purposes and water heating in urban communities. The system is comprised of three elements, a central heat source, a piping system, and consumer equipment. The idea was born in the United States and has been in commercial use in many parts of the world since the beginning of this century. Having fewer fossil fuels, the Northern European countries have developed hot water district heating systems and proved them to be economical, efficient and profitable. ' At the beginning steam was distributed, but the development showed that hot water was a more convenient heat medium, offering Many technical and economical advantages. The original background for establishing the schemes was a wish to achieve greater comfort, rather than conserving energy. How- ever, an important improvement of the environment was achieved, as a number of small, inadequte, individual stoves were replaced by one single efficient heat source. In today's Denmark, for instance, more than 400 schemes serve approximately 750,000 homes all over the country. Approximately 350 of these schemes are privately owned cooperatives serving 5=3 mainly the small towns and villages. Thus, a great part of these serve less than a few hundred one-family houses. Also many communities in Greenland have district heating schemes utilizing waste heat from power plants. A district heating network consists of an insulated, double pipe system, connecting the individual users with one or more central heat sources. From the heating stations, hot water of approxi- mately 200° to 240°F is sent out through the flow pipe system. In the consumers' houses the heat content of the water is released in the heating systems, and water of approximately 100° to 120°F returns through the return pipe system for reheating in the station. Surplus heat from thermal power plants (diesel engines, gas or steam turbines) offers a big potential for district heating and is easy to recover at low cost, depending on the system and installation. Boiler stations can be designed for combustion of coal, osis gas, wood waste, or even straw, if available. Opposed to small individual boilers, such stations can utilize cheaper qualities of ifuels, e.g. heavy fuel oil, and they may be designed for a combination of fuels in order to reduce the dependency on one particular fuel. Also, incineration plants for household garbage or industrial waste offer a heating potential by which a double purpose is achieved: solving a refuse and an energy problem at the same time. A district heating scheme is capital intensive, but a community operating a utility which serves a large number of consumers can, contrary to the individual, afford to install specialized equip- ment for utilization of various kinds of low-grade fuels, such as heavy fuel oil, local goal, waste products, or even waste heat. 5-4 In other words, it is possible to reduce the consumption of imported, highly refined and consequently costly fuels, which are the only types of fuel individual heat consumers can use in their small heating plants, and replace these by local, low-grade, cheap alternatives, which can only be used in large-scale systems. In this way a higher degree of flexibility and independency can be achieved. It is estimated within 5 years, fuel oil costs will rise sufficiently to make it difficult to goperate existing individual or group heating systems with any degree of Le Lor, anor WD on ' reliability in Kotzebue, a 5.0.3 Performance Characteristics A modern low-temperature, water-based district heating system offers high flexibility, as almost any fuel, combustible waste material, or waste heat source may be converted into useful energy. The. waste heat, or central heat source is usually a heat only boiler, or an electrical power plant which has been con- verted for cogeneration. Cogeneration allows the reject heat from electrical generation modes to be used for district heating. Cogeneration increases a power plant's efficiency from 30 percent to nearly 80 percent, resulting in substantial savings making the performance benefit ratio high for cogeneration district heating systems. 5.0.4 Costs District heating systems are cost intensive, and costs can vary widely when retrofit conditions are necessary in converting to cogeneration. A typical 500 GPM, 20,000,000 Btu/hr distribution system one mile in length utilizing extraction steam from exist- ing steam generators including all three elements of a district heating system, heat source, distribution piping, and consumer equipment is expected to cost $265 per 1000 Btuh delivered, or $904 per kW. District heating systems in Alaska can be expected to cost from $146 to $585 per 1000 Btuh or from $500 to $2000 per kW. 5.05 Special Requirements There are no special hazards associated with a district heating system other than those attributed to installation in existing villages and cities where existing structures and utilities present planning and installation problems. On the attached outline (Graph 5.0) various heat sources of a hypothetical district heating scheme are illustrated. 5-06 . Summa ry wr r { The eventual installation of a hot water district heating system in the village of Kotzebue would)\result in the savings of many dollars presently being expended for business and individual home heating. : The existing diesel electric plant producing electricity would be more efficient with cogeneration, the joint production of thermal and electric products. District heating is not limited to a single fuel source; therefore, individual boilers fired by oil, wood, coal and refuse may be considered for Kotzebue. District heating has the following additional advantages: 1. Elimination of consumer handling and storage of fuel. 2. Reduction of pollution from burning oil. 3. Reliability of heat delivery. 5-6 OUTLINE OF A DISTRICT HEATING SCHEME Heat input from: - Power plant - Boiler station - Incinerator - Industry - Geothermal energy Sewage system/ heat pump - Solar collector ~“ NubWN GRAPH 5.0 Siok Diesel-Electric Generating Units (Base Case) Siew e General Description The diesel-generator is an electric generating system that uses a diesel engine as a prime mover. The diesel engine is an otto cycle, intermittent, internal combustion engine with compression ignition. S.i.2 Performance Characteristics The efficiency of 500 KW or larger units can approach 12 Kwh/gallon which can be competitive with larger steam plants. Smaller units that are remotely located may have efficiencies as low as 8 to 9 kWh/gallon. 5.1.3 Thermal Efficiency Ranges from 18 - 30 Percent. With waste heat recovery equipment efficiencies approach 40 - 42%. ‘ Srey liee Costs Varies considerably over size of equipment. Current 1981 costs are estimated to be 1250 to 1600 $/KW}.. — mel lle a tl Why atid, JE Lees i 5.1.5 Special Requirements and Impacts None other than currently existing. 5-8 5.1.6 Summary and Critical Discussion Diesel power is widely used to generate electricity in Alaska due to its high reliability and easy maintenance; however, with the high cost of fuel and its high transportation cost, together with the low efficiency of the diesel electric generation station, alternate means of electrical generation now have to _ be considered. Cogeneration technology can improve low efficiency significantly at reasonable cost. 5.1.7 Biblography Jet Propulsion Laboratory and California Institute of Technology, "Should We Have a New Engine? An Automobile Power Systems Evaluation," Volume I, Volume II, JPLSP 43-17, August 1975. Robert U. Ayres and Richard P. McKenna, Alternatives to the Internal Combustion Engine (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, Encyclopedia of Energy (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1976). 5-9 See. Steam-Electric Generating Units At the end of 1977, there was a total of 951 steam electric plants operating in the United States, and 320 more probably will be built during the next decade. The current trend is to larger size units located near the coal source. Sided General Description In a steam plant, fuel is burned in large boilers to provide high pressure steam to drive turbines, which in turn drive generators to provide electric power. Low-energy steam leaving the turbines is condensed and pumped back to the boilers, where it is heated to steam again and the cycle repeated. 5.2.2 Performance Characteristics Boiler sizes for steam electric power plants in the United States range from less than 1,000 to about 3,000,000 lb/hour, and most (about 65 percent) range from 100,000 to 1,000,000 l1b/hour. Furnaces in today's units generally are larger than those in comparable boilers built only a few years ago, allowing greater fuel flexibility. Turbines used in U.S. steam electric plants are rated from 100 to 900 MW, with about 40 percent rated from 500 to 699 MW. The current average thermal efficiency of steam electric plants is about 41 to 62.5 percent, using steam conditons from 600 to 4500 psi and higher with steam temperatures from 710 to 1000°F as practical design limits. Steam electric plants have heat rates of 8500 to 12,000 Btu of fuel value to produce 1 kWh of electricity. Heat rate (HR) is defined as 3413 Btu divided by the thermal efficiency. In establishing the performance of a steam electric plant the heat rate (HR), which is the heat supplied per unit of power output is generally preferred to thermal efficiency because is it more directly 5-10 appliacable to fuel performance. With large boilers, 90 percent efficiency is not uncommon; medium sized units consistently operate above 80 percent efficiency; therefore, with 65-75 percent efficient turbines, 98 percent efficient generators, 7 percent plant auxiliary power, 2 percent water make-up, and a plant rationalization factor of .90 to .98 percent, thermal efficiency of a typical steam electric plant can range from 41.8 to 52.5 percent. In using correction factors and comparative data to determine and apply plant heat balance data, care should be exercised. In using generalized data (example, 2 percent plant make-up) relative values are more reliable than absolute values; accordingly, simplified values should be used with caution in estimating plant thermal efficiency. Sates Costs - 7 Estimated to be (272 $/kWh for todays standard operating facilities. 5.254 Special Requirements and Impacts Steam plants can be fueled with coal, oil, or gas. Government regulatory policies have a major influence on the selection of fuels for steam electric plants. Gas and oil have lower sulfur and ash contents than coal and thereby avoid sulfur oxide and particulate emission problems. Government energy policy, however, strongly encourages the use of coal, which is in more plentiful domestic supply . Therefore, many plants now burning these fuels are converting their boilers to coal burning. (A number of plants now burning oil and gas have burned coal in the past and have facilities for conversion depending on fuel avail- ability, costs, and environmental restrictions.) Converting oil and gas burning steam electric plants to coal involves extensive Ss11 retrofitting of handling and storage facilities, boiler: design, ash and other solid waste disposal, and flue gas treatment facilities. The cost of an air pollution control system alone may be as much as 50 to 60 percent of the apparent conversion cost. Hidden environmental costs, such as treatment for coal pile and ash pond leachate and runoff, may constitute another 12 to 15 percent of the conversion cost. 5.205 Summary and Critical Discussion In Alaska, steam plants should be totally enclosed. The enclosed plants have a significantly higher unit investment cost. Further- more, plants burning low-grade coal have a higher investment in fuel, ash, and related environmental protection equipment. 5.2.6 Bibliography Encyclopedia of Energy (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1976). Frahk L. Cross, Jr., "Hidden Costs of Industrial Boiler Conversion to Coal," Pollution Engineering, February 1979. B. Schwieger, "Central-Station Design: Optimizing Efficiency, Reliability, and Cost in Plant Design and Construction," Power, Vol. 122, No. 11, November 1978. Edison Electric Institute, Statistical Yearbook, 1977, October 1978. U.S. Department of Energy, “International Coal Technology Summary Document," HCP/P-3885, December 1978. d= 12 D.M. Considine, ed., Energy Technology Handbook (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1977). 5-13 Ses Cogeneration Systems In cogeneration systems, electrical or mechanical energy and useful thermal energy are produced simultaneously. Such improved efficiency systems use a combination of mechanisms to utilize more of the heat energy produced when conventional fuels are burned than is possible with any existing single system. Using cogeneration, rather than separate systems to produce heat and electricity will yield net fuel savings of 10 to 30 percent. Production efficiency of generating electricity is ..22. to 34 percent, and recoverable heat is 43 to 63 percent, permitting total system cycle efficiency of 65 percent to 80 percent in cogeneration cycles. Cogeneration systems include dual-purpose power plants, waste heat utilization systems, certain types of district heating systems, and total energy systems. Such systems have been applied since the .late 1880's and, in the United States, have been used much more widely in the past than they are today. In the early 1900's, most U.S. industrial plants gener- ated their own electricity and many used the exhaust steam for industrial processes; many utility companies supplied cogenerated steam to large industrial users and densely populated urban areas. By 1909, an estimated 150 utility companies were pro- viding district heating. Cogeneration operations in the United States declined largely because of the availability of natural gas heating and of relatively low-cost reliable supplies of electrical power from large generation plants located in sites remote from densely populated areas. Sesie General Description There are two fundamental types of cogeneration systems -- topping and bottoming -- differentiated on the basis of whether electrical (or mechanical) energy or thermal energy is produced Lirse. In a topping system, electricity or mechanical power is produced first, and the thermal exhaust from the turbine is used 5-14 as industrial process heat, for space heating, or in other applications. The topping cycle is the common choice for utility and industrial applications. In a bottoming system, thermal energy for process use (such as steel-reheat furnaces, glass kilns, and aluminum-remelt furnaces is produced first, then the waste heat is recovered as an energy source for generating electricity or more mechanical power. Converting a large part of the low temperature process exhaust to useful work limits the application of bottoming cycles. Choosing a system depends on the balance of thermal energy and electrical (mechanical) power needed, and the level of waste heat available. Sie siee, Performance Characteristics Topping Systems Steam turbines (Rankine engines), gas turbines (Brayton engines), and diesel engines are the three primary heat engines used in cogeneration topping systems. A steam turbine system consists of a boiler and a backpressure turbine. The boiler can be fired by oil, natural gas, coal, wood, or industrial by-products and wastes. The turbine drives an electric generator and provides exhaust steam, still under pressure, for heating purposes. The overall efficiency of steam turbine cogeneration systems generally ranges from 65 to 85 percent; such systems require 4,000 to 6,000 Btu of fuel for each kWh produced. The amount of electricity produced increases in proportion to the pressure of the steam entering the turbine. Exhaust from the turbine is limited to atmospheric pressure and temperature. A_gas_ turbine combined cycle system consists of a gas turbine waste heat recovery boiler and steam turbine generator. Natural gas or light petroleum products (distillate oils) are used as S=L5 fuels, and the combustion gases produced are used in. the gas turbine to provide the mechanical shaft power that drives an electrical generator. The exhaust heat from the gas turbine (850° to 950°F) is recovered in the waste heat boiler to produce high pressure steam piped to the steam turbine generator. The steam turbine may be the back pressure or condensing type. Condensing of the turbine exhaust can be utilized in district heating systems or for process requirements. The combined cycle system produces heat rates comparable to steam turbine cogeneration systems typically ranging from 5000 to 8500 Btu/kWh. The efficiency of gas turbines is sensitive to inlet air temperature; the lower the ambient temperature, the higher the unit's power output, i.e., a simple cycle gas turbine that will produce 4000 kW at 60°F can produce 4750 kW at -20°F. A_diesel system, consisting of a diesel engine and a waste heat recovery unit, uses natural gas or distillate oil. The combustion of fuel in the engine yields the mechanical power that drives an electrical generator. Of the three topping systems, this cycle is the least efficient in producing electricity, and requires 7800 to 9000 Btu of fuel for each kWh produced. The engine exhaust can provide process heat or low-pressure process steam, but requires carefully controlled water treatment equipment. For process heating applications, the exhaust (at about 500F) has been used. Process steam of about 100 psi is generated in boilers that recover heat from the engine exhaust. In addition to the engine exhaust, heat can be recovered from the water- cooled engine jacket; low pressure steam is produced, or water for district heating can be generated at 180 - 200°F through a heat exchanger. Production of steam from exhaust and jacket water has not enjoyed success in Alaska. Maintenance on steam waste heat recovery systems is higher than the other topping systems. Typically, minor repairs are required every 7,000 to 10,000 hours and major overhauls, every 20,000 to 30,000 hours. 5-16 Bottoming Systems All bottoming systems are based on the Rankine cycle for waste heat recovery. Two types of Rankine cycles are used -- steam and organic. Steam bottoming systems recover heat rejected from thermal processes at high temperatures. Steam systems operate within a heat temperature range of 300 to 1000F with thermal efficiencies of 14 to 36 percent, and generally have capacities of over 500 kW. Bottoming systems that use organic working fluids to recover thermal energy are available in limited sizes, ranging to 1000 kW. Because these operate at lower temperatures (195 to 340°F), such systems can recover lower temperature waste heat. These systems have efficiencies of 13 - 18 percent. Work on bottoming systems is focused on further development of organic-fluid Rankine cycles, which may prove to be more flexible than steam Rankin cycles. Because the organic fluids vaporize at temper- atures below 212°F, and are more efficient than water at higher temperatures, it should be possible to develop high performance organic Rankine cycles. Combined-Cycle Systems Combined-cycle systems are comprised of two or more different thermodynamic cycles connected together in a way to gain maximum efficiency from the primary heat source. In most cases, both cycles are used for the same purpose -- usually to generate electricity; however, turbine exhaust is readily used for district heating. Such systems using coal or coal-derived fuels offer significant improvements over conventional systems for electric power generation in terms of increased efficiency, potentially lower cost, and reduced environmental impact. The concept of this advanced system is to burn coal or coal- derived gaseous or liquid fuels in air to produce a high 517 temperature gas 2600F or higher before expanding it through the turbine to produce electricity. After expansion, remaining hot gases can be used to generate steam in a conventional steam turbine plant to produce additional electricity. The open-cycle gas turbine/steam system forms a combined-cycle power plant with potentially greater efficiency than today's standard steam plant. Integrating a combined-cycle system with a low-Btu coal gasifier appears to be most promising from the standpoints of efficiency, cost of electricity, and emissions. Advances in combined-cycle power plants focus on high-temperature gas turbines combined with steam systems. 1. . Open-Cycle Gas Turbine Combined Cycles Open-cycle gas turbines that burn natural gas and distillate fuels are used commonly for utility peak load applications. Combined-cycle power plants couple such gas-turbines with steam- turbine technology to reduce the cost of electricity. There is one oil-fired and 2 gas-fired combined-cycle plants currently in utility service in Alaska. Relatively low capital investment/kw, higher conversion efficiency, capability for base and inter- mediate load service, and ease of waste heat utilization are factors making investment in new combined-cycle units increasingly attractive to electric utilities. The advantage of combined-cycle systems is represented by reliability due to the use of two tried and proven technologies. System efficiencies can reach nearly 75 percent with waste heat utilization of the steam turbine exhaust ina district heating system or other heating process. Reliability can be improved by arranging the waste heat recovery boiler for auxiliary firing. 2. The combined gas turbine/steam turbine system using direct combustion of coal will not be discussed because the technology has not been totally identified. The same is true for the 5-18 closed-cycle turbine combined cycle using alkali-metal vapor turbines. 5.3.3 Costs Costs are based on a 5000 kW plant $/kW Steam electric plants -- coal fired Condensing ~------------------------------- = 3200 Non-Condensing -----9- 9-9 rrr 2800 Steam electric plant -- oil fired Condensing -------3- 9-9 re 2500 Non-Condensing -----------3------------------ 2150 Diesel electric plant ------------------- 1250--- 1600 Combined cycle -- oil fired Gas turbine/steam turbine Cogeneration for district hot water ------------- 3500 Installed costs are difficult to determine for plant technology other than diesel electric in Northwest Alaska. There is no historical data. We have computed costs based on Anchorage prices and factored by 1.8. 5.3.4 Biblography U.S. Department of Energy, "Cogeneration: Technical Concepts, Trends, Prospects," DOE/EFU-1703, September 1978. Peter G. Bos and James H. Williams, "Cogeneration's Future in the CPI," Chemical Engineering, 26 February 1979. Peter A. Troop, "Cogeneration in a Changing Regulatory Environment," Chemical Engineering, 26 February 1979. U.S. Department of Energy, "Fossil Energy Program Summary Document, FY 1980, Assistant Secretary for Energy Technology," January 1979. 5-19 Power Generation Alternatives, 2ND edition (Seattle, WA: Seattle City Light, October 1972. 5-20 5.4 Coal Gasification Combined Cycle Technology Profile for the City of Kotzebue 5.4.0 Introduction A conceptual design of a combined cycle electrical generation power plant integrated with a coal gasification section is shown in Figure 5.4.1. Briefly, raw coal is delivered to the plant site where it is cleaned, sized and dried to the consistency required by the gasification unit. The prepared coal is then fed into the gasifier with air or oxygen and steam where it is partially oxidized. The hot raw gas exiting the gasifier is predominately made up of hydrogen and carbon monoxide as well as _ trace contaminants. These contaminants, which include particulates, tars, sulfur and nitrogen are generally removed by a gas cleanup process before delivery to the. gas turbines. In the gas turbine section the feed gas undergoes combustion. These hot combustion gases drive the turbine and usually exit at a temperature of about 1000°F. A waste heat recovery boiler is then used to generate steam from the combustion gas exhaust of the gas turbine. This steam in turn powers another turbine driven electrical generator to produce additional electrical energy. Combined cycle technology is current state-of-the-art. Numerous coal gasification plants incorporating Lurgi, Koppers-Totzek and Winkler technology have been commercially proven. Gas turbine technology coupled with a steam power plant has also been commer- cially proven in over 40 installations using natural gas or oil as the fuel source. Therefore, many of the system aspects of an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant have been commerically demonstrated. In addition, the entire combined cycle process has been commerically demonstrated in a 170 MW plant at Lunen, West Germany by Steag AG. This facility uses Lurgi coal gasification technology coupled with a gas turbine/steam turbine power plant and a supercharged boiler. In the United States, plans are underway for the construction of a 100 MW demonstration 5-21 combined cycle facility using second generation coal gasification technology. Start-up of the Cool Water Facility by the. Southern California Edison Company is expected before the end of 1983. Figure 5.4.1 COMBINED CYCLE POWER FLOW DIAGRAM The key element in a combined cycle power plant is the coal gasification section. Selection of the gasifier is a crucial step which will determine not only the performance of the system but the economic feasibility of the project. Numerous coal gasifica- tion technologies exist and the selection of the technology must be based on such factors as: (1) production rate of energy (2) turndown requirements (3) heating value of the gas (4) pressure and temperature (5) allowed gas purity (sulfur, carbon dioxide, etc.) (6) allowed gas cleanliness (tars, soot, ash) (7) coal availability, type, and cost (8) gasifier/end-use locations and interactions, and (9) size constraints. The major factor affecting gasifier selection in the Kotzebue area will be the availability of coal. The rank of coal, it's moisture, fixed-carbon, volatile matter, sulfur and ash content are all critical factors. D=2)2 Coal moisture content will affect the heating value of the raw gas in a proportional manner. This is especially true in fixed- bed processes because the moisture is removed by the hot gases rising through the drying and devolatilization zones; thus, the product gas contains more water vapor. In fluidized-bed units, an increase in the water content tends to cause greater production of carbon dioxide. Entrained beds are particularly sensitive to coal moisture content because mositure inhibits the overall gasification reaction which must take place quickly in this type of bed. Depending on the feed coal moisture content, some drying may be necessary for entrained- or fluidized-bed units. Fluidized and entrained beds, compared with fixed beds, are less sensitive to the volatile matter content of coal because these compounds are gasified very quickly. In fixed-bed units, however, increases in volatile matter content cause an increase in the heating value of the gases, because these components are driven off in the devolatilization zone. In single-stage units, this volatile matter also will be cracked and polymerized to heavy tars and pitch, that must be removed if the gas is not used directly. Coal with high fixed-carbon content require more oxygen and steam per pound of coal than do those coals with lower carbon content. This leads to an increase in the percentage of carbon monoxide and hydrogen produced (decreased COj content), and thus increases the heating value of the gas. A trade-off exists in this, how- ever, because higher fixed-carbon content usually means lower volatile-matter content. Sulfur in coal exists in three different forms: pyrites (FeS5), organic, or sulfates. During gasification, the organic sulfur and some of the pyritic sulfure will react with hydrogen (to form hydrogen sulfide) and with carbon monoxide (to form carbonyl sulfide), thereby lowering the heating value of the gas. S=23) Ash is the remaining inorganic material left after coal is subjected to complete combustion. Ash composition will determine the temperature at which its melting will occur. Because all commercially available, fixed-bed gasifiers remove the ash in a solid dry form, the maximum temperatures (and thus the product gas compositions) allowed will be governed by this ash-softening temperature. In a fluidized-bed (Winkler) gasifier, any softening of the ash will cause the bed particles to stick and produce a loss in fluidization. Conversely, in the entrained-bed units (Koppers-Totzek), the ash is liquified and removed as a run-off slag. Therefore, for proper operation and maximum heating value fo product gases, high ash-softening temperatures are preferred for fixed and fluidized beds; whereas, low values are preferred for entrained-bed units. There are four known coal deposits within reasonable economic distance of Kotzebue. These deposits are: 1) the Kugruk River deposit 2) the Corwin Bluff deposit 3) the Point Hope deposit and 4) the Kobuk deposit. These coals are predominately bituminous and subbituminous in nature with the exception of the Kugruk River deposit which is lignitic. Preliminary reports indicate that the Kugruk River deposit may be the most economical to mine but, its exceptionally high moisture content (33.0%) and correspondingly low heating value make this the most unattractive of the four deposits is necessary before selection of a gasification technology can be made. With this in mind the remaining descriptions of a combined cycle facility will have to be made in a generic way. The description and performance of the gasification section is representative of the technology state-of-the-art and does not necessarily represent the most appropriate gasifier selection for Kotzebue. This is beyond the scope of this effort. 5-24 5.4.1 General Description The following description is based on the 100 MW Cool Water Combined Cycle Project being built by Southern California Edison. This project will use the Texaco coal gasification process and standard General Electric combined-cycle gas and steam turbine equipment. In this project 1000 short-tons per day of coal ona moisture and ash-free basis will be gasified. The resulting synthesis gas will be cleaned and combusted in the combined cycle section to produce approximately 100 MW of net electricity. In the first stage of the plant, coal will be delivered and unloaded onto coal conveyors for subsequent transportation to coal storage silos. At the Cool- Water facility two dedicated unit trains will deliver coal on a continuous basis and therefore storage is kept to a minimum. However, this may not be the case for a facility located at Kotzebue. From the silos, coal is then conveyed to the grinding section where it is sized and mixed into a slurry. This slurry is then temporarily stored in two tanks before it is heated and pumped into the Texaco gasifiers. The slurry is heated by low-level steam produced in other downstream processes. Adjacent ot the gasification section is the air separation plant which will provide the 1000 tons/day of oxygen necessary for gasification. This integrated facility will produce 99 percent pure oxygen at 820 psia for injecton into the gasifier. The oxygen compressor driver is electrically motor driven. A fifteen minute reserve gaseous oxygen supply and one day liquid oxygen supply are provided for start-up, cool down and emergency use. 5-25 The Texaco coal gasifier is a single stage, pressurized, down flow, entrained bed reactor which operates under’ slagging conditions. This type of reactor can utilize both caking and non- caking coals to produce high throughputs of gas which are relatively free of tars and other by-products. The Texaco process contains four main features which the developer feels essential for both technical and financial success. These features include hgih temperature opertion, high reactor pressures, the utiliza- tion of pulverized coal and the slurry introduction of feed into the gasifier. The desirable gasification temperatures are greater than 1800°F for lignites and greater than 2300°F for higher ranking coals. These reaction temperatures will increase gas yields, increase carbon conversion efficiencies, and produce a gas which is relatively free of liquid by-products. Operation at these temperatures in the slagging mode also simplifies ash removal from the high pressure gasification vessel. The slag which is produced is glassy in nature and releases only traces of metal during leaching tests. The non-polluting aspects of the slag indicate that disposal or storage of slag will present no problems. The absence of liquid by-products due to _ high temperature operation results in waste water effluent levels far below other industrial processes. The Texaco gasifier is designed to operate at a pressure of 600 psig. This higher pressure facilitates high space/time velocities and reduces reactor size. This high pressure also reduces recompression costs for downstream process requirements. The use of pulverized coal in the Texaco process increases the range of feedstocks available to the process. The use of run-of- mine coals, which are increasing in fines content due to modern mining techniques, can be used without previous pretreatment. 5-26 High coal conversion rates and carbon efficiencies are also produced due to the high specific surface area of the pulverized coal dust. The fuel design philosophy feature of the Texaco process is the use of a slurry to introduce coal into the high pressure gasifier. This slurry is a suspension of finely-divided coal ina liquid carrier such as water, organic liquids or even waste by- products. Wet run-of-mine coals therefore do not require pretreatment or drying in this process. However, slurry properties decrease carbon conversion but increase efficiency. This last fact is a result of less cabon dioxide formation which produces heat to evaporate the liquids from the slurry. This intern results in a greater production of carbon monoxide and an increase in process efficiency. Since less carbon monoxide is converted into carbon dioxide ‘to produce heat, specific oxygen consumption will decrease with increasing slurry concentration. However, this does not indicate the relative water content of the raw gas which must also be taken into consideration. Increased slurry concentrations will have the desirable effect of increasing carbon monoxide and hydrogen production while decreasing carbon dioxide and steam concentrations. Although increased carbon monoxide concentration increase the energy content of the exit gas, the corresponding decrease in carbon dioxide production, and hence heat, decreases the specific steam production of the gasifier. Decreases in gasifier steam production may warrant increases in boiler steam production, and hence increases in coal consumption elsewhere in the plant to supply the necessary process steam requirements of the facility. 5-27 The synthesis gas produced in the gasifier is predominately hydrogen and carbon monoxide with traces of carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, nitrogen and ammonia (see Table 5.4.1). This synthesis gas composition was produced using a Utah coal with the properties shown in Table 5.4.2. The particulates, sulfides, ammonia and some carbon dioxide in the synthesis gas must be removed before delivery to the gas turbine section. Before cleanup however, the hot gas leaving the gasifier is cooled ina series of waste heat boilers to produce high pressure steam. The raw gas and slag which exit at the bottom of the refractory lined reactor vessel are deflected at the discharge end of the radiative waste heat boiler which is located below the gasifier reactor vessel. As the raw gas is cooled to below the ash fusion temperature of the coal, the slag is separated and granulated in a water bath at the bottom of the radiative cooler. The ash which settles in the water bath is collected for removal in a program- mable lock hopper. The radiative heat boiler is sized to take advantage of the high temperature syngas to the point where convective heat transfer is more economical. The partially cooled raw gas is then sent ot the second stage convective waste heat boiler where additional process steam is generated. The cooled syngas which exits the waste heat boilers passes through a venturi or orifice type scrubber where any remaining particulate matter, as well as ammonia, is scrubbed out by direct contact with water. The wet scrubbing which takes place at near gasifier pressures, is expected to remove over 99.9% of the entrained paritculates and fly ash. The water which is removed from the quench section and scrubbing system is sent to a settling tank. The extracted particulate matter is then recycled to the wet grinding mill for reinjection into the gasifier. This step assures high process carbon conversion efficiencies. The gas leaving the scrubbing system has a particulate loading of typically less than l mg/Nm3. 5-28 The wet gas exiting the scrubber is further cooled in a heat ex- changer by cooling water to condense water from the syngas. After this final cooling the gas is processed ina Selexol® unit where sulfur compounds, hydrogen sulfide and some carbonyl sulfide is removed. The sulfur removal step is expected to remove approxi- mately 97% of the sulfur compounds. The concentrated hydrogen sulfide stream from the Selexol® unit will be converted to elemental sulfur for sale or disposal in a Clause® unit. Sulfur emissions from the Claus°® plant will be reduced by a tail gas treating section. Vol.% “Raw Clean Component Gas Gas Ho 34.48 35.67 co 43.31 44.79 COs 19.83 17.26 CHy 0.05 0.05 No + Ar 2.16 2.23 H2S 0.16 0 .ppmv cos 0.01 60.ppmv Total 100 100 Table 5.4.1 SYNTHESIS GAS COMPOSITION FROM TEXACO GASIFIER As Ultimate Analysis Received Moisture 10.0% Carbon 63.2% Hydrogen 4.3% Nitrogen 1.05% Chlorine 0.00% Sulfur 0.45% Ash 9.45% Oxygen 11.55% Proximate Analysis Moisture 10.08% Ash 9.45% Volatile 36.05% Fixed Carbon 44.50% Sulfur 0.45% Btu ° ; ’ Grindability (Hardgrove Index) 48 Table 5.4.2 UTAH COAL FEED CHARACTERISTICS The clean synthesis gas exiting the Selexol® scrubber section is then passed through a saturator, heat exchanger, pressure con- troller and a gas surge drum before entering the combined cycle gas turbine. In the saturation section, water is added to reduce NO also also produces significant power in the combustion turbine. The saturated synthesis gas is then heated in the heat exchanger before entering the surge drum which helps to smooth out any minor load variations between the gas turbine and gasifier. Short excesses of sysnthesis yas are flared if they occur in this x emissions during combustion. This additional water vapor section. 5-30 The gas turbine generator, heat recovery steam generator and turbine make up the combined cycle section. The saturated syn- thesis gas and additional steam are injected into the combustion gas turbine to generate approximately 65 MW of electricity. Additional energy is recovered by generating high pressure steam from the hot gas turbine exhaust gases in the steam generator. The cooled exhaust gases exit the steam generator at approxi- mately 270°F and are vented to a 200 ft stack. The high pressure superheated steam from the steam generator is fed to the steam turbine where an additional 55 MW of electricity are generated. Thus, the gross electrical production capabilities of the Cool Water facility are approximately 120 MW. However, the net power produced is approximately 200 MW after in-plant electrical consumption is subtracted. 5.4.2 Performance Characteristics Energy and Material Balance The heat rate of the Cool Water combined cycle demonstration facility is anticipated to be approximately 10,500 Btu/kWh, which would translate into a 32.5 percent efficiency on a coal-to- busbar basis. This value is contingent on the quality of coal and the coal slurry preparation technique. A heat rate value of 10,000 Btu/kWh is possible if quality coal is available and optimum slurry preparation is achieved. These heat rates can be compared to a heat rate of 9,000 Btu/kWh for a "commercial size" (greater than 1000 MW) combined cycle power plant. This lower heat rate is based on the use of larger more efficient steam turines with reheat. However, the Cool Water facility is expected to come close to the 9,900 Btu/kWh heat rate of conventional coal-fired steam plants which use wet scrubbing of stack gases. A detailed material and energy balance for the Cool water facility has not been published. However, detailed material and energy balances by a "commercial size" combined cycle plant using Danses oxygen-blown Texaco coal gasification units has been published. Table 5.4.3 presents a summary of the overall systems well as the gasification and gas cleaning subsystem and the power generation subsystem. This large scale facility produces approximately 1,157 MW at a net heat release rate of 8,813 Btu/kWh and an overall system efficiency of 38.7% (coal -> electricity). Some of the values presented in this table will be somewhat different for smaller combined cycle installations such as the 100 MW Cool Water plant and the 10 MW to 50 MW plant which Kotzebue requires. Power system energy outputs can be expected to be somewhat lower due to the lower efficiencies of smaller steam turbines. Overall system efficiency for a small combined cycle plant near Kotzebue would probably be in the area of 35% (coal to electricity - % of coal HHV). A material balance around the gasifier is shown in Table 5.4.4 for a commercial size plant using the oxygen-blown Texaco technology. This balance is for multiple gasifiers and therefore can be linearly scaled down -for smaller size combined cycle installations. However, this material balance is for an Illinois #6 coal and will be somewhat different for other coal feedstocks. The overall energy balance for the commerical size combined cycle facility is shown in Table 5.4.5. This energy balance is repre- sentative of an oxygen blown Texaco gasifier and again is related to the coal properties and plant size. Somewhat different values can be expected for Kotzebue area coal and a smaller plant size. Table 5.4.6 presents the energy balance as a percent of the coals higher heating value. As this table indicates, nearly 40% of the coals heating is rejected from the cooling towers. The material and energy balance above are for a facility that rejects cooling water at approximately 100°F. However, this temperature can be increased for district - heating application with a marginal decrease in overall plant efficiency. This would required a plant redesign. 5-32 9E—S Table 5.4.5 ENERGY BALANCE FOR A LARGE SCALE COMBINED CYCLE POWER PLANT Basis: 60°F, water as liquid, 3,413 Btu/kWh. HAV HEAT_IN foal 10,196 Gas Turbine Suction Air -- Demineralized and Raw Water Auxiliary Power Inputs TOTAL 10,196. HEAT OUT Ash Slurry Gasifier Heat Losses Gas Cooling Sulfur Product 105 Air Coolers : Oxidant Compressor Interstage Cooling Gas Turbines Sulfur Plant Effluent Gas Steam Turbines Power Block Losses Turbo-Generator Condensers HRSG Stack Gas Steam Heat and Power Losses Selexol Overhead Condenser Selexol Solvent Cooler Waste Water Effluent TOTAL 105 Input - Output Input = 0.22% SENSIBLE 102 109° 50 91 82 70 616 22 176 28 1,124 MM_Btu/hr LATENT RADIATION 258 258 0 112 47 4,860 159 POWER 149 149 1,871 2,163 193 TOTAL 10,201 106 1,871 20 2,163 240 4,171 1,395 46 68 176 28 10,689 Se-S Table 5.4.4 MATERIAL BALANCE AROUND GASIFIER FOR A LARGE SCALE COMBINED CYCLE POWER PLANT FEEDS T (°F lb/hr lb mol/hr Coal 163 Moisture 35,000 1,942.8 Ash 80,000 MAF Coal Carbon 554,985 46,205.9 Hydrogen 42,525 21,094.6 Oxygen 80,022 2,500.8 Nitrogen 9,985 356.4 Sulfur 30,816 961.1 TOTAL COAL 833,333 Oxidant (dry) 1000 Oxygen 863,337 26,979.3 Argon 48,469 1,213.4 Nitrogen 2,826,661 100,894.6 TOTAL OXIDANT 3,738,467 129,087.3 Water (including air moisture) 163 388,994 23,534.3 TOTAL FEEDS 4,960,794 Gasifier Effluent CH, He co C02 HS cos No Ar H20 NH3 T (°F) 2,300-2,600 TOTAL GASIFIER EFFLUENT Ash Carbon Ash TOTAL ASH TOTAL EFFLUENTS 2,300-2,600 EFFLUENTS mol % lb/hr lb mol/hr (wet) 2,828 176.3 0.09 39,672 19,678.6 10.21 923,019 32,952.0 17.09 572,211 13,001.6 6.74 30,101 883.2 0.46 4,674 77.8 0.04 2,834,153 101,162.0 52.48 48,469 1,213.4 0.63 422,646 23,459.5 12.17 3,034 178.1 0.09 4,880,794 192,781.9 100.00 Nil 80,000 80,000 4,960,794 GASIFICATION AND GAS CLEANING SYSTEM Coal Feed Rate, lbs/hr (m.f.) 798,333 Oxygen or Air (1)/Coal Ratio, lbs/lb m.f. 0.858 Oxidant Temperature, °F 300 Steam/Coal Ratio, lbs/lb m.f. (4) 0 Slurry Water/Coal Ratio, lbs/lb m.f. (5) 0.503 Gasification Section Average Pressure, psig 600 Crude Gas Temperature, °F 2300-2600 Crude Gas HHV (dry basis), Btu/SCF (2) 281.1 Temperature of Fuel Gas to Gas Turbine, °F 781 POWER SYSTEM Gas Turbine Inlet Temperature, °F 2,400 Pressure Ratio 17:1 Turbine Exhaust Temperature, °F 1,140 Steam Conditions, psig/°F/°F 1,450/900/1,000 Condenser Pressure, Inches Hg abs . 225 Stack Temperature, °F 272 Gas Turbine Power (3), MW 745 Steam Turbine Power (3), MW 448 Power Consumed, MW 36 Net System Power, MW . 1,157 OVERALL SYSTEM Process and Deaerator Makeup Water, gpm/1000 MW 362 Cooling Tower Makeup Water, gpm/1000 MW 7,588 Cooling Water Circulation Rate, gpm/MW 347 Cooling Tower Heat Rejection, % of Coal HHV 38.7 Air Cooler Heat Rejection, % of Coal HHV a 5.2 Net Heat Rate, Btu/kWh 8,813 Overall System Efficiency (Coal + Power), % of Coal HHV : 38.7 (1) Dry Basis, 100% 02 (2) Excluding the HHV of H2S, COS and NH3 (3) At Generator Terminals (4) Includes moisture in oxidant air (5) Small changes in this ratio do not significantly alter the results presented here. Table 5.4.3 SUMMARY OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE FOR A LARGE SCALE OXYGEN-BLOWN TEXACO GASIFIER INTEGRATED COMBINED CYCLE POWER PLANT 5-33 Table 5.4.6 our VALUE FOR A LARGE SCALE COMBINED CYCLE POWER PLANT Coal HHV Net Power Sulfur Ammonia Product, HHV Selexol Sensible and Latent Oxidant Interstage Cooling Ash Slurry Sensible HRSG Stack Gases Rejected at Condensers Other Sensible Losses Other Latent Losses Gasifier Heat Losses Power Block Losses MM Btu/hr 10,196 3,948 105 mal: 568 81 1817 3754 (94) (288) ENERGY BALANCE AS PERCENT OF COALS HIGHER HEATING Percent 100.0 38.72 1.03 Ott Sie oll 0.79 17.82 36.82 (.92) (2.28) 0.26 Zana tal 100.15 Table 5.4.7 AVAILABILITIES OF GASIFIERS BY BED TYPE Bed Type Availability, % Fixed 80-97 (avg = 95) Entrained 90+ Fluidized 90+ p37) H/Yr 7000-8497 7880 7880 Table 5.4.8 COST ESTIMATE FOR A 100 MW COMBINED CYCLE POWER PLANT USING OXYGEN BLOWN TEXACO GASIFIER (x103$) Description Total Coal Receiving, Storage and Preparation 28,800 Oxygen Plant 34,800 Coal Gasification 38,400 Sulfur Removal/Recovery 18,000 Steam, Condensate and Water 27,600 Power Generation Equipment 50,400 Supporting Systems and Facilities 27,600 Initial Operation - 12,000 Subtotal , $237,600 E-C Engineering & Management 36,000 Other Program Expenses 31,200 Contingencies 45,600 . $350,400 ($595,680) * *installed plant cost in Kotzebue In addition to the Cool Water costs presented, the capital investment costs shown in Table 5.4.9 assume a 70% operating load factor and coal costs of $2.00/MM Btu. Total capital costs for this size facility are roughly 1.5 billion dollars. With the cost of the 100 MW Cool Water Plant and the projected cost of this "commercial size" facility, one can calculate the appropriate scaling factor for estimating the cost of a smaller combined cycle plant for the city of Kotzebue. This scaling factor is: (Capital Cost of Large Facility) ae (Net Power Output of Large Facility)x Z Capital Cost of Small Facility Net Power Output of Small Facility A q ($1,538 689,000) J (4156.8 MW)0.605 4 $ 350,400,000 / 100 MW Uy DN / yar Therefore, the capital cost for a 50 MW combined cycle plant would be approixmately $230,000,000 1982 dollars. Using a 1.7 scaling factor for construction in Alaska, this cost would increase to $391,000,000 for a combined cycle plant producing 50 MW of power in Kotzebue. However, as previously mentioned, this cost might be reduced if barge construction is practical. In the short term, the City of Kotzebue will probably require a combined-cycle power generation facility in the 10 to 30 MW(@) size range. The installed cost of such a facility would be $147,900,000 and $287,500,000 for a 10 MW(,) and 30 MW.) size plant respectively. The 10 MWe) facility will probably require approximately 5 acres of land, excluding coal storage. The appropriate scaling factor for land requirement is: (_iland_size of large facility) . (_net power output of large facility )0.25 land size of small facility net power output of small facility This is based on a 2000 MWe) facility requiring 20 acres of land. Additional land requirements for coal storage are a function of reserve storage requirements and are included in the above equation. 5-39 Table 5.4.9 CAPITAL INVESTMENT FOR A 1157 MW COMBINED CYCLE PLANT AT 70% OPERATING LOAD FACTOR AND 1,000) g/m? Percent PLANT INVESTMENT Coal Handling - 35,297 30. St 3556 Oxidant Feed 187,822 162.37 18.95 Gasification and Ash Handling 38,817 33.55 3.92 Gas Cooling 267,177 92.66 10.81 Acid Gas Removal and Sulfur Recovery 45,736 39.54 4.61 Waste Water Treating - 7 Steam, Condensate & BFW 1,323 1.14 0.14 Support Facilities 88 , 328 é 76.35 8.91 Combined Cycle 486,649 420.70 49.10 Subtotal 991 ,152 856.82 100.00 Contingency 189 ,056 163.42 Total Plant Investment 1,180,208 1,020.24 SALES TAX 26 ,649 23 .04 CAPITAL CHARGES ; Preproduction Cost 77 5423 66.67 Paid-up Royalties ° 5,900 5.10 Initial Catalyst and Chemical Charge 824 0.72 Construction Loan Interest 147,408 127.42 Total Capital Charges 231,256 199.92 DEPRECIABLE CAPITAL 1,438,113 1,243.20 WORKING CAPITAL 100,576 86.94 TOTAL CAPITAL 1,538,689 1,330.14 ' NOTE (1) Mid-1982 Dollars $2.00/MM BIU COAL (2) Based on 100% Operating Load Factor 5-40 5.4.5 Maintenance Requirements Gasifiers normally are shut down once a year according the requirements of the ASME Boiler Inspection Code. During this scheduled shutdown, the following items receive attention: (ib) Ash Grate and Holder: Inspected and replaced. Usual lifetime cast iron is 1 to 2 year; that of steel is indefinite. ((74)) Gasifier: Refractory linings are patched every 1 to 2 years, replaced every 5 to 10 years in single-stage; every 10 to 15 years in a two-stage, fixed bed. (3) Agitators: Checked for general wear, and agitator bearings are inspected. (4) Coal Feed and Ash Withdrawal Screws: Inspected and adjusted. (5) Piping: Cleaned and blown out; checked for deposits. In addition, tar and oil precipitators and coolers usually are steam cleaned every three months. 5.4.6 Operating Costs and Manpower Requirements The operating cost of a 1157 MW combined cycle plant is shown in Table 5.4.10. This table assumes an operating load factor of 70% and coal costs of $5.00/10° Btu. The operating labor costs are based on a 28 person shift. Maintenance labor is appproximately 82 persons per shift. Total labor requirements for the entire facility operating on a three shift basis is estimated to be approximately 400 people. 5-41 The scaling factor to be used here for estimating the number of personnel as a function of plant size may be seen in the following relation: desired staff size ™ desired plant size ) 0.5 ( ) ( known staff size known plant size The exponent, 0.5 is only an approximation; its actual value requires much more operating data than are currently available. The actual value could vary between 0.3 and 0.8. Therefore, the staff requirement for a 50 MW combined cycle plant at Kotzebue would be approximately 84 people. However, this number could vary between 33 and 156. Table 5.4.10 COST OF SERVICES FOR A 1157 MW COMBINED CYCLE PLANT AT 70% OPERATING LOAD FACTOR COAL COST, HHV $2/MM Btu NET PRODUCTION (1) Net Power, MW ; 1,156.8 By-product Ammonia ST/SD 0 By-product Sulfur ST/SD 301 OPERATING CHARGES, $1000/YEAR Coal 125,044 Operating Labor 4,307 Catalyst and Chemicals 419 Utilities 2,166 Maintenance, Labor 12,611 Maintenance, Materials i 18,915 Administrative and Support Labor 5,075 General and Administrative Expenses 10,134 Ash Disposal 392.0 Property Tax/Insurance 29,505 By-product, Ammonia (0) By-product, Sulfur (0) Total Operating Charges, $1000/Year 208,568 NOTE 7 (1) At 100% Operating Load Factor 5-42 Sa eiT Bibliography McElmurry, B., Smelser, S., "Economics of Texaco Gasification Combined Cycle System" by Fluor Engineering and Construction, Inc. EPRI AF-753, April 1978. Blazek, C.F., Baker, N.R., Tison, R.R., "Low- and Medium-Btu Coal Gasification Processes" by the Institute of Gas Technology ANL/ CES/TE 79-1, January 1979. Walter, F.B., Kaufman, H.C., Reed, T.L., "The Cool Water Coal Gasification Program - A Demonstration of Gasification Combined Cycle Technology". Paper presented at the Conference on Synthetic Fuels: Status and Direction, San Francisco, October 13- 16, 1980. Larson, J.W., "Comparison of Coal-Gasification Combined Cycle Development in the USA," Modern Power Systems, pp. 39-45, January 1981. 5-43 5.5 Old Fashioned Coal Gasification by the "“Kopper - Totzek” Method Sr Sieak General Description Because of the ever rising costs of oil-based fuels, new interest has been shown in coal-gasification. New processes have been developed in order to raise the thermal efficiency of the gasi- fication, and in order to get an output of high Btu-value than the 125-500 Btu/scf normally found in "blue" or "water" gas. However, these new processes all involve high-technology components, such as high-pressure reactors working in the 300- 1500 psi and the 1200-2000°F range. This makes them less useful in remote areas with extreme climatic conditions where reliability and easy repair by local labor is essential. The Koppers - Totzek atmospheric gasification process has been utilized for more than a century in Europe and the U.S. Because of its rather uncomplicated technology it could be utilized in areas where coal is locally available and oil-based fuels must be imported at high costs. Almost all grades of coal can be gasified in the Koppers - Totzek process and a thermal efficiency of 50-60 percent can be expected. Part of the waste heat from the process can be utilized in heating nearby buildings. Before gasification the coal must be pulverized and together with low pressure steam and oxygen, it is then blown into the gasifier where combustion takes place. Due to the limited amount of oxygen, the combustion is not completed and the combustion product thus consists of combustible gases such as hydrogen, methane and carbon monoxide. 5-44 The latter is highly toxic and to ensure early detection and tracing of leaks in the disribution system, a small amount of odorous gas must be added. It remains, however, unknown whether authorities would allow local gas companies to distribute such toxic gases. This problem can be overcome by methanation, a process in which the methane content in the gas it increased by catalyilte reaction of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. By this action the heating value of the gas is increased considerably thereby reducing the required capacity of the distribution system. Thus distribution costs are lowered and a greater choice of standard equipment such as meters, burners and gasturbines are available. SSIs Performance Characteristics Energy input is adjusted by the maintenance of the correct pressure in the distribution system. Energy output is adjusted by the individual consumer and by the power plant, where electricity is generated with gasturbines or gas engines. Based on the demand for electricity and space heating computed in Task 4 and on assumed conversion factors for coal-to-gas and gas- to-electricity processes of 50 percent and 25 percent respectively the annual coal demand in 1982 and 2002 will be approximately 12000 and 75000 short tons. (These figures will be somewhat lower with waste heat utilitzation from the power plant.) 5-45 5.5.3 Reliability Due to the many years of experience accululated with the Kopper - Totzek coal gasification process, it must be considered highly reliable. In the extreme climatic conditions of Northern Alsaka however any long lasting break down, would have serious effects and a 100 percent backup for all essential components, must be provided. Backup could also be provided with a LPG storage for heating and cooking purposes and by maintaining the existing diesel generation. 5.5.4 Thermodynamic Efficiency Coal to gas conversion: 50 - 60% Distribution system 2 100% House installations 8 85% Power generation : 20 - 30% no R a o over al “hh ease A Mok to los bow — — 5.D.05 Costs The capital costs are expected to be high. Based on an operating Danish plant, an estimate of approximately 600-800 $/ton coal handling capacity on a yearly basis, has been made. This figure does not take into account the extra expenses involved in arctic construction work in remote locations. A work force of approximately one full time employed per 1000 tons of coal on a yearly basis, has been estimated. With a working year of approximately 2000 hours, this will amount to 8 $/ton, costs will be around 32 $/million Btu. 5-46 5.5.6 Special Requirement and Impacts Due to a certain amount of foul odors from the gasification process the plant should be located in a location where the prevailing winds do not carry these odors through the city. Coal would have to be transported from a source, which has not yet been determined. Construction for a coal gasification plant will require some highly specialized labor which is not expected to be locally available. The technology level of operative personnel would not have to be much higher than for the diesel generating and heavy road machinery in use in Kotzebue today. However, special trained key personnel will be required. Environmental residuals (smoke, ash and tar), will have to meet emission and other requirements. This should not present insurmountable difficulties. 5.5.7 Summa ry The use of coal gasification does not seem to be an economic way of providing Kotzebue with energy for space heating and power generation. Even with the assumption of coal being available at 100 $ per ton, the final price for coal gas will be almost three times that of diesel fuel. With distribution, interest and depreciation taken into account, the total costs will most likely be higher than the costs experienced with existing systems, 5-47 5.5.8 Bibliography Energy. Volume 2. Non-nuclear Technologies. S.S. Penner, L. Icerman 1975. Energy Technology Handbook. Doulgas M. Considine 1977. Scientific American: Volume 230. Personal communication "Strandvejsgasvaerket", Gasification Plant) March 1974. p. with Opton Hansen, Copenhagen, 5-48 Denmark. 19-25. President (Copenhagen of Coal 5.6 Solar Energy 5.6.1 Solar Energy -~- General Description Little information is available to determine the applicability of solar technologies in Northwestern Alaska. Kotzebue has no station recording solar radiation, and few installations have been in existence long enough to provide relevant performance data. 7 Preliminary research has shown that there are a limited number of solar technologies that are feasible in Kotzebue. Using photovoltaic cells for conversion of sunlight into electricity is not cost effective, nor are large collector arrays for active solar space heating. The two applications that merit consideration are passive solar space heating and active solar hot water heating. Passive solar heating utilizes the entire structure as a simple solar collector. Sunlight is collected through the south glazing and generally stored in some form of thermal mass (water, rock, phase-change materials). The technology relies on the thermal envelope (insulation) to retain solar heat. Passive solar in it's purest sense employs no mechanical equipment for distribution of heat, though in practice a small fan(s) is sometimes used, particularly in an isolated gain situation such as a greenhouse. Though there are several types of passive solar systems that have been used throughout the world, only two have been judged applicable to the Kotzebue area. These are direct gain, where sunlight enters directly into the living space via south glass, and isolated gain, where a greenhouse on the building's south side acts as a buffer zone for both heat gain and loss. 5-49 Indirect gain systems employing significant storage masses at the south wall are impractical in Northern Alaska, due to the high cost of concrete and the light suspended floor systems that are incapable of supporting the heavy mass required. Movable insulation that can be placed over the glazing at night is an integral part of a passive solar system in the north. Without it, most of the heat captured during the day will escape back out at night. : In contrast to the simplicity of passive solar, active solar hot water heating requires a mechanical pump(s) to operate. Collectors with a metal or rubber absorber plate are mounted on the roof, with a distribution loop to and from the storage (hot water tank). There are several different system configurations possible; the most attractive for northern conditions would likely be a simple antifreeze system with a double jacket heat exchanger in the hot water tank to maintain ~~~ separation from potable water. , 5.6.2 Performance Characteristics Energy input will differ greatly depending on the installation, as the amount of solar radiation usable as heat is.a direct relation to area of glazing and conversion efficiency of a system. In passive solar heating, a south glass to floor area ratio of 10% has been determined as feasible by preliminary research (through not necessarily optimum; this will vary dependent on several factors). Typically, the glass area is increased as more thermal storage is added, but this latter item is of minor importance during 5-50 most of the year, as solar radiation is used to heat the building before it ever reaches storage. Energy output for 100 square feet of south glazing on a 1000 square foot structure would be about 17.6 MMBTU's annually. The solar fraction (percent of heating load supplied by solar) will vary depending on the annual heating load of the structure. . Computer modeling done at the University of Fairbanks indicates that about 50% of the annual hot water load can be met by 120 sq. feet of active solar collector, assuming "typical" hot water usage by a.family of four. Energy output is approximately 10-11 MMBTU's annually. The system would be drained down and unusable during the coldest months of the year. , Systems adjustments on an active system are generally automatic through use of a differential controller (with Manual override by the consumer possible). 5.6.3 Reliability The solar resource at Kotzebue is quite dynamic, ranging from a low of no appreciable gain in mid-winter to a high in late winter/early Spring. Interpolated data shows a smaller amount of radiation in the fall; this can likely be attributed to overcast conditions. As a result, solar systems performance is variable, and should be considered as a "fuel-saver" technology. There is a need for 100% backup in both space and water heating applications. Thermodynamic Efficiency - Efficiencies will vary with each individual installation, dependent on such factors as siting, Orientation and care of design and installation. General figures can be given for the conversion efficiency of solar systems (percentage of available solar radiation converted to usable heat); these are listed below: - Passive Solar Direct Gain a 75% - Passive Solar Greenhouse 40-60% - Active Solar Collectors 35-40% 5.6.4 Cost Installed costs for solar technologies in Northern Alaska are difficult to determine, due to the lack of historical applications. Complicating this task is the fact that each installation may be vastly different due to such factors as orientation, architectural constraints and sizeof the-living=7=">=> area or energy demands of the structure. Costs for a simple direct gain passive system need involve nothing more than south glazing and accompaning window insulation. If a new structure is designed and oriented correctly, much of the glazing that would exist in a "typical" structure could be placed on the south, adding no cost over a conventional home save for the shutter system. For purposes of comparison, we will assume a cost of $25 per Square foot for solar windows on the 100 square foot glazing/1000 square foot new house referenced earlier in this section (a reasonable estimate for double pane glazing with a rigid-type shutter system). Installed cost would thus be 5-52 $2500.00 dollars. Costs for adding windows to an existing house would be much higher, due to the remodeling required of an existing wall. Adding a greenhouse to a structure would cost about the same per square foot aS new residential construction in the Kotzebue area; slightly higher if shutters are added. Lifetime of passive solar technologies are normally that of the building. As passive systems are an integral part of the structure, maintenance costs are limited to a possible replacement of weatherstripping and/or hardware for the movable insultion at mid-term or later of the useful life. The cost of active hot water systems is very difficult to determine, due to the lack of installations throughout Alaska. Preliminary research and application in the Fairbanks area (Seifert, 1981) suggests that site built or locally manufactured collectors might be built for $30.00 per square foot in Kotzebue. System "constant" costs (tank, pumps, etc.) are estimated at $1,000.00 dollars. Installed cost for a 120 square foot system would thus be $4,600.00 dollars. Maintenance costs are not readily available for Alaska, but usually estimated at 1% of installed cost. Maintenance consists of system draindown at winters outset and recharging with glycol/water solution in the spring. Operation costs will vary with systems design (number and size of pumps), but may be significant in areas with high electrical costs. 5-53 Bs Useful life of an active system is estimated at 20 years, though replacement of components such as pumps may be necessary during that period. Economies of scale apply to both passive and active technologies, as bulk buying, shipping, and more efficient use of skilled labor should reduce installed costs. 5.6.5 Special Requirements & Impacts In order to be effective, a solar system must be oriented within about 20 degrees of due south and have a relatively unobstructed "window" to the sun. Active solar systems have some leeway in siting, as they can be placed anywhere on a roof. Passive systems are more site-specific; much of the existing housing stock is likely not properly oriented for solar gain. New housing can easily be oriented to the south, development to assure that one building does not shade another.’ Required construction skill's differ little from those of standard light construction. Typical light construction materials are used, with the exception of the collector array on the active system. All required resources are commercially available. Solar technologies have no known significant negative impacts on the environment. 5-54 5.6.6 Summary & Critical Discussion Practical applications of solar energy in Northwest Alaska are limited at this time. Based on the simple example herein, active hot water systems would cost approximately $21.00 per million BTU. This does not, however, include operation and maintenance costs. The only time active solar can compete with fossil fuels is in the case where an individual is using electricity to heat domestic water. However, it would likely be more cost effective to switch to oil fired hot water with energy conserving items included. Passive solar applications are largely limited to new structures: it is generally more cost effective to concentrate expenditures on energy conservation when considering existing buildings. | attractive an investment (from an economic standpoint) ona single family residence as other conservation or solar options. Larger community greenhouses using solar as supplemental heat offer greater benefits in terms of economies of scale. Simple direct gain passive solar systems show great promise in new construction, with preliminary calculations showing costs in the $5.00 per million BTIU range. All solar systems in Alaska must be combined with energy conservation to achieve maximum effectiveness. Without the ability to retain captured solar heat, a structure will benefit little from solar technologies. 5=55 Greenhouses are effective heat collectors,. but are not as” 5.6.7 Bibliography Solar Design Manual for Alaska by Richard D. Seifert, Bulletin of the Institute of Water Resources, July 1981. Solar Technical Profile for the Shungnak, Kiana and Ambler Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives, by James Barkshire, Wind Systems Engineering, May 1981. 5-56 5.7 Heat Pumps -- Individual Space Heating Srerriotk: Generation Description A thermodynamic law of nature is for heat energy to flow from higher to lower temperature. A heat pump works against this natural flow by using a refrigerant to move heat from a cooler area to a warmer one. To do this, the heat pump uses an outdoor coil containing a low-pressure liquid refrigerant that is even cooler than the air. When a fan blows outdoor air across this coil, the cooler refrigerant absorbs the heat from the air, "boils", and turns into a vapor. The refrigerant vapor is then pumped through a compressor, where it becomes "superheated". The refrigerant vapor is next pumped through an indoor coil. As the vapor is now hotter than room temperature, it condenses (turns into a liquid), releasing heat. This heat is normally blown through a duct system for distribution to the structure. Once the liquid refrigerant has released its heat, it is pumped back outside to repeat the cycle. On the way, it passes through an expansion valve, which lowers the refrigerant's pressure again so that it can boil more easily in the outdoor coil. Operation can be reversed in the summer so that the unit becomes an air conditioner for cooling purposes; this is not expected to be a major need in the Kotzebue area. The ratio of thermal energy delivered inside the building at a high temperature as heat to the amount of external electric energy required to run the heat pump is called the coefficient of performance (COP). The COP is greater on mild days than on cold days because more heat is available in the outdoors air. o— 517, The effectiveness of a heat pump on an annual basis is measured by it seasonal performance factor (SPF). The higher the SPF, the more efficient (and therefore cost effective) a unit is. 5.7.2 Performance Characteristics The heat pump is effective down to certain temperatures (varies by manufacturer), generally around 20-45°F. Below this temperature, alternate heat must be provided. Some units have electric resistance elements in the air make-up plenum of the heat pump that are staged to activate incrementally as needed. Ste eS Reliability Heat pumps in Kotzebue would require that 100 percent back up heat by available. The unit will not operate without a source of electric power. Thermodynamic Efficiency - Varies with manufacturer and outdoor temperature. 5.724 Costs There are no heat pump installations in Kotzebue that can be used as a basis for comparison. Air to air heat pumps in the Juneau are currently average about $7,000 per installation; the figure is expected to be higher in the Kotzebue area. Maintenance costs are usually minimal for a heat pump, except in a cold climate where water (instead of air) is used as the heat source. Operating costs in an area with high electrical rates can be substantial, likely erasing any potentail benefits. 5-58 5.7.5 Special Requirements and Impacts There are no special siting requirements or environmental impacts associated with the installation of heat pumps. Installation requires fairly simple mechancial skills. However, some training on the specifices of heat pumps would be required of technicians before any wide-scale implementation of the technology could take place. S766 Summary and Critical Discussion ae “6 & Px” \e” No cost per kWh (or mBtu) is available at this writing; ie - is likely that an actual installation would have to be monitored before such costs could be determined. It would appear, however, that the use of heat pumps in areas with prolonged cold temperatures during the heating season makes the conversion efficiency of these units questionable. Using electric resistance back up heating for any length of time in the Kotzebue area will most likely result in extremely high annual heating bills. In summary, the high cost of installation versus the energy savings makes it obvious that the money could be better spect elsewhere. 5.767 Bibliography Heat Pumps Fact Sheet, U.S. Department of Energy Technical Information Center, May 1979. Juneau Heat Pump Demonstration Progress Report, U.S. Alaska Power Administration et. al., May 1980. 5-59 5.8 Coal Fired Low Pressure District Heat The use of coal to fire a low pressure boiler to produce steam or hot water for district heating has been accomplished for many years. 5.8.1 General Description This technology relies on coal for energy to reheat’ the circulating heating fluid of a central district heating system. Coal would be used as fuel in low pressure water heaters, which would heat the return flow of a heating fluid from temperatures around 95°F up to the supply temperature of about 210°F. The pressure in the water heaters would be low -- around 15 psi -- and no licensed boiler operators would be required to run them. The pressure in the heating fluid mains would be no greater than that required to circulate the fluid in the system. The fluid can be water, where no frost-danger exists, otherwise a mixture of water and a suitable antifreeze compound would be required. This technology has been perfected in Scandinavia during the last 20 years and is also used in Greenland and in the far north of Scandinavia. 5 Cue Performance Characteristics Energy input is adjusted by the maintenance of the correct supply temperature and the flow in the system. Energy output is adjusted by the individual consumers. 5-60 5.8.3 Reliability In the harsh climatic conditions of Kotzebue, each component should, where applicable, have 100% backup. The components would comprise: -- Outside stockpile for coal -- Inside heated buffer storage -- Coalhandling equipment to transport coal from stockpile to buffer to heater -- Low-pressure water heaters -- Cyclones or filters and stacks -- Distribution system -- House installations 5.8.4 Thermodynamic efficiency -- Water heaters 80% -- Distribution system 85 - 90% -- House installations 100% -- Overall thermodynamic efficiency 68-72% 5.8.5 Costs / Costs will depend heavily on conditions. The best indiciation we can give for a technology} which is new in Alaska} derives from feasibility level assessments for a North Slope village of 400 inhabitants. i Capital costs for this system from storage and coal handling through house installatiens are on the order of $650 per 1000 a Btub’ peak load in 1982 dollars. Operational costs are on the order of $20 per million Btu. 5-61 The above is based on an assessed coal price of approximately $100 per ton. Economics of scale in Kotzebue would apply to the Central Heating Plant, but not materially to the distribution system. 5.856 Special Requirements and Impacts On account of coal dust from coal handling, the Central Plant should be sited so as not to impact the residential and public areas of Kotzebue. On account of the reasonably stable soil conditions of Kotzebue, it should be feasible to place the pre-insulated distribution piping underground, although special mitigation measures may have to be undertaken in some areas to prevent permafrost degradation. Coal would have to be transported from a source, which has not as yet been determined. Construction employment for the central plant would not be different from that utilized on existing larger facilities. For example, welders would not have to meet standards for high pressure piping. The technology level of operating personnel would not have to be higher than for the diesel generating and heavy road machinery in use in Kotzebue today. Environmental residuals would have to meet emission and other requirements, which would seem to present no insurmountable difficulty. 5-62 5.8.7 Summary Subject to coal being available at the right price, the coal-fire low pressure central district heating appears to be a likely candidate for providing the bulk of Kotzebue's space heating requirements. If such a system were introduced, it could be combined with waste heat utilization, refuse-firing and wind-powered direct heating for energy input into the distribution system, in order to save on coal consumption. The technology is tried and proven also in circumstances somewhat similar to those of Kotzebue. Special attention will, nevertheless, have to be paid to adequate back-up in the system. The level of operation technology required is not higher than that already in use in Kotzebue, which may be a favorable factor for this technology. 5.8.8 Bibliography Feasibility Study of District Heating System for Wainwright commissioned by North Slope Borough and produced by Arctic Slope Technical Services in July 1980. A description of combined heat and power supply for the city of Herning in Denmark, Bruun & Sorensen, August 1981. Typescript of a talk by Flemming Hammer on the subject of Central District Heating held at the Alternative Energy Conference in Anchorage, November 1981.- 5-63 5.9 Hydropower -- Buckland Site 5.9.2 General Description This technology relies on annual runoff (precipitation) with sufficient energy gradient and volume of water to drive turbines and generators. The electrical power is then transmitted over power line from the energy source to the use area. Numerous hydropower facilities exist north of the Arctic Circle, in Scandinavia for example, yet none exist in this country. General reasons for this are: (1) since annual precipitation is low (arctic desert), large storage capacities (reservoirs) are needed to ensure year round operations; (2) often hydropower facilities without large storage reservoirs can only operate in periods of high runoff in summer and fall, i.e. run-of-river projects; (3) stream flows in most arctic streams and rivers either disappear or are greatly diminished during the winter months; (4) problem associated with finding adequate foundation conditions in the permafrost areas; (5) high construction costs associated with remote site construction and limited periods for certain work efforts, i.e. summer field season; etc. 5.9.2 Performance Characteristics Energy output is controlled by the amount of water allowed to enter the turbines. The water flow is adjusted to meet power demands. With the exception of cold weather problems, i.e. ice formulation, low flows into the reservoir, etc., few problems are expected in water management during the winter period. High inflows during summer period may require spillage of water over spillway or through other gated structures to control the integrity of the storage area. 5-64 Hydropower in the northern areas is a proven system whose performance characteristics are well known and_ understood worldwide. Braces Reliability Because of the long transmission line from Buckland to Kotzebue and because of the unknown hydrological inflows, 100% backup power system should be provided. Most likely, this would consist of continuation and expansion of diesel electric generators. 5.9.4 Costs Hydropower is capital intensive for plant construction. Fuel costs are none and operation and maintenance costs are less than most other reliable energy systems. Additional evaluation of the Buckland hydropower site will be done in Task 8. Currently cost for hydropower in Alaska (not elsewhere) is running from $4,000 to $12,000 per KW of installed capacity (.18 to .40 $/kWh). Hydropower should be as, if not more, competitive with other energy forms if properly sited, designed, constructed and operated. 5.9.5 Special Requirments & Impacts As noted above in section 5.7.1 "General Description", hydropower in the arctic, while practicable, has significant and distinct concerns. This is especially true for the Buckland site which is remote from Kotzebue; which has a proposed relatively large shallow reservoir; which: requires a long transmission line to bring the power from Buckland to Kotzeube; which while it can and should be remotely controlled from Kotzebue will still require operators and maintenance personnel at the project site; which 5-65 does not have ground access (except in winter via snow/ice roads); which has not had an environmental assessment made; whose possibility for expansion appears nil; etc. 5.9.6 Summary While the hydropower is a proven technology, even in the Arctic, many unanswered questions exist about the Buckland site. Foremost in this evaluation is: (1) reliability and cost estimates due to date; .(2) is the site adequate from a geotechnical standpoint; (3) how reliable are the hydrological assumptions; (4) what problems can we expect with large shallow reservoir; (5) what problems will be experienced because of limited access to the site and transmission route; (6) concern for type of transmission line; etc. While hydropower is usually considered as the source for lights and appliances, it provides’ almost a foolproof system for heating. Electric resistance heaters are reliable and relatively maintenance free (especially in the Arctic where, for example, frozen pipes associated with hot water systems are always a concern). 5.9.7 References Robert Ww. Retherford: Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue, June 1980. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Regional Inventory and Reconnaissance Study for Small Hydropower Projects in Northwest Alaska, May 1981. . 5-66 5.10 Wind Turbine Electric Generators 5.10.1 General Description There are three basic types of wind turbines which generate electricity that have applicability in Kotzebue. They are distinguished by the type of generator they employ and its characteristics. They all have in commona set of blades to capture the wind called a rotor. The size of the rotor determines the amount of energy the machine is capable of producing. The rotor is connected by shaft to a speed increase then to the generator. The induction generator type turbines are the most common found especially in the 17 meter and smaller windgenertors. These are strictly utility intertie machines and produce good quality 60 cycle power. Because of their requirement for "reactive power" there is a theoretical limit to the level- of- penetration this type of turbine. can have into a grid. A synchronous generator is usually found only in the 25 meter and larger units. This type provides utility grade power generating its own signal with no "reactive power” requirements. Synchronous generators can operate in a stand alone capacity and posess complex controls to maintain a 60 cycle output. The direct current generator which commonly is a rectified alternator feeds its power into a synchronous inverter which matches the utility grid signal. This configuration is found on only a few smaller turbines and while compatable with 60 cycle AC power, there is again a limit to it's penetration 5-67 into a grid because of power quality problems. Other uses for the DC generated power are battery changing and resistive heating. Batteries are not presently considered cost- effective and resistive heating is very site specific yet practical in certain applications. 5.10.2 Performance Characteristics Most conventional wind turbine generators today start producing useful power in 4 m/s (9mph) winds. The power output increases exponentially until the maximum or rated output of the turbine is reached. The power from the windgenerator is dependent on the winds and as such is only as reliable and constant as the winds are. The winds in Kotzebue are fairly persistent and according to Jim Wise at AEIDC Kotzebue is in a wind power class of 6 (7.0 m/s annual mean wind speed). This corresponds to a wind power density of 400 watts/m. The following table represents the annual energy output of representative commercially available windgenera- tors: rotor rated rated annual energy diameter power (kw) wind speed output in wind power (m/s) class 6(10°kwh) 4 1.8 10.7 inetd, 7 10.0 11.2 40.0 10 25.0 11.6 65.0 17 65.0 11.6 248.0 25 200.0 ~° 13.4 672.0 91 2500.0 16.1 9006.0 5-68 5.10.3 Reliability The reliability of windgenerators in the Kotzebue environment has been demonstrated with two systems tied into the grid. The demonstrations showed that technical problems will be encountered, but with a commitment to the project the "bugs" can be worked out and useful power can be generated. Until such time more demonstrations show different, 100% backup should be provided by the utility in event of turbine failure. Thermodynamic Efficiency - The conversion efficiency of available power in the wind (59% of the total energy in the wind) to useful power on the ground is variable, from a high of around 30%, to a low of 5%, depending on the rotor design and power train efficiency. Most machines fall in the 15% - 25% conversion efficiency range according to DOE studies at Rocky Flats test center. 5.10.4 Cost 4 Sie eenb eee ie = eT Ge ae The installed cost of wind turbines are very dependent on site specific parameters. For the turbines cited in section 2 of this profile the follow costs are given as best guess: turbine diameter installed system installed system cost (lower 48) cost (Kotzebue) @ eee ee eee 4n $9,330 $14,000 7m 21,320 : 32,000 10m 24,400 37,000 17m - 133,000 190,000 25m 432,000 610,000 91m 6,000,000 - 8,200,000 5-69 1. From: SERI/JBF Scientific, Inc. in Wind Energy Report, October 1981. 2. Using: Alaskan Construction Cost Index from HMS Inc., Anchorage, AK, March 1981. The operation and maintenance costs are difficult to define without more Alaskan experience on the larger turbines. Generally a 1% to 5% of installed cost per year is used yet may be low when logistics are factored in. The useful life is assumed by the Alaska Power Authority to be 15 years, yet DOE and most manufactures use a 30 year life. Considering the Kotzebue environment and the developmental nature of the technology at present, the 15 year figure is perhaps more reasonable. Economies of scale in multiple installations; size of tubines, and number of machines manufactured; do exist and were not taken into account in the costs given:-. The-biggest===-== reduction will occur with the larger utility scale machines as more are installed and built. 5.10.5 Special Requirements and Impacts Proper siting of a windgenerator in a location free from turbulence caused by nearby obstructions is essential. Siting can mitigate safety problems if properly fenced-off and installed by National Electric and Safety Code Requirements. Construction personnel need to be trained in tower work safety procedures and liscensed electricians familiar with wind systems should be used. Other skills required would include 5-70 heavy equipment operators and laborers. Operations personnel would need special training of which locals should be able to assimilate. Radiomagnetic interference and aesthetics are two possible environmental impacts, both of which proper planning can mitigate. No other impacts of any significance are expected to occur. 5.10.6 Summary & Critical Discussion Windgenerators have a tremendous potential in Kotzebue to save significant amounts of fuel. With proper planning a wind program could provide low cost power and work with any base load facility. Used in conjunction with load management and resistive heat dumps a significant portion of the grid could be supplied by wind generated electricity (30-70% penetration is possible). The larger turbines are not as yet proven reliable in the arctic environment and demonstration projects => would be required to gain more operating experience in Alaska. It is expected to be well within the study period that the larger turbines would come on line (the 25 meter turbine should be tested enough by 1987 to be considered ready for Kotzebue). 5.10.7 Bibliography Curtice, David, and James Patton. Operation of Small Wind Turbines on a Utility Distribution System. Wind Publishing Corporation, August 1981. Electric Power Research Institute. Proceedings of the 5-71 workshop on Economic and Operational Requirements and Status of Large Scale Wind Systems. Monterey, California, March 28- 30, 1979. Electric Power Research Institute. Reguirements Assessment of Wind Power Plants in Electric Utility Systems, Volume Iwo. Palo Alto, California. January 1979. Newell, Mark A. ed. "Bristol Bay Regional Power Plan-Wind Energy Analysis". Anchorage, AK: Wind Systems Engineering, February 1982. Park Gerald L., et al. Planning Manual for the Utility Application of Wind Energy Conversion Systems. Michigan State University, Division of Engineering Research. East Lansing, Michigan. June 1979. Reckard, Matt and Newell, Mark. Alaskan Wind Energy Handbook. Fairbanks, AK: State of Alaska, Department of Transportation andyPubliciFacilities), foul y, (9 815.) | aime a ae iniachde aaa ani niin’ U.S. Department of Energy. Bonneville Power Administration. Environmental Report-Goodnoe Hillis Wind Turbine Generation. December 1979. U.S. Department of Energy. Environmental Assessment-Fighteen Prospective MOD-2 Wind Turbine Sites-The Goodnoe Hills i Washington Installation Site. December 1979. Klickitat County, Washington. U.S. Department of Energy. Environmental Assessment- Installation and Field Testing of a Large Experimental Wind Turbine Generator System Near Kahuku Point on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii. December 1979. i 5-72 U.S. Department of Energy. First Semiannual Report: Rocky Flats Small wind Systems Test Center Activities. RFP# 2920/3533/78/6-1. Springfield. VA.: N.T.I.S., 1978. "WECS potential large at federal sites". Wind Energy Report. New York, October 1981. Wise, James L., et al. Wind Energy Resource Atlas: Volume l0-Alaska. Pacific Northwest Laboratories. Richland, Washington. December 1980. 5-73 5.11 Geothermal Technology 5.11.1 General Description Geothermal energy is stored heat energy generated in the earth's interior and available to man from heated rocks or water within the upper 3100 ft. of the earth's crust. The heat escapes very slowly from the earth's core to the crust by conductive flow through solid rocks, by convective flow in circulating fluids, and by mass transfer of magma (molten rock generated from within the earth, termed lava when expelled at the earth's surface). Thermal gradient describes the rate at which temperature increased with depth below the earth's surface and is expressed as degress per unit of depth. Normally, the earth's heat is diffuse, the thermal gradient averaging about 25C/km. In many areas, though, geologica conditions have created local thermal gradients much higher than the average; these areas usually are asociated with young volcanism, thin crust, or tectonic plate boundaries. The thermal reservoirs contain enough concentrated heat to make up a potential energy source. 5.11.2 Performance Characteristics Geothermal resources are classified according to the mode of heat transfer and the temperature and pressure of the geothermal system. A. Vapor-Dominated Systems In vapor-dominated systems, the geothermal steam can be used directly in a turbine generator. The technology for this type of system is well-known, largely because there are not as many technical dfficulties as there are for liquid-dominated systems. Most of the experience gained in the United States has been at The Geysers in California, the largest geothermal installation in 5-74 the world. It is a Know Geothermal Resource Area _ (KGRA) consisting of 163,428 acres, of which 11,450 acres are federally owned. Total generating capacity is now 500 MWe. About 2 million pounds of steam per hour are needed for every 100 MWe generated at the Geysers, an amount supplied by about 14 wells delivering steam to the turbine generators. B. Liguid-Dominated Systems Liquid-dominated systems can be developed as energy sources for electrical power generation if fluid temperatures and pressures are adequate. Nonelectric applications, such as space heating and process heating, vary widely and occur throughout the world. Liquid-dominated reservoirs often contain minerals that can be extracted to provide raw materials and/or fresh water for agricultural use. The end use of energy from liquid-dominated geothermal systems depends largely on temperature. The temperature ranges, divided arbitrarily, are: about 300F for generation of electricity (binary systems may allow use of somewhat lower temperatures for generating electricity), 195 to 300F for space and process heating, and below 195F for local use where better energy sources do not exist. Multipurpose applications occur where process heating, space heating, and electric power production have been integrated in the same overall system. C. Flash-Steam Systems When high-pressure hot water is brough to the earth's surface, the pressure reduction can cause 13 to 25 percent of the hot water to flash into steam. (Simple flash systems are probably useful only for reservoir temperatures exceeding 390 to 500F.) The water-steam mixture that flows to the wellhead is separated and the steam is piped to the steam turbines of a power plant. Additional steam can be produced from flashing again at a lower S=i5) pressure, and the steam then can be introduced to a low pressure section of the power turbine to increase total power output. The residual hot water can be reinjected into the reservoir, desalted, or used for process heating. The first electric power generator in the world using geothermal energy was from a vapor-dominated system. It began operating in 1904 in Larderello, Italy, and commercial production began in 1912. The present electrical power capacity of the area is 38 MWe. Commercial flashed-steam systems began operating in New Zealand in 1958. About 180 MWe are being generated in the Wairakei- Broadlands field where the fluid temperatures are about 500F and around 20 percent is flashed to steam for power production. A plant to produce 150 MW also is’ being built at Broadlands. Two 37.5 MWe turbogenerators are operating in a geothermal field in Mexico near the volcano of Cerro Prieto. Fluid temperatures are 570F or more, and salinities are 15,000 to 25,000 ppm. This facility is in the same geothermal resources area as the Imperial Valley of California (Salton Trough) and is important for providing data on operating with highly corrosive geothermal brine. An ultimate capacity of 400 MWe is expected there. Japan has numerous active geothermal regions. Five of these are producing electricity using flash-steam systems: Otake (13 MW), Matsukawa (22 MW), Onuma (10 MW), Onikobe (25 MW), and Hatchoboru (50 MW). Japan's "Sunshine Project" is an aggressive program of geothermal investigation, which has a goal of 1,000 MW geothermal generating capacity by 1982 and 2,000 MW by 1985. A 60 MW power plant has been in operation since 1976 in the Ahuachapan field in El Salvador; the plant will soon be increased to 80 MW capacity through the development of a secondary flash system. A 6 MW power station utilizing a steam-hot water mixture 5-76 was completed in 1967 in the Pauzhetka River Valley on the Kamchatka peninsula of the USSR. In Chili, a multipurpose, wet- steam geothermal facility is being developed. Electricity will be produced, minerals extracted from brine, and fresh water produced by desalting the hot water. In the United State, a5 MW plant is planned as part of the Hawaii Geothermal Project (HGP) in the Puna district. D. Secondary Fluid Systems When the steam from a hot water reservoir is too coorsive to use directly in a turbine, the steam can be used to boil water in a heat exchanger. The clean steam can then be used in the turbine. Compared with flashed-steam systems, such systems cost more (because of the cost of heat exchangers) and are less efficient. Another type of secondary fluid system uses a binary cycle. In this system, the hot water from the geothermal well is prevented from flashing to steam by maintaining pressure, then pumping the water to a heat exchanger where it heats a liquid, boils it, and superheats it. The vapor from the secondary fluid (usually a low- boiling-point liquid such as one of the freons or isobutane) drives the power turbine. The working fluid is then cooled, condensed, an recycled. Binary-cycle systems have an estimated efficiency of 10 percent or more and may be more efficient thermodynamically than flash systems for geothermal reservoirs with temperatures ranging from 300F to 400F. Because it is a closed-loop system, the possibility of releasing noncondensable gases or brine chemicals is reduced greatly. A disadvantage is that the binary system requires an additional external water supply or a dry cooling tower. The first geothermal power plant-using a binary-cycle system was the Paratunka Station (0.68 MWe) on the east coast of Kamchatka, USSR, which operates on Freon. The reservoir temperature there is 180F and the salinity of the fluids is low. 5-77 In Niland, California, a geothermal loop experimental facility has been operated since May 1976 by San Diego Gas and Electrict Company with government support. Although the turbine and generator are not present, the facility is sized to generate 10 MWe using a flash/binary cycle. By April 1977, the facility had operated successfully for 2,600 hours using high-temperature, high-salinity brine. Long-term tests will provide the engineering data needed to design commercial plants. Magma Power Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, and Standard Oil Company are working jointly to design, install, and operate an 11,200 kW (net- dual-cycle binary plant at East Mesa, California. E. Total-Flow Systems In a total-flow system, a two-phase working fluid, hot water and steam, is expanded through a nozzle into a turbine, making use of mechanical as well as heat energy. Theoretically, it could produce significantly more power than other systems given the same reservoir temperature. Although this is not a new concept for converting geothermal energy to electric power, there have been no practical applications studied until recently. The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory is developing the total-flow concept. In 1977, it reported a new two-phase expander had been developed successfully. Generally, the program focuses on the development of systems for the recovery and conversion of energy stored in hot water deposits containing more than 3 percent total dissolved solids. These high-salinity brines pose formidable problems because of precipitation, scaling, corrosion, erosion, and brine handling and disposal. The goal of the program is a full 10 MWe experimental power plant system. Recently, Biphase Energy Systems successfully operated a two- phase rotary separator for 117 hours in a_ high-salinity environment. They concluded that, when applied to a two-stage flash system, the design would show a 20 percent increase in power output with a 12 percent specific cost reduction. F. Extraction from Magma Technologies for extracting energy from magma are at _ the preliminary stage of development. Techniques being studied include: o Insertion of a heat exchanger into a magma source with surface conversion to electric power o Use of the reducing. nature of magma to produce transportable fuels such as hydrogen and methane Most hot dry rock deposits are more than 10 miles deep. Some shallow deposits exist, however, and are being studied at Coso Hot Springs, California and on the Lemez Plateau of New Mexico near Los Alamos. Since 1972, the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory of the University of California, under the auspices of DOE, has been developing methods to extract energy from hot dry, impermeable rock, such as the granite of the western and northern United States. In the Los Alamos concept, a man-made geothermal reservoir would be formed by drilling into hot rock, then creating a large surface area for heat transfer within the rock by using large-scale hydraulic fracturing techniques developed by the oil industry. After a circulation loop is formed by drilling a second hole into the top of the fractured region, the heat contained in the reservoir would be brought to the surface by the buoyant circulation of water, with no need for pumping. The water in the loop would remain liquid due to pressurization at the 5-19) surface, thereby increasing the rate of heat transport up the withdrawal hole compared with the rate possible with steam. Prelminary experiments and analyses indicate that thermal stresses created by cooling the hot rock in such a man-made reservoir may gradually enlarge the fracture system so that its useful lifetime will be extended far beyond the planned 10 to 15 years provided by the original reservoir. If these thermal-stress cracks grow preferentially downward and outward ito hotter rock, as seems probable, the quality of the geothermal source may actually improve as energy is withdrawn. The Los Alamos concept is being demonstrated in an area about 20 miles west of Los Alamos, New Mexico. The well reached a depth of 1000 ft. The bottom hole temperature was 390F. A near vertical, 400 ft. radius fracture was created with hydraulic pressure near the bottom of the hole. A second hole, intersected the fracture at a depth of a little over 1000 ft. with a bottom hole tempera- ture of 400F. Cold waer was circulated through the fractures at 1,000 psi to be heated, then flows from the second hole at 260F. Installation of a 10 MWe heat exchanger in the closed-loop pressured water system was done. Salles) .Gosts NOT USED 5.11.4 Special Requirements and Impacts NOT USED 5-80 5.11.5 Summary and Critical Discussion The use of geothermal energy as an energy source to supply either heat and/or electricity to the city of Kotzebue is under study. The equipment that would be required to utilize this resource in the city of Kotzebue depends on the nature of the resource, the availability of the resource, and the type of resource and its physical and chemical characteristics. Currently, a resource evaluation is being conducted. At the conclusion of this evaluation will be provided with an overall system analysis under Task 8 Description of Alternatives to determine if this resource, if extensive enough, could be used to provide district heating. 5.11.6 Bibliography U.S. General Accounting Office, "Problems in Identifying, Developing, and Using Geothermal Resources," 6 March 1975. D.E. White, "Characteristics of Geothermal Resources," Geothermal Energy (Stanford University Press, 1973). C.R. Swanson, "San Diego Gas and Electric Company's Geothermal Program," in Geothermal Resources Council Annual Meeting Transaction, 25-27 July 1978, Vol. 2. Robert N. Chappel and others, "The Multi-Purpose Geothermal Test and Experimental Activities at Raft River, Idaho," in Geothermal Resources Council Annual Meeting Transaction, 25-27 July 1978, Vole 2) J.F. Addoms, 3B. Breindel, and C. M. Gracey, "Wellsite Verification Testing of an Advanced Geothermal Primary Heat Exchanger," in Geothermal Resources Council Annual Meeting Transaction, 25-27 July 1978, Vol. 2. "Sperry to Develop Geothermal System," Energy Research Digest, 23 October 1978. Electric Power Research Institute, "Geothermal Energy Prospects for the Next 50 Years," Preliminary Report to the World Energy Conference, ER-611-SR, February 1978. 5-81 A.L. Austin and others, "The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Geothermal Energy Development Program Status Report, January 1975 through August 1975," UCID-16954, September 1975. Donald J. Cerini, "Geothermal Rotary Field Tets," in Geothermal Resources Council Annual Meeting Transaction, 25-27 July 1978, Vol. 2. Los Alamos’ Scientific Laboratory, "Los Alamos’ Scientific Laboratory Dry Geothermal Source Demonstration Projects," 1975. Los. Alamos Scientific Laboratory, "Los Alamos Dry Geothermal Source Demonstration Project -- Mini-Review 76-1," March 1976. H.M. Stoller and J.L. Colp, "Magma as a Geothermal Resource -- A Summary," in Geothermal Resources Council Annual Meeting Transaction, 25-27 July 1978, Vol.2. 5.12 Peat Technology 5.12.1 General Description A. Resource Characterization The United States has an estimated 52.6 million acres of peat lands containing approximately 120 billion tons of peat (35% by wt moisture). Approximately half of this quantity is in the State of Alaska. Within the contiguous United States, the deposits in Minnesota, Michigan, Florida, and Wisconsin are the largest. The proximate analysis and heating value of peat as compared to coals are presented below in Table 5.12.1. TABLE 5.12.1 PEAT AND COAL COMPARISONS Volatile Fixed Carbon Heat of Combustion Matter -M.A.F. Basis- -M.A.F. Basis- Resource (Wt. Percent) (Wt. Percent) (Btu/1b.) Peat 71 29 9,200 Lignite 44 56 12,200 Subbituminus 40 60 13,300 Bituminus 35 65 15,000 Anthracite 3 97 15,100 Peats are classified into three general categories according to the degree of decomposition: fabric, hemic, and sapric. Of the three types, hemic peats are the most widely distributed and are best suited for energy use. The peat resource in Kotzebue is only a thin layer of organic soil which overlays the permafrost. Removal of the overburden and the organic layer can cause severe degradation; however, the thin layer of organic material may be sufficient to be used for space heating in a family home. 5-83 B. Peat Extraction Due to the water-saturated environment associated with peat resources, peatlands must undergo various levels of preparation prior to any harvesting activities. The first steps in preparing a peat bog for harvesting (by European methods) are to dredge, clear surface vegetation, and provide roads for access. A care- fully designed network of ditches and waterways through the bog collects much of the water and routes it away from the harvesting area. If surface streams are associated with the peat bog, these must also be rerouted. As the bog dries, it can be cleared of debris and leveled. This initial bog preparation activity can take up to several years to complete. However, once the bog is prepared, four different methods can be used for harvesting. These methods are: (1) manual; (2) sod peat; (3) milled peat; and (4) hydraulic harvesting. C. Peat Dewatering Peat's high affinity for water presents significant technical difficulties in removing the water by mechanical solid-liquid separation techniques. Even the best of filter press-type dewatering processes can only reduce the moisture content to 60- 70 percent by weight. Thermal drying alone, other than that resulting from in-field drying by milled or sod peat harvesting, would require more heat input per pound of raw peat than is available in the resulting moisture free fuel product. Unless this larg heat requirement is met by solar heating or exhaust heat from a nearby industrial process, thermal drying of peat is not practical except when used downstream of other dewatering processes. As an alternative to conventional dewatering (and its limita- tions), there is a family of wet processing technologies that convert peat to more useful forms while it is contained in a water slurry. These processes utilize elevated temperatures and 5-84 pressures to attack the colloidal bonds which bind the water to the peat solids. Structural changes occur, gaseous and liquid products and by-products are evolved, and the resultant slurry can be mechanically dewatered to a much great extent than a raw peat slurry. Technologies considered as alternative wet technologies include: wet oxidation, wet carbonization, and solvent extraction. It is important to note than these wet technologies do not necessarily elminate the need for mechanical (and sometimes thermal) dewatering processes; rather, they alter the peat' chemical structure so as to make mechanical dewatering much more effective. The current goals for moisture reduction operations are dependent on the particular use for the peat fuel: for direct combustion of peat, 60 wt. percent moisture in the peat fuel feedstock repre- sents the approximate maximum percentage of water allowable; for the production of substitute natural gas (SNG), a peat fuel with less than 35 wt. percent moisture content is preferred. 5.12.2 Performance Characteristics A. Peat Combustion Peat has been used successfully as a feedstock for various types of furnaces. The choice of sod peat, milled peat, peat briquettes, or pellets depends upon the furnace, be it stoker, pulverized, or FBC. In Table 5.12.2 peat combustion methods are roughly selected according to the design capacity and the type of peat fuel. 5-85 TABLE 5.12.2 Matching of Combustion Method with Peat Fuel Produce Method Capacity Type of Peat@ Pulverized Firing 30 - 200 MW milled peat Grate Firing 3 - 60 MW milled or sot peat Grate Firing - 3 MW peat briquettes or pellets Cyclone Firing 3 - 15 MW milled peat Fluidized Bed Firing 10 - 100 MW milled or sod peat Generally, sod peat and peat briquettes are produced for small grate-fired boilers, although they can be burned in different types of boilers constructed for solid fuels other than peat. In large plants, peat is pulverized and burned in suspension boilers. On the bottom of the furnace there is often an after- burning grate, and fuel oil is used to complete combustion of the peat fuel. Cyclone burners have proved to be one of the best combustion methods in medium-sized peat-fired plants because of their ability to handle variations in milled peat quality and moisture content. Fluidized bed combustors offer additional advantages due to extremely effective heat release and relatively low furnace temperatures. All of these combustion technologies are discussed in the following paragraphs. @peat fuel produced by the previously discussed alternative wet technologies can be formed and burned like sod peat or briquettes. Other possibilities include grinding and blending in fuel oil and burning as.a slurry. 5-86 bs Grate Firing Grate firing of peat occurs in stoker furnaces, where the fuel peat is introduced to the combustion zone on a grate allowing air to mix with the peat from below. Furnace grate designs are generally similar to those used with other solid fuels (coal). However, peat fuel requires slight modifications to the grate design. The modified grate design usually results in high fuel layer thicknessses, up to four feet on traveling grates and the need for steeper angles of inclination with inclined grates. The main concern is not only to reduce the fouling of boiler passes and particle emissions, but psecifically to minimize the danger of a dust explosion in the furnace. The temperature of primary air and the overall thermal load must be kept low in order to avoid fusion which, among other inconveniences, also leads to extreme wear of moving grate parts. The high luminousity of the flame which is characteristic to combustion of peat, combined with the low fusion point of fly ~, produces a high but rather narrow furnace column. Furnaces fired with pulverized peat often require an afterburning grate at the bottom of the furnace because of incomplete pulverization of larger wood particles in the fuel. Narrow traveling grates and stationary grates with dumping grate sections have been used. Grate firing of peat does not require a pretreatment of the fuel because all the necessary treatment for final combustion takes place on the grate. 25 Cyclone Firing Cyclone furnaces desiqned for milled peat firing have been developed over the last 10 years by Kymi Kymmene Metalli in Finland. Presently, most of the medium-sized district heating plants in Finland firing with milled peat are delivered by Kymi Kymmene. 5-87 The cyclone furnace is a cylindrical chamber with the inside surface either coated with a refractory lining or made completely of firebrick. Milled peat and combustion air are _ blown tangentially into the cylinder, creating a swirling combustion flame. Cyclones are classified into two types, dry or molten ash, depending on whether the slag from peat melts in the cyclone or whether it remains dry. The oldest cyclones were dry ash fur- naces. The slag accumulating on the cyclone walls had to be removed by raising the combustion temperature beyond the slag melting point and draining the molten slag from the furnaces. Another problem with the dry cyclone furnace was the wide variation of moisture in peat. Peat with over 49 percent moisture did not burn satisfactorily because the temperature in the cyclone could not be raised sufficiently. Excessively dry peat, on the other hand, caused the temperature to exceed the ash-softening point, which resulted in slaggin. These problems are avoided by using molten ash cyclones. Gas temperatures within the cyclone reach up to 3000F, which is sufficient to melt the ash into a liquid slag. The centrifugal forces created by the swirling air and fuel maintain a thin layer of slag on the furnace walls, which in turn holds incoming peat particles as they become combustion products and molten ash. The heat release rate per cubic foot in a cyclone furnace is very high, but the small furnace area is partially insulated by the covering slag layer. The combination of high heat release and low heat adsorption assures the high temperatures necessary for complete combustion and for maintaining the liquid slag layer on the furnace walls. . Reaching and maintaining the necessary combustion temperature of 2250-2730F is not consistently possible without pre-drying the peat. Flash drying with flue gases has proved to be the best solution, according to Kymi Kymmene. With flash-drying, the flue gases of a peat-fired boiler may be cooled nearly to the dewpoint because the sulphur content of the peat is low (0.2%). The efficiency of the boiler is at about the same level as that of an oil-fired boiler, i.e. 85-90 percent. ae Pulverized Firing For pulverized peat firing, peat must be dried and equalized in one or more stages. Chunks of wood, always present in peat, must be screened out and eventually crushed. Flue gas or hot air is used to reduce the moisture content from the delivered 40 to 55 wt. percent down to the 20 to 25 wt. percent suitable for firing. When ordinary pulverizer equipment is used, the drying takes place in the pulverizer and the peat-gas suspension is blown to the burners. The pulverizers used are of the hammer types, either combined with a blower or equipped with a separate fan. One of the recent improvements has been the removal of the pulverizer. In this modified system, peat is dried in a flash dryer and blown to the burners with primary air. 4. Fluidized-Bed Combustion The fluidized-bed combustor (FBC) is a versatile unit and can well be used for peat. As with pulverized coal firing, FBC provides large fuel surface area anda long contact time between gas and solid particles. Complete combustion of the fuel can thus occur at temperatures below ash softening temperatures, and the "fluidized" nature of the bed eliminates hot spots that could initiate slag formation. 5-89 There are two primary types of fluidized bed combustors; atmospheric and pressurized. The objective of the PFBC system is to utilize the energy of the hot, pressurized flue gas to drive a gas turbine for additional power generation and higher thermodynamic efficiency. AFBC systems, whichi are closer to commercial utilization, provide conventional steam turbine power only. B. Thermal Gasification Ths production of gas from peat has received much experimental attention since the mid 1800's, when sod peat was gasified under normal presure in Russia. After the Second Wolrd War about 2 million tons of sod peat a year was gasified in the USSR by a process resembling the Wellman-Galusha process. This process may be considered a commercial one, as it is offered by several manufacturers. No other peat gasification processes are considered commercial at this time. However prior to the 1960's, peat has been gasified in the laboratory or in pilot plants using both gasifier pro- cesses in commercial use with other feed stocks and experimental processes not yet considered commercial. The "commercial" gasi- fier processes studied include: Lurgi, Koppers-Totzek, Winkler, and the Soviet sod peat gasifier. The "non-commercial" group includes processes designed for peat gasification with research results obtained from experiments in the laboratory or on a pilot plant scale. Tests were made in Germany with Irish peat in pilot plants for the Lurgi, Koppers-Totzek, and Winkler processes. The Lurgi and Koppers-Totzek reactors performed successfully with peat feed- stocks, but difficulties were experienced in maintaining a fluidized bed in the Winkler reactor. Successful fluidized bed peat gasificiation has been reported from English and Russian experiments. Tests in England were conducted to produce water- 5-90 gas using indirect heat by fluidizing with steam at temperatures up to 1650F and fluidization velocities of 1 to 2 feet per second. The Institute of Gas Technology (IGT) has been conducting a peat gasificiation program since 1976. Supported by funding from DOE and the Minnesota Gas Company, IGT has proposed a hydrogasifi- cation system consdisting of a three-zone reactor vessel. In this reactor, termed a PEATGAS reactor by IGT, peat would be slurried (with toluene or water) and fed into the fluidized bed slurry dryer, to be heated by the product gases coming up from the hydrogasifier. The heated peat would be picked up by synthesis gas generated in the fluidized bed char gasifier and entrained into a vertical cocurrent dilute-phase hydrogasifier with a residence time of a few seconds. Char produced in the hydrogasifier would be gasified with input steam and oxygen in the lower fluidized bed char gasifier section. A simplified PEATGAS process would yield the following products: 10,500 Cu. Ft. SNG at 950 Btu/scf One Ton = 33.2 gallons residual oil 3.9 lbs. sulfur 37.2 lbs. ammonia 5.12.3 Costs NOT USED 5.12.4 Special Requirements and Impacts NOT USED 5.12.5 Summary and Critical Discussion NOT USED 5.12.6 Bibliography Proceedings of Second International Peat Congress, 1963. Kopstein, M. Peat Prospectus, U.S. DOE, Division of Fossil Fuel Processing, July 1979. . ak Conservation Needs Inventory, Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1967. Fraser, J.S. "Assessment of Peat Mining Methods Considered for Proposed Canadian Fuel Peat Operations," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat as an Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginina, July 22-24, 1979. Johnson, B.V., et al. "An Environmentally Sound Peat Harvesting Technique," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As an Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. "Analyzing Excavation and Materials Handling Equipment," Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Reserach Division Bulletin 53, February 1970. Cancross, C.A. "Transport of Peat Moss Slurry in a Pipeline," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. A_Report on European Peat Technology, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, reprinted August 1978. Campbell, R.N., Jr. "First Colony Farms, Inc., Experimental Peat Harvesting Program," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. Brooks, K.N. and S.R. Predmore. Hydrologic Factors of Peat Harvesting, Phase II -- Peat Program, College of Forestry, University of Minnesota, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, May 1978. "Potential of Peat as a Power Plant Fuel," Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, November 1977. Martin, J. "“Briquetting of Peat Fuel," in Proceedings of the Institute for Briquetting and Agglomeration, Vol. 14, 1975. Otava, K.J. (editor). Minnesota Peat Mission to Europe, Office of Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation, St. Paul, Minnesota, August 1958. Myreen, B. The Peat Fuel Process, Ra-Shipping Ltd. Oy, SF-21600, Pargas, Finaland, undated (ca. 1979). Pier, M. and W. Kroenig. Pressue Hydrogentation of Solid Carbonaceous Material, German (FRG) patent 725,603, filed July 31, 1937. Glinka, K. Treatment of Fuels of High Moisture Content, German (FRG) patent 1,048,378,filed January 8, 1959. 5-92 Bull, W., L. Stevenson, D.L. Kloepper, and T.F. Rogers. Salvation Process for Carbonaceous Fuels, U.S. patent 3,341,447, September 12, 1967. Cavalier, J.C. and E. Chornet. "Conversion of Peat with Carbon Monoxide and Water," Fuel, V. 56, No. 1, January 1977. Leppa, K. "Direct Combustion of Peat for Electric Power Generation," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. Asplund, D. Peat As _a Source of Energy in Finland, Technical Research Center of Finland, Fuel and Lubricant Research Laboratory, undated (ca. 1978). Alander, O. Combustion of Milled Peat in a Cyclone Furance, Kymi Kymmene Metalli Heinola, Finland, undated (ca. 1978). Laukkanen, T., and J. Hanni. "Peat Coking and Fluidized Bed Combustion of Peat," Outokumpu Oy, Finland, undated (ca. 1978). Puwani, D.V. "Synthetic Fuels from Peat," presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. Leppamaki, E., D. Asplund, and E. Ekman. "Gasification of Peat -- a Literature Review," (Technical Research Center of Finland), paper presented at the Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. Kelly, J.J. "Peat Gasification," a paper presented at the International Peat Symposium, Dublin, July 1954. MacDougall, D. "Production of Water-Gas from Milled Peat ina Fluidized Bed," a paper presented at the International Peat Symposium, Dublin, July 1975. Sundgren, A., E. Ekman, and P. Komonen. "Manufacturer of Water- Gas from Milled and Powdered Peat," a paper presented at the International Peat Congress, Leningrad, 1963. Punwani, D.V. “Status of the PEATGAS Process," presented at the 10th Synthetic Pipeline Gas Symposium, Chicago, Illinois, October 30 - November 1, 1978. Punwani, D.V., J. L. Arora, and C.L. Tsaros. "SNG from Peat by the PEATGAS Process," (IGT), paper first presented at Fifth Annual International Conference on Coal Gasification, Liquefaction and Conversion to Electricity, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, August 1-3, 1978; then presented at Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. 5-93 Punwani, D.V. and A.M. Rader. "Gas from Peat -- A Good Source of Heat," presented at Management Assessment of Peat As An Energy Resource Conference, Arlington, Virginia, July 22-24, 1979. 5-94 5.13 Solid Fuel Stoves and Furnaces Solid fuel may be coal, peat or wood. For the purpose of this report and as per tradition it will be referred to as coal and/or wood, although peat could be used as well. Individual coal and wood fired units for space heating have long been in existence, and have enjoyed increased popularity as fuel prices continue to rise. This technical profile examines the range of available units. 5.13.1 General Description There are a myriad of coal and wood burning units on the market, each with different degrees of efficiency. Standard built-in fireplaces are the least efficient for burning solid fuel (mainly paper waste and wood). Efficiencies are typically less than 10%. While the addition of glass doors and an outside air source will increase the fireplaces reliability, they are generally regarded as an "energy loser". There are several types of free standing coal and wood stoves available, ranging from inexpensive Box stoves with low efficiencies to airtight units of heavy construction which give long life and high conversion of coal and wood to usable heat. On the simpler stoves, positive draft control is not present, and combustion air is introduced under the fire, allowing large amounts of unburned gas (and heat) to be carried up the chimney. The better units normally incorporate both primary and secondary air; some employ a second chamber for better combustion of gases. This type of unit is known as the "airtight" variety, and includes positive draft control. S95 A third type of unit gaining some popularity is the multi-fuel or mixed fuel system, where coal or wood and another fuel (oil, or gas for instance) may be burned alternately in the same unit (never at the same time). While offering the user more flexibility, these units are very expensive to purchase and install. They are typically designed as central furnaces distributing heat by means of a forced-air system or a water- glycol filled baseboard system. 5.13.2 Performance Characteristics Energy output of a solid fuel stove will vary tremendously dependent on several factors, including efficiency of the heating unit, quality and heat output of the resource used, and proper operation by the user. Typical residential units are sized in the 30,000-75,000 BTU per hour range for the stove type, while the furnace type typically will yield 100,000-150,000 BTU per hour, some even up to 200,000. Amount of heat output is adjusted manually by the individual, or automatically by damping down the fire. 5.13.3 Reliability Theoretically, coal and wood heat could satisfy all of the space heating requirements of a residence during the heating season, provided that the resource is readily available and an occupant is always there to tend to the fire. In practice, and for the time being however, coal and wood are used asa "fuel saver", requiring 100% backup for times when the structure might be unoccupied or shortage of solid fuel supply exists. 5-96 A storage area that will protect the solid fuel from the elements and provide for proper seasoning of the wood is required. The size of storage generally hinges on frequency of resource use and the dynamics of availability to the consumer. Thermodynamic Efficiency - varies with the type of stove or furnace as well as properties of the fuel, e.g., the moisture content of the wood, BTU-value of the coal, etc. General percentages of conversion efficiency are given below: Standard Fireplace up to 10% With glass doors and outside air 15 - 20% Simple Box Stoves (sometimes airtight) 20 - 45% Quality airtight stoves 45 - 65% Mixed fuel units 50 - 70% 5.13.4 Costs Costs for the units and associated hardware typically range from $500 - $2,000 dollars (not installed). Mixed fuel stoves and furnaces approach $6,000 (installed) in Anchorage prices. Installation costs for most units are not available, but can be expected to approach that of capital costs. Adding stoves to existing units will likely cost more than new buildings, due to modifications to structural members. 5-97 Operation costs revolve around the coal or wood resource. There are no current cost figures for coal or cordwood at Kotzebue. Presently options consist of driftwood gathered from the waterfront or felled timber from stands 30 miles or more from the town, while coal is not available on a commercial basis right now in Kotzebue. Maintenance consists of cleaning of both fire box and flue. The latter should be cleaned at least once per year. Professional chimney cleaning can cost up to $100.00 per visit. Useful life of coal and wood stoves range from under 5 years on inexpensive models with thin-wall construction to a potential 20 years or more on quality units. Economies of scale are difficult to assess, although bulk shipping and installation would certainly reduce costs. 5.13.5 Special Requirements & Impacts A solid fuel resource be it coal, peat or wood is necessary for solid fuel utilization on any scale. Visual impacts include smoke from coal and wood fires and storage of the solid fuel. Air quality from a large amount of coal or wood burning units could be impacted, though this is difficult to assess at present with relation to the Kotzebue area; it would depend on the level of penetration and local wind patterns. 5-98 Health and safety aspects include keeping all combustibles a proper distance from the stove or furnace, maintaining air quality inside the structure by ventilation, and preventing chimney fires by cleaning the flue on a regular basis. 5.13.6 Summary & Critical Discussion Cost per million BTU for coal or wood space heating in Kotzebue cannot be established without further knowledge of resource cost to the consumer. Peat and coal heating technology is currently available but, due to non-available resources for the time being, is rarely used in Kotzebue. Wood heating technology is also currently available and is used in the Kotzebue area. It is highly likely that it will continue to be an attractive supplemental heat source to fuel oil and even to a coal-fired central district heating system, in the event that it should be introduced. However, before an analysis of penetration into the community can be performed, further assessment of the future availability of the resource must be done. 5.13.7 Bibiliography Barkshire, James, editor. "Western Sun Energy Workshop Manual - Wood Section", Alaska Renewable Energy Associates: Anchorage. December 1981. Baumbach. C. L. "Fyring i To-Kammerkedler "[Combustion in Multifuel Furnaces]" Fyring No. 4 1979. (Danish publication). 5=99) Kerr, Calvin and Richardson, Jeffery. "Technology Profile: Wood Fuel for Space Heating in Alaska's Railbelt Region", Alaska Renewable Energy Associates: Anchorage. February 1981. Krzeminski, Elissa, R. "Central Heat from Wood and Coal in New Roots, 1981. Rice, Ed. "Building in the North", Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. 1975. Sullivan, Allana, M. "Coal Heats Homes as Oil Prices Rise" Coal Age August 1980. 5-100 Load management plays a supervisory role in the use of electrical energy. It can, when properly planned and programmed, reduce peak demands and ensure that unused energy consuming devices are turned off and then turned on only when certain conditions exist. The simplest type of the load "manager" is a clock that has been promoted to controller with the addition of a few relays. The levels of sophistication possible through the use of programmable microcomputers in Energy Management can provide the tools to alter operating parameters on a real-time basis maximizing the energy savings in large scale applications. 5.14.3 Reliability The light controls and flourescent components are all off-the- shelf proven hardware. They are typically more reliable with a longer life than the components they replace. The power factor controllers in the single phase units have--not=been=-=—===== satisfactorily demonstrated in Alaska to date and therefore have an indeterminate reliability. The load management hardware while well proven in the Lower 48 is untested in the Arctic, but is expected to be reliable with the ability to switch totally over to a manual system in the event of a failure. Thermodynamic Efficiency - A complete energy saving fixture is approximately 13% to 22% more efficient than a standard fixture. The addition of a power factor controller to a motor circuit will improve the motor efficiency, but the amount of. improvement is dependent upon motor size and loading. Typical motor efficiencies will improve 5% to 20%. Load management in a commercial application should save between 5% to 25% depending on the very site specific circumstances. 5-104 The advantage of using available light is obvious though less quantifiable. Manufacturers have claimed lighting loads reductions of up to 50%, however this value can vary considerable in the study area due to a distinct lack of "available" light during the winter months. High efficiency ballasts are actually high quality transformers built to “tighter” specifications than standard units. Up to 10% reduction in energy useage is claimed by manufacturers of these units when used with standard flourescent tubes. High efficiency flourescent tubes use newer phosphorescent compounds in order to increase. ‘their efficiency. The combination of high efficiency ballasts and tubes.does-not==- reduce the lighting load in an additive sense. The use of high performance tubes reduces the losses in even a standard ballast. the efficiency of a combination of the high quality ballast and tube is in the vicinity of 18-24%. Power factor controllers operate by sensing the phase relationship of current and voltage. In a lightly loaded motor this phase difference can produce a significant increase in the motor's power factor which in turn reduces the motors conversion efficiency. When detected by the controller unit, the input voltage is reduced in proportion to the out of phase component. This in effect reduces the motor's energy useage. The reduction in energy useage with controllers depends then on the loading and cycle time of any given motor. 5-103 Other directions taken in the area of lighting conservation are "task" lighting and the use of "available" light to allow the reduction of electrically supplied illumination. Induction motors have seen a rapid increase in operating efficiency and the technology is continuously updating advances in high efficiency motor design. There is a certain aspect inherent in the operation of the induction motor that cannot be altogether corrected through efficient design. This is its "power factor" or, the ratio of actual power produced to power consumed. The NASA-LEWIS power factor controller has gone a long way in reducing this power consuming facet of the induction motor. 5.14.2 Performance Characteristics Lighting controls entail the use of circuitry that allows the user to establish a specific illumination’ level” in” each areas of concern. The circuitry then maintains that level of illumination, taking full advantage of other sources of light such as available light from windows on sunny days or even as individual desk or work are lights are turned on. The savings take place in two distinct areas: First, the general methods in lighting design utilize a "degradation" factor that tends to provide more illumination than is required when the lights, fixtures etc. are new. Then as the fixtures age and bulbs deteriorate the lighting levels are always above the required level-and never below. The ability to preset the required light level and allow the circuitry to increase power as the system "matures" presents an opportunity for significant savings. DO? 5.14 Electrical Energy Conservation Electrical conservation can be implemented in many forms; from plastic wall stickers that announce: "Turn off the lights when you leave", to sophisticated microprocessor based controllers with distributed networks of "mini" controllers under its command (though ready to take over should the master fail). Another approach is in the increasing of end use efficiency of discrete components that use electrical energy. 5.14.1 General Description Electrical conservation generally entails the increasing of the efficiency of devices that utilize electrical energy to perform a given function. Devices found in the study area include lighting and inductive motor loads. Load "management" is another form of electrical conservation. However, it can be thought of as increasing "system" efficiency rather than dealing with discrete components. Load management systems actively "pursue" the conservation of electrical energy. Duty cycling, thermostat "setback", light monitoring, and load "shedding" are among the processes undertaken by Load (or Energy)Management systems. This could be described as the "active" mode of electrical conservation. Lighting can be made more efficient through replacement of incandescent fixtures with the more efficient flourescent device. There have retently appeared on the market high efficiency flourescent fixtures that improve the energy to light conversion process even more (thigh efficiency ballasts/tubes). ; . : i 5-101 The original installation and calibration should be performed by a licensed electrician. ‘No maintenance to flourescent components or the Power Factor Controller should required, except recalibration if (and only if) the motor replaced with another. 4) Environmental Residuals the be is Lower fossil fuel usage due to lower electrical demand. 5) Health and Safety Aspects None 5.14.6 Summary These electrical conservation technologies are straightforward, relatively benign, and easily applied to village lifestyle. Used in conjunction with any power source they can improve the utility's power characteristics, reduce peak loading, and pay for themselves quickly. An example of savings is the power factor controller used on a motor which ran 24 hours per day (as a water plant circulation pump does), the total power savings per year would be 1,472 Kwh. This is equivalent to a savings of $294.40 per year based upon a utility rate of $0.20 per Kwh. A typical Power Factor Controller for this size motor costs $140 plus $50 for installation. In this case the unit would pay for itself in about six months. It should be noted that the implementation of these electrical conservation strategies may not produce a cumulative energy savings. 5-106 5.14.4 Costs For Typical Unit Installed No costs for the Load Management system were available. 1) Capital $63.60 per four tube flourescent fixture. $140.00 per 5 HP power factor controller (PFC) 2) Assembly and Installation - $22.00 per four tube fixture. $50.00 per 5 HP PFC 3) Operation and Maintenance No cost, to be performed by home owner or normal maintenance personnel. 4) Cost per Kw Installed. N/A 5) Economies of Scale Capital costs could be reduced through bulk buying (dependent upon number of units purchased). Assembly and==—= installation costs could be reduced through a blanket contract for a village-wide retrofit. 5.14.5 Special Requirements and Impacts 1) Siting No special siting requirements } 2) Resource Needs ' a) Renewable None b) Non-renewable .Materials required to manufacture units. 3) Construction and Operating Employment by Skill 5-105 5.15 Thermal Energy Conservation Thermal conservation is defined here as those measures which increase the thermal efficiency and decrease the heating loads in a building. They are not user oriented (e.g., turning down the. thermostat). Rather, they are “technical fixes"; one time improvements such as increasing insulation and reducing infiltration. hie 5.15.1 General Description There are a myriad of conservation options available to the consumer. Many are "gadgets" that do not give an appreciable return on investment. The options have been limited here to those that provide the most dramatic increase in fuel savings. Commonly referred to as "superinsulation", these measures typically consist of very high levels of insulation (usually . requiring some structural modifications to a more conventional--=—-—— building), very low air changes per hour, and an air to air heat exchanger to ensure that controlled ventilation is kept to levels that will not have an adverse effect on occupants health. Conservation measures (and thus energy savings) will likely be different in new and existing buildings. With new structures, one has the option of designing construction systems capable of containing greater levels of insulation. In existing buildings, "retrofitting" is often limited by existing structural members. . The most common measures employed in retrofits include caulking and sealing holes in the building envelope (doors, 5-107 windows, electrical and plumbing penetrations), adding ceiling insulation, and applying movable insulation over the windows. Increasing insulation thickness in the walls is generally not cost effective, due to the large expenditure in tearing out and replacing finishes. For this same reason, adding insulation to the suspended floor systems on pilings that are prevelant in the Kotzebue area is often not feasible. Only when chicken wire or some other inexpensive finish on the underside of the floor system is used does added insulation become cost effective. i As mentioned, new construction does not have these restraints. A wall system can be any thickness to accomodate increased insulation. Often, a "double-wall" method is used, with separate 2 x 4 walls at the exterior and interior. The space between the two wails is filled with fiberglass insulation, often reflecting values of R-40 and above. Structural floor systems are usually deep enough to accomodate insulation of R-40 and above. For example, a 12 inch deep floor joist could be completely filled to achieve the figure stated above. Special roof trusses ("Arkansas" truss) are used so that deep layers of insulation can be extended to the roof edges while i still maintaining room for ventilation through the attic. Typically, R-values of 60 or more are used in the roof. Other options used in new construction are basically the same as in retrofits; movable insulation over glazing and caulking of the building envelope. A great amount of detail work usually goes into sealing the vapor barrier, as well as all cracks where air infiltration occurs. i 5-108 When infiltration has been dramatically reduced, a potential problem occurs. Ventilation in the building may not be sufficient to expel moisture and air pollutants that occur as a part of daily living. A small air to air heat exchanger using low power fans is employed to provide proper ventilation levels. The device exhausts stale air and replaces it with outside air; a series of baffles transfers heat from outgoing to incoming air. The efficiency of this transer varies depending on several factors, among them outside air temperature and indoor humidity levels. Even at relatively low efficiencies (40-50%), substantial energy savings can be had. Several other low cost conservation options not necessarily related to superinsulation can produce a significant return on investment over a period of time. Two of the more effective are setback thermostats on central heating systems and insulation jackets around domestic hot water tanks.and hot... water supply lines. 5.15.2 Performance Characteristics Thermal conservation measures performance are “constant” in the sense that once installed it is not directly influenced by such factors as fuel availability. Obviously, the effectiveness of fuel savings hinges on the care of installation and the variance in outside weather conditions. A few conservation measures-most notably movable insulation over the windows - require manual operation by the occupant. 5-109 5.15.3 Reliability Conservation is reliable in that once installed it will continue to conserve fuel throughout the useful life. As it is not a supply option, 100% backup space heating is required. In new construction, furnace or boiler sizing can be reduced if conservation measures that significantly reduce the peak heating load are applied. - , Thermodynamic or conversion efficiencies do not directly apply to most conservation measures. 5.15.4 Costs Installed costs will vary considerably depending on many factors; chief among them are the levels of conservation installed, who actually does the work (paid labor versus homeowner), and whether the work is new construction or retrofit. There is little historical information on installed costs for these measures in the Kotzebue area. However, extrapolation of Anchorage costs using a construction multiplier developed for Alaska (HSM, Inc., 1981) suggests that conservation expenditures will vary from about $250.00 for simple weatherization materials to $10,000.00 for a full "superinsulation" package on an average sized residence. i Theoretical fuel savings range from 13 to 43% annually. Operation and maintenance costs do not apply to the majority of conservation investments, as they are an integral and non- mechanical part of a structure. Items such as setback thermostats and air-to-air heat exchangers would be the exception, although O & M on even these options is generally 5-110 minimal. Replacement costs are generally restricted to thermostats, fans for the heat exchangers, and some cheaper grades of caulking materials when they are directly exposed to the environment (such as around windows or doors). Manufacturers of many of the newer caulking compounds claim useful lives of 20 years of more. Economies of scale apply to conservation investments, as bulk purchasing, shipping, and installation can be utilized. A large scale conservation program could conceivably result in lower prices and better quality control than isolated and incremental installations. 5.15.5 Special Requirements & Impacts There are no special siting needs for conservation technologies, although proper orientation and placement of south glazing on new structures should be taken. into-account————~—... to provide solar radiation into the living area. Resource needs are limited to the specific conservation products; the majority would have to be shipped into the Kotzebue area. Thermal conservation technologies have no appreciable impact on the external environment. Care must be taken to ensure that proper ventilation is present in a tightly sealed structure to avoid the buildup of indoor pollutants; the air- to-air heat exchanger discussed herein is used for that purpose. Sai Skills required for installation generally consist of carpentry, mechanical, electrical and/or labor trades. No special skills are required beyond an understanding of the details needed to achieve energy efficiency. Potential energy savings are discussed in the next section. 5.15.6 Summary & Critical Discussion. The savings in energy and subsequent reduction in fuel bills employing conservation strategies are theoretical at present, as there has been no monitoring done at Kotzebue. In addition, these savings will vary widely depending on the level of conservation implemented and the size and original condition of a particular structure. Some examples can, however, be given by drawing on other research work in Alaska. A brief study of conservation=in==="-"== Northwest Alaska done in 1981 (see bibliography) theorized that the annual heating load of an average sized residence could be reduced from 92 million BTU's to 53 MBTU by adding a full "superinsulation" package. Simple weatherizing (caulking and weatherstripping) accounted for an 11.8 MBTU reduction. As stated earlier, these represent a range of 13 to 43%, with other options falling somewhere between the two. i Preliminary cost per million BTU in the Kotzebue area ranges from under $1.00 per MBTU for weatherization done by a homeowner to about $11.00 per MBTU for a retrofit on ceiling insulation that is contractor applied. Conservation cost for new structures ranges from $4.00 - $8.50 per MBTU, depending on the level of investment. 5— bi Thermal energy conservation is readily available in the Kotzebue area today. It is in most cases competitive with fuel oil, and can result in substantial annual savings to the consumer. Conservation is reliable in the sense that it will reduce fuel demand throughout its useful life. A large investment in thermal conservation could result in a significant reduction in space heating requirements in the Kotzebue area. 5.15.7 Bibliography "Energy Conservation Technical Profile for the Shungnak, Kiana and Ambler Reconnaissance Study of Energy Requirements and Alternatives," by James Barkshire, Wind Systems Engineering, May 1981. . : "Energy Conservation, Solar and Wood. for Space and-Water=--s=== Heating: A Preliminary Report on Costs and Resources in Alaska's Railbelt Region," by James Barkshire, Alaska Renewable Energy Associates, September 1981. 5-113 5.16 Organic Rankine Cycle 5.16.1 Generation Description The Rankine process forms the thermodynamic basis for steam engines and steam turbines and the process is the oldest one used for power genera ion efficiencies of almost 50 Derived from the commonly used power plant Rankine process using water as working medium, is the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) using an organic fluid as working medium. The use of such working media permits power generation .from low temperature waste heat or from heat supplied by simple low pressure boilers. The obtainable theraml efficiencies are 8-15 percent depending on ambient temperatures. As efficiency is increasing with decreasing ambient temperatures, arctic locations would be favorable. However, only few makes and sizes are commerically available at this time and accumulated time in service is rather limited. 5.16.2 Performance Characteristics Energy input for an ORC is in the form of heat in the temperature range of 200-300°F. In Kotzebue this would be supplied from coal fired low pressure boilers. The process also requires the availability of natural cooling capacity such as air or water with a temperature not exceeding 60-80°F. 5-114 Output from the ORC is electricity with a selected voltage, and heat delivered at a temperature slightly above ambient temperature. Efficiency and output reach the highest values during the winter, which also is desirable due to seasonal load differences. 5.16.3 Reliability As ORC systems are completely sealed units working at moderate temperatures with non-aggressive working medias, a high degree of reliability can be expected. The rather limited operating experience gathered with ORC systems makes back-up generating capacity essential and for this purpose the existing diesel fueled generating capacity should be kept in serviceable condition. 5.16.4 Thermodynamic Efficiency Coal fired boiler 3 80% Organic Rankine Cycle : 8 - 15% Overall efficiency of power generation : 6 - 12% 5.16.5 Costs Capital costs are expected to be high. Based on the electrical power needs for 1985 a generating capacity of 3000 kW will be needed at a price of approximately 11 million dollars. At $100/ton coal, electricity costs will be around $0.3/kWh with an expected lifetime of 25 years and an interest rate of 12 percent. 5 DES However, there is a rather large degree of uncertainty concerning capital costs of a comples system. Assuming that the above mentioned price 11 million dollars can be reduced by 50 percent of 1 kWh will be approximately $0.25. 5.16.6 Special Requirements and Impacts One of the main reasons for employing the ORC technique, is the offering of coal based power generation without the use of high pressure steam. Under normal conditions the use of high pressure steam is not considered a disadvantage, because the technique is well proven after many years of commercial use. However, some highly skilled labor is essential for operation and maintenance, and this could represenrt a problem in remote areas with limited availability of such highly skilled labor. While the construction of an ORC system will require some skilled labor, the operation and maintenance should not require personnel of higher skill than is locally available in the Kotzebue area today. The ORC should not pose any health or safety hazards due to the limited pressures and temperatures of the process. The working media, such as Freon 12 or propylene, are rather harmless when handled in appropriate ways. 5.16.7 Summary and Critical Discussion Considering the price of generated power of 31 cent/kWh, the ORC does not seem to be a practical solution to the problems of high energy prices in the Kotzebue area. If coal was locally available at very low prices, a utilization of the ORC process should be considered. At $100/ton which is approximately 44 percent of the price of diesel fuel, the same proportion between thermal 5-116 efficiencies would be required to make such utilization feasible. However, the thermal efficiency of the complete ORC is only 25-33 percent of that of the corresponding diesel process and with the relatively high capital costs of the ORC, its ecoomy becomes less than favorable. The satisfaction of Kotzebue's power needs would in the year of 1985 require almost 24,000 tons of coal, and in the year of 2000 - 100,000 tons, if an ORC system was to supply these power needs. As only few makes and types of ORC systems are available, the chance of the appropriate system being readily available is limited. Thus, few systems with outputs greater than 300 kW can be found. In Kotzebue 14 such units will be required if needs are to be met, and the maintenance and coordination of 14 sm 1l separate power generating systems are likely to increase to unacceptable levels, Sey Soli. Heat Pump Systems - District Heating 5.17.1 General Description The working principle of a heat pump is basically the same as the well known principle found in a normal household refrigerator. Heat is extracted from a source at a low temperature and delivered to a heating system at a higher temperature. This requires a certain amount of energy input in the form of high temperture heat or mechanical energy. Th + t “rom the heat pump is the sum of two inputs, and it is delivered as heat at a selected temperature. The amount of high temperature heat or mechanical energy needed to extract a certain amount of heat from a low temperature source, increases with the difference in temperature between the source and the heating system. Thus, it is favorable to keep the temperature of the heating system as low as possible. The source may be air or water from rivers, lakes or the sea. Also geothermal energy may be used. The highest efficiencies in commercially available heat pumps have been obtained with diesel driven units, where the waste heat from the diesel engine is recovered. A coal fired heat pump has been designed using proven components only, and it is commercially available at this time. However, installation of a coal fired unit will not make sense in locations with local coal fired production of electricity due to the availability of waste heat from coal based power generation. The wast heat will normally be sufficient to satisfy the demand for space heating and thus there will be no need for a heat pump. 5-118 Due to the climatic condition of Kotzebue, only air and sea water can be used as a heat source. With sea water utilization, heat will be extracted from a freezing process. The use of air simplifies the process, however, this in return causes a decrease in thermal efficiency. The heat pump can be coupled with a generator to provide a city or district with space heating delivered through a district heating system and with electricity. 5.17.2 Performance Characteristics In the Danish town of Frederikshavn, a diesel driven heat pump/ generator was installed in 1979. This plant delivers 24 million Btu/h electricity and 38 million Btu/h heat. (700 kw electricity and 11000 kw heat.) Total input in the form of heavy fuel oil is 7400 kw or 25.2 million Btu/h. Thus, 15.2 million Btu/h is extracted from a low temperature heat source which in Frederikshavn is purified sewage water. Thermal efficiencies of such a plant will be lower in Kotzebue due to lower heat source temperatures. For a plant of this kind an input of approximately 8500 kw or 29 million Btu/h can be expected. The system used in Frederikshavn is unique by its efficiencies at part loads. At loads above 50 percent, efficiencies can be considered constant. 5.17.3 Reliability All major components are of heavy duty design and should be highly reliable. However, due to the effects of a longer lasting 5-119 break down in remote locations with severe climatic conditions, a backup system is essential. This can be provided by maintaining the existing diesel power plant and by installing a normal oil fired boiler with appropriate capacity. 5.17.4 Thermodynamic Efficiency Diesel driven heat pump (Kotzebue conditions) 2150% Coupled power generation : 35% Waste heat recovery from coupled power generation : 85% 5.17.5 Costs The cost of a diesel driven heat pump unit with a backup boiler, is estimated at $2,325 per kW or $681 per 1000 Btu/h peak load capacity. Power generating capacity is estimated at $1,280/kw capacity. Based on the computations for required capacity in the 1985 a diesel driven heat pump/generator plant will cost around $10 million. For the diesel driven heat pump, heat and electricity prices will be $23 million/Btu and $0.14/kWh based on a price of $1.50/gallon for diesel oil. 5.17.6 Special Requirements and Impacts A diesel driven heat pump will have basically the same requirements and impacts as a normal diesel power plant. In Kotzebue the emissions will be normall diesel exhaust and rather large amount of ice that should be left in piles to melt during summer or led to the sea in pipes permitting duel phase flow. 5-120 Construction employment for the heat pump plant would only differ slightly from that of a normal diesel power plant. Operating personnel would require special training. The technology level of the required personnel should represent no problem in the Kotzebue area. 5.17.7 Summary In areas with adequate low temperature heat sources, a heat pump system seems to be an attractive solution to the problems caused by the high prices of energy. The technology is rather uncompli- cated and thus good reliability could be expected. Heat and electricity prices are low and investments are moderate. At the same time only few plans are operating and experience is limited. This could cause some breakdowns due to minor technical problems, as it is known from other’ projects involving untraditional designs. Especially the ice making technique in connection with the heat extraction from sea water could create problems and thus a heat pump plant cannot be recommended. for Kotzebue unless another low heat source can be found. The use of air does not seem realistic due to the extremely low winter temperatures. If, however, geothermal energy could be utilized in connection with a heat pump, economy could be promising. It is known that water at a temperature of 100°F is present in a depth of approximately 2,000 feet under the Kotzebue area and if this could be pumped to the surface in adequate amounts, a production of heat could take place. 5-121 The costs of such utilization of geothermal energy is not known and experience gathered is very limited. Even though access to low temperature geothermal energy could be better in the Kotzebue area than in most other areas, the isolated location of Kotzebue would make it less than recommendable to employ such new technology here. 5-122 TASK 6.0 EVALUATION OF TECHNOLOGY PROFILES 6.1 Systematic Evaluation Procedure 6.1.1 Categories: In evaluating the technologies discussed in Task 5.0, it is necessary to sort them into several different categories as follows: A Technologies, which mainly aim at producing electric energy. B Technologies, which produce both electric energy and heat energy in significant proportions. Cc Techologies, which mainly aim at producing heat energy. D Support systems, which would support other systems producing electric energy by reducing cost or consumption. E Support systems, which would support other systems producing heat energy by reducing cost or consumption. F _ Geothermal Energy. This technology will not be compared with others in this task, since it is being examined on a separate budget. It will be evaluated in relation to other alternatives in Task 10. 6=1 The technologies, which gain the higher ratings within each category will subsequently be combined into several alternative scenarios, each of which will be described in Task 7, and evaluated in relation to one another and to the base case in Task 10. 6relyere: Criteria Groups: Each technology will be evaluated in three criteria groups, each of which will be assigned a maximum point number. The total of these maximum point numbers will add up to 100 as follows: Max points a Economic criteria 45 2 Environmental criteria 25 3 Social criteria ae30) 100 4 Penalty for major flaws -50 Group 4 enables a penalty to be awarded for major flaws when these are of a nature that does not adequately show up in the point system. This is regarded as a helpful feature because it is impossible to design a systematic evaluation methology which will register all, sometimes conflicting and subjective points of view. 6-2 The criteria groups will be further subdivided as follows: Group High Points for: Point Range a Economic criteria (45) 1.1 Low capital cost 0-15 1.1 Low energy cost 0-30 2a Economic criteria (25) 2.1 Low air quality impact 0-5 2.2 Low water quality impact 0-5 2.3 Low floral/faunal impact 0-5 2.4 Low land use impact 0-5 2.5 Low aesthetics impact 0-5 3. Social criteria (30) 3.1 High level of community acceptance 0-10 3.2 High level of local employment 0-10 3.3 Low operating technology level, high safety level 0-5 3.4 High reliability 0-5 The points awarded on each technology are tabulated in Table 6.1. The basis for Table 6.1 is as set out hereunder: Price level as of January 1, 1982 Power capacity : 5,000 kw Heating capacity: 12,500 kW (42 x 106 Btu/h) Landed cost in Kotzebue: 10,000 Btu/lb coal- - - ---- - $100 per ton No. 1 fuel oil- - -------- $1.50 per gallon 6.1.3 Economic Criteria Points for economic criteria have been awarded in accordance with the following scales: (1) Capital Cost $_ per kW points $ per kW points $ per kW points >6,000 0 4,500 5 3,000 10 5,700 a 4,200 6 2,700 ll 5,400 2 3,900 Z 2,400 12) 5,100 3 3,600 8 2,100 a3) 4,800 4 3,300 9 1,800 14 < 1,500 15 (2) Energy Cost (a) Power $ per kWh points $ per kWh points $ per kWh points > 0.35 0 0.25 10 0.15 20 0.33 2 0.23 12 O13 22 Waele 4 0.21 14 0.11 24 0.29 6 0.19 16 0.09 26 0.27 8 0.17: «#18 0.07 28 <0.05 30 (b) Heat $ per $ per $ per mil Btu points mill Btu points mil Btu points > 40 0 30 10 20 20 38 2 . 28 12 18 7474 36 4 26 14 16 24 34 6 24 16 14 26 32 8 22 18 12 28 <10 30 6.1.4 Environmental Evaluation Environmental factors were divided into 5 categories for evaluation: air quality, water quality, floral/faunal resources, land use and aesthetic considerations. Each was rated from 0-5, with 5 and 4 indicating little or no impact, 3 and 2 indicating moderate impact and 1 and 0 indicating most adverse impact. It was assumed that mitigating measures would be used wherever possible; actual impacts would be expected to be more severe than ratings indicate if mitigations are not adopted. The evaluations were quite subjective. Each category was evaluated for several factors, and not all were necessarily of equal weight, but all were taken into account to some extent where data was available. Factors considered in each category are given below. Air quality considerations. Types of air pollutants and their effects; expected volumes and duration of emissions; concentra- tions; odors; location of the emission in relation to the population. Water guality considerations. Types and volume of pollutants expected; volume and water quality parameters affected; type of water (surface or marine) and water use (wildlife habitat, recreational, drinking water, etc.) impacted. Floral/faunal considerations. Type of organism(s) affected; size of habitat affected; value of organisms (sport or commercial value to man, or importance in ecosystem); legal constraints (protected, threatened or endangered species). Land _use considerations. Size of area impacted; effect of the facility on adjacent areas; conflicting uses; consistency with existing land use. 6-5 Aesthetic considerations. Visual impact of construction or of emissions/effluents; noise; glare; "presence" or change of existing atmosphere. 6.1.5 Notes referenced in table 6.1. Note l Electrical energy conservation (Task 5.14) can take so many forms, that it is not practical to evaluate all the different possibilities in the context of Table 6.1. The introduction or non-introduction of electrical energy conservation does not significantly impact the choice of electric generation method. The introduction would serve to slow the growth of demand and would therefore have a bearing on future capacity considerations. Note 2 Individual heat pumps (Task 5.7) are unlikely to prove of interest under the soil and air temperatures prevailing in Kotzebue. No attempt has been made to evaluate the technology in the context of Table 6.1. Note 3 The ratings for community acceptance is based solely on impressions from the first site visit, when no local people actually turned up at the public meeting. These ratings will be reassessed after the public meeting to be held after the production of the Phase I report. 6-6 Note 4 The ratings for level of local employment is based on the assumption that coal will ultimately be produced from local coal resources. Note 5 The Hydropower Alternative (Task 5.9) will be included in Task 7 and re-evaluated economically under Task 8. This is being done to ensure the cost effectiveness of the Retherford preferred plan in their “Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue" of June 1980 has been fairly evaluated from an overall cost standpoint. 6-7 TABLE 6.1. KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT AND COAL UTILIZATION DETAILED FEASIBILITY STUDY TASK "6", EVALUATION OF TECHNOLOGY P ROFILES oto THERMAL ENERGY CONSERVATION, NONE 275-3300 eee SEPARATE BUDGET 3.17 GEOTHERMAL DISTRICT HEATING GEOTHERMAL + EL POWER A B Cc D E | ” T UPPORT SYSTEMS | CATEGORY ELECTRICAL POWER ELECTR. POWER + SPACE HEATING a SPACE HEATING TRCTaEeAL BOER | SUPPORT SYSTEMS - SPACE HEATING | TECHNOLOGY PROFILE NO. 5.2 5.16 5.9 5.4 $3 5.9 Sof : : 5 3-5 5.10 5.14 5.648 5.66. 527 H.P. STEAM ORCANIC HYDROPOWER ae GASIFI- H.P. STEAM HYDROPOWER INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUAL LOW PRESSURE KOPPERS-TOTZEK WIND ELECTRICAL PASSIVE ACTIVE INDIVIDUAL | TECHNOLOGY ELECTRIE cae WITHOUT CATION, BACKPRESSURE INCL. ELECTR.| |OIL stoves SOLID FUEL DISTRICT COAL GASI- GENERATION ENERGY SOLAR SOLAR HEAT (CONDENSATION CYCLE GEN. ~ELECTR-HEAT COMB. CYCLE CO-GENERATION HEATING BASE CASE Euan oeS HEATING FICATION CONSERVATION PUMPS TURBINE) RESOURCE COAL (COKE), PEAT WATER COAL COAL, PEAT WATER FUEL OIL 1 COAL, WOOD COAL, WOOD COAL WIND NONE SUN SUN + GEO, AIR 7 WOOD, REFUSE WOOD, REFUSE : PEAT PEAT REFUSE EL. POWER + EL. POWER t ae t ; | CAPITAL COST $/Kwh | 1250-1600 3, 300 3,650 12,000 15,000-20,000 3,800 12,000 700 700 500-2000 5,000 if 1500~3200 Variable 1850 5500 See note 2 | COST OF ENERGY 3/Kwh | 0.15-0.22 0.18 - 0.24 0025-0031 0.40 0.55 0.02-0.12 0.35 | 0.05-0.09 See note l | | , 3 /Mbtu | see note 5 |__| 16-18 88 | 23 12-20 oe 23 70 | see note 5 | CRITERIA (MAX RATING) | | i j | \ ‘Group HIGH RATING FOR: Rating Ranze | L 11 ECONOMIC (45) | * | | | | ene! | 1.1 LOW CAPITAL COST 0-15 | 15 9 0 0 7 0 15 . = 3 12 | 1.2 LOW ENERGY COST 0-30 | 17 14 g 9 2 25 2 fee : CL SUBTOTAL | 39 23 0 0 32 0 32 32 39 8 40 | : — Tet oo pee 12 JIRONMENTAL (25) - | 1a... Tow AIR QUALITY IMPACT o- 5 | 3 2 5 2 2 5 2 l : 3 5 | 2.2 LOW WATER OUAL. IMPACT 0-5 | 4 2 2 1 Z 2 2 3 : 1 5 ! 2.3 LOW FLORAL/FAUNAL IMPACT 0-5 \ 4 2 I 2 2 1 2 3 2 5 | 2.4 LOW LAND USE IMPACT 0-5 4 3 2 2 3 2 4 3 3 2 is | 2.5 LOW AESTHETICS IMPACT 0-5 3 3 3 1 a 3 5 3 4 i 1 | * SUBTOTAL | 18 12 \ 13 8 12 13 12 13 15 8 20 ' t : t- [3 SOCIAL CRITERIA (20) | . | 3.1 HICH COMMUNITY ACCEPTANCE 0-10 | 5 1 1 see note3 |: 10 5 5 9 9 ti | 3.2 HIGH LOCAL EMPLOYMENT 0-10 3 10 0 see note 4 10 10 0 2 7 8 9 2 | 3.3. LOW OPERATING TECHNOLOGY : : | LEVEL, HIGH SAFETY o- 5 4 1 i a : 5 2 5 | 3.4 HIGH RELIABILITY 0= 5 | 4 3 5 4 3 | 3 SUBTOTAL | 16 15 j 17 22 26 23 17 | PRELIMINARY TOTAL | 66 50 4 61 67 80 42 TT a 15 34 | | i 4 PENALTY FOR MAJOR FLAW -10 to -50 | -20 -25 ee -25 -20 ~20 -25 iu] © 30 -30 -30 | ee a ; i High tech . High tech Imported Incon- me Not fully daily handl. resources \ SATURE OF FLAW | Imported High tech Nerpially : level fuel venience High techn. developed of external lacking \ | ipel level developed — FINAL RATING | 46 25 =1 33 ae 34 28 a. ae ue e - 47 b | eS | La so See tasks 7&8 6.2 6.2.1 RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION The results of the evaluation as shown in Table 6.1 are commented upon in the following: Category A: Electrical Power Technology Prelim Penalty Final No. Description Rating Rating 5. 1 Dieselelectric (Base Case) 66 -20 46 5. 2 High Pressure Condensation Steam Turbine 50 —25 25 5.16 Organic Rankine Cycle Generation 48 -50 —2 5. 9 Hydropower without Electrical Space Heating 33 33 Technology no. 5.1 Dieselelectric (Base Case) This technology earns a penalty of -20 points on account of the necessity to import fuel from outside the district. As the base case, nevertheless, the technology will be subject to more detailed description and evaluation in tasks 7 through 10. Technology no. 5.2 High Pressure Condensation Steam Turbine This technology earns a penalty of -25 points on account of its high technology level, which would necessitate the hiring or training of licensed boiler operators. It earns a final rating of 25 points. 6-9 The technology is not recommended for inclusion in any scenario, since it is inferior to technology 5.3, backpressure steam co-generation by virtue of the latter making use of waste heat. Technology 5.3, therefore, is preferred. Technology no. 5.16 wo Organic Rankine Cycle Generation NX This technology earns a penalty of -50 points on account of it not being fully developed and proven over a reasonable period of time in the capacity range required, usually in a final rating of -2. It will therefore not be included in any scenarios for further NAT SK Mevaluation. COX cost € ex. vs SD a 6/ 8 ae 60 — one 022 fs] feo 2 (Le Technology no. 5.9 » Hydroelectric Power without Electric Space Heatin This technology has a final rating of 33 points. Having regard to the wishes of the Alaska Power Authority, the technology will together with technology 5.9, hydropower with electric space heating, be dealt with in some more detail in Task 7.0. 6.2.2 Category B: Electrical Power and Space Heating Technology Prelim Penalty Final No. Description Rating Rating 5. 4 Coal Gasification, Combined Cycle 22 25 3 5. 3 Backpressure Steam Co-generation 59 =—25 34 6-10 5. 9 Hydropower with Electrical Space Heating 28 28 Technology no. 5.4 Coal Gasification, Combined Cycle This technology is dealt a penalty of -25 on account of a high level of technology, which leads to a very low final rating of -3. Consequently, the technology is not included in any scenario for further investigation. Technology no. 5.3 Backpressure Steam Co-generation a With a preliminary rating of 59 points and a penalty of -25 points for a high technology level, calling for licensed boiler operators, this technology ends up with a final rating of 34 points. On account of this score the technology is included in Alternative "A" for further investigation. Technology no. 5.9 Hydropower with Electrical Space Heating This technology has a final rating of 28 points. As explained earlier, this technology will be examined in some more detail in Task 7. 6-11 6.2.3 Category C: Space Heating Technology no. Prelim Penalty Final No. Description Rating Rating 5. 1 Individual Oil Stoves 61 -20 41 5.13 Individual Solid Fuel Fuel Furnaces 67 -20 47 5. 8 Low Pressure District Heating 80 80 5. 5 Koppers-Totzek Coal Coal Gasification 42 -25 7 Technology no. 5.1 Individual Oil Stoves © This base case technology presently in use earns a penalty of -20 points owing to its dependence on fuel oil imported from outside the district, leaving it with a final rating of 41. As an element in the base case, it forms the basis for measuring other alternatives in tasks 7 through 10. Technology no. 5.13 Individual Solid Fuel Furnaces This technology earns a penalty of -20 points because of the inconvenience involved to the house owner compared to District Heating systems, leaving it with a final rating of 47 points. The technology is not included in any alternative scenario, since the final rating is considerably lower than that for the following preferred technology. 6-12 6.2.4 Technology no. 5.8 Low Pressure District Heating This technology has a final rating of 80 points. It is the preferred technology for space heating and is included in Task 7 for further investigation. In Task 7 the technology is used to supplement the space heating energy obtained from backpressure steam co- generation. This technology is also to be considered as the sole means of providing space heating energy. Technology no. 5.5 Koppers-Totzek Coal Gasification This technology earns a penalty of -25 points for a high technology level, leaving a final rating of/17. The technology is not included in any scenario for further investigation. Category D: Support Systems Producing or Saving Electrical Power Technology no. 5.10 Windgeneration This technology earns a preliminary rating of 77, but this is reduced by a penalty of -30 on account of the fact, that newer machines are not sufficiently tested in Alaska, leaving a final rating of 47 points. The technology is investigated further in Task 7. 6-13 6.2.5 Technology no. 5.14 Electrical Energy Conservation The technology will be dealt with again in Task 7. Category E. Support Systems Producing Savings in Space Heating Needs. Technology Prelim Penalty Final No. Description Rating Rating 5.6a Passive solar 75 -30 45 5.6b Active solar 34 -30 4 5.15 Thermal energy Conservation ; 97 97 Technology no. 5.6a Passive Solar This technology earns a penalty of - 30 points, because its main benefit hinges on the use of external) shutters; which is felt to be a limitation on its practical use. This penalty results in a final rating of 45. The technology will be dealt with again under Alternative "E". Technology no. 5.6b Active Solar. > This technology carries a penalty of -=30 points leaving a final rating of 4 points. The technology is not included in any alternative for further investigation. 6-14 6.3 Technology no. 5.7 Individual Heat Pumps See note 2, page 6-6 y This technology is not regarded as viable in the circumstances. Technology no. 5.15 Thermal Energy Conservation This technology has a final rating of 97, and is investigated further in alternative "E", Resource Considerations. A number of technologies (nos. 5.2, 5.3, 5.8, 5.13, and 5.16) can function with a variety of solid fuels. Technologies 5.4 and 5.5 are predicated to use coal, but 5.4 could with considerable modifications also use other solid fuels (peat, wood). Resource investigation and determination is not a part of this feasibility study. Nevertheless, when proceeding to the closer investigation of a limited number of alternatives, for the purposes of that investigation, it is necessary to focus on a particular type of solid fuel. 6-15 The solid fuels which could be considered are the following, that are known to exist within a reasonable distance of Kotzebue. Coal, Kobuk River Coal, Chicago Creek Wood Peat Trash Live) possibilites, as coal sources within the Nana Region are: - Kallarichuk River, 90 miles upstream from Kiana on the Kobuk River. - Chicago Creek on the Kugruk River 15 miles west of Candle. The Kallarichuk coals have a heating vallue of about 10,500 btu/lb (as received) The Chicago Creek coals have a heating value of 6000 - 6,500 btu/lb (as received) At the meeting with the District Heating Committee held Kotzebue on January 19th, it was clearly the desire of the members present, that the investigation of the use of local coal resources as a source of energy for Kotzbue should receive priority over other sources of solid fuel. The Joint Venture will therefore focus its investigations on the use of local coal for the various alternatives chosen. 6-16 It is known that there are considerable resources of wood in the Kobuk and Noatak River catchments. These resources can be floated down the rivers to Kotzebue. The cutting of woodfuel in the quantities required for Kotzebue would have a considerable environmental impact in the region. Woodfuel is therefore considered a second choice, which could be investigated as a resource, if local coal sources fail to prove viable. The Alaska peat Altas shows the area around Kotzebue to be in class A2 area. This class is defined as having: - High ratio of area covered by organic soil - Medium Probability that the organic soil meets DOE fuel peat requirements. reference: Peat Resource Estimation in Alaska. U.S. Dept. of Energy Division of Fossil Energy On account of the northern location of Kotzebue and the shortness of the summer during which time the peat must be harvested and air dried (if produced as milled peat or sod peat) also on account of the environmental impact of peat production, peat is regarded as a distant third choice as the main solid fuel for Kotzebue. Trash at present is an_- environmental nuisance. Depending upon what alternative becomes the preferred final recommendation, consideration should be given to supplementing the energy from the main energy source with waste heat derived from the buring of trash in a boiler suited for the purpose. 6-17 APPENDICES Agenda for Meeting with KDHWG ....cccccsccccccccccccccccce Summary of Meetings in Kotzebue January 18, 20, and 21, 1982 wccccrcececcveccccvecccccs February 1, 2, and 3, 1982 wcccccrcccvcrccccecccercvere References to studies done (by Retherford) for KEA ....... KEA Copies of Electrical Output to Kotzebue 1968 through 1982 .ccccccvcrecvcccccvveccscceccscsccscece Letter of January 21, 1982 from Don Fiscus, KEA, reference Coal Gasification Concerns, et. al. .w.ceceeeese Public Meeting AMNOUNCEMENE .ccccecevccvccccccccccccccrveceececccccece Summary Agenda .occccccccccescccscccsecccvcccscvcccccece Detail AGendarcc-coclele elele elerclolere o1cls sleleo1s clelels eo cle eielei ele ele eel Agencies and Organizations Contacted ....sccecccsccccevece Agencies and Organizations RESPONSES ..eceeeeeceseseseveves E=1 F=2 F=-3 G-1 AGENDA KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT AND COAL UTILIZATION FEASIBILITY STUDY MEETING OF JANUARY 19, 1982 with the . KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEATING WORK GROUP and the Joint Venture of VECO, Inc. Stephano & Associates, Inc. Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc. Moderator and Speaker: Jack Turner Arctic Slope Technical Services, Anchorage, Alaska 1. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL DATA (Jack Turner) ae Ce a. ee An Alaska Power Authority study for the evaluation of previous work performed by others and new data developed during this study of the following energy sources for the Kotzebue area. 1) Diesel generation 2) Coal-fired steam generation 3) Gasified coal generation 4) Coal-fired low pressure district heating 5) Space heating individual coal stoves 6) Energy conservation 7) Miscellaneous Others . Contracting Agency — Alaska Power Authority Contract Time Schedule - December 1981 to May 1982 Introduction of Team Members 1) Alaska Power Authority, 334 W. 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Patty Dejong; (907) 277-7641 or 276-0001 2) NANA Development Corporation, 4706 Harding Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99509; Pete Jorgenson; (907) 248-3030 3) VECO, Inc., 5151 Fairbanks Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; Albert Swank, Jr., Assistant Project Manager; (907) 276-2010 4) Stephano & Associates, Inc., 704 W. 2nd Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Herb Bartick; (907) 279-1961 5) Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc., 420 L Street, Suite 406, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Jack Turner - Project Manager, Costa Bursell - District Heating; (907) 276-0517 Team Member Firms and Subcontractor Introductions , 1) Arctic Slope Technical Services (Jack Turner) a) Anchorage Base of Operations b) North Slope Regional Corporation c) Polar Consults d) ERTEC e) DMJM £) Project Involvements g) Subcontractors (1) Wind Systems, Inc. (a) Anchorage base of operations (b) Project involvements APPENDIX A-1 2. 2) 3) Institute of Gas Technology (a) Chicago, Illinois base’ of operations (b) Projects involvements VECO, Inc. (Albert Swank, Jr.) a) Anchorage Corporation Headquarters and Operations b) North Slope Operations c) Drilling Operations (1) Alaska (2) Colorado d) North Sea Operations e) Houston VEMAR Yard £) Project Involvements Stephano & Associates, Inc. (Herb Bartick) a) Anchorage Base of Operations b) Project Involvements JOINT VENTURE TEAM MEMBERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ae b. Ce VECO, Inc. (Albert Swank, Jr.) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Project Management Previous Literature Economic Review Site Reconnaissance Energy Balance Evaluation of Technology Profiles Cost Estimation Evaluation of Alternates Plan Economic Evaluation General Reports and Recommendations Ralph Stephano & Associates (Herb Bartick) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) Previous Literature Review Involving a) Coal-Fired Steam Generation b) Coal Gasification c) Geothermal Resources da) Coal Resources e) Coal Utilization Site Reconnaissance Diesel Generation - Technology Profile Coal-Fired Steam Generation —- Technology Profile Coal Gasification Gas Distribution - Technology Profile Heat Exchangers Energy. - Technology Profile Geothermal Energy - Technology Profile Peat Energy - Technology Profile Wood Energy — Technology Profile Evaluation of Technology Profiles Development of Alternatives Cost Data Base of Alternatives General Reports and Recommendations Arctic Slope Technical Services (Jack Turner, Costa Bursell) 1) 2) 3) 4) Previous Literature Review Involving a) Hydroelectric Energy b) Coal-Fired Low Pressure District Heating ec) Space Heating d) Geothermal Resources e) Coal Resources £) Coal Utilization Site Reconnaissance Energy Forecast Coal Gasification Gas Distribution - Technology Profile 4. 5) Coal- 2d Low Pressure District Hea ; ~ Technology Profile a) Presentation of Danish District Heating Brochures (Costa Bursell) (1) Facts about Danish District Heating . (2) Planning District Heating Systems from Danish Generating Stations (3) Computerized Heating Areas: A.valuable data collection (4) Conserving Energy (5) Large Economic Gain Through Coal Firing (6) Prefabricated Pipe-in-Pipe System for District Heating : (7) Modern Transport of Heat through the I.C. Moller System (8) District Heating - an important tool for energy conservation in Denmark (9) Co-Generation 6) Space Heating - Technology Profile 7) Energy Conservation - Technology Profile 8) Organic Rankine Cycle - Technology Profile 9) Hydroelectric Energy - Technology Profile 10) Geothermal Energy - Technology Profile 11) Peat Energy - Technology Profile 12). Wood Energy - Technology Profile 13) Evaluation of Technological Profiles 14) Development of Alternatives 15) Alternatives Environmental Evaluations 16) Evaluation of Alternatives 17) Plan Evaluation 18) General Reports and Recommendations d. Wind Systems 1) Energy Conservation - Technology Profile 2) Heat Exchanger Energy -— Technology Profile 3) Wind Energy - Technology Profile 4) Wood Energy - Technology Profile 5) Development of Alternatives e. Institute of Gas Technology 1) Gasified Coal Generation - Technology Profile 2) Development of Alternatives SCOPE OF WORK OUTLINE AND SCHEDULE (Jack Turner) (See attached sheet) WORK GROUP QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD ‘cITr OF KOTZEDUE DISTRICT NRAT AND COAL UTILIZATION PEASIBILITY STUDY -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13014 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 DECEMBER 1961 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH 4 4. 16 25 31 8 15 22 29 5 12, «19 #26 «S$ 12>«19 26 2 APRIL MAY 9 16 23 30 7 a . “TASK 1 Literature Review TASK 2 Site Reconnaissance TASK . 3 Energy Balance TASK 4 Forecast Year 2002 TASK 5 Technology Profiles TASK 6 Evaluation Technical Profiles TASK 7 Description of Alternativeb TASK 8 Cost Estimation TASK 3 Environmental Evaluation TASK 10 = =Plan Evaluation “TASK 11 = Public Preferences TASK 12 Data Collection Requirements and Costs TASK 13. Work & Permitting Schedules TASK 14 Phase I Report TASK 15 Draft Final Report TASK 16 =Final Report [Z re LEGEND Scheduled "Ma Completed FEB APPENDIX B-1 MEETING MINUTES SITE RECONNAISSANCE, KOTZEBUE JANUARY 19, 20, 21, 1982 On January 19, 1982 at 3:40 a.m. our group, consisting of Mr. Albert Swank, Project Assistant Manager, VECO, Inc.; Mr. Mogens Bastrup, ASTS, Inc.; Mr. Gosta Bursell, ASTS, Inc.; and Mr. Ralph Stefano, Stephano and Associates, Inc. arrived in Kotzebue for the purpose of holding several meetings and performing a portion of the site reconnaissance work. Shortly after arrival, Mr. Swank contacted Mr. Gene Moore, City Manager, and arranged a meeting at 4:00 p.m. Mrs. Neeli Ward was contacted to arrange a radio interview for 7:45 a.m. on January 20, 1982 for announcing the public meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on that day. Mr. Donald Fiscus of the Kotzebue Electric Association was contacted and a meeting arranged for 9:00 a.m. on the 20th, also. Efforts were made to arrange a meeting with the Maniilaq Corporation; however, due to their people being out of town and their office not being open, a meeting was never arranged. Our group then met with Mr. Gene Moore, the City Manager, and entered into a general discussion of our reasons for being in the community and received his views and concerns. Mr. Moore expressed his concern that geothermal resources should be evaluated and that there were some strong feelings in the community on coal gassification. Mr. Moore then went on to explain the work that Quadra Engineering was performing for the city and showed us all available information with regard to aerial photography coverage, utility as-builts, zoning and planning. : Mr. Moore then explained some of the city's current projects including the feasibility study of a deep water port at Cape Bloosum with an access road and a road to the Chicago Creek area. Site Reconnaissancr Kotzebue Page 2 January 19, 20, & : 1982 Our group then prepared for a meeting with the Kotzebue District Heating Work Group to be held at 5:00 p.m. The attached agenda was presented and discussed by our group at the meeting. People in attendance at the meeting consisted of: Mr. Gene Moore -- City Manager Mr. Allen Upicksoon -- City Council Mr. Paul Harris -- City Council Mr. Joe Squicciapini -- City Council Mr. Royal Harris -- City Council The agenda was presented with considerable involvement being taken and questions béing asked by the work group; the involve- ment and question areas of the members being outlined as follows: Mr. Gene Moore -- General comments on geothermal resources investigation, the possibility. of. inter- tieing communities in the region, and the poor quality of past studies done in the area previously. Mr. Allen Upicksoon -- The coal resources of the surrounding area as well as outlining areas and the general economic factors in their usage such as transportation, mining and community benefits. Mr. Paul Harris -- The coal resources of the surrounding area as well as outlining areas and the general economic factors in their usage. Site Reconnaissance Xotzebue Page 3 January 19, 20, & 2., 1982 Mr. Joe Squicciapini-- The general environmental effects of developing coal resources. or power plants and the general economic benefits of the community by the alternatives presented within the study. Mr. Royal Harris -- The consideration that will be given to other possible nonconventional energy sources and the general economic and transportation factors involved in the development of coal resources. One factor was agreed upon by all people present during this meeting: that after this study was completed, it was of the utmost importance to perform a second study outlining the coal resources of the area and the costs associated with their development and delivery to the Kotzebue area. On January 20, 1982 at 9:30 a.m., our group held a meeting with Mr. Donald Fiscus of the Kotzebue Electric Association. Mr. Fiscus outlined the general existing generation facility and his views on future development in the area. Existing generation equipment: - 500 kw White diesel generators - 1000 kw Fairbanks Morris diesel generator 1000 kw Delaual diesel generator - 900 kw Solar turbines - Vapor phase waste heat recovery boilers &® NY FF NY ' Mr. Fiscus stated that the power plant, manager's house, office, warehouse and city water supply were heated utilizing the waste heat energy from jacket water as well as exhaust. Site Reconnaissanc” Kotzebue Page 4 January 19, 20, & 1982 The system typically operated with one 1000 kw unit during the summer months and with both a 1000 kw unit and two 500 kw units during the winter. Mr. Fiscus presented copies of three reports as prepared by Robert Retherford and Associates for our usage; these being are a financial forecast, power requirement and two-year work plan. The system's fuel storage consisted of approximately 1,150,000 gallons with the last fuel purchase in September 1981 at $1.281 per gallon for No. 2 fuel. Mr. Fiscus then went on to outline his impressions of the general community with regard to energy usage and life styles. Data was then presented with regard to the electrical generation of the system, its distribution in the community, and the system's fuel usages. Mr. Fiscus then entered into a discussion on coal gasification---- and forwarded to us his outline of study et. al. now underway in Kotzebue. Our group then returned to City Hall to continue our review of available existing engineering and zoning data until the public meeting was held at 7:00 p.m. During this time, Mr. Royal Harris was contacted about community fuel usages, and data was compiled. At 7:00 p.m. our group attended the public meeting held at the City Hall. We had prepared the attached agenda to be presented during this meeting; however, no people showed for this meeting and our group left at 7:30 p.m. On January 21 our group left Kotzebue at 11:00 a.m. and returned to Anchorage. 1. 2. APPENDIX B-2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE, KOTZEBUE FEBRUARY 1, 2, AND 3, 1982 Meeting with Gene Moore, City Manager: Gene Moore referred to Quadra Engineering for copies of aerial photos, taken in July 1981, as these are supposed to be ready by the end of this week. Gene Moore agreed that he or Robert Baker, who is Assistant to the City Manager, would review a CIP List to be provided by Maniilaq Association. General information from study team to Gene Moore on how the feasibility study is progressing. Meeting with Robert Barker, Assistant to the City Manager: Robert Barker confirmed that the City has no written CIP List and that almost all the projects on the list provided by Maniilaq Association were either in progress or already done. However, Robert Barker revealed that the City's main CIP targets concentrate on roads, water, sewer and a new City Hall with the following specific items: 1) Street improvements. 2) Extended water and sewer services. As of now, there is approximately 500 hookups of each out of 692. 3) New or expanded City Hall. 4) New water line, Devil's Lake-Vortac Lake. 5) New water main from Vortac Lake to treatment plant. 6) New 1 mill. gallons water storage tank. 7) New dry firepipes. 8) Convention Center. 9) Improvements to sewer lagoon. Site Reconnaissanc Kotzebue Page 2 February 1, 2, & 3 .982 3. 4. Robert Barker mentioned that a reconnaissance study has already been undertaken for a road to Kotzebue-Chicago Creek. Robert Barker estimates that barges should not have a draught of more than 6 to 8 feet. Robert Barker further commented on details with Progress Report No. 1 on this study; these comments will be dealt with separately. Robert Barker confirmed that the City does not maintain a building list. Meeting with Matt Conover and David Weingartner, Maniilag Association Matt Conover produced a list of CIP projects, although some of the projects were already carried out. He therefore requested that the list be checked by the City Manager. David Weingartner expressed concern about possible air and water pollution, but was relieved to hear that air pollution will be only within allowable limits and that water pollution will not occur, since cooling water from the sea will not be needed. Matt Conover referred to NANA Regional Housing Authority for an inventory of buildings. Matt Conover also referred to energy audits’ recently undertaken in Kotzebue. Meeting with Mayor Royal Harris, Arctic Lighterage: In addition to information provided by Royal Harris at last site reconnaissance, further details on, the’ fuel consumption were made available from the files of Arctic Lighterage. iy Site Reconnaissance Xotzebue Page 3 February 1, 2, & 3, _382 5. 6. It was also confirmed that all fuel to Kotzebue goes through Arctic Lighterage. Telephone conversation with Major Bowen, U.S. Air Force Base: Major Bowen referred us to Elmendorf Air Force Base since he was not allowed to release any information. Meeting with Tommy Sheldon, NANA Regional Housing Authority: NANA Regional Housing Authority built 57 homes in Kotzebue in 1976 (afterwards referred to as the new NANA houses) and plan to build approximately 60 in 1982. Between 1976 and today, the Housing Authority has built in the surrounding villages. Tommy Sheldon provided an owner list and a house number list for the 57 new NANA houses as well as a set of standard specifications for these houses (HUD Minimum Property Standards). 7. Meeting with Energy Auditors Robin Sandwik and Richard Schmitt: The two energy auditors, who are locals, have recently visited and worked out energy reports on 81 houses in Kotzebue, the 81 homes considered to be fairly representative of the city. They both generously made the information gathered by them available to this feasibility study, i.e. items such as_ furnace type, house insulation, fuel consumption, hot water consumption, means of producing hot water, etc. z The two energy auditors estimated that 75 to 90 percent of Site Reconnaissance Kotzebue Page 4 February 1, 2, & 3 982 8. the households have a freezer and that approximately 25 percent have two freezers. Likewise, they estimated that 50 to 75 percent have a refrigerator. "Classification" of Buildings: Supported by a town map, produced by the City at the previous site reconnaissance, all buildings were inspected from outside in order to determine the number of stories and to appoint an insulation value to each house, the purpose of this being to make it possible to determine the energy need for space heating fairly accurate. Insulationwise, the buildings were divided into three categories and by means of the energy auditors' reports and our own assumptions and calculations, heat losses per square foot are determined for each of the three categories. After the buildings have been measured on the map, the total present space heating consumption can be estimated. APPENDIX C-1 Robert W. Retherford Associates October 1980 draft studies for KEA, titled: ° Power Requirement Study ° Financial Forecast ° Construction Work Plan 1980-1982 [2 LL MME PMN SAM “AHH (ffl HT hy a Pal il s/f iTr Fork Approved SYSTEM DESIGNATION OUB NO. 4C-RUSST YU. 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINIETR ATION SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 1929 NL AcK 2 Ker Roe suey aus. EXPLANATION AOJUETMENTS 4 ~ - RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION OEP ARTUENT OF AGRICULTURE SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 192.7 sUeSTATION OR METERING POINT BLAsK SYSTEM DESIGNATION AME OF SYSTEM auc Fyrorew p-- 13 Kare pas Maree sovrseue, acetal VTete.. TOTALS EXPLANATION AQsUSTMENTS 4 aa | Espero fo Sn vie «. - >| $ =z Es - z °? = a 18. : i sf 2 § {SEITE Ooo | | qBBUUPEUOUET 7 APB U ERE U UU | GE EO : | |, Peeper oe | : Pe eo red | Pee eee fee EEE EL Wee COUPE ae : —-—- =: ‘sf ae +|t : 7 3 = aS . af < ¥ Jefe: ss 2 leis. $ ° § Iwlfe. z ae tice = e res . < joues ess": See ao? oF : < Fors Appeared SYSTEM DESIGNATION NAME OF S~STEM U. 8, DEP ARTWENT OF AORICULTURE OUB NC), 90-R 1881 Kate cave = RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AOMINIBTRATION SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 19 [2 2, inte Ce | fit traded ih ‘itl anata 129 Sevrreete} LCE ETE it cere anantntals Ae TO ELE rE 2 n q ! | : acre ee | ' 1 ! Cc SPERAT 5 FZPORT - aa ae itote. - Bory Apes ted SYSTEM DESIGNATION NAME OF SYSTEM OUB NO, 90-3881 U. 8. CEP ARTMRMT OF AGRICULTURE RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 19//2_ Dj pce SS Se Carian CLCBEREE CL CEE LCE ER CL CERF ER CLCREREH alia Peel hihi agate nti i oe TOTAL nnn EXPLANATION on ADJUSTMENTS OPEFSTINZ PEPORT eee {EO Seer, : 5 SYSTEM DESIGNATION NAME OF SYSTEM a Fors Apprated DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OWB \Q), 40-RI8S1 ATT RIE ' Ne-nciprviay F RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AOMINISTRATION SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 19 “'tt Pell cathe a Toraus : 734) He CCC CFE oo TCC ro et TCH Hf fith RRPLAWATION on ' ADsusTMENTS OPERATING PEPORT Sea fuesTAtion om METERING POINT a) U. 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION bs SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 1975. Form Approved OUD NO, 40-R3881 ALASKA SYSTEM DESIGNATION 13 Korzeaue DA ocr. Nov. vec. "HAY 28, 197 Paul E, KRISS t=? t=t t= nme nome mone ur TOTALS 14OO 1250 12 290° |_ @ 822 ¥SO EXPLANATION ADJUSTMENTS . VU. 8, ORPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE @ RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AOMINIETRATION SUPPLY SUESTATION DATA FOR 19 7G Form Approved OVA NO, 40-R3881 OF SYSTEM OTLEBvE Etecreic Mera, (NC 27/177 Loveco Fiscus l SUBSTATION OF oct. . otc. METERING Pome | aw aw ae ToTaus xr nwt nen [vee] [eer] [ze [4 7 Geveration _|'Il 7LE7Z0\697772 |G1F7SO| 6121/0 |F2Z72470| Fb 860 errr 43 14 — »|suuco | 7¢¢0 740 l ERPLANATION ADJUSTMENTS SYSTEM DESIGNATION WAME OF SYSTEM Kor 7 7 E;. carrie Asse Jue Alaska 13 oe F-17777 Doses Fiz2us suey aue. ocr. MOV. OFC. seer. U, 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE MURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY SUPSTATION DATA FOR 19 77 Form Approved OMA NO, 40.R9881 SYSTEM DESIGNATION ALASKSa IS MAME OF SY: ff, BMtepve Epecraic OATE ]/~-23-€0 ocr. ev capece aT Dovarr Fisev ee tenine Soune nw nn we | as porate ee [as [1476 ieze(203z|) [2zez¥. 949600| 16600) 745600 | Fb 7900 4 56600 | 606000 | 4149200 |102.400|/2497179.4 00 ohh. MSE Oe 4.0 a4 Wes” 74¢| GaiesP 153460 |6% z.7 te | -569 no) —Wd 1S VMS 2.8 Ws 1438| |/523| 11797) |/70 2060 (arse) l2ize 1§}200| §10300|778000| 64900] 912$%0| 143900| wes300 Ce es zouszoo |** I 120 | 42 a - oul 49 8.0 tt ToraL EXPLANATION a | AUIUSTMENTS [FE TING REPORT ro “ERECT every | SYSTEM DESIGNATION Form Approved U. ©, DEPARTMENT OF AERICULTURE OWD NO, 40-R3881 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AOMINISTR ATION SUPPLY SUBSTATION DATA FOR 19 72 OATE Eee 27/7 Bvarv Fiscus Nov, ALASEA 13 Korzeeve sUBETATION On METERING POINT RPL MATION on ADJUSTMENTS : ' APPENDIX E-1 Jamuary 27, 1982 Albert L. Swank VECO Inc. 5151 Fairbanks St. Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Deer Mr. Swank: : ~ Enclosed are hand written comments on the study underway at Kotzebue. I must apolegize for the form as no typist is available to me thet would do the work. I had planned on submitting the comments at the public meeting, however, I was still busy. Thank You Sincerely, Wa L vous Doneld Fiscus PROJECT MANAGER'S NOTE: The attached letter from Donald Fiscus was typed from handwritten copy referenced in the above letter. Submitted by lette on Page 1 January 27, 1982 WRITTEN COMMENTS BY DONALD FISCUS FOR KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEATING AND COGEMEPATION STULY From the original proposal and from the contract document Appendix B it is apparent that the intention was to use the coal in some form of boiler to either make steam for heat- ing water or to heat water directly for the purpose of heating the buildings in Kotzebue with the hot water. The question of electric cogeneration is a possibility only if steam is generated and therefore was thrown in to be con- sidered. At the insistence of a certain individual, consi- deration was given to include in the study the use of manufactured gas for home heating and electric genera- tion. The manufactured gas process to be considered is coal gassification. In comparing the two possible methods of using coal, we quickly find considerable dollar differences. Making a conservative estimate for steam, approximately $7,000,000 would be spent to install boilers, electric generators, heat exchangers, distribution facilities and building heating equipment. The annual depreciation and interest (30 years, 5%) would be $583,333 on equipment alone. For manufactured gas, the estimate is $2,100,000 with an annual depreciation and interest (30 years, 5%) of $175,000. These estimates would be about the same regardless of which coal (6500 Btu/ton or 10,000 Btu/ton) was used. When including the operational cost of coal, labor, and overhead, the consumer cost was calculated and showed that costs would rise about 6% if boilers were used and go down about 12% if manufactured gas was used. In the calculation of these estimates, reference was made to various engineering and chemical publications to derive the efficiency of all parts and pieces that would be necessary in each method. Site Reconnaissance ‘otzebue Page 2 January 19, 20, & 21, 1982 Such as: Steam Equipment Efficiency Manufactured Gas Efficiency Boiler 80% Generator 70% Heat Exchanger 80% Dist. System 100% Dist. System 80% Generator 32% Generator 28% Home Heater 80% The availability of manufactured gas equipment is not widely known although it is readily available, if not in the United States then in Europe. Also, equipment designed to operate on manufactured gas is readily available, if not in the United States then in Europe. The question of using coal to replace other forms of energy in Kotzebue will be answered by this study. However, there are other more important questions this study will have unanswered for one reason or another. The first question is: what coal will be used? If the coal comes from outside the Nana Region regardless of the quality, then $3,220,000 would leave the area just as the money now spent for oil leaves the area. If instead, the coal used is from the Nana Region, then the money would stay in the hands of the residents of the Nana Region. The dollar value for inside ($100/ton) or outside $150/ton) would be about equal since the volume for Nana coal at 6,500 Btu/ton would be larger than North Slope coal at 10,000 Btu/ton. The second question is: how to use the coal? Some minor research was accomplished and determined that manufactured gas equipment is now available in small units sized to 100 homes. These were the sizes included in the above estimate since multiple small units provide much’ greater versatility and reduce operational problems. Site Reconnaissanc Kotzebue Page 3 January 19, 20, & ~~, 1982 Conversation indicates that some people are aware of manu- factured gas possibility but they are either misled or misinformed on required equipment and therefore believe the costs to be much highier than necessary. Another misconception of manufactured ~gas is that it will not provide sufficient fuel to operate an internal combus- tion engine. In fact, the only modification to any gas engine necessary to have it operate on manufactured gas is to modify the carburation so that the fuel/air ratio is changed from 1:10 to 1:1 approximately. With this change, the burnables to nitrogen ratio in the firing chamber is maintained. The only effect is to reduce the H.P. produced by about 25%. For diesels, the HP reduction is about 35%. In both gas and diesel engines all other operations remain the same. In the event that steam boilers are determined to be the most desirable method, then an entire new level of knowledge will be required since State licenses are required for the operation of the pressure vessels capable of developing pressures necessary to generate electricity with a steam generator. The time required to obtain the knowledge and experience for a boiler license precludes anyone in this area. Only imported persons with licenses could operate the boilers. Manufactured gas does not require any licenses since it is a different technology; therefore local people could operate the equipment with minimum training. The effect on local income would be approximately: Steam ~ Manufactured Gas Imported Labor $346,000 -- Site Reconnaissance ‘otzebue Page 4 January 19, 20, & 21, 1982 Local Labor 604,000 $789,200 $950,000 $789,200 The sources of the coal would have considerable affect on the local bills for either process. Steam Manufactured Gas 10,000 Btu/ton + $238,131 - $512,905 6,500 Btu/ton + 412,155 - 836,508 When totalling the various monies, a local economic benefit would be realized by either process regardless of the source of the coal. The most important question is which process and which coal would have the greatest benefit. From my estimates: Economic Benefit to Present Nana Residents: Steam Manufactured Gas North Slope 10,000 Btu/ton $ 532,561 $ 943,071 Nana 6,500 Btu/ton 2,834,554 3,379,252 New Persons to Nana Region: 10,000 Btu/ton $346,000 -- 6,500 Btu/ton . 346,000 == Total Money Retained in Region: 10,000 Btu/ton $ 878,561 $ 943,011 6,500 Btu/ton 3,180,554 3,379,252 I fully realize that the estimates I made are based on some questionable values; however, most figures are valid -- only the equipment required can be seriously questioned. My interest in making this estimate was only to determine the economic aspects because of the dollar problems that Site Reconnaissance Kotzebue Page 5 January 19, 20, & -_, 1982 exist in this area. However, I felt that preconceived ideas would dominate the engineering work performed under this contract and complete consideration would not be given manufactured gas possibilities unless there was’ some evidence presented. Signed Mr. Donald Fiscus January 6, 1982 TUNDRA TIMES PUBLIC MEETING ’ KOTZEBUE ee : JANUARY 20, :7:00 P.M.. on ; KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEATING ~ - AND ~ ‘COAL UTILIZATION a5 DETAILED FEASIBILITY STUDY * FOR THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY | Your input, opinions, and: Goncems are needed ‘to assist us in evaluating the -various energy alternatives for Kot-. zebue including district heating. ‘ ~ You are encouraged to speak’ or furnish a written statement at the mine. : If you cannot attend, but would like a written statement to _ appear in the official record, please send your thoughts to _. us in writing by January 20th, to: Arctic ‘Slope Technical Services “Suite 406. 420 "L” Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 |. For additional: information, | “rege call Jack. Turner at 276-0517. . i T-d XIGNadddv APPENDIX F-2 AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING CITY HALL January 20, 1982 7 p.m. : KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT & COAL Ben settee FEASIBILITY STUDY 1. Introduction and Background of the Study 2. Study Responsibilities 3. Schedule and Scope of Work 4. Public Question and Answer Period Possible Panel Members: Patty Dejong - ‘Alaska Power Authority Jack Turner - Contractor Gosta Bursell - Contractor Ralph Stefano - Contractor Al Swank - Contractor AGENDA APPENDIX F-3 KOTZEBUE DISTRICT HEAT AND COAL UTILIZATION FEASIBILITY STUDY MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 1982 with the GENERAL KOTZEBUE PUBLIC and the Joint Venture of VECO, Inc. Stephano & Associates, Inc. Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc. Moderator and Speaker: Jack Turner Arctic Slope Technical Services, Anchorage, Alaska 1. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL DATA (Jack Turner) ae ee. An Alaska Power Authority study for the evaluation of previous work performed by others and new data developed during this study of the following energy sources for the Kotzebue area. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Diesel generation Coal-fired steam generation Gasified coal generation Coal-fired low pressure district heating Space heating individual coal stores Energy conservation Miscellaneous Others Contracting Agency - Alaska Power Authority Contract Time Schedule - December 1981 to May 1982 Introduction of Team Members 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Team 1) Alaska Power Authority, 334 W. 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Patty Dejong; (907) 277-7641 or 276-0001 NANA Development Corporation, 4706 Harding Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99509; Pete Jorgenson; (907) 248-3030 VECO, Inc., 5151 Fairbanks Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; Albert Swank, Jr., Assistant Project Manager; (907) 276-2010 Stephano & Associates, Inc., 704 W. 2nd Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Herb Bartick; (907) 279-1961 Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc., 420 L Street, Suite 406, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; Jack Turner - Project Manager, Costa Bursell - District Heating; (907) 276-0517 Member Firms and Subcontractor Introductions Arctic Slope Technical Services (Jack Turner) a) Anchorage Base of Operations b) North Slope Regional Corporation ec) Polar Consults d@) ERTEC e) DMJM f) Project Involvements g) Subcontractors (1) Wind Systems, Inc. (a) Anchorage base of operations (b) Project involvements 2. 2) 3) Institute of Gas Technolog (a) Chicago, Illinois base’ of operations (b) Projects involvements VECO, Inc. (Albert Swank, Jr.) a) Anchorage Corporation Headquarters and Operations b) North Slope Operations c) Drilling Operations (1) Alaska (2) Colorado d) North Sea Operations e) Houston VEMAR Yard £) Project Involvements Ralph Stephano & Associates (Herb Bartick) a) Anchorage Base of Operations b) Project Involvements JOINT VENTURE TEAM MEMBERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ae be Ce VECO, Inc. (Albert Swank, Jr.) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Project Management Previous Literature Economic Review Site Reconnaissance Energy Balance Evaluation of Technology Profiles Cost Estimation Evaluation of Alternates Plan Economic Evaluation General Reports and Recommendations Stephano & Associates, Inc. (Herb Bartick) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) Previous Literature Review Involving a) Coal-Fired Steam Generation b) Coal Gasification c) Geothermal Resources d) Coal Resources e) Coal Utilization Site Reconnaissance Diesel Generation - Technology Profile Coal-Fired Steam Generation - Technology Profile Coal Gasification Gas Distribution - Technology Profile Heat Exchangers Energy -— Technology Profile Geothermal Energy - Technology Profile Peat Energy - Technology Profile Wood Energy - Technology Profile Evaluation of Technology Profiles Development of Alternatives Cost Data Base of Alternatives General Reports and Recommendations Arctic Slope Technical Services (Jack Turner) 1) 2)- 3) 4) Previous Literature Review Involving a) Hydroelectric Energy b) Coal-Fired Low Pressure District Heating c) Space Heating d) Geothermal Resources e) Coal Resources z) Coal Utilization Site Reconnaissance Energy Forecast Coal Gasification Gas Distribution - Technology Profile 5) Coal-F d Low Pressure District Heat - Technology Profile 6) Space Heating - Technology Profile 7) Energy Conservation - Technology Profile 8) Organic: Rankine Cycle - Technology Profile 9) Hydroelectric Energy - Technology Profile 10) Geothermal Energy - Technology Profile 11) Peat Energy - Technology Profile 12) Wood Energy - Technology Profile 13) Evaluation of Technological Profiles 14) Development of Alternatives 15) Alternatives Environmental Evaluations 16) Evaluation of Alternatives 17) Plan Evaluation 18) General Reports and Recommendations a Wind Systems (Jack Turner) 1) Energy Conservation - Technology Profile 2) Heat Exchanger Energy - Technology Profile 3) Wind Energy - Technology Profile 4) Wood Energy - Technology Profile $) Development of Alternatives e. Institute of Gas Technology (Jack Turner) 1) Gasified Coal Generation - Technology Profile 2) Development of Alternatives 3. SCOPE OF WORK OUTLINE AND SCHEDULE (Jack Turner) (See attached sheet) 4. | PUBLIC QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD APPENDIX G-1 Agencies and organizations contacted about our study were: (typed letter sent out is attached for your information). Alaska Power Administration Federal Building Juneau, AK 99801 U.S. Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 7002 Anchorage, AK 99510 State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities 4111 Aviation Drive Anchorage, AK 99502 State of Alaska Public Utilities Commission 338 Denali Anchorage, AK 99501 United States Department of Interior 1675 -*c™ Street Anchorage, AK 99501 University of Alaska 3211 Providence Drive Anchorage, AK 99504 Alaska Center for the Environment 1069 W. 6th Avenue Anchorage, AK 99501 State of Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development Energy and Power Development 338 Denali Anchorage, AK 99501 Division of Community Planning, Department of Community and Regional Affairs 225 Cordova Street, Building B Anchorage, AK 99501 University of Alaska Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center 707. "A" Street Anchorage, AK 99501 University of Alaska Institute of Social and Economic Research 707 "A" Street Anchorage, AK 99501 United Interior Bureau of Mines, Alaska Field Operations Center 2221 E. Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99504 States Department of Rural Community Action Program 327 Eagle Anchorage, AK 99501 Maniilaq Association Box 256 Kotzebue, AK 99752 NANA Development Corporation, Inc. 4707 Harding Drive Anchorage, AK 99503 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA BARROW, ALASKA COPENHAGEN, DENMARK DENVER, COLORADO jaretic dope oo , technical services SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Incorporated 420 L STREET * ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 * TELEPHONE (907) 276-0517 WASHINGTON, D.C. a January 6, 1982 Alaska Power Administration Federal Building Juneau, AK 99801 Dear Sirs: The Joint Venture of VECO, -R. Stefano and Arctic Slope Technical Services has been selected by the Alaska Power Authority to analyze for the city of Kotzebue their District Heat and Coal Utilization needs projected through the year 2002. During 1980 and 1981 reconnaissance studies of the energy potential and area needs were conducted. In part, these included studies of hydroelectric, coal, wind, geothermal, etc. We believe you are aware of these studies done for the State of Alaska Power Administration and Division of Energy and Power Development; they are: (1) Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue, Robert W. Retherford Consulting Engineers, June, 1980. (2) Kotzebue Geothermal Project, Energy Systems, Inc., October, 1980. (3) Kotzebue Geothermal Project, Energy Systems, Inc., January 1981. (4) Assessment of Coal Resources of Northwest Alaska, (Vols. I & II), Dames and Moore, December, 1980. (5) Assessment of the Feasibility of Utilization of the Coal ‘ Resources of Northwestern Alaska for Space Heating and - Electricity, (Draft), Dames and Moore, June, 1981. Kotzebue January 6, 1982 Page 2 We would be pleased to meet with you at your convenience to better brief you on our work efforts should you so desire. Additionally, we would appreciate any comments you may have on the above noted studies or other concerns which deal with electrical generation and district heating. If you have any comments, please furnish them to us by the middle of February. Your cooperation is appreciated. Sincerely yours, ARCTIC SLOPE TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. Morris J. Turner, P.E. Project Manager MIT: cm KO-1 APPENDIX H~-1 AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATION RESPONSES. Copies of correspondence received in response to our January 6th communications, to date, are enclosed. Department Of Energy Alaska Power Administration P.O. Box 50 Juneau, Alaska 99802 Mr. Morris J. Turner, P.E. Project Manager Arctic Slope Technical Services Incorporated 420 L Street Anchorage, AK 99501 Dear Mr. Turner: ARCTIC SLOPE TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. JAN 2 11982 January 19, 1982 Thank you for your January 6 notice of investigation of District Heating and Coal Utilization for Kotzebue for the Alaska Power Authority. We did present comments to the Alaska Power Authority on the Assessment of Coal Resources of Northwestern Alaska for Space Heating and Electricity, Dames and Moore, December 1980. A copy of our letter is enclosed. We have no other information to provide. Enclosure Sincerely, Robert J. Cross Administrator ET ee a Tween Arctic Environmental Information and Data Cente 707 A Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 PHONE (907) 279-4523 ARCTIC SLOPE . TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. JAN 2 11982 UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA Janaury 19, 1982 Mr. Morris J. Turner Project Manager Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc. 420 L Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Turner: This responds to your letter of January 6 relative to heat and coal utilization in the Kotzebue area. The subject studies are generally known to me. However, these reports have not been readily available to the natural resource and engineering profession. Thus, their efficacy has not been discussed widely. Moreover, these reports are only a small fraction of the available literature on coal, geothermal, and wind resources in northwest Alaska. Should you wish to examine other reports, references are available here at AEIDC and we would be happy to serve you. if erely, ave Hake E David M. Hickok Director DMH/pp