HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity of Huslia AEA 15003 REF Biomass Grant Application
Biomass Alaska Energy Authority – AEA 15003
Renewable Energy Grant Application
H
CITY OF HUSLIA
City of Huslia
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY – AEA 15003 RENEWABLE ENERGY
GRANT APPLICATION
APPLICATION CONTENTS
AEA APPLICATION – SECTION 1 THROUGH 9
AUTHORIZED SIGNERS – SECTION 10
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION – SECTION 11
RESUMES
LETTERS OF SUPPORT
FUEL
GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION
ASSESSMENT OF WOODY ENERGY RESOURCES
FEASIBLITY ANALYSIS AND CALCULATIONS
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT
BIOMASS OPERATIONAL PLAN
COST ESTIMATE
O&M COST ESTIMATE
PLAN SET DRAWINGS
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 1 of 25 7/2/14
Application Forms and Instructions
This instruction page and the following grant application constitutes the Grant Application Form for
Round VIII of the Renewable Energy Fund Heat Projects only. If your application is for energy
projects that will not primarily produce heat, please use the standard application form (see RFA
section 1.5). An electronic version of the Request for Applications (RFA) and both application
forms are available online at: www.akenergyauthority.org/REFund8.html.
If you need technical assistance filling out this application, please contact Shawn Calfa, the
Alaska Energy Authority Grants Administrator at (907) 771-3031 or at scalfa@aidea.org.
If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms
for each project.
Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application.
If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide
milestones and budget for each phase of the project.
In order to ensure that grants provide sufficient benefit to the public, AEA may limit
recommendations for grants to preliminary development phases in accordance with 3 ACC
107.605(1).
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding
for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding
phases are completed and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with your
submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed.
In the sections below, please enter responses in the spaces provided, often under the
section heading. You may add additional rows or space to the form to provide sufficient
space for the information, or attach additional sheets if needed.
REMINDER:
Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials
submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no
statutory exemptions apply.
All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final
recommendations are made to the legislature.
In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or proprietary
company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by the Authority. If you
want information to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their
application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept confidential.
If the Authority determines it is not confidential it will be treated as a public record in
accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon request.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 2 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
City of Huslia
Type of Entity: City Fiscal Year End: 2014
Tax ID # 92-0070378
Tax Status: ☐ For-profit ☐ Non-profit ☒ Government (check one)
Date of last financial statement audit: 6/30/2014
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
PO Box 70 58 Dakli Street
Huslia, Alaska 99746 Huslia, Alaska 99746
Telephone: Fax: Email:
(907) 829-2294 907-829-2224 elslesv@gci.net
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT / GRANTS MANAGER
Name: Eric Hanssen, P.E. Title: Sr. Engineering Project Manager
Mailing Address:
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
Division of Environmental Health & Engineering
Rural Energy Program
3900 Ambassador Drive, Suite 301
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Telephone: Fax: Email:
(907) 729-3620 (907) 729-4090 echanssen@anthc.org
1.1.1 APPLICANT ALTERNATE POINTS OF CONTACT
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Suzanne Wolf – Energy Program (907) 729-4065 (907) 729-3571 swolf@anthc.org
Heather Dongoski – Grant Specialist (907) 729-3049 (907) 729-3049 hdongoski@anthc.org
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 3 of 25 7/2/14
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your
application will be rejected.
1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box)
☐ An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, or
☐ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
☒ A local government, or
☐ A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (continued)
Please check as appropriate.
☒ 1.2.2 Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for the project by the
applicant’s board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the
applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing
authority is necessary. (Indicate by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.3 As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow
procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement
(Section 3 of the RFA). (Indicate by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.4 If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the award as
identified in the Standard Grant Agreement template at
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/vREFund8.html. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted
and submitted with the application.) (Indicate by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant funds for
the benefit of the general public. If no please describe the nature of the project and who will
be the primary beneficiaries. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 4 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
This section is intended to be no more than a 2-3 page overview of your project.
2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project). Type in space below.
Huslia Water System and Clinic Biomass Boiler Project
2.2 Project Location –
Include the physical location of your project and name(s) of the community or communities that will
benefit from your project in the subsections below.
2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude, street address, or community name.
Latitude and longitude coordinates may be obtained from Google Maps by finding you project’s
location on the map and then right clicking with the mouse and selecting “What is here? The
coordinates will be displayed in the Google search window above the map in a format as follows:
61.195676.-149.898663. If you would like assistance obtaining this information please contact
AEA at 907-771-3031.
65.701462, -156.389489
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
Huslia, Alaska
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
☐ Wind to Heat ☒ Biomass or Biofuels
☐ Hydro to Heat ☐ Solar Thermal
☐ Heat Recovery from Existing Sources ☐ Heat Pumps
☐ Other (Describe) ☐
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Pre-Construction Construction
☐ Reconnaissance ☒ Final Design and Permitting
☐ Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☒ Construction
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 5 of 25 7/2/14
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of the proposed heat project.
In 2013, AEA provided funding to the community of Huslia through the Renewable Energy Fund for
initial planning and conceptual design of a biomass heating system to serve community buildings.
Under this previous grant, Huslia partnered with ANTHC to engineer a conceptual design and to
develop an initial woody biomass resource assessment and a draft operations plan. The proposed
project will build from this initial work to complete the design and construction of a biomass heating
system to serve the Health Clinic and Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant in Huslia, Alaska.
Specifically, this project will install a manually-fed cordwood boiler to be housed in a prefabricated
building and integrated into the existing buildings using circulating glycol heat transfer loops.
Modifications to end user building heating systems will be carried out as needed to ensure effective
utilization of biomass heat. The estimated heating oil reduction resulting from this biomass project
is projected to save the Clinic and Water Treatment Plant 8,474 gallons of heating oil per year. For
more detailed information refer to the attached Huslia, Alaska 2014 Biomass Study.
2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT
Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this heat project, (such as
reduced fuel costs, lower energy costs, local jobs created, etc.)
Based on the attached 2014 Huslia, Alaska Biomass Study, this project is projected to displace
8,474 gallons of heating oil per year, resulting in an annual savings to the community of $34,742.
Over the 25-year life of the system, the community is projected to displace 211,850 gallons of
heating oil, at a present value of $868,550.
This project will promote sustainability of the community by not only reducing dependence on fuel
oil for heating, but also by keeping the dollars spent on locally harvested wood in the local
economy. This project also provides the added benefit of creating jobs for local wood cutters and
biomass system operators in a rural community where employment is hard to come by.
2.6 PROJECT BUDGET OVERVIEW
Briefly discuss the amount of funds needed, the anticipated sources of funds, and the nature and
source of other contributions to the project.
The requested grant funding is $499,000.
Design requested AEA funding $83,000. Construction requested for AEA funding $416,000.
The total anticipated project cost is $503,990 including ANTHC’s in-kind contribution for project
and program management services.
In section 2.7.8 - Energy efficiency improvements to buildings to be heated (upgraded within the
past 5 years or committed prior to proposed project completion): $85,000 has been allocated to the
City of Huslia from three funding sources: State of Alaska direct legislative appropriation to ANTHC
to implement energy efficiencies in rural communities; Denali Commission Energy Efficiency
funding and USDA RD Rural Alaska Village Grant Program, Technical Assistance and Training
Grant.
In section 2.7.10 – Additional performance monitoring equipment expenses of $15,000 will be
covered under an Environmental Protection Agency project that ANTHC was awarded to install
remote monitoring systems in select rural communities.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 6 of 25 7/2/14
2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY
Summarize the grant request and the project’s total costs and benefits below.
Costs for the Current Phase Covered by this Grant
(Summary of funds requested)
2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application $ 499,000
2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $
2.7.3 In-kind match to be provided $ 4,990 (ANTHC Proj. Mangt.)
2.7.4 Other grant funds to be provided $
2.7.5 Total Costs for Requested Phase of Project (sum of 2.7.1 through 2.7.4) $ 503,990
Other items for consideration
2.7.6 Other grant applications not yet approved $
2.7.7 Biomass or Biofuel Inventory on hand $
2.7.8 Energy efficiency improvements to buildings
to be heated (upgraded within the past 5 years or
committed prior to proposed project completion) $ 85,000
Project Costs & Benefits
(Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully
operational project)
2.7.9 Total Project Cost
Summary from Cost Worksheet, Section 4.4.4, including
estimates through construction.
$ 503,990
2.7.10 Additional Performance Monitoring Equipment not
covered by the project but required for the Grant
Only applicable to construction phase projects
$ 15,000 (ANTHC Remote
Monitoring Prog. Funds)
2.7.11 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings)
The economic model used by AEA is available at
www.akenergyauthority.org/REFund8.html. This
economic model may be used by applicants but is not
required. Other economic models developed by the
applicant may be used, however the final benefit/cost
ratio used will be derived from the AEA model to
ensure a level playing field for all applicants.
$ 34,742 / year
2.7.12 Other Public Benefit
If you can calculate the benefit in terms of dollars please
provide that number here and explain how you
calculated that number in Section 5 below.
Cost of local biomass fuel is assumed to
equal project’s local employment
benefit, resulting in a net zero effect
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 7 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Describe who will be responsible for managing the project and provide a plan for successfully
completing the project within the scope, schedule and budget proposed in the application.
3.1 Project Manager
Tell us who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information, a resume
and references for the manager(s). In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate
PDFs if the applicant would like those excluded from the web posting of this application. If the
applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management
support. If the applicant anticipates project management assistance from AEA or another
government entity, state that in this section.
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) is a statewide non-profit health services
organization, formed by congress in 1997 to assume the roles and duties of the Indian Health
Service (IHS) in Alaska. ANTHC is the largest tribal self-governance entity in the United States,
with over 1,900 employees and an annual operating budget in excess of $475M. Approximately
31% of this funding is from a compact agreement with IHS. Approximately 25% of the operating
revenue originates from other federal and state grants and contracts. ANTHC has a 16-year history
of clean audits, conducted by an independent accounting firm in accordance with the Single Audit
Act.
The Division of Environmental Health & Engineering, Rural Energy Program:
ANTHC Rural Energy Initiative Senior Engineering Project Manager Eric Hanssen, P.E., LEED AP
has been with ANTHC since 2007. As part of ANTHC’s Rural Energy Initiative, he oversees project
development, design, and construction of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects for
remote communities across the entire state of Alaska. During his time with ANTHC, Eric has also
served as a Project Manager for rural water and wastewater infrastructure projects, as well as a
Health Facilities Engineer focused on hospital and clinic construction and renovation projects. Prior
to joining ANTHC, Eric served seven years as a civil engineer and officer for the US Air Force in
Alaska, Washington DC, Florida, and Iraq. He holds a BS in Environmental Engineering from the
US Air Force Academy in Colorado and a Master’s in Environmental Policy and Economics from
the University of Maryland, College Park.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 8 of 25 7/2/14
3.2 Project Schedule and Milestones
Please fill out the schedule below. Be sure to identify key tasks and decision points in in your
project along with estimated start and end dates for each of the milestones and tasks. Please
clearly identify the beginning and ending of all phases of your proposed project.
Please fill out form provided below. You may add additional rows as needed.
The Milestones noted below, are based on a typical construction season. If the project is awarded, before it is
executed, updated and realistic milestones will be completed by ANTHC and provided to AEA.
Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date
Conduct Kickoff Meeting 11/1/2015 11/1/2015
Biomass Harvesting Plan 11/1/2015 6/1/2016
Biomass Operations Plan 11/1/2015 6/1/2016
65% design w/cost estimate 11/1/2015 4/1/2016
Heat Sales Agreement 1/1/2016 4/1/2016
Final Design documents 6/1/2016 6/1/2016
Pre-construction meeting 7/1/2016 7/1/2016
Construction 7/1/2016 9/1/2016
Commissioning 10/1/2016 11/1/2016
Final Inspection and follow-up 11/1/2016 12/1/2016
Project closeout 12/1/2016 12/1/2017
Project management throughout (ANTHC in-kind) 11/1/2016 12/1/2017
1.) Project Planning
2.) Construction
3.) Project Closeout
4.) Project Management and Match Activities
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 9 of 25 7/2/14
3.3 Project Resources
Describe the personnel, contractors, personnel or firms, equipment, and services you will use to
accomplish the project. Include any partnerships or commitments with other entities you have or
anticipate will be needed to complete your project. Describe any existing contracts and the
selection process you may use for major equipment purchases or contracts. Include brief resumes
and references for known, key personnel, contractors, and suppliers as an attachment to your
application.
The City of Huslia will be partnering with ANTHC and the Interior Regional Housing Authority
(IRHA) to manage and carry out the proposed project. ANTHC has developed its design and
construction experience in the field of rural community biomass heating systems over the past
several years and has completed or is currently completing biomass projects in the communities of
Elim, Kobuk, Anvik, Hughes, and Koyukuk.
The project manager will be supported in the design of the project by Chong Park, ANTHC Lead
Mechanical Engineer, and Dave Reed, ANTHC Lead Electrical Engineer. To the extent possible,
local labor will be used during construction. ANTHC or IRHA will use its purchasing and contracting
resources for material procurement and delivery. IRHA, who has worked extensively with the
community of Huslia and has an experienced staff of licensed construction tradespeople, has
indicated their interest in partnering with the community and ANTHC to construct the project once
design is complete. Resumes of potential alternate resources and key personnel are attached to
this application.
3.4 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. Please
provide an alternative contact person and their contact information.
Written project progress reports will be provided to the AEA project manager as required by the
grant. Meetings will be conducted by ANTHC, the Village, and AEA & IRHA to discuss the status of
the project. Regular coordination meetings will be held between AEA and ANTHC regarding all
projects.
3.5 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
All biomass projects face the risk of improper operation and maintenance that could reduce heat
produced by the system and overall benefit to the community. Training and a detailed operations
plan are included in this project to develop local capacity for technical operations and maintenance,
as well as business management required to make this biomass energy project successful and
sustainable. In addition, a detailed biomass harvest plan will be developed as part of the project to
make certain that legal and regulatory aspects of resource harvesting are followed, and to ensure
sustainability of the local wood resources. In general, there are minimal technical risks involved
with the proposed plan to install a biomass boiler to provide heat to the water system, washeteria,
and clinic. ANTHC’s experience in design, construction, commissioning and operating rural
community biomass systems will serve to minimize risk during each phase of the project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 10 of 25 7/2/14
3.6 Project Accountant(s)
Tell us who will be performing the accounting of this Project for the Grantee and include contact
information, a resume and references for the project accountant(s). In the electronic submittal,
please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would like those excluded from the web
posting of this application. If the applicant does not have a project accountant indicate how you
intend to solicit project accounting support.
The City of Huslia will use the accounting resources of ANTHC. ANTHC’s Division of
Environmental Health accounting department is led by the Construction Controller, Diane Chris.
The Construction Finance Department is comprised of 10 staff that handle all DEHE’s accounting
functions. A Senior Accountant has been designated to support any ANTHC Grant awards
including AEA financial reporting. Key Staff resumes are included in this application.
ANTHC has a 16-year history of clean audits, conducted by an independent accounting firm in
accordance with the Single Audit Act.
3.7 Financial Accounting System
Discuss the accounting system that will be used to account for project costs and who will be the
primary user of the accounting system.
The project finances will be kept in Spectrum job cost accounting software used by ANTHC. The
software accounts expenditures by phase code and cost types. Purchasing, contracting, and
accounting are the primary users of the system with the information always available to the project
team.
3.8 Financial Management Controls
Discuss the controls that will be utilized to ensure that only costs that are reasonable, ordinary and
necessary will be allocated to this project. Also discuss the controls in place that will ensure that
no expenses for overhead, or any other unallowable costs will be requested for reimbursement
from the Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program.
The City will enter into a cooperative project agreement (CPA) with ANTHC to implement the
project as well as financial management. ANTHC’s cost controls have been implemented to comply
with OMB cost control principles and requirements of all state and federal grants. ANTHC has a
16-year history of clean audits, conducted by an independent accounting firm in accordance with
the Single Audit Act. ANTHC will provide records and accounting records available to state and
federal auditors on request.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 11 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to undertake
with grant funds.
If some work has already been completed on the project and the funding request is for an
advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases are
satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
4.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available.
Discuss the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be
available, in the market, to be served by your project. For pre-construction applications, describe
the resource to the extent known. For design and permitting or construction projects, please
provide feasibility documents, design documents, and permitting documents (if applicable) as
attachments to this application.
To prepare for this project, Huslia has partnered with ANTHC to complete an initial wood resource
evaluation. ANTHC, in turn, contracted with the Tanana Chief Conference (TCC) Forestry Program
to assess the forest resources around Huslia that would supply the energy feedstock required to
support the proposed biomass project.
Using LandFire imagery data, GIS, and relational database software, TCC has produced a
preliminary assessment of the biomass energy resources within a 25-mile radius surrounding
Huslia. (See next section for additional detail).
As part of the proposed project, a detailed Biomass Harvesting Plan will be developed via
professional forester services, direct community involvement and coordination with the local
ANCSA village corporation, K’oyitl’ots’ina Ltd., and other major landowners surrounding Huslia.
As mentioned previously, this project will promote sustainability of the community by not only using
local wood resources to reduce dependence on fuel oil for heating, but also by creating local jobs
and by keeping monies spent on energy in the local economy.
The only realistic alternative to utilizing the biomass boiler system is to continue to burn fuel oil to
provide the heat required by the water system and clinic. Heat recovery from the power plant was
evaluated by ANTHC and was determined to be non-viable because the AVEC power plant is
approximately 3500 ft. away from the project buildings.
4.1.1 For Biomass Project only
Identify any wood inventory questions, such as:
Ownership/Accessibility. Who owns the land and are their limitations and restrictions to
accessing the biomass resource?
Inventory data. How much biomass is available on an annual basis and what types (species)
are there, if known? Please attach any forest inventory reports
The primary landowners in the Huslia area are the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS),
K’oyitl’ots’ina Ltd., Doyon Ltd., and the State of Alaska. Native Allotments are also present in the
area but would not be considered for harvest for this project. Each landowner has an annual
allowable cut that indicates the maximum amount of wood, in cords, that can be harvested without
significantly affecting the resource sustainability. The amount of wood considered for this project is
far below the annual allowable cut for each entity.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 12 of 25 7/2/14
According to the attached August 2014 “Huslia Alaska Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy” by
the TCC Forestry Program, the annual allowable harvest within a 25-mile radius of Huslia is 73,644
tons or approximately 57,000 cords per year. With this project’s proposed wood resource
requirement of 77 cords per year, the preliminary assessment indicates that local biomass can be
sustainably harvested from as close as 1-2 miles from Huslia. The woody biomass resource in the
vicinity of Huslia consists primarily of Black Spruce, Birch and White Spruce, which are all suitable
for the proposed cordwood heating system.
For additional biomass resource details, please refer to the attached August 2014 “Huslia, Alaska
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources.”
4.2 Existing Energy System
4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Heating Energy System
Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about the
number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation.
The water treatment plant, washeteria, and clinic use oil fired boilers and circulating glycol hydronic
heating systems to provide building and domestic hot water and community water system heating.
Unit heaters and baseboard heating elements are present to fulfill space heating requirements.
The water treatment plant and washeteria building uses two boilers rated at 234 MBH each. The
two boilers were installed in 2008. The boilers run at approximately 85% efficiency. The clinic
uses two boilers rated at 175 MBH each. The two boilers were installed in 2005.
4.2.2 Existing Heating Energy Resources Used
Briefly discuss your understanding of the existing energy resources. Include a brief discussion of
any impact the project may have on existing energy infrastructure and resources.
The water plant, washeteria, and clinic use #1 heating oil for all of their heating energy needs. This
fuel is kept in a large tank farm and distributed throughout the year. Implementing a biomass boiler
system will reduce or eliminate the need for heating oil, leaving the existing fuel storage capacity
available as a backup heating source. The existing fuel supply will be used on an as-needed basis
during emergencies, system maintenance, or demand peaks.
4.2.3 Existing Heating Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
Heating oil must be barged in during summer months. The expected impact of this project will be to
reduce the overall heating oil use by approximately 8,474 gallons annually. While this reduction will
not change the price of fuel oil in Huslia, it will significantly reduce the community’s consumption of
oil, replacing that consumption with locally harvested wood.
Through overall reduction in operating costs for the washeteria and water system, this project also
has the potential to reduce fees for washeteria customers for laundry and showers, as well as for
residential water and sewer customers.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 13 of 25 7/2/14
4.3 Proposed System
Include information necessary to describe the system you are intending to develop and address
potential system design, land ownership, permits, and environmental issues.
4.3.1 System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
Optimum installed capacity
Anticipated capacity factor
Anticipated annual generation
Anticipated barriers
Basic integration concept
Delivery methods
Using cordwood as fuel, the biomass boiler system will transfer heat via circulating glycol loops to
heat the existing hydronic heating systems of the end-user buildings.
Although the proposed biomass system is estimated to fulfill roughly 80% of the heating
requirement for the end user builidngs, it is imperative that the water treatment plant/washeteria
and clinic heating systems remain operational at all times.
The biomass boiler has an integral water jacket that is heated by the cord wood boiler. The hot
water is piped through a heat exchanger that transfers the water heat to an intermediate loop filled
with glycol. The intermediate loop is circulated through arctic pipe between the biomass boiler
heat exchanger and a heat exchanger located within each end-user building, transferring the heat
to the given locations before cycling back to the biomass boiler building.
END-USER BUILDING TIE-IN
End-user building tie-ins typically consist of brazed plate heat exchangers with motorized bypass
valves to prevent back feeding heat to the biomass boiler. The circulating system will pass through
the biomass system heat exchanger prior to entering the fuel-oil boilers. The glycol is preheated
by the biomass heat and upon entering the fuel oil boilers at a higher temperature allows the boiler
controls to keep the boilers running for a shorter period of time in order to maintain the system.
Where required, a heat injection pump will be used to avoid introducing excessive pressure drop in
the building heating system. The anticipated delivered biomass heat supply temperature is
between 130-180F. When there is insufficient biomass heat to meet the building heating load, the
building heating system will fire and add heat. Off-the-shelf controls will lock out the biomass boiler
system when there is insufficient heat available.
Typical indoor piping will be type L copper tube with solder joints. Isolation valves will be solder
end bronze ball valves or flanged butterfly valves. All piping will be insulated with a minimum of 1-
inch insulation with an all-service jacket. Flexibility will be provided where required for thermal
expansion and differential movement. Air vents, thermometers, pressure gauges, drain valves,
and pressure relief valves will also be provided.
The facility will also receive a BTU meter to provide totalized biomass heat use as well as
instantaneous use. In addition, Remote Monitoring of energy performance will be installed by
ANTHC under separate program funds, to provide continuous, real-time reporting of system data.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 14 of 25 7/2/14
4.3.2 Land Ownership
Identify potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project
or how you intend to approach land ownership and access issues.
The property on which the biomass boiler building is to be sited is owned by the City of Huslia. The
Clinic is owned and operated by the Huslia Traditional Council. There are no apparent conflicts
with rights-of-ways for the biomass boiler building and arctic piping between the biomass boiler
building and the end user building, as they are entirely sited on City and/or Tribal property.
4.3.3 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address
outstanding permit issues.
List of applicable permits
Anticipated permitting timeline
Identify and discuss potential barriers
No permits are anticipated for this biomass boiler project. If during the course of the project, it is
determined that permits are required, ANTHC will ensure they are obtained and followed.
4.3.4 Environmental
Address whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will be
addressed:
Threatened or endangered species
Habitat issues
Wetlands and other protected areas
Archaeological and historical resources
Land development constraints
Telecommunications interference
Aviation considerations
Visual, aesthetics impacts
Identify and discuss other potential barriers
ANTHC will consider all potential environmental concerns associated with this project. ANTHC
uses the comprehensive Indian Health Service (IHS) environmental review procedures for
conducting environmental analysis of all health and sanitation facilities projects in all stages of
development, as outlined in the IHS environmental review Manual issued in January 2007.
4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues
(Total Estimated Costs and Projected Revenues)
The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding requested and
any previous work the applicant may have done on the project. Applicants must reference the
source of their cost data. For example: Applicant’s records or analysis, industry standards,
consultant or manufacturer’s estimates.
4.4.1 Project Development Cost
Provide detailed project cost information based on your current knowledge and understanding of
the project. Cost information should include the following:
Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase
Requested grant funding
Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in-kind
Identification of other funding sources
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 15 of 25 7/2/14
Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system
Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
The requested grant funding is $499,000.
Design requested AEA funding $83,000. Construction requested for AEA funding $416,000.
The total anticipated project cost is $503,990 including ANTHC’s in-kind contribution for project
and program management services.
A detailed construction cost estimate is contained in the attached Huslia, Alaska Biomass Study.
In section 2.7.8 - Energy efficiency improvements to buildings to be heated (upgraded within the
past 5 years or committed prior to proposed project completion): $85,000 has been allocated to the
City of Huslia from three funding sources: State of Alaska direct legislative appropriation to ANTHC
to implement energy efficiencies in rural communities; Denali Commission Energy Efficiency
funding and USDA RD Rural Alaska Village Grant Program, Technical Assistance and Training
Grant.
In section 2.7.10 – Additional performance monitoring equipment expenses of $15,000 will be
covered under an Environmental Protection Agency project that ANTHC was awarded to install
remote monitoring systems in select rural communities.
4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Include anticipated O&M costs for any new facilities constructed and how these would be funded
by the applicant.
(Note: Operational costs are not eligible for grant funds however grantees are required to meet
ongoing reporting requirements for the purpose of recording the impacts of AEA projects on the
communities they serve.)
O&M costs of biomass boiler systems are primarily driven by the need for an operator to load and
fire the boiler day-to-day during the heating season—up to every 3-4 hours during times of highest
heating demand. This likely means that the operator will be required to work more hours.
Maintenance of the biomass boiler system is also critical to its success, and will require periodic
additional labor for cleaning, adding and testing of boiler water, and replacement of parts as
needed. According to the completed feasibility analysis, total O&M costs for the proposed biomass
system are estimated to be $8,182 per year.
4.4.3 Heating Purchase/Sale
The heat purchase/sale information should include the following:
Identification of potential energy buyer(s)/customer(s)
Potential heat purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
The City of Huslia is the owner/operator of the Washeteria/Water Treatment Plant, and outlined in
the draft Biomass Operations Plan, will also own and operate the new biomass heating system.
The Huslia Traditional Council is the owner/operator of the community Health Clinic, and will pay
$300 per cord of fuel wood used to heat the clinic. The quantity of wood used to heat the two end
user facilities will be determined by BTU metering for each building. A formal agreement between
the City and Traditional council will be established during development of the project’s final
operations plan.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 16 of 25 7/2/14
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in
evaluating the project.
Please fill out the form provided below and provide most recent heating fuel invoice that supports
the amount identified in “Project Benefits” subpart b below.
Renewable Energy Source
The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a
sustainable basis.
Annual average resource availability.
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomass fuel)
According to the attached “Huslia Alaska Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy” by the TCC
Forestry Program, the annual allowable harvest within a 25-mile radius of Huslia is 73,644 tons or
approximately 57,000 cords per year.
Existing Energy Generation and Usage
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 4 boilers, 2 per building
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other WTP boilers 234 MBH, Clinic boilers 175 MBH
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Oil-Fired, #1 Diesel
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 5-10 years
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 80%
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $300 (existing boiler maintenance)
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $200 (existing boiler maintenance)
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal]
Other
iii. Peak Load
iv. Average Load
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency
vii. Future trends
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] 14,580 gal
1 The Railbelt grid connects all customers of Chugach Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric
Association, the City of Seward Electric Department, Matanuska Electric Association and Anchorage Municipal Light and Power.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 17 of 25 7/2/14
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
Proposed System Design Capacity and Fuel Usage
(Include any projections for continued use of non-renewable fuels)
a) Proposed renewable capacity
(Wind, Hydro, Biomass, other)
[kW or MMBtu/hr]
Biomass: 232,742 Btu/hr
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Heat [MMBtu] 1136 MMBtu
c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood or pellets [cords, green tons,
dry tons]
77 cords
iv. Other Heating Oil: 6,106 gal
Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $416,000
b) Development cost $83,000
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $8,182
d) Annual fuel cost $23,100 (cord wood @ $300/cord)
Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity
ii. Heat 8,474 gal
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $4.10
c) Other economic benefits Local jobs for wood harvesters and biomass operator
d) Alaska public benefits Enhanced forest fire risk mitigation through removal
of dead standing fuel
Heat Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for heat purchase/sale $300/cord
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 18 of 25 7/2/14
Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio
Payback (years) 14.36 years
4.4.5 Impact on Rates
Please address the following items related to the proposed location of the heating project. If more
than one building will be impacted, please address this information for each building.
Building name
Huslia Water Treatment Plant/Washeteria, and Clinic
Type or primary usage of the building
Drinking water production, laundry and shower services, primary healthcare services
Location
Huslia
Hours of operation
24
Single structure or multiple units
Multiple
Total square footage
4,659 SF
Electrical consumption per year
Heating oil/fuel consumption per year
14,580 gallons of #1 heating oil per year
Average number of occupants
4
Has an energy audit been performed? When? Please provide a copy of the energy audit, if
applicable.
An Energy Audit of the Washeteria / Water Treatment Plant took place January 2014
(See Attached)
Have building thermal energy efficiency upgrades been completed?
o If applicable, please provide evidence of efficiency improvements including cost and
anticipated savings associated with upgrades.
Energy efficiency upgrades recommend by the audit are planned for installation in 2015
o Estimated annual heating fuel savings
$15,478 / year (See attached 2014 Huslia Washeteria/WTP Energy Audit Report)
If the building is not yet constructed please provide evidence of the value of planned
building envelope efficiency investments beyond typical construction practices. Include
anticipated savings associated with efficiency investments if available.
N/A
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 19 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 5– PROJECT BENEFIT
Explain the economic and public benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings, and
how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project.
The benefits information should include the following:
Potential annual fuel displacement (gallons and dollars) over the lifetime of the evaluated
renewable energy project. In order for the applicant to receive credit for heating fuel
displaced the applicant must provide the most recent invoice for heating fuel purchased.
Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Heat Purchase Agreement price, RCA
tariff, or cost based rate)
Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits)
Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy
subsidies or programs that might be available)
Discuss the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project
The potential fuel displacement is 8,474 gallons of the 14,580 gallons of fuel to be used by the
water system, washeteria, and clinic. The cost of the fuel is $4.10 per gallon (2014 feasibility
study). The annual cost of fuel displaced for the water treatment plant therefore equals $34,742.
Collection of wood is an important task that can create income and keep city money within the
community. To operate the biomass boiler, the city will have to purchase cords of wood from local
harvesters, which is anticipated to sell at $300 per cord. This money is not exported to outside
entities and stays within the community as a result.
There are no other known incentives or revenue streams that will result from this project. The
benefits to the community of this project include a reduction in the amount of fuel required by the
community, and a direct benefit to each community member due to the lower cost to produce,
store, and deliver water.
SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY
Discuss the operation of the completed project so that it will be sustainable.
Include at a minimum:
Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered.
How the maintenance and operations of the completed project will be financed for the life of the
project
Identification of operational issues that could arise.
A description of operational costs including on-going support for any back-up or existing
systems that may be require to continue operation
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits
This project increases the sustainability of the community water system and health clinic by
reducing operating costs over the life of the project. The minimal maintenance and operating cost
can be funded out of its revenue stream and out of its savings over the 25-year life of the project.
The biomass harvest plan details how to proceed with the collection of wood in order to best keep
the resource protected for a sustainable project. Following the harvest plan will make sure that the
collection of wood does not become more difficult by eliminating the option of collecting from the
closest resources and moving further away.
The attached draft Operations Plan details responsibilities and business structure required to
operate the biomass system in a sustainable manner. This operations plan will be refined and
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 20 of 25 7/2/14
finalized as part of the proposed project. The City of Huslia is committed to meeting all reporting
requirements over the entire length of the reporting period.
SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS
Discuss what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with
work once your grant is approved.
Tell us what you may have already accomplished on the project to date and identify other grants
that may have been previously awarded for this project and the degree you have been able to
meet the requirements of previous grants.
A detailed biomass study has been completed and is attached to this application. In addition,
conceptual drawings have been completed and a biomass resource assessment has been
developed and is attached to this document. The intent is to proceed with this project as soon as
practical once design and construction funding is available.
In 2013, ANTHC maintained a robust operating budget for all four divisions. ANTHC operates
dozens of programs and projects. ANTHC receives funding from numerous well-recognized
sources; this demonstrates our capacity to manage this grant. Funders include the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Agriculture, Indian Health Service,
Denali Commission, Centers for Disease Control, Department of Energy, Department of Health &
Human Services, Department of Commerce, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Mayo
Clinic, National Native American AIDS Prevention Center, Rasmuson and Robert Wood Johnson
Foundations, State of Alaska, University of Washington, and others.
ANTHC has developed its design and construction experience in the field of rural community
biomass heating systems over the past several years and has completed or is currently completing
biomass projects in the communities of Elim, Kobuk, Anvik, Hughes, and Koyukuk.
SECTION 8 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION
Discuss local support and opposition, known or anticipated, for the project. Include letters of
support or other documentation of local support from the community that would benefit from this
project. The Documentation of support must be dated within one year of the RFA date of July 2,
2014.
The City of Huslia is submitting the grant application. The Huslia Traditional Council, the local tribal
entity, is also supportive of this project as demonstrated by their participation in the recently
completed feasibility study and conceptual design. ANTHC is providing project management
services as a match for the project, as well as a letter of support. In addition, IRHA has been
working with the City of Huslia for several years on development of a community biomass heating
system, and has demonstrated their region-level support and focus on enhancing the sustainability
of Huslia’s and other Interior communities’ biomass systems (see attached letter of support).
There is no known opposition to this project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 21 of 25 7/2/14
SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET
Tell us how much you are seeking in grant funds. Include any investments to date and funding
sources, how much is being requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as
an applicant.
9.1 Funding sources and Financial Commitment
Provide a narrative summary regarding funding source and your financial commitment to the
project
The cost estimates presented in the table below represent the anticipated costs of the proposed
system, taking into account recent design and construction costs of similar projects. Large
financial risks are associated with construction work in rural Alaska. Expenses for potential
changes in site conditions, unknown or unforeseen issues, and logistics have been incorporated
into these costs. ANTHC’s match may actually work out to be much higher than shown, as this
work may be performed at ANTHC’s billing rate and may exceed the hours anticipated.
Any excess time/value of the project management in-kind match does not replace other financial
cost elements of this project. The anticipated dates of completion are projected based on the
likelihood of funding, other ongoing work in the city, and coordination with other statewide design
and construction activities.
An energy audit for the Huslia water treatment plant was conducted in January 2014, and the
audit’s proposed energy efficiency measures will be the basis of the energy efficiency upgrades on
this project.
9.2 Cost Estimate for Metering Equipment
Please provide a short narrative, and cost estimate, identifying the metering equipment, and its
related use to comply with the operations reporting requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the
Request for Applications.
Metering and monitoring equipment for this water plant are estimated to be $15,000. A KEP BTU
meter will be installed equipped with a Monnit pulse counter. This data is to be fed through a
cellular internet connection to the central Monnit server and the ANTHC web site. This is will be
funded out of ANTHC’s current remote monitoring program and is not included in the project
budget.
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 22 of 25 7/2/14
Applications MUST include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in
section 2.3.2 of this application, (I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III. Final
Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction and Commissioning). Please use the tables provided
below to detail your proposed project’s budget. Be sure to use one table for each phase of your
project.
If you have any question regarding how to prepare these tables or if you need assistance preparing
the application please feel free to contact AEA at 907-771-3031 or by emailing the Grants
Administrator, Shawn Calfa, at scalfa@aidea.org.
DESIGN PHASE
Milestone or Task
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching Funds:
Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See Milestone
list below. )
Project Management Throughout $0 $830
In-kind 1% ANTHC
project/program
management
$830
Conduct Kickoff Meeting 11/1/2015 $1,000 $1,000
65% design w/cost estimate 4/1/2016 $33,000 $33,000
Biomass Harvesting Plan 6/1/2016 $15,000 $15,000
Biomass Operations Plan 6/1/2016 $10,000 $10,000
Final Design documents 6/1/2016 $24,000 $24,000
TOTALS $83,000 $830 $83,830
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $0
Travel & Per Diem $0
Equipment
Materials & Supplies
Contractual Services * $83,000 $830 $83,830
Construction Services
Other
TOTALS $83,000 $830 $83,830
Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Grant Application – Heat Projects
AEA 15003 Page 23 of 25 7/2/14
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Milestone or Task
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching Funds:
Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See Milestone
list below. )
Energy Efficiency Upgrades 10/1/2015
Project Management Throughout $4,160
In-kind ANTHC
project/program
management
$4,160
Pre-construction meeting 7/1/2016 $3,500 $3,500
Construction 9/1/2016 $388,500 $388,500
Commissioning & Training 11/1/2016 $15,000 $15,000
Final Inspection and follow-up 12/1/2016 $7,500 $7,500
Project Closeout 12/2/2017 $1,500 $1,500
$416,000 $4,160 $420,160
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits
Travel & Per Diem $0
Equipment
Materials & Supplies $0
Contractual Services * $416,000 $4,160 $420,160
Construction Services
Other
TOTALS $416,000 $4,160 $420,160
City of Huslia
LETTERS OF SUPPORT
Tanana Chiefs
Conference
Tribal Empowerment through Health, Employment, Economic Development and Family Services
122 1st Avenue
Fairbanks, AK 99701
907-452-8251
www.tananachiefs.org
September 9th 2014
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Fund Committee
813 W. Northern Lights Blvd
Anchorage, AK 99503
Re: Letter of Support for Huslia to the Alaska Energy Authority Renewable Energy Fund Round VIII
Dear Alaska Energy Authority
The Tanana Chiefs Conference is writing this letter to express its full support to Huslia Tribal Council’s
application to the Alaska Energy Authority’s (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund (REF) for a biomass heating
project in their community.
Tanana Chiefs Conference appreciates the work of the AEA on funding these projects and supporting
rural communities as they work to transition from community reliance on outside energy sources to self‐
reliance on local resources. TCC supports all of our tribal government’s efforts to reduce dependence on
imported fuel oil, provide economic development in the community and make each village a more
sustainable place to live.
TCC has been actively involved in working with ANTHC, Interior Regional Housing Authority and other
project partners on developing, implementing and supporting biomass projects across the interior of
Alaska. TCC enthusiastically supports Huslia’s efforts to pursue the construction of a biomass system in
their community and we commit that our rural energy department will provide staff time and travel to
support them with the implementation of this project, if funded. We would appreciate AEA’s careful
consideration of this application.
Sincerely,
David Pelunis‐Messier
Rural Energy Coordinator
Tanana Chiefs Conference
122 1st Ave Suite 600
Fairbanks, AK 99701
Dave.pm@tananachiefs.org
City of Huslia
Page 6
FUEL
City of Huslia
GOVERNERING BODY
RESOLUTION
City of Huslia
ASSESSMENT OF WOODY ENERGY
RESOURCES
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources
Huslia, Alaska
Presented to:
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
3900 Ambassador Drive
Anchorage, AK 99508
By:
Will Putman
Tanana Chiefs Conference, Forestry Program
122 First Ave., Suite 600
Fairbanks, AK 99701
August, 2014
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
i
Executive Summary
As part of an effort to assess the feasibility of proposed biomass energy projects at the
community of Huslia in Interior Alaska, an assessment of woody biomass resources was
conducted for the vicinity of Huslia. The assessment attempts to leverage existing
information as much as possible, including forest inventory information compiled by Tanana
Chiefs Conference for previous projects and classified satellite imagery. The area
considered for the assessment was defined by a 25-mile radius from Huslia, approximately
1.25 million acres. A number of cost parameters were assumed and used to estimate costs
of harvesting, transporting, and managing biomass resources across the landscape. The
assessments result in woody biomass stocking and annual allowable cut estimates stored
and maintained in a geodatabase, with the ability to query and report data by land cover
type, ownership, biomass growth, biomass cost, distance from village, and other
parameters.
Highlights of the resulting data analysis include:
The percentage of land area determined to be associated with forested timber-
bearing strata in the Huslia project area was determined to be 35%.
As determined in the analysis, total woody biomass in the Huslia project area was
determined to be about 6.4 million air-dry tons.
Using some simple growth modeling and estimates of existing stocking, estimates
of Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) were generated. Total AAC for the entire Huslia
project area was estimated at 73,644 tons.
Using the cost parameters assumed in the analysis, the cost of harvesting,
transporting and managing the woody biomass was determined to range from
$46 to $223 per ton. Not surprisingly, the most expensive biomass is farthest
from the community because of the effect of the estimated transportation cost
parameters.
There are extensive biomass stocks on Federal, State, and ANCSA corporation
land holdings, but the area closest to the village is dominated by ANCSA
corporation ownerships.
The data indicate the presence of significant amounts of recoverable woody
biomass, particularly when viewed in terms of supporting relatively modest-sized
thermal heating projects. Larger-scale projects, more demanding economic
thresholds, and information demands required by more detailed planning will
require the collection and analysis of additional data.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
ii
Table of Contents
List of Figures
Figure 1: Location of Huslia in Alaska. ................................................................ 2
Figure 2: Location of 25-mile radius Huslia project area. ...................................... 3
Figure 3: Land ownership, Huslia project area. .................................................. 18
Figure 4: Woody biomass dry ton stocking, Huslia project area. .......................... 19
Figure 5: Woody biomass cost, Huslia project area. ........................................... 20
List of Tables
Table 1: Wood density of tree species in Interior Alaska. ...................................... 7
Table 2: Cost parameters used in the analyses. ................................................ 11
Table 3: Huslia Biomass by Land Ownership ..................................................... 15
Table 4: Huslia Biomass by Village Proximity. ................................................... 16
Table 5: Huslia Biomass by Estimated Cost. ...................................................... 16
Table 6: Huslia Biomass Dry Tons by Ownership and Village Proximity. ................ 17
Table 7: Huslia Biomass by species. ................................................................ 17
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 1
DATA COMPONENTS ...................................................................................... 4
Land Cover ................................................................................................... 4
Forest Inventory data .................................................................................... 5
Woody Biomass Units .................................................................................. 6
Land Ownership ............................................................................................ 7
Site class ................................................................................................... 8
Estimating AAC and assigning rotation and growth parameters ........................... 8
Cost modeling ............................................................................................. 11
DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS ............................................................. 12
RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 15
FUTURE STEPS............................................................................................. 21
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
1
INTRODUCTION
Rapidly increasing fossil fuel costs have resulted in a heightened sense of urgency when
considering the ability of small communities to absorb these costs and maintain some sense
of community sustainability. There are few places where this is more severe than rural
communities in Interior Alaska, where fossil fuel dependence, energy costs, and remoteness
are conspiring to produce an energy crisis that is becoming increasingly difficult for these
small communities to deal with. These conditions have resulted in increased interest in any
available form of alternative energy that may possibly be deployed. In Interior Alaska, the
presence of apparently large amounts of woody biomass has increased the consideration of
biomass energy systems to help address this crisis.
Funding was provided by the Alaska Energy Authority to the Alaska Native Tribal Health
Consortium to pursue biomass energy projects at a number of communities in Interior
Alaska, including Huslia. A term contract was established between ANTHC and the Tanana
Chiefs Conference (TCC) Forestry Program to facilitate work related to assessing and
managing the forest resources that would supply the energy feedstock required to support
these proposed projects. There has been no prior work assessing the forest resource at
Huslia in the context of a proposed biomass energy project; this document represents the
initial attempt at this, and as such is a recon-level biomass resource assessment, designed
to be preliminary in nature, and intended to leverage existing information as much as
possible.
Huslia, with a population of 275 (2010 Census data), is located on the Koyukuk River in
western Interior Alaska (Figure 1). Huslia is not on a contiguous highway system, and is
accessible only by air, water, or overland trails. The nearest regional hub is Galena (pop.
470, 2010 Census data), located about 68 miles south of Huslia. The largest nearby urban
centers providing goods and services are Fairbanks and Anchorage, approximately 260 and
370 air miles away, respectively.
With any proposed woody biomass energy project, a number of basic questions arise
concerning the biomass supply, including:
How much biomass is there in the vicinity of the community?
What are the characteristics of the biomass (size, species, quality)?
Where is the resource located?
Who owns the resource?
What are the costs associated with getting the resource to an energy facility?
What management restrictions are there are on the resource?
Considering growth rates, cover type conversions, and other factors, what is the
sustainability of the resource?
How large an array of biomass energy facilities could be economically supported on a
sustainable basis by the local biomass resource?
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
2
Figure 1: Location of Huslia in Alaska.
This report is an attempt to document an approach to answer these questions with available
information, using information management tools such as a geographic information system
(GIS) and relational databases. The process described here is meant to present a model for
the handling of information to answer these questions, and in that regard does not
constitute an end product. In those cases where information is lacking or unavailable,
assumptions have been made and documented, with the idea that improved information in
the future can be used to improve the model. It is intended that the model itself be a useful
tool in the land management required to support proposed biomass energy projects.
The geographic extent of the community’s assessment was defined as a radius of 25 miles
surrounding Huslia (Figure 2).
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
3
Figure 2: Location of 25-mile radius Huslia project area.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
4
DATA COMPONENTS
The biomass assessment relied heavily on computerized geographic information system
(GIS) and relational database technologies to store, process, query, and analyze data. The
GIS software used was ArcGIS 10.2.2 from ESRI, Inc., and the relational database software
used was Microsoft Access. The GIS was used to spatially define the location of various
attributes of the landscape, the combination of those attributes for any given location on the
landscape, and to produce acreages and biomass stocking estimates associated with any
combination of attributes. A relational database was used to relate the attribute information
stored in GIS data layers to tabular datasets such as biomass stocking information derived
from existing forest inventory datasets, cost parameters, and lookup tables, allowing the
generation of GIS layers of derived information such as biomass stocking, annual allowable
cut, and biomass cost estimates.
The basic data input to the biomass assessment model consisted of land cover data, forest
inventory data, and land ownership. Additional data components were derived from the
basic input datasets, including raster datasets for site class, biomass stocking, biomass
annual allowable cut, village proximity, and biomass cost estimates.
Land Cover
Typically, land cover is characterized from sources of remotely sensed image data such as
aerial photography or satellite imagery. For Huslia, RapidEye medium-resolution imagery
(spatial resolution of ~ 7m) covering a portion of the project area has been acquired, and
there is the possibility of medium resolution (spatial resolution 2.5m) Spot 5 imagery
becoming available through the Alaska Statewide Digital mapping Initiative (SDMI) for
portions of the project area. However, the time and funding required to classify the
imagery into classified land cover data layers was prohibitive given the scope of the project .
As a result, it was decided instead to attempt to rely on classified image layers made
available through the LandFire program, an interagency vegetation, fire and fuel
characteristics mapping program sponsored by the U.S. Department of the Interior and the
U.S. Forest Service (http://www.landfire.gov).
LandFire data products consist of up to 50 data layers generated for all land areas within
the United States, including Alaska. Within Alaska, the data layers are generated from
classified LandSat satellite imagery at a spatial resolution of 30 meters. Existing vegetation
is described in 3 layers; existing vegetation type (evt), existing vegetation height (evh) and
existing vegetation cover, or density (evc). In addition, a layer for biophysical settings
(bps) showed potential for attempting to model potential productivity of a site. The
advantages of the LandFire data include the comprehensive coverage of the data over the
entire country, and the apparent detailed vegetation classification that appeared to be
relatable to forest inventory stocking data from old forest inventory data on file at TCC.
Potential disadvantages of use of the LandFire datasets include their relatively coarse spatial
resolution (30m), and anecdotal and objective evidence that would lead one to question the
accuracy of the LandFire classifications. In either case, the landscape-level nature of this
biomass assessment and the preliminary nature of the assessment led to the decision to
utilize the LandFire datasets.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
5
The LandFire data layers are provided as raster datasets, with classifications provided for
individual pixels, or cells in an image. This is in contrast to vector datasets, which define
areas as polygons defined by line segments running between x-y coordinates. Using land
cover data in a raster format dictated that the analyses for these assessments be based on
raster techniques and processing.
Forest Inventory data
In Interior Alaska, as in many places, woody biomass is a forest resource. The process of
trying to assess the amount and location of forest resources falls under the purview of
forest inventories, a traditional and essential component of forestry and forest
management. This project is essentially a form of forest inventory, with particular interests
and requirements that are driven by the land management required to support proposed
biomass energy projects.
The most prominent forest inventory efforts to date in the vicinity of Huslia are inventories
conducted by the Forestry Program at Tanana Chiefs Conference on village corporation
lands and Native allotments. A village corporation inventory has not been conducted for
Huslia, but past inventories on corporation lands have been conducted downriver at
Koyukuk and upriver at Hughes, both in 1987. For Native allotment inventories, the entire
TCC region was subdivided into 8 subunits, and a separate inventory project was conducted
for each subunit, with the overall work occurring from 1987 to 1993. In the vicinity of
Huslia, a forest inventory on Native allotment parcels was conducted for the Doyon-Koyukuk
subunit. The Native allotment inventories were conducted on Native allotment parcels with a
status of pending or better at the time of the inventories. For this assessment, the strata
defined by the Doyon-Koyukuk Native allotment forest inventory were used to assign
stocking levels to land cover types near Huslia, with the exception that a black spruce strata
from a corporation inventory in the Melozitna region was used for black spruce types.
The protocols and processes used in the corporation and allotment inventories were very
similar, and utilized a process that included the following steps:
1. The area included in the inventory was interpreted for land cover type using
high-altitude color-infrared aerial photographs dating from the late 1970s.
2. Forested stands delineated on the aerial photographs were attributed with a
cover type code that included a determination of primary tree species,
primary tree size class (dwarf, reproduction, poletimber, sawtimber),
secondary tree species, secondary species tree size class, and overall tree
density (low, medium, and high crown closure). Non-forested areas were
attributed for cover types such as water, tall shrub, bog, barren/cultural,
etc.
3. Forested cover types covering the highest proportion of area were selected
for field sampling by randomly selecting accessible stands within those
types.
4. Field sampling was accomplished by visiting the selected stands on the
ground and installing a series of variable radius plots and conducting tree
measurements. Sample trees were measured for species, tree diameter,
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
6
tree height, and percent defect, and a small number of white spruce trees
were measured for radial growth and age.
5. The collected field data were processed and compiled in the office with a
computer to produce timber volume per acre figures by species and size
class within strata defined as groupings of similar cover types.
6. The volume per acre figures were then extrapolated to all forested areas
within the extent of the project.
7. Some years after the completion of the inventories in the early ‘90s, the
spatial data represented by the cover type maps prepared in the inventory
were digitized into a GIS, and the processed timber volume data was
incorporated into a digital relational database.
The most important components provided to this biomass assessment as a result of the
forest inventories are the tabular timber volume and stocking estimates. The stocking data
generated from the field measurements are used to produce estimates of the amount of
woody biomass present in each forested cover type. The tree data processing produced
estimates of board-foot and cubic-foot timber volumes per acre by tree species and size
class. For the purposes of evaluating a forest resource as an energy source, it is most
appropriate to focus on the cubic-foot estimates, since they represent the total woody
biomass volume on the main stem of trees below a minimum top diameter (usually 4”), and
not just the amount of recoverable wood when processing trees for lumber.
There are a number of serious limitations in this available forest inventory data that need to
be considered. The inventories are quite “extensive”, that is, the geographic scope was
relatively large and the intensity of the field sampling was relatively low, particularly for the
allotment inventories. Forest cover types with relatively low acreages were not field
sampled at all, but were lumped into similar types that were sampled, with resulting
inaccuracies in the volume estimates. The photography used to produce the land cover
typing was less than 15 years old at the time the inventories were conducted, but is now
more than 30 years old, and does not take into account the changes that have no doubt
occurred on the landscape. The data collection was focused on the standing stock, and
what little growth information was collected is difficult to apply in any meaningful way with
regards to estimates of site and forest growth. Only the biomass represented by the main
boles of trees is included in the volume estimates, with no attention paid to whole tree
biomass or non-timber species such as alder or willow. That being said, the data contained
in these old inventory project still provide a useful starting point for evaluation of woody
biomass energy resources.
Woody Biomass Units
As mentioned previously, the cubic-foot (CF) estimates of wood volume that are one of the
products of a forest inventory analysis are appropriate when evaluating the volume of
woody biomass as an energy source. However, the energy value of wood per unit volume
varies somewhat by species because of varying wood densities, so it is common to report
woody biomass in units of weight, commonly tons (1 ton=2,000 lbs). This matter is further
complicated by the variability of wood weight per unit volume because of moisture levels in
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
7
Table 1: Wood density of tree species in Interior Alaska.
White spruce, Paper birch, Aspen and Balsam poplar figures are from the State of
Alaska, Department of Commerce (http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/ded/
dev/forest_products/forest_products5.htm); Black spruce figures are from a
Canadian website maintained by Lakehead University in Ontario
(http://www.borealforest.org/); Tamarack figures are from an engineering website
(http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/weigt-wood-d_821.html).
Tree Species Green Density
(lbs/cubic foot)
Air-dry density
(lbs/cubic foot)
Air-dry
tons/cord
White spruce 36 31 1.31
Black spruce 32 28 1.19
Paper birch 48 38 1.62
Aspen 43 27 1.15
Balsam poplar 38 24 1.02
Tamarack 47 37 1.57
the wood. There are three units commonly used to report woody biomass by weight:
Green tons, or the weight of the wood in tons at moisture levels found when the material is
freshly cut, often in the neighborhood of 50% moisture by weight; air dry tons, or the
weight of the wood when enough moisture has been removed from the wood to make it
feasible to efficiently recover energy from the wood through combustion, commonly in the
neighborhood of 20% moisture by weight; and bone-dry tons, the weight of the wood with
all moisture removed. For the purposes of this analysis, the unit of air-dry tons (also
referred to in this document as “dry tons”) is used, the weight of the wood in the form most
likely to be used in a heating project. The literature is inconsistent in terms of wood density
values for the species found in Interior Alaska, but representative values (and their sources)
are presented in Table 1.
Another unit used to measure wood is the “cord”, traditionally used to measure fuelwood. A
cord is defined as the amount of minimally processed wood (bucked, split) that can be
stacked in a space measuring 4’x4’x8’. Because of the airspace and inconsistency inherent
in stacking cordwood, the cord is a relatively imprecise measure, but is nonetheless in
common use in fuelwood transactions. The volume space of a cord, 128 cubic feet, is
sometimes thought to contain roughly 100 cubic feet of wood (a “cunit”) when the air space
between wood chinks in the stacked wood is considered. Other estimates put the
conversion at 85 cubic-feet of roundwood per cord. Using the conversion factors presented
in Table 3 at 85 CF/cord, the number of air-dry tons in a cord varies from approximately 1.0
tons for balsam poplar to 1.6 tons for paper birch.
Land Ownership
A key component of the analysis is the determination of which individual or organization
owns or has management responsibilities for the lands on which the biomass resource is
found. In this analysis, this is accomplished through the use of a GIS layer that defines
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
8
land ownership in the vicinity of the project. Spatial data of land ownership were acquired
from several sources and combined into the ownership layer:
Generalized land status, from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
ANCSA Corporation conveyed lands, also from BLM.
Native Allotments, from BLM.
The data from the various sources vary in quality and precision; specifically, the generalized
land status data is available statewide, but only shows categories of land ownership to the
nearest section (square mile). Because of that, allotment lands and ANCSA corporation
lands as defined in the other sources were given priority over the generalized land status
when combining the land ownership data.
Site class
It was assumed that site productivity is a critical factor when attempting to determine the
growth of biomass on the landscape, a key factor when evaluating biomass sustainability.
For the purposes of this analysis, four broad site classes were defined to describe the
location of site class areas in the project area. The four site classes defined were:
Site Class 0 – areas incapable of producing woody biomass such as rivers, lakes,
seasonally submerged sandbars, wetland bogs, and other non-forest areas.
Site Class 1 – areas of relatively poor site in terms of woody biomass production,
such as poorly drained areas and north-facing slopes with underlying continuous
permafrost. These sites may have cover types such as tall shrubs, dwarf shrubs
(dwarf birch, etc.), black spruce or other slow-growing unproductive cover types.
Site Class 2 – areas of intermediate productivity such as lower slopes adjacent to
wetlands, areas underlain by permafrost but with some productive tree cover, etc.
Site Class 3 – Areas of relatively high productivity of woody biomass such as south-
facing slopes, well-drained benchlands, and productive riparian sites.
In the GIS, all parts of the project area were classified into one of the four site classes,
using the LandFire biophysical settings (bps) layer and a lookup table in the database
assigning a site class to each bps classification, creating site class raster datasets for
covering the project area.
Estimating AAC and assigning rotation and growth parameters
In order to assess sustainability, the traditional forestry concept of Annual Allowable Cut
(AAC) was applied. AAC is deemed to be the maximum level of annual harvest that is
possible in perpetuity without diminishment of the level of harvest or the amount and
quality of the resource. There are a variety of techniques used to calculate AAC, including
the “Hanzlik formula”, which was designed to attempt to deal with areas still in an
unmanaged “old-growth” state. The Hanzlik formula uses mature standing volume, rotation
length, and growth (increment) as parameters required to calculate AAC:
Allowable cut (AAC) = (Mature Standing Volume / Rotation ) + Growth
Standing volume is determined from the inventory data as described above, but relative
maturity is difficult to determine. In this analysis, estimates of standing volume were
assumed to be mature, based on the concept that most areas of younger stands would be
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
9
assigned a land cover type that would not have an associated timber volume. Figures for
rotation length and growth are similarly difficult to determine or estimate.
“Rotation”, or “rotation length” refers to the hypothetical length of ti me required for a forest
stand to reforest, grow, and replace itself after harvest. At first glance this appears quite
simple, but there are a number of complicating factors, including:
What species the stand regenerates to – different species will grow at different rates
and mature at different time intervals.
Site potential may vary over time; in fact, in Interior Alaska, the act of harvesting
(or other disturbances, such as fire) may change the growth potential of a site, and
as a result, the anticipated rotation length.
Anything other than even-aged management may complicate the determination of
rotation length, particularly if it involves multiple tree species and multiple stand
entries in a rotation.
Differing economic conditions or other factors may dictate a different array of forest
products requiring material to reach different sizes or ages to be marketable at a
specific rotation length.
Similarly, “growth” can be a concept that may be simple to visualize, but involves a number
of factors that make it difficult to determine with any precision. The ability to gauge the
capacity of woody biomass to grow and replace itself after harvest is a critical component of
any assessment that would attempt to evaluate the sustainability of the resource.
Unfortunately, this is one area where hard data to drive the analysis is in short supply. It is
an exceedingly complex situation that is being modeled – growth rates of individual trees
and the stands they grow in vary by site, species, tree age, stand age, stand density,
reproductive capacity, disturbance regime, and other factors, and all in cumulative and
interactive ways. Growth models for the boreal forest are in development at the University
of Alaska Fairbanks and with the U.S. Forest Service and may prove to be useful. In the
meantime, this effort applies some broad and exceedingly gross assumptions in an attempt
to get a handle on growth and sustainability.
For both growth and rotation, the approach taken was to establish an optimal value for
each, then adjust the values based on other conditions. Based on TCC inventory data,
maximum biomass stocking in high-volume spruce stands, presumably on good sites, is in
the neighborhood of 60 tons/acre. Employing the concept of mean annual increment (MAI),
and assuming a stand age of 120 years to produce this volume, this would indicate a
maximum mean annual increment of 0.5 tons/acre/year on the best sites. Interestingly,
roughly similar rates can be arrived at with productive hardwood stands; TCC’s inventory
data indicates total biomass tons of well-stocked cottonwood, birch, or aspen stands to be in
a somewhat lower range (~20-50 tons/acre), with lower stand ages to be expected to
produce those volumes (~50-80 years). Based on this, a value of 0.5 tons/acre/year is
assumed as an optimum mean annual growth rate.
Optimal rotation length is assumed to be 60 years, based on a hypothetical rotation length
for the deciduous broadleaf tree species (birch, aspen, and balsam poplar). Although white
spruce has traditionally been the favored species for timber management in Interior Alaska,
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
10
it is assumed that managing for hardwoods is desirable from a woody biomass perspective
because of faster juvenile growth rates, shorter rotations, ease in regenerating, importance
in wildlife habitat, and desirability from a community wildfire protection perspective.
Several key assumptions were made to facilitate adjusting the optimum growth and rotation
figures based on the availability of existing information. The assumptions used in this
analysis to estimate growth and rotation include:
1. Fully stocked stands will show best realization of potential growth.
2. Lower site quality will result in longer rotations and slower growth.
The first assumption of stand stocking levels influencing relative growth can be dealt with
most directly using the stand density component of the cover type calls coming from the
LandFire evc layer. Each of the evc codes related to density of a tree canopy were assigned
a relative growth rate expressed as a proportion of optimum growth:
LandFire evc Class Growth Proportion
151 (Tree Canopy >= 10 and < 25%) 0.3
152 (Tree Canopy >= 25 and < 60%) 0.6
153 (Tree Canopy >= 60 and <= 100%) 1.0
Similarly, the second assumption of relative growth varying by site quality was handled by
taking the site class codes as assigned to areas on the landscape and adjusting the optimal
rotation of 50 years upwards for poorer site classes, as well as assigning degraded growth
proportions for lower sites:
Site Class Growth proportion Rotation (years)
0 0 none
1 0.3 140
2 0.6 100
3 1.0 60
Using this approach, annual allowable cut was seriously degraded for those areas
interpreted to be of poor site quality, by calculating a lower current growth and by using a
longer rotation in the AAC formula.
By applying a series of update queries in the database, allowable cut was determined for the
project areas; since this was a raster analysis, this was done on a pixel-by-pixel basis based
on the LandFire datasets. Growth for each pixel was determined by multiplying the
optimum growth rate (0.5 tons/acre/year) by the growth proportion number assigned to the
stand density of the pixel, and multiplied again by the growth proportion assigned to the
site class of the pixel. Rotation length for each pixel was determined by applying the
rotation length assigned to the site class of the area. The resulting figures for growth and
rotation were used with the overall stocking of each pixel in the Hanzlik formula to generate
an AAC for each pixel.
The resulting AAC figures for each pixel are not meant to mean that some calculated portion
of every pixel is a portion of the volume cut in any given time frame, but refers to the
contribution that the resource represented by the area of that pixel contributes to the
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
11
Table 2: Cost parameters used in the analyses.
Cost Type Cost
Stumpage (payments to owner), cost per ton $5
Harvest Costs
Costs per acre $300
Costs per ton of woody biomass $10
Transportation costs
Cost/ton/mile off-road $6
Reforestation – cost per acre $100
Misc. Admin – cost per acre $20
harvestable volume of biomass over the project as a whole. Through the other attributes
assigned to each pixel through the creation of overlaid raster datasets, both standing stock
and AAC figures can be broken out by ownership, proximity to the village, or other area
attributes.
Cost modeling
In addition to estimates of the amount and growth of the woody biomass resource, it is also
useful to estimate the costs involved in making the biomass available to an energy facility.
This estimation could include the modeling of costs associated with harvesting, transport,
reforestation, stumpage, and other costs. At this stage of the project, much is unclear in
terms of type of harvest and equipment to be used, the nature and extent of the
transportation network to be established and other cost factors, but all of these factors can
be modeled in the GIS and reported back from the database. Table 2 presents a list of cost
factors used in this analysis as an example of how these costs could be modeled.
Per acre costs were converted into costs per ton. Per acre cost parameters such as harvest
costs per acre and reforestation costs per acre have the effect of driving up relative costs
per ton of woody biomass for low volume areas. Estimated transportation costs were driven
solely by distances from the village, with the off-road transportation cost parameter of
$6/ton/mile being applied. Harvest costs are broken into two components, cost per ton and
cost per acre (Table 2). This is an attempt to recognize that some costs associated with
harvesting will remain relatively fixed per ton, while other costs associated with
mobilization, equipment movement, etc. may remain relatively fixed per unit area. Other
costs associated with biomass supply could include reforestation costs and other
management costs, and stumpage payments made to a landowner. The reforestation costs
initially used in this analysis are based on a lowering of known planting costs, assuming that
some level of natural regeneration or other techniques may be used.
This cost modeling can be modified in the future with changes to the cost parameters,
modification of the modeling used to assign costs, etc. to create updated cost scenarios.
Since the cost per ton is determined by area, as is the annual allowable cut, one interesting
ramification of this is that it is possible to evaluate AAC based on different cost thresholds.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
12
DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
Starting with the basic datasets described above, there were several data processing steps
that were conducted to prepare and analyze the data and prepare for the generation of
tables and maps showing the analysis results. The spatial data raster processing steps
described below used geoprocessing tools in the GIS software, with the use of the tools
being automated somewhat through the creation of script tools written in Python, a scriptin g
language used with ArcGIS software. The data processing steps implemented for the
project area were:
1. Data were downloaded from the LandFire website for the LandFire data layers to be
used in the analysis for an area covering the 25-mile radius that defines the project
for this analysis. Data were downloaded for the LandFire evt, evc, evh, and bps
layers in ArcInfo GRID format.
2. A geodatabase was created, and the downloaded data were imported into it as raster
datasets. All resulting datasets, both raster and vector, were also stored in the
geodatabase, which was created as an ArcGIS personal geodatabase in MS Access
format, and which also served as the repository for the other database structures in
the analysis such as lookup tables, strata stock tables, queries, data entry forms,
reports, etc.
3. The evt, evc, and evh layers were combined into a new raster layer (called lf_tch)
containing the combined attributes of vegetation type, vegetation cover (density)
and vegetation height. This produced a VAT (value attribute table) describing all
possible combinations of the attributes from the combined raster layers. For this
analysis for Huslia, this produced a table of 344 combinations of vegetation type,
coverage, and height classes.
4. The VAT was exported into a database table, (called tch_classes), and a column was
added to the table to hold information on strata ID.
5. Each row in the tch_classes table was assigned to strata defined in the TCC forest
inventories, identified with a strata ID number. Non-forested vegetation types
(shrubland, wetland, water, barren, etc.) were assigned to non-forested strata not
associated with any timber volume. Forested vegetation types were subjectively
assigned to the most appropriate strata from nearby TCC forest inventory projects ,
primarily the Doyon-Koyukuk Native allotment forest inventory. To aid in this rather
complex, manual, and very subjective process, a form was developed in MS Access.
6. The database contained a table called strata_biomass that had been processed to
contain biomass stocking values (in tons and cords) for all strata defined in the TCC
inventories. In ArcGIS, the tch_classes table and the strata_biomass table were
joined and the tch_classes table and the lf_tch VAT were joined to associate each cell
in the combined vegetation raster with strata biomass stocking values. This joined
raster is used to create a series of raster datasets of biomass stocking with the
ArcGIS Spatial Analyst “lookup” command. Raster datasets were created for overall
dry ton stocking, dry tons by species, and cords by species.
7. Similarly, a site class raster was created for the project area. The LandFire
biophysical settings raster (lf_bps) VAT was exported to a database table
(bps_classes) and a column for site class code was added to the bps_classes table,
and each row of the bps_classes table was coded for site class using the codes 0
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
13
through 3 described above. In ArcGIS, the bps_classes table was joined to the
lf_bps raster layer, and the “lookup” command was used to create a site class raster
for the project area.
8. A raster of annual allowable cut (AAC) was created by first creating rasters of growth
adjustment by density values, growth adjustment by site values, and rotation
adjustment by site values, and then executing a map algebra raster calculation for
AAC using an application of the Hanzlik formula with the rasters for biomass
stocking, growth as determined from the growth adjustment rasters, and rotation as
determined from the rotation adjustment raster. The growth by density adjustment
raster was created in a process similar to that used to create the stocking and site
class rasters by joining the LandFire vegetation density raster (lf_evc) to a
growth_by_density table in the database to relate the evc codes to a density
adjustment factor and creating a growth by density adjustment raster with a lookup
command. Similarly, the growth adjustment by site and rotation adjustment by site
rasters were created by joining the site class raster to lookup tables in the database
(growth_by_site, rotation_by_site) and creating the adjustment rasters with lookup
commands.
9. A raster dataset was created defining the proximity to the nearest village (Huslia) in
miles up to a 25 mile radius using ArcGIS spatial analyst commands.
10. A raster dataset of biomass costs per ton was created by applying the cost
parameters described above to previously created raster datasets. A harvest cost
raster was created by dividing the harvest per acre parameter by the biomass
stocking per acre raster, and adding the result to the harvest cost per ton
parameter. A transportation cost raster was created by multiplying the village
proximity raster and multiplying it by the off-road transportation cost parameter. A
total cost per ton raster was created by adding the harvest cost raster, the
transportation cost raster, the reforestation parameter and the administration cost
parameters divided by the biomass stocking raster (to convert those parameters to
per-ton units), and the stumpage parameter.
11. A vector layer of land ownership was created for the project by overlaying
generalized land status with conveyed ANCSA land data and Native allotment
locations. These are overlapping datasets, but a unique ownership was identified for
all areas through the overlay commands applied, with a priority given to the location
of Native allotment parcels, the next lowest priority given to the conveyed ANCSA
data, and the least priority given to the generalized land status. The resulting
polygons were attributed for owner and owner class. Native allotments were coded
with the BLM serial number as the owner and “Native allotment” as the owner class.
ANCSA conveyed lands were coded with the name of the ANCSA corporation as the
owner (K'oyitl'ots'ina, Ltd. or Doyon, Ltd.) and an owner class of “ANCSA corp”. The
remaining lands were identified from the generalized land status data with some
level of agency ownership; State lands were identified as “State patented” or “State
selected” as the owner and “State of Alaska” as the owner Class; federal lands
identify the agency (USFWS, NPS, BLM) as the owner and “Federal” as the owner
class. To be compatible with the raster analysis used in these analyses, the tools
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
14
used to query the data convert the vector ownership layer to a raster dataset for
processing.
12. The layers described above for ownership, village, village proximity, and biomass
cost were combined together into a single raster layer, called the “combined
parameters layer”, attributed for all parameters. To do this, vector layers such as
ownership were converted to rasters, and to keep the number of parameter
combinations to a reasonable number, layers containing continuous data (biomass
cost and distance to village) were converted into class categories; for example,
instead of using the calculated biomass cost numbers directly, the biomass costs
were grouped into increments of $20/ton ($20-40/ton, $40-60/ton, etc.), and the
distances in the village proximity raster were converted to 1-mile classes (1-2 miles,
2-3 miles etc.).
13. Using spatial analyst commands in ArcGIS, tables of statistics were generated by
analyzing the stocking rasters with the combined parameters layer. Each table
generated summarized one component of biomass stocking with all combinations of
the parameters. Tables were generated for summary statistics for overall dry tons,
dry ton annual allowable cut, dry tons by species, and cords by species. Once the
statistics table were generated, it was possible to produce summary tables of
biomass stocking by various attributes using standard database reporting tools.
The datasets resulting from the process described above allow querying and displaying the
data with multiple combinations of attributes. For example, one can query the data to show
those areas and the biomass stocking amounts for a particular ownership and under a
particular cost threshold. Or, perhaps one would want to query the data show the
estimated annual allowable cut on a particular ownership within a specified distance of the
village. Two tools were prepared as ArcGIS Python script tools to facilitate querying the
data:
1. A GIS interactive query tool allows a user to interactively specify query parameters
for village, ownership, owner class, and maximum biomass cost per ton, view the
calculated values for total biomass and annual allowable cut in a brief tabular
display, and have the areas in question highlighted on the map in ArcGIS.
2. A GIS statistics generation tool generates a table of statistics that is stored in the
database and can be used to drive reports showing biomass stocking and annual
allowable cut by distance class, cost class, owner, and owner class.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
15
Table 3: Huslia Biomass by Land Ownership
Annual Allowable Cut Forested
Ownership Air-dry Tons Cords (AAC, tons/year) Acres
K'oyitl'ots'ina Ltd. 691,013 529,006 9,706 43,549
Doyon Ltd. 1,161,454 900,805 13,563 79,517
Native Allotment 81,989 62,933 1,158 5,062
USFWS 4,273,993 3,311,343 46,874 299,721
State of Alaska 158,242 127,643 2,343 9,988
All ownerships: 6,366,692 4,931,730 73,644 437,838
RESULTS
Following are selected results of the analysis, with tabular results produced from the
statistical summaries generated by the statistics generation tool described above, and
sample maps of the generated spatial data. As indicated above, these results as displayed
constitute only a portion of the possible combinations and ways to view the data, both in
tabular form or on maps.
“Forested area” refers to those portions of the project area that have been associated with a
forest inventory stratum that have woody biomass estimates. It does not include those
areas that have a LandFire classification not associated with any woody biomass stocking
estimates, including low-volume types such as dwarf black spruce or shrubland types. As
determined in this analysis, forested area for Huslia is 437,838 acres, or 35% of the project
area.
The amount of biomass found on ANCSA corporation lands (both regional and village) was
about 29% of the total (Table 3). Perhaps more importantly, 77% of the biomass within 10
miles of the village was found on ANCSA lands (Table 6), highlighting the importance of the
ANCSA corporations, particularly the village corporation, K'oyitl'ots'ina Ltd., in the
ownership of the most accessible, least expensive biomass resources.
The analysis indicates that the bulk of the biomass is comprised of black spruce (38%),
birch (26%) and white spruce (25%), with smaller amounts of balsam poplar and aspen
(Table 7). The nature of the LandFire classifications did not readily associate themselves
with forest inventory cottonwood strata, and as a result, those strata may be
underestimated in the analysis. The analysis of species composition in general is subject to
substantial uncertainty because of the lack of local field data in the analysis.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
16
Table 4: Huslia Biomass by Village Proximity.
Proximity to Annual Allowable Cut Forested
village (miles) Air-dry Tons Cords (AAC, tons/year) Acres
0 - 1 7,939 6,468 106 549
1 - 2 32,342 26,593 441 2,215
2 - 3 43,608 33,649 574 2,876
3 - 4 70,493 53,176 953 4,458
4 - 5 83,303 63,541 1,168 5,276
5 - 6 88,355 67,704 1,183 5,672
6 - 7 90,402 68,010 1,113 6,040
7 - 8 111,102 84,865 1,294 7,586
8 - 9 150,597 115,257 1,664 10,359
9 - 10 164,023 126,438 1,809 11,343
10 - 11 162,650 125,922 1,761 11,486
11 - 12 192,014 148,119 2,136 13,485
12 - 13 226,561 174,815 2,480 15,859
13 - 14 265,901 207,366 3,062 18,240
14 - 15 309,983 242,264 3,477 21,720
15 - 16 309,325 240,445 3,438 21,909
16 - 17 357,443 274,178 4,192 24,424
17 - 18 380,803 293,142 4,436 26,155
18 - 19 429,458 331,938 4,994 29,625
19 - 20 442,778 341,969 4,920 31,051
20 - 21 452,365 350,388 5,170 31,123
21 - 22 454,361 352,779 5,157 31,331
22 - 23 464,114 359,765 5,407 31,692
23 - 24 508,171 399,805 5,985 34,780
24 - 25 568,600 443,134 6,724 38,586
Totals: 6,366,692 4,931,730 73,644 437,838
Table 5: Huslia Biomass by Estimated Cost.
Biomass Cost Annual Allowable Cut Forested
($/ton) Air-dry Tons Cords (AAC, tons/year) Acres
40 - 60 9,242 6,982 146 338
60 - 80 157,800 120,362 2,294 8,900
80 - 100 277,762 210,627 3,710 17,474
100 - 120 445,622 340,166 5,157 29,945
120 - 140 716,885 552,697 8,295 48,533
140 - 160 1,082,931 834,165 12,673 73,313
160 - 180 1,383,806 1,066,731 16,072 94,635
180 - 200 1,551,123 1,208,890 17,959 107,188
200 - 220 733,942 585,414 7,218 56,700
220 - 240 7,579 5,696 120 811
Totals: 6,366,692 4,931,730 73,644 437,838
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
17
Table 6: Huslia Biomass Dry Tons by Ownership and Village Proximity.
Land Ownership:
Proximity to Native State of
village (miles) ANCSA Corp. Allotments Federal Alaska Total
0 - 1 7,112 827 7,939
1 - 2 29,932 2,410 32,342
2 - 3 41,659 1,873 76 43,608
3 - 4 65,203 1,518 3,772 70,493
4 - 5 72,914 5,954 4,435 83,303
5 - 6 74,122 5,944 8,289 88,355
6 - 7 71,942 3,853 14,608 90,402
7 - 8 83,790 3,689 23,623 111,102
8 - 9 99,936 7,401 43,260 150,597
9 - 10 99,736 6,556 57,731 164,023
10 - 11 105,705 1,998 54,947 162,650
11 - 12 132,406 1,293 58,315 192,014
12 - 13 128,157 3,225 91,791 3,389 226,561
13 - 14 146,502 1,003 115,304 3,092 265,901
14 - 15 131,988 5,351 143,797 28,847 309,983
15 - 16 115,578 3,058 165,071 25,618 309,325
16 - 17 93,554 3,080 237,274 23,535 357,443
17 - 18 77,041 2,911 268,503 32,348 380,803
18 - 19 51,676 4,179 347,366 26,236 429,458
19 - 20 30,293 3,735 398,706 10,044 442,778
20 - 21 31,834 5,997 409,401 5,133 452,365
21 - 22 33,015 413 420,932 454,361
22 - 23 30,247 2,519 431,349 464,114
23 - 24 37,524 3,201 467,446 508,171
24 - 25 60,603 507,998 568,600
Totals: 1,852,467 81,989 4,273,993 158,242 6,366,692
Table 7: Huslia Biomass by species.
Tree Species Air-dry Tons Cords % of Total
White Spruce 1,566,166 1,188,741 24.6%
Black Spruce 2,425,436 2,038,182 38.1%
Birch 1,660,548 1,028,203 26.1%
Aspen 219,645 191,412 3.4%
Cottonwood 494,897 485,193 7.8%
All Species 6,366,692 4,931,730 100.0%
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
18
Figure 3: Land ownership, Huslia project area.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
19
Figure 4: Woody biomass dry ton stocking, Huslia project area.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
20
Figure 5: Woody biomass cost, Huslia project area.
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
21
FUTURE STEPS
As plans for proposed biomass heating projects move forward, what steps need to be taken
to implement effective and sustained use of forest resources as a woody biomass supply at
villages in Interior Alaska? This report constitutes a first-look assessment designed to assist
in determining if the potential supply of woody biomass warrants pursuing the development
of proposed biomass energy projects. Additional steps that will need to be considered as
proposed projects move forward include:
Develop agreements with major landowners. As owners of the resource required to
fuel a biomass energy project, any proposed project needs to have the commitment
and participation of the landowners involved. This means the required participation
of the local ANCSA village corporation (K'oyitl'ots'ina Ltd.) as the owner of the bulk
of the lands in the immediate vicinity of the community.
With the involved landowners, develop forest management plans. The forest
stewardship program, administered by the State of Alaska with federal funds, is one
option for a landowner to receive planning assistance. A project involving multiple
landowners would require coordinated planning among the landowners to best serve
the project and the affected community. Included in the issues to be addressed by
these plans would be:
Managing the biomass resources in a sustainable manner through
reforestation and other forestry Best management Practices (BMPs), and
ensuring compliance with the Alaska Forest Resource Practices Act (FRPA);
Preparation of a transportation and access plan;
Detailed harvest plans;
Ensuring that the harvest of biomass for energy does not interfere with
normal subsistence wood gathering and other forest products utilization by
community residents;
Work to avoid the natural tendency to harvest the most available resource
first, with the resultant effect of making fuel costs prohibitively more
expensive in the future;
Coordinate biomass harvesting with other land management activities such as
hazardous fuel mitigation, wildlife habitat enhancement, etc.
Work to develop local capacity for technical land management tasks, biomass
harvesting and transportation, and other contractable services and small businesses
required to make a biomass energy project functional.
Attempt to develop better biomass supply and growth data. This can include the
development of more precise and accurate land cover mapping using higher-
resolution imagery or aerial photography, and the installation of ground plots to
determine more accurate estimates of biomass stocking. This work can be quite
expensive, but can be scaled to fit the demands of a proposed project. For example,
a combined heat and power project (CHP) projected to consume relatively large
amounts of woody biomass would require tighter biomass stocking and sustainability
estimates and more detailed planning than would a relatively small cordwood
thermal heating project. The Alaska Energy Authority has recently worked to
Assessment of Woody Biomass Energy Resources, Huslia, Alaska
22
develop standards for required information for projects of varying size, complexity,
resource demands, and stage of development.
As projects come on line, develop monitoring programs to collect information on
harvest and transportation costs to better inform decisions made for current and
future projects.
City of Huslia
FEASIBLITY ANALYSIS
AND
CALCULATIONS
ANTHC DEHEDivision of Environmental Health & EngineeringAlaska Native Tribal Health Consortium3900 AMBASSADOR DR, SUITE 301Project Name:Huslia Biomass Boiler ProjectANCHORAGE, AK 99508Project Number:TBD(907) 729-4083Engineer:PKCChecked:________FAX (907) 729-4046Revision Date:e-mail: pkc@anthc.orgPrint:File: \\deh02\Energy Program\AEA\Renewable Energy Fund Round 8\Applications\Huslia\[Huslia Biomass Boiler Calcs.xlsx]CalcFind:Feasibility study of Biomass Boiler system for Huslia Water Treatment Plant and ClinicGiven:Heating Degree Days for Huslia33,800 BTU/H14,750 BTU/H40,300 BTU/H23,640 BTU/H5,000 BTU/H47,100 BTU/H30,000 BTU/H12,000 BTU/H100,000 BTU/H74,400 BTU/H35,500 BTU/H171,890 BTU/H24,320 BTU/HAssumptions:Indirect hot water heater114,300BTU/HrDesign Air Temperature:-50Deg FWasher Load20.625MBH/MonthDesign Water Temperature40Deg FDesign Glycol Heat Trace Temperature75Deg FDesign Crawl space temperature50Deg FUtility buidling Space temperature70Deg FGround temperature @ 3" depth20Deg FWell water temperature35Deg F80000BTU/H20000BTU/HEfficiency of Biomass Boiler80%Cost of Wood$300.00per cordEstimated Boiler AFUE:80%Heating Value of Fuel134000 BTU/GalCommunity Estimated Fuel Price:$4.10per galAVEC Estimated Fuel Price$4.10per galAVEC Heat Sales Agreement:30%Avoided fuel cost at AVEC's PriceFrozen Soil Conductivity0.12(Between 0.05 & 0.15 BTUH/Ft)MonthEst. WTP Fuel Demand (Gal) Est. Clinic Fuel Demand (Gal)Total Fuel Demand: WTP & Clinic (Gal)Avoided Fuel Use with Biomass Boiler (Gal)Total Wood Demand (Cord)Cost of Wood (Dollars)Recovered Heat Avoided Fuel Cost (Dollars) Net Benefit to CommunityJanuary1,6363842,0208978 $2,450 $3,679$3,679February1,6193761,9958378 $2,286 $3,433$3,433March1,5153591,8748708 $2,375 $3,567$3,567April1,1662911,4578788 $2,397 $3,600$3,600May5691787477477 $2,040 $3,063$3,063June242482902903 $791 $1,188$1,188July259543133133 $855 $1,284$1,284Aug306763833833 $1,045 $1,570$1,570Sept5001626636636 $1,809 $2,717$2,717Oct6391918308308 $2,267 $3,404$3,404Nov1,4843531,8378718 $2,377 $3,570$3,570Dec1,7624082,1708948 $2,442 $3,667$3,667116992881 14580847477 $23,136 $34,742$34,742Calculations:Biomass Project Final SummaryWater main heat add HX‐7:Raw water Heat Add HX‐6:Clinic Space heatClinic Crawl Space Space heat 275 person x 1 load per person per week x 4 week per month x 1 hour per load x 27000 Btu/Hr*load x 1 month/ 30day x 1day/ 24 hrCUHHeating CoilBuilding space heating: Crawl space space heating: 09-Sep-1419-Sep-14radiant floor + radiant panelbase boardunit heatersWater main Loop‐1 Heat Add HX‐2:Water main Loop‐1 Heat Add HX‐3:Water well heat trace HX‐4:Water Storage tank Heat Add HX‐1:
ANTHC DEHEDivision of Environmental Health & EngineeringAlaska Native Tribal Health Consortium3900 AMBASSADOR DR, SUITE 301Project Name:Huslia Biomass Boiler ProjectANCHORAGE, AK 99508Project Number:TBD(907) 729-4083Engineer:PKCChecked:________FAX (907) 729-4046Revision Date:e-mail: pkc@anthc.orgPrint:File: \\deh02\Energy Program\AEA\Renewable Energy Fund Round 8\Applications\Huslia\[Huslia Biomass Boiler Calcs.xlsx]Calc09-Sep-1419-Sep-14WTP Building Heat Loss:Well Water Heat Loss:Building design heating loss:171,890 BTU/HBuilding design heating loss:5,000 BTU/HHeat loss / degree of OSA temp1,432.4 BTH/H* Deg FHeat loss / degree of OSA temp58.8 BTH/H* Deg FWTP Crawl Space Heat Loss:Process Heat Loss:Building design heating loss:24,320 BTU/HBuilding design heating loss:109,600 BTU/HHeat loss / degree of OSA temp810.7 BTH/H* Deg FHeat loss / degree of OSA temp1,217.8 BTH/H* Deg FStorage Tank Heat Loss:Raw Water Heat Add:Building design heating loss:30,000 BTU/HBuilding design heating loss:100,000 BTU/HHeat loss / degree of OSA temp333.3 BTH/H* Deg FHeat loss / degree of OSA temp1,111.1 BTH/H* Deg FWasheteria Washer Load:Clinic Building Heat Loss:Building design heating loss:21 MBH/MonthBuilding design heating loss:80,000 BTU/HHeat loss / degree of OSA temp666.7 BTH/H* Deg FClinic Crawl Space Heat Loss:Building design heating loss:20,000 BTU/HHeat loss / degree of OSA temp200.0 BTH/H* Deg FMonthDays / Month Htg Degree Days / Month (35F)Htg Degree Days / Month (40F)Htg Degree Days / Month (50F)Htg Degree Days / Month (65F)Htg Degree Days / Month (70F)Htg Degree Days / Month (160F)Design Air Temperature‐50Degrees FDesign Ground Surface Temperature‐10Degrees FJanuary311,002 1,157 1,622 1,932 2,087 4,877 Design Circulating Water Loop Temp160Degrees FFebruary 291,025 1,170 1,605 1,895 2,040 4,650 Insulation:1.3Inch foam ins.March30902 1,052 1,502 1,802 1,952 4,652 Carrier Pipe:2Pipe OD (Inches)April30554 704 1,154 1,454 1,604 4,304 Insulation K value0.0133BTUH / (ft x Deg F)May31‐ 94 559 869 1,024 3,814 Ground K value0.12BTUH / (ft x Deg F)June30‐ ‐ ‐ 172 322 3,022 R value =9.967 Ft x hr x Deg F July31‐ ‐ ‐ 207 362 3,152 Depth of Bury =3.0feetAug31‐ ‐ 36 346 501 3,291 Buried Pipe1400FtSept30‐ 40 490 790 940 3,640 Design Heat Loss:21,584 BTU/hrOct319 164 629 939 1,094 3,884 Design Heat Loss per linear feet15.42 Nov30871 1,021 1,471 1,771 1,921 4,621 Heat Loss / Degree OSA temp103 BTU/hrDec311,127 1,282 1,747 2,057 2,212 5,002 Calculations (Continued)Clinic Heating DemandWTP Heating DemandHeating Degree Days Buried Biomass Boiler Pipe Heat Loss
ANTHC DEHEDivision of Environmental Health & EngineeringAlaska Native Tribal Health Consortium3900 AMBASSADOR DR, SUITE 301Project Name:Huslia Biomass Boiler ProjectANCHORAGE, AK 99508Project Number:TBD(907) 729-4083Engineer:PKCChecked:________FAX (907) 729-4046Revision Date:e-mail: pkc@anthc.orgPrint:File: \\deh02\Energy Program\AEA\Renewable Energy Fund Round 8\Applications\Huslia\[Huslia Biomass Boiler Calcs.xlsx]Calc09-Sep-1419-Sep-14Month Building Heat Loss (MBH) WST Heat Loss (MBH)Crawl Space Heat Loss (MBH)Washeteria washer load (MBH)Process Heat Loss (MBH)Well Water heat Trace (MBH)Total WTP Heat DemandMonthClinic Building Heat Loss (MBH)Crawl Space Heat Loss (MBH)Total Clinic Heat DemandJanuary9612 17 21872236 January4510 55 February10113 1821942249 February4711 58 March9312 1721822226 March4310 53 April778 1321551174 April368 43 May471 6217082 May224 26 June15‐ 0210036 June7‐ 7 July17‐ 0210037 July8‐ 8 Aug23‐ 0210044 Aug110 11 Sept450 5213075 Sept213 24 Oct512 72112092 Oct244 28 Nov9211 1621792221 Nov4310 52 Dec10214 1921962254 Dec4811 59 MonthHeat Loss from Burried Pipe (MBH)MonthEstimated Available Biomass Heat (MBH)WTP Heating Demand (MBH)Clinic Heating Demand (MBH)Total Heat Demand: WTP& Clinic (MBH)Available Biomass Heat Benefit (MBH)Biomass Boiler Firing Interval3HrHeat available per manufacture specification325000BTU/HJanuary16January129 23655291129Heat available using Locally Available Wood232742BTU/HFebruary16February129 24958307129Boimass boiler Fire rate 5times per dayMarch16March130 22653279130Total Heat available by biomass per hour3491125.973BTU/dayApril15April131 17443217131Average heat available per hour with biomass boiler145463.5822BTU/H per dayMay13May 133 82 26 108108June10June135 3674343July10July135 3784545Aug11Aug135 44115555Heating value of Local Wood (average)18.4(millions Btu/cord)Sept12Sept133 75249999Heating value of Red Oak (Manufacturer Default)25.7(millions Btu/cord)Oct13Oct133 9228120120Nov16Nov130 22152273130Dec17Dec129 25459313129Biomass Boiler Biomass Boiler Line Loss Available Biomass Heat (Note : Local wood is the extrapolated average from the biomass resource assessment. Manufacturer uses oak wood to calculate heat available from biomass boiler)Model : Garn 2000
City of Huslia
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria
Page 1
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 9/18/2014 7:08 PM
General Project Information
PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION
Building: Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria Auditor Company: ANTHC DEHE
Address: PO Box 10 Auditor Name: Carl Remley, Eric Hanssen, Cody Uhlig
City: Huslia Auditor Address: 3900 Ambassador Drive, Suite 301
Anchorage, AK 99508 Client Name: Darrell Vent & Emil Sam
Client Address: PO Box 10
Huslia, AK 99746
Auditor Phone: (907) 729‐3543
Auditor FAX:
Client Phone: (907) 829‐2218 Auditor Comment:
Client FAX:
Design Data
Building Area: 2,167 square feet Design Space Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 0
Btu/hour
with Distribution Losses: 0 Btu/hour
Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and
25% Safety Margin: 0 Btu/hour
Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW and
other plant loads, if served.
Typical Occupancy: 0 people Design Indoor Temperature: 60 deg F (building average)
Actual City: Huslia Design Outdoor Temperature: ‐39.8 deg F
Weather/Fuel City: Huslia Heating Degree Days: 14,942 deg F‐days
Utility Information
Electric Utility: AVEC‐Huslia ‐ Commercial ‐ Sm Natural Gas Provider: None
Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.507/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.000/ccf
Annual Energy Cost Estimate
Description Space
Heating
Space
Cooling
Water
Heating
Ventilation
Fans Lighting Other
Electrical
Raw
Water
Heat
Add
Water
Circulation
Heat
Tank
Heat Other Service
Fees
Total
Cost
Existing
Building
$500 $0 $3,871 $0 $3,453 $24,272 $9,582 $9,034 $4,186 $1,236 $60 $56,194
With
Proposed
Retrofits
$740 $0 $2,215 $0 $2,254 $24,327 $3,457 $4,932 $2,276 $455 $60 $40,716
Savings ‐$240 $0 $1,656 $0 $1,199 ‐$54 $6,124 $4,103 $1,910 $781 $0 $15,478
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria
Page 2
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
Existing Retrofit
Service Fees
Other
Tank Heat
Water Circulation Heat
Raw Water Heat Add
Other Electrical
Lighting
Water Heating
Space Heating
Annual Energy Costs by End Use
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria
Page 3
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
1 Other ‐ GenericLoad Interlock well pump to raw
water heat add and shut
off heat add when
pumping
$2,855 $2,500 15.45 0.9
2 Other ‐ GenericLoad Lower unit heater set
point from 60 to 45
degrees
$373 $350 14.42 0.9
3 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Tank
Hallway
Replace with 2 LED 12W
Module StdElectronic
$19 $40 6.85 2.1
4 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Exterior
Lighting
Replace with 2 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic
$308 $700 6.42 2.3
5 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Washeteria
Lighting
Replace with 6 LED (4)
17W Module StdElectronic
$355 $1,560 3.32 4.4
6 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: WTP
Replace with 12 LED (4)
17W Module StdElectronic
$356 $3,120 1.67 8.8
7 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Office
Replace with 2 LED (4)
17W Module StdElectronic
$59 $520 1.67 8.8
8 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Restroom
Lighting
Replace with 2 LED (3)
17W Module StdElectronic
$29 $390 1.10 13.2
9 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Mechanical
Room Lighitng
Replace with 3 LED (4)
17W Module StdElectronic
$36 $500 1.04 14.1
10 HVAC And DHW Add a Garn 2000 biomass
boiler, Tekmar 256
controller, and shut off the
boilers in the summer
except when the
washeteria is open.
$11,088
+ $1,000 Maint.
Savings
$276,000 1.00 22.8
TOTAL $15,478
+ $1,000 Maint.
Savings
$285,680 1.18 17.3
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Building Envelope
Insulation
Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R-
Value
Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria
Page 4
Exterior Doors – Replacement
Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Windows and Glass Doors – Replacement
Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Air Leakage
Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage
Target
Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
2. Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical
Rank Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
10 Add a Garn 2000 biomass boiler, Tekmar 256 controller, and shut off the boilers in
the summer except when the washeteria is open.
$276,000 $11,088
+ $1,000
Maint.
Savings
Setback Thermostat
Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Ventilation
Rank Recommendation Cost Annual
Energy
Savings
3. Appliances and Lighting
Lighting Fixtures and Controls
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
3 Tank Hallway 2 FLUOR CFL, Spiral 26 W with
Manual Switching
Replace with 2 LED 12W
Module StdElectronic
$40 $19
4 Exterior Lighting 2 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with
Manual Switching
Replace with 2 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic
$700 $308
5 Washeteria
Lighting
6 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W
Standard Instant StdElectronic
with Manual Switching
Replace with 6 LED (4) 17W
Module StdElectronic
$1,560 $355
6 WTP 12 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W
Standard Instant StdElectronic
with Manual Switching
Replace with 12 LED (4)
17W Module StdElectronic
$3,120 $356
7 Office 2 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W
Standard Instant StdElectronic
with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 LED (4) 17W
Module StdElectronic
$520 $59
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Water Treatment Plant & Washeteria
Page 5
8 Restroom Lighting 2 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W
Standard (2) Instant
StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 2 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
$390 $29
9 Mechanical Room
Lighitng
3 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W
Standard Instant StdElectronic
with Manual Switching
Replace with 3 LED (4) 17W
Module StdElectronic
$500 $36
Refrigeration
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Electrical Equipment
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Other
Rank Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
1 Interlock well pump to raw water heat add and shut off heat add when pumping $2,500 $2,855
2 Lower unit heater set point from 60 to 45 degrees $350 $373
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
AkWarmCalc Ver 2.3.2.1, Energy Lib 4/11/2014
City of Huslia
BIOMASS OPERATIONAL PLAN
Huslia Water Plant Biomass Project
Operational Plan
Prepared By:
Energy Projects Group
Department of Environmental Health and Engineering
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
3900 Ambassador Drive, Suite 301
Anchorage, AK 99508
Prepared For:
City of Huslia and Huslia Tribal Council
August 2014
Contents
I. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 2
II. Community Overview ........................................................................................................................... 2
III. Management Structure ......................................................................................................................... 4
IV. Primary Operator .................................................................................................................................. 5
V. Secondary Operator .............................................................................................................................. 5
VI. Financial Data ........................................................................................................................................ 5
VII. Capital Replacement Schedule ............................................................................................................. 6
VIII. Legal Authority and Issues .................................................................................................................... 6
IX. Insurance ............................................................................................................................................... 6
X. Regulatory Compliance ......................................................................................................................... 7
XI. Inter‐organizational Relationships ........................................................................................................ 7
XII. Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 7
I. Executive Summary
The City of Huslia and the Huslia Traditional Council are implementing a biomass heating system
to supply heat to the water treatment plant, washeteria, and clinic in the community. The project
will install a Garn 2000 cordwood boiler that will be located in a prefabricated building across the
street from the end‐user buildings. The heated water from the biomass boiler will be sent to the
water plant/washeteria building and the clinic building where it will tie in with each existing heating
system. The current total fuel usage for the end‐user buildings is 14,850 gallons. The Garn 2000 will
use approximately 77 cords of wood to annually displace 8,474 gallons of fuel. The cords will be
purchased from local vendors for $300 per cord, providing jobs to the people of Huslia and
increasing cash flow in the community. The project will save the community $34,742 annually.
II. Community Overview
The City of Huslia, Alaska is located along the northeast side of the Koyukuk River in the interior
region of the state. It lies within the Koyukuk National Wildlife Refuge just south of the Purcell
Mountain range. Huslia is approximately 290 miles west of Fairbanks, the regional hub, which
serves as the medical, economic, and transportation center of the region. Temperatures average ‐
20 to ‐9 degrees Fahrenheit in the winter and 52 to 70 during the summer. Temperature extremes
have been recorded from ‐65 in the winter and 90 in the summer. Huslia is a Koyukon Athabascan
village practicing a traditional subsistence lifestyle.
Huslia is a second‐class incorporated city inhabited predominantly by Koyukuk‐hotana
Athabaskans. The state listed population as of 2013 is 322 people. The village has a school, clinic,
and grocery store. The community relies heavily on subsistence food gathering. According to the
online Alaska Division of Community and Regional Affairs database, between the years of 1990 and
2010, the population trend for Huslia increased approximately 31%.
Land transportation is mostly by ATV in the summer and snow machine in the winter. The
Koyukuk River is navigable by small boats from breakup in mid‐May through September. Daily
passenger flights are available to Huslia from Fairbanks year round on Wright Air and Ravn Air.
Freight service is available from Fairbanks.
Huslia is located in remote Alaska and is not connected to the road system. Huslia does have a
state‐owned, gravel runway. Fairbanks International Airport in Fairbanks accommodates jet service
from multiple locations in Alaska, the lower 48 states, and international destinations.
When river water levels permit, goods are barged from Fairbanks up the Koyukuk River.
Residents commonly travel by boat, snowmobile, and all‐terrain vehicles; however, transportation
to and from the village is predominantly by airplane. Huslia primarily has gravel roads within the
village.
Current infrastructure in Huslia consists of a K‐12 school, City office building, Tribal office
building, post office, health clinic, and water plant. Huslia is a piped community in that it has both
water and sewer to all public facilities and homes.
The primary energy source for the production of heat is #1 fuel oil, also known as “diesel fuel”
and “home heating oil.” The oil is an arctic blend that does not gel in extremely low temperatures.
Energy content of fuel oil is typically 125,000‐135,000 British Thermal Units (BTUs) per gallon. Fuel
oil is burned in boilers or furnaces to produce heat for commercial and residential facilities.
While most residents of Huslia rely upon heating fuel to heat their homes and domestic hot
water, many also supplement their oil heating with wood heat. Residents harvest and process (cut,
haul, and chop) their own wood from the surrounding forest.
The key assumptions of this operational plan are as follows: The biomass boiler system will only
serve the water plant, washeteria, and clinic. The biomass boiler will be the primary heat source in
the water plant/washeteria and clinic buildings and will be backed up by the two existing oil fired
boilers in each building. The water plant and washeteria is owned and operated by the City of
Huslia. The clinic is owned and operated by the Tribal Council. The City and The Tribal Council will
purchase the wood from local suppliers. Specifications for the wood supplied will be as defined in
the attached wood specification. The local suppliers of wood shall follow the attached forestry plan
when gathering wood and shall supply wood that meets the attached wood specification.
III. Management Structure
The city water plant operator will operate the biomass boiler as part of their daily duties. This
will include firing the biomass boiler (loading with wood) approximately three times per day and
coordinating wood purchases with the City Mayor and the Tribal Administrator. The operator will
also manage the fenced wood yard next to the biomass boiler building. The city water plant
operator reports to the city council.
The Administrator at the City of Huslia will handle all coordination and financial matters with
ANTHC, Doyon Ltd., and with the local suppliers. The City Administrator is also responsible for
assuring that wood is gathered as defined by the Forestry Plan and meets the wood specification
attached to this document. The City Administrator is employed by the City of Huslia.
As necessary, the city water plant operator and the Tribal Administrator will coordinate with the
City Administrator. The City of Huslia owns the water plant. The City Administrator is employed by
the City Council.
Doyon Ltd. Is the primary landowner in the Huslia region. Doyon Ltd. will work with the City
Administrator to assure that the wood taken from Doyon land is gathered in accordance with the
Forestry Plan.
The biomass boiler and associated equipment will be fully commissioned once the installation is
complete. The water plant operator will take part in this commissioning and has been identified by
the City as the future biomass operator. Training of the water plant operator after commissioning is
the responsibility of the City of Huslia.
Staffing the water plant with operators is a city responsibility. Normally, this is done by hiring
and training local personnel and includes both a primary and back‐up operators. In the unlikely
situation that there are no local operators available, ANTHC will do what is necessary to train local
personnel on biomass operations.
The key personnel necessary to assure the initial success of this project are the project manager,
the installation team, and the commissioning team. The project manager is Eric Hanssen, Energy
Projects Manager for ANTHC. Mr. Hanssen has been directly involved in energy conservation and
renewable energy projects since 2013. He will be supported by a construction manager, certified
plumber, and certified electrician. Commissioning of the project will be accomplished by a team
consisting of the project manager, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, and the operator.
One assumption on this project is that $300 per cord will be enough of an incentive for the local
wood suppliers to provide wood. The Tribal Council members have stated they think is will be an
adequate price. This cost per cord is the equivalent of approximately $2.60 per gallon of # 1 fuel.
The present cost for oil purchased by the City of Huslia is $4.10 per gallon. Therefore, the price of
wood (white spruce) is approximately two‐thirds the price of oil at $300 per cord.
Another assumption made on this project is that the Alaska Forest Resources Act (FRPA) does
not apply to this small scale (approximately 77 cords per year) project. It appears that biomass
operations would not be considered “commercial” as defined by FRPA if the fuel consumption is less
than roughly 80 to 150 cords per year. As of this writing, the issue of FRPA applicability for small
rural energy projects is currently being considered by the Alaska Board of Forestry, with the
expectation that issues such as the “commercial operation” threshold will be clarified in the near
future.
IV. Primary Operator
The primary operator of the biomass system shall be the city water plant operator. As the
operator of the water plant, the city is responsible to assure that the primary operator carries out
his daily duties.
Financial responsibilities are the responsibility of city management. On a day to day basis, that
responsibility for this Huslia biomass project goes to the city clerk. It is his responsibility to assure
that the operator is trained, punctual, and has the skills and materials necessary to perform his job.
All expenses and revenue are handled and monitored by the City of Huslia. This includes any
auditing and generation of the annual report
V. Secondary Operator
It is the responsibility of the City of Huslia to assure that a back‐up operator is available in Huslia
to operate the biomass system and the water plant when the primary operator is not available.
VI. Financial Data
Revenue for the biomass operation at the Huslia water plant is generated through water and
sewer fees paid by the end users and heat purchased by the clinic. End users are the school, clinic,
City office, Tribal Office, several other public facilities and all homeowners.
The estimated annual expense for wood is 77 cords at a cost of $300 per cord or $23,100. This
is significantly less than the 8,474 gallons of oil at $4.10 per gallon or $34,743 the water plant
spends now. City funding previously set aside foil oil will now be used to purchase wood fuel
Maintenance and operations are the responsibility of the city and are not expected to be
significantly different than they are now. The annual revenue surplus will be used to lower the
water and sewer rates, increase the maintenance fund, and provide for a long term replacement
fund.
The key assumptions are that the Tribal Administrator will be responsible for paying the wood
suppliers. A 10 percent administrative fee may be added to the cost of the wood. Payment to the
wood suppliers for a cord of wood that meets the attached wood specification shall be at the rate of
$300. This amount may be changed by agreement of the Tribal Council and the city manager.
VII. Capital Replacement Schedule
The water plant is owned and operated by the City of Huslia. Capital replacement of the
biomass system shall be handled in the same manner as the rest of the water plant equipment. The
lower cost of fuel anticipated due to this biomass project will increase the funds available for capital
replacement.
The biomass boiler is the only high cost equipment in this project. It has an expected life of at
least 20 years and a cost of $20,868. Maintaining the infrastructure for this project is the
responsibility of the City of Huslia. The City of Huslia has the backing of ANTHC which has designed
and built most of the water plants in rural Alaska and now plays a major role in helping these
communities identify and implement both energy conservation and renewable energy projects. The
ANTHC Tribal Utility Support Program (TUS) has the responsibility of responding to emergencies and
developing contingency plans as necessary.
VIII. Legal Authority and Issues
A Cooperative Project Agreement (CPA) must be signed defining the responsibilities of the major
parties involved and authorizing the installation of the biomass boiler.
A detailed Forestry Plan has been generated specifically for this project.
Detailed civil, mechanical, and electrical design drawings have been created, stamped, and
signed that define all necessary modifications required to install the boiler. The required design
review has been held.
Authorization from the local land owner (Doyon Ltd.) to gather wood for this project is expected
in the very near future.
The Garn 2000 will be installed in compliance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and all
applicable local, state, and national codes.
IX. Insurance
The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium will carry the appropriate insurance during
construction. Once installed, the insurance provided by the City of Huslia will cover the installed
boiler and operator(s) employed by the City.
X. Regulatory Compliance
The Garn 2000 biomass boiler meets all Environmental Protection Agency requirements and the
implementation approach has been approved by the manufacturer, Fire Marshall, and meets all
local, state, and federal requirements
XI. Inter‐organizational Relationships
The major organizations involved in this project are the Alaska Energy Authority (Grantor), City
of Huslia (Grantee), Huslia Traditional Council (Operators of Clinic), ANTHC (Project Management &
Design), Tanana Chiefs Conference (Forestry Plan), Doyon Ltd. (Owner of Biomass Resources), and
Interior Regional Housing Authority (Construction Resources).
As mentioned earlier, the only significant assumptions are that $300 per cord will be adequate
to stimulate the wood gatherers in Huslia to sell wood to the City and that FRPA does not apply to
this small project.
As the operator of the Huslia water plant, the city is responsible for providing qualified primary
and back‐up operators.
Site control of the water plant in Huslia has been established as the City of Huslia for many
years. The City of Huslia is also the Grantee for this project.
XII. Summary
The main objectives of this biomass project for the Huslia water plant, washeteria, and clinic are
to reduce operating costs and reduce the use of imported oil. Based on our analysis, this project
should result in a major reduction in the 14,850 gallons of oil consumed in the end‐user buildings
each year. Biomass is estimated to displace 8,474 gallons of heating fuel per year.
City of Huslia
COST ESTIMATE
Huslia Biomass System Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimate Daily Operations Labor (hrs/yr) (hrs/day X 210 Days/yr)280Periodic Maintenance Labor (hrs/yr) (hrs/week X 28 wks/yr)49Total Annual Labor (hrs/yr)328.93Total Annual Labor Cost ($/yr) (wage rate = $22/hr)$7,236Annual Replacement Parts Cost ($/yr)$945Total Annual O&M Cost ($/yr)$8,182Garn Boiler Replacement Parts ListDescriptionQTY Unit Unit Price TotalFrequency/YearAnnual Cost VendorGasket Service Pack Horizontal Flue P-00 2 Ea $68.00 $136.00 0.5 $68.00 GarnIndoor Door Tadpole Gasket P-0008 1 Ea $77.00 $77.00 1 $77.00 GarnManway Cover gasket P-00011 1 Ea $19.00 $19.00 1 $19.00 GarnBlower Wheel P-0001 1 Ea $100.00 $100.00 0.5 $50.00 GarnBlower Motor for Garn JR 1000 H 1/2 Hp In1 Ea $331.00 $331.00 0.5 $165.50 GarnMotor Mount Kit P-0031 1 Ea $87.00 $87.00 0.5 $43.50 GarnBlower Wheel Puller P-0075 1 Ea $19.00 $19.00 0.25 $4.75 GarnAnode Rod P-0014 1 Ea $52.00 $52.00 0.5 $26.00 GarnRod and Brush Kit P-0053 1 Ea $68.00 $68.00 0.5 $34.00 GarnFibreglass Cleaning Rod 36" P-0045 1 Ea $8.00 $8.00 1 $8.00 GarnFlat Gasket Kit P-0073 1 Ea $32.00 $32.00 1 $32.00 GarnSeasonal Water Quality Testing 2 Ea $150.00 $300.00 1 $300.00 GarnGarn Chemicals 1 Set $235.00 $235.00 0.5 $117.50 Garn $945.25Total Annual Replacement Parts
Cost Estimate for Biomass Heating Project
Qty Rate 134 126 117 115 127 126 85 108 35 35 35 Labor
Project Management (Match)830$
Civil 85 8 8.5 10,200$ Site Visit 1 1,100$ 1,100$
Mechanical 125 8 12.5 15,000$ Site Visit 2 1,100$ 2,200$
Electrical 45 8 4.5 5,400$ Site Visit 1 1,100$ 1,100$
CAD 171 8 17.1 17,100$
Survey 40 8 4.0 4,800$ Site Visit 1 1,100$ 1,100$
53,330$ 5,500$
Biomass Harvesting Plan 15,000$
Biomass Operations Plan 10,000$
Subtotal 30,500$
83,830$
Total hours > 330.0 150.0 0.0 0.0 210.0 305.0 100.0 0.0 940.0 170.0 30.0
Mobilization Man-Days
Equipment Shipping 2.0 1 1,700$
Takeoffs 3.0 1 1 7,590$
Training 0.0 -$
Materials Receiving and Inventory 4.0 1 1 1 13,520$
Set up Materials Storage/Yard 1.0 0.5 0.5 1 2,115$
Expediting to Const Site 1.0 -$
Housing
Local Rental -$ Rental 45 200$ 9,000$ 9,000.00$
Camp set up 11 -$
-$
-$ Equipment Rental 15 250$ 3,750$ 3,750.00$
Sitework & Foundation/Slab 12.0 1 2 1 28,680$ Garn 2000 Boiler 1 20,500$ 20,500$ 9,500$ 30,000.00$
Arctic Pipe 5.0 1 1 8,450$ Arctic Pipe 250 50$ 12,500$ 8,000$ 20,500.00$
Building Erection 6.0 1 3 14,340$ Boiler Accessories 1 3,100$ 3,100$ 300$ 3,400.00$
Boiler Installation/Framing 9.0 1 3 21,510$ Prefab Building 1 15,000$ 15,000$ 2,500$ 17,500.00$
Plumbing 7.0 1 8,820$ Foundation 1 7,500$ 7,500$ 2,000$ 9,500.00$
Electrical & Controls 8.0 1 10,160$ Pipe & Fittings 1 10,000$ 10,000$ 1,000$ 11,000.00$
Heat Exchanger 2 3,500$ 7,000$ 200$ 7,200.00$
Controls 1 2,000$ 2,000$ 100$ 2,100.00$
Insulation 1 600$ 600$ 200$ 800.00$
-$
Building Penetration 1.0 1 1 1 2,040$ Pipe & Fittings 2 2,000$ 4,000$ 700$ 4,700.00$
Plumbing 10.0 1 1 16,100$ Heat Exchanger 2 3,500$ 7,000$ 200$ 7,200.00$
Electrical & Controls 3.5 1 4,445$ Pumps 2 750$ 1,500$ 200$ 1,700.00$
Heating Elements 3 1,200$ 3,600$ 200$ 3,800.00$
Controls 2 2,000$ 4,000$ 100$ 4,100.00$
BTU Meter 2 3,000$ 6,000$ 100$ 6,100.00$
Connection and install 1.0 1 1 1 1 3,730$ Flow meter 2 4,500$ 9,000$ 100$ 9,100.00$
Programming and interface 1.0 1 1,260$
-$ -$
Glycol 1.0 1 1 2,110$ Glycol 6 1,150$ 6,900$ 1,000$ 7,900.00$
Startup and Operator Training.-$ -$
Literature and References 4.0 1 5,040$ Publishing 4 520$ 2,080$ 15$ 2,095.00$
Training 5.0 1 2 9,800$ -$ -$
-$
Job Clean Up/ Final Inspection -$ -$ -$
Preliminary Clean Up 1.0 1 2 1,960$ -$ -$
Final Inspection Punch List 1.0 1 1 1 3,790$ -$ -$
Final Clean Up 1.0 1 2 1 2,310$ -$ -$
-$ -$
De-Mobe -$
Pack Up and Crate 1.0 1 1,260$ -$ -$
Shipping 1.0 1 850$ -$ 3,500$ 3,500.00$
-$ -$
-$ -$ -$
Financial Close out/ Auditing 2.0 1 2,520$ -$ -$
As builting 2.0 1 2,520$ -$ -$
-$ -$
Construction Management 15,000$
Project Management (Match)3,370$
194,990$
135,030$ 29,915$ 164,945$
359,935$
443,765$
488,087$
2 years escalation @ 3% / year 15,903$
503,990$
4,990$
499,000$
$34,742
Simple Payback of Grant Investment 14.36 yrs
Final
Labor + Materials + Freight
Total Mat
*Note
MATERIALS / SUBCONTRACT
Local PlumberSupport Activities
Fixed estimate @ 120 /hr.
*Note LocalLabor ElectricianLocal OperatorHuslia Biomass Cost Estimate
PlumbershippingHuslia Biomass Cost Estimate
Materials
+ FreightTotalItemOperatorFreight
Production
Rate
EngineerDays
(60hr.
Week)Crew LeadSuperLABOR
MechanicEstimated annual savings
Assumptions:
- Local accomodations are available.
- All exterior piping run on sleepers above
No. Cost Ea Total Cost
BTU Meter install
Design
End-User Building Integration
ELEMENT
Fixed estimate @ 120 /hr.
Biomass Building and Boiler
Fixed estimate @ 120 /hr.
Fixed estimate @ 120 /hr.
Total Construction Phase Labor
Total
All + contingency
Labor + Mat + Frgt + Design
Fixed estimate @ 100 /hr.
Grant Request
Design Subtotal
Design Total
Design Travel Total
Match
City of Huslia
PLAN SET DRAWINGS
*75.+##.#5-#
$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/
%10%'267#.
2.#05'607/$'4 *5.ÄÄ
#06*%241,'%607/$'4 #0Ä<
4755+#
#0%*14#)'
01/'
-16<'$7'
$#4419
,70'#7
(#+4$#0-5 %#0#&#
-1&+#-
$'6*'.
70#.#5-#
*75.+#
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
5JGGV.KUV6CDNG
5*''6
07/$'4 5*''66+6.'
5+6'5647%674'5
9#6'4
219'4#0&%1//70+%#6+10
5#0+6#4;5'9'4
6121#0&8')'6#6+10
#$$4'8+#6+105.+0'.#$'.5
9#6'4
5#0+6#4;5'9'4
6121)4#2*;#0&8')'6#6+10
219'4#0&%1//70+%#6+10
5+6'
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
%Ä
%+8+..')'0&*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI64+$#.
*
'#.6 *%1 0 5146+7/#.#5 -#0 #6
+8
'%Ä
%1//70+6;5+6'2.#0*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.%1//70+6;5+6'2.#0
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI64+$#.
*
'#.6 *%1 0 5146+7/#.#5 -#0 #6
+8
'%Ä
5+6')4#&+0)2.#0*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.5+6')4#&+0)2.#0
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
/Ä
/'%*#0+%#..')'0&*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#..+0'.')'0&
'37+2/'06 8#.8'5
12'0 %.15'&
(#+.
12'0
(#+.
%.15'&
+05647/'06#6+10
#$$4'8+#6+105
¨
¨
'37+2/'06.#$'.5
2+2+0)5;/$1.5
*8#%
+05647/'06#6+105;56'/5#0˹/#6+1051%+'6;
+5# 6#)+&'06+(+%#6+10.'66'45
(+456.'66'4 57%%''&+0).'66'45
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
/Ä
/'%*#0+%#.
5'37'0%'1(
12'4#6+105*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.5'37'0%'1(12'4#6+10
$+1/#55$1+.'45;56'/
*2Ä*2Ä#0&*:Ä
$+1/#55$1+.'4#+4+06#-'&#/2'4
':*#756(#0
'(Ä
$+1/#55$1+.'45;56'/
*2Ä*2Ä#0&*:Ä
*'#6':%*#0)'45%*'&7.'
5;/$1..1%#6+10
5'48+%'
/#07(#%674'4
/1&'./$*
67$'5+&'#%1.&5*'..5+&'$*16
4'/#4-5
(.7+&)2/'96 .96 ¾2 (.7+&)2/ ')6 .)6 ¾2
27/25%*'&7.'
5;/$1..1%#6+10
5'48+%'
/#07(#%674'4
/1&'.
(.7+&)2/*'#&
(6 42//1614 4'/#4-5
6;2' 6'/2 *281.652*
/+5%'..#0'175'37+2/'06.+56
5;/$1.36;.1%#6+10
5'48+%'
/#07(#%674'4
/1&'.4'/#4-5
$1+.'45%*'&7.'
5;/$1. /#07(#%674'/1&'.(7'.$.19'4 &+/'05+105 4'/#4-5
81.652*
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI64+$#.
*
'#.6 *%1 0 5146+7/#.#5 -#0 #6
+8
'/Ä
$+1/#55$1+.'4
411/2.#0*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.$+1/#55$7+.&+0)(.1142.#0
Ä
016'
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI64+$#.
*
'#.6 *%1 0 5146+7/#.#5 -#0 #6
+8
'/Ä
$1+.'45%*'/#6+%*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.$+1/#55$1+.'45%*'/#6+%
Ä
%.+0+%$1+.'4411/5%*'/#6+%
Ä
962$1+.'4411/5%*'/#6+%
Ä
&'5%4+26+10
#$$4'8+#6+105
)'0'4#.'.'%64+%#.914-52'%+(+%#6+105 5;/$1.&'5%4+26+105;/$1.
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
'Ä
'.'%64+%#..')'0&*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.
.+)*6+0)(+:674'5%*'&7.'
5;/$1.5 &'5%4+26+10 81.65
8#% .#/29#665 /#07(#%674'414
#22418'&'37#..1%#6+10 /1706+0)
#ODCUUCFQT&TKXG5WKVG
#PEJQTCIG#NCUMC
Ä
&
#
$
%
&KXKUKQPQH'PXKTQPOGPVCN
*GCNVJCPF'PIKPGGTKPI
'Ä
'.'%64+%#.
5%*'&7.'5*75.+##-$+1/#55*'#6+0)5;56'/%10%'267#.