Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutYakutat Wave Energy Grant App-Final November 10, 2009 Renewable Energy Grant Fund Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 Re: Yakutat Power -Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application - Letter of Commitment Application Review Committee: The City of Yakutat is pleased to submit the attached application for a Renewable Energy Fund Grant for a Phase III Final Design and Permitting project of a four phase Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) Pilot Demonstration Project; the first wave energy demonstration project in Alaska. Yakutat Power funded Phases I and II, Reconnaissance and Feasibility Studies ($44,000) recently completed by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The results of Phases I and II encourage us to proceed with this Phase III proposal . Yakutat is an eligible renewable energy project as defined under HB 152. Yakutat Power is authorized by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska to provide power to the community of Yakutat under Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, CPC&NNo.53. The attached Application documents 1) describes the proposed WEC project, 2) the benefit and cost and the 3) budget. We have also attached a letter of support from the selected WEC device developer, Aquamarine Power of Scotland and the grant application describes their WEC device and its technology development status. The total estimated cost of design and permitting for the pilot plant is $1,600,000. We propose that the cost be shared 75% by the State of Alaska and 25% by the U.S. Department of Energy Waterpower program. This demonstration program is not only important to Yakutat, but to all Alaska coastal remote villages. Yakutat Power strives to keep electric costs as low a possible by maximizing operating efficiencies and reducing operating costs. This project will provide a significant improvement toward meeting this continued goal, and will greatly benefit the community of Yakutat and may benefit many other remote coastal Alaskan communities as well. Yakutat Power welcomes and fully supports this opportunity to work with the Alaska Energy Authority to implement this innovative wave energy conversion project,and requests the Review Committee carefully review the merits of this application. We welcome your review and evaluation of our proposal,and look forward to working with you on this project.If you have any questions about this project,please feel free to contact Skip Ryman at 907-784-3323 or Scott Newlun,Yakutat Power general Manager at (907)784-3242 kl av'"Q Borough Manager Scott Newlun Yakutat Power General Manager Renewable Energy Fund Round 3 Grant Application AEA 10-015 Application Page 1 of 43 10/7/2009 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-III.html Grant Application Form GrantApp3.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 Costworksheet3 .doc Summary of Cost information that should be addressed by applicants in preparing their application. Grant Budget Form GrantBudget3.d oc 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 GrantBudgetInst ructions3.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 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 2 of 43 10/7/2009 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal) City and Borough of Yakutat Type of Entity: Local government Mailing Address City and Borough of Yakutat PO Box 160 Yakutat, AK 99689 Physical Address City and Borough of Yakutat 390 Max Italio Drive Box 347 Yakutat, Alaska 99689 Telephone (907) 784-3323 Fax (907) 784-3281 Email sryman@yakutatak.us 1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT Name Frank L. “Skip” Ryman Title Borough Manager Mailing Address City and Borough of Yakutat PO Box 160 Yakutat, AK 99689 Telephone (907) 784-3323 Fax (907) 784-3281 Email sryman@yakutatak.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 X A local government, or A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities); Yes 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 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 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.) X 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. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 3 of 43 10/7/2009 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) Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration 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. We believe this section only relates to the geographical location of the project, which is Yakutat, and only a general statement indicating the project location within Yakutat is needed for this section. The project description, including detailed information on location of specific system components, is provided in Section 4.3 The physical location of the “Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration” project is Yakutat, Alaska. The City and Borough of Yakutat has a population of 631, and is located at the mouth of Yakutat Bay along the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest of Juneau and 220 miles southeast of Cordova. Yakutat receives monthly barge service during the winter and more frequent service during summer. Yakutat is equipped with two jet-certified runways and receives jet service daily. The U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service have offices in Yakutat. This project will investigate the conversion of readily available wave energy with the long term goal of integrating the resource into the Yakutat Power electric grid. Direct beneficiaries of this project include all Yakutat Power electric service customers and indirect beneficiaries include those future Alaska coastal villages that will someday use and benefit from the early adopter work of Yakutat. 2.3 PROJECT TYPE Put X in boxes as appropriate 2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type Wind 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 X Other (Describe) - Wave Energy 2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply) Reconnaissance X Design and Permitting Feasibility Construction and Commissioning Conceptual Design Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 4 of 43 10/7/2009 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project. The City and Borough of Yakutat is pleased to propose a Phase III Final Design and Permitting Project leading to the first Alaska Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration. A Phase I Reconnaissance and Phase II Feasibility Analysis Phase was completed in 2009 by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) under Yakutat Power funding ($44,000) which evaluated and assessed in detail the technical, cost, economic and operational viability of a WEC project. The study scope included; (1) a shallow water wave energy resource assessment, (2) a conceptual design based on the Aquamarine Power Oyster shallow water wave energy conversion technology, (3) a cost assessment (capital and O&M), and (4) a economic analysis. The Aquamarine Oyster was chosen after a trade-off analysis showed that a the 500 kW to 1 MW plant scale, a near-shore device would make most sense. Aquamarine Power’s shallow water wave energy conversion technology Oyster has been identified as the best suited wave energy technology for the deployment site. Oyster is a wave actuated hydraulic pump that pumps fresh water to shore at a pressure level of about 120 bars, where it is converted into electricity using a conventional hydroelectric system and then returns it to the Oyster in a closed loop. The major project elements include; (1) the Oyster WEC device, (2) a high pressure (120 ) bar pressure supply sub sea pipeline and a low pressure (3 bar) return sub sea pipeline, (3) a onshore turbine generator power station, and (3) a distribution line extension to connect the power station to the city electrical grid network. The proposed deployment location and related project elements are shown in the following figure. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 5 of 43 10/7/2009 Oyster is well suited for the Yakutat location. The system elements that are most prone to require maintenance are located on-shore where the equipment can easily be accessed. The EPRI study showed that Yakutat has an excellent wave climate for wave energy conversion. A shallow water wave transformation model (SWAN) was used to propagate a full-year of wave data to the deployment location and 13m water depth. Shallow water power densities at the deployment site of interest were assessed at between 19kW/m and 22kW/m. Based on this wave energy resource data, the resulting capacity factor of the 650 kW rated Oyster machine was assessed at 45.6%. Cost elements, including; (1) device, (2) sub sea pipeline, (3) on-shore power station, (4) overland distribution line extension, (5) installation, and (6) operation and maintenance were assessed for the plant at 4 different sizes (1,2, ,4 and 8 units at 650 kW per unit). Cost of electricity was then computed using a Municipal Utility Ownership economic model. Cost of electricity is estimated to be about 45 cents/kWh (in constant Jan 1, 2010 dollars) for a 20 year plant-life. Cost and economic uncertainties at this early stage of project development are still quite substantial and based on EPRI’s experience with similar projects at a conceptual stage of development is on the order of +/- 30%. The cost at this relatively small scale (as far as sizes of utility power plants in the lower 48) is clearly dominated by infrastructure and operational considerations related to the installation of the device in this somewhat remote location. However, present busbar cost of electricity from the existing diesel-based generation facility comes in at about 27 cents/kWh and will only increase in the future. This is comparable to Oyster at an 8 unit scale plant and removes the issue of price volatility of diesel fuel generation. Diesel fuel cost has dramatically increased since the year 2000 and is only temporarily lower at present because the global recession has reduced the demand on fossil fuels, creating a temporary more attractive pricing structure. In the long-term energy cost are expected to increase, which creates an additional economic burden to small communities like Yakutat, that are heavily reliant on diesel fuel. One of the key results of the EPRI feasibility study was that the level of cost-reduction potential that could come from optimization is substantial. These cost reductions can only be quantified through detailed design and engineering analysis because most cost elements are driven by site- specific considerations. A key part of the proposed next phase is to investigate some of the identified alternate design options and detail the “optimal” solution for the site of interest. Many cost reductions could come from improved installation and operational procedures, economies of Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 6 of 43 10/7/2009 scale, and the potential to locate the plant closer to shore. These alternate topologies will be optimized in this proposed phase of development. Therefore, we propose progressing to Phase III based upon the results of this study. And, if the results of Phase III show adequate benefit cost ratio, Yakutat intends to implement a Phase IV Construction and Operations/Maintenance Phase Alaska has more than 50% of the wave energy resource (about 1,200 TWhr/year) of the entire United States of America off its shores (and that is excluding the Bering Seas to the north of the Aleutian Islands). We believe that wave energy will play an important role in meeting the energy needs of the State of Alaska in the future. With this pilot demonstration project, wet propose to be an early adopter and evaluator of emerging Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) technology. The goal of this Phase III is complete a detailed construction design of the wave pilot pant and perform permitting/licensing activities required to obtain a FERC 5 year pilot license to construct and operate the plant. The goal of a future Phase IV to construct, operate and maintain the pilot plant rated at 650kW for 5 years. The results of this pilot demonstration plant project will enable Yakutat Power to make an informed evaluation as to whether wave energy should be included in its energy portfolio and whether the technology is ready for building out a full scale plant at Yakutat or anywhere else along the coast of Alaska. If successful, it will be possible to re- license the project to extend the project life to 20-years and additional units could be added to displace additional loads within the village. This increase in deployment scale would further reduce cost of electricity (economies of scale) and allow heating fuel to be displaced. The specific objective of Phase III Final Design and Permitting is to conduct all work necessary to complete engineering design, conduct baseline environmental studies and submit all license applications required for a pilot wave energy demonstration plant offshore Yakutat. The specific objective of Phase IV is to implement the technology in the actual environment near Yakutat to obtain real operational experience, environmental, performance and other data gathering and evaluation/analysis. Results of this project could open up the possibility of more wave energy conversion plants at many sites in Alaska. 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.)  We expect that funding and oversight of this innovative wave energy project by AEA will yield multiple benefits to the State of Alaska. Anticipated benefits will accrue to the residents of Yakutat in the near term, and to the residents of Alaska generally over the intermediate and long term as the results of testing and development associated with this project are applied to similar projects elsewhere in the state. Specific, anticipated benefits deriving from this project include: • diversification of Alaska’s energy supply portfolio • reduced dependence on finite, dwindling fossil fuels Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 7 of 43 10/7/2009 • reduced emissions of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants • job creation • reduced cost of electricity to consumers • Get on the path to a sustainable energy future The most significant benefit to Alaskans will be testing and development of wave energy electric generation technology that may substantially reduce the cost of power in Yakutat and in other remote coastal areas of Alaska. Additional economic benefits include the job creation that will accompany development and implementation of this power generation technology. Installation, operation, and maintenance of this and similar projects will lead to creation of jobs locally and elsewhere in the state. Cost stability will also be enhanced by this and subsequent projects, because Alaskans will be freed from the price volatility of imported diesel fuel. The proposed project proposes to freeze electricity rates in the affected area for a period of five years. This is in sharp contrast to the price escalation that rural Alaskans have experienced in recent years. Environmental benefits of wave energy conversion include replacement of diesel fuel importation and combustion with an emission-free technology that draws upon a renewable, local resource. Thus, this technology will reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants, and will eliminate the risk of incidental spills of petroleum products. 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 City and Borough of Yakutat proposes a Final Design and Permitting Phase III to be cofunded by the state of Alaska (75%) and the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) (25%) as the next step in its Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration Project The Phase I and II Reconnaissance Study was funded by Yakutat Power ($44,000) and is complete The budget overview for this Phase III Final Design and Permitting Phase is Total estimated budget required = $1,600,000 (100%) Budget requested from the state of Alaska = $1,200,000 (75%) Budget to be requested from the USDOE = $400,000 (25%) The U.S. Congress has appropriated $50million for the FY2010 USDOE Waterpower Program (which includes wave energy technology as well as a few other water power technologies) and plans to issue a broad area solicitation in March 2010. The City and Borough of Yakutat intends to reply to that solicitation and request a 25% cost share funding. Announcements of awardees selected for negotiation leading to award is expected to be made by the USDOE in September 2010 and a project start is expected in January, 2011 In the event that the City and Borough of Yakutat is not successful in receiving a 25% co funding from the USDOE, we will seek that funding elsewhere Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 8 of 43 10/7/2009 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. $1,200,000 2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $400,000 2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $1,600,000 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) $10,644,000 2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) – see cost benefit worksheet for details – 5 year pilot only – diesel fuel savings only assuming no fuel price increases $3,775,000 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.) See cost benefit worksheet for details $ 20,000,000 Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 9 of 43 10/7/2009 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 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 for this proposed Phase III Detailed Design and Permitting Licensing Project will be Mr. Frank L. “Skip” Ryman, Borough Manager of the City and Borough of Yakutat. His resume is included in Attachment A of this application 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.) Given the State of Alaska and US DOE funding cycles, we expect a start date for this proposed Phase III Final Design and Permitting Project in January, 2011. The technical period of performance is estimated to be 18 months with another 6 months of regulatory review of the submitted applications for construction and operation licenses. A Gantt chart showing the start and estimated completion of each task and milestone is shown below Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 10 of 43 10/7/2009 TASK 2. Site Measurements TASK 6. Project Mgmt and Reporting FERC/Agency Deliberations Milestones/ Deliverables Kickoff Meeting Submittal of FERC preliminary permit application Receipt of FERC preliminary permit Completion of system and interface req'ts documents Completion of O&M requirementrs/approach Completion of agency environmental consultation Completion of final design Completion of updated economic analysis Completion of business and operational plan Submittal of license application Receipt of license and go-no go decision for Phase IV Quarterly reports Mid-term review License application review Final briefing Final report PROJECT GANNT CHART TASK 3. Enviroment Studies and Permitting TASK 5. Electrical Final Design CONTRACT START TASK 1. Implementa ti on Planni ng TASK 4. Civil Final Design Month 13 - 24 2012 Month 1 - 12 2011 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.) We propose the following task work breakdown structure (WBS) and have estimated the cost of the project and its required budget using an identical cost breakdown structure (CBS). The Phase III project will consist of six (6) task elements with each task consisting of sub task elements as described below (and these tasks and subtask elements have been mapped to the project organization shown in Section 3.4.) Phase III - Final Design and Permitting Task III.1. Implementation Planning (Yakutat lead with support from entire Team) 1. Scoping and Implementation Planning (including Kickoff Meeting) 2. System level user requirements and functional design 3. Completion of interface requirements Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 11 of 43 10/7/2009 4. Completion of operations and maintenance requirements/approach Task III.2. Siting studies and cost optimization (re-vision LLC lead with support from entire team) 1. Wave Resource Modeling (Aquamarine Power) 2. Wave Measurement / Validation (re-vision) 3. Navigation Risk Assessment (re-vision ) 4. Micro-Siting and trade-off studies (Aquamarine Power) 5. Supply-chain and installation/operation study (Aquamarine Power) 6. Side-scan Sonar / Sub-bottom Profiling (to be determined by competitive bid process following contract award) 7. Collecting Sediment Cores (to be determined by competitive bid process following contract award) 8. Geotechnical Assessment for Directional Drilling (to be determined by competitive bid process following contract award) Task III.3. - Environmental Studies and Permitting/Licensing (EPRI lead with support from entire team) 1. Prepare Permit Application 2. Prepare Construction and Operation License Application (including EIS Work and environmental mitigation plans) Task III.4. Civil/Mechanical Design (to be determined by competitive bid process following contract award and with support from the entire team) 1. WEC foundation/attachment to seabed 2. Closed loop piping run from WEC device to powerhouse 3. Powerhouse foundation building 4. Transmission line structures from Powerhouse to existing grid interconnect Task III.5. Electrical Design (AE&E lead with support from primarily Aquamarine Power) 1. Electrical and grid interconnect detailed design Task III.6. Project Management and Reporting (Yakutat lead with support from entire Team) 1. Prepare final business and operations plan 2. Post construction design and permitting cost estimate 3. Economic and financial analysis 4. Final Report and Briefing 5. Project Management The key milestones which we have selected to measure planned versus actual progress are 14 in number and listed below 1. Project scoping and kickoff meeting for presenting a detailed Phase III project implementation plan and assuring mutual expectations among project participants. 2. Submittal of FERC preliminary permit application 3. Receipt of FERC preliminary permit 4. Completion of system level user requirements and functional design 5. Completion of interface requirements 6. Completion of operations and maintenance requirements/approach 7. Completion of agency environmental consultation Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 12 of 43 10/7/2009 8. Completion of final detailed design 9. Completion of post construction design and permitting cost estimate for Phase IV 10. Updated economic and financial analysis based on the post construction and permitting cost estimate and any required changes to the Phase II financial assumptions 11. Final business and operational plan with the agreement on the funding for the 5 year pilot plant operation in terms of the Yakutat electricity rates and funding for any cost gap between the true cost of electricity and those rates 12. Submittal of License Application 13. Receipt of Construction and Operations License 14. Decision Gate for proceeding from Phase III Final Design and Permitting to Phase IV Construction and Operations. . 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. The City and Borough of Yakutat will be the Grantee under the Renewable Energy Fund grant. Yakutat has put together an experienced and well qualified team of contractors to implement this Phase III Final Design and Permitting project, including the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), revision Consulting LLC (the lead engineering consultant to EPRI for the Phase I and II reconnaissance and Feasibility Study), Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. (AE&E) and Aquamarine Power (the developer of the wave energy conversion system). A lead civil engineering contractor will be selected shortly following contract award and will be based on a competitive bid process. Additional lower tier contractors will be added to the team as required (e.g., we expect to add a local fabricator to the team to estimate the cost to manufacture the Oyster structure locally for Phase IV). EPRI is a non-profit, public-benefit organization leading innovation in strategic areas of electricity technology through public-private partnerships. Over the past four and half years, EPRI has performed techno feasibility studies for offshore wave and tidal energy conversion; wave energy in 2004 and tidal in 2005 and early 2006. The wave energy work evaluated the application of linear attenuators and oscillating water columns to convert the potential and kinetic energy in ocean waves to electricity. The wave energy feasibility studies, for good sites, made a compelling case for investing in projects using this technology to diversify our energy supply portfolio. The case made was so compelling that within a year of the completion of the EPRI feasibility studies, approximately 10 applications for preliminary permits were filed by private investors to the FERC for wave power plants in Oregon and Northern California. re vision consulting, LLC is a consulting firm that is focusing exclusively on marine renewable energy conversion, including; wave, tidal, river hydrokinetic, and OTEC energy conversion. Over the past 5-years, it has lead a technical lead role in many high-profile studies and programs in ocean energy conversion for a wide client base, including electric utilities, government agencies and technology developers. Re vision was recently awarded 2 grants from the U.S. Department of Energy that it will be able to leverage into this project. (1) the Development of a Hydrokinetic Technology Siting Protocol, and (2) The Development of Cost Profiles for Hydrokinetic Technologies. It is also actively supporting early hydrokinetic energy projects in Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 13 of 43 10/7/2009 Alaska (Ruby hydrokinetic project, UAF river resource assessment), California (PG&E Wave Connect Project), Washington (SnoPUD tidal power demonstration and supports the U.S. Department of Energy with technical and analytical support in it’s ocean energy program. AE&E is an Alaska-owned, Anchorage-based firm incorporated in 1993 specifically to provide design and project management services for rural energy projects. AE&E has built its reputation on the ability to provide practical design solutions and hands-on construction support to effectively meet the challenges of rural Alaska. We have fostered excellent working relationships with permitting and regulatory agencies, which ensures that our projects comply with current interpretation of state and federal regulations. The engineering staff of AE&E has extensive experience designing and constructing projects in remote sites throughout the state with particular emphasis in western Alaska. Our primary field of expertise is electric power generation and distribution, rural fuel storage and handling facilities, and energy systems integration. AE&E has a long history of successful energy-related projects throughout Alaska, and has worked with Yakutat Power on several energy-related projects dating back to 1991. Project Organization Chart Yakutat’s proposed organization chart for this project is shown below and identifies key members of our team and shows the lines of authority. Each design engineering discipline is led by a professional engineer registered in the State of Alaska. All engineering design documents will be stamped by Alaska registered engineers. AEA / DOE Technical Program Manager Yakutat Project Manager Mr. S. Ryman Detailed Design Electrical Mr. S. Stassel/AE&E Yakutat Contracts Manager Mr. Scott Newlun AEA / DOE Contracts Manager System Level Design and Technical Requirements Mr. M Previsic/ - re-vision Wave Energy Conversion Device Dr. G. Bryans /Aquamarine Power Environmental Studies and Permitting/Licensing Dr. P. Jacobson/EPRI Detailed Design Civil TBD Local Fab - Alaska Science Center Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 14 of 43 10/7/2009 Key contractor personnel and a short biography describing their project role and qualifications and experience to fulfill those roles are described below. All key team members and personal are selected except for one area; civil engineering design. This contractor and key person will be selected based on a competitive bid process at the beginning of the Phase III project City and Borough of Yalutat Frank L. “Skip” Ryman will be the Project Manager and will be responsible for overall project planning, tracking and control. He will interface with AEA, DOE and team members on a routine basis to assure the project goals and objectives are consistently being met. The City and Borough of Yakutat will execute all grant contractual and administrative responsibilities ane will issue all subcontracts. Scott Newlun the General Manager of Yakutat Power will assist with all aspects and technical guidance toward the project management and permitting requirements. He will also bring hands on experience to the integration of the new generation with the existing system. Mr. Newlun has been pursuing this project for many years and brings to the table over ten years of experience running, assisting in design and constructing all of the projects, day to day operations and expansions of Yakutat Power. He has managed and completed several grants from various sources for the City and Borough of Yakutat DBA Yakutat Power. Mr. Newlun has worked with AEA, AE&E and various other State and Federal entities to complete projects in Yakutat. He has also been involved in developing alternative energy projects for Yakutat Power and strives to lower the cost of energy to the citizens of Yakutat and others that are dependent on diesel generated power. Electric Power Research Institute Paul T. Jacobson, Ph.D., EPRI, will be the lead for the Task III.3 Environmental and Permitting/Licensing task. He has 28 years of experience in environmental assessment and 20 years experience assessing impacts of electricity generation on aquatic ecosystems. His Ph.D. and M.S. degrees are in oceanography and limnology, with an emphasis on fisheries ecology, and his graduate training includes coursework in physical oceanography and in air-sea interactions. His hydropower permitting and licensing experience includes work performed on behalf of project owners and developers and as a support contractor to federal and state regulators, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Re-Vision LLC Mirko Previsic, P.E., will be the lead for Task III.2 System Level Design and technical Requirements. He has over 10 years of experience with the design, evaluation and optimization of renewable power generation systems, theoretical modeling, resource assessments, feasibility studies, and environmental impact studies with an emphasis on wave and tidal power conversion. He has had primary technical responsibility in many high-profile studies of wave, tidal and river- in-stream power conversion for various state and federal government agencies, research institutes, technology development companies and utilities. He is the Technology Lead in WEC projects for EPRI Ocean Energy programs and was the Technology Lead for the Phase I and II WEC study for Yakutat. He is also the principal investigator on two relevant federally funded projects of relevance to this project; (1) the Development of a Hydrokinetic Technology Siting Protocol, and (2) The Development of Cost Profiles for Hydrokinetic Technologies. AE&E Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 15 of 43 10/7/2009 Steven J. Stassel, P.E., AE&E president, will lead the Task III.5 Electrical Design. He will work with the Project Manager to commit essential engineering disciplines to ensure a successful project. He has more than 23 years of engineering experience, including rural Alaska energy projects in more than 125 communities, and has ongoing relevant project experience in Yakutat dating back to 1993. Clois Versyp AE&E, will be the lead for grid integration He has more than 27 years of industry experience, with 20 years in Alaska. Clois Versyp has provided design, construction, supervision, and project management of electrical systems, including 20 electrical distribution system and 30 power plant upgrade projects in rural Alaska, as well as controls upgrades at six 138 kV transmission substations in the continental US. Mr. Versyp has recently provided design and construction support services for 3 line extension projects in Yakutat, and is presently preparing a system-wide design to upgrade the existing YP distribution system to below-grade 7.2/12.47kV. Aquamarine Power Dr Garth Bryans will be the point of contact at Aquamarine Power for there support to all aspects of this project. Dr. Bryans joined Aquamarine Power in September 2008 to lead marine analysis within the Commercial Development department. Dr. Bryans has also worked as an energy trading analyst within Airtricity, forecasting customer demand, market price and optimising the renewable portfolio to minimise the cost of power for customers. He holds a PhD from the University College Dublin and Queen’s University Belfast following his research into The Impact of Tidal Stream devices on Electrical Power Systems. He also holds a MSc and BSc from the University of Bangor North Wales in the subjects of Applied Physical Oceanography and Marine Biology with Oceanography respectfully. 3.5 Project Communications Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. The Authority Project Manager will be kept up to date on the WEC pilot project status by periodic email and/or verbal status reports, in addition to written quarterly reports that will be submitted by the Yakutat Project Manager. Periodic reports will provide general information regarding project status and any unforeseen circumstances that need to be resolved. The quarterly reports from the Project Manager will include specific information on project completion status vs. project schedule; project labor reports – including hours, rates and costs; and current project expenditures relative to budgeted project costs. In addition to regular email updates and quarterly reports, we also propose to conduct a minimum of four briefings: • an initial kickoff briefing of the detail project implementation plan, • a mid term review at the completion of the Phase II Pilot Project, • a review at completion of final design and permitting, and • and a final briefing of all project results. The techniques that Mr. Ryman will employ to keep the project on track are the classic project management actions of planning, assessing actual performance against planned performance and applying corrective action when necessary. The structured approach for defining, implementing Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 16 of 43 10/7/2009 and managing the project will use a work breakdown structure, resource requirements and responsibilities plan, written risk mitigation planning, and milestone/schedule/cost performance tracking. Mr. Ryman is responsible for assuring that sufficient programmatic and technical project discussions take place in order that expectations are correctly communicated, issues are resolved and project team members are empowered. These discussions are conversations and meetings between project and technical management and others as necessary and take place in all elements of the project both formally and informally. 3.6 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. The risk associated with this project to develop emerging WEC technology will be mitigated by implementing a risk identification and mitigation program for the duration of the project. At this proposal stage, the primary risks and our proposed mitigation plan is as follows: 1. Risk of increased project cost – the cost estimate to construct and operate the commercial plant is currently at the preliminary design stage of development. There is a risk that the cost estimate will increase during the final design and permitting stage of development. We will mitigate this risk by investigating cost reduction approaches (i.e., above and beyond the preliminary design whose costs were estimated in Phase I and II) during this final design phase 2. Risk of measurable environmental affects – As WEC technology is emerging; there is currently uncertainty about interactions between the WEC equipment and the environment in which they are generating electricity. The primary purpose of a pilot plant is to gain technical, environmental, and commercial confidence in a technology. There are additional elements of risk that arise in any rural Alaska construction project; however, the risk associated with this project is well managed. A highly competent team of professionals has been assembled with the skills and motivation necessary to see this project through to successful completion. The project has been devised to precede in distinct phases, with carefully planned go/no go decision intervals. In the event that the pilot project is deemed unsuccessful, or Yakutat Power changes its direction or power production needs, the latter phases of the project may be postponed or cancelled with little additional risk. Yakutat Power understands the potential risks from this project, but seeks to be an early adopter of WEC technology to realize the benefit of reduced diesel fuel consumption by utilizing a readily available renewable resource. Demonstration of increased cost certainty and minimal environmental effects of this technology at Yakutat will benefit many remote coastal villages in the state of Alaska. Yakutat is willing to accept these risks. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 17 of 43 10/7/2009 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. Phase III – Detailed Design and Permitting/Licensing Description and Tasks Building on information gathered in Phase I and II, the City and Borough of Yakutat shall establish the project configuration and specifications that will be used to guide construction, refine project cost estimates, finalize business plans, and obtain land use and resource authorizations and licenses required for Phase IV construction and operation. The project is comprised of the following six tasks which are described below Task III.1. Implementation Planning Yakutat Power and its primary contractor team (AE&E, EPRI and Aquamarine Power) shall perform detailed implementing planning as its first task following contract start. On the order of a year will have gone by since this proposal and its project plan were developed and changes will be required. At the conclusion of this implementation planning task, the Yakutat Power team shall briefing of this plan to the project sponsors for the purpose of assuring mutual expectations; that is, Yakutat Power plans on doing what the sponsors expect Yakutat Power to do and Yakutat Power will not do anything that the sponsors expect Yakutat Power to do Task III.2. Siting studies and cost optimization The objective of this task is the successful completion of all site measurements required for developing the pilot plant detailed design and construction plan and satisfying the baseline environmental resource requirements for licensing. This will include the following elements: • Wave Resource and Sediment Transport Modeling (Aquamarine Power) o Computational Modeling and model calibration based on measurement data collected o Micro Siting and trade-off studies (i.e. where would we optimally deploy the device given the various constraints and impacts on cost. Please note that environmental and site specific constraints will be characterized by other team members). o Supply-chain and installation/operation study (Aquamarine Power) Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 18 of 43 10/7/2009 o Sediment Transport Modeling (i.e. understanding the interaction of the device with the geology of the area). • Wave Measurement / Validation (re-vision) At least one year of detailed wave measurements will be conducted in the final location(s) chosen for WEC deployment. These measurements will inform device and plant design/layout, and also be used to further refine the model already begun in Phase I and II. This model will be used to predict and evaluate the performance of WEC devices, as well as to inform the Task III.3 environmental studies and permitting activities. • Navigation Risk Assessment (re-vision LLC) • Side-scan Sonar / Sub-bottom Profiling (TBD) • Collecting Sediment Cores (TBD) • Geotechnical Assessment for Directional Drilling (TBD) The choice of geotechnical survey method depends largely on the foundation type for the device to be installed. Wherever possible, acoustic technology will be leveraged to reduce overall cost and map out a broad area. Some core-sampling may be necessary, however, to validate seabed composition data and to get detailed, site-specific properties before actual installation. The final product of this task is the completion of all necessary site measurements required for completing the pilot plant detailed design, construction planning and permitting/licensing. Task III.3. Environmental Studies and Permitting The objective of this task is to provide for all necessary environmental study plans and outreach/consultation to obtain required permits/licenses to support the pilot plant. This will include the following elements: ƒ Development of an appropriate baseline environmental study plan ƒ Regulatory agency and stakeholder outreach and consultation ƒ Development of the solicitation and specifications to bid execution of study plan elements ƒ Execution of all required baseline study plans ƒ Development of the plant operations environmental monitoring plan ƒ Preparation and submittal of all required permit applications As part of this project, EPRI and Yakutat will collaborate closely with the federal, state and local marine working groups to develop an appropriate environmental baseline study plan which fully supports all permitting/licensing requirements. EPRI will also prepare an appropriate environmental monitoring plan ready for implementation coincident with the beginning of site construction preparation in the next phase of the project. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 19 of 43 10/7/2009 An environmental framework will be developed to define the information needed for a baseline assessment of conditions, as well as the requirements for an optimum long term monitoring program. Execution of the baseline environmental study plan elements will likely require multiple subcontractors with specialized marine biology and habitat expertise. EPRI and Yakutat will work with the Aquamarine Power and the others to develop specifications and competitive RFPs to achieve the baseline study plan goals. Potential project impacts and associated studies are shown in the table below: EPRI and Yakutat will also execute a comprehensive communications plan. This effort will reach out to a diverse array of stakeholders including the general public, Alaska Natives, environmental groups, recreationalists, state/federal/local agencies, and other key stakeholders. EPRI and Yakutat shall conduct outreach workshops/ meetings to inform key stakeholders of wave energy conversion and feasibility studies being conducted, and to solicit the feedback and concerns of these stakeholders. Lastly, EPRI and Yakutat will prepare and submit all necessary federal, state, and regional permit applications necessary for construction and operation of the project. The final product of this task is the completion and execution of the environmental baseline study plan, development of the environmental monitoring study plan, and the preparation and Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 20 of 43 10/7/2009 submission of all necessary permit applications. Task III.4. Civil/Mechanical Detailed Design (TBD lead with support from the entire team but primarily from Aquamarine Power) The objective of this task is to complete all civil engineering design work required to both build the pilot demonstration plant and to describe the system sufficiently to support all regulatory/ permitting requirements. This will include the following elements: • Plant location and layout (both sea-based and land-based components) • Mounting options will be identified and evaluated • Construction drawings and bills of materials • Construction budget and timeline development The City and Borough of Yakutat will subcontract to a TBD contractor to perform civil engineering studies including, the attachment of the Oyster to a sea bed foundation, the routing and design of the piping to the shore-based power house and back to the Oyster and the housing requirements and design for the shore-based power house and to complete detailed construction design of the elements of the project. The City and Borough of Yakutat will subcontract to Aquamarine Power to perform device optimization design. Devices that are being considered for implementation will need to be optimized for the specific wave conditions at the site. The resulting data will then feed directly into subsequent design and permitting processes. This data can also be used in further technology evaluation programs and will provide critical data for decision-making tools. It will also facilitate the ongoing efforts to reduce manufacturing and operations costs. Aquamarine Power shall complete detailed design of Oyster project components including o Foundation o Pipeline design and burial requirements o Onshore powerhouse specifications o Electrical output specifications and communication interface o Installation Procedures, decomissioning procedures, operation procedures optimized for Yakutat o Manufacturing and transport The City and Borough of Yakutat will subcontract to revision LLC support your process with respect to; identification of manufacturing alternatives, technical review of detailed design data, cost trade-off studies and analysis, and marine operational aspects. The final product of this task is an engineering package of sufficient detail to enable construction of the WEC pilot plant including the bill of materials, fabrication drawings, equipment procurement specifications, assembly drawings, and deployment plan/schedule. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 21 of 43 10/7/2009 Task III.5. Electrical Detailed Design (AE&E lead with support from entire team and primarily Aquamarine Power) The City and Borough of Yakutat will subcontract to AE&E to perform grid interconnection studies to identify the ideal overland cable route and to complete detailed design of the electrical interconnection and grid integration system. In addition, distributed generation interconnection standards shall be reviewed for applicability. AE&E will coordinate high-level generator interconnection and facilities studies to identify interconnection costs and schedules. Task III.6. Project Management , Communication and Reporting (Yakutat lead with support from entire Team) Project Management • Contract and sub contract management • Monitoring actual performance versus planned performance and applying corrective actions as required • Liaison with clients • Quarterly progress reports Prepare final business and operations plan Post construction design and permitting cost estimate Economic and financial analysis Final Report and Briefing 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. Yakutat is located along the rugged Alaskan Gulf Coast between Sitka and Cordova. Bounded by the Gulf of Alaska on the South, nearly impenetrable mountains to the North, and coastal glaciers to the East and West, Yakutat is remote. There are no roads leading into or out of Yakutat. All commerce and access must occur via air or sea. Yakutat has an excellent wave energy climate. Archival measurements are available from a number of National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National data Buoy Center (NDBC) and other wave measurement buoys. Preliminary analysis based on NDBC data from a prior assessment indicates the average annual deep water wave power density is about 34kW/m near Yakutat. The wave power densities are higher in the winter than in the summer, due to seasonal storms, indicating a good match between higher winter electric loads and WEC device power output. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 22 of 43 10/7/2009 The EPRI Reconnaissance and Feasibility study funded by Yakutat Power further investigated and quantified the available wave energy data to be used for siting the pilot project. Because the most suitable technology for the site is shallow water WEC device deployed in shallow (13m) water depth, a shallow water wave transformation model named “SWAN” was used to propagate the deep water wave energy resource to shore. SWAN is a third-generation wave model for obtaining realistic estimates of wave parameters in coastal areas, lakes and estuaries from given wind, bottom and current conditions. However, SWAN can be used on any scale relevant for wind-generated surface gravity waves. The model is based on the wave action balance equation with sources and sinks. Directional wave data from NOAA Wavewatch IIITM was used to define the deep water offshore wave boundary condition. This boundary was about 50 miles from shore in sufficiently deep water. Bathymetry data obtained from NOAA was used to define the bathymetry. A total of 2920 SWAN runs were completed for the site, by propagating the deep water wave energy resource over the spatial domain in 3-hour intervals. This corresponds to a full year of Wavewatch IIITM data. The year 2008 was chosen as reference year. . Bathymetry around Yakutat. Water Depth in m, thicker contour lines are at 50m increment. The following figure shows the annual average significant wave height over the computational domain. The significant wave height is a good indicator of power density and hence device Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 23 of 43 10/7/2009 performance. A slight reduction in energy levels towards shore is seen. A single output point at the potential deployment site in 13m water depth was chosen and a statistical analysis was carried out to quantify the resource in detail at the site of interest. The results indicated an excellent wave energy resource was available. The modeling indicated an annual average power density of 22kW/m wave front. Aquamarine Oyster carried out an independent analysis processing 8-years of data and came to a similar conclusion with about 19kW/m. For a shallow water resource assessment these results demonstrated excellent agreement, providing confidence in the resource data available. Annual Average Significant Wave Height (Hs) within the computational domain. The following table shows a frequency distribution of sea-states defined as a function of significant wave height (Hs) and zero crossing period (Tz) at the deployment site Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 24 of 43 10/7/2009 Using the Aquamarine Power Oyster performance table, which specifies the electrical machine output as a function of sea state, the annual energy output for the Oyster was calculated at the deployment site. The results of this performance assessment are shown below. • Rated Capacity: 650kW • Capacity Factor: 49% • Availability: 95% • Annual Output : 2651 MWh/year These resource assessment results are encouraging and indicate a potentially attractive economic profile. Presently, Yakutat uses 100% diesel fuel, for electricity generation which is expensive and unsustainable. Other potential renewable resource options in this village may include; biomass, tidal energy and wind energy. Yakutat has already completed a wind resource study, and it was determined that there was not enough resource to justify a commercial sized project. The CBY along with the US Forest Service, Yak-Tat-Kwaan and Yakutat Tlingit Tribe are studying a possible bio-mass electrical generation system. While this type of generation may be developed quicker due to the off the shelf generation devices available, it will still be a very expensive form of generation due to the cost of fuel. When we experienced the high cost fuel in 2008 a group of concerned citizens formed an alternative energy group to study and discuss the various things that may be possible for our community. After much deliberation it was determined to try and develop a bio-mass based project for the near term and an Ocean energy project for the long term. We feel very confident that we have plenty of Ocean resource that can be developed and knowledge that can be share with the rest of the world that is striving to develop this type of power generation. 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. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 25 of 43 10/7/2009 The existing Yakutat Power plant generation equipment consists of four diesel generator sets (gensets) with a total generation capacity of 4,000 kW. The generation system is a 4160-volt wye three-phase system. All generators operate at 1200 RPM. • Genset #1 a new CAT 3516B rated at 1322 kW • Genset #2 is a CAT 3512B rated at 880 kW. • Genset #3 is a CAT 3508B rated at 600 kW. • Genset #4 is a CAT 3516 rated at 1200 kW. • The new 3516B is the primary genset. The 3512B and 3508B gensets operate on an as needed when the electric load exceeds the 3516B capacity, and when the 3516B is down for maintenance. The 3516 is nearing the end of its useful life and is used sparingly. The power plant has two separate cooling systems both with heat recovery capability. The 3516B and 3512B are on one common cooling loop, and the 3508B and the 3516 are on a separate cooling loop. Both cooling loops are 5-inch diameter welded steel piping with flanged butterfly valves, an AMONT valve, plate heat exchanger and a single radiator. 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. The existing resource is diesel fuel. Fuel is delivered to Yakutat via barge year round and stored in bulk at the Delta Western tank farm. Fuel is delivered by truck to Yakutat Power, local businesses, and residents. Yakutat Power made a major investment in 2007 to replace an antiquated CAT 3412 with the new 3516B, to increase the plants rated kW capacity. A heat recovery system was installed in the early 1990s and provides heat to the Yakutat school complex nearby. Virtually all heating of the school complex is provided by the Yakutat power plant heat recovery system. The displacement of diesel fuel with wave energy will reduce the total fuel throughput of the Delta Western fuel terminal. It is not anticipated that the reduction in Yakutat Power’s diesel fuel use will have an appreciable impact on the Delta Western facility, except that it will be used to a lesser extent then before. The proposed WEC project will displace diesel fuel but will not replace the diesel generation capacity. The WEC system will be sized so that the electricity can be fully absorbed by the existing electrical load. The diesel generator will be used in load following mode. 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. The following shows the daily electrical generation in Yakutat for 2007. The average electrical Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 26 of 43 10/7/2009 load during that year was 794kW. The amount of electricity that could be displaced is largely dependent on how well the generation matches demand. From the chart above, showing daily average, low and peak generation, it becomes apparent that short-term storage could greatly increase the renewable capacity that could be added to the electrical system in the village. The following shows typical examples of daily load fluctuations in remote villages such as Yakutat. January Average Daily Load Profile 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 01234567891011121314151617181920212223 Hour of DayNormalized (Peak = 1)1 - Selawik 2 - Scammon Bay 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 Apr-07 May-07 Jun-07 Jul-07 Aug-07 Sep-07 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 Feb-08Power (kW)Daily High Daily Low Daily Average Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 27 of 43 10/7/2009 The load profile shows that the lowest load during the daily load cycle is almost half of the peak load. If there was no storage in the electrical system, the renewable generation system would have to be sized at a capacity that would not exceed the minimum load. This would insure that none of the electrical energy from a renewable power plant would get wasted. For Yakutat this lower limit is at about 450kW. Another source of energy presently used in Yakutat is heating fuel. Instead of using fuel for heating, electricity could be used to provide heating. Because heat can be stored relatively easily using thermal mass, the time of the day during which energy is dissipated in heating elements does not need to directly coincide with the heating needs. In addition there appears to be a natural correlation between the heating needs in the night/early morning hours and the lowest electrical energy needs in the village. This is the time during which there may be excess electricity coming from the wave power plant and this energy could be dissipated in form of heat. Total heating fuel used in 2007 was 343,000 Gallons. In order to calculate the equivalent number of kWh to meet that heating demand, the following assumptions are made: - 1 Gallon of heating fuel = 140,000 btu - Heating efficiency of oil = 80% - 1kWh = 3,412 btu - Electrical Heating efficiency = 99% Based on these assumptions, 1 MWh of electricity could accomplish the same amount of heating as 30.2 Gallons of heating fuel. In other words, the 343,000 gallons of heating fuel could be replaced with 11,357 MWh of electricity, which corresponds to an average electrical output of 1.3MW. Meeting all of the heating and electrical needs in the village may be impractical at present and would require additional work on creating intelligent loads within the village. However, the total needs will set an upper limit on the potential for renewable generation within Yakutat. The total potential average load is 2.1MW (0.8MW electrical + 1.3MW heating). Given a capacity factor of the wave power plant of 49%, this would require an installed capacity of 4.3MW to meet all of July Average Daily Load Profile 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 01234567891011121314151617181920212223 Hour of DayNormalized (Peak = 1)1 - Selawik 2 - Scammon Bay Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 28 of 43 10/7/2009 the village electrical and heating needs. If no energy storage was present, the electrical generation from the wave power plant would have to be limited to the lowest electrical load in the system, which was 450kW in 2007. Clearly this exercise shows that an intelligent grid design and integration with electrical heating has the potential to significantly increase the amount of energy that could come from a renewable (i.e., variable) resource. A second consideration is the cost of electricity. Over the past decade, fuel prices have continually increased and have lead to significant increases in the cost of electricity. The following chart shows the fuel prices between 1999 and 2008. 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 YearFuel Cost ($/Gallon)Electricity Generation Fuel Heating Fuel These fuel cost have translated directly into significant electricity cost increases. The following chart shows the electricity cost over the same time-frame. 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Yearcents/kWhNon-fuel cost Electricity Cost As shown in the above chart, electricity cost increases are largely driven by fuel cost increases. In 2008, the electricity cost in Yakutat reached 44 cents/kW. 27 cents/kWh is directly related to fuel cost and the remaining 17 cents/kWh is related to other cost of the electrical generation system. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 29 of 43 10/7/2009 While fuel prices have come down in 2009, this adjustment is largely believed to be temporary nature and is attributed to the global recession which reduced pressure on fuel prices globally. In the long-term, fuel prices will continue to climb and put increased pressure onto this remote community economically. Clearly, the value of electricity for heating is not the same as the value for electricity. In addition, diesel generation systems can yield additional benefits such as heating. Based on a heating fuel cost of $4.7 per gallon, the equivalent electricity value is 18 cents/kWh. In terms of present break even points, the first 0.8 MW of average electricity (7000MWh/year) has a value of 44 cents/kWh, while the next 3.5MW (31,000 MWh/year) has a value of 18 cents/kWh. As mentioned earlier, the real value of electricity from wave power would be less then the equivalent from a diesel generation system. However, because of the added value of long-term price stability from renewable resources, the above cost levels are good indicators of what the value of electricity in Yakutat is at the given generation levels and that wave energy could provide cost competitive renewable energy to the city. 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 Aquamarine Power’s shallow water wave energy conversion technology Oyster has been identified as the best suited wave energy technology for the deployment site. Oyster is a wave actuated hydraulic pump that pumps fresh water to shore at a pressure level of about 120bars, where it is converted into electricity using a conventional hydroelectric system. The major project elements include; (1) the Oyster wave power conversion devices, (2) a subsea high- pressure pipeline and a low pressure return pipeline, (3) a onshore hydroelectric power station, and (3) a distribution line extension to connect the power house to the village electrical grid network. The proposed deployment location and related project elements are shown in the following figure. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 30 of 43 10/7/2009 Oyster is well suited for such a remote location, because most of the active elements that provide points of failure are located on-shore where the equipment can easily be accessed for O&M purposes. A critical aspect of the plant design is the need to bring a set of pipelines from the deployment location back to the shore-based hydroelectric power plant. Such pipelines can be installed by directionally drilling from the shore to the site. The conceptual design established during the EPRI conceptual feasibility study assumed that the directional drilling would extend all the way out to the site. A key cost reduction measure would entail only drilling for a portion of the distance and simply laying the pipeline onto the seabed for the remainder of the distance. The following illustration shows a cross-sectional profile of the anticipated pipeline path. The profile shows that about 1,150m of subsea pipeline would be needed to connect the offshore plant to the power station on-shore. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 31 of 43 10/7/2009 Cross-sectional profile of likely pipeline path. Elevation data derived from GIS data-sets. Oyster 1 prototype operation Specifications (Oyster 2 commercial device) Water Depth 12-16m typical, 10-20m possible Flap Width 26m Flap Depth 13m Total Weight about 450T, including foundations Power Conversion Water Hydraulics Generator 3 phase Induction generator Converter Step up transformer, to 7.2/12.47kV to coordinate with proposed YP distribution voltage (the actual voltage will be determined in the future) Rated power output about 700kW (depending on deployment site) Anchor type Site-specific, e.g. a novel tension anchor solution has been developed for hard rock substrates, other substrates such as deep sand will use conventional offshore foundation solutions such as suction cans. Hydraulic fluid Pressurized fresh water (closed loop system) Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 32 of 43 10/7/2009 Principle of Operation The Oyster concept is a large buoyant oscillator that completely penetrates the water column from the water surface to the sea bed. It is a near shore device, typically deployed in 10 to 20 meters water depth, designed to capture the amplified surge forces founds in these near shore waves. The surge component in the waves forces the bottom hinged ‘flap’ to oscillate which in turn compresses and extends two hydraulic cylinders mounted between the flap and the sub-frame, pumping water at high pressure through a pipeline back to the beach. Onshore is a modified hydro-electric plant consisting of a Pelton wheel turbine driving a variable speed electrical generator coupled to a flywheel. The Pelton turbine is an impulse turbine, commonly used in the hydropower industry. Impulse turbines are known to have high efficiencies at high pressure levels (typically >20 bars) and are considered proven technology. Power flow is regulated onshore using a combination of hydraulic accumulators, an adjustable spear valve, a flywheel in the mechanical power train and rectification and inversion of the electrical output. The low pressure return-water passes back to the device in a closed loop via a second pipeline. A key design philosophy is to keep the offshore components as few and as simple as possible. The Oyster device has no major electrical components or active control functions operating in the offshore environment. Device Anchoring and Footprint The Oyster wave power device differs from all other wave power devices in this project both because it is anchored directly to the sea floor and because it operates in relatively shallow water. An example array including device footprint size, pipeline layout and spacing between devices for a 5MW deployment is shown below. An initial foundation concept has been developed for rocky substrates, using tension anchors to provide high friction between the device and the seabed. Other foundation solutions are under development for substrates including deep sand and sand-over-rock. 26m 13m Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 33 of 43 10/7/2009 Figure 1 – An indicative device array and pipeline layout for a 5MW (peak) Oyster 2 farm Operation and Maintenance The offshore device units are designed with a minimal number of moving elements – 2 hinges, 4 non-return valves and an accumulator. Each moving part is designed for low-cost modular replacement using non-specialist marine vessels on a 5-year preventative maintenance cycle. The fixed steel ‘flap’ structure is designed for an operating lifetime of 20 years in high-energy sea environments, without replacement. This low complexity will likely result in extended periods of operation without the need for maintenance and/or repair. The Pelton wheel and turbine are located in a permanent onshore structure, and thus readily accessible on a 24/7 basis, in all weather conditions, for inspection and maintenance purposes. Additional Information The infrastructure of a project using Aquamarine technology will differ quite significantly from other deep water projects. Instead of an electrical cable back to shore, a pipe is used to transport pressurized freshwater back to shore, where it is used to generate electricity. This has implications on operational activities and related impacts. As compared to other projects, this would mean: - No electricity is generated or transmitted through the water, eliminating any EMF concerns - A larger diameter conduit would need to be used to bring the high-pressure pipe to shore - The lower complexity of the in-water portion of the project will result in fewer interventions over the project life - The hydraulic power take-off uses a closed loop freshwater system, eliminating any entrainment concerns Operational Procedures The following operational activities and time-frames are estimated for a deployment at three different scales. In absence of detailed design and engineering studies the time-frames and intervention intervals represent initial estimates and are to be used for illustrative purposes only. Time estimates refer to operational time within the general deployment area and includes mobilization time. Only offshore activities that are directly affecting the marine environment are outlined here to provide the reader with a better understanding of operational impacts on the environment. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 34 of 43 10/7/2009 The first set of operational activities are outlined for pre-construction activities that are used to support permitting, detailed design and subsequent construction activities at the site. Pre- installation activities will not differ significantly as a function of scale or technology choice. Pre-installation resources and duration Activity Resources Duration Survey to map high-resolution bathymetry at deployment site and cable route Survey vessel < 1 week Sub-bottom profiling to identify sedimentation layer thickness at deployment site Survey vessel < 1 week Visual inspection of seabed in deployment area and along cable route. Soil Sampling where required. Survey vessel ROV or diver < 1 week Wave Resource Characterization using ADCP or directional measurement buoy Survey Vessel or RIB 1 year Environmental baseline studies Survey vessel Stand-alone instrumentation 1-2 years The second set of activities represent project construction activities. These are activities that will have the most significant impacts over the project life and are compressed in a relatively short (1-2 year) timeframe. While onshore construction and pipeline drilling works can take place during the winter months, offshore construction activities are dependent on weather windows at the site and would occur during times when there is a high likelihood of calm seas. Due to weather considerations, the offshore construction time-period is likely constrained to the May through early September time period. Installation resources and duration Activity Resources Duration 1-Unit 10-Units 100-Units Directional drilling to land high- pressure water pipeline to shore Drill rig < 2 months < 2 months < 6 months Construction of onshore powerhouse Standard excavation and construction equipment < 3 months < 3 months < 6 months Foundation Installation 2 Tugs Barge Supply boat 2 weeks (including weather downtime) 3 weeks 20 weeks Connect High-pressure collector system Supply boat Diver 1 week (including weather risk) 2 weeks 20 weeks Device Deployment and Commissioning Barge 2 Tugs Supply boat 2 weeks (including weather downtime) 3 weeks 20 weeks Operation and Maintenance activities can be divided into planned and unplanned activities. The majority of operational activities will occur during summer months, when relatively calm weather conditions allow these operations to be carried out safely. Some unplanned maintenance activities may need to be carried out during the winter season as a result of a failure that require Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 35 of 43 10/7/2009 immediate attention. Operational activity, resources and intervention frequency estimates Activity Resources Frequency Planned maintenance (offshore) Standard mid-size boat Every 5 years Un-planned Maintenance (offshore) Standard mid-size boat, diver Every 4-5 years Visual Inspection of underwater elements Research Vessel, ROV Every 2 years Replacement/Refurbishment/Decommissioning of offshore Power Capture Unit and Foundation Derrick Barge 2 Tugs Supply Boat 20 years Decommissioning occurs at the end of the project life (typically 20 years). Decommissioning activities will probably be carried out over 1-2 summer seasons, depending on the project scale. Decommissioning, resources and duration Activity Resources 1-Unit 10-Units 100-Units Recover Devices Custom Vessel 1 week 2 weeks 20 weeks Recover Device Foundation 2 x Tug Barge Supply Boat 1 week 2 weeks 20 weeks Hydraulic Collector System Removal 2 x Tug Barge Supply Boat 1 week 2 weeks 20 weeks 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 Yakutat Energy Pilot Demonstration plant offshore segment is well within the 3 mile state lands limit such that the sea bed belongs to the State of Alaska. Appropriate rights to the plant area will be secured The State of Alaska department of Natural Resources. The Yakutat Wave Power Pilot Demonstration plant onshore segment is sited on land near the beach. The City and Borough of Yakutat has management authority over municipal entitlement selected and approved beach and uplands of Ocean Cape that could be used for onshore facilities with State concurrence. State concurrence is anticipated but the requirement could be mooted by requesting survey instructions and receiving final patent. In the alternative, the Borough could apply for use of forest Service lands under their permitting, land lease and land trade policies. If forest Service lands are used the Borough will need to secure a utility easement approximately one mile in length along Forest Service maintained “Cannon Beach Road”. No such easement would be required if Borough lands are used. 4.3.3 Permits Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 36 of 43 10/7/2009 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 The City and Borough of Yakutat will file an application for a FERC hydrokinetic license in order to hold first exclusive right to develop the resource throughout the Phase IV period. FERC has been notified that Yakutat may file an application, and in the meantime has agreed to notify Yakutat Power if any other developer/investor applies for such a preliminary permit. A FERC pilot plant license required to construct and operate the WEC plant will be obtained during the proposed Phase III of the project as will all other licenses required by federal, state and local agencies 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 The project team is aware of no barriers to obtaining the permits required to complete this project and licenses required to implement the Phase IV Construction and Operations Phase. Potential environmental and land use issues will be addressed prior to and during the Final Design and Permitting phase III to eliminate or minimize these issues. This will be accomplished, in part, through consultation with the pertinent management and regulatory agencies and other stakeholders. The following potential issues will be evaluated, relevant information documented, and associated permits obtained as required to construct and operate the WEC plant: • threatened or endangered species • habitat issues • wetlands and other protected areas • archeological and historical resources • land development constraints • telecommunications interference • aviation considerations • visual, recreation and aesthetic impacts • other issues as appropriate and identified through agency and stakeholder consultation Given proper care in siting, design, construction and operations, we believe that WEC power will have a minimal environmental impact and be one of the more benign ways to generate electricity. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 37 of 43 10/7/2009 EPRI has extensive experience in assessment of potential impacts of energy projects and past experience in FERC-related NEPA documentation will enhance the project team’s ability to effectively address potential environmental issues. Collectively, our understanding of the NEPA process and potential environmental impacts allows us to mitigate possible negative affects early in the design stage. The environmental and sea bed issues will be addressed as part of the permitting/licensing process. 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 The total anticipated project cost (“project” meaning the four Phase project) is • Phase I and II = $44,000 (funded by Yakutat Power and is complete and is the source for the estimate of the Construction and Operation Phase IV) • Phase III = $1,600,000 was estimated by the Phase III project team which prepared this grant application and the statement of work for this Final Design and Permitting phase is described in Section 4. Requested grant funding for this phase is 75% from the State of Alaska and 25% from the USDOE • Phase IV = $9,000,000 and was estimated from the preliminary design work of Phases I and II and with consultation from the WEC developer, Aquamarine Power who has recently built and deployed a 650 kW Oyster pilot plant at the European Marine Energy Centre in Scotland. Although some uncertainty exists relative to 2012 construction funding, the City and Borough of Yakutat meeting this budget requirement by a combination of bond funds coverable by revenue from the sale of electricity and any budget gap made up by grant funding from the State of Alaska and/or USDOE The results of this Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration project is intended to inform the City and Borough of Yakutat and the state of Alaska as to the feasibility building this plant out for the City and Borough of Yakutat and applying the technology to other coastal cities in Alaska 4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 38 of 43 10/7/2009 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 communities they serve.) Although uncertainty exists relative to 2013 – 2017 and beyond operating and maintenance (O&M) cost, the City and Borough of Yakutat is not anticipating requesting grant funding for Phase IV and that the O&M costs would be paid from the revenue form the sale of the electricity. The O&M costs for a remote WEC project such as the proposed project has a high degree of uncertainty because currently there are no commercial scale WEC projects in operation. One of the goals of this proposed pilot project is to ferret out real costs based on remote Alaska application. Real O&M costs obtained during the pilot project will be incorporated into the business plan and will weigh heavily in the decision whether or not to expand the pilot project to full commercialization. 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 The City and Borough of Yakutat through Yakutat Power will own and operate the project, therefore, there will be no power purchase agreement. Yakutat Power owns and operates its own distribution grid. The energy generated by the WEC pilot demonstration plant will displace diesel fuel. The bus bar cost of electricity from this project is estimated to be 45 cents/kWh in constant Jan 1, 2010 dollars compared to the current cost of 27 cents/kWh just for the diesel fuel displaced Key assumptions include 1. The construction and installation costs is funded by bonds issued by the City and Borough of Yakutat 2. The 5 year FERC pilot plant license is extended to a 20 year plant life 3. There is no state or federal government funding to build the plant and no financial incentives for producing renewable energy 4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in evaluating the project. The cost worksheet is submitted as Appendix B. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 39 of 43 10/7/2009 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 The Yakutat pilot project will advance the technical design, permitting, and environmental knowledge of WEC for use by other coastal Alaskan communities considering this form of renewable energy. The project will also boost the expertise of the industry and potentially reduce manufacturing and operations costs. Economic benefits The estimated annual fuel displacement from a 650 kW 45.6% capacity factor plant pilot scale project is 160,000 gallons/year. This equates to approximately 3,200,000 gallons over a twenty-year anticipated useful life of the project. The anticipated cost savings to the electric utility based on reduced diesel fuel use is $15,000,000 over a 20- year period based on the current fuel cost of $4.71/gallon. Non-economic benefits There are no known tax credits or other subsidies for a project of this type. Non-economic benefits to Alaskans include the reduction in diesel exhaust emissions realized by using renewable wave energy, short term job creation during testing and construction, long term job creation during operations and maintenance, reduced dependence of imported diesel fuel as well as improved long term viability of Yakutat Power by getting on the path to a sustainable energy future 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 First of all, the current diesel generator electricity system in Yakutat is NOT sustainable Relative to this proposed Phase III Final Design and Permitting of the Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration Project, we are proposing that the State of Alaska fund 75% of the cost and that Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 40 of 43 10/7/2009 the US DOE fund the remaining 25%. This will allow the City and Borough of Yakutat to progress the project to the point of submitting the license applications to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission (FERC) and other federal, state and local agencies with a stake in this project. Following the receipt of a FERC Pilot Plant license and approvals from the other agencies for the construction and operation of the pilot plant for a 5 year period, the City and Borough of Yakutat will acquire the funding as follows: 1. The City will freeze (or maybe a fixed escalation rate) the electricity rates to the citizens of Yakutat at the then current level and sell electrical energy at that rate. The City will issue a bond to raise the construction funds with the revenues covering the bond 2. The City recognizes that the revenues from this sale of electrical energy from the pilot plant will not meet the full funding requirements to construct, operate and maintain the pilot plant 3. The City will request additional Alaska REF and/or USDOE funds to fill the budget gap If the results of the pilot demonstration project show the City and Borough of Yakutat that a build out of the plant is commercially attractive, the City will issue a bond to raise the construction funding and pay off the bond from future electricity sales. The operational risk issues that could arise are twofold and their mitigation is described below 1. The wave energy resource is less that estimated over this time period. Because there are no mitigation approaches for this, we have very conservatively estimated this resource and therefore we believe that the risk is extremely low 2. The wave energy conversion (WEC) device does not generate the amount of electrical energy predicted. This risk will be mitigated by including provisions in the purchase of the derive such that financial penalties will result from any performance shortfall to be paid by the WEC developer The existing diesel generation system will remain in operation in Yakutat during the wave energy pilot demonstration project period, albeit operating at reduced level with a reduced need for diesel fuel. We estimate 160,000 gallons per year reduction in diesel fuel requirements just from the pilot plant. The City and Borough of Yakutat commits to carefully and accurately reporting yearly savings and benefits from the wave energy pilot demonstration plant, including but not limited to: - Initial contraction, deployment and commissioning cost - Annual operation and maintenance cost - Annual wave energy resource available to the pilot demonstration plant - Annual electrical energy produced by the pilot plant - Revenues received from the citizens of Yakutat purchasing that energy SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 41 of 43 10/7/2009 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. As stated earlier in this grant application, Yakutat Power has funded ($44,000) the Phase I and II Reconnaissance and Feasibility study The City and Borough of Yakutat intends to submit a preliminary permit application to FERC by no later than one month after contract award The City and Borough of Yakutat will begin the outreach activities as soon as the FERC preliminary permit application is submitted (town hall meeting to alert the citizens and especially the fisherman, and any others who think that the may be directly affected by the project) The City and Borough of Yakutat will initiate consultation with the regulator agencies as soon as the FERC preliminary permit application is submitted 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 most recent Capital Improvement Project (CIP) list for the city and Borough of Yakutat (attached) lists the replacement of diesel powered electrical generation with alternatives such as biomass (short term) and wave (long term) as the communities number one priority. The CIP is prepared by the Planning Commission to be in conformity with the borough’s Comprehensive Development Plan. It receives at least one public hearing before the Commission before it is passed on the Assembly for a second public hearing and final Assembly approval. The city and Borough of Yakutat has entered into a memorandum of understanding with the United States forest Service, the Yakutat Tlingit Tribe and the Yak-Tat Kwaan (Yakutat’s local native corporation) for the stated purpose of seeking an affordable alternative electrical energy generation system for the community. The original signed copy of the MOU is currently out of town and in the possession of Tongass Regional Forest Service offices. A copy will be submitted for inclusion with this application when it is returned The local chief executives for these four entities and the manager for Yakutat Power meet weekly (Wednesday at 3 o’clock pm) in public with staff and interested community members to manage and direct ongoing efforts in biomass and wave energy production. 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. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 3 AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 42 of 43 10/7/2009 Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget3.doc Provide a narrative summary regarding funding sources and your financial commitment to the project. Total required grant funding for this Phase III Final Design and Permitting Project of the Yakutat Wave Energy Pilot Demonstration is $1,600,000. We propose that 75% of those funds come from the State of Alaska and 25% come from the U.S. DOE. The grant budget request is submitted as Attachment C Yakutat Power has invested the $44,000 required to complete the Phase I and II Reconnaissance and Feasibility studies A letter of support from the WEC developer, Aquamarine Power of Scotland, is contained in Attachment D APPENDIX A PROJECT RESUMES APPENDIX B COST WORKSHEET   Renewable Energy Fund Round 3 Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet   RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 1 10-7-09 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. Annual average wave energy resource of 19-22 kW per meter of wave crest width at 13 meter depth offshore the Yakutat coast Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel) Significant wave height and wave energy period 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 4 Gensets ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 4,000 kW iii. Generator/boilers/other type Diesel iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 1990s to 2007 v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 14.6 kWh/gallon b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Annual O&M cost for labor $655,000 ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $570,000 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] 6,600,000 kWh/year ii. Fuel usage Diesel [gal] 400,000 gallons Other Zero iii. Peak Load 1,500 kW (peak daily average) iv. Average Load 794 kW (peak daily average) v. Minimum Load 500 kW (peak daily average) vi. Efficiency 14.6 kWh/gallon vii. Future trends Up to 85,000 gallons/year reduction in diesel fuel costs d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable) i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] N/A ii. Electricity [kWh] N/A iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] N/A iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] N/A v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] N/A                                                              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 3 Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet   RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 2 10-7-09 vi. Other 3. 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) [kWh or MMBtu/hr] 650 kW Wave Energy Conversion rated power at 45.6% annual capacity factor b) Proposed Annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable) i. Electricity [kWh] 2,650 MWh per year ii. Heat [MMBtu] N/A c) Proposed Annual fuel Usage (fill in as applicable) i. Propane [gal or MMBtu] Zero ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu] Zero iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] Zero iv. Other Zero 4. Project Cost a) Total capital cost of new system About $9 million b) Development cost About $2 million c) Annual O&M cost of new system About $330,000 d) Annual fuel cost Zero 5. Project Benefits - NOTE THAT THIS IS A “PILOT” PROJECT WHOSE MAIN PURPOSE IS TO EVALUATE WHETHER COMMERCIAL PLANTS MAKE SENSE FOR ALASKA AT THIS TIME – “PILOT” PROJECTS DO NOT COMPETE WITH COMMERCIAL PLANTS ON A COST BASIS a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity ii. Heat N/A iii. Transportation N/A b) Price of displaced fuel $4.70 per gallon (weighted average) c) Other economic benefits Reduced emissions, reduced dependence on imported fuel, local job creation and the value of starting on the path to a sustainable energy future d) Amount of Alaska public benefits This is a demonstration test facility for determining state wide applicability 6. Power Purchase/Sales Price a) Price for power purchase/sale Yakutat will own the plant   Renewable Energy Fund Round 3 Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet   RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 3 10-7-09 7. Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio Benefits include 1) Annual reduced cost of diesel fuel purchases = $755,000 in 2010 $ (400,000 gal *$4.70/gal *2,650,000 MWh//6600 MWh) 2) Annual estimated emission cost to society ($30/ton of carbon) = $63,600 in 2010 constant dollars (2,650MWh *0.8 tons carbon/MWh * $30/ton of carbon) 3) Annual value to citizens of Yakutat of less dependency on imported diesel fuel = $1,000,000 (a pure guesstimate) 4) Annual value to citizens of Yakutat for switching to a sustainable energy resource = $1,000,000 (a pure guesstimate) 5) Annual value to the citizens of local job creation = $1,000,000 (a pure guesstimate) 6) Value to the state of Alaska = $1,000,000 (a pure guesstimate) 7) Value to the USA = $1,000,000 (a pure guesstimate) Total annual benefit = $4,819,000 * 5 years = $24,095,000 Costs in include 1) Capital cost of plot plant = $9 million (2010 $) 2) Annual O&M cost = $329K in 2010 constant 2010 $ and includes the cost of removal after 5 years per the FERC pilot license requirement Total Cost = $329K * 5 years + $9,000K = $10,560K Therefore, benefit to cost ratio for 5 year pilot project is $24,095,000/$10,560,000 = 2.3 We ask that the evaluators not compare the benefit to cost ratio and the simple payback period of a “pilot” plant to other proposals for “commercial” plants as that would not be a fair comparison Payback The simple payback period (SPP) is the ratio of the initial capital to the difference between the revenues and the O&M cost SPP = $9,000,000/(2,650 MWh/yr * $270/MWh – $195,000) = $9,000,000/$520,050 = 17.3 years Where the O&M cost includes only parts/labor and insurance and does not include the potential removal cost at the end of 5 years And where we add the footnote that pilot plants do not have short payback periods and if that was the criteria, we would never have pilot demonstration plants and we would lock out all new technology APPENDIX C GRANT BUDGET Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09 Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date (based on Jan 1, 2011 start date) RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS (Cumulative) (List milestones based on phase and type of project. See Attached Milestone list. ) 1. Project scoping and kickoff meeting Jan 31, 2011 $30,000 $10,000 Federal (USDOE Waterpower Program) $40,000 2. Submittal of FERC preliminary permit application Receipt of FERC preliminary permit Jan 31, 2011 Jul 30, 2011 $30,000 $10,000 Federal (USDOE) $40,000 3. Completion of system level user requirements, functional design and interface requirements Mar 31, 2011 $75,000 $25,000 Federal (USDOE) $100,000 4. Completion of operations and maintenance requirements Apr 30, 2011 $150,000 $50,000 Federal (USDOE) $200,000 5. Completion of agency environmental consultations Dec 31, 2011 $900,000 $300,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,200,000 6. Completion of final design Mar 31, 2012 $1,080,000 $360,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,440,000 7. Completion of updated economic and financial analysis Apr 30, 2012 $1,110,000 $370,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,480,000 8. Completion of business and operational plan May 31, 2012 $1,140,000 $380,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,520.000 9. Submittal of License Application Jun 30, 2012 $1,170,000 $390,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,560.000 10. Receipt of Construction and Operations License Dec 31, 2012 $1,200,000 $400,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,600.000 TOTALS $1,600,000 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $112,500 $37,500 Federal (USDOE) $150,000 Travel & Per Diem $7500 $2500 Federal (USDOE) $10,000 Equipment $ $ $ Materials & Supplies $ $ $ Contractual Services $1,080,000 $360,000 Federal (USDOE) $1,440,000 Construction Services $ $ $ TOTALS $1,200,000 $400,000 $1,600,000 Applications should include a separate worksheet for each project phase (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Design and Permitting, and Construction)- APPENDIX D ELECTRONIC COPY OF APPLICATION (REFER TO ENCLOSED DISC) APPENDIX E RESOLUTION & SUPPORTING LETTERS City and Borough of Yakutat 2009 CIP COMMUNITY PROFILE Location Yakutat is located on the Gulf of Alaska, 225 miles northwest of Juneau, at the mouth of Yakutat Bay. Because it is one of the few refuges for watercraft along a very long coastline, this mild, often rainy location has a long history as a port and trading center. History & Culture Yakutat, meaning “the place where the canoes rest,”has a cultural history that is strongly tied to the traditional Tlingit and Eyak cultures. More recent influences include Russian, English and American traders. The area’s diverse cultural history has been originally traced to Eyak-speaking people from the Copper River area. Conflict with Tlingits from the south led to Tlingit settlement of the area and the expansion of the Tlingit cultural influence. In the 18th and 19th centuries, fur traders and explores came to the region from England, France, Spain and Russia. The next major influence came at the end of the 19thcentury with the area’s black sand beaches being mined for gold. A cannery, sawmill, store and railroad were constructed beginning in 1903 by the Stimson Lumber Co. Most residents moved to the current site of Yakutat to be closer to this cannery, which operated through 1970. During World War II, a large aviation garrison and paved runway were constructed. Troops were withdrawn after the war, but the runway is still in use. The City of Yakutat was formed in 1948 and in 1992 was combined with the Borough. Land, Environment & Climate The City and Borough of Yakutat encompasses 7,650.5 square miles of land and 1,808.8 square miles of water.1 The area is characterized by a maritime climate, meaning relatively mild and often rainy weather. Yakutat receives some of the heaviest precipitation in the state, averaging 132 inches, including 219 inches of snowfall. Temperatures range from 42 to 60 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer to 17 to 39 degrees in the winter.2 Land Ownership Land ownership in the City and Borough includes: Alaska Department of Natural Resources; Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; Yak-tat Kwaan (an ANCSA corporation); City and Borough of Yakutat; Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority and private land owners. 1 State of Alaska, DCCED, Community Database, November 2007. 2 Ibid. Population Served In 2006, the population of the City and Borough of Yakutat was 634 individuals (DCCED, 2006). This figure is a decline from the Census 2000 figure of 808 individuals (see Table 1 for more population statistics). Of those counted in 2000, just under half, 46 percent, identified themselves as Alaska Native. Fifty percent of the population in 2000 was white, with the remaining percentages being split among the Asian, Hawaiian native or black populations. It should be noted that Borough formed in 1992, increasing the area of the City substantially. Gender The population in Yakutat is slightly skewed toward a higher male population with 40.7 percent female and 59.3 percent male. This can be compared to the state as whole where the percentages are 48.3 percent and 51.7 percent, respectively. Age Compared with the state, Yakutat has a much higher percentage of the population in the 45-64 age group, 28.7 percent compared to 22.3 percent for the state. This is also reflected in the median age which is 37.2 for Yakutat and 32.4 for the state. Economy Overview Fishing is integral to both the lifestyle and economy of Yakutat. Most Yakutat residents depend on subsistence hunting and fishing. Much of the area’s economy is dependent on fishing or fish processing. In recent years, tourism based on hunting and fishing has become an increasingly important sector of the local economy. Income and Employment Both the per capita income and median household income are similar to the statewide income figures which are $22,660 and $51,571, respectively. The employment picture in Yakutat is heavily dependant on, as mentioned above, fishing, fish processing and government. The Yakutat Tlingit Tribe and the services it provides to the community is another significant employer locally. In 2000, 162 residents held commercial fishing permits. Table 1. U.S. Census Bureau Statistics, 2000 Population 2000 808 1990 534 1980 449 1970 190 1960 230 1950 298 1940 292 Income and Poverty Levels Per Capita Income $22,579 Median $46,786 Household Income Percent Below Poverty 13.5% Employment Percent Unemployment 7.8% Percent of Adults Not Working 28.2% Current Infrastructure Yakutat is not reachable by road but receives frequent air and boat traffic. There are scheduled jet, air taxi and float plan services to Yakutat using either the float plane base, the State-owned runway, the Cape Yakataga airfield or on one of five U.S. Forest Service airstrips in the area. The Borough operates a boat harbor. A state ferry, the Kennicott, began summer service to Yakutat in 1998. Infrastructure provided in Yakutat includes water and sewer. Water is derived from wells, treated and piped to 191 homes in the community and the schools. Sewage is strained, sent to a settling chamber, chlorinated, de-chlorinated and released to sea. Refuse is collected by a commercial firm or brought to the community receiving area by private individuals. Hazardous waste is identified, separated and stored for eventual transport to appropriate treatment plants. Remaining waste is buried in accordance with a “trench and fill” operational plan. Diesel-fueled generators provide electricity for the area, run by Yakutat Power, Inc. The potential to utilize hydroelectric power is being explored in the area. The community operates a local clinic that is a qualified Emergency Care Center and Yakutat is classified as a Regional Center. Priority 1 Alternative Energy The City and Borough of Yakutat owns Yakutat Power, the only commercial electrical generation plant in the borough. Electrical power is produced by diesel generators providing between 750 and 2000 MW between minimum and peak periods. Currently, customers are paying $0.53/KWH. Fuel expense for the plant is running between $150,000 and $180,000 per month. Yakutat Power operates with a strict business approach and aggressively peruses delinquent accounts. Local businesses and households are struggling to pay bills resulting from diesel generated energy. With an ever-increasing percentage of homeowner’s income going to electrical power, other segments of the community’s economy, particularly in the retail markets, are beginning to suffer. Yakutat does not have a viable source for hydro or geothermal electrical generation. Wind studies have shown wind generators have not reached the level of efficiency necessary to function at average Yakutat wind velocity. Like wind, solar, while capable of providing supplemental, seasonal relief, does not offer a reasonable alternative. The City and Borough of Yakutat has dedicated $45,000.00 to a study of offshore wave energy potential. Wave energy technology exists that would supply borough needs, installation is ten to fifteen years away and unanswered maintenance issues remain to be addressed. In cooperation with the Yak-Tat-Kwaan and the Yakutat Tlingit Tribe, we are evaluating several biomass fuel producing systems, which, working with our diesel generators, could meet our electrical power requirements until an efficient source of wave energy is identified. Funding Source We believe a combination of federal, local and state funding willl be required for both the biomass system and/or wave energy production. Funds Required and probable source Biomass system $7,000,000 1. Local contribution 20% 2. Federal and State Govt. 80% Long term wave energy $15,000,000 1. Local Contribution 5% (inkind labor)* 2. State and Federal 95% Modernize existing diesel power generation plant $4,000,000.00 1. Local contribution 20% (in kind equipment and land 2. State or federal Funding 80% *Local contribution could be increased through revenue bonding Priority 2 Sewer and Water Facilities Yakutat needs a comprehensive master plan that identifies the location of current utility delivery systems and addresses future infrastructure and expansion requirements. We have a scope of work prepared by HDR Engineering and are ready to go to RFP on such a project as soon as funding is identified. The study is estimated to cost $200,00.00. The DEC has grant funds available for plan development but competition is intense and matching funds are not available locally. Parts of the West Addition water delivery system was installed without DEC permitting and without the required stamped, engineering plans. We are required to have an engineer do an “as built” of the installation and submit it for an after-the-fact permit. The as-built is estimated to cost 30,000.00. The permit fee will run a minimum of $20,000.00. . Our only source for financing such a project is federal grants or direct legislative funding. The South Addition special assessment district is tied into the non- permitted system and it too will need to be included in the as-built and permitting project. A SEARHC inspection of our waste water system has identified numerous deficiencies that need immediate attention. All of our lift stations need overhaul, cleaning and extensive repair. One needs to be completely replaced. The study estimates the of upgrades, personnel training and facilities at $2,000,000.00. Yakutat has been awarded 700,000.00 in State funds and work is underway upgrading our sewer and water infrastructure. We are holding 500,000.00 in reserve as matching funds Should a federal funding source be identified. Funds required and probable source Upgrade project 1,500,000.00 1. State funds onhand received in FY08 $500,000.00 2. Federal Grant funds $1,500,000.00 Priority 3 Harbor Facilities 1. Fuel Dock Economic Development Alternatives $900,000 a. Gravel conveyor b. Fisherman’s Market c. Cranes d. Fuel line extension Source of funding 1. Local contribution, in kind and cash 20% 2. State 80% (Cruise ship tax Eligible) 2. Boat Harbor Upgrades: $2,750,000 a. Restroom and Harbor Office b. Boat Weighs and Haul Out c. Sewer Lift Station d. Additional slips and covered stalls Source of funding 1. EDA 50% (under application) 2. State DOT Tier 1 Harbor Grant Program 50%, or, 3. Cruise Ship Tax !00% Fuel Dock Additives: We are unable to finance all the deductive alternatives included in the original EDA grant request. Steel prices and transportation costs have escalated over the past three years and the $3,071,000.00 project cost estimate fell well short of the $5,800,000 minimum project bid. Items listed (1, a through d) above have been dropped until additional funds are located. In FY08 we received state funding that allowed for the installation of a cruise ship loading platform and fueling dock. Together with the EDA grant, additional Denali Commission funds and approximately $800,000.00 in local contributions, we awarded West Construction a reduced contract totaling $4,300,000 to construct the dock and cruise ship/fueling platform minus items a through d above, which remain vital components of our economic development plan for the facility. The fisherman’s market component would allow individual setnet and troll fishermen a facility from which to process, preserve and sell value added product. The gravel loading conveyor is necessary so give individual Yakutat contractors and the Sealaska Corporation an opportunity to load gravel barges and ships. Since this facility serves the cruise ship industry and the value added fisherman’s market will provide a retail commodity to customers of that industry, funding from the cruise ship tax account is appropriate. Boat Harbor Improvements: PND Engineering has prepared a plan for expanding the small boat harbor and estimates the cost for items listed in “2” above at $1,500,000. The boat haul out will cost an additional $1.200,000. We have been invited to submit an EDA pre-application for fifty percent of project costs. This facility qualifies for a 50% tier one DOT small boat harbor grant in the amount of $1,350,000.00 which we are requesting. Priority 4 Borough Services Facilities 1. Public Safety/Fire Hall building ($700,000) Source of funding a. Crusie Ship Tax 80% b. Local 20% 2. Courthouse Renovation ($600,000) Source of funding a. State 80% b. Local 20% 3. Science laboratory ($550,000) Source of funding a. Cruise ship tax 80% b. Local 20% (in kind land and labor) Yakutat's emergency services need a new facility. They are presently housed in a seventy year old quonset. The roof leaks, carbon monoxide from emergency vehicles occasionally poisons personnel offices, and the electrical and heating installations are outdated and inefficient. We have to date, invested $550,000.00 of local funds and $200,000.00 of state funds in a new police station and two stall garage The Borough needs another 700,000.00 to complete the project and provide adequate facilities for fire equipment and personnel training and partially pay the debt owing on the new police station. Because the cruise ship industry uses our emergency response facilities on a regular basis, this project qualifies for funding under the cruise ship tax program. City Hall is a forty-year-old, 1400 sq ft. residence. Offices are cramped and there is no space for files or storage. Necessary upgrades of the electrical and water utilities are required but the expense is hard to justify considering the poor condition of the overall structure. The courthouse, while an older building, has a sound foundation and is available for renovation. It has an existing revenue stream from State court system leases and Salmon Board grant sources. With an investment of $600,000.00 a second floor could be constructed over the existing apartment and the combined square footage would provide ample space for a new city hall. Maintenance and utility cost savings from vacating the existing facility, combined with the aforementioned revenue stream could offset construction costs. The unique geology, anthropology, weather and marine environment that characterizes the Yakutat Borough continues to be fertile ground for scientific study. Most locally documented studies, while a recognized asset, are conducted absent significant local participation. Borough residents and officials need to become more acquainted and involved in local scientific investigations. Our administrative decisions routinely include consideration of resource extraction activities and geologic anomalies. Accurate historical and anthropological information is essential to efficient economic development. The inclusion of Yakutat's youth in academic investigation carries obvious advantages for their personal development. The Borough Assembly committed $10,000.00 toward the development of a science laboratory that would provide facilities necessary to consolodate projects and involve local students. A site for the future facility has been identified and has been committed to the project. Planning funds have been requested from federal sources. Several national non profit organizations are working on our behalf to secure construction funding. Planned site preparation and startup facilities will require about $550,000.00. Much of this work will be done in association with the waterway utilized by the crusie ship industry on their visits to the Hubbard Glacier and could, at least partially, be funded from the cruise ship tax account. Priority 5 Transportation Projects 1. Street Pavement $7,000,000.00 a. Pave Subdivision roads b. Pave Ocean Cape road to West Addition Funding source a. State Revenue Bonds 50% b. Federal funding through tribal government programs 40% c. Local contributions 10% (in kind equipment, personnel, support) 3. Icy bay Breakwater $2,000,000 Funding Source a. Cruise Ship Tax 100% Paving borough streets is an ongoing collaborative effort between the City and Borough of Yakutat and the Yakutat Tlingit Tribe. The Tribe has direct access to considerable federal highway money and is taking the lead in securing necessary funding. Keeping the program on our priority list assists them and gives us the opportunity to access funds that would supplement their efforts. Additional funding through State bond programs would expedite the project minimizing health hazards associated with seasonal traffic initiated dust. The economic development of the Western borough is dependent on establishing surface transportation to the area. A road is not a possibility. Development of a dependable, usable port at Icy Bay is the only alternative. A breakwater is necessary to define and protect a dock proposed in the vicinity of the current State LTF. Lands selected by and under the management of the borough has sufficient quantity of rock to build a breakwater protection the State owned and maintained LTF facility. Such a breakwater would allow for the dredging of and development of a port/dock facility. Priority 6 Landfill 1. Waste disposal a. Incinerator 700,000 b. Recycle center 900,000 c. Electrical extension 350,000 Funding source a. State of Alaska 80% b. Tribal Government sources 10% c. Local Borough funding 10% As many as seventeen bears are in the Yakutat landfill at any given time. Because the landfill is in fairly close proximity to residential areas and schools, bears, now familiar with people and domestic trash, are becoming a threat to the life and property of residents. We have tried the “trench and fill” system for a year now with little to no success. Bears dig into the trench and scatter the trash causing additional, significant unbudgeted expense. Rubber bullets and electric fences have all failed. Equipment maintenance and fuel budgets are strained from the additional workload. The landfill needs an incinerator and an upgraded recycling center in order to dispose of the trash in a manner that effectively discourages bear problems. Electrical power lines, presently 1.5 miles distant from the site, need to be extended to the landfill. APPENDIX F TECHNICAL DATA Kick Off MeetingYakutat Wave Energy Feasibility StudyMay 28, 2009Roger BedardEPRI Project Manager Mirko Previsic re-vision LLC Principal Investigator 2© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Purpose of Kickoff Meeting•For EPRI to present to the Yakutat Power the results of its detailed implementation planning •For EPRI and Yakutat Power to achieve a mutually understood set of expectations–What we will do–How we will do it–What we will deliver–When we will deliver itThis briefing addresses how EPRI will implement wave energy feasibility study project in greater detail than described in the proposal Yakutat Power of September 11, 2008This briefing addresses plans and not results 3© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Key Drivers for Yakutat Power•Yakutat residents are totally dependent on diesel generated power with a residential rate is about $.53/kWh.•Yakutat is not connected to a grid and its base load is around 500 kW with a peak at 1.7 MW. •The central coast of Alaska has an excellent wave energy climate.•Will some vendors think that Yakutat represents a good opportunity for pilot demonstration testing? 4© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.How are waves formed?Uneven global heating of the Earth by the Sun generates windsSustained wind blowing over a sufficient fetch of water generates wavesWaves are a derived and concentrated form of solar energyWind SeaSwell 5© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Definition of Wave Power Density (kW/m)Wave power density is defined as the flux of energy across a vertical plane intersecting the sea surface and extending to the depth of no sub-surface orbital motion (which is half the wavelength of the longest harmonic component). For a 16-second wave, this depth is 200 m, which is the approximate depth of the continental shelf edge.This is an approximate formula for wave power density, basedon statistically derived sea state parameters.A more accurate formula takes the product of the spectral energy density and group velocity at a given frequency, and sums these products across all frequenciesof the wave spectrum. 6© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Global Annual Average Wave Power Density 7© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.U.S. Offshore Wave Energy ResourcesNew Englandand Mid-Atlantic110 TWh/yrWA, OR, CA440 TWh/yrSouthern AK1,250 TWh/yrNorthern HI300 TWh/yrTotal Energy = 2,100 Twh/yr (excluding the Bering sea) for sites with >10 kW/m or 240 GW annual average resource baseExtracting 15% and converting to electricity at 80% efficiency yields 255 Twh/yr or 29 GW mean output 8© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Project ObjectiveThe objective of this project is to perform a feasibility study of applying wave energy conversion (WEC) technology for generating electricity for the city of Yakutat, Alaska.The objective will be achieved through an approach that Task 1. Site Survey and Selection Task 2. Device Characterization and update of existing integrated device modelTask 3. Preliminary Design, Performance Estimate, Cost EstimateTask 4. Economics Assessment Task 5. Project Management Task 6. Reporting Task 7 –Storage and Grid Integration Study 9© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 0 –Deep Water vs Shallow WaterAll previous EPRI Wave Studies were deep water studiesAt Yakutat, 50 meter depth is 3 miles from shoreCost of installed submerged transmission cable = $1 to 2 million/mileFor a wave plant in the 0.5 to 1 MW rated power class, the submerged cable would represent a significant fraction of the cost of a traditional deep water plant 2 to 4 miles off shoreFor a 100 MW plant, the percent of the capital cost represented by the power cable is a small fraction Therefore, Yakutat needs to consider near shore wave plants 10© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 1. Site Survey and SelectionWave Energy ResourceBathymetryGrid InterconnectLoad Profile Heating Fuel Usage 11© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Site Overview –Deployment Site and Grid I/CDeployment Site @ 12m water depthShore-based Generator set 12© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Grid Interconnection•The closest area to tie-in to the Yakutat Grid will be out by the airport -either off the end of Cannon Beach Road or off the end of the airstrip.•Currently, there is no power out Cannon Beach Road, but there is electric power to within about 1.7-miles of the beach at the airport. •The existing distribution at the airport it 4160V, but will be upgraded to 12.47kV as part of the distribution upgrade. 13© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Photographs of SiteFrom Ocean Cape looking Southeastlooking northwest 14© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Central Alaska Wave Measurement Buoys46083 15© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Resource Assessment•Deep Water Resource from offshore NDBC 46083 @ 137m water depth•WavewatchIII hindcasthistorical data to initiate SWAN model to develop near-shore resource•Bathymetry will be provided by NOAA for SWAN model runs (expected to receive end of May) 16© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.NOAA Wave Watch III (NWW3)Only NWW3 numerical simulation model offers high-resolution, uniform grid spacing over broad regions off U.S. coastlinesCoastal 4’x 4’grids (and 8’x 4’grid surrounding Alaska) provide resolution of 2.9 to 3.6 nautical miles between grid points, depending on latitude 17© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.NWW3 –NDBC Buoy ColocationsMap shows co-located NDBC buoys and NWW3 spectral output locations in high-resolution coastal grids 18© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Correlation between NWW3(WIS) and NDBC Buoy Measurements is Good 19© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Bathymetry50m Water Depth =3 Miles from Shore 20© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.SWAN Modeling –Example Humboldt County CaliforniaSWAN modeling was not initially anticipated as part of this project => ProjectDelay 21© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Yakutat Load Profile-Alaska Electrical Village Calculator-Generator Data supplied by Yakutat Power-Estimates of fuel useage-Estimated heating useage⇒Primary objective is to replace as much fuel as possible with wave power generation⇒Heating loads could be a good match for this system to allow fora higher % in renewables penetrationHourly Electric Load0100200300400500600700800JanFebMarAprMayJunJulyAugSeptOctNovDecAverage Load (kW) 22© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 2 –Device Characterization•1stModern Day Grid Connected Wave Energy Conversion–LIMPIT–500 MW installed in 2000 at Islay, Scotland–Oscillating water column•Built into a cliff but could be near shore or breakwater•Oscillating water Column 23© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Near Shore Wave Energy Conversion (Electricity Generation with the Device) BoiPowerBioWaveAquaMarineOysterOceanLinxOWCSDE 24© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Near Shore Water Wave Pump with Electricity Generation On ShoreRenewable Energy CETOIndependent Natural Resources Inc SeaDog 25© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 2 -Device Selection –AquaMarinePower OysterSize = 18 x 12 meters Rated Power per Device: 350kWPower Conversion: Pressurized Water Peltonturbine on shore to generate power 26© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Oyster Fabrication 27© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Annual Electrical Energy Produced CalculationXDevice Performance in each Sea State(Example , Pelamispower matrix to be replaced by Oyster matrixHours of Occurrence per year in each cell (Scatter diagram derived from SWAN modeling==> MWh/ yearHsTeTeHsTeEnergy in each Sea state cell –add them and get:Hs 28© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Oyster Costs•Data for Oyster Weight Breakdown was received from Aquamarine Power•CAPEX and OPEX cost will be estimated based on existing models developed for similar devices•An update of the operational requirements and cost will be performed based on installation location and device requirements 29© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 3. Preliminary Design, Performance & Cost 30© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 3 –AquaMarinePower Oyster Plant DesignSingle or Double Device Plant DesignRated Power per Device: 350kWPower Conversion: Pressurized WaterPeltonturbine on shore to generate power 31© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 4. EconomicsSimple payback period (SPP) is the number of months (or years) it takes before the accumulated value of the revenues from the sale of electricity equals the capital cost and the yearly operating and maintenance cost of the plant. The value of electricity revenues is the avoided cost. The avoided cost of electricity has been specified by Yakutat power as 53 cents/kWh in 2008 dollars.The O&M cost of a diesel gensetis 2-5 cents/kwh, but we will conservatively assume that a gensetidling in the background has no O&M savings.The following assumptions about escalation of costs will be made:Escalation of O&M cost = 3% per yearEscalation of Revenue Prices (i.e., diesel fuel) = 8% per year Capital Cost O&M Cost 32© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 5. Storage and Grid Integration •The storage/grid integration issue is that Yakutat has a baseloadelectricity demand of 500 kW base and a peak electricity demand of 1.7 MW. •A renewable power plant, supplying electricity to this islanded grid will likely be very limited in capacity because the electrical load will always need to use all the electricity of the renewable power system, resulting in a low threshold of renewable penetration into the grid network. •We will address this issue by evaluating the use of energy storage to increase the percentage of electricity that can be supplied by wave energy in this isolated electrical grid network. •The approach will take detailed load data and evaluate how the electrical load of the village and the electrical generation from the wave power conversion plant can be integrated to allow for a substantial amount of electricity to be provided by wave energy.•Different energy storage options will be evaluated to their applicability to this particular application and sized to match supply and demand. 33© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 5. Storage and Grid Integration •Development of representative load profiles provided by Yakutat Power and Model results•Overlay Device Performance onto established load profile•Evaluate potential to displace heating fuel in the village by providing electric heating from surplus energy not being used•Evaluate grid integration with the existing diesel generation systemHourly Electric Load0100200300400500600700800JanFebMarAprMayJunJulyAugSeptOctNovDecAverage Load (kW) 34© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Task 6 & 7. Management & Reporting•Management –$13K spend so far of $44K budget; we will complete the project for the budgeted cost•Monthly progress reports –Describe progress during that reporting period; –Difficulties encountered during the reporting period, –Plans for the next reporting period including –In an email format. •Final report –description of all methods, analysis and results from the project–A draft final report shall be submitted for Yakutat Power’s review prior to publication of the final report on the EPRI public website (unless Yakutat desires to keep this report confidential to the company) 35© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.Wrap UpOutstanding Action ItemsHave we adequately explained what we will do and how we will do it?Have we achieved mutual expectations?Does EPRI understand what YakutatPower expects?Does YakutatPower understand what EPRI expects to do and deliver?Are the two consistent?