HomeMy WebLinkAboutAK Gateway School District Tok Biomass Heating Projec 2010 Grant AppAlaska Energy Authority
Round IV
Grant Application
Tok School Biomass Heating Project:
Phase II
Table of Contents Section
Regional School Board Resolution 1
Funding Application 2
Resumes 3
Feasibility Studies 4
Proposed Project Schedule 5
Map of Tok Area Wildfire Remediation 6
Available Biomass 7
Conceptual Design 8
State of Alaska Use Permit 9
Project Cost Estimate Summary 10
Cost Worksheet 11
Budget Sheet 12
Engineering & Business License 13
Renewable Energy Fund Round IV
Grant Application
AEA 11-005 Application Page 1 of 23 9/15/2010
Application Forms and Instructions
The following forms and instructions are provided to assist you in preparing your application for
a Renewable Energy Fund Grant. An electronic version of the Request for Applications (RFA)
and the forms are available online at: http://www.akenergyauthority.org/RE_Fund-IV.html
Grant Application
Form
GrantApp4.doc Application form in MS Word that includes an outline
of information required to submit a complete
application. Applicants should use the form to assure
all information is provided and attach additional
information as required.
Application Cost
Worksheet
Costworksheet4.doc Summary of Cost information that should be
addressed by applicants in preparing their application.
Grant Budget Form GrantBudget4.doc A detailed grant budget that includes a breakdown of
costs by milestone and a summary of funds available
and requested to complete the work for which funds
are being requested.
Grant Budget Form
Instructions
GrantBudgetInstructions4.pdf Instructions for completing the above grant budget
form.
• 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 grant budget for completion of each phase.
• 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 satisfied 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.
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 is 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
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 2 of 23 9/15/2010
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
Alaska Gateway School District
Type of Entity:
K-12 Public School
Mailing Address
Box 226, Tok Alaska 99780
Physical Address
Mile 1313.5 Alaska Highway, Tok Alaska
Telephone
907 883 5151
Fax
907 883 5154
Email
smacmanus@agsd.us
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT / GRANTS MANAGER
Name
Scott MacManus
Title
Executive Director
Mailing Address
Box 226, Tok Alaska 99780
Telephone
907 883 5151
Fax
907 883 5154
Email
smacmanus@agsd.us
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
x A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Yes
or
No
1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its project by
its 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 Yes or No in the box )
Yes
or
No
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.
Yes
or
No
1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the attached
grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the
application.)
Yes
or
No
1.2.5 W e intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant
funds for the benefit of the general public.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 3 of 23 9/15/2010
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
This is intended to be no more than a 1-2 page overview of your project.
2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 5 word title for your project)
Tok School Biomass Heating Project: Phase II
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.
The Project is located at Mile 1313.5 Alaska Highway, in Tok. On the Tok School Campus.
The entire Upper Tanacross Valley will feel the benefits from the project. The community of Tok
will be the primary beneficiary of the energy savings provided by the biomass heating project,
however the other communities that are part of the Alaska Gateway School District, Dot Lake,
Eagle, Tetlin, Tanacoss, Mentasta Lake, and Northway will also benefit from the reduced
operating costs at the Tok School Campus.
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
Wind X Biomass or Biofuels
Hydro, including run of river Transmission of Renewable Energy
Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas
Heat Recovery from existing sources Hydrokinetic
Solar Storage of Renewable
Other (Describe)
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Reconnaissance X Design and Permitting
Feasibility X Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
Phase I of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project is scheduled to be complete in October
2010. This project was developed using AEA Round I Grant Funding. The project consisted of
a Biomass heating facility that contained an automated biomass heating system that will heat
the existing K-12 School. Phase II, which is seeking AEA Round IV Grant Funding, is an
extension of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project and will consist of the Bid Alternates that
were developed during Phase I but were not constructed. The Bid Alternates that would be of
most benefit to the facility and will be part of the Scope of W ork for Phase II will consist of:
1. Bid Alternate 1: Extending a hot water heating loop and related mechanical and
electrical integration from the Biomass Heating Facility to a detached multipurpose
building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range and also to an additional
detached Zamboni garage. Both buildings are located on the Tok School Campus
2. Bid Alternate 3: Adding a heat exchanger in the K-12 school building to isolate the new
biomass boiler system fluid from the existing K-12 school heating system fluid.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 4 of 23 9/15/2010
2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT
Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this project, (such as reduced fuel
costs, lower energy costs, etc.)
The Project Feasibility Assessment was completed for Phase I of the project in 2008 prior to the
submission for AEA Round I Grant Funding. Incorporated into this submittal for AEA Round IV
Grant Funding are the assumptions that were gathered during the Phase I Feasibility
Assessment which are still applicable to Phase II, as it is an extension of Phase I. W here it is
relevant to the review and assessment the information has been updated to 2010 figures.
As is described in detail throughout this application, the immediate and most obvious benefit is
the cost savings to the school district through the direct reduction of heating fuel costs for the
district. Based on the current economic spreadsheet, assuming the entire project is funded, the
school is estimated to save around $84,000 in fuel oil cost the first year, and with conservative
inflation rates, would save or avoid costs of nearly $8,100,000 in 30 years.
The project will also assist in the remediation of the wildfire threat to the communities in the
Upper Tanana Valley, by using wood fiber that is removed during Wildfire Remediation
programs as a heat source for Tok School. The community would finally be able to have a
sustainable way of removing hazardous fuels from around homes and the community, and a
sustainable energy supply that has an annual cost which is affordable and has a stable price.
The move to a sustainable energy source also allows the School District to become self
sufficient from an endless request for more funds for increasing energy cost. A sustainable
economy will be nourished that does not export local hard earned dollars out of the local
economy. This will create long term employment and opportunity in the Upper Tanana Valley.
Lastly, safety for families, schools, and communities that will be the result of removing wildfire
threat and instead using this material to a positive use for our future. The School District will
begin to turn a state funded liability of hundreds of millions of dollars in firefighting, into an asset
worth millions of dollars. The facility constructed in Phase I will become a model for dozens of
similar situations around the state. The example will prove what can be done with the world
class renewable resources of our forests.
The benefit's that this project will have on the community of Tok and the upper Tanana region is
of paramount importance. Sustainability, self sufficiency and the safety of our community will be
the result of using a local renewable resource for long-term energy, which up to this date have
been a liability and a looming annual threat of a disaster in the form of wildfire. This project will
initiate the conversion from fossil fuel to a wood fiber based industry in the Upper Tanana that
will create the foundation for creating heat and power from the renewable resource of the
Tanana Valley Forest. A sustainable economy will be created that does not export hard earned
local dollars out of the local economy, and will create long term employment opportunity.
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.
A $754,651 grant from the Alaska Energy Authority is requested in this proposal that will be
used to fund Phase II of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project.
Phase I of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project, is scheduled for completion in October
2010. Phase I was developed using Alaska Energy Authority Round I Grant Funding and
additional local funding listed below.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 5 of 23 9/15/2010
The Tok Umbrella Corporation received a $500,000 legislative appropriation that has funded the
purchase of a wood grinder, loader, and additional storage area within the facility. The grinder
will be operated by Tok Area Forestry to grind the biomass harvested from the wildfire fuel
reduction project that will be used to fuel the boiler at Tok School, and will provide an important
match for the project.
The district currently has between 1000 and 1200 tons of biomass decked at the location of the
project. Using the figure of $60 per chipped ton of biomass, this means that the district has
between $60,000 and $72,000 in fiber available on hand.
A detailed cost benefit estimate can be found in Appendix B
2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY
Include a summary of grant request and your project’s total costs and benefits below.
Grant Costs
(Summary of funds requested)
2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $754,651
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $560,000
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $4,000,000
Project Costs & Benefits
(Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully
operational project)
2.7.4 Total Project Cost (Summary from Cost Worksheet
including estimates through construction)
$4,560,000
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $39,000,000 over 30 years
2.7.6 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 your application
(Section 5.)
This benefit will be in
terms of long term jobs
created, keeping funds in
the community, and
saving firefighting dollars.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 6 of 23 9/15/2010
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). If the applicant does not have a project manager
indicate how you intend to solicit project management support. If the applicant expects project
management assistance from AEA or another government entity, state that in this section.
The Project Manager and main point of contact will be Scott MacManus, who is also the
principal investigator of this application. Mr. MacManus has had experience in project
management for both construction and education programs. He will coordinate the stages of
the project between the district, engineer and construction companies and with the Alaska
Energy Authority, ensuring timely completion of the project.
Mr. MacManus will be assisted by Chris Rauch District Maintenance Director, Nathan Ratz,
from CTA Engineering, and Jeff Hermanns, Tok Area Forestry.
Appendix 3:
The follow resumes are enclosed:
Scott MacManus - AGSD, Project Manager
Nathan Ratz - CTA, Mechanical Designer
Jeffery Hermanns- State of Alaska, Tok Area Forester
Nick Salmon - CTA, Project Manager
Todd Poage - AGSD Superintendent
Marion MacManus - AGSD, Business Manager
Christian Rauch - AGSD, Maintenance Supervisor
3.2 Project Schedule
Include a schedule for the proposed work that will be funded by this grant. (You may include a
chart or table attachment with a summary of dates below.)
Project Schedule flow chart can be found in Appendix 5
3.3 Project Milestones
Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. The
Milestones must also be included on your budget worksheet to demonstrate how you propose to
manage the project cash flow. (See Section 2 of the RFA or the Budget Form.)
The key tasks for this project are as follows:
1: Reconnaissance (completed)
2: Feasibility Phase I (completed)
Field Visit
Pre-Feasibility Report
Cost Estimate
AEA Round 1 Grant Application
AEA Round 1 Grant Award & Notice to Proceed
Field Visit
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 7 of 23 9/15/2010
35% Complete Design Development Documents
AEA, Agencies, AGSD review & comment
3: Final Design Phase I (completed)
Complete Design Development Documents
Complete Cost estimate/QA/QC Review
AEA, Agencies, AGSD review & comment
Complete Construction Documents
Complete Cost estimate/QA/QC Review
AEA, Agencies, AGSD review & comment
4: Construction Phase I (Project Substantial Completion Date October 2010)
Bid/Negotiate
Release
Bid Date
Award
Procurement of W ood Fired Boiler/Fabrication
Mobilization
Begin mechanical integration with existing boiler room
Complete mechanical integration with existing boiler room
Begin construction of wood storage/boiler building
Complete construction of wood storage/boiler building
Delivery of wood fired boiler
Begin mechanical integration within wood storage/boiler building
Complete mechanical integration within wood storage/boiler building
Substantial completion/punch list
Commissioning
Final Completion
1 YR W arranty Review (complete in conjunction with Part II Substantial Completion)
5: Feasibility Phase II (In Progress)
Cost Estimate for Bid Alternates
AEA Round IV Grant Application
AEA Round IV Grant Award and Notice to Proceed
6: Final Design Phase II
Revise Construction Documents to reflect Phase II Scope of W ork for Bidding
AEA, agencies, AGSD Review and comment
7: Construction Phase II
Bid /Negotiation
Release
Bid Date
Award
Mobilization
Begin Mechanical integration with existing boiler room
Complete mechanical integration with exiting boiler room
Begin mechanical integration and install heating loop to multi purpose building &
Zamboni garage
Complete mechanical integration and install heating loop to multi purpose building &
Zamboni garage
Add heat exchanger and boiler feed unit
Substantial completion/punch list
Commissioning
Final completion
1 year warranty review
See attached Project Schedule in Appendix 5
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 8 of 23 9/15/2010
3.4 Project Resources
Describe the personnel, contractors, 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.
Personnel:
Professional design services will be provided by the Architectural / Engineering design team
used to complete Phase I. By using a consistent A / E design team the project is insured
efficiencies and seamless delivery as the Phase II design was completed during Phase I. The
professional design services were originally determined through a competitive request for
qualifications. The A / E design team was selected based on experience in integration wood
fired heating systems into school buildings.
Contractors:
To be determined through competitive bid process and managed by the Construction Project
Manager.
Equipment:
Phase II of the project will require integration into the newly constructed Biomass Heating
Facility, which was constructed in Phase I. Phase II which is included in this proposal for Round
IV Grand Funding will expand the use of the new biomass facility by extending a hot water
heating loop and related mechanical and electrical integration from the Biomass Heating Facility
to the additional outbuildings on the Tok School Campus, and adding a heat exchanger boiler
feed unit to create an isolated system from the new biomass boiler to the exiting K-12 School
Building.
Phase I which is scheduled for completion in October 2010, contains a new boiler building with
total storage capacity of 350 tons of biomass fuel. The facility site has enough access for large
trucks and chip trailers to maneuver. The storage capacity of the facility should allow for
approximately one month supply of wood fuel to minimize the need to chip wood fuel in severe
weather conditions. The building includes storage for a grinder which has been purchased by
Tok Umbrella Corporation.
Services:
Professional design services will be provided by the Architectural / Engineering design team
used to complete Phase I. By using a consistent A / E design team the project is insured
efficiencies and seamless delivery as the Phase II design was completed during Phase I. The
professional design services were originally determined through a competitive request for
qualifications. The A / E design team was selected based on experience in integration wood
fired heating systems into school buildings.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
A communications plan will be developed as part of the project, and all engaged parties
(Consultants, Contractors, Engineers, AEA Staff and AGSD Staff) will be briefed on the plan.
Communications will be the primary responsibility the Project Manager, who will work closely
with Engineers and Contractors to ensure that each party understands their role, and what the
time lines are, and will trouble shoot the issues that will arise during design and construction.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 9 of 23 9/15/2010
During Phase I of the project the AEA Staff was fully integrated into the communication chain.
They were invited to attend all meetings, consulted on all major decisions, and were copied on
all meeting minutes.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
While an attempt has been made to foresee the possible events and issues that could delay the
project, or otherwise cause problems completing Phase II of the Tok School Biomass Heating
Project , there are scenarios where by problems may occur, as follows:
Cost Increases that are unforeseen and go beyond the Scope of Work indicated
in the proposal.
Construction delays which include inclement weather, or gaining the required
approvals from the Fire Marshal and Division of Fire and Life Safety.
Mechanical operating challenges with the equipment, eg; filtering out "stringers",
or power outages
Clearly, all problems that come along will not be foreseen, however, ensuring that realistic
planning timelines and project flowcharts are in place, contingencies developed, and ensuring
that lines of communication are used, will reduce many of the problems that might otherwise
occur. To some extent, installing liquidated damages agreements into each contract, and
clearly outlining these at the start of each phase, with clear benchmarks in place, should serve
to reduce delays.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 10 of 23 9/15/2010
SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
• Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of
the RFA.
• The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to
undertake with grant funds.
• If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project provide a
plan and grant budget form for completion of each phase.
• 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 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 for the market to be served by your project.
The volume of wood that is available to process into biomass fuel for use in this project is
incredible. W ith the annual required biomass required, the estimated harvest would only require
between 15 to 30 acres of the typical forest found within a 10 mile radius of the school if one was
harvesting specifically for this use.
The first source of material is the trees removed from the hazardous fuels reduction projects in
the Tok Area. Over the last 18 years all of the material removed to create a safety zone around
homes and business for defensible space has been burned in the open and at a tremendous
cost. There has been very little use of this material for firewood with 99% being piled and
burned. A Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CW PP) was signed off by the community and
State of Alaska agencies in 2008. This was and continues to be a collaborative effort of
community leaders and state and federal agencies to address the issue of the material which is
an extreme wildfire hazard the community faces annually.
The second source is from Tok’s two small, longtime sawmill businesses that have never had a
use or market for the waste products from their milling operations. This includes tons of
sawdust, planner shavings, and slabs. These materials are available for purchase at a very
reasonable price and could be a significant source of biomass for the school. This would be a
tremendous benefit to the milling operations and the timber industry in the upper Tanana, with a
source of revenue never before realized in the interior of Alaska.
One of the most basic and sensible approaches agreed to in the CW PP to was the remove of the
hazardous fuels surrounding homes, schools, businesses, public building, communication
facilities, roads and highways. The State of Alaska Forestry worked to obtain a grant agreement
with US Fish and W ildlife Service Tetlin W ildlife Refuge funding approximately $180,000 dollars
which was used for the removal of hazardous fuels in the Tok Area. This includes the Tok
School where 50 Acres of hazardous fuels (spruce trees) were selectively removed and decked
for future chipping. This will be approximately 1,000 Tons of biomass alone. An additional 70
acres will be harvested on nearby Red Fox road less than 3 miles from the school, which will
generate an estimated 2,100 tons of biomass that could be used at the school. Additionally 60
acres will be thinned and removed from around senior citizen’s homes in the Tok Area. This will
generate an additional estimated 100 to 300 tons of biomass for the Tok School. This biomass/
hazardous fuel (spruce trees) have never had a use or value but have been a real cost and
liability to the land owner and the State of Alaska. This hazardous material (biomass) will now
have a value of $50 to $70 dollars per ton.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 11 of 23 9/15/2010
There is a goal over the next 5 to 10 years to remove 3,000 acres of highest priority hazardous
fuels in the Tok area. This is a hundred year rotation just within the highest priority areas for fuel
removal for the Tok School. The total stand of high volume hazardous fuels is over 39,000 acres
in Tok. By having a value for the material it will make it possible to sustainably remove this fuel
and turn a real liability into a real value. This simply cannot be overstated on the importance of
this to the Tok community. At the historic cost per acre it would require $7,500,000 million
dollars of funding to remove this hazardous fuel. This is far more fuel than the school alone
could use but would have a minimum value of at least $50 per ton or at least $4,500,000 million
dollars for biomass fuel. Biomass may also be harvested from clearing operations for private
land development, highway and road construction, and future pipeline construction. Waste
supply is also growing, due to ongoing timber harvest operations for firewood and sawlog
production in the area. Approximately 40 % of the forest is not suitable for commercial firewood
or sawlog products; the unusable waste is left on the ground, on the harvest unit landing or
disposed of in the log yards. This is at a considerable cost to the timber harvest operators with
an unrealized use for the material. The waste created by the timber harvest operations could be
utilized and transported in chip form or log form to the mill and / or school and purchased for
biomass fuel. The material that is available from this industry alone could annually heat the Tok
School.
This issue for the project will not be finding enough biomass wood fuel to keep the new biomass
facility operational. Instead the challenge is going to be not having enough capacity to fully
utilize the tremendous biomass resource which is available in the region. The constraints
associated with harvesting timber on federal land will not be an issue in the Tok Area. The vast
majority of land available for harvest is State of Alaska land, including land designated as State
Forest and private land with native corporations of Tanacross, Tetlin and Doyon. There is
widespread agreement among all landowners to this project and the harvest of hazardous fuels
or timber products in the Upper Tanana.
For attachments related to Section 4.1 please see
Appendix 6:
Hazardous fuels map
4.2 Existing Energy System
4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing 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 Tok School Campus includes the K-12 school, a detached multipurpose building housing an
ice hockey rink, shooting range, and restrooms; and a detached Zamboni garage. The K-12
school is approximately 75,000 SF in size. The shooting range and restroom portion of the
multipurpose building is the only part of the building heated and is approximately 10,000 SF.
The zamboni garage is approximately 1,400 SF.
The school is heated with a pair of fuel oil fired hot water boilers each with a 3,000,000 Btu/hr
capacity (output). The existing boiler operates at approximately 80% efficiency. A 1,000,000
Btu/hr (output) domestic hot water heater for lavatories and showers has a 600 gallon capacity
and represents a portion of the fuel oil use for the facility. The existing domestic hot water heater
operates at approximately 80% efficiency. The multipurpose building is heated with two fuel oil
fired boilers, one rated at 346,000 Btu/hr output and the other rated at 1,528,000 Btu/hr output.
These boilers also provide domestic hot water for the zamboni and the restrooms through an
indirect water heater. The zamboni garage is heated with a fuel oil fired boiler rated at 143,000
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 12 of 23 9/15/2010
Btu/hr output. All of these boilers operate at approximately 80% efficiency.
4.2.2 Existing 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.
Based on the last three years of fuel consumption, the school campus uses approximately
55,864 gallons of fuel oil each year at a current delivered cost of $2.75/gallon or $153,626 per
year.
The school, as the primary customer for heating fuel in the region, will have a negative impact on
the market for heating fuel following a transition to biomass fuels that are produced to reduce
consumption by 50,278 gallons a year. However, most of the cost of that fuel is transferred
outside the community, whereas the costs for biomass will remain in the community.
For attachments related to Section 4.2.2 please see
Appendix 6:
Hazardous fuels map
Appendix 7:
Decked wood photo
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
The existing energy use in the Tok Area and Upper Tanana consists of fuel oil, propane,
cordwood, wood pellets, wood chips and electricity. The use of fuel oil over the last two years
has dramatically shrunk in the residential market to an estimated 5 to 20 % of the total heating
energy. The majority of the population has added wood stoves and / or outdoor wood boilers
and plan to heat with wood use fuel oil only as a backup heating source.
The primary use for heating fuel oil is with state and federal government offices and buildings
and with some commercial businesses because of the lack of suitable alternatives. Some
businesses are using the outdoor (Central) wood boilers but they are very smoky and inefficient.
Fuel oil will have some of the market in the area for a long time, due to its dependability in cold
weather and as a backup system which is a must in this part of Alaska. Fuel oil is expensive,
and currently costs $2.75 a gallon and has cost as much as $4.10 just two years ago.
Propane is not used for heating by many facility owners. Propane freezes at minus 40 degrees
and so is not well suited to this country. Propane is the choice for cooking stoves. Propane has
become very expensive, and costs $79 for a 100lb tank.
Cordwood is a large market in the area, and is growing rapidly around the entire state for
residential use and for some business applications. Cordwood costs between $150 and $200
dollars cut and delivered. The demand for cordwood has created a supply shortage in the region
and the price has increased with demand. Most of the trees in the upper Tanana are not
cordwood trees. If the school were to burn cordwood it would be in direct competition for the
cordwood with the residential market that cannot meet current market demand.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 13 of 23 9/15/2010
Wood pellets are becoming increasing popular and are being imported into the area from as far
away as Idaho, and costs between $200 and $300 a ton. If a local manufacturer were to start
producing pellets consistently, the wood pellet market would greatly expand for residential and
commercial use. One person currently is burning wood chips in a homemade sawdust and chip
stove to heat their home and greenhouse.
There is no current market or use for sawdust, wood chips or small diameter trees that cannot be
used to produce cordwood. The school project would not be competing with anyone for this
biomass material. In fact it will help reduce the cost for timber harvest operations by enabling
them to be more efficient in the harvest of firewood and saw-logs by giving them a market for the
30% of their current harvest that is slash, and for which they currently have no market. Lastly
electricity in the upper Tanana is extremely expensive as it is generated from diesel. No facilities
in the region use electricity as a heat source and due to the current costs per kwH it is used very
sparingly for lights and necessities. Even with Power Cost Equalization, it is cost prohibitive for
most people, business, and facilities. The power company currently has no realistic plans to
produce reasonable power by alternative means within the next few years.
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
Proposed System
Phase II is an extension of Phase I of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project and will
consist of the Bid Alternates that were developed during Phase I. The Bid Alternates that
are to be incorporated in the Scope of W ork for AEA Round IV Grant Funding consist of:
1. Bid Alternate 1: Extending a hot water heating loop and related mechanical and
electrical integration from the Biomass Heating Facility to a detached multipurpose
building which houses an ice hockey rink and shooting range and also to an
additional detached Zamboni garage. Both buildings are located on the Tok
School Campus
2. Bid Alternate 3: Adding a heat exchanger in the K-12 school building to isolate the
new biomass boiler system fluid from the existing K-12 school heating system
fluid.
Phase I that was developed using AEA Round I Grand Funding is nearing completion.
The project consists of a new boiler building with storage capacity of 250 tons of wood
fuel in the fuel storage bunker and an overflow storage area that will hold 100 tons of
wood fuel. The overflow storage area will allow wood fuel to be processed in advance to
minimize the handling of the material, reduce contact with the ground (a potential source
of contamination), and provides the school with access to additional wood fuel during
extended periods of extreme weather. The wood fuel will be delivered to the biomass
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 14 of 23 9/15/2010
boiler by an automated auger and conveyer system. The facility has been located 250’
from the existing school with a separate entry access road created to allow enough
access for large trucks and chip trailers to maneuver and access the building without
disrupting the activities of the School Campus. Adequate space has been created on site
for log decks. By creating this space the School District will be able to take advantage of
available materials and will not be subject to having to purchase logs during their peak
prices. The storage capacity of the facility should allow for approximately one month
supply of wood fuel to minimize the need to chip wood fuel in severe weather conditions.
The building would be heated with residual heat from the boiler, hydronic unit heaters,
and in slab radiant floor heating system. The building includes storage for a chipper
which has been purchased by Tok Umbrella Corporation.
System Design
Renewable Energy Technology Specific to Project Location:
The outbuildings will be heated by the biomass boiler installed in Phase I. In Phase II the
connection to the outbuildings will be made using arctic pipe to address the extreme
temperatures experienced in Tok.
Optimum Installed Capacity:
The wood fired boiler is estimated to have an output capacity of 5,000,000 Btu/hr, or
approximately 75% of the likely existing boiler and domestic hot water peak load. Typical
load profiles for schools show that approximately 90% of the boiler run hours occur at
60% of the peak load or less. This smaller size (compared to the peak load) will allow
the wood boiler to operate in medium and high fire mode as often as possible which
optimizes efficiency and reduces emissions. The 5,000,000 Btu/hr boiler was also
selected to allow for future electrical co-generation. This size and the associated
electrical output matches well with the schools electrical load profile.
Anticipated capacity factor:
The anticipated capacity factor is 0.20. Unlike a power plant with a consistent base load,
a biomass boiler is used to heat a building, which has a variable load. The amount of
heat generated is directly proportional to outside air temperature. This capacity factor is
actually two to three times better than the existing connected heating equipment.
Anticipated annual generation:
Based upon current fuel oil consumption, the wood boiler is estimated to use 800 tons of
wood fuel each year. The Tok School is immediately adjacent to large forested areas
where active thinning is occurring, creating a steady supply of fuel in close proximity to
the facility. Thinning in the region typically generates more than 100 tons of material per
acre. The school could be heated on an annual basis with material from less than 10
acres per year. The material is likely to be staged in log decks similar to drying
processes used at lumber mills. Storing the wood fuel in this manner will minimize
handling of the trees and potential sources of contamination (from soil and rocks). The
wood fuel can be accessed throughout the winter and chipped directly in to a chip trailer.
The combustion of 800 tons of wood fuel is projected to produce 5,616,000,000 Btu’s of
heat energy for space heat and domestic hot water.
Anticipated barriers:
Service and technical support for the project are not in close proximity to the project site.
This could result in additional costs during the first year of operation to provide additional
training and support. Access to wood fuel in winter will present processing problems in
extreme extended severe weather.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 15 of 23 9/15/2010
Basic integration concept:
Underground arctic piping will be installed from the new boiler plant constructed in Phase
I to the multipurpose building and Zamboni garage mechanical rooms. The new primary
– secondary pumping system would be utilized to allow the biomass boiler to be the
primary boiler and allow the fuel oil boilers to operate to supplement the biomass boiler in
peak heating conditions and/or at other times when the biomass boiler is not functioning.
A heat exchanger will be installed in the mechanical room of the multipurpose building to
isolate the biomass boiler loop from the building loops.
Delivery methods:
The biomass boiler building has been constructed similar to any school capital project.
The building and systems has been designed by licensed professionals who will generate
construction documents and bid by General Contractors. The successful contractor
mobilized and constructed the building.
For attachments related to Sections 4.3 and 4.3.1 please see
Appendix 4:
Original Pre-feasibility Assessment for the Integration of Biomass Energy Systems
Connected boiler load summary
Economic Summaries
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 project will be constructed on land owned by the Alaska Gateway School District,
directly adjacent Tok School.
For attachments related to Section 4.3.2 please see
Appendix 9:
Use Agreement from the State of Alaska
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 discussion of potential barriers
List of Applicable Permits
Approval to Construct, from the State of Alaska Fire Marshall / Division of Fire and Life Safety
Anticipated Permitting Timeline
The Bid Documents will be issued to the Division of Fire and Life Safety prior February 1, 2011
for review. A permit is expected by May 1, 2011.
Identify and Discussion of Potential Barriers
No significant barriers are anticipated for the building permit. The State of Alaska Division of Fire
and Life Safety have been contacted to discuss the work identified in Phase II. The design team
worked closely with the Division of Fire and Life Safety during Phase I.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 16 of 23 9/15/2010
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
There are no identified Endangered species in the Upper Tanana. The habitat issues are few.
The Tok Area is on a glacial outwash comprised of sand and gravel. There is no permafrost in
the immediate area and very limited permafrost within a 25 mile radius of Tok. Most of the
ground is suitable for year around timber harvest operations. The major habitat issue is the
natural cycle of large wildfires in the Tok area comprising hundreds of thousands of acres in
single fires. This in essence creates a large single aged stand and forest succession that is not
ideal for wildlife. According to wildlife biologists and managers, a small mosaic of fires on the
landscape creates better habitat. By having active forest management and breaking up the
continuous stands of spruce fuel there is much reduced chance of large fires on the landscape.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game is in support of our project and active timber harvest in
mature stands of spruce. Timber harvest mimic fire and create new areas for browse for moose
and upland game such as ruffed grouse. Many timber harvest projects have been jointly
planned for habitat improvement between Forestry and Fish & Game in the area and will
continue into the future. Tok is on a glacial outwash and has very limited wetlands. W etlands
are not present on the site identified to be disturbed during construction.
There are limited Archaeological and historical resources in the area; this has never been a
restriction to development or timber harvest activities in the past 50 years in the Tok Area.
Those areas that are identified are largely on Native owned lands, where there are strict
controls. The land development constraints are the short construction season in the upper
Tanana from June through September for all earthwork. There are no zoning constraints due to
a lack of any local government of any kind including the absence of a borough authority.
Telecommunications interference is not an issue. There are no negative Aviation considerations
for the project or harvest operations. If there are fewer fires there would be less smoke and that
would be a great benefit for all aviation activities. Visual, aesthetics impacts are minimal with the
harvest of hazardous fuels and timber in the area. The harvest activities are limited in size and
are never seen from the highway. Any impact is short term in duration with a vigorous rate of
reproduction of aspen from coppice (20,000 trees per acre sprouting in the 1990 burn) and
spruce from natural seeding in the Tok Area of up to a foot of growth annually. Timber harvest is
much preferable to large burns such as the 100,000 plus Tok River fire that scorched the land in
1990 or the million acres of large burns in the Tok Area in 2004.
The primary environmental barrier in the Upper Tanana is the extreme cold temperatures. It is
difficult to harvest timber in temperatures colder than 30 below zero. The community of Tok
experiences temperatures that reach 30 below and colder for several weeks a year. However,
this will not be a prohibiting factor for the supply of biomass for this project. A planned one
month’s supply of biomass fuel will be on hand within the building prior to any forecasted cold or
storm fronts. Additionally biomass will be stored in tree length decks on the School Campus that
will be chipped throughout the winter by a grinder stored in the heated building. Harvest of
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 17 of 23 9/15/2010
timber in winter has also taken place in the Upper Tanana for over 70 years. Lastly a very
positive proactive approach to burning the hazardous fuels for biomass rather than letting it burn
in forest fires will have a huge positive impact on the air quality. New research by major
universities is finding large quantities of particulate and other pollutants from wildfires much more
damaging to the atmosphere than once thought and may be a contributing factor to the global
climate change.
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: Applicants 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
• Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system
• Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
Requested grant funding:
Grant Funds Requested: A $754,651 grant from the Alaska Energy Authority is
requested. The Alaska Gateway School District does not have the ability to borrow funds
for the project. $33,500 will be used for development of the Phase II Bid Alternate bid
package and associated design and construction administration efforts.
Applicant matching funds:
The Tok Umbrella Corporation has already received a $500,000 grant for the purchase of
a grinder and expansion of the building to store the grinder.
The school district has recently thinned adjacent forest areas in order to reduce fire
hazard. A portion of that material has been decked on site and will be available to heat
the facility during the first year of operation. This material will save the school district
$60,000 to $120,000 in fiber costs during the first year of operation.
For attachments related to Section 4.4.1 please see
Appendix 10:
Estimate of Probable costs of design and construction
4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Include anticipated O&M costs for 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 reporting impacts of projects on the
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 18 of 23 9/15/2010
communities they serve.)
How will O&M costs be funded?
The project operation and maintenance costs will be funded from the regular budget of
the school district, and the reduced cost of energy to heat the school each year.
Requested grant funding.
Funding will not be needed for O&M. The grant will help reduce the annual loan
payments and result in greater assurance that the reduced cost of energy to heat the
school each year can be used to enhance the educational mission of the Alaska Gateway
School District.
4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
• Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
• Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
• Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
For attachments related to Section 4.4.4 please see
Appendix 11:
Application Cost Worksheet
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 (gal and $) over the lifetime of the evaluated
renewable energy project
• Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power 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
Based on data from the Energy Information Administration
(http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/whowsus4w.htm), wholesale fuel oil prices
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 19 of 23 9/15/2010
increased 6.35% from 1991 to 2010. However, in two other 10 year periods the increase
was greater. From 1998 to 2008 fuel oil prices increased 20.3% and from 2000 to 2010
fuel oil prices increased 8.9%.
On the high end, in FY08 (2007-2008) when the Feasibility Study for Phase I was
completed, the Tok School complex consumed 65,419 gallons of heating fuel. Using that
amount at the price of $2.75 a gallon, and increasing that price by 8.9% a year, (which is
the ten year average), by 2018 the district will spend over $387,000 a year. Using
average fuel consumption figures, (55,864 gallons), and a more conservative estimate of
5.9% annual increase for heating fuel, it will cost Tok School $257,000 annually by 2018.
At that rate, in 30 years, if heating oil is still even being used as a heat source, it will cost
$809,000 annually to heat the school.
The immediate public benefit that this project will have is to allow the School District to
spend fewer dollars on facilities, and more dollars in the classroom teaching children,
which is the mission of all schools. Due to the utility costs in Alaska the School District
spends a disproportionate level of financial resources on heat and electricity. The project
means additional funding would be available to fund the addition of an itinerate
counselor, or a music teacher to the school staff.
Assuming a successful project, the district will initiate a systemic conversion from fossil
fuel to biomass fuel at two more sites, Northway and Tanacross. Northway is a 30,000
gallon a year facility and Tanacross where this 15,000 gallon a year project will be a
partnership with the community, offsetting the heating costs of a whole community.
In the long term, this project could be what initiates the beginning of a systemic energy
conversion in Interior Alaska, moving the region to a renewable biomass energy source.
The school is the largest single consumer in our small community, followed by the DOT
and State Forestry complex, which has also invested in this conversion.
Initiating a conversion to biomass in the form of wildfire remediation will simultaneously
make the community safer, supply a sustainable form of low cost heating fuel for schools,
initiate a regional conversion from fossil fuels to biomass, and be the foundation of an
industry that will create long-term viable timber industry employment for the residents of
the Upper Tanana.
For attachments related to Section 5 please see
Appendix 4:
Economic Summary
SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY
Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable.
Include at a minimum:
• Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered.
• How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations 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
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 20 of 23 9/15/2010
Proposed Business Structure and Concept
The project was evaluated using a 30-year cash flow analysis. A basic benefit to cost
(B/C) ratio was calculated as well as accumulated cash flow. Accumulated cash flow is
similar to simple payback with the exception that accumulated cash flow takes the cost of
financing and fuel escalation into account. Positive accumulated cash flow in year one
indicates a strong project. Positive accumulated cash flow in year 20 or more indicates a
challenged project.
The existing conditions section of the analysis is based on data collected at the school.
The cost of wood chips ($60/ton) is based on estimates from the local Department of
Forestry office which has recent data on thinning operations in the area. The biomass
boiler efficiency was assumed to be 65%. Wood fired boilers efficiencies can reach 70%
to 75%, so 65% is conservative. The wood chips in the Upper Tanana are assumed to be
at approximately 35% moisture content after a year being decked, yielding 5400 Btu/lb.
Power is very expensive in Alaska compared to the continental US. Because of this the
cost of the additional electricity used by the new boiler plant was accounted for in the
analysis. The power use is based on historical data from a wood fired school boiler plant
in Darby, Montana, and is estimated at approximately 55,000 kwh annually.
The O&M inflation rate was assumed to be 3%. The fuel cost escalation for petroleum
based fuels was estimated at 5.9% annually which is based on the EIA crude oil price
projections. Fuel cost escalation for wood based fuels was estimated at 3% annually.
At low loads, the biomass plant will not be able to sufficiently turn down to operate
efficiently. During these times, the fuel oil boilers will operate. Also at the campus peak
heating load, the biomass boiler will not be large enough, so the fuel oil boilers will
operate to supplement the heating systems. Because of these two reasons, it is
assumed the biomass system will supplant 90% of the facilities fuel oil use.
Based on discussions with other biomass system users, system manufacturers, and
estimates of operator time required, additional operation and maintenance time on
average of 4 hours per week were assumed. The cost of this over a 40 week operation
period at $20/hour was used for the analysis. In addition, experience has shown that the
first two heating seasons have extra maintenance time as the system “bugs” are worked
out and the maintenance staff learns the system. The analysis includes an additional 4
hours per week for the first two years to account for this.
Economics based on the very conservative estimated project costs and the assumptions
listed above were assembled and is shown on the attached summary. With the project
fully funded, the economic analysis shows a positive cash flow in the first year of
approximately $84,000 in fuel savings, and a positive accumulated cash flow (PAC) of
$1,210,000 in year 10, $3,596,000 in year 20; and $8,134,000 in year 30. This indicates a
strong project. The simple payback is 54 years. The B/C ratios exceeds 1.0 in year 23.
Proposed Financing the Maintenance and Operations for the Life of the Project
The project operation and maintenance costs will be funded from the regular budget of the
school district. The funding will be set aside from the reduced cost of energy to heat the
school each year.
Identification of Operational Issues that could Arise
It is expected that during the initial two years of operation the maintenance staff will have
to spend an addition 4 hours per week becoming familiar to the operations of the biomass
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 21 of 23 9/15/2010
system and working on new protocols. A future operation issue that could arise would be
additional training in the event of a change to the maintenance staff for the School District.
Operational Costs Including On-going Support for Existing Systems
The existing fuel oil boilers will need to continue to be maintained. These costs are
already identified in the budget of the School District and will not change.
Commitment to Reporting the Savings and Benefits
The Alaska Gateway School District will send annual savings and benefit reports to
Alaska Energy Authority. In addition we will open our facility to other School District that
are interested in exploring the integration of biomass heating to their facilities.
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.
Phase II is an extension of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project and will consist of the Bid
Alternates that were developed during Phase I. The design and planned integration of the
Phase II Bid Alternates is complete and is expect to move forward immediately with releasing the
documents for Bid on the notice from AEA of award of funding.
The Tok School Biomass Heating Project: Phase I, which used AEA Round I Grant Funding is
nearing completion. Through work with AEA representatives, the A/E design team, and the
General Contractor, Alaska Gateway School District was able to deliver a completed facility that
was of a higher level of quality and Scope than originally proposed in the Round I Grant
Application. This accomplishment shows the ingenuity of the School District to use the AEA
Round I Grant Funding to the full potential. With the additional Scope Phase I has met both
schedule and budget milestones identified in the Round I Grant Funding.
The Alaska Gateway School District has obtained additional legislative funding to integrate a
Combined Heat Power System (CHP) into the Biomass Heating Facility. The Combined Heat
Power System will use the biomass boiler to produce electricity by using a steam engine
generator. The integration of the CHP is currently pending Notice to Proceed and Release of
Funding.
SECTION 8– LOCAL SUPORT
Discuss what local support or possible opposition there may be regarding your project. Include
letters of support from the community that would benefit from this project.
The Tok School Biomass project has no known opposition, and has ever increased support
following this summer’s fire season, and the Eagle Trail fire, which was a very close call for Tok.
As community residents, businesses and organizations have seen the project move from an idea
to the reality of a building on site, with infrastructure being installed and a fire up date nearing,
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 22 of 23 9/15/2010
local support is growing into a near movement.
The Tok Area Forestry Office remains a strong supporter, and have been working with the
school district on this project from the beginning. We are working out a long term use contract
for biomass that is the result of road rights of ways that are being cut, and on the wildfire
remediation that they are undertaking. A recent presentation was made by the school district at
the local forestry office to a meeting of the State Forestry Board, which included a lengthy
question and answer session, and tour of the facility, all commented that this was the kind of
project that the state needed more of.
The Tok Umbrella Corporation, our local government organization, has also been a consistent
supporter of the project, and only just last month gave the project a check for $100k toward the
purchase of a Case 700 Series loader with a 6 yard biomass bucket and a log grapple for
handling biomass in order to feed it into the Rotochopper grinder that is also an integral part of
the project.
In addition to these key players in the project, we have the support of all the forest products
businesses in the area, which includes lumber mills and those in the logging industry.
SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET
Tell us how much you want 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.
Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget3.doc
The total cost of the project for both Phase I and Phase II is projected to be $4,560,000
including the site work, boiler building, boiler and connecting infrastructure, and grinder.
$500,000 in cash is already in hand for this project, along with $60,000 to $120,000
thousand in-kind, in the form of decked fiber on the applicant’s premises.
Phase I of the project has been completed using AEA Round I Grant Funding in the
amount of $3,245,349.
Phase II of the project requests $754,651 in AEA Round IV Grant Funding.
For attachments related to Section 9 please see
Appendix 10:
Estimate of probably cost of design and construction.
Appendix 12:
Grant budget form
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round IV
AEA11-005 Grant Application Page 23 of 23 9/15/2010
SECTION 9 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and
suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4
B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4
C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 6.
D. An electronic version of the entire application per RFA Section 1.6
E. Governing Body Resolution per RFA Section 1.4
Enclose a copy of the resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management that:
- authorizes this application for project funding at the match amounts indicated in
the application
- authorizes the individual named as point of contact to represent the applicant for
purposes of this application
- states the applicant is in compliance with all federal state, and local, laws
including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
H. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
Print Name Scott MacManus
Signature
Title Executive Director
Date September 15, 2010
!" #$!
#!% !
&$’
( #)
*"
+! !
,! -# .!" #/+$
"$!-!" #
! . !
!
"#
Pre-feasibility Assessment for
Integration of Biomass Energy Systems
in
Tok School
Tok, Alaska
October 6, 2008
Presented by
CTA Architects Engineers
Nathan Ratz & Nick Salmon
For
Alaska Gateway School District
In partnership with:
Alaska Energy Authority
CTA Project: AGSD_TOK
Executive Summary
The following assessment was commissioned to determine the technical and economic
feasibility of integrating a wood fired heating system in the existing Tok School located in Tok,
Alaska.
The Tok School is approximately 75,000 square feet in size. The school campus includes the
school, a detached multipurpose building housing an ice hockey rink and shooting range, and a
detached Zamboni garage. The shooting range and toilet group portion of the multipurpose
building (approximately 10,000 square feet) is heated, as is the stand alone Zamboni garage
(approximately 1,400 square feet). The school is heated with a pair of fuel oil fired hot water
boilers each with a 3,000,000 Btu/hr output capacity. A 1,000,000 Btu/hr output fuel oil fired
domestic hot water heater has a 600 gallon capacity and represents a portion of the fuel oil use
for the facility. The multipurpose building is heated with two fuel oil fired boilers, one rated at
346,000 Btu/hr output and the other rated at 1,528,000 Btu/hr output. The Zamboni garage is
heated by a 143,000 Btu/hr fuel oil boiler.
The school currently uses approximately 46,250 gallons of fuel oil each year at a current
delivered cost of $4.10/gallon or $190,000 per year, and the campus (including the school) uses
approximately 56,600 gallon per year at a cost of $231,900. Two options were reviewed, a
school only option and a campus option. Both options appear to be strong projects with full
subsidy. It is recommended that the project include heating the multipurpose building and
Zamboni garage with the wood fired boiler system.
Energy Analysis:
For the purpose of this investigation it is assumed that 90% of the existing annual fuel oil
consumption could be offset by the use of wood chips in a boiler approximately 60% the size of
the combined capacity of the fuel oil boilers. Modeling energy consumption would establish a
more precise wood boiler size for the facility. The wood heating system would be sized to meet
approximately 90% of the typical annual heating load of the building, using the existing boilers
for additional capacity in peak load conditions, and for future expansion.
Electrical energy consumption is projected to increase with the installation of the wood fired
boiler, conveyors, augers, compressors and a pair of circulating pumps. The cash flow analysis
accounts for the additional electrical energy consumption and reduces the annual savings
associated with using wood fuel rather than fuel oil.
Building & Site Constraints:
The school boiler room is located on the exterior of the school building on the north end of the
school. The multipurpose boiler room is located in the southwest corner of the building and the
zamboni garage boiler is located on the east side of the garge. A new boiler building with
storage capacity for four 25-30 ton chip trailers for wood fuel could be located approximately
150 feet form the existing school boiler room, with good access for large trucks and chip trailers.
Wood fuel delivery vehicles would access the campus from the main access road and would
back the vehicle into one of two overhead doors to the receiving conveyor. The hydraulics of
the live bottom trailer would be connected to hydraulic equipment in the building and an empty
trailer would be removed from an adjacent bay and filled with chips from logs decked on site or
from other thinning projects and mills in the region. This approach to wood fuel processing
minimizes the handling of the material, reduces contact with the ground (and potential sources
of contamination) and provides the school with access to wood fuel in most weather conditions
above 30 degrees below zero. The storage capacity of the facility should allow for
approximately two weeks of wood fuel to minimize the need to chip wood fuel in severe weather
conditions. The building includes storage for a chipper, which would allow the equipment to
operate in colder temperatures. The overhead doors to the building would be 18-20 feet wide to
allow 2 pairs of chip trailers (4 total) to be stored inside the building. The building would be
heated with residual heat from the boiler or an in-slab radiant heating system to improve the
performance and longevity of the chip trailers and chipping equipment. Deliveries should be
scheduled to minimize conflicts with other activities on the school campus.
Basic Integration Concept:
The biomass boiler building would be constructed north of the existing boiler room, which is on
the north side of the school and has and exterior wall. The biomass boiler would become one
boiler in the existing boiler system. A primary – secondary pumping system would be utilized to
allow the biomass boiler to be the primary boiler and allow the fuel oil boilers to operate to
supplement the biomass boiler in peak heating conditions and/or at other times when the
biomass boiler is not functioning. Hot water pumps would be located in the boiler plant and
would pump to the three boiler rooms where the glycol heating piping would tie into the exiting
boiler headers. A water to water heat exchanger will be utilized to heat the domestic hot water
in the school. The piping runs between buildings will utilize a pre-insulated piping system
designed for direct burial.
Fuel Supply:
The Tok School is immediately adjacent to large forested areas where active thinning is
occurring, creating a steady supply of fuel in close proximity to the facility. Thinning in the
region typically generates more than 100 tons of material per acre. The school could be heated
on an annual basis with material from less than 10 acres per year. W ood pellets are not
currently being produced in bulk quantities in the region. Wood pellet fuel may also freeze in
extreme temperatures if stored in exposed grain bins rather than with a heated building. For
this reason a wood pellet heating system was not explored in greater detail.
Air Quality Permits:
Air quality permit requirements in Tok should be reviewed in greater detail. The boiler output for
either scenario (school only or campus) is likely to require review by Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation, Division of Air Quality. At either of the proposed biomass boiler
sizes it appears that a Type 1 permit would be required, which requires a one time fee and
review, but not any annual fees. Type 1 permits are required if the boiler is greater than
450,000 Btu/hr and produces less than 100 tons of pollutants in a year. Modeling of the stack
height and emissions is recommended.
Estimated Costs:
The total project costs including integration, contingency and escalation are estimated as noted
on the attached spreadsheets.
Results of Evaluation
The cash flow analysis assumes delivered fuel oil costs of $4.10/gallon, wood chips at a locally
delivered price of $60 per green ton.
Wood Chip Options:
Option A.1 (School Only- No Subsidy): Appears to achieve positive accumulated cash flow
(PAC) in year 14 with no subsidy. 30 year savings (avoided costs) are approximately
$27,500,000.
Option A.2 (School Only-100% Subsidy): Appears to achieve positive accumulated cash flow
(PAC) in 1 year with a subsidy of $2,836,000. 30 year savings (avoided costs) are
approximately $31,000,000.
Option A.3 (Campus- No Subsidy): Appears to achieve positive accumulated cash flow
(PAC) in year 15 with no subsidy. 30 year savings (avoided costs) are approximately
$34,900,000.
Option A.4 (Campus- 100% Subsidy): Appears to achieve positive accumulated cash flow
(PAC) in 1 year with a subsidy of $3,707,000. 30 years savings (avoided costs) are
approximately $39,700,000.
Accumulated cash flow is the primary evaluation measure that is implemented in this report and
is similar to simple payback with the exception that accumulated cash flow takes the cost of
financing and fuel escalation into account. For many building owners, a positive accumulated
cash flow of about 10 years maximum is considered necessary for implementation. Positive
accumulated cash flow in year one indicates a strong project. Positive accumulated cash flow in
year 20 or more indicates a challenged project.
Project Funding:
The Tok Umbrella Corporation has already received a $500,000 grant for the purchase of a
chipper, chip trailers and expansion of the building to store the chipper.
The Alaska Gateway School District is pursing a grant from the Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Program.
The project might be of interest local rural electric and telephone cooperatives. Rural electric
and telephone cooperatives have the ability to provide a portion of the project financing through
the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant (REDLG) program.
The school could enter into a performance contracts for the project. Companies such as
Siemens, McKinstry, Johnson Controls and Chevron have expressed an interest in participating
in funding projects of all sizes throughout the W estern United States. This allows the facility
owner to pay for the project entirely from the guaranteed energy savings, and to minimize the
project funds required to initiate the project.
Next Steps:
The Tok School appears to be a good candidate for the use of a wood biomass heating system.
Modeling the energy use would establish the appropriate size and energy savings associated
with the boiler. It is recommended that a detailed energy analysis and cost estimate be
developed to refine the project economics with grant support from the Alaska Energy Authority
grant program.
Attachments:
• Diagrams of biomass heating system and wood fuel storage facility.
• Cost estimates.
• Cash flow analysis.
Alaska Gateway School District
Tok School
Building FY07 FY08 FY09 AVG
School Campus Total 47715 65419 54460 55865
Likely
Peak System
Output Load Peak
MBH Factor MBH
School Boiler 1 3000 0.6 1800
Boiler 2 3000 0.6 1800
DW H 1000 1.0 1000
School Total 7000 4600
Multipurpose Building Boiler (Heat)1528 1.0 1528
Boiler (DW H)346 1.0 346
Zamboni Garage Boiler 140 1.0 140
Remote Buildings Totals 2014 2014
Campus Total 9014 6614
Likely Biomass
System Biomass Boiler
Peak Boiler Size
MBH Factor MBH
School Total 4600 0.75 3450
Remote Buildings Total 2014 0.75 1511
Campus Total 6614 4961
Heat Energy Produced
Input Assumed Heat Energy Prod.
Gals Btu/gal Btu Efficiency Btu
55865 138690 7.75E+09 0.8 6.2E+09
Maximum Potential Output - Existing Boilers
Connected Max
Output W eeks of Possible Capacity
Btu/hr Operation Btu Factor
9014000 36 5.45E+10 0.11
Maximum Potential Output - Biomass Boiler
Connected Max
Output W eeks of Possible Capacity
Btu/hr Operation Btu Factor
5000000 36 3.02E+10 0.20
School Heating System Capacity Factors
Connected Boiler Load Summary
Proposed Biomass Boiler Size
Fuel Oil Use - Gallons
Fuel Oil Use Summary
ProjectO&MFuel OilWoodAnnualPACPACPACB/CB/CB/CB/CYearCostInflationInflationInflationSavings YR 10YR 20YR 30YR 10YR 15YR 20YR 30B/C > 1$4,560,0003.0%2.5%1.5%$83,721$987,985$2,313,543$4,070,9400.220.350.510.89> 30$4,560,0003.0%5.9%3.0%$83,721$1,210,061$3,595,785$8,133,6700.270.480.791.7823$4,560,0003.0%8.9%4.0%$83,721$1,452,968$5,359,569$15,232,8380.320.651.183.3419$4,560,0003.0%10.0%5.0%$83,721$1,537,060$6,107,831$18,873,1050.340.711.344.1418$4,560,0003.0%12.0%6.0%$83,721$1,725,481$7,914,031$28,553,5550.380.851.746.2617Note: Highlighted row is the base economic case. Other cases shown for comparison.Economic Summary - School Campus ProjectUpdated 9/14/10
Tok SchoolFuel Oil ChipsOption A.4Alaska Gateway School District, Tok, AlaskaCampus With GrantDate(Revision Date): October 6, 2008 (Rev 9/14/10) Analyst: CTA-Architects Engineers- Nathan Ratz & Nick Salmon EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Fuel Type:Fuel Oil Current Annual Fuel Cost:$2.75 3-year Annual Average Fuel Usage:55,864 Annual Heating Costs:$153,626ENERGY CONVERSION (to 1 mmbtu, or 1 dka)Current Annual Fuel Volume (btu):7,747,778,160 Assumed efficiency of existing heating system (%):80% Net Annual Fuel Usage (btu):6,198,222,528 WOOD FUEL COSTWood Chips$/ton: $60.00 Assumed efficiency of wood heating system (%): 65% PROJECTED FUEL USAGEAssumed btu content of wood fuel 5400 Tons of wood fuel to create net equivalent of 100% annual heating load88330 ton chip van loads29 Project Capital Cost-$4,560,000 Project Financing InformationPercent Financed0%Est. Pwr Use55000kWhAmount Financed$0Elec Rate$0.35/kWhAmount of AEA Grants$4,000,000 Tok Umbrella Corp. Grant (for grinder & add. storage)$500,000Alaska Gateway SD- In kind donation (decked logs)$60,000Interest Rate5.00%Term10Annual Finance Cost (years)$0 54(years)Inflation FactorsO&M Inflation Rate3.0%Current Fuel Inflation Rate5.9%Wood Fuel Inflation Rate3.0%YearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearYearCash flow DescriptionsUnit CostsHeatingSource ProportionAnnual Heating Source VolumesHeating Units123456789101520232530Existing Heating System Operating CostsDisplaced heating costs$2.7555864gal$153,626$162,690$172,289$182,454$193,218$204,618$216,691$229,476$243,015$257,352$342,774$456,550$542,220$608,090$809,930Displaced Operation and Maintenance Costs$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0Biomass System Operating CostsWood Fuel ($/ton, delivered to boiler site, btu/lb) (90% of total heat rqmnt)$60.0090%795tons$42,911$44,198$45,524$46,890$48,296$49,745$51,238$52,775$54,358$55,989$64,906$75,244$82,221$87,229$101,122Small load existing fuel (10% of total heat rqmnt)$2.7510%5586gal$1,536$1,627$1,723$1,825$1,932$2,046$2,167$2,295$2,430$2,574$3,428$4,565$5,422$6,081$8,099Additional Operation and Maintenance Costs$3,200$3,296$3,395$3,497$3,602$3,710$3,821$3,936$4,054$4,175$4,840$5,611$6,132$6,505$7,541Additional Operation and Maintenance Costs First 2 years$3,200$3,389Additional Electrical Cost $0.35$19,058$20,182$21,373$22,634$23,969$25,383$26,881$28,467$30,146$31,925$42,522$56,636$67,263$75,434$100,473Annual Operating Cost Savings$83,721$89,998$100,274$107,609$115,419$123,734$132,584$142,004$152,026$162,690$227,078$314,493$381,182$432,841$592,695Financed Project Costs - Principal and Interest0000000000 Displaced System Replacement Costs (year one only)0Net Annual Cash Flow83,72189,998100,274107,609115,419123,734132,584142,004152,026162,690227,078314,493381,182432,841592,695Cumulative Cash Flow83,721173,720273,994381,603497,022620,756753,341895,3441,047,3711,210,0612,208,7733,595,7854,669,9565,509,0318,133,670Benefit Cost Ratio0.020.040.060.080.110.140.170.200.230.270.480.791.021.211.78Simple Payback: Total Project Cost/Year One Operating Cost Savings:Additional Power Use
$
%
Work CompletedSEP 10OCT 10NOV 10DEC 10JAN 11FEB 11MAR 11APR 11MAY 11JUN 11JUL 11AUG 11SEP 11OCT 11NOV 11DEC 11JAN 12FEB 12MAR 12APR 12MAY 12JUN 12JUL 12AUG 12SEP 12OCT 12NOV 12DEC 12School Year10-11 11-12 12-13Tok School Biomass Heating Facility: Phase I(Completed with AEA Round I Grant Funding) Reconnaissance Feasibility Field VisitPre-Feasibility ReportCost EstimateGrant ApplicationGrant Award & Notice to ProceedField Visit35% Complete Design Development DocumentsAEA, Agencies, AGSD review and commentFinal DesignComplete Design Development DocumentsComplete Cost Estimate/QA/QC ReviewAEA, Agencies, AGSD review and commentComplete Construction DocumentsComplete Cost Estimate/QA/QC ReviewAEA, Agencies, AGSD review and comment ConstructionBid/NegotiateReleaseBid DateAward Procurement of Wood Fired Boiler/FabricationMobilization Begin mechanical integration with existing boiler room Complete mechanical integration with existing boiler room Begin construction of wood storage/boiler building Complete construction of wood storage/boiler building Delivery of wood fired boiler Begin mechanical integration within wood storage/boiler building Complete mechanical integration within wood storage/boiler building10/8 Substantial Completion/Punch list11/9 Commissioning12/4 Final Completion1/81 YR Warranty Review 11/9Tok School Biomass Heating Facility: Phase II(Project submitted for AEA Round IV Grant Funding)Feasibility Phase II (In Progress)Cost Estimate for Bid AlternatesAEA Round IV Grant Application9/15AEA Round IV Grant Award and Notice to Proceed5/17Design and Permitting Phase IIRevise Construction Documents to reflect only Phase II Scope of Work 5/21AEA, agencies, AGSD Review and comment5/21Construction Phase IIBid /NegotiationBIDRelease6/1Bid Date6/30Award7/3Mobilization7/9Begin mechanical integration with existing boiler room7/15Complete mechanical integration with existing boiler room 9/15Begin install of heating loop to multi-purpose building & Zamboni garage8/15Complete install of heating loop to multi-purpose building & Zamboni garage9/15Begin addition of heat exchanger and boiler feed unit 9/15Complete addition of heat exchanger and boiler feed unit 10/15Substantial completion/punch list11/9Commissioning12/4Final completion1/81 year warranty review11/9Existing and Proposed Project Schedule 9/15/2010201020112012
&
’()*+(
,
-"
.
/
(*0
1
%2 #
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS15-Sep-10Tok School Biomass Heating Facility: Phases I and IITok, AlaskaQUANTITYMATERIALLABORNo. UnitPerPerTOTALUnitsMeas.UnitTOTALUnitTOTALCOST TOTAL COST TOK SCHOOL BIOMASS HEATING FACILITY: PHASE I$3,805,349$3,245,349$560,000TOTAL COST TOK SCHOOL BIOMASS HEATING FACILITY: PHASE II$754,651(Pricing developed from average of contractor bids submitted for Phase I)Bid Alternates ALT 01Hot water heating loop to addition outbuildings on campus$525,000ALT 03Add a heat exchanger, boiler feed unit, and create an isolated system $123,774from the new biomass boiler to the existing k-12 school buildingBid Alternate Total$648,774Project Contingency8.00%$51,902Project Construction Costs Total$700,676AGSD Owner's Representative1ls$10,000.00$10,000$10,000A/E Design Services (Revise Bid Package)1ls$3,000.00$3,000 $3,000A/E Services (Bidding, Negotiations, Construction Administration , and Commissioning)1ls$33,725.00$33,725 $33,725Travel1ls$5,000.00$5,000 $5,000Printing1ls$750.00$750 $750Misc (postage, teleconferencing, file transfer, etc.)1ls$1,000.00$1,000 $1,000 State Fire Marshall Review1ls$500.00$500 $500Soft Costs Total$53,975TOTAL PROJECT COSTS$4,560,000AEA Round I Grant FundingOther Funding
2 +*
Renewable Energy Fund Round 4
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA11-005 Application Cost Worksheet Page 1 7-21-10
Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project
phases. The level of information detail varies according to phase requirements.
1. Renewable Energy Source
The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a
sustainable basis.
Annual average resource availability. Biomass, need 20 Acres Annually
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel)
2. 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 5 heating boilers, 1 domestic hot water heater
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 3,000,000 Btu/hr (output) each for the school
heating boilers
1,000,000 Btu/hr (output) for the domestic hot
water heater
1,528,000 Btu/hr and 346,000 Btu/hr (outputs) for
the two multipurpose building boilers
143,000 Btu/hr (output) for the zamboni garage
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Cast iron sectional
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other School boilers - 15 years
Multipurpose building boilers – 7 years
Zamboni garage boiler – 4 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 Approx. $1,000
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $153,600 for heating oil
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kW h]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 55,864
Other
iii. Peak Load
iv. Average Load
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency 80%
vii. Future trends Cost for heating oil has gone up 6.4% on average annually since 1991.
Prices receded in 2009 to a bottom in 2009 but have begun to advance at a
rate of 10% to the current rates in 2010. It is anticipated that future rates will
continue to increase. EIA estimates 5.9% annual increase to 2030.
!"#"!$%&
Renewable Energy Fund Round 4
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA11-005 Application Cost Worksheet Page 2 7-21-10
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] 55,864
ii. Electricity [kW h]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
3. Proposed System Design Capacity and Fuel Usage
(Include any projections for continued use of non-renewable fuels)
a) Proposed renewable capacity
(W ind, Hydro, Biomass, other)
[kW or MMBtu/hr]
Biomass
5,000,000 Btu/hr (output)
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Heat [MMBtu] 5,616
c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] 800 green tons of wood fuel
iv. Other
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $4,560,000
b) Development cost $199,964
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $126,562
d) Annual fuel cost $1,536 in heating fuel and $42,900 in fiber at market
value, or $2,000 for years one and two.
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity
ii. Heat 50, 278 gallons of fuel oil
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $138,263
c) Other economic benefits
d) Alaska public benefits Creating jobs, saving funds to improve education
through the Alaska Gateway School District.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 4
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA11-005 Application Cost Worksheet Page 3 7-21-10
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio 1.78 (30 year analysis)
Payback (years) 54 years
+*
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round IV Grant Budget Form-Design and Permitting 9-15-10 Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS 1. Completion of Bid Documents (Adjust Specifications and Construction Documents from Phase I to reflect Scope of Work for Phase II of facility) 6/21/11 $3,000.00 $3000.00 2. Permit Applications (as needed) 6/1/11 $500.00 $500.00 3. Permit Approvals 7/1/11 $0 $0 TOTALS $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $ Travel & Per Diem $ $ $ Equipment $ $ $ Materials & Supplies $ $ $ Contractual Services $3,000.00 $ $3,000.00 Construction Services $ $ $ Other (anticipated permit fees) $500.00 $ $500.00 TOTALS $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Applications should include a separate worksheet for each project phase (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Design and Permitting, and Construction)- Add additional pages as needed
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round IV Grant Budget Form-Construction 9-15-10 Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS 1. Bid Documents Issued 6/1/11 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 2. Contractor Selected and Contract Awarded 7/9/11 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 3. Mobilization 7/15/11 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 4. Construction Phases: a. Bid Alternate 01: Hotwater Heating Loop to additional outbuildings on School Campus. 9/15/11 $474,151.00 $474,151.00 5. Construction Phases: a. Bid Alternate 03: Add a heat exchanger, boiler feed unit, and create an isolated system from the new biomass boiler to the existing k-12 school building. 10/15/11 $116,000.00 $116,000.00 6. Integration and testing 11/19/11 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 7. Final Acceptance, Commissioning and Start-Up 1/8/12 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 8. Operations Reporting (completed as part of Operations and Maintenance) 1/8/13 $0.00 $0.00 TOTALS $751,151.00 $0.00 $0.00 $751,151.00 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Travel & Per Diem $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Equipment $ $ Materials & Supplies $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Contractual Services $33,725.00 $33,725.00 Construction Services $700,676.00 $700,676.00 Other $750.00 $750.00 TOTALS $751,151.00 $0.00 $0.00 $751,151.00 Applications should include a separate worksheet for each project phase (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Design and Permitting, and Construction)- Add additional pages as needed
3 4