HomeMy WebLinkAboutDistrict Wood Heating in Fort Yukon Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Application
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
Submitted by the
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Grant Application
AEA 10-015 Application Page 1 of 17 10/7/2009
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility Company
Type of Entity:
Electric Utility
Mailing Address
PO Box 9
Fort Yukon, AK 99740
Physical Address
5th and Spruce,
ST Fort Yukon, AK 99740
Telephone
(907) 662-2322
(907) 662-2933
Fax
(907) 662-2983
Email
gerald carroll" <gerald_carroll@msn.com>
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT
Name
William A. Wall, PhD
Title
Consultant – Project Manager
Mailing Address
PO Box 988 Seeley Lake, MT 59868
Telephone
406-210-9984
Fax
Email
williamwall11@gmail.com
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)
X An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS
42.05, or
X An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
A local government, or
A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Yes
(See
appendix 1)
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.
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.)
Yes 1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 2 of 17 10/7/2009
funds for the benefit of the general public.
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)
District Wood Heating in Fort Yukon
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.
Fort Yukon
Communities to benefit: Gwitchyaa Zhee, Gwitchyaa Gwich’in, Fort Yukon, Yukon Flats
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
Wind X Biomass or Biofuels
Hydro, including run of river X Transmission of Renewable Energy
Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas
X Heat Recovery from existing sources Hydrokinetic
Solar X Storage of Renewable
Other (Describe)
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Reconnaissance Design and Permitting
Feasibility X Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
This application supports a wood-heating project in Fort Yukon, Alaska. Gwitchyaa Zhee
Corporation Board is the authorizing Board for the Applicant, Gwitchyaa Zhee Utility. Local
partners include the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (DOE recipient of biomass
grant support $1.2 million), Gwitchyaa Zhee Native Corporation & Utility, Gwitchyaa Gwich’in
Tribal Government, Yukon Flats School District and the City of Fort Yukon. A wood energy
supply analysis, a feasibility and 35% conceptual design analysis has been completed for a
district heating loop for primary commercial buildings. This analysis has been integrated with
heat capture from a new power plant to be co-located with the wood boiler plant. The feasibility
included Net Simple Payback for several size plants and a sensitivity analysis for displacing
heating fuel oil based on costs of $4-$6/gallon. A centralized wood chip fired boiler will require
approximately 1,500-2,000 tons of chips annually, depending on moisture content, to displace
up to 149,000 gallons of fuel or 90+% of the oil used in commercial buildings. The cost is
approximately $18/MMBTU ($175/ton @ 25%moisture) for chips, as compared to $29-
43/MMBTU for fuel oil ($4-6/gal). This project is being conducted in concert with a project
funded by Denali Commission, US DOE through an Alaska Village Initiatives earmark, and GZ
Corporation to develop a wood harvesting system, wood yard and a wood energy utility to
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 3 of 17 10/7/2009
supply and maintain the boilers. Both projects have been developed through technical support
from Alaska Village Initiatives, Alaska Wood Energy Associates, CATG Resource Department,
e-Four Engineering, and Alaska Energy and Engineering. Principle personnel to date include
Bill Wall PhD, Peter Olsen, Ben Stevens, Jerry Carroll, Greg Koontz (ME) and Steve Stassel
(Alaska Energy and Engineering).
2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT
Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this project, (such as reduced fuel
costs, lower energy costs, etc.)
The key benefits in this project are energy cost stabilization and energy import substitution.
These will support village sustainability. Without this project people will continue to leave to
village for a lager town. A wood energy project in Fort Yukon will affect energy costs on 2
scales, local households and major commercial buildings. A reliable source of firewood at a
cost of approximately $250 per cord split and delivered to households will help displace an
unknown amount of fuel oil in the village and reduce heating costs to households. A full cord of
seasoned spruce burned at 80% efficiency will displace approximately 100 gallons of heating
fuel oil at $4-6/gallon. This benefit is not reflected in the savings and cost analysis of the project
in section 2.5, as it would be only an approximation. The key to this household benefit is that
wood delivery is reliable and ready for use. A household that burns 500 gallons of fuel oil per
annum will spend up to $3,250. If that is displaced by 80% with wood, then there is a savings of
$2,000 per household. Reliable sources of wood in combination with house heating education
(a planned village workshop) will encourage investment in cleaner wood burning appliances,
thus yielding environmental benefits as well.
Using wood to heat major commercial buildings is what makes this project definitely
economically viable. Schools are one of the most expensive buildings to heat in the village and
a client that will help with economies of scale for supporting development of a wood energy
business model. Reducing energy costs for schools and clinic reduces public support costs for
education and health care. A 35% CDR with feasibility studies for five scenarios has been
completed (see appendix 2). The optimum scenario selected is the Max 1 district-heating loop
including downtown, the new CATG Clinic, City Offices and the Yukon Center. The following
are the expected savings at $6/gallon for heating fuel. A sensitivity analysis was conducted at
$4-6 per gallon.
Savings: The plan is to displace 149,000 gallons of imported fuel oil annually. With heating oil
at $6.00/gallon the Total net savings are $482,886 annually (see table below). The added
benefit is that money paid for heating remains in the village, since the village is providing its own
fuel instead of importing fuel oil.
Table 3. CDR Report with Net Simple Payback at $6/ gallon of fuel displaced
(Appendix 2)
A wood energy program can also reduce wildfire risk through forest thinning, enhance
wildlife habitat and most importantly create local jobs and economy through import substitution.
Wood energy fits with subsistence lifestyles and creates a greater level of self-sufficiency
within the village. The process of developing and creating business, management and planning
capacity enhances opportunities for increasing long term opportunities for youth to stay in the
village with well paying resource based jobs. An integrated wood energy system is one of the
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 4 of 17 10/7/2009
best energy and community economic develop projects available to villages with good wood
resources and high cost of heating fuels.
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.
Phase III of the project, funded by AEA and DOE Tribal Energy, is in process with anticipated
completion in July 2010. A total project cost for Phase IV construction for a central boiler plant
is $3,606,255 with $990,000 coming from federal funds and $2,360,000 from the Alternative
Energy Fund. CATG has received an award of $1.2 million from DOE Tribal Energy program for
the project with $210,000 being spent for Phase III. Phase IV will purchase and install a central
boiler plant and district heating system to be co-located and integrated with heat capture from a
new proposed power plant. A new marine jacketed Cat Generator is being purchased by GZ
and will be moved to the DH plant. The district heating system will heat 15 buildings in Fort
Yukon and displace 149,000 gallons of fuel oil annually at an annual worth of $596,000-
$894,000 depending on the cost of displaced heating fuel.
The boiler construction project will be implemented in tandem with development of a wood
energy utility and harvest group as a subsidiary of GZ Corporation Utility. Funding for this
separate project includes $805,804 from Denali, $475,000 as an earmark from DOE Tribal
Energy through AVI and $200,000 in cash from GZ Corporation. The Energy Utility Project has
the following objectives that linked with the boiler installation project create a complete
integrated village wood energy program:
1. Purchase harvest equipment
2. Create 5 year harvest and regeneration plan
3. Develop and install wood storage/wood yard in the village
4. Equipment storage
5. Training and technical support
a. Business training for GZ and CATG Boards
b. Forest Technician training
c. Harvest training and technical support
d. Development of a harvest methods manual
e. 2 years of technical support to make sure chip harvest system is well established
(For full budget see appendix 4)
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. $2,500,000
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $990,000
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $3,480,000
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)
$3,606,255
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $879,755 annual gross
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
$13,410,000 15 year gross
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 5 of 17 10/7/2009
(Section 5.)
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.
Two projects will be run concurrently in Fort Yukon: A boiler design and installation project
(current application) and the wood harvest project (previously described). The project manager
is Alaska Wood Energy Associates for both projects lead by Bill Wall, PhD. Responsibilities will
be divided among a technical support team. The schematic design engineer is Greg Koontz of
eFour Engineering, who has completed a 35% design schematic and a feasibility study. Steve
Stassel with AE&E will complete final design and operations plan and will be responsible for
construction support during phase IV. Will Putman of TCC is developing a forest inventory.
Peter Olsen will work with Bill Wall in forest management implementation, wood harvesting,
delivery systems and training. Doug Johnson of Professional Growth Systems will be used for
GZ and CATG Board Business Development and Management Training. Jeff Batton will
complete the final business and financial plan. (For resumes see appendix 3).
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.)
Phase IV of project will be initiated immediately after notification of a positive response to this
application. Actual timing of construction will depend on the release timing of funds. The intent
is to complete construction of this project within one year after funding is in place. Phase III is
expected to be completed in June 2010. Phase IV is expected to be commissioned in
September 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.)
Analysis has led us to decide to use wood chip boilers so that all the wood processing can be
done on site in the village. Many of the key tasks, milestones and decisions are discussed in the
35% final design report (see appendix 2).
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.
Key personnel (resumes attached see appendix 3)
Jerry Carroll – President of GZ Corporation is a certified heavy equipment operator and has
worked the last several construction seasons installing sewer pipe in Fort Yukon. This
experience will support the installation of boiler infrastructure including district-heat piping.
David Thomas – Manager of GZ powerhouse with over twenty years experience in operating
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 6 of 17 10/7/2009
the utility in Fort Yukon including all construction and maintenance operations. David is the
likely primary boiler operator and will have additional support as GZ recognizes the need to
develop depth in management of both the powerhouse and future boiler operations.
Ben Stevens: Executive Director of CATG has a background in business administration and
has been a leader in support of wood energy program in Fort Yukon. CATG is a partner in the
project and has secured $1.2 million in matching funds from DOE Tribal Energy Program. Ben
will support the program through CATG.
Bill Wall, PhD: Alaska Wood Energy Associates principle and Project Manager co-authored the
Forest Stewardship Plan for GZ and has worked to develop a sustainable wood energy model
for interior villages. He has coordinated a Rural Business Enterprise Grant to develop a
business model and for a local harvest company and transportation plan for delivery of wood
into Fort Yukon both summer and winter. He has coordinated the development of a Level 2
feasibility study to determine optimum boiler installation in Fort Yukon to maximize fuel oil
displacement for heat.
Peter Olsen: Contractor and Forester, co-authored the Forest Stewardship Plan for GZ and has
developed a cost model for wood harvest. Peter will support the Forest Harvesting and
Management portion of the program.
Greg Koontz, ME: Engineer contractor conducted the 35% design and feasibility report for a
biomass and heat recovery district heating plant. Has experience in biomass operations and
energy savings analysis. Greg will support AE&E with final design.
Steve Stassel, AE&E: Steve is one of the most successful engineers and firms in the
development of energy projects in Rural Alaska. He will develop the final design,
environmental analysis and integration with the new power plant and will support construction.
Jeff Batton: Past CEO with Alaska Growth Capital has significant experience in business and
financial analysis for projects in Rural Alaska. Jeff will be completing the business structure and
financial model for the Fort Yukon Biomass Project.
Doug Johnson: Professional Growth Systems will support the business develop, business
plan and board/employee training to increase business capacity for GZ and CATG.
The GZ corporation, Gwitchyaa Gwichin Tribe and CATG have all signed an MOU in
support of the development and funding of the wood energy program in Fort Yukon. Alaska
Village Initiatives helped initiate the process with funding to support the initial model. Funding to
date has come through AVI, CATG, and DOE Rural Development to support the project.The GZ
corporation also has equipment to support building of boiler pads, installation of pipe and
delivery of wood chips to boilers.
Business Management Capacity: GZ Corporation owns the GZ electrical utility in Fort Yukon.
They also own and operate the gas station. Operations of wood fired boilers fits within their
current management capacity of operating the power plant and billing. New personnel will be
hired and trained for boiler operations. However, development of a commercial level biomass
harvest company is a new enterprise that will require new expertise and management of a labor
intensive and planning intensive field operation. A five-year forest harvest plan will be
developed with an annual implementation plan. Annual plans will have to be managed based
on summer and winter operations and variation in annual weather patterns. Operation timing will
vary depending on ice thickness, temperature in winter and dry ground patterns and river levels
in summer. Management of transportation of equipment and supplies back to the village are
critical to final costs of the supply. These capacities must be developed locally. Training is
planned in business management and structure, forest planning, and harvest management.
Fort Yukon has a good labor pool of equipment operators and labor experienced from work on
the North Slope.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
Project communications will focus on three areas:
1. Support team and local implementation partners
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 7 of 17 10/7/2009
2. Fort Yukon Community
3. Funding Partners
A detailed implementation matrix of activities, responsibilities and due dates was developed for
Phase III of the project using a dynamic planning process by Professional Growth Systems
conducting a workshop with GZ, CATG and AWEA. This was part of a planned training and
planning exercise with the GZ Board, CATG, Tribal Council and AWEA. The matrix will be kept
current by the project manager and shared monthly with key members of the team. Another
community meeting will be scheduled in Winter 2009-2010 to update the community on the
project progress and get feedback on the attached CDR (appendix 2). The schedule matrix will
be used as the basis to track the project and supply reports as required by AEA.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
There are two key types of risks associated with making this a sustainable project in rural
Alaska:
Technical: Technical risks for a chip fired boiler installation include making sure that reliable
chip storage and feed systems are developed for the climate conditions in rural interior Alaska.
This is being developed and will account for the worst-case scenario of wet chips at -50F. The
project will utilize European boiler manufacturers with high quality and proven reliability.
Systems are designed for oil-fired systems to serve as a redundant back up.
Management Capacity: The most critical risk associated with installation of wood burning
appliances in rural Alaska is whether there is a sustainable and reliable supply of fuel being
delivered to the boiler. Fort Yukon has experienced heavy equipment operators, an experienced
and licensed boiler operator, local knowledge for construction and knowhow for moving wood
into the village.
Creating a system that displaces a significant amount of fuel also creates greater need for
harvest planning and harvesting in both summer and winter. This risk is being effectively dealt
with by a complimentary project to set up a wood harvest and delivery company owned by the
GZ Corporation (mentioned earlier). A team has been formed for technical support and training.
A harvest planning system will be created within the CATG Resource Department with
additional training for GIS capacity and a forestry technician to layout harvest boundary areas.
A five-year harvest plan will be developed cooperatively to develop local capacity. Employees
will spend time outside the village working on a harvesting crew prior to full scale harvesting
within the village. Board and business training will be conducted for the GZ Board, the CATG
and the tribal Council. A final business plan will be developed and used as a planning and
training exercise as part of the implementation of the harvest project as well as boiler
operations. GZ has experience effectively operating the power plant as a utility, which parallels
the operation of a wood energy utility.
SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
• Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of
the RFA.
• The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to
undertake with grant funds.
• If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project provide a
plan and grant budget form for completion of each phase.
• If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for
an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases
are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
4.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 8 of 17 10/7/2009
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.
An extensive forest resource review was conducted and a forest stewardship plan was
developed for GZ Corporation lands in 2006 by Peter Olsen and Bill Wall, PhD. A GIS-based
inventory is under development by TCC. An average of 18 tons/acre of harvestable woody
biomass is available on fully stocked stands of mixed hardwoods and white spruce. It was
determined that GZ lands could easily sustain a harvest of 15-20,000 tons of wood per year in
chips and round firewood. This is 10 times the projected need for the proposed project, clearly
setting the proposed project at sustainable harvest level. A five-year harvest plan is being
developed in association with this project.
Wood is the only alternative source of energy readily available to displace fuel oil on a
village scale in Fort Yukon. The positive attributes of a wood energy program are that the
program is both an alternative energy program and an economic development program. Harvest
and conversion of wood for energy is import substitution and creates local jobs. The greatest
local economic benefit occurs when ownership and operations are kept local.
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.
All commercial buildings in Fort Yukon are heated with oil boilers at an efficiency of
approximately 85%; some are up to 15 years old. Most of the commercial buildings have a dual
installation of Weil McClain or Burnham Boilers. Sizes by BTU/ hour were inventoried and used
for 35% conceptual design and feasibility analysis. These are in the AEA sponsored
reconnaissance study conducted by the Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Force. It is the
intent of this project to continue to use the current oil boilers as a back up system to wood
boilers. Large chip boilers turn down at a 3:1 ratio. In addition, Fort Yukon’s powerhouse is old
and is in dire need of replacement. The biomass project will be collocated with the new
powerhouse and use all the rejected heat from the new generators. This re-captured heat will
supply up to 30% of the heating load in the system.
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 heat energy resources are locally harvested wood, fuel oil purchased at rack
prices for houses and bulk fuel for most major commercial buildings. At the household level a
wood energy program as described in this project will create a consistent supply of fire wood for
households and may positively affect the willingness of households to invest in efficient and
clean burning appliances. At the commercial scale displacing approximately 149,000 gallons of
fuel will reduce but not eliminate the need for bulk deliveries of fuel into the village. Fort Yukon
typically may get 2 deliveries by barge per year and has recently begun flying in fuel at
somewhat lower costs. This reduction in the amount of fuel will reduce the frequency of
deliveries into the village.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
There are two levels of market for each village, households and commercial buildings. The
commercial buildings drive the economies of scale for a feasible wood energy project including a
harvesting group. This project will reduce and stabilize the cost of heat. This project is proposing
to create a consistent inexpensive supply of fire wood for residences and to displace up to 90%
of the heating fuel used by up to 15 major building with BTUs from the district heating system.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 9 of 17 10/7/2009
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
Renewable energy technology specific to project location
A 35% CDR is attached for details (see appendix 2). This project will use a chip-fired boiler
integrated with heat capture from generators. A wood storage and feeding mechanism is
discussed in the report as well as integration with recovered heat. Weismann (Kob) boilers are
the primary consideration for boiler types because of their proven reliability.
Optimum installed capacity
Optimum installed capacity depends on creating an economy of scale for profitable
sustainable wood harvest which is 1,500 tons or more annually and displacing a significant
amount of fuel oil in commercial buildings. This will create an economically viable program of
harvest and sales of BTUs to buildings based on cost savings for each building participating.
Projected fuel to be displaced is approximately 149,000 gallons using up to 1500+ tons of wood
chips (actual amount depends on moisture). Optimum installed capacity is discussed in the 35%
CDR based on a sensitivity and feasibility analysis of 5 different configurations. The Max 1 has
been decided upon as the optimum installation.
Anticipated capacity factor
The anticipated capacity factor for the displacement of current fuel consumption for the 15
buildings attached to the District heating system is 92% of the approximately 149,000 gallons of
fuel currently utilized.
Anticipated annual generation
The system is expected to delivery 16,610,040 kBTUs to buildings. Details in 35%CDR
attached.
Anticipated barriers
There are two key barriers:
o a reliable supply of good quality reasonable moisture chips delivered to the boiler
installation;
o a reliable automated storage and feeding system to the boiler;
Both of these issues can be addressed in design. Quality chips are a design of the
harvest, delivery and wood yard storage of the chips. This is being dealt with in the wood
harvest system project. The second will be addressed in the final boiler design process
that will include on site chip storage and delivery systems.
Basic integration concept
Heat recovery from the generators at the new powerhouse will be captured (see general
schematic design in CDR, appendix 2). Heat integration in each of the installations will be
designed with wood boilers as the primary and the current oil boilers as back up.
Delivery methods
Heat will be delivered through Insulated Pex Pipe system to the individual buildings. Each
building will have a heat exchanger that will connect the DH system into the current in building
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 10 of 17 10/7/2009
heat system.
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.
GZ corporation owns the proposed location of the boiler and wood yard and has fully
endorsed the project. GZ corporation owns the forestland base surrounding Fort Yukon where
the all of the biomass will be harvested. As they will be a vertically integrated harvesting and
wood energy utility, they are in full support of the sustainable utilization of forest biomass from
their lands. Model contracts have been developed to support a legal basis for harvest. All piping
is being proposed to go into current ROWs.
4.3.3 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address
outstanding permit issues.
• List of applicable permits
• Anticipated permitting timeline
• Identify and discussion of potential barriers
Phase III was initiated in September of 2009, so work on these permits is still pending.
List of permits –
• Permits for the wood boiler is under development. No issues are anticipated.
• Forest harvesting – The provisions of the Alaska State Forest Practices Act will be
incorporated into harvest and delivery of biomass plans. Development of stream
crossings, ice roads and summer and winter harvest operations may require special
permits. These permits are granted annually based on harvest and transportation plans.
The permitting request process will begin at least one month prior to seasonal operations
allowing for 30 days in which the plan can be adjusted based on State suggests.
• An EA for the boiler site and DH system is being conducted under Phase III.
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
This section will address both the current application for boilers and the project for biomass
harvesting:
Threatened and Endangered Species – no listed species in the project area
Habitat issues – a Forest Stewardship Plan has been completed for the GZ ownership and
a five-year forest management and harvest plan will be completed as part of the biomass
harvesting project. Opportunities for enhancing moose habitat will be sought and developed.
No significant negative habitat impacts outside the natural range of variation in this fire driven
ecosystem are expected. Harvesting of mature spruce and hardwood stands are not
expected to be a major portion of the target for biomass production, but their use could have
some small scale local impacts on Neotropical migratory bird species.
Wetlands and other protected areas – The Alaska State Forest Practices Act will be
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 11 of 17 10/7/2009
followed in all harvest operations. Accessing or crossing wetlands will only be done during
winter when frozen. CATG Resource Department has an excellent GIS system and has
done mapping on key sensitive areas for each of the villages in Yukon Flats region. These
will be noted during forest harvest transportation planning.
Land Development Constraints – none are anticipated at this time.
Telecommunications Interference – none are anticipated at this time.
Aviation Considerations – none are anticipated at this time.
Visual and aesthetic impacts – Harvesting of biomass can create unaesthetic impacts on a
forest. FPA required buffers keep harvesting from banks and visibility corridors. Forest
planning can deal effectively with these issues. The wood yard will be fenced and located on
the edge of the village (both current sites). Wood chip deliveries to sites where noise maybe
an issue will be scheduled such that minimum impact will occur.
Potential Project Barriers – The approach that the project developers have taken in the
development of the Fort Yukon program is to make this a model project for converting a
village to substantial wood use for heating. We have tried to anticipate many of the barriers
and provide ways to bridge these barriers. However, some additional barriers will emerge as
the project moves forward. Key barriers identified:
o Organization cooperation: Developing cooperation among the various key
organizations that are now acting as partners was and will remain critical. An
MOU among the Tribe, CATG, and GZ Corporation was developed early in the
process. As a final business plan is developed even more specific roles will be
spelled out and agreed upon. This is an ongoing process with good cooperation
thus far.
o For Profit Model Simultaneous Development of Supply and
Delivery/Demand: Creating a local structure for a for-profit model for harvesting
and converting biomass and a wood energy utility was key to being confidence
that both the biomass supply side and BTU demand side were installed in sync.
Thus we have 2 projects: biomass harvest – supply; boiler installation and
operations – demand. Appropriate economic incentives are being put in place for
economic sustainability. A final business plan will arrange within GZ Corporation
a vertically integrated biomass harvest, conversion, delivery and boiler operations
company. Although this model fits in Fort Yukon the same components must be
developed in other villages but may not be vertically integrated. The more local
ownership in the overall process the more benefits go to the community.
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
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 12 of 17 10/7/2009
• Identification of other funding sources
• Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system
• Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
Total Cost Phase IV: $3,606,255
Total grant funding requested: $2,500,000
Matching Funds Phase IV: $990,000 DOE Tribal Energy Program $1.2 million granted to CATG in
partnership with GZ (for DOE document reference see appendix 5).
In-Kind Funds: GZ has established an account with $300,000 in support of the wood energy program.
These funds are targeted in support of the wood harvest project – separate project from this application but
concurrent with the boiler installation project. These funds are being used to match Denali Commission
funds for purchase of harvest equipment to support securing fuel for the boilers. GZ is purchasing a used
Cat engine with a marine jacket for heat recapture that will be used as a match.
4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Include anticipated O&M costs for new facilities constructed and how these would be funded by
the applicant.
(Note: Operational costs are not eligible for grant funds however grantees are required to meet
ongoing reporting requirements for the purpose of reporting impacts of projects on the
communities they serve.)
The O&M will be developed in an operations business plan in conjunction with the final
design documents by AE&E, Steve Stassel Phase III. The primary cost of operation of chip
boilers is wood fuel at $175 per ton and daily inspection of boiler to check operations. Fuel
delivery and bin loading occurs on a weekly basis and is accounted for in the fuel cost. Boilers
will have an automatic de-asher that will need to be serviced weekly. Boiler tubes need to be
brushed once a month. Boilers will operate with automated computerized controls that can be
read remotely. Current staff of the powerhouse will be trained as boiler operators. The boiler will
operate from mid-September through mid-April. A new position at $45,000 per year will be added
for support and replacement of current operators. The boiler will need to be cleaned and
inspected annually at shut down. Primary area for potential issues is the feed delivery system.
GZ utility will develop a maintenance, service, and equipment replacement fund for boiler
operations derived from BTU sale revenues. Since this project is operated as a for-profit
business the size of the fund will be determined in the final business plan and based on
maintenance history.
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 three largest customers in Fort Yukon are the school district, which includes the
following buildings in the downtown loop: the school, gym, school shop, and school district office
and the CATG Clinic. The next largest customer is the water plant and the City Office both
operated by the City. Additional customers are the Yukon Center, AC Store, Post Office, Radio
Station and State Building. Letters of support from CATG and the School Superintendent are
attached. An RBEG from DOE has allowed the development of a draft template BTU purchase
agreement that is culturally relevant to rural Alaska as well as a stumpage sale agreement.
These templates will be used as the starting point for development of final agreements.
The GZ Wood Utility operators of the boilers will develop a five year BTU agreement with
the commercial buildings to stabilize the heat equivalent price at from $4.00 – $5.00 per gallon of
fuel or a commercial price of a million BTUs will range from $28.88 - $36.10. Escalation clauses
will be developed based on the price of fuel oil that is purchasable by the specific customer.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 13 of 17 10/7/2009
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
Cost Worksheet attached (see appendix 6)
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
Project Benefits
Fuel Displacement: Annual fuel displacement of 149,000 gallons @ a price of $6.00 per gallon
is $894,000 in savings. At a project life of 15 years the total gallons displaced are 2,235,000 with
a total gross import displacement value of $13,410,000.
Anticipate Revenues: At a delivered wood fuel price of $175/ton for 25% moisture wood chips
and total demand of 1,500 tons the wood harvest and delivery company will derive an annual
gross income of $262,000 and million BTUs will be worth $16.46. At $4.00 per gallon for fuel oil,
a million BTUs of heat costs $29.85. The wood utility operators of the boilers will develop a long-
term BTU agreement with the commercial buildings to stabilize the heat equivalent price at a
range of $4.00-$5.00 per gallon of fuel so the commercial price of a million BTUs will be $28.88 -
$36.10. An annual gross savings of $379,742 will be divided between the Wood Energy Utility
and major commercial customers. Final determination of how displacement savings will be
dispersed to customers will be developed in the final business plan. The intent of the program is
to build both an economically viable wood utility and service to the community and primary
commercial customers.
Annual Incentives: Tax credits or other annual incentives have not yet been explored.
Green Credits: CATG has been contacted by several organizations regarding the potential sale
of green credits. Until the scope of the project and the need for additional incentives has been
fully explored within the context of the partners, Green Credits will remain only a possible option.
Public benefits: These two projects, woody biomass harvest and boiler installations, create
significant economic and non-economic public benefits. On the economic side benefits include, direct
fuel cost savings to public commercial buildings such as the school and clinic. Reducing energy costs
for schools and clinic reduces public support costs for education and health care. Savings are paid
locally as salaries and profit to the local wood energy utility, which then pays dividends to local
shareholders. Community public benefit based on multiplier of new infusion of funds into the community is
just slightly over 1.0 in the potential creation of new jobs. This is primarily due to the high number of
resources imported into rural Alaskan Villages. The largest outpouring of village money goes to the
importation of fuel oil. In multiple discussions and presentations, community members have
commented on how wood energy will create local jobs that are consistent with their subsistence
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 14 of 17 10/7/2009
lifestyles. Wood energy utility will create 4-6 half-time jobs and one full-time at a rate of $15-25 per hour.
Community leaders agree that utilizing local wood resources supports local self-sufficiency, and
reduces dependence on outside energy sources.
Non-economic benefits include a reduction in wildfire risk through forest thinning, enhance
wildlife habitat and most importantly create local jobs and economy through import substitution.
Wood energy business fits with subsistence lifestyles and creates a greater level of self-
sufficiency within the village. The process of developing and creating business, management
and planning capacity enhances opportunities for increasing long-term opportunities for youth to
stay in the village with well paying resource based jobs. An integrated wood energy system is
one of the best energy and community economic development projects available to villages with
a sustainable source of wood.
The importance of a wood energy utility and the jobs that it creates are demonstrated by
the below quotes from a report on rural community economic benefit multipliers. In the case of
commercial or public buildings such as the school, money currently spent outside the community
for energy will be redirected into the community for wood energy.
Report Quotes:
“A community can add new wage paying jobs in three ways:
· Goods or services produced locally, sold to non-residents, bring money into the
community to pay wages
· Money from outside the region can directly pay the wages of local jobs
· Money already in the region can be re-spent there, supporting local jobs”
Quotes from an interim report produced by UAA at website:
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/client/afnjobs/ecmulti.pdf
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
Proposed business structure
The business structure proposed is a heat utility as a subsidiary of GZ Corporation. This will
be a vertically integrated with a wood harvest operation. Management of the district heat plant
will be similar to current management of the electrical utility.
Finance of Maintenance
GZ utility will develop a maintenance, service, and equipment replacement fund for boiler
operations derived from BTU sale revenues. Since this project is operated as a for-profit
business the size of the fund will be determined in the final business plan and based on
maintenance history.
Identification of operational issues
GZ Corporation will be the parent business entity. Start up operations capital will come from
the parent corporation initially and ongoing operational costs will be generated through the sale of
BTUs heat to the various commercial customers serviced in the district heating system.
Description of operational costs
Current back-up or existing systems are oil-fired boilers servicing each of the projected
customers of the district heating system. Operation and maintenance of these back-up systems
will be the responsibility of the current owners. This issue will be addressed in the power sales
agreements being developed currently in phase III of the project.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 15 of 17 10/7/2009
Reporting savings and benefits
This project is both a for-profit local utility and a model project for demonstrating how systems
of this nature can be successful in Alaskan villages with forested areas. Basic business
accounting practices and annual reporting for the wood utility can support the reporting of the
savings, benefits and lessons learned from the project. The company and the project developers
are committed to understanding and reporting the benefits of developing wood heat capacity.
Resource Sustainability
It was determined that GZ lands could easily sustain a harvest of 15-20,000 tons of wood per
year in chips and round firewood. This is 10 times the projected need for the proposed project,
clearly setting the proposed project at sustainable harvest level.
SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS
Discuss what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed
with work once your grant is approved.
Tell us what you may have already accomplished on the project to date and identify other grants
that may have been previously awarded for this project and the degree you have been able to
meet the requirements of previous grants.
Preparation and Speed of post Award action
As is well documented, this project has been under development for the past 3.5 years.
The GZ Board has discussed the need and benefits of this project at their annual meeting of
shareholders and a significant majority fully support the project. The Board is committed to
securing additional business development and management training for itself and staff.
Leadership has attended multiple workshops, one of which was held in Fort Yukon to create a
dynamic plan for developing the project and operations once installed. GZ has years of
experience in operating an electrical utility and believes that operation of district heating plant is
within its current capacity. GZ also has access to professional heavy equipment operators that
can be trained to harvest and deliver the amount of wood needed on an annual basis. There is
wealth of local knowledge on moving wood into the village during the winter months.
Accomplishments and Other Grants
This project has received significant endorsement from various agencies in the form of
multiple grants to address all aspects of the development of a heat utility system in Fort Yukon.
The project works primarily through various project partners and supporters. Alaska Village
Initiatives (AVI) secured funding to conduct a Forest Stewardship Plan in 2006. AVI also
secured a Rural Business Enterprise Grant from USDA RD to develop reports on harvesting
machinery configurations, modes of transportation for wood into the village, and contractual
agreements to support various business components. Council of Athabascan Tribal
Governments received a DOE Tribal Energy Grant to conduct a feasibility study and compare
the differences between utilizing stick fed boilers vs. district heating systems with chip fired
boilers. In addition, CATG has received a grant for $1.2 million with $210,000 to support the
completion of Phase III for permitting and design and $990,000 for match in the Phase IV
construction process. Through funding from DOE Tribal Energy Program AVI is supporting the
development of a forest inventory for GZ lands, a five-year harvest plan, business training and
development, and a detailed financial/operation business plan. In June 2009, AVI/DOE
supported a workshop composed of engineers, equipment specialists, foresters, financial
expertise and business training expertise to ensure integration across all disciplines in the Fort
Yukon project. All of this technical support is aimed at developing and supporting the
implementation of a sustainable Fort Yukon District Heating system.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 16 of 17 10/7/2009
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 GZ corporation, Gwitchyaa Gwichin Tribe and CATG have all signed an MOU in support
of the development and funding of the wood energy program in Fort Yukon. Yukon Flats School
District and the City of Fort Yukon are also in support (see attached letters in appendix 7).
Alaska Village Initiatives helped initiate the process with funding to support the initial model.
SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET
Tell us how much you want in grant funds Include any investments to date and funding sources,
how much is being requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an
applicant.
Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget3.doc
Below is a narrative summary regarding funding sources and our financial commitment to the
project. (See budget in appendix 4 and further cost analysis in appendix 2 for the Max 1 plant scenario)
Phase IV Purchase and Installation of Boilers 2010-2011
Task one: Project Management, Communications, Reporting and Funding Facilitation
Total cost: $120,000
Requested funds: $65,000 includes $5,000 for travel
Federal Funds: $65,000 includes $5,000 for travel
Task Two: Purchase and install chip fired district heat system– summer 2011
Total cost: $3,606,255
Requested funds: $2,500,000
Federal Funds: $850,000
CATG will support this program through their Resource department and GIS capacity. They will
also provide housing for the project manager and coordination among organizations. A project
implementation committee made up of CATG, GZ and Tribe staff will meet monthly to discuss
project issues and serve as a support structure for the Project Manager during all phases and
task of the project.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 17 of 17 10/7/2009
SECTION 9 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and
suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4.
B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4.
C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 9.
D. Letters demonstrating local support per application form Section 8.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD per RFA Section 1.6.
F. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
- Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
- Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to
commit the organization to the obligations under the grant.
- Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
- Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
F. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
Print Name William A. Wall
Signature
Title Project Manager- Consultant
Date 11/9/2009
Appendices
Appendix
1:
Resolution
from
GZ
Board,
CATG
Resolution
Appendix
2:
35%
Conceptual
Design
Report
Appendix
3:
Resumes
of
managers
and
staff
Appendix
4:
Grant
Budget
Appendix
5:
Documentation
of
Match
funding
from
the
Department
of
Energy
Appendix
6:
Grant
Cost/Benefit
Worksheet
Appendix
7:
Letters
of
Local
Support
Appendix:
1
A:
Governing
Body
Resolution
from
the
Gwitchyaa
Zhee
Corporation
B:
Resolution
from
the
Council
of
Athabascan
Tribal
Governments
C OUNCIL OF A THABASCAN T RIBAL
G OVERNMENTS
P .O .BOX 33 - FORT YUKON, ALASKA 99740 - (907)662-2587
FACSIMILE (907)662-3333
R ESOLUTION 08-02
Title: Authorizing the CATG Natural Resourses Director, Bruce Thomas and Dr. Bill Wall and Peter Olsen with
Private Lands and Resource Consulting (PLARC) to negotiate a final agreement and structure of the grant award of
the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Tribal Energy Program grant.
WHEREAS: The Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (CATG) is a Tribal consortium authorized by the
Athabascan tribes of the Yukon Flats; and,
WHEREAS: The purpose of the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments is to conserve and protect tribal
land and other resources; to encourage and support the exercise of tribal powers of self-
governance; to aid and support economic development; to promote the general welfare of each
member tribe and it’s respective individual members; and to preserve and maintain the cultural
and spiritual values of the Tribe and its Tribal members; and,
WHEREAS: CATG, along with Denali Commision and Alaska Energy Authority, hosted a Yukon Flats
Regional Economic Development Summit in 2004 and directed staff to develop a long-range
energy plan incorporating appropriate energy technologies including biomass, hydro fuel cells,
solar, nuclear and wood boiler studies.
WHEREAS: NRCS helped AVI and PLARC develop conceptual design of a biomass program; Alaska DNR
Forestry supported development of a Forest Stewardship Plan and Rural Business Enterprise
Grant supported development of the business model and development of harvest equipment and
transportation components.
WHEREAS: GZ Corporation has been approved for a grant through the Denali Commission to purchase harvest
equipment for the biomass program. The total of the grant is $808,805. The grant is administered
through AEA and requires a 50% match which is an additional $808,805.
WHEREAS: CATG has been approved to negotiate with DOE Tribal Energy Program for up to $1.2 million
dollars for technical support, travel and wood boilers.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: CATG Council authoizes Bruce Thomas and Dr. Bill Wall
and Peter Olsen to negotiate a final agreement and structure of the grant process with DOE Tribal
Energy Program.
CERTIFICATION: This resolution was adopted and approved by the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments
at a meeting held by Teleconference on August 20, 2008.
Appendix:
2
Fort
Yukon
District
Heating
Plant
Final
Design
Process
35%
Report
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 1
Table of Contents
Section 1. Executive Summary
1.1 Goals and Objectives
1.2 Project Scale
1.3 Resource Assumptions
1.4 35 percent Summary and Recommendations
Section 2. Design Intent
2.1 Recovered Heat
2.2 Wood Heat
2.3 Supplemental Heat
2.4 Distribution
2.5 Recovered Heat Integration
2.6 Building Integration
Section 3. Feasibility
3.1 Methodology
3.2 Results
Section 4. Financial Metrics, Sensitivity Analysis
4.1 Financial Metrics
4.2 Sensitivity Analysis
Appendices
Appendix A One-line Diagram and Sequence of Operations for Proposed DH Plants
Appendix B Control Points List for Proposed DH Plants
Appendix C Cost Estimates for Proposed DH Plants
Appendix D Maps of Proposed DH Plants
Appendix E Typical Design Documents, Heat Recovery from Engine Generators
Appendix F Main Summary, DH Plant Summary Sheets, and Key Inputs
Appendix G Sample Calculations
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 4
Section 1: Executive Summary
1.1 Goals and Objectives
The objective of this interim 35 percent report is to document the progress and findings at this
stage of the project. The scope of the project is the final design of a (primarily) biomass-fired
district heating plant (DH Plant) for Fort Yukon, Alaska. The proposed DH plant will utilize heat
recovered from co-located engine generators which provide power to the village, energy from the
surrounding wood resources, and some supplemental oil heat. The entire process includes both
an investment grade feasibility study and a final design for the plant.
At 35 percent, the feasibility study is 95 percent complete. The study is complete based on
current knowledge. Additional site work in the village and as well additional information that
comes to light as the design is finalized is expected to result in minor changes to the savings
and/or cost projections.
To date, design has advanced primarily as required to support the study. The design at the 35
percent point is characterized as schematic level design. Examples of the design work to date
are scattered through the text and the appendices.
The work on this project is being done by a team, Alaska Wood Energy Associates. This team
consists of people from a number of different companies, representing various skill and
knowledge sets. The feasibility study is being performed by Greg Koontz of efour, PLLC, Seattle,
WA. Overall design responsibility integrating the biomass and diesel power plants lies with Steve
Stassel of AE&E, located in Anchorage. Steve has designed and overseen the installation of
numerous power plants, tank farms, and heat recovery systems throughout rural and bush
Alaska. Greg Koontz will also provide design services specific to the DH Plant.
Obviously, a primary concern for any biomass fired plant is availability of the wood resources.
This issue is the responsibility of Bill Wall of Sustainability, Inc. The means and methods of
procuring the wood and processing it have been document extensively elsewhere. For that
reason, this report does not address supply, only storage and material handling.
The objective for the team at this point is to use the study to choose a path forward into final
design and construction. This report documents the feasibility study and design to date, and the
path that will be followed moving forward to final design.
1.2 Project Scale
In order to be successful, a DH Plant must achieve a certain economy of scale. The capital costs
involved are quite large, and so the savings to the village must be on the same scale in order to
make economic sense.
In Fort Yukon, many of the largest buildings in the village are clustered together, most of them on
the same street. One of the primary cost elements in a DH Plant is the distribution piping, so the
most economical approach is to serve the largest, most tightly clustered buildings. However, this
strategy may not completely support future village plans, and may exclude some of the more
significant buildings within the village. For that reason, the study looked at five different DH Plant
scenarios for Fort Yukon. The five plants are labeled Base, Expanded 1 (Exp 1), Expanded 2
(Exp 2), Maximum 1 (Max 1), and Maximum 2 (Max 2). Maps of the village showing the included
buildings and proposed piping routes for all five Plants can be found in Appendix D.
Figure 1 below shows the buildings which were included in the study. In addition to the buildings,
there is one heating load that is not associated with a building. Because the soil temperatures in
Fort Yukon are low, the village heats the domestic water system enough to ensure it does not
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 2 of 4
freeze. This system has supply and return piping. The heat is currently injected into the system
at the pump house. This building is a significant distance from the main village buildings – so far
that it is not possible to serve this heating load from the DH Plant load economically. The cost of
the piping and the associated heat loss from the piping preclude serving the pump house directly.
However, we believe we can intercept the domestic water return piping where it runs through our
service area. Injecting heat into the return water means that when it gets to the pump house, it is
ideally already at setpoint temperature, so the pump house boilers (oil-fired) simply do not run.
Additional field work in the village will be needed to determine exactly how this is achieved.
Currently, the study includes this heat load. However, the model is constructed in such a way
that the load can easily be “toggled off” (see Section 3 for more information on the model). In
Figure 1, this load is labeled “City DHW Load”. Figure 1 not only shows all of the buildings
considered, it indicates which buildings are included in each of the five Plant configurations.
Figure 1, buildings included in study
1.3 Resource Assumptions
In Section 4, a sensitivity analysis shows how the project financials vary as the cost of the inputs
vary. In order to compare all the Plants on an equal basis, some base level assumptions about
these costs had to be made and used in the performance / financial model. The assumptions
shown in Figure 2 are based on current of recent costs in the village, plus projections of the cost
of obtaining wood chips.
Figure 2, Base Level Resource Assumptions
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 3 of 4
1.4 35 percent Summary and Recommendations
A mathematical model was constructed to model the performance of the various Plants, and to
compare the financial performance of the five options. This model is discussed in detail in
Section 3, and a sample of the calculations involved is shown in Appendix G. To date, it is not
known for sure how this project would be financed, so the financial model does not include the
cost of money, nor does it include projections of future resource costs escalation.
At this point, the key financial metric is net simple payback (NSP) at current costs. Figure 3A
shows an abbreviated summary of the results of the model using the Base Level resource
assumptions (see Section 1.3 above). The complete overall Summary sheet and the individual
Plant Summary sheets can be found in Appendix F.
Figure 3A, Abbreviated Financial Summary (oil at $4.00/gal)
Section 4 includes a number of tables and graphs showing the sensitivity of the project financials
to changes in the cost of the inputs. One conclusion that is drawn from those tables is that the
project is extremely sensitive to the cost of oil, and less so to the cost of wood and electrical
energy. The feasibility study (and Figure 3A) is based on the current lower price of oil in the
village; it has been much higher within the past 12 months, and is expected to get more
expensive in the near future. For that reason, Figure 3B is included, showing the same
abbreviated data at an oil cost of $6.00 per gallon. Oil has reached and exceeded this level
within Fort Yukon in the past.
Figure 3B, Abbreviated Financial Summary (oil at $6.00/gal)
As noted above, the project shows extreme sensitivity to the cost of oil – an increase of 50
percent in the cost of oil cuts the NSP by more than half.
Based on the design and study results to date, the team believes that the Maximum Plant 1 is the
best option for Fort Yukon. This Plant includes nearly every major building in the village, and
provides significant piping infrastructure upon which to build for future additions.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 4 of 4
The Base Plant and the Expanded 2 Plant both have better NSP values than Maximum 1. That is
because they serve only the core village buildings, which are closely grouped. Beyond this core,
the marginal cost to add a building to the system in the future goes up significantly. Adding
buildings (outside the core area served) in the future to either of these Plants would mean that
these new buildings would bear the cost not only of the connection to the main piping, but the
extension of the mains as well. This may well be so cost prohibitive (when considered as part of
the “building” cost) that no new buildings would be added in future.
The key marginal cost of expanding a DH plant is the distribution piping. The team believes that
Fort Yukon should leverage the savings associated with serving the core buildings (the Expanded
2 Plant) to expand the piping infrastructure as far as economical feasible. Extending the
infrastructure all the way to the out to the Old CATG Clinic (Maximum 2) does not look like a good
deal for the village (20.0 year NSP). However, the Maximum 1 Plant, by extending to the New
CATG Clinic and the City Building, provides the village with ~ 1,500 feet of additional main supply
and return piping for only a small increase in NSP.
Having the piping mains in place means that the marginal cost of adding a future building to the
system along this route consists only of the building connection, making it more likely that
buildings will be added. In fact, installing DH main along a route often serves as a guide for
future expansion, since the parties involved know that can get heat at a lower price if they hook
into the DH heating system.
The team therefore recommends that further design and development concentrate only on the
Maximum Plant 1 option.
The estimated cost of this option is $3,100,228 for the DH Plant. However, there are additional
costs not directly associated with the DH Plant. As noted above, the plant utilizes heat recovered
from engine generators producing power for the village.
The existing power plant, like the pump house, is too far away from the proposed DH Plant site to
allow for piping between the two. However, the village is planning to build a new power plant in
the near future. As the maps in Appendix D show, the proposed location is directly adjacent (or
even in the same building as) the proposed DH Plant. Towards this end, the village has already
initiated the purchase of a new engine generator (and may soon purchase a second new unit).
This unit is not only more fuel efficient than the existing units by far, but because it has a marine
water jacket, it recovers more useful heat. Therefore, it will be run as the Lead generator.
As a part of this project, it is the intent that this new power unit (or units) be temporarily located at
or in the DH Plant in order to allow heat recovery until the new plant is built. At that point, the
new generators would be moved a short distance into their permanent locations. The DH Plant
could then recover heat off of any engine running, not just the new one(s).
This temporary installation and setup necessarily costs more than it would cost to place and
install the generators only once, in their final locations. The team estimates that an allowance of
$250,000 would be sufficient to cover this additional expense.
We therefore recommend that the village commit to a cost of $3,350,000 (rounded) for the new
DH plant.
A further note on recovered heat; the electrical demand data used in this study came from
calendar year 2007. It therefore does not include the increased demand due to the new large
waste water pumping stations recently and currently being installed. Thus the amount of
recovered heat available when the DH Plant is installed is expected to be significantly larger than
the values used in this study. Since this heat is “free” (no marginal cost) to the DH Plant, this
additional heat can only improve the economics of any DH Plant considered.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 8
Section 2: Design Intent
2.1 Recovered Heat
Heat recovered from an engine generator and used in a DH Plant is “free” in the sense that there
is no marginal cost increase to reject that heat to a heating loop compared to the rejecting it to the
atmosphere. The heat comes primarily from the cooling jacket of the engine, and must be carried
away from the unit to prevent it overheating. In the absence of a co-located heating plant, the
heat is normally carried to a radiator, which cools the jacket water by rejecting the heat to the
atmosphere.
As noted in Section 1, the intent in the short term is to temporarily co-locate at least one, or
perhaps two new Caterpillar 3456 engine generator next to the DH Plant. The longer term plan is
to relocate a completely new power plant adjacent the DH Plant. This new plant would likely use
the 3456 engine exclusively.
The Caterpillar 3456 engine is proposed because it has a significantly better fuel consumption
profile than any other similarly sized engine that Fort Yukon could buy. With the cost of fuel (No.
1 oil) so high in the village, the new engine generators pay for themselves very quickly. In
addition, the 3456 can be fitted with a marine cooling jacket that allows the capture of significantly
more heat than an engine without the jacket. Thus the 3456 in the proposed configuration
minimizes fuel consumption and maximizes heat recovery.
Engine generators producing prime power are an ideal source of heat for any heating plant. They
run continuously, and the quality (temperature) of the heat rejected is almost identical to the heat
required by the Plant. Recovered heat is the lowest cost form of input energy to the DH Plant,
thus it is always selected first and used to the fullest. As the design is “tweaked”, the proposed
operations will be continually examined to see if more recovered heat can be used in place or
wood or oil heat. Section 3 tabulates the effects of recovered heat on the proposed Plant energy
input.
Section 2.5 below describes how the recovered heat will be integrated into the DH Plant;
Appendix A provides detailed one-line diagrams and sequence of operations for the combined
Plant. Finally, Appendix E includes typical design documents for tying into the power plant
cooling circuits.
2.2 Wood Heat
As noted above, recovered heat can be considered the primary heat source, because it is always
used first to meet the needs of the DH Plant. Wood heat is the thus the secondary heat source.
As with recovered heat, wood heat will always be used to the extent possible before using
supplemental heat (oil, in this case). The village owns significant amounts of this resource in the
surrounding lands, and the team believes it can be produced in a usable form (wood chips) at a
price significantly below that of oil, on a BTU basis.
Solid fuel boilers require more infrastructure than oil-fired boilers. They require space for wood
storage and processing as well as material handling equipment to get the chips into the boiler.
Given the remoteness of Fort Yukon, the equipment installed must be reliable and well tested. It
is also desirable that the boilers be standard units, “off the shelf” so to speak. Proprietary or
customized equipment increases the chance that if equipment failure occurs, it will be expensive
and/or time consuming to get it fixed.
The team proposes to use a German line of boilers and material handling equipment.
Wiessmann (formerly Kob) equipment has been deployed in hundreds of installation all over
Europe, and now is starting to be used in the US. The North American headquarters of
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 2 of 8
Wiessmann is in Vancouver, BC. The units have been modified to meet UL and ASME
standards, and can thus be used in the US.
The Wiessmann boilers are standard products, which come in set sizes, and offer a range of
options specifically designed for each boiler in the range. The model range proposed for Fort
Yukon is the Pyrtec line. Figure 4 below shows a Pyrtec boiler:
Figure 4, Pyrtec Boiler
The Pyrtec range has a relatively wide range of capacities, from 1.3 mmBTU/h to 4.3 mmBTU/h.
The boiler can be equipped with automatic start, automatic de-ashing, a cyclone to remove
particulate, and soot blowers to keep the tubes clean, all well as a number of other options. All of
this equipment is purpose-built for the boiler, and is off-the-shelf equipment.
Wiessmann also offers a variety of material handling equipment to get the chips into the boiler.
The site selected for the DH Plant (see Appendix D) will require some gravel fill to get the DH
Plant and power plant above flood level. The wood storage, on the other hand, does not
necessarily have to be raised as high as the plants.
In addition to the DH Plant and power plant buildings (which may actually be in the same building,
depending on timing), the team anticipates an on-site wood processing building; basically a large
Quonset-style building. The current plan is to leave a gap between the processing building and
the DH Plant. This section, built in the shape of a steep-walled “V” can be constructed when the
adjacent building fill is installed. The V would be covered, and run the width of the buildings. At
the bottom would be two linear augers, both running into the center of the V. In the center of the
V, these augers would dump into the opening of a perpendicular auger that would run diagonally
up the wall of the V and into the DH Plant, and ultimately dump into the metering box on the
boiler(s). Gravity would keep the chips flowing into the two center augers. The design will be
finalized as the details of the DH Plant design proceed; the intent is to keep the material handling
as short and simple as possible, with a minimum of moving parts.
From the processing building, chips could either be pushed into the V with a small bobcat-style
loader, or blown into the V (depending on chipper type) as it is chipped.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 3 of 8
2.3 Supplemental Heat
There are two conditions under which the combination of recovered heat and wood heat might
not be able to meet the DH Plant load. Biomass boilers cannot turn down much below 35 – 40
percent of their full load capacity (the study assumed 40 percent to be conservative). Depending
on the boiler selected, therefore, there may be time when the Load is greater than the amount of
recovered heat available, and yet less than the minimum load the biomass boiler can support.
This “middle” range of temperature conditions is fairly narrow, but it does exist. The second
condition is if the sum of the biomass boiler output and the recovered heat is too low to meet the
Load. This would only occur when it is very cold. For both of these situations, the DH Plant is
equipped with a small oil-fired boiler.
Either one of there ranges can be eliminated, but generally not both. Making the biomass boiler
bigger eliminates the use of oil at the high end of the load, but widens the gap between the
recovered heat and the minimum boiler load. Choosing a smaller boiler can eliminate this
“middle” gap, but at the expense of more oil required in very cold conditions.
As a result, choosing the biomass boiler is a balancing act. Using the model, one can
immediately see the effect of boiler size on heat source. Choosing a bigger boiler reduces or
eliminates oil consumption in the cold months, while increasing it in the shoulder months. A
smaller boiler has the opposite effects. Using two boilers can eliminate or nearly eliminate oil use
altogether; however, it adds significant first cost. In optimizing the DH Plant options using the
model, only the Maximum 2 Plant actually lowered the net simple payback by using two boilers.
By using one smaller boiler and one larger one, this Plant essentially eliminated all oil use.
It could be argued that no oil boiler need be included in the DH Plant. The means in which the
DH Plant connects to the buildings (see Section 2.6 below) allows the end-user to extract all the
available heat possible from the DH loop and still use their existing oil boilers to top up the heat if
need be. This could be a viable proposition; the DH Plant could simply notify all the customers to
enable their existing heating equipment when the temperature dropped below a given level.
However, it would not be nearly as convenient to cover the “middle” gap in heating that occurs
when the Load exceeds the recovered heat, but is too small to allow a biomass boiler to be fired
up. As noted in Section 3, the model predicts electrical demand (and thus available recovered
heat) on an average basis. These profile curves predict monthly consumption very accurately
using average demand data, but have little or nothing to say about the demand (and thus heat) at
a given time on a given day. Thus the DH plant would always be in danger not meeting load in
parts of the shoulder season, and further, could not accurately predict when it might happen.
If the DH Plant cannot predict these events, they cannot warn their end-users to have their
equipment available and ready. The potential for the DH Plant under-supplying heat is
significant.
Again, one could argue that this could be mitigated by selecting smaller biomass boilers for the
DH Plant. However, that in essence shifts a significant (and unpredictable) amount of the annual
cost of heating back onto the end-user. In essence, the DH Plant is building a plant that cannot
meet then known loads, knowing that it will shift the burden in very cold weather to the end-user.
Because this would occur only in very cold periods, the consequences of a failed “handover”
would be significant. This, plus the unpredictability inherent in such an operating scheme
(operationally and financially) has lead the team to recommend that the DH Plant be able to
deliver the full expected Load; in order to do this smoothly, a supplemental oil-fired boiler was
included.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 4 of 8
Because an oil-fired boiler can start and stop very quickly, without human intervention and with
high reliability, it is ideal for the supplemental heat needed. Oil heat will always be added last,
only when the other two sources cannot be used to maintain Load. See Appendix A for details of
how the proposed oil-fired boiler fits into the operating sequence.
2.4 Distribution
2.4.1 Piping: The heat generated at the DH plant must be distributed to the various end-users.
This is done by pumping hot water through distribution pipes to each building.
Traditionally, the piping used in this part of Alaska is a rigid system of pre-insulated
piping. A carrier pipe carries the fluid; this is standard steel piping. Rigid foam insulation
surrounds the carrier, and insulation in turn is protected by an outer spiral-wound metal
jacket. See Figure 5 below
Figure 5, traditional “arctic pipe”
This system provide superior heat loss characteristics (i.e. very low losses), but it is
expensive, and installation must be very well planned. It is expensive primarily because
the whole piping system is rigid. It must therefore be installed below the permafrost – in
Fort Yukon this means 18 to 20 feet deep. The required trenching is expensive, requires
large equipment, and takes time.
Installation must be well planned out because it is difficult to modify in the field. Cutting a
piece to length means cutting through all three layers; it is difficult to get a clean cut and
subsequent clean connection to the next piece. For that reason, the system is typically
laid out in great detail in the plans, and each piece and each fitting made for a specific
spot in the system. Thus any mistakes in fabrication or any damage to a piece in the field
can take a long time to repair.
If the proposed Fort Yukon DH Plants had to rely on this traditional piping system, the
payback would be significantly extended. Instead, the basis of design is a flexible, pre-
insulated system that uses a plastic carrier pipe. The carrier piping is constructed of
cross-linked polyester, or PEX. The piping comes on rolls that are dozens or hundreds of
feet long. Standard easy to install fittings are used anywhere in the piping to connect
end-to-end, tee, or elbow as required. The piping can be obtained as a single pipe within
a pipe (outer layer), or even supply and return in one common outer layer pipe.
Figure 6 shows an example of a PEX system:
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 5 of 8
Figure 6, Pex piping
Because the system is flexible, it can be installed in the active layer of the soil – the
proposed depth in Fort Yukon is 48 to 60 inches deep. Connections are simple, so the
layout does not need to be planned in great detail. Because it comes in rolls, hundred of
feet of piping can be laid out in very little time. Trenches are shallow and simpler to
construct.
The most significant negative aspect of the PEX system as opposed to the traditional
system is that the insulation is not as effective. Piping losses are greater with the PEX
system, and piping losses can have a significant effect on ongoing operating costs. As
shown in Section 3.2, however, much of the input energy into the DH Plant is “free”
recovered energy. These operational savings can be leveraged on an ongoing basis to
counteract the increased piping losses, allowing Fort Yukon to realize the first cost
savings associated with the PEX system without the additional piping losses excessively
damaging the project financials.
In the DH plant calculations, all segments of the piping were individually sized based on
the expected peak flow rate. However, in order to standardize sizes and inventory, and
simply the installation even further, only three sizes were included in the final design (and
cost estimate). These are 2”, 4”, and (2) x 4”. The latter is not a size; the maximum size
carrier pipe in the PEX system is 4”. When this is not enough, the intent is to use two
parallel 4” pipes (2 x supply and 2 x return). The supply and return mains will be
connected at intervals to equalize flow and pressure drop. This not only provides
significant capacity for future expansion, it means that damage to one main need not shut
down the whole system.
This would not be the first installation of the PEX system in rural Alaska; thousands of
feet of this type piping were recently installed in McGrath in less than one week.
Pipe sizing calculations can be seen in Appendix G.
2.4.2 Pumping. The DH plant uses a primary/secondary system. This means that within the
DH Plant is a small piping loop that includes all of the heat sources, as well as some
thermal storage. The secondary loop is the distribution loop which includes all the buried
piping, and the connections to the end-user buildings.
The primary loop piping is shown in detail in Appendix A, and the sequence of operations
for the Plant is also contained in Appendix A (the controls points list for the Plants is in
Appendix B).
The heat sources are connected to the primary loop in the order the heat is preferentially
taken – the heat exchanger from the engine cooling loop is first, the biomass boiler(s)
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 6 of 8
second, and the oil-fired boiler last. Thus the biomass boiler adds heat only when the
recovered heat cannot maintain setpoint, and the oil boiler in turn adds heat only if
either/both of the other two sources cannot maintain setpoint.
The thermal storage is added to primary loop because the volume of water in the loop is
quite small. Thus it reacts to added heat very quickly. A biomass boiler does not react to
temperature changes quickly, the way a gas or oil fired boiler can. Thus the thermal
storage slows down the response time of the primary loop, allowing the biomass boiler to
operate more smoothly. Three sensors in the tank at different elevations give an
advance notice of the trend that the temperature loop is taking.
The primary loop contains two small pumps, each constant volume and each sized for
100 percent of the pumping load.
The secondary loop, on the other hand, contains two much larger pumps, each variable
speed (to save energy) and each sized for 100 percent of the pumping load. These
pumps must pump all the way out to the farthest building and back. This system volume
is quite large, and has no heat sources connected, so no thermal storage is used.
Between the primary and secondary loops is a heat exchanger. This transfers heat
between the loops, but keeps them physically separate.
At the building connection(s), two way control valves are used to control the transfer of
heat to the end-users. As the loads decrease, the valves modulate closed. This raises
the differential pressure between the supply and return piping in the distribution loop. As
this happens, the control system modulates the speed of the secondary pumps down
(using the associated variable frequency drives), driving the system differential back
down to its setpoint. An increase in Load likewise results in the pumps speeding up.
Varying the speed of these large pumps in response to Load creates significant energy
savings compared to constant speed pumps. In order to cover such large piping system,
three differential pressure sensors are used at different locations – the system uses the
lowest of the three signals to modulate the pump speed, ensuring that all parts of the
system get adequate flow.
2.5 Recovered Heat Integration
Diagrammatically, the integration of recovered heat into the DH Plant is covered in detail in
Appendix A and Appendix F. The concept is very simple. The cooling loop from the operating
engine(s) producing power in the power plant is routed first to the DH Plant.
In the DH Plant, the hot cooling water flows through a heat exchanger. A three-way control valve
on the cooling loop side of the exchanger controls how much heat is rejected to the primary DH
loop. If the valve is wide open, all the flow goes through the heat exchanger.
A temperature sensor in the primary loop compares the supply temperature to the setpoint. If the
supply temperature is below setpoint, the three-way valve will be wide open, extracting as much
heat as possible from the cooling loop. If this is not enough heat for to meet the Load, additional
wood or oil heat will be added to primary loop as required. If the Load is less than the available
recovered heat, the three-way valve will modulate as required to maintain the loop at setpoint.
On the cooling loop side, the water leaving the DH Plant, having flowed either through the heat
exchanger or through the valve bypass, will return to the power plant cooler than it left. It will then
flow to the engine radiators. If it is already cooler the radiator setpoint temperature, then the
radiator fans will not come on – the water continues back to the engine jacket to start the cycle
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 7 of 8
over. If the water from the DH Plant is warmer than the radiator setpoint, the fans will comes on
as needed to cool the water, and send it back to the jacket.
2.6 Building Integration
Once in the building mechanical room, the new hot water distribution piping will be tied into the
existing hot water supply and return lines that feed the existing boilers. Typically, four 2-position,
2-way automatic isolation valves will be installed in the piping, as shown in Figures 7, 8, and 9
below. The position of these valves will determine whether the heat comes from the oil-fired
boiler, the DH Plant, or both. The existing building pumps will continue to serve the building
heating load.
The valves that control the origin of the heat will be controlled by the existing building controls
where they exist, or by a small dedicated control panel if needed. If this proves too costly for very
small installations, the switchover can always be done with manual valves, but this relies on an
operator being present.
Figure 7 below shows a typical installation for two oil fired boilers. In this scenario, each boiler is
sized for 100 percent of the load; the boilers are manually alternated so that they get roughly
equal run time. In all cases (figures7, 8, and 9), light solid lines indicate existing equipment and
piping, dark solid lines depict new equipment and piping, and light dashed lines show the water
flow through the system. For convenience, it is assumed in all cases that Oil Fired Boiler – 1 is
the active boiler, and boiler 2 would be isolated using the associated manual isolation valve.
HWS is hot water supply to the building, HWR is hot water return from the building.
Figure 7, oil-fired heating plant
Figure 8 shows the initial configuration of the combined oil and DH Plant, with the Plant providing
all the heat. In Figures 8 and 9, the “wood-fired boiler” represents hot water heat from the DH
Plant.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 8 of 8
Figure 8, combined oil and DH Plant, all heat from DH
In the event that the DH plant cannot meet the building setpoint for any reason, the two systems
can operate in series. The lack of adequate heat from the DH Plant could range from small to
total (a plant failure), but the operation would remain the same – the oil-fired boiler would simply
add enough heat to maintain setpoint, whether this is 1 percent or 100 percent of Load. This is
shown in Figure 9.
Figure9, combined oil and DH Plant, boil r heat in series with Plant heat
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 7
Section 3: Feasibility
3.1 Methodology
3.1.1 Limits. As with any performance evaluations, the quality and validity of the outputs and
subsequent conclusions depends on the quality of the inputs and the methodology.
Methodology is discussed in Section 3.1.2 below. The input data gathered for used in the
analyses performed as a part of this study include:
> Building specific data
> Historical Fort Yukon PCE (electrical consumption) data
> Proposed DH Plant equipment data
> Annual oil consumption, by building
> Annualized weather data (bin data) from the Fort Yukon airport
> Site observations
> Interviews with operating personnel
> Interviews and meetings with Village and Corporation personnel
> Village maps and plans
> Interviews with Civil Engineers, contractors, and consultants with significant
experience in the interior of Alaska
> Pricing data from boiler manufacturers, piping suppliers and other AK vendors
> Performance data from Wiessmann and Caterpillar
> Input from other Alaska Wood Energy Associate team members
What was not performed a part of this analysis was detailed measurements of building
heat loads and existing equipment performance. A building heating load profile is central
to predicting annual fuel consumption (see 3.1.2 below). Ideally, this would be generated
by directly measuring heating load throughout the year. At the same time, the actual
operating efficiency of the existing boilers and distribution system would be measured.
This would provide a highly detailed profile of heating load and the energy required to
meet that load, for any condition throughout the year.
In practical terms, however, the required measurements are difficult to perform, and not
cost-effective. The equipment needed to make these measurements is not present at
any of the installations in the villages, and would have to be flown in and installed. The
measurements would need to continue from winter to summer, to generate a complete
load profile. The resulting incremental increase in the accuracy of the load profile cannot
justify that level of cost. As Section 3.1.2 explains, even without the measurements, the
data that were collected limit the load profiles to within a narrow range of values.
3.1.2 Methodology.
3.1.2.1 Energy Savings. The performance of the existing and proposed heating systems was
modeled using a spreadsheet; the type of model used is known as a “bin model”. In this
case, the bins are ranges of outside air temperatures (OATs). Temperature bins are
used because heating load is very closely correlated to OAT. Each “bin” of OAT is 2 deg
F wide – for instance, 40 – 42 deg F is a bin, with the midpoint temperature of 41 deg F.
For each OAT bin, the heating load profile assigns a heating load to that temperature bin.
The actual “bin data” is the number of hours per year that the outside air temperature falls
into each specific bin.
Bin weather data is published for numerous sites, including many in Alaska. However,
Fort Yukon is not one of those sites. Therefore, actual hourly temperature data from the
Fort Yukon airport was used to construct a bin table for this site. The weather data came
from calendar years 2007 and 2008, the last two complete years. The data were
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 2 of 7
combined to come up the average number of hours per year that the OAT in Fort Yukon
falls into each bin. This was done a on a monthly basis – for instance, the data in Figure
10 show the spread of temperatures in three different bins; 80 to 82 deg F, 40 to 42 deg
F, and -20 to -22 deg F. The data show that on average, the OAT falls into the -20 to -22
deg F bin 6.5 hours in October, and 18.5 hours in January. If there are no hours within
the given bin for a specific month, the cell remains blank; there are zero hours per year
when the outside air temperature falls into the 80 to 82 deg F bin January, February,
March, April, May, August, September, October, November, or December, for instance.
Figure 10, FY bin data
In the calculations performed within the model, individual calculations are completed in a
series of tables that have the same format at the original bin temperature data (see
Appendix G for extensive sample calculations). Figure 11below shows a portion of a
calculation used in this study.
Figure 11, partial bin model
In the columns to the left, the building heat load, DH Plant heat load, and piping loss heat
load are calculated; the fourth column shows the total load on the DH Plant. The next
column shows the midpoint of the temperature bin represented. Proceeding to the right,
the load is expressed in each month in which there are hours within the bin. For
instance, in all five bins shown, there are no hours within that bin in January – so the load
is not expressed anywhere in the January column shown. In June, only the top two bins
shown have any hours, so the load is expressed only in those two bins. After all the
loads are distributed across the table, the SUMPRODUCT function is used – that is, for
each month, each load is multiplied by the number of hours within the associated bin, and
all of those products are summed to calculate the total BTU of heat required that month.
Subsequent calculations are done to determine how much oil/wood/recovered heat is
required to meet that load – one table for each energy source (complex rules determine
which source is the primary, secondary, or tertiary source in each load condition). Once
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 3 of 7
the required oil (for instance) is calculated for each spot in the table, the SUMPRODUCT
function sums up all the oil require for each month. This is the basic format of the
calculations.
The basis of all calculations is the heating load profiles for each building included in the
study. These load profiles reflect all the information available about the building, such as
heating equipment capacity, operating data, historical oil consumption data, size and type
of building, etc. As noted above, it is difficult to measure heat load directly, but simple to
measure oil consumption. So the first profiles generated are oil consumption profiles.
These profiles assign a specific oil consumption rate to each OAT bin. Using the
calculation format above, the model calculates the amount of oil required to heat each
building, and then compares that to known consumption – obviously, the model must be
able to back-predict known consumption if it is to be used to predict future consumption.
Once the oil consumption profiles are verified, the oil consumption profile is converted to
a space heating load profile, by multiplying BTU of input heat (oil) times the efficiency of
the boiler/furnace to arrive at the actual heat to the space. Once these space load
profiles are generated (see Figure 11 above), they are fixed.
No matter what heat source is used, or how great any parasitic or piping losses are, any
proposed DH Plant must at the end of the day deliver that same amount of BTUs to the
space as the current oil-fired appliance do. Once the space load profiles are established,
the spreadsheet models the various DH Plants to determine how much energy they
would consume to provide this required space heat. As noted above, in addition to
producing a set amount of BTU for space heat, a DH Plant must produce enough BTUs
to heat the plant itself (parasitic loss) and to overcome the heat lost from the distribution
piping into the ground (piping losses). Finally, the model must calculate how much
pumping (electrical) energy must be used to get the heat to the buildings. Once inside
the buildings, the electrical energy used for pumping is the same for the existing systems
as it would be with a DH Plant in place, so this energy is not calculated or accounted for
in the model.
Additional key load profile assumptions:
> Space heating load varies linearly with OAT (a 10 deg F drop in OAT results in
twice the increase in load that a 5 deg F drop causes)
> There is an OAT at which space heating stops – the OAT combined with the
internal loads in the building (people, lights, equipment) are such that no
additional heat is required; beyond this temperature, the only load is DHW. The
model assumes no space heating above 60 deg F.
> However, there is heating required above 60 deg F, for heating recirculating
water in the village and domestic hot water in some of the buildings.
3.1.2.2 Recovered Heat. Just as with heating loads, a “recovered heat” profile is generated.
This profile assigns a specific village power requirement to each temperature bin. This is
less straightforward than assigning heat loads versus OAT, because the correlation
between village power and OAT is not as strong – there is a also a time-of-day
component to power output. However, bin models predict long term average
performance, not hour-by-hour performance. A bin model that predicts consumption
accurately on a monthly basis is generally as specific as is required – most utilities bill
and/or report consumption on a monthly basis
Plotting average monthly temperature versus monthly kWh for 2007 (the last calendar
year for which complete PCE data were available when the plot was done) resulted in a
scatter of data points. A best-fit curve could be constructed, and when used to predict
demand kW at each OAT bin point, it would accurately predict annual electrical
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 4 of 7
consumption. However, it could not predict consumption monthly to within acceptable
levels (some months were plus or minus 20 percent of more). However, it was noticed
that the data points grouped themselves into two sets. Applying a separate curve to the
two “sets” of points resulted in Figure 12 below:
Figure 12, village demand v OAT
The top curve represents the data from the months shown in dark blue, the bottom curve
the remaining months in maroon. It is not known why the correlation to OAT would
change from month to month, but in general, the dark blue months are colder (except
June) and the maroon months are warmer (except Mar). However, the R^2 correlations
are extremely high (in excess of 99 percent). Using these curves to predict demand kW
should produce valid results.
Figure 13 below shows the monthly results:
Figure 13, correlation of predicted power to actual
The first line is the actual 2007 PCE data, kWh. The second line is the energy predicted
by the model, applying the OAT bin data to the demand kW predicted by the two curves
above. The third line is the delta (change in) on a unit basis, that is, in kWh. The final
line is the delta as a fraction of the known PCE data. The table shows a deviation
between actual and predicted of 0.8 percent (0.008) on an annual basis. More
importantly, the magnitude of the largest monthly deviation is 4.9 percent (Feb), while the
smallest is November, when the predicted value matches the actual value to within 49
kWh out of 310,000 (0.02 percent deviation).
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 5 of 7
These curves provided a means to accurately predict power demand as a function of
temperature, but that is not the value needed for modeling DH Plant performance. What
is needed is the amount of heat is available for heat recovery as a function of OAT.
However, using the engine-generator manufacturer’s data, a curve was constructed to
calculate the available heat as a function of power output. So the bin model first
generates a bin table of power demand for each bin by month, then a subsequent table
calculates the heat recovery available for each bin by month. The model then calculates
how much additional heat input in the form of wood or oil is required to meet the DH Plant
load.
Figure 14 shows the relationship between kW demand and heat available for recovery;
this is specific to the Cat 3456 generator on order by Fort Yukon (see Section 1):
Figure 14, available heat recovery v power output
These three profiles, the “existing” oil consumption profiles, the building heat load
profiles, and the profiles of heat available for recovery represent a baseline condition –
the state of the things as they exists now in Fort Yukon. The model is set up to first
model these elements, and then it can be modified to calculate the performance of the
proposed DH Plants.
The following is the list of other calculations made in order to predict performance. Other
than the calculations relating to the DH Plant piping (flow rates, distance, pipe size, etc),
all of these calculation took the form of bin tables as described above (again, sample
calculations can be found in Appendix G):
> Proposed routing of DH pipe and associated lengths
> Peak flow rate required by each building
> Size of piping run-out to each building
> Size of each segment of the piping mains (any pipe that serves more than one
building)
> Minimum and maximum heat loss in each segment and run-out and bin profile
> DH Plant parasitic heating load profile
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 6 of 7
> DH Plant heating load (building profile plus parasitic profile plus piping loss
profile)
> Useable recovered heat profile and bin calculation (month by month)
> Wood energy input profile and bin calculation (month by month)
> Oil energy input profile and bin calculation (month by month)
> Pumping energy input profile and bin calculation (month by month)
3.1.2.3 Cost Estimates. The other component required to calculate the payback of any given
scenario is the cost. One estimate was prepared for each proposed DH Plant (see
Appendix C for a copy of the cost estimates). The current cost estimates contains the
best knowledge of the team members regarding construction in Bush Alaska. As the final
design proceeds, these costs estimates will be constantly updated to reflect the current
design.
Ultimately, actual vendor quotes and contractor’s estimates or bids will be used for the
final cost estimates.
3.2 Results
Financial results are provided in Sections 1 and 4, and in Appendix F. This section
details the engineering results of the performance model, specifically how each proposed
DH plant performs in the complementary goals of displacing as much oil as possible,
using as much “free” heat (recovered heat) as possible, and utilizing the village resources
appropriately to reduce the village’s energy dependence.
Figures 15 through 19 show the engineering/energy performance of the five proposed DH
Plants. In all cases, the preferred option, Maximum Plant 1, is shaded.
Figure 15, Plant Inputs
The amount of oil displaced ranges from 92 percent to 100 percent (actually slightly less,
but even rounded to three places, it appears as 100 percent). The Max 2 Plant has the
highest percentage of oil displaced; this is because it is the only plant with two biomass
boilers, allowing it to cover both the very bottom of the range as well as the top. The
other plants have only one boiler, and must thus use oil to fill the gaps when the
recovered heat is not quite enough, and on the very coldest days when the biomass
boiler capacity is not quite enough.
Figures 16 and 17 show the breakdown of heat sources for each DH Plant. Figure 16
shows the data in kBTU, while Figure 17 shows the same data in fractions.
Figure 16, Heat Sources (units)
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 7 of 7
Figure 17, Heat Sources (fractions)
The ability of each Plant to use recovered heat (as a fraction of total input heat) depends
both on the size of the Plant and the boiler selection. In a smaller Plant, such as Base,
the recovered heat naturally comprises more of the input energy, because the overall
capacity of the Plant is much smaller than others. Exp 2 is only slightly larger than Base
in terms of Load), so it also receives more than a third of its input energy from recovered
heat.
Equally interesting is where the output heat goes. Figures 18 and 19 show this
distribution, again in units of kBTU and then fractions of total. The DH Plant load
(parasitic load) is a constant in all plant in kBTU terms, so naturally it drops as fraction of
total as the Plant size gets bigger. Piping losses, on the other hand, vary in both
absolute and relative terms, based on the length of size of the distribution piping required.
Figure 18, Heat Sinks (units)
Figure 19, Heat Sinks (fractions)
Piping losses are an important criterion for evaluating the plants. This heat, unlike the
DH Plant load, is a complete loss. In essence, it can be thought of as the Plant
efficiency, much like a boiler has an efficiency. It is calculated the same way – heat
delivered divided by input heat. The Exp 2 Plant, for instance, would have a “heat
delivery” efficiency of (1.0 – 0.175) = 0.825 = 82.5 percent. In a stand-alone DH Plant,
that 17.5 percent loss would have to paid for in fuel costs. However, because the
proposed plants all use recovered heat from the co-located engine generator, this
mitigates much of the impact of the losses. Note that in all cases, the percent of input
heat from recovered heat is greater than the losses. The recovered heat is thus a major
factor in the cost effectiveness of any of these Plants.
This data is all included in the Summary sheets in Appendix F.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 4
Section 4: Financial Metrics, Sensitivity Analysis
4.1 Financial Metrics
The date, the funding mechanism(s) for the project have not been determined. For that reason,
the current financial model does not include the effects of the cost of money, or required rates of
return on investment.
The intent is that some or all the money come in the form of grants, which would carry no future
obligation as debt and/or equity would do.
Until the funding mechanism is known, the financial model uses the simplest of key metrics – the
net simple payback of the project. This is simply defined here as the cost of the project in dollars
divided by the savings (over the current means of the heating) in dollars per year (year 1),
resulting in a NSP in years. Figures 3A and 3B in the Section 1 show the NSP of the various DH
Plants under two sets of assumptions. Appendix F shows the entire Summary sheets for the
overall project, and for each individual DH Plant
4.2 Sensitivity Analysis
The base level resource assumptions are tabulated in Section 1.3 (abbreviated) and in Appendix
F (in full). Figure 2 from Section 1.3, reproduced here, shows the base level cost and unit heat
content assumptions.
Figure 2, Base Level Resource Assumptions (reproduced from Section 1.3)
As shown, there are three primary energy inputs to the DH Plant(s), electrical energy, No. 1 oil,
and wood chips. Currently, there is only one primary energy input in the village (for heating), No.
1 oil. In the sensitivity tables and graphs that follow, two input costs are held constant, and one of
the three is varied. This provides insight into how sensitive the project is to shifts in cost of the
major cost component, input energy. In Figure 20, the cost of electrical energy is varied as the
cost of oil and wood are held constant.
Figure 20, sensitivity table, electrical energy
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 2 of 4
As the table shows, the net simple payback of the project is not especially sensitive to the cost of
electrical energy – a 75 percent increase in the cost of the energy causes the NSP to increase by
only about 35 percent.
This can seen graphically in Figure 21; the slope of the lines are not particularly steep (see Figure
23). It can also been seen that the slope is increasing as the cost of energy increases; thus less
dramatic increases in electrical costs have even smaller effects on project financials.
Figure 21, sensitivity graph, electrical energy
Figures 22 and 23 below show the effects of changes in cost of No. 1 oil. These effects are
significantly greater than those associated with the cost of electricity. This is because oil is the
primary energy input in the “existing” case (i.e. the current means of heating the village).
Figure 22, sensitivity table, oil energy
The financial effect of changes in the price of oil is the opposite of those associated with changes
in the cost of electricity or wood; because oil is the sole source of energy in the “existing” case
(and only a very small input to the DH Plants), an increase in the cost of oil increases the value of
the project.
This can be seen in Figure 23 – the slope of the curves is opposite that of the curves in Figures
21 and 25. Note that because of the greater sensiticity of the NSP to the cost of oil, the scale of
the Y axis had to be expanded. This allows the effect of a drop in oil cost to be shown, but it also
masks the significance of increases in oil cost, by flattening out the slope of the curves to the right
of the Base Level case. Figure 23, however, shows that an increase in the cost of oil by 50
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 3 of 4
percent represents a drop of more than 50 percent in NSP. A doubling of the oil cost decreases
the NSP by close to 75 percent. The most significant effect, however, is a decrease in the price
of oil from $4.00 per gallon (Base Level) to $3.00 per gallon; the NSP increases 300 percent or
more. Resource prices can be volatile, however, the long term price of oil in the village is
expected to rise. Therefore, the team believes the Base Level price of $4.00 per gallon to be
conservative, and a reasonable Base Level to use for this analysis.
Figure 23, sensitivity graph, oil energy
Figures 24 and 25 show the effects of changes in the price of wood chips. The magnitude of
these effects is almost identical to the effect of the price changes for electrical energy.
Figure 24, sensitivity table, wood energy
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 4 of 4
Figure 25, sensitivity graph, wood energy
Another assumption contained within the Base Level resource assumptions is the heat content of
the wood chips. However, the sensitivity of the project to the heat content of the chips is
essentially the same as that of the cost of wood chips – if the chips have less unit heat, one
would simply have to buy more of them. Thus a drop in heat content has a one-to-one
relationship with the cost of wood, and has the same effect on the project as an increase in wood
chips costs.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix A:
One-line Diagram and Sequence of Operations for Proposed DH Plants:
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 1 of 5
Sequence of Operations:
I Abbreviations:
BB: Biomass Boiler
CGL: Generator Cooling Loop
CV: Control Valve
dP: delta P (the change in Pressure)
FM: Flow Meter:
IV: Isolation Valve (motor actuated valves, used only for isolating equipment)
OB: Oil Boiler
PL: Primary Loop
PS: Primary Supply
SL: Secondary Loop
SS: Secondary Supply
TT Temperature Transmitter
II Heat Transfer
Heat transfer in BTUs is measured at two points; in the generator cooling loop, and the in the
secondary, or distribution loop. The measurement is made by multiplying the difference
between the supply and return temperatures times the mass rate of the system. The mass
rate itself is calculated – the flow meters [FM.GCL.1] and [FM.SL.1] measure volumetric flow
rate, which is then converted into mass rate via an internal calculation.
Heat transfer from the generator cooling loop is measured for accounting purposes.
Depending on the final ownership of the district heating plant (DH Plant) and the Power Plant
(P Plant), it may necessary that these BTUs be tracked.
Heat Transfer into the secondary loop is tracked for control purposes (see below) and also as
a diagnostic. The heat transfer to each client is measured and recorded for billing/tracking
purposed. The difference between the measured heat rate that leaves the DH plant, and the
sum of the client heat rates is the system losses. These losses consist primarily of heat lost
from the piping into the ground. By tracking this differential, the DH Plant operators can see if
significant increases in losses occur, and so knowing, can track down the reason for the
increase.
III Secondary (distribution) Loop
A. Flow Control: There are three delta P transmitters ([dPT.SL.1, 2, and 3]) located within
the secondary (distribution) piping. These transmitters measure the pressure differential
between the secondary supply piping and the secondary return piping. The control
system modulates the Lead Secondary Pump speed via the variable frequency drive
(VFD) to maintain the supply-return dP setpoint, based on the lowest of the three dP
values received from the transmitters.
B. Pump Lead/Lag: Each pump is designed for 100 percent of the required flow. The
operating pump is designated the Lead pump, the backup is the Lag pump. The Lead
and Lag pump designations shall switch on the first of each calendar month, as noon on
that day.
In the event of a Lead pump failure, the Lag pump shall immediately become the Lead
pump, and the failed pump, the Lag pump. After a failure, the scheduled monthly Lead /
Lag designation switch shall be suspended until the operator re-enables the switch. This
is to prevent the system from trying to switch operations to a failed pump.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 2 of 5
C Temperature Control:
1. Setpoint: Secondary Loop Setpoint is reset based on outside air temperature.
Above 50 deg F OAT, setpoint shall be 140 deg F. Below 20 deg F, setpoint shall be
185 deg F. Between the 20 and 50 deg F, the setpoint shall vary linearly between
the endpoint values.
2. Control: The control valve [CV.SL.1] located at the primary / secondary heat
exchanger (HX) modulates to maintain the secondary loop heating water supply
setpoint, as measured at [TT.SS.1].
IV Primary (plant) Loop
A. Flow Control: The primary pumps are constant speed. However, there is a bypass
between primary supply and return that controls flow from supply to return. The control
valve [CV.dP.1] modulates to maintain the supply-return differential pressure setpoint,
measured at [dPT.PL.1].
B. Pump Lead/Lag: Each pump is designed for 100 percent of the required flow. The
operating pump is designated the Lead pump, the backup is the Lag pump. The Lead
and Lag pump designations shall switch on the first of each calendar month, as noon on
that day.
In the event of a Lead pump failure, the Lag pump shall immediately become the Lead
pump, and the failed pump, the Lag pump. After a failure, the scheduled monthly Lead /
Lag designation switch shall be suspended until the operator re-enables the switch. This
is to prevent the system from trying to switch operations to a failed pump.
C. Temperature Control:
1. The primary loop setpoint is set at 5.0 deg F higher than the secondary loop setpoint.
2. The primary loop temperature is measured by the transmitter [TT.PL.1], which is
located downstream of the thermal storage tank. The signals from this transmitter
are used to control both the control valve at the generator cooling loop HX and the
firing rates of all of the boilers.
3. The primary purpose of the thermal storage tank is to provide a “thermal flywheel” for
what is a very small system in terms of the amount of water in the system.
a. In a system with a minimal amount of water, temperature control is difficult,
because a small input of heat can result in a large change in temperature.
b. The thermal storage tank provide extra volume (mass), which helps dampen the
speed of temperature changes, and makes control easier.
c. However, because the transmitter that provide temperature control is
downstream of the tank, there is a lag between an input of heat, and the resulting
rise in temperature at [TT.PL.1]. To help make the control more accurate, there
are three temperature transmitters in the tank at different elevations within the
tank (not shown on drawing).
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 3 of 5
d. This means the temperature controls must be set to react slowly, but because of
the transmitters within the tank, it means that the controls can see how the
system temperature is trending.
1) This is an ideal scheme for the biomass boilers, which want use the
knowledge of how the tank temperatures are trending to make slow and
small changes in firing rate.
2) During the commissioning process, the control valve on the HX [CV.PL.1] will
be tuned to match the control speed to the reaction of the system.
3) Also during commissioning, the rate at which control signal are sent to the
oil-fired boiler will be tuned to match the system response.
D. Temperature and Flow Control, as load increases:
1. General: In this Section, BB max equals the maximum output of the biomass boilers.
If there is only one, then BB max equals the capacity of that boiler. If there are two,
then BB max equals the sum of the two boiler capacities. BB min equals the
minimum turndown capacity of the smallest biomass boiler in the plant (there may be
one or two). This is estimated at 40 percent of the rated capacity of the smallest
biomass boiler. HR is the available heat recovery from the generator cooling loop.
2. Case 1: Load is less than available heat recovery (HR).
a. Control valve [CV.PL.1] modulates to maintain primary loop setpoint. As long as
Load remain less than HR, no other action is required. When the Load exceeds
the available heat recovery, the loop temperature measured at [TT.PS.1] will fall
below setpoint.
b. In all cases, all primary flow goes through the generator loop HX. In this case,
because the recovered heat can meet the Plant Load, all of the water flows
through the downstream bypass from supply to return. The valve [CV.dP.1]
modulates to maintain dP setpoint.
c. Because the primary pump flow is constant, and the flow through the HX does
not vary, this valve holds a constant position once it has reached setpoint.
3. Case 2: Load is greater than HR, Load is less than BB min.
a. In this Case, the operator cannot meet the Load with only the recovered heat,
and he cannot start a biomass boiler. Because the Load is less than BB min, the
biomass boiler would not be able to remain on, and would attempt to cycle, which
is not recommended. Therefore, the control system starts up the oil boiler. The
system uses two pieces of information to determine the Case:
1) Heat recovery alone cannot meet load: this is known because the
temperature at [TT.PL.2] is less than the primary loop setpoint.
2) The Load is less than BB min: The DH plant heat load is calculated as
described above in Section II, and is found to be less than BB min.
b. Because the generator loop HX is upstream of the oil boiler, and in series with it,
the system first takes all the available heat recovery; it fires the oil boiler only as
required to maintain loop setpoint. This maximized the use of recovered heat.
c. In order to start up the oil boiler, the associated isolation valve [IV.OB.1] must be
opened.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 4 of 5
1) Each of the boiler isolation valves are two position valves (open or closed)
and each is flow limited – that means the flow through the valve is a constant
when it is open.
2) Each of the two (or three) boilers has a set flow rate, each of which is
individually less than the total primary flow. The sum of these flow rates
equals the primary flow.
3) The result of this is that except in the Case where all available boilers are
operating, some water must flow through the bypass.
4) When a valve opens, the supply/return dP in the bypass drops as some of
the flow is diverted through a boiler, and into the supply piping.
5) The bypass valve [CV.dP.1] modulates further closes to maintain the dP
setpoint.
6) Flow is now split between the operating boiler and the bypass.
7) This pressure modulation and control occurs in this and all subsequent
Cases; this description will not be repeated in further Case outlines.
4. Case 3: Load is greater than HR, Load is greater than BB min.
a. At this point, the system opens [IV.BB.1] and starts the first (smallest, if there are
two) biomass boiler.
b. When this biomass boiler is established, the system shuts down the oil fired
boiler, and closes [IV.OB.1].
c. This is the only case in which not all of the available heat recovery is used. The
system selects for wood over oil, so once the Load is great enough to operate a
biomass boiler, the following occurs:
1) The control valve [CV.GCL.1] slowly closes.
2) This ensures that the first biomass boiler sees the entire Load.
3) Using the control system, the biomass boiler is held at the minimum
sustainable firing rate (minimum turndown).
4) As the Load increases, the boiler is held at minimum, and [CV.PL.1]
modulates to maintain primary loop setpoint. This ensures that the maximum
amount of recovered heat is used.
5) As Load increases further, the point will be reached when the Load is now
greater than HR plus the BB min.
5. Case 4: Load is greater than HR, Load is greater than (HR + BB min).
a. The control [CV.PL.1] is wide open, and all possible heat is being recovered.
b. The biomass boiler controls are released from their hold at minimum. The boiler
is now allowed to modulate the firing rate to maintain primary loop setpoint.
c. If there is only one biomass boiler, then the boiler modulates the firing rate until
the rate reaches maximum. If the primary loop temperature then falls below
setpoint, the next Case is reached.
d. If there are two biomass boilers:
1) The smaller boiler modulates to or near to full fire as Load increases.
2) The larger boiler is then brought on, and the smaller one shut down.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates 5 of 5
3) As Load increases, and the larger boiler modulates to or near to full fire, the
smaller boiler is brought on. Both boilers modulate in unison (same percent
firing rate, not same BTU output).
4) When the boilers reach maximum firing rate, and the primary loop
temperature drops below setpoint, the next case is reached.
6. Case 5: Load is greater than HR, Load is greater than (HR + BB max).
a. The control [CV.PL.1] is wide open, and all possible heat is being recovered.
b. The biomass boiler(s) are at maximum firing rate.
c. The oil fired boiler is brought on to make up the difference between the Load and
recovered heat plus the biomass boiler heat. Recovered heat and biomass heat
are maximized, oil heat is minimized.
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix B:
Control Points List for Proposed DH Plants:
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Points List
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Points List (same for all 5 proposed plants)
15 31 7 22
DH Plant AO AI BO BI
main HX in and out temp : 4
HR HX in and out temp : 4
main HX control valve position : 1
HR HX control valve position : 1
main HX flow meter flow : 1
HR HX flow meter flow : 1
primary loop supply temp 1
:
primary pump status : 2
primary pump stop/start : 2
:
secondary pump VFD status : 2
secondary pump VFD enable : 2
secondary pump VFD speed : 2
secondary pump VFD alarm : 2
secondary pump VFD amps : 2
:
secondary piping system delta P : 3
secondary loop supply temp 1
:
boiler in outlet temp : 3
boiler discharge setpoint temp : 3
boiler enable : 3
boiler status : 3
boiler iso valves position : 3
stack gas temp : 3
:
storage tank temp : 4
:
emergency generator status : 1
tank low level : 1
tank low low : 1
fuel oil pumpset alarm : 1
fuel oil pumpset enable : 1
:
plant oa temp : 2
plant sp temp : 2
UH enable : 4
UH status : 4
:
heat trace status : 5
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix C:
Cost Estimates for Proposed DH Plants:
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Cost Est
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
$80
Unit costs Number Extended Cost
labor labor
description units hrs each material Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
boilers : : :
Wiessmann model 390 : ea $276,250 : 1.0 : $276,250
Wiessmann model 530 : ea $295,000 : 1.0 : $295,000
Wiessmann model 720 : ea $313,750 : 1.0 : $313,750
Wiessmann model 950 : ea $332,500 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $332,500 $332,500 $332,500
Wiessmann model 1250 : ea $351,250 : :
install model 390 on site : ea 200.0 $16,000 $15,000 : 1.0 : $31,000
install model 530 on site : ea 200.0 $16,000 $15,001 : 1.0 : $31,001
install model 720 on site : ea 240.0 $19,200 $15,002 : 1.0 : $34,202
install model 950 on site : ea 240.0 $19,200 $15,003 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $34,203 $34,203 $34,203
install model 1250 on site : ea 240.0 $19,200 $15,004 : :
shipping : ea $20,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 : $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $40,000
:::
mech room : : :
main heat exchanger, flat plate : ea 30.0 $2,400 $29,900 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $32,300 $32,300 $32,300 $32,300 $32,300
generator loop heat exchanger : ea 30.0 $2,400 $29,900 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $32,300 $32,300 $32,300 $32,300 $32,300
7.5 HP Pump : ea 10.0 $800 $3,536 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 : $8,672 $8,672 $8,672
10 HP Pump : ea 14.1 $1,129 $4,053 : 2.0 2.0 : $10,365 $10,365
15 HP Pump :ea 14.1 $1,129 $4,053 ::
20 HP Pump :ea 16.0 $1,280 $4,312 :2.0 :$11,184
25 HP Pump :ea 15.6 $1,246 $7,250 ::
30 HP Pump :ea 17.3 $1,388 $8,140 :2.0 :$19,056
40 HP Pump :ea 20.0 $1,600 $9,475 ::
50 HP Pump :ea 22.5 $1,803 $11,900 :2.0 :$27,406
60 HP Pump :ea 24.7 $1,980 $13,620 :2.0 :$31,200
75 HP Pump :ea 28.1 $2,246 $16,200 :2.0 :$36,891
4 inch pump set (valves, etc):ea 36.5 $2,918 $3,106 ::
6 inch pump set (valves, etc):ea 52.0 $4,163 $4,294 :4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 :$33,829 $33,829 $33,829 $33,829 $33,829
20 HP VFD :per HP $150 :2.0 :$6,000
25 HP VFD :per HP $150 ::
30 HP VFD :per HP $150 :2.0 :$9,000
40 HP VFD :per HP $150 ::
50 HP VFD :per HP $150 :2.0 :$15,000
60 HP VFD :per HP $150 :2.0 :$18,000
75 HP VFD :per HP $150 :2.0 :$22,500
additional piping : ls 320.0 $25,600 $25,000 :1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 :$50,600 $50,600 $50,600 $50,600 $50,600
oil fired boiler, 750 kBTU/h : ea 78.0 $6,244 $8,193 :1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 $14,437 $14,437 $14,437 $14,437 $14,437
efour, PLLC 1 of 3
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Cost Est
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
$80
Unit costs Number Extended Cost
labor labor
description units hrs each material Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
2-position isolation valves, 6" : ea 8.0 $640 $3,278 :2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 :$7,836 $7,836 $7,836 $7,836 $11,754
control valves, 6" : ea 8.0 $640 $5,600 :2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 :$12,480 $12,480 $12,480 $12,480 $12,480
6" flow meter : ea 6.9 $549 $4,500 :2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 :$10,097 $10,097 $10,097 $10,097 $10,097
electrical : ls $30,000 :1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
lights : sf $10 : 480.0 480.0 480.0 480.0 480.0 : $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800
control points, binary : ea $600 : 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 : $17,400 $17,400 $17,400 $17,400 $17,400
control points, analog : ea $900 : 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 : $41,400 $41,400 $41,400 $41,400 $41,400
controls, panels : ea 16.0 $1,280 $8,000 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 : $18,560 $18,560 $18,560 $18,560 $18,560
controls, HMI : ea $1,500 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 : $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
controls, programming : ls 250.0 $20,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
thermal storage tank, 6000 gal : ea 60.0 $4,800 $21,965 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $26,765 $26,765 $26,765 $26,765 $26,765
expansion tank, primary loop, 80g : ea 2.3 $183 $817 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $999 $999 $999 $999 $999
expansion tank, primary loop, 400g : ea 5.7 $457 $3,939 : 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 : $13,188 $13,188 $13,188 $13,188 $13,188
building : sf $100 : 900.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 : $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000
:::
remainder of plant : : :
plant stack, 50 ft : lf 0.8 $60 $158 : 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 : $10,900 $10,900 $10,900 $10,900 $10,900
stack fittings : ea 0.8 $64 $250 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 9.0 $1,884 $1,884 $1,884 $1,884 $2,826
emergency generator, 100 kW : ea $50,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
fuel oil tank, DW, AG, 2000 gal : ea 7.7 $617 $7,590 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $8,207 $8,207 $8,207 $8,207 $8,207
tank accessories : ls 48.0 $3,840 $3,500 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $7,340 $7,340 $7,340 $7,340 $7,340
FO pump set : ea 2.7 $213 $1,200 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $1,413 $1,413 $1,413 $1,413 $1,413
electrical : ea $7,500 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $7,500
lights : sf $10 : 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 : $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000
material handling : ls $80,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000
:::
distribution : : :
2" pex pipe, installed in place : lf $38 : 3,164 3,068 4,312 4,802 7,522 : $118,650 $115,050 $161,700 $180,075 $282,075
4" pex pipe, installed in place : lf $60 : 7,376 3,016 6,516 6,516 : $442,560 $180,960 $390,960 $390,960
(2) 4" pex pipe, installed in place : lf $112 : 3,110 870 870 1,730 1,730 : $348,320 $97,440 $97,440 $193,760 $193,760
:::
building connections : ea $21,500 : 11.0 13.0 13.0 15.0 16.0 : $236,500 $279,500 $279,500 $322,500 $344,000
future connections : ea $1,500 : 7.0 8.0 7.0 9.0 7.0 : $10,500 $12,000 $10,500 $13,500 $10,500
:::
DH site : : :
wood processing building : sf $40 : 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 : $48,000 $48,000 $48,000 $48,000 $48,000
fill : cu yd $2.5 :10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 : $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
efour, PLLC 2 of 3
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Cost Est
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
$80
Unit costs Number Extended Cost
labor labor
description units hrs each material Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
General Conditions : : :
mob and demob : ls $40,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
small tools : ls $42,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000
temp facilities : ls $25,000 : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 : $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
:
construction subtotal : $1,905,062 $2,203,566 $1,954,015 $2,366,298 $2,829,099
:
subcontractor mark-ups (mech is general) :
electrical contractor mark-up 0.125 : $15,788 $16,288 $16,288 $16,788 $17,038
controls contractor mark-up 0.125 : $22,222 $24,347 $23,597 $25,722 $27,274
site contractor 0.125 : $97,059 $125,944 $99,075 $145,037 $160,474
subtotal : $135,068 $166,578 $138,959 $187,546 $204,786
:
total construction : $2,040,130 $2,370,144 $2,092,974 $2,553,844 $3,033,885
:
design / construction admin (% of cons) :
final design/study : $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000
bid assistance 0.005 : $10,201 $11,851 $10,465 $12,769 $15,169
construction admin 0.035 : $71,405 $82,955 $73,254 $89,385 $106,186
commissioning/start up 0.025 : $51,003 $59,254 $52,324 $63,846 $75,847
contingency 0.100 : $204,013 $237,014 $209,297 $255,384 $303,388
subtotal : $461,621 $516,074 $470,341 $546,384 $625,591
:
total : $2,501,751 $2,886,217 $2,563,315 $3,100,228 $3,659,476
efour, PLLC 3 of 3
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix D:
Maps of Proposed DH Plants:
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix E:
Typical Design Documents, Heat Recovery from Engine Generators:
(These plans are from a previous job, but the methodology will be the same)
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix F:
Main Summary, DH Plant Summary Sheets, and Key Inputs:
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary
Buildings included On Inputs (dark text are user inputs)
1 School 1 cost of oil : $4.00 per gallon
2 Gym 1 cost of electricity : $0.48 per kWh
3 Store 1 cost of wood : $175.00 per GT
4 Post Office 1 :
5 CATG Main Office 1 MC of wood at use : 0.25 MC
6 State Building 1 unit heat content :5,315 BTU/lb
7 Shop (adj School)1 :
8 District Office 1 soil conditions :med (for heat loss calcs, select only one)
9 Church 1 dry :
10 Yukon Flats 1 med :1
11 City Building 1 moist :
12 New CATG Clinic 1
13 Tribal Offices 1 Biomass Boilers : B-1 model B-2 Model choices
14 Water Treat 1 Base Plant : 530 390
15 Old CATG Clinic 1 Expanded Plant 1 : 950 530
16 City DHW Load 1 Expanded Plant 2 : 720 720
Maximum Plant 1 : 950 950
include Heat Recovery 1 Maximum Plant 2 : 390 950 1,250
Results (see Individual Plant Summary sheets for more details)
Financial Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
current annual cost to heat connected buildings : $431,228 $547,228 $481,376 $597,376 $621,376
proposed annual cost of oil, DH Plant : $16,152 $40,285 $21,481 $48,248 $292
proposed annual cost of wood chips, DH Plant : $157,393 $236,122 $192,243 $269,201 $316,395
proposed annual cost of electrical energy, DH Plant : $66,378 $101,150 $77,626 $70,522 $121,982
total annual proposed costs, DH Plant : $239,922 $377,557 $291,350 $387,971 $438,669
savings : $191,306 $169,671 $190,026 $209,405 $182,707
estimated total DH plant cost : $2,501,751 $2,886,217 $2,563,315 $3,100,228 $3,659,476
net simple payback :13.1 yrs 17.0 yrs 13.5 yrs 14.8 yrs 20.0 yrs
Inputs Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
current annual oil consumption, connected bldgs, gal : 107,807 136,807 120,344 149,344 155,344
proposed annual oil consumption, gal : 4,038 10,071 5,370 12,062 73
proposed annual wood consumption, green tons : 899 1,349 1,099 1,538 1,808
proposed annual electrical energy consumption, kWh : 138,287 210,730 161,721 146,920 254,130
fraction of oil displaced : 0.963 0.926 0.955 0.919 1.000
Heat Sources, unit Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
annual heat from oil, kBTU : 449,103 1,120,118 597,292 1,341,548 8,106
annual heat recovered from Power Plant, kBTU : 5,285,120 5,513,598 5,407,258 5,524,605 5,559,001
annual heat from wood chips, kBTU : 8,030,058 12,046,738 9,808,062 13,734,424 16,142,238
Heat Sources, fraction Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
annual heat from oil : 0.033 0.060 0.038 0.065 0.000
annual heat recovered from Power Plant : 0.384 0.295 0.342 0.268 0.256
annual heat from wood chips : 0.583 0.645 0.620 0.667 0.744
Heat Sinks, unit Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
annual heat to buildings, kBTU : 11,990,295 15,215,675 13,384,660 16,610,040 17,277,360
annual heat to piping losses, kBTU : 1,397,094 3,087,885 2,051,057 3,613,643 4,055,091
annual heat to plant, kBTU : 376,894 376,894 376,894 376,894 376,894
Heat Sinks, fraction Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
annual heat to buildings : 0.871 0.815 0.846 0.806 0.796
annual heat to piping losses : 0.102 0.165 0.130 0.175 0.187
annual heat to plant : 0.027 0.020 0.024 0.018 0.017
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Base Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary Base DH Plant
Buildings included DH Plant
1 School 1 maximum plant load: 3,827 kBTU/h
2 Gym 1 coincident heat recovery available: 971 kBTU/h
3 Store 1 fraction of heat from HR at peak: 0.254
4 Post Office 1
5 CATG Main Office 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 2,856 kBTU/h
6 State Building 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 837 kW(th)
7 Shop (adj School)1
8 District Office 1 use Weissmann model: 530 (from Summary)
9 Church 1 maximum capacity: 1,808
10 Yukon Flats 1 minimum capacity: 723
11 City Building
12 New CATG Clinic predicted plant flow rate: 320 gpm 6.0
13 Tribal Offices pipe length to design load: 2,726 ft
14 Water Treat estimated secondary pump head: 162 ft
15 Old CATG Clinic estimated pump efficiency: 0.740
16 City DHW Load 1 peak secondary pump power: 13.2 kW 17.7 20.0
estimated primary pump head: 50 ft
peak primary pump power: 4.1 kW 5.5 7.5
estimated plant parasitic power: 7.5 kW
Results
DH Plant runs :111111111111
Current :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total
oil gal :15,023 14,275 13,609 7,444 4,676 2,587 2,612 3,720 5,563 10,561 12,386 15,350 :107,807
cost $:60,094 57,101 54,437 29,774 18,704 10,350 10,446 14,882 22,250 42,243 49,546 61,401 :$431,228
Predicted :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total fraction
oil gal :621 1,221 526 10 88 106 285 296 83 133 55 614 :4,038
cost $:2,485 4,883 2,103 42 353 422 1,141 1,183 331 534 221 2,455 :$16,152 0.067
::
wood tons :127 116 131 62 40 7 5 25 52 100 104 132 :899
cost $:22,275 20,314 22,982 10,852 6,942 1,141 829 4,344 9,075 17,465 18,150 23,023 :$157,393 0.656
::
electricity kWh :12,841 12,100 12,191 10,723 11,067 10,710 11,067 11,067 10,710 11,372 11,441 12,998 :138,287
cost $:6,164 5,808 5,852 5,147 5,312 5,141 5,312 5,312 5,141 5,458 5,492 6,239 :$66,378 0.277
::
total cost $:30,923 31,005 30,937 16,041 12,607 6,705 7,282 10,839 14,547 23,457 23,862 31,717 :$239,922 1.000
savings $:29,170 26,096 23,500 13,733 6,097 3,645 3,164 4,042 7,703 18,786 25,684 29,684 :$191,306
::
estimated construction cost :$2,501,751
net simple payback :13.08 yrs
Heat Sources :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
from oil kBTU :69,093 135,785 58,470 1,163 9,809 11,744 31,720 32,886 9,196 14,839 6,133 68,267 :449,103 0.033
from HR kBTU :666,938 603,907 471,513 404,616 267,090 311,805 313,257 263,465 262,122 430,261 621,274 668,872 :5,285,120 0.384
from wood kBTU :1,136,444 1,036,387 1,172,542 553,653 354,187 58,229 42,316 221,640 463,007 891,050 926,004 1,174,598 :8,030,058 0.583
(assumes plant runs all year)total :13,764,282
Heat Sinks :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
to load kBTU :1,670,907 1,587,696 1,513,625 827,867 520,076 287,780 290,463 413,784 618,667 1,174,561 1,377,626 1,707,242 :11,990,295 0.871
to piping kBTU :137,366 126,271 132,961 110,832 104,784 93,715 96,640 101,550 104,897 123,464 126,230 138,384 :1,397,094 0.102
to plant kBTU :64,203 62,113 55,939 20,733 6,225 282 190 2,658 10,760 38,125 49,555 66,112 :376,894 0.027
(assumes plant runs all year)total :13,764,282
gallons of oil displaced :103,769
fraction of oil displaced :0.963
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Exp 1 Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary Expanded DH Plant 1
Buildings included DH Plant
1 School 1 maximum plant load: 5,091 kBTU/h
2 Gym 1 coincident heat recovery available: 971 kBTU/h
3 Store 1 fraction of heat from HR at peak: 0.191
4 Post Office 1
5 CATG Main Office 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 4,120 kBTU/h
6 State Building 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 1,208 kW(th)
7 Shop (adj School)1
8 District Office 1 use Weissmann model: 950 (from Summary)
9 Church 1 maximum capacity: 3,241
10 Yukon Flats 1 minimum capacity: 1,297
11 City Building 1
12 New CATG Clinic 1 predicted plant flow rate: 420 gpm 6.0
13 Tribal Offices pipe length to design load: 6,986 ft
14 Water Treat estimated secondary pump head: 322 ft
15 Old CATG Clinic estimated pump efficiency: 0.740
16 City DHW Load 1 peak secondary pump power: 34.4 kW 46.2 50.0
estimated primary pump head: 50 ft
peak primary pump power: 5.3 kW 7.2 7.5
estimated plant parasitic power: 7.5 kW
Results
DH Plant runs :111111111111
Current :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total
oil gal :19,256 18,312 17,414 9,391 5,780 3,098 3,122 4,537 6,941 13,442 15,831 19,682 :136,807
cost $:77,025 73,248 69,655 37,565 23,120 12,391 12,490 18,150 27,765 53,768 63,324 78,727 :$547,228
Predicted :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total fraction
oil gal :245 551 69 396 1,669 1,403 1,854 2,378 1,350 157 :10,071
cost $:979 2,203 277 1,584 6,678 5,610 7,417 9,510 5,398 629 :$40,285 0.107
::
wood tons :203 192 202 99 40 1 1 17 66 155 165 210 :1,349
cost $:35,582 33,583 35,435 17,263 6,952 191 114 2,901 11,521 27,044 28,792 36,743 :$236,122 0.625
::
electricity kWh :21,010 20,295 19,237 15,493 15,958 15,443 15,958 15,958 15,443 16,868 17,635 21,433 :210,730
cost $:10,085 9,742 9,234 7,437 7,660 7,413 7,660 7,660 7,413 8,097 8,465 10,288 :$101,150 0.268
::
total cost $:46,645 45,527 44,946 26,284 21,290 13,214 15,191 20,071 24,332 35,141 37,256 47,660 :$377,557 1.000
savings $:30,379 27,721 24,710 11,281 1,830 (822) (2,701) (1,922) 3,432 18,628 26,068 31,067 :$169,671
::
estimated construction cost :$2,886,217
net simple payback :17.01 yrs
Heat Sources :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
from oil kBTU :27,216 61,248 7,690 44,036 185,673 155,997 206,221 264,437 150,103 17,498 :1,120,118 0.060
from HR kBTU :666,922 603,246 471,012 385,387 340,305 386,234 349,012 319,295 276,689 426,275 620,348 668,872 :5,513,598 0.295
from wood kBTU :1,815,348 1,713,380 1,807,874 880,754 354,696 9,724 5,835 148,023 587,811 1,379,757 1,468,922 1,874,613 :12,046,738 0.645
(assumes plant runs all year)total :18,680,453
Heat Sinks :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
to load kBTU :2,141,675 2,036,674 1,936,765 1,044,481 642,852 344,541 347,283 504,650 771,997 1,495,025 1,760,719 2,189,014 :15,215,675 0.815
to piping kBTU :303,609 279,086 293,872 244,964 231,597 207,132 213,595 224,447 231,846 272,883 278,996 305,858 :3,087,885 0.165
to plant kBTU :64,203 62,113 55,939 20,733 6,225 282 190 2,658 10,760 38,125 49,555 66,112 :376,894 0.020
(assumes plant runs all year)total :18,680,453
gallons of oil displaced :126,736
fraction of oil displaced :0.926
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Exp 2 Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary Expanded DH Plant 2
Buildings included DH Plant
1 School 1 maximum plant load: 4,306 kBTU/h
2 Gym 1 coincident heat recovery available: 971 kBTU/h
3 Store 1 fraction of heat from HR at peak: 0.226
4 Post Office 1
5 CATG Main Office 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 3,335 kBTU/h
6 State Building 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 977 kW(th)
7 Shop (adj School)1
8 District Office 1 use Weissmann model: 720 (from Summary)
9 Church 1 maximum capacity: 2,457
10 Yukon Flats 1 minimum capacity: 983
11 City Building
12 New CATG Clinic predicted plant flow rate: 360 gpm 6.0
13 Tribal Offices 1 pipe length to design load: 4,180 ft
14 Water Treat 1 estimated secondary pump head: 217 ft
15 Old CATG Clinic estimated pump efficiency: 0.740
16 City DHW Load 1 peak secondary pump power: 19.9 kW 26.6 30.0
estimated primary pump head: 50 ft
peak primary pump power: 4.6 kW 6.1 7.5
estimated plant parasitic power: 7.5 kW
Results
DH Plant runs :111111111111
Current :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total
oil gal :16,699 15,862 15,137 8,324 5,272 2,972 3,003 4,217 6,246 11,770 13,783 17,059 :120,344
cost $:66,795 63,448 60,547 33,294 21,088 11,887 12,012 16,870 24,985 47,079 55,131 68,238 :$481,376
Predicted :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total fraction
oil gal :325 690 140 83 611 635 1,044 1,092 498 14 237 :5,370
cost $:1,300 2,761 558 334 2,446 2,541 4,175 4,369 1,993 55 950 :$21,481 0.074
::
wood tons :159 149 162 80 42 3 2 24 61 123 128 165 :1,099
cost $:27,833 26,097 28,379 14,043 7,417 501 308 4,205 10,611 21,525 22,485 28,839 :$192,243 0.660
::
electricity kWh :15,432 14,682 14,447 12,296 12,682 12,273 12,682 12,682 12,273 13,166 13,437 15,669 :161,721
cost $:7,407 7,047 6,935 5,902 6,087 5,891 6,087 6,087 5,891 6,320 6,450 7,521 :$77,626 0.266
::
total cost $:36,540 35,906 35,872 20,279 15,950 8,933 10,571 14,661 18,495 27,900 28,935 37,310 :$291,350 1.000
savings $:30,254 27,543 24,675 13,015 5,138 2,955 1,441 2,209 6,491 19,179 26,197 30,928 :$190,026
::
estimated construction cost :$2,563,315
net simple payback :13.49 yrs
Heat Sources :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
from oil kBTU :36,153 76,781 15,526 9,278 68,009 70,645 116,096 121,467 55,402 1,522 26,413 :597,292 0.038
from HR kBTU :666,925 603,446 471,264 383,449 300,020 372,198 344,249 284,791 262,708 428,698 620,638 668,872 :5,407,258 0.342
from wood kBTU :1,420,012 1,331,442 1,447,860 716,467 378,393 25,549 15,722 214,550 541,371 1,098,196 1,147,162 1,471,338 :9,808,062 0.620
(assumes plant runs all year)total :15,812,611
Heat Sinks :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
to load kBTU :1,857,222 1,764,179 1,683,513 925,749 586,365 330,527 334,002 469,066 694,722 1,309,035 1,532,929 1,897,353 :13,384,660 0.846
to piping kBTU :201,665 185,377 195,198 162,712 153,833 137,583 141,876 149,084 153,998 181,256 185,317 203,159 :2,051,057 0.130
to plant kBTU :64,203 62,113 55,939 20,733 6,225 282 190 2,658 10,760 38,125 49,555 66,112 :376,894 0.024
(assumes plant runs all year)total :15,812,611
gallons of oil displaced :114,974
fraction of oil displaced :0.955
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Max 1 Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary Max DH Plant 1
Buildings included DH Plant
1 School 1 maximum plant load: 5,551 kBTU/h
2 Gym 1 coincident heat recovery available: 971 kBTU/h
3 Store 1 fraction of heat from HR at peak: 0.175
4 Post Office 1
5 CATG Main Office 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 4,580 kBTU/h
6 State Building 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 1,342 kW(th)
7 Shop (adj School)1
8 District Office 1 use Weissmann model: 950 (from Summary)
9 Church 1 maximum capacity: 3,241
10 Yukon Flats 1 minimum capacity: 1,297
11 City Building 1
12 New CATG Clinic 1 predicted plant flow rate: 460 gpm 6.0
13 Tribal Offices 1 pipe length to design load: 6,986 ft
14 Water Treat 1 estimated secondary pump head: 322 ft
15 Old CATG Clinic estimated pump efficiency: 0.740
16 City DHW Load 1 peak secondary pump power: 37.7 kW 50.6 60.0
estimated primary pump head: 50 ft
peak primary pump power: 5.9 kW 7.8 10.0
estimated plant parasitic power: 7.5 kW
Results
DH Plant runs :111111111111
Current :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total
oil gal :20,931 19,899 18,941 10,271 6,376 3,482 3,514 5,034 7,625 14,651 17,227 21,391 :149,344
cost $:83,726 79,596 75,765 41,085 25,504 13,929 14,056 20,138 30,500 58,605 68,909 85,565 :$597,376
Predicted :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total fraction
oil gal :643 1,320 320 165 1,412 1,965 2,474 2,215 928 52 6 562 :12,062
cost $:2,571 5,281 1,278 659 5,650 7,862 9,897 8,859 3,712 208 24 2,249 :$48,248 0.124
::
wood tons :225 207 224 112 56 4 2 32 83 174 187 232 :1,538
cost $:39,379 36,276 39,188 19,669 9,823 661 407 5,574 14,498 30,395 32,724 40,608 :$269,201 0.694
::
electricity kWh :21,474 12,100 12,191 10,723 11,067 10,710 11,067 11,067 10,710 11,372 11,441 12,998 :146,920
cost $:10,308 5,808 5,852 5,147 5,312 5,141 5,312 5,312 5,141 5,458 5,492 6,239 :$70,522 0.182
::
total cost $:52,257 47,365 46,318 25,475 20,785 13,664 15,616 19,745 23,351 36,061 38,240 49,096 :$387,971 1.000
savings $:31,468 32,231 29,447 15,610 4,719 265 (1,560) 393 7,149 22,544 30,669 36,469 :$209,405
::
estimated construction cost :$3,100,228
net simple payback :14.80 yrs
Heat Sources :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
from oil kBTU :71,473 146,825 35,544 18,320 157,091 218,602 275,182 246,327 103,201 5,770 678 62,533 :1,341,548 0.065
from HR kBTU :666,938 604,264 471,607 427,964 328,157 377,656 345,047 294,556 287,238 430,481 621,825 668,872 :5,524,605 0.268
from wood kBTU :2,009,085 1,850,786 1,999,349 1,003,484 501,146 33,711 20,745 284,369 739,694 1,550,717 1,669,573 2,071,765 :13,734,424 0.667
(assumes plant runs all year)total :20,600,577
Heat Sinks :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
to load kBTU :2,327,990 2,213,157 2,106,653 1,142,363 709,140 387,288 390,822 559,932 848,051 1,629,499 1,916,021 2,379,124 :16,610,040 0.806
to piping kBTU :355,303 326,605 343,909 286,673 271,029 242,399 249,963 262,662 271,321 319,345 326,500 357,935 :3,613,643 0.175
to plant kBTU :64,203 62,113 55,939 20,733 6,225 282 190 2,658 10,760 38,125 49,555 66,112 :376,894 0.018
(assumes plant runs all year)total :20,600,577
gallons of oil displaced :137,282
fraction of oil displaced :0.919
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Max 2 Summary
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Summary Max DH Plant 2
Buildings included DH Plant
1 School 1 maximum plant load: 5,844 kBTU/h
2 Gym 1 coincident heat recovery available: 971 kBTU/h
3 Store 1 fraction of heat from HR at peak: 0.166
4 Post Office 1
5 CATG Main Office 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 4,873 kBTU/h
6 State Building 1 est minimum boiler capacity: 1,428 kW(th)
7 Shop (adj School)1
8 District Office 1 use Weissmann model: 390 950 (from Summary)
9 Church 1 maximum capacity: 1,331 3,241
10 Yukon Flats 1 minimum capacity: 532 1,297
11 City Building 1
12 New CATG Clinic 1 predicted plant flow rate: 480 gpm 6.0
13 Tribal Offices 1 pipe length to design load: 8,626 ft
14 Water Treat 1 estimated secondary pump head: 384 ft
15 Old CATG Clinic 1 estimated pump efficiency: 0.740
16 City DHW Load 1 peak secondary pump power: 46.8 kW 62.8 75.0
estimated primary pump head: 50 ft
peak primary pump power: 6.1 kW 8.2 10.0
estimated plant parasitic power: 7.5 kW
Results
DH Plant runs :111111111111
Current :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total
oil gal :21,855 20,783 19,765 10,662 6,568 3,537 3,567 5,159 7,883 15,259 17,969 22,338 :155,344
cost $:87,420 83,133 79,059 42,649 26,270 14,148 14,267 20,636 31,532 61,034 71,875 89,352 :$621,376
Predicted :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :total fraction
oil gal :7 56 10 :73
cost $:30 222 39 :$292 0.001
::
wood tons :249 239 243 114 71 45 48 62 94 186 201 256 :1,808
cost $:43,628 41,743 42,504 20,035 12,349 7,930 8,373 10,912 16,467 32,585 35,136 44,733 :$316,395 0.721
::
electricity kWh :25,972 25,247 23,521 18,312 18,837 18,230 18,837 18,837 18,230 20,153 21,401 26,551 :254,130
cost $:12,466 12,119 11,290 8,790 9,042 8,750 9,042 9,042 8,750 9,674 10,273 12,745 :$121,982 0.278
::
total cost $:56,124 54,084 53,794 28,825 21,391 16,681 17,415 19,954 25,218 42,259 45,408 57,517 :$438,669 1.000
savings $:31,296 29,049 25,266 13,824 4,879 (2,533) (3,148) 682 6,314 18,776 26,466 31,835 :$182,707
:
estimated construction cost :$3,659,476
net simple payback :20.03 yrs
Heat Sources :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
from oil kBTU :825 6,185 1,096 :8,106 0.000
from HR kBTU :666,938 604,264 471,607 506,112 410,761 261,079 250,184 314,479 351,815 431,066 621,825 668,872 :5,559,001 0.256
from wood kBTU :2,225,872 2,129,680 2,168,496 1,022,179 630,047 404,599 427,197 556,699 840,157 1,662,478 1,792,595 2,282,238 :16,142,238 0.744
(assumes plant runs all year)total :21,709,345
Heat Sinks :Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec :fraction
to load kBTU :2,430,725 2,311,512 2,198,243 1,185,866 730,445 393,384 396,692 573,770 876,745 1,697,063 1,998,480 2,484,434 :17,277,360 0.796
to piping kBTU :398,707 366,503 385,921 321,693 304,139 272,011 280,499 294,750 304,466 358,357 366,385 401,661 :4,055,091 0.187
to plant kBTU :64,203 62,113 55,939 20,733 6,225 282 190 2,658 10,760 38,125 49,555 66,112 :376,894 0.017
(assumes plant runs all year)total :21,709,345
gallons of oil displaced :155,271
fraction of oil displaced :1.000
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
Inputs
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Global Inputs Fort Yukon
fuel :
cost of oil :$4.00 per gallon assumption
heat content of oil :134,000 BTU/gal ASHRAE
:
cost of chips :$175.00 per green ton assumption
heat content of wood chips, dry :8,300 BTU/lb assumption
average moistue content when used, MC :0.250 assumption
average fuel temp :45 deg F assumption
heat content of chips at MC :5,315 BTU/lb calc
:
electricity :$0.48 per kWh
:
Boiler efficiency :
Wiessmann chip-fired :0.840 assumption
minimum turndown :0.400 assumption
No 1 oil-fired :0.830 assumption
:
fluid :
fraction of glycol (propelyne):0.00 standard in the area
density at 180 deg F :60.790 lb/ft^3 tables
heat capacity at 180 deg F :1.000 BTU/lb*deg F tables
density specific heat product :487.6 BTU/hr/gpm/deg F calc
:
at peak load :
HWS :190 deg F assumption
HWR :165 deg F assumption
building delta T :25 deg F assumption
:
ground temp, active layer (insulpex):0 deg F Dwayne Miller
:
at min load :
HWS :150 deg F assumption
HWR :125 deg F assumption
building delta T :25 deg F assumption
:
ground temp, active layer (insulpex):45 deg F Dwayne Miller
:
soil conditions for piping heat loss :med
dry :0
medium :1
moist :0
:
piping :
sizing criteria for pipe sizing :2.50 ft drop per 100 ft average
heat exchanger pressure drop :18.48 ft each assumption
control valves :11.55 each assumption
eq length multiplier :1.50 assumption
estimated pump efficiency, all pumps :0.74 assumption
minimum pump turndown :0.50 assumption
:
plant parasitic power :
estimated plant power for lights, etc :7.5 kW assumption
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G:
Sample Calculations:
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G, part 1:
Sample Calculations: Power Load Profile and Heat Available for Heat Recovery
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
power
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Bin hours, Fort Yukon Airport Data, average of 2007 / 08
bin
mid 744 672 744 720 744 720 744 744 720 744 720 744 8,760
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
85 : 1.5 : 1.5
83 : 2.0 2.0 : 4.0
81 : 14.0 9.5 : 23.5
79 : 22.5 18.5 1.5 : 42.5
77 : 14.0 16.5 1.0 : 31.5
75 : 27.5 40.5 1.5 : 69.5
73 : 11.0 26.5 38.5 10.0 : 86.0
71 : 9.0 37.0 41.5 14.5 : 102.0
69 : 17.0 56.5 53.5 30.0 1.0 : 158.0
67 : 15.5 50.5 49.0 23.5 4.5 : 143.0
65 : 13.5 63.5 56.0 36.0 12.0 : 181.0
63 : 19.5 68.5 67.5 40.0 15.0 : 210.5
61 : 25.5 53.0 69.0 43.5 20.0 : 211.0
59 : 18.0 42.0 41.0 46.5 8.5 : 156.0
57 : 1.5 38.5 63.5 73.0 77.0 14.0 : 267.5
55 : 7.0 50.5 53.5 60.5 64.0 17.5 : 253.0
53 : 4.5 36.5 43.5 49.0 49.5 19.0 : 202.0
51 : 10.5 57.5 30.0 23.0 50.5 35.5 : 207.0
49 : 8.5 47.0 24.5 19.5 37.0 39.0 : 175.5
47 : 20.5 52.5 11.5 5.5 48.0 39.0 : 177.0
45 : 26.5 59.0 7.0 6.0 56.0 53.5 : 208.0
43 : 30.0 44.0 4.0 3.0 34.0 53.5 : 168.5
41 : 24.0 29.0 2.0 0.5 17.0 36.5 0.5 : 109.5
39 : 38.5 49.5 1.5 0.5 29.5 64.0 2.0 : 185.5
37 : 41.5 38.0 0.5 15.5 52.0 2.5 : 150.0
35 : 2.0 45.0 34.0 7.5 41.5 3.5 : 133.5
33 : 2.0 65.0 29.5 4.0 48.5 16.0 : 165.0
31 : 0.5 48.5 26.5 2.0 31.0 23.5 : 132.0
29 : 2.4 0.5 63.5 13.5 3.0 36.0 27.5 3.5 : 149.9
27 : 5.8 3.0 50.0 7.0 1.5 31.5 47.5 9.5 : 155.8
25 : 0.5 3.9 2.5 39.0 1.5 22.0 52.0 2.5 : 123.9
23 : 0.5 1.4 3.5 19.0 6.5 37.0 2.0 : 69.9
21 : 0.5 5.3 8.5 40.5 1.0 9.5 63.5 3.5 : 132.3
19 : 1.0 3.4 8.5 34.5 4.5 60.5 6.0 1.5 : 119.9
17 : 1.0 4.3 19.0 23.5 2.0 46.5 28.0 8.0 : 132.3
15 : 8.5 10.1 21.5 15.0 2.0 69.0 48.0 8.5 : 182.6
13 : 15.0 11.2 27.5 10.5 0.5 43.0 32.5 4.5 : 144.7
11 : 8.0 10.2 24.0 10.5 28.5 41.5 8.0 : 130.7
9 : 19.5 14.7 36.0 12.5 23.5 53.5 14.0 : 173.7
7 : 14.0 18.7 35.5 12.5 27.5 31.0 18.5 : 157.7
5 : 7.0 17.2 21.0 3.5 10.5 32.0 7.0 : 98.2
3 : 31.0 27.6 45.0 7.0 20.0 61.0 20.5 : 212.1
1 : 52.0 29.5 44.5 1.5 23.5 69.5 38.0 : 258.5
(1): 17.0 19.6 32.0 1.5 7.5 26.0 9.5 : 113.1
(3): 44.0 22.1 32.5 3.0 8.5 30.5 30.0 : 170.6
(5): 69.0 32.8 49.0 1.0 8.0 37.5 49.5 : 246.8
(7): 44.0 25.5 40.0 9.0 28.0 44.0 : 190.5
(9): 43.5 30.4 38.5 8.5 30.0 33.0 : 183.9
(11): 54.0 20.1 49.5 13.0 21.5 42.5 : 200.6
(13): 20.5 7.9 25.5 9.0 11.5 30.0 : 104.4
(15): 41.0 22.6 32.5 10.0 10.0 44.0 : 160.1
(17): 38.5 18.7 23.0 10.5 12.5 52.0 : 155.2
(19): 34.5 12.2 26.5 8.0 20.5 45.5 : 147.2
(21): 18.5 10.8 14.0 6.5 21.5 32.5 : 103.8
(23): 23.0 19.2 15.5 5.5 33.5 34.0 : 130.7
(25): 11.5 21.5 7.0 5.5 11.0 21.0 : 77.5
(27): 13.5 24.1 8.5 3.0 2.0 24.5 : 75.6
(29): 12.0 24.7 11.0 3.5 26.5 : 77.7
(31): 8.0 16.3 5.0 18.5 : 47.8
(33): 9.0 19.7 3.5 12.0 : 44.2
(35): 13.5 21.8 4.5 13.5 : 53.3
(37): 8.5 11.8 4.0 10.5 : 34.8
(39): 6.5 17.3 3.0 5.5 : 32.3
(41): 7.0 15.3 5.0 12.0 : 39.3
(43): 6.0 11.9 3.5 10.5 : 31.9
(45): 16.0 11.4 4.0 5.0 : 36.4
(47): 10.5 13.9 1.5 : 25.9
(49): 4.5 8.9 0.5 : 13.9
(51): 3.0 9.4 : 12.4
(53): 4.5 7.9 2.5 : 14.9
(55): 4.0 11.7 6.0 : 21.7
(57): 10.6 0.5 : 11.1
(59): 5.8 : 5.8
::
efour, PLLC 1 of 4
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
power
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
x^3 0.0 0.0
x^2 (0.1) (0.0)
x (1.2) (1.1)
c 441.9 328.6 annual
kWh
MWh 333 301 249 264 236 208 185 188 192 229 313 333 3,029,360
Ja, Fe, Mr, Jl, Predicted demand, kW
Ap, My, Au, Se bin
Jn, Nv Oc mid
De pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
kW kW deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
295.4 266.8 85 : 295 : 295
290.6 262.5 83 : 291 263 : 553
286.7 258.8 81 : 287 259 : 545
283.5 255.6 79 : 284 256 256 : 795
281.1 252.8 77 : 281 253 253 : 787
279.5 250.5 75 : 279 250 250 : 780
278.5 248.6 73 : 279 279 249 249 : 1,054
278.3 247.2 71 : 278 278 247 247 : 1,051
278.6 246.1 69 : 279 279 246 246 246 : 1,296
279.6 245.5 67 : 280 280 245 245 245 : 1,296
281.1 245.2 65 : 281 281 245 245 245 : 1,298
283.2 245.2 63 : 283 283 245 245 245 : 1,302
285.8 245.6 61 : 286 286 246 246 246 : 1,308
288.9 246.3 59 : 289 289 246 246 246 : 1,317
292.4 247.4 57 : 292 292 292 247 247 247 : 1,619
296.3 248.7 55 : 296 296 296 249 249 249 : 1,635
300.6 250.2 53 : 301 301 301 250 250 250 : 1,652
305.2 252.0 51 : 305 305 305 252 252 252 : 1,672
310.2 254.1 49 : 310 310 310 254 254 254 : 1,693
315.5 256.3 47 : 315 315 315 256 256 256 : 1,715
321.0 258.8 45 : 321 321 321 259 259 259 : 1,739
326.7 261.4 43 : 327 327 327 261 261 261 : 1,764
332.6 264.2 41 : 333 333 333 264 264 264 264 : 2,055
338.7 267.2 39 : 339 339 339 267 267 267 267 : 2,085
344.8 270.2 37 : 345 345 270 270 270 270 : 1,771
351.1 273.4 35 : 273 351 351 273 273 273 : 1,796
357.5 276.7 33 : 277 357 357 277 277 277 : 1,822
363.8 280.0 31 : 280 364 364 280 280 280 : 1,848
370.2 283.4 29 : 370 283 370 370 283 283 283 370 : 2,614
376.5 286.9 27 : 377 287 377 377 287 287 287 377 : 2,654
382.8 290.3 25 : 383 383 290 383 383 290 290 383 : 2,785
388.9 293.8 23 : 389 389 294 389 294 294 389 : 2,437
394.9 297.3 21 : 395 395 297 395 395 297 297 395 : 2,866
400.8 300.7 19 : 401 401 301 401 301 301 401 401 : 2,906
406.4 304.1 17 : 406 406 304 406 304 304 406 406 : 2,944
411.9 307.4 15 : 412 412 307 412 307 307 412 412 : 2,982
417.0 310.7 13 : 417 417 311 417 311 311 417 417 : 3,017
421.9 313.8 11 : 422 422 314 422 314 422 422 : 2,737
426.4 316.8 9 : 426 426 317 426 317 426 426 : 2,766
430.6 319.7 7 : 431 431 320 431 320 431 431 : 2,792
434.4 322.5 5 : 434 434 322 434 322 434 434 : 2,817
437.7 325.1 3 : 438 438 325 438 325 438 438 : 2,839
440.7 327.4 1 : 441 441 327 441 327 441 441 : 2,858
443.1 329.6 (1): 443 443 330 443 330 443 443 : 2,875
445.0 331.6 (3): 445 445 332 445 332 445 445 : 2,888
446.3 333.3 (5): 446 446 333 446 333 446 446 : 2,898
447.1 334.8 (7): 447 447 335 335 447 447 : 2,458
447.2 336.0 (9): 447 447 336 336 447 447 : 2,461
446.7 337.0 (11): 447 447 337 337 447 447 : 2,461
447.9 337.6 (13): 448 448 338 338 448 448 : 2,467
449.1 337.9 (15): 449 449 338 338 449 449 : 2,472
450.3 337.8 (17): 450 450 338 338 450 450 : 2,477
451.4 346.7 (19): 451 451 347 347 451 451 : 2,499
452.6 355.7 (21): 453 453 356 356 453 453 : 2,522
453.8 364.6 (23): 454 454 365 365 454 454 : 2,544
455.0 373.5 (25): 455 455 373 373 455 455 : 2,567
456.2 382.4 (27): 456 456 382 382 456 456 : 2,589
457.3 391.3 (29): 457 457 391 391 457 : 2,155
458.5 400.2 (31): 459 459 400 459 : 1,776
459.7 409.1 (33): 460 460 409 460 : 1,788
460.9 418.0 (35): 461 461 418 461 : 1,801
462.0 427.0 (37): 462 462 427 462 : 1,813
463.2 435.9 (39): 463 463 436 463 : 1,826
464.4 444.8 (41): 464 464 445 464 : 1,838
465.6 453.7 (43): 466 466 454 466 : 1,850
466.8 462.6 (45): 467 467 463 467 : 1,863
467.9 471.5 (47): 468 468 472 : 1,407
469.1 480.4 (49): 469 469 469 : 1,407
470.3 489.3 (51): 470 470 : 941
471.5 498.3 (53): 471 471 471 : 1,414
472.6 507.2 (55): 473 473 473 : 1,418
473.8 516.1 (57): 474 474 : 948
475.0 525.0 (59): 475 : 475
::
efour, PLLC 2 of 4
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
power
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
x^3
x^2 0.0000
x 0.0407
c 4.2052 annual
gal
gal 23,348 21,142 17,026 18,145 16,106 14,173 12,699 12,895 13,116 15,630 21,861 23,408 209,549
Predicted fuel demand, gph, Cat 3456 - Low BSFC
bin
mid
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
85 : 20.1 : 20
83 : 19.8 18.0 : 38
81 : 19.6 17.7 : 37
79 : 19.4 17.5 17.5 : 54
77 : 19.2 17.4 17.4 : 54
75 : 19.1 17.2 17.2 : 54
73 : 19.0 19.0 17.1 17.1 : 72
71 : 19.0 19.0 17.0 17.0 : 72
69 : 19.0 19.0 16.9 16.9 16.9 : 89
67 : 19.1 19.1 16.9 16.9 16.9 : 89
65 : 19.2 19.2 16.9 16.9 16.9 : 89
63 : 19.3 19.3 16.9 16.9 16.9 : 89
61 : 19.5 19.5 16.9 16.9 16.9 : 90
59 : 19.7 19.7 17.0 17.0 17.0 : 90
57 : 19.9 19.9 19.9 17.0 17.0 17.0 : 111
55 : 20.2 20.2 20.2 17.1 17.1 17.1 : 112
53 : 20.5 20.5 20.5 17.2 17.2 17.2 : 113
51 : 20.8 20.8 20.8 17.3 17.3 17.3 : 114
49 : 21.1 21.1 21.1 17.4 17.4 17.4 : 116
47 : 21.5 21.5 21.5 17.6 17.6 17.6 : 117
45 : 21.9 21.9 21.9 17.7 17.7 17.7 : 119
43 : 22.3 22.3 22.3 17.9 17.9 17.9 : 121
41 : 22.7 22.7 22.7 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 : 140
39 : 23.1 23.1 23.1 18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 : 143
37 : 23.6 23.6 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 : 121
35 : 18.7 24.0 24.0 18.7 18.7 18.7 : 123
33 : 18.9 24.5 24.5 18.9 18.9 18.9 : 125
31 : 19.1 25.0 25.0 19.1 19.1 19.1 : 126
29 : 25.4 19.3 25.4 25.4 19.3 19.3 19.3 25.4 : 179
27 : 25.9 19.6 25.9 25.9 19.6 19.6 19.6 25.9 : 182
25 : 26.4 26.4 19.8 26.4 26.4 19.8 19.8 26.4 : 191
23 : 26.8 26.8 20.0 26.8 20.0 20.0 26.8 : 167
21 : 27.3 27.3 20.3 27.3 27.3 20.3 20.3 27.3 : 197
19 : 27.7 27.7 20.5 27.7 20.5 20.5 27.7 27.7 : 200
17 : 28.2 28.2 20.7 28.2 20.7 20.7 28.2 28.2 : 203
15 : 28.6 28.6 21.0 28.6 21.0 21.0 28.6 28.6 : 206
13 : 29.0 29.0 21.2 29.0 21.2 21.2 29.0 29.0 : 208
11 : 29.4 29.4 21.4 29.4 21.4 29.4 29.4 : 190
9 : 29.7 29.7 21.6 29.7 21.6 29.7 29.7 : 192
7 : 30.1 30.1 21.8 30.1 21.8 30.1 30.1 : 194
5 : 30.4 30.4 22.0 30.4 22.0 30.4 30.4 : 196
3 : 30.6 30.6 22.2 30.6 22.2 30.6 30.6 : 197
1 : 30.9 30.9 22.3 30.9 22.3 30.9 30.9 : 199
(1): 31.0 31.0 22.5 31.0 22.5 31.0 31.0 : 200
(3): 31.2 31.2 22.6 31.2 22.6 31.2 31.2 : 201
(5): 31.3 31.3 22.8 31.3 22.8 31.3 31.3 : 202
(7): 31.4 31.4 22.9 22.9 31.4 31.4 : 171
(9): 31.4 31.4 22.9 22.9 31.4 31.4 : 171
(11): 31.3 31.3 23.0 23.0 31.3 31.3 : 171
(13): 31.4 31.4 23.1 23.1 31.4 31.4 : 172
(15): 31.5 31.5 23.1 23.1 31.5 31.5 : 172
(17): 31.6 31.6 23.1 23.1 31.6 31.6 : 173
(19): 31.7 31.7 23.7 23.7 31.7 31.7 : 174
(21): 31.8 31.8 24.4 24.4 31.8 31.8 : 176
(23): 31.9 31.9 25.0 25.0 31.9 31.9 : 178
(25): 32.0 32.0 25.7 25.7 32.0 32.0 : 179
(27): 32.1 32.1 26.3 26.3 32.1 32.1 : 181
(29): 32.2 32.2 27.0 27.0 32.2 : 151
(31): 32.3 32.3 27.7 32.3 : 125
(33): 32.4 32.4 28.4 32.4 : 126
(35): 32.5 32.5 29.1 32.5 : 127
(37): 32.6 32.6 29.8 32.6 : 128
(39): 32.7 32.7 30.5 32.7 : 129
(41): 32.8 32.8 31.2 32.8 : 130
(43): 32.9 32.9 31.9 32.9 : 131
(45): 33.0 33.0 32.6 33.0 : 132
(47): 33.1 33.1 33.4 : 100
(49): 33.2 33.2 33.2 : 100
(51): 33.3 33.3 : 67
(53): 33.4 33.4 33.4 : 100
(55): 33.5 33.5 33.5 : 100
(57): 33.6 33.6 : 67
(59): 33.7 : 34
::
efour, PLLC 3 of 4
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
power
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
x^3 1 heat recovery available?max kw HR available 285
x^2 0.00
x 0.41
c 217.13 annual
kBTU
mmBTU 667 604 472 506 445 390 351 356 362 431 622 669 5,874,367
Predicted heat available for heat recovery, KBTU/h
bin
mid
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
85 : 555 : 555
83 : 546 496 : 1,041
81 : 538 489 : 1,028
79 : 533 484 484 : 1,500
77 : 528 479 479 : 1,487
75 : 525 475 475 : 1,476
73 : 524 524 472 472 : 1,992
71 : 523 523 470 470 : 1,986
69 : 524 524 468 468 468 : 2,452
67 : 526 526 467 467 467 : 2,452
65 : 528 528 467 467 467 : 2,456
63 : 532 532 467 467 467 : 2,464
61 : 537 537 467 467 467 : 2,476
59 : 542 542 469 469 469 : 2,490
57 : 549 549 549 470 470 470 : 3,057
55 : 556 556 556 472 472 472 : 3,086
53 : 564 564 564 475 475 475 : 3,118
51 : 573 573 573 478 478 478 : 3,153
49 : 583 583 583 481 481 481 : 3,192
47 : 593 593 593 485 485 485 : 3,235
45 : 604 604 604 489 489 489 : 3,280
43 : 616 616 616 494 494 494 : 3,328
41 : 628 628 628 498 498 498 498 : 3,877
39 : 640 640 640 504 504 504 504 : 3,935
37 : 653 653 509 509 509 509 : 3,342
35 : 514 667 667 514 514 514 : 3,391
33 : 520 680 680 520 520 520 : 3,442
31 : 526 694 694 526 526 526 : 3,494
29 : 709 532 709 709 532 532 532 709 : 4,964
27 : 723 539 723 723 539 539 539 723 : 5,047
25 : 737 737 545 737 737 545 545 737 : 5,322
23 : 752 752 552 752 552 552 752 : 4,661
21 : 766 766 558 766 766 558 558 766 : 5,503
19 : 780 780 565 780 565 565 780 780 : 5,592
17 : 793 793 571 793 571 571 793 793 : 5,679
15 : 807 807 577 807 577 577 807 807 : 5,765
13 : 819 819 584 819 584 584 819 819 : 5,847
11 : 831 831 590 831 590 831 831 : 5,336
9 : 843 843 596 843 596 843 843 : 5,405
7 : 853 853 602 853 602 853 853 : 5,470
5 : 863 863 607 863 607 863 863 : 5,529
3 : 872 872 612 872 612 872 872 : 5,583
1 : 879 879 617 879 617 879 879 : 5,630
(1): 885 885 622 885 622 885 885 : 5,671
(3): 890 890 626 890 626 890 890 : 5,704
(5): 894 894 629 894 629 894 894 : 5,728
(7): 896 896 632 632 896 896 : 4,849
(9): 896 896 635 635 896 896 : 4,855
(11): 895 895 637 637 895 895 : 4,854
(13): 898 898 638 638 898 898 : 4,869
(15): 901 901 639 639 901 901 : 4,882
(17): 904 904 639 639 904 904 : 4,895
(19): 907 907 657 657 907 907 : 4,945
(21): 911 911 677 677 911 911 : 4,995
(23): 914 914 696 696 914 914 : 5,047
(25): 917 917 716 716 917 917 : 5,100
(27): 920 920 736 736 920 920 : 5,153
(29): 923 923 757 757 923 : 4,284
(31): 926 926 778 926 : 3,557
(33): 929 929 800 929 : 3,588
(35): 933 933 822 933 : 3,620
(37): 936 936 844 936 : 3,652
(39): 939 939 867 939 : 3,684
(41): 942 942 890 942 : 3,717
(43): 945 945 913 945 : 3,750
(45): 949 949 937 949 : 3,783
(47): 952 952 962 : 2,865
(49): 955 955 955 : 2,865
(51): 958 958 : 1,917
(53): 962 962 962 : 2,885
(55): 965 965 965 : 2,894
(57): 968 968 : 1,936
(59): 971 : 971
::
efour, PLLC 4 of 4
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G, part 2:
Sample Calculations: Calculation of Current Oil Heating Consumption Requirements
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
oil heat
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Bin hours, Fort Yukon Airport Data, average of 2007 / 08
bin
mid 744 672 744 720 744 720 744 744 720 744 720 744 8,760
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
85 : 1.5 : 1.5
83 : 2.0 2.0 : 4.0
81 : 14.0 9.5 : 23.5
79 : 22.5 18.5 1.5 : 42.5
77 : 14.0 16.5 1.0 : 31.5
75 : 27.5 40.5 1.5 : 69.5
73 : 11.0 26.5 38.5 10.0 : 86.0
71 : 9.0 37.0 41.5 14.5 : 102.0
69 : 17.0 56.5 53.5 30.0 1.0 : 158.0
67 : 15.5 50.5 49.0 23.5 4.5 : 143.0
65 : 13.5 63.5 56.0 36.0 12.0 : 181.0
63 : 19.5 68.5 67.5 40.0 15.0 : 210.5
61 : 25.5 53.0 69.0 43.5 20.0 : 211.0
59 : 18.0 42.0 41.0 46.5 8.5 : 156.0
57 : 1.5 38.5 63.5 73.0 77.0 14.0 : 267.5
55 : 7.0 50.5 53.5 60.5 64.0 17.5 : 253.0
53 : 4.5 36.5 43.5 49.0 49.5 19.0 : 202.0
51 : 10.5 57.5 30.0 23.0 50.5 35.5 : 207.0
49 : 8.5 47.0 24.5 19.5 37.0 39.0 : 175.5
47 : 20.5 52.5 11.5 5.5 48.0 39.0 : 177.0
45 : 26.5 59.0 7.0 6.0 56.0 53.5 : 208.0
43 : 30.0 44.0 4.0 3.0 34.0 53.5 : 168.5
41 : 24.0 29.0 2.0 0.5 17.0 36.5 0.5 : 109.5
39 : 38.5 49.5 1.5 0.5 29.5 64.0 2.0 : 185.5
37 : 41.5 38.0 0.5 15.5 52.0 2.5 : 150.0
35 : 2.0 45.0 34.0 7.5 41.5 3.5 : 133.5
33 : 2.0 65.0 29.5 4.0 48.5 16.0 : 165.0
31 : 0.5 48.5 26.5 2.0 31.0 23.5 : 132.0
29 : 2.4 0.5 63.5 13.5 3.0 36.0 27.5 3.5 : 149.9
27 : 5.8 3.0 50.0 7.0 1.5 31.5 47.5 9.5 : 155.8
25 : 0.5 3.9 2.5 39.0 1.5 22.0 52.0 2.5 : 123.9
23 : 0.5 1.4 3.5 19.0 6.5 37.0 2.0 : 69.9
21 : 0.5 5.3 8.5 40.5 1.0 9.5 63.5 3.5 : 132.3
19 : 1.0 3.4 8.5 34.5 4.5 60.5 6.0 1.5 : 119.9
17 : 1.0 4.3 19.0 23.5 2.0 46.5 28.0 8.0 : 132.3
15 : 8.5 10.1 21.5 15.0 2.0 69.0 48.0 8.5 : 182.6
13 : 15.0 11.2 27.5 10.5 0.5 43.0 32.5 4.5 : 144.7
11 : 8.0 10.2 24.0 10.5 28.5 41.5 8.0 : 130.7
9 : 19.5 14.7 36.0 12.5 23.5 53.5 14.0 : 173.7
7 : 14.0 18.7 35.5 12.5 27.5 31.0 18.5 : 157.7
5 : 7.0 17.2 21.0 3.5 10.5 32.0 7.0 : 98.2
3 : 31.0 27.6 45.0 7.0 20.0 61.0 20.5 : 212.1
1 : 52.0 29.5 44.5 1.5 23.5 69.5 38.0 : 258.5
(1): 17.0 19.6 32.0 1.5 7.5 26.0 9.5 : 113.1
(3): 44.0 22.1 32.5 3.0 8.5 30.5 30.0 : 170.6
(5): 69.0 32.8 49.0 1.0 8.0 37.5 49.5 : 246.8
(7): 44.0 25.5 40.0 9.0 28.0 44.0 : 190.5
(9): 43.5 30.4 38.5 8.5 30.0 33.0 : 183.9
(11): 54.0 20.1 49.5 13.0 21.5 42.5 : 200.6
(13): 20.5 7.9 25.5 9.0 11.5 30.0 : 104.4
(15): 41.0 22.6 32.5 10.0 10.0 44.0 : 160.1
(17): 38.5 18.7 23.0 10.5 12.5 52.0 : 155.2
(19): 34.5 12.2 26.5 8.0 20.5 45.5 : 147.2
(21): 18.5 10.8 14.0 6.5 21.5 32.5 : 103.8
(23): 23.0 19.2 15.5 5.5 33.5 34.0 : 130.7
(25): 11.5 21.5 7.0 5.5 11.0 21.0 : 77.5
(27): 13.5 24.1 8.5 3.0 2.0 24.5 : 75.6
(29): 12.0 24.7 11.0 3.5 26.5 : 77.7
(31): 8.0 16.3 5.0 18.5 : 47.8
(33): 9.0 19.7 3.5 12.0 : 44.2
(35): 13.5 21.8 4.5 13.5 : 53.3
(37): 8.5 11.8 4.0 10.5 : 34.8
(39): 6.5 17.3 3.0 5.5 : 32.3
(41): 7.0 15.3 5.0 12.0 : 39.3
(43): 6.0 11.9 3.5 10.5 : 31.9
(45): 16.0 11.4 4.0 5.0 : 36.4
(47): 10.5 13.9 1.5 : 25.9
(49): 4.5 8.9 0.5 : 13.9
(51): 3.0 9.4 : 12.4
(53): 4.5 7.9 2.5 : 14.9
(55): 4.0 11.7 6.0 : 21.7
(57): 10.6 0.5 : 11.1
(59): 5.8 : 5.8
::
efour, PLLC 1 of 5
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
oil heat
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
11111111
max kBTU/h 598.4 447.0 580.9 145.2 93.2 250.5 348.6 232.4
17,000 17,000 13,000 13,000 16,000 16,000 4,000 4,000 2,567 2,567 6,900 6,900 9,600 9,600 6,400 6,400
use 5.1 use 3.8 use 5.1 use 1.3 use 0.8 use 2.2 use 3.0 use 2.0
max 15.6 max 4.2 max max 4.0 max 4.0 max max max
bin School Gym Main Off State Bldg Shop District + Ch Store Post Office
mid
pt 0.050 0.065 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030
deg F Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW
85 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
83 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
81 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
79 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
77 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
75 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
73 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
71 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
69 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
67 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
65 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
63 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
61 0.26 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.06
59 0.09 0.26 0.06 0.25 0.08 0.15 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.03 0.06
57 0.17 0.26 0.13 0.25 0.17 0.15 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.06
55 0.26 0.26 0.19 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.07 0.15 0.09 0.10 0.06
53 0.34 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.34 0.15 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.15 0.07 0.20 0.09 0.14 0.06
51 0.43 0.26 0.31 0.25 0.42 0.15 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.18 0.07 0.25 0.09 0.17 0.06
49 0.51 0.26 0.38 0.25 0.51 0.15 0.13 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.22 0.07 0.30 0.09 0.20 0.06
47 0.60 0.26 0.44 0.25 0.59 0.15 0.15 0.04 0.09 0.02 0.26 0.07 0.35 0.09 0.24 0.06
45 0.68 0.26 0.50 0.25 0.68 0.15 0.17 0.04 0.11 0.02 0.29 0.07 0.41 0.09 0.27 0.06
43 0.77 0.26 0.57 0.25 0.76 0.15 0.19 0.04 0.12 0.02 0.33 0.07 0.46 0.09 0.30 0.06
41 0.85 0.26 0.63 0.25 0.85 0.15 0.21 0.04 0.14 0.02 0.36 0.07 0.51 0.09 0.34 0.06
39 0.94 0.26 0.69 0.25 0.93 0.15 0.23 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.40 0.07 0.56 0.09 0.37 0.06
37 1.02 0.26 0.75 0.25 1.01 0.15 0.25 0.04 0.16 0.02 0.44 0.07 0.61 0.09 0.41 0.06
35 1.11 0.26 0.82 0.25 1.10 0.15 0.27 0.04 0.18 0.02 0.47 0.07 0.66 0.09 0.44 0.06
33 1.20 0.26 0.88 0.25 1.18 0.15 0.30 0.04 0.19 0.02 0.51 0.07 0.71 0.09 0.47 0.06
31 1.28 0.26 0.94 0.25 1.27 0.15 0.32 0.04 0.20 0.02 0.55 0.07 0.76 0.09 0.51 0.06
29 1.37 0.26 1.01 0.25 1.35 0.15 0.34 0.04 0.22 0.02 0.58 0.07 0.81 0.09 0.54 0.06
27 1.45 0.26 1.07 0.25 1.44 0.15 0.36 0.04 0.23 0.02 0.62 0.07 0.86 0.09 0.57 0.06
25 1.54 0.26 1.13 0.25 1.52 0.15 0.38 0.04 0.24 0.02 0.66 0.07 0.91 0.09 0.61 0.06
23 1.62 0.26 1.19 0.25 1.61 0.15 0.40 0.04 0.26 0.02 0.69 0.07 0.96 0.09 0.64 0.06
21 1.71 0.26 1.26 0.25 1.69 0.15 0.42 0.04 0.27 0.02 0.73 0.07 1.01 0.09 0.68 0.06
19 1.79 0.26 1.32 0.25 1.77 0.15 0.44 0.04 0.28 0.02 0.77 0.07 1.06 0.09 0.71 0.06
17 1.88 0.26 1.38 0.25 1.86 0.15 0.46 0.04 0.30 0.02 0.80 0.07 1.12 0.09 0.74 0.06
15 1.96 0.26 1.45 0.25 1.94 0.15 0.49 0.04 0.31 0.02 0.84 0.07 1.17 0.09 0.78 0.06
13 2.05 0.26 1.51 0.25 2.03 0.15 0.51 0.04 0.33 0.02 0.87 0.07 1.22 0.09 0.81 0.06
11 2.14 0.26 1.57 0.25 2.11 0.15 0.53 0.04 0.34 0.02 0.91 0.07 1.27 0.09 0.85 0.06
9 2.22 0.26 1.64 0.25 2.20 0.15 0.55 0.04 0.35 0.02 0.95 0.07 1.32 0.09 0.88 0.06
7 2.31 0.26 1.70 0.25 2.28 0.15 0.57 0.04 0.37 0.02 0.98 0.07 1.37 0.09 0.91 0.06
5 2.39 0.26 1.76 0.25 2.37 0.15 0.59 0.04 0.38 0.02 1.02 0.07 1.42 0.09 0.95 0.06
3 2.48 0.26 1.82 0.25 2.45 0.15 0.61 0.04 0.39 0.02 1.06 0.07 1.47 0.09 0.98 0.06
1 2.56 0.26 1.89 0.25 2.54 0.15 0.63 0.04 0.41 0.02 1.09 0.07 1.52 0.09 1.01 0.06
(1)2.65 0.26 1.95 0.25 2.62 0.15 0.66 0.04 0.42 0.02 1.13 0.07 1.57 0.09 1.05 0.06
(3)2.73 0.26 2.01 0.25 2.70 0.15 0.68 0.04 0.43 0.02 1.17 0.07 1.62 0.09 1.08 0.06
(5)2.82 0.26 2.08 0.25 2.79 0.15 0.70 0.04 0.45 0.02 1.20 0.07 1.67 0.09 1.12 0.06
(7)2.90 0.26 2.14 0.25 2.87 0.15 0.72 0.04 0.46 0.02 1.24 0.07 1.72 0.09 1.15 0.06
(9)2.99 0.26 2.20 0.25 2.96 0.15 0.74 0.04 0.47 0.02 1.28 0.07 1.77 0.09 1.18 0.06
(11)3.07 0.26 2.26 0.25 3.04 0.15 0.76 0.04 0.49 0.02 1.31 0.07 1.83 0.09 1.22 0.06
(13)3.16 0.26 2.33 0.25 3.13 0.15 0.78 0.04 0.50 0.02 1.35 0.07 1.88 0.09 1.25 0.06
(15)3.25 0.26 2.39 0.25 3.21 0.15 0.80 0.04 0.52 0.02 1.39 0.07 1.93 0.09 1.28 0.06
(17)3.33 0.26 2.45 0.25 3.30 0.15 0.82 0.04 0.53 0.02 1.42 0.07 1.98 0.09 1.32 0.06
(19)3.42 0.26 2.52 0.25 3.38 0.15 0.85 0.04 0.54 0.02 1.46 0.07 2.03 0.09 1.35 0.06
(21)3.50 0.26 2.58 0.25 3.47 0.15 0.87 0.04 0.56 0.02 1.49 0.07 2.08 0.09 1.39 0.06
(23)3.59 0.26 2.64 0.25 3.55 0.15 0.89 0.04 0.57 0.02 1.53 0.07 2.13 0.09 1.42 0.06
(25)3.67 0.26 2.70 0.25 3.63 0.15 0.91 0.04 0.58 0.02 1.57 0.07 2.18 0.09 1.45 0.06
(27)3.76 0.26 2.77 0.25 3.72 0.15 0.93 0.04 0.60 0.02 1.60 0.07 2.23 0.09 1.49 0.06
(29)3.84 0.26 2.83 0.25 3.80 0.15 0.95 0.04 0.61 0.02 1.64 0.07 2.28 0.09 1.52 0.06
(31)3.93 0.26 2.89 0.25 3.89 0.15 0.97 0.04 0.62 0.02 1.68 0.07 2.33 0.09 1.56 0.06
(33)4.01 0.26 2.96 0.25 3.97 0.15 0.99 0.04 0.64 0.02 1.71 0.07 2.38 0.09 1.59 0.06
(35)4.10 0.26 3.02 0.25 4.06 0.15 1.01 0.04 0.65 0.02 1.75 0.07 2.43 0.09 1.62 0.06
(37)4.18 0.26 3.08 0.25 4.14 0.15 1.04 0.04 0.66 0.02 1.79 0.07 2.48 0.09 1.66 0.06
(39)4.27 0.26 3.14 0.25 4.23 0.15 1.06 0.04 0.68 0.02 1.82 0.07 2.54 0.09 1.69 0.06
(41)4.36 0.26 3.21 0.25 4.31 0.15 1.08 0.04 0.69 0.02 1.86 0.07 2.59 0.09 1.72 0.06
(43)4.44 0.26 3.27 0.25 4.39 0.15 1.10 0.04 0.71 0.02 1.90 0.07 2.64 0.09 1.76 0.06
(45)4.53 0.26 3.33 0.25 4.48 0.15 1.12 0.04 0.72 0.02 1.93 0.07 2.69 0.09 1.79 0.06
(47)4.61 0.26 3.40 0.25 4.56 0.15 1.14 0.04 0.73 0.02 1.97 0.07 2.74 0.09 1.83 0.06
(49)4.70 0.26 3.46 0.25 4.65 0.15 1.16 0.04 0.75 0.02 2.00 0.07 2.79 0.09 1.86 0.06
(51)4.78 0.26 3.52 0.25 4.73 0.15 1.18 0.04 0.76 0.02 2.04 0.07 2.84 0.09 1.89 0.06
(53)4.87 0.26 3.58 0.25 4.82 0.15 1.20 0.04 0.77 0.02 2.08 0.07 2.89 0.09 1.93 0.06
(55)4.95 0.26 3.65 0.25 4.90 0.15 1.23 0.04 0.79 0.02 2.11 0.07 2.94 0.09 1.96 0.06
(57)5.04 0.26 3.71 0.25 4.99 0.15 1.25 0.04 0.80 0.02 2.15 0.07 2.99 0.09 1.99 0.06
(59)5.12 0.26 3.77 0.25 5.07 0.15 1.27 0.04 0.81 0.02 2.19 0.07 3.04 0.09 2.03 0.06
efour, PLLC 2 of 5
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
oil heat
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
1111111
102.1 462.6 684.3 315.6 299.5 224.0 275.0
4,964 4,964 24,090 24,090 20,000 20,000 9,000 9,000 8,250 8,250 6,000 6,000 7,573 7,573
use 0.5 use 4.2 use 5.8 use 2.7 use 2.6 use 2.0 use 2.4
max 2.0 max 5.5 max 9.6 max max 2.6 max max
bin Water Treat Pumphouse New Clinic City Bldg Yukon Flats Old Clinic Tribal Office
mid
pt 0.750 0.400 0.065 0.050 0.030 0.015 0.030
deg F Sp DHW DWH Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW Sp DHW total
85 0.39 1.66 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.18
83 0.39 1.70 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.21
81 0.39 1.73 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.25
79 0.39 1.77 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.28
77 0.39 1.80 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.32
75 0.39 1.84 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.35
73 0.39 1.87 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.39
71 0.39 1.91 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.92
69 0.39 1.94 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.96
67 0.39 1.98 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 3.99
65 0.39 2.01 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 4.03
63 0.39 2.04 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 4.06
61 0.39 2.08 0.38 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.07 4.10
59 0.01 0.39 2.11 0.10 0.38 0.05 0.14 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.07 4.79
57 0.02 0.39 2.15 0.19 0.38 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.08 0.07 5.48
55 0.03 0.39 2.18 0.29 0.38 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.03 0.12 0.07 6.17
53 0.03 0.39 2.22 0.39 0.38 0.18 0.14 0.17 0.08 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.07 6.86
51 0.04 0.39 2.25 0.48 0.38 0.23 0.14 0.22 0.08 0.17 0.03 0.20 0.07 7.55
49 0.05 0.39 2.29 0.58 0.38 0.27 0.14 0.26 0.08 0.20 0.03 0.24 0.07 8.24
47 0.06 0.39 2.32 0.67 0.38 0.32 0.14 0.31 0.08 0.23 0.03 0.28 0.07 8.93
45 0.07 0.39 2.36 0.77 0.38 0.36 0.14 0.35 0.08 0.26 0.03 0.32 0.07 9.62
43 0.08 0.39 2.39 0.87 0.38 0.41 0.14 0.39 0.08 0.30 0.03 0.36 0.07 10.31
41 0.09 0.39 2.43 0.96 0.38 0.45 0.14 0.44 0.08 0.33 0.03 0.40 0.07 11.00
39 0.10 0.39 2.46 1.06 0.38 0.50 0.14 0.48 0.08 0.36 0.03 0.44 0.07 11.69
37 0.10 0.39 2.50 1.16 0.38 0.54 0.14 0.52 0.08 0.40 0.03 0.48 0.07 12.38
35 0.11 0.39 2.53 1.25 0.38 0.59 0.14 0.57 0.08 0.43 0.03 0.52 0.07 13.07
33 0.12 0.39 2.56 1.35 0.38 0.63 0.14 0.61 0.08 0.46 0.03 0.56 0.07 13.76
31 0.13 0.39 2.60 1.44 0.38 0.68 0.14 0.65 0.08 0.50 0.03 0.60 0.07 14.45
29 0.14 0.39 2.63 1.54 0.38 0.72 0.14 0.70 0.08 0.53 0.03 0.64 0.07 15.14
27 0.15 0.39 2.67 1.64 0.38 0.77 0.14 0.74 0.08 0.56 0.03 0.68 0.07 15.83
25 0.16 0.39 2.70 1.73 0.38 0.81 0.14 0.78 0.08 0.60 0.03 0.72 0.07 16.52
23 0.17 0.39 2.74 1.83 0.38 0.86 0.14 0.83 0.08 0.63 0.03 0.76 0.07 17.21
21 0.17 0.39 2.77 1.93 0.38 0.90 0.14 0.87 0.08 0.66 0.03 0.80 0.07 17.89
19 0.18 0.39 2.81 2.02 0.38 0.95 0.14 0.92 0.08 0.69 0.03 0.84 0.07 18.58
17 0.19 0.39 2.84 2.12 0.38 0.99 0.14 0.96 0.08 0.73 0.03 0.88 0.07 19.27
15 0.20 0.39 2.88 2.21 0.38 1.04 0.14 1.00 0.08 0.76 0.03 0.92 0.07 19.96
13 0.21 0.39 2.91 2.31 0.38 1.08 0.14 1.05 0.08 0.79 0.03 0.96 0.07 20.65
11 0.22 0.39 2.95 2.41 0.38 1.13 0.14 1.09 0.08 0.83 0.03 1.00 0.07 21.34
9 0.23 0.39 2.98 2.50 0.38 1.17 0.14 1.13 0.08 0.86 0.03 1.04 0.07 22.03
7 0.24 0.39 3.02 2.60 0.38 1.22 0.14 1.18 0.08 0.89 0.03 1.08 0.07 22.72
5 0.24 0.39 3.05 2.70 0.38 1.26 0.14 1.22 0.08 0.93 0.03 1.12 0.07 23.41
3 0.25 0.39 3.08 2.79 0.38 1.31 0.14 1.26 0.08 0.96 0.03 1.16 0.07 24.10
1 0.26 0.39 3.12 2.89 0.38 1.35 0.14 1.31 0.08 0.99 0.03 1.20 0.07 24.79
(1)0.27 0.39 3.15 2.99 0.38 1.40 0.14 1.35 0.08 1.03 0.03 1.24 0.07 25.48
(3)0.28 0.39 3.19 3.08 0.38 1.44 0.14 1.39 0.08 1.06 0.03 1.28 0.07 26.17
(5)0.29 0.39 3.22 3.18 0.38 1.49 0.14 1.44 0.08 1.09 0.03 1.32 0.07 26.86
(7)0.30 0.39 3.26 3.27 0.38 1.53 0.14 1.48 0.08 1.12 0.03 1.36 0.07 27.55
(9)0.31 0.39 3.29 3.37 0.38 1.58 0.14 1.53 0.08 1.16 0.03 1.40 0.07 28.24
(11)0.31 0.39 3.33 3.47 0.38 1.62 0.14 1.57 0.08 1.19 0.03 1.44 0.07 28.93
(13)0.32 0.39 3.36 3.56 0.38 1.67 0.14 1.61 0.08 1.22 0.03 1.48 0.07 29.62
(15)0.33 0.39 3.40 3.66 0.38 1.71 0.14 1.66 0.08 1.26 0.03 1.52 0.07 30.31
(17)0.34 0.39 3.43 3.76 0.38 1.76 0.14 1.70 0.08 1.29 0.03 1.56 0.07 31.00
(19)0.35 0.39 3.47 3.85 0.38 1.80 0.14 1.74 0.08 1.32 0.03 1.60 0.07 31.69
(21)0.36 0.39 3.50 3.95 0.38 1.85 0.14 1.79 0.08 1.36 0.03 1.64 0.07 32.38
(23)0.37 0.39 3.54 4.04 0.38 1.89 0.14 1.83 0.08 1.39 0.03 1.68 0.07 33.07
(25)0.38 0.39 3.57 4.14 0.38 1.94 0.14 1.87 0.08 1.42 0.03 1.72 0.07 33.76
(27)0.38 0.39 3.60 4.24 0.38 1.98 0.14 1.92 0.08 1.46 0.03 1.76 0.07 34.45
(29)0.39 0.39 3.64 4.33 0.38 2.03 0.14 1.96 0.08 1.49 0.03 1.80 0.07 35.14
(31)0.40 0.39 3.67 4.43 0.38 2.07 0.14 2.00 0.08 1.52 0.03 1.84 0.07 35.83
(33)0.41 0.39 3.71 4.53 0.38 2.12 0.14 2.05 0.08 1.55 0.03 1.88 0.07 36.52
(35)0.42 0.39 3.74 4.62 0.38 2.16 0.14 2.09 0.08 1.59 0.03 1.92 0.07 37.21
(37)0.43 0.39 3.78 4.72 0.38 2.21 0.14 2.14 0.08 1.62 0.03 1.96 0.07 37.90
(39)0.44 0.39 3.81 4.81 0.38 2.25 0.14 2.18 0.08 1.65 0.03 2.00 0.07 38.59
(41)0.45 0.39 3.85 4.91 0.38 2.30 0.14 2.22 0.08 1.69 0.03 2.04 0.07 39.28
(43)0.45 0.39 3.88 5.01 0.38 2.34 0.14 2.27 0.08 1.72 0.03 2.08 0.07 39.97
(45)0.46 0.39 3.92 5.10 0.38 2.39 0.14 2.31 0.08 1.75 0.03 2.12 0.07 40.66
(47)0.47 0.39 3.95 5.20 0.38 2.43 0.14 2.35 0.08 1.79 0.03 2.16 0.07 41.35
(49)0.48 0.39 3.99 5.30 0.38 2.48 0.14 2.40 0.08 1.82 0.03 2.20 0.07 42.04
(51)0.49 0.39 4.02 5.39 0.38 2.52 0.14 2.44 0.08 1.85 0.03 2.24 0.07 42.73
(53)0.50 0.39 4.06 5.49 0.38 2.57 0.14 2.48 0.08 1.89 0.03 2.28 0.07 43.42
(55)0.51 0.39 4.09 5.58 0.38 2.61 0.14 2.53 0.08 1.92 0.03 2.32 0.07 44.11
(57)0.52 0.39 4.12 5.68 0.38 2.66 0.14 2.57 0.08 1.95 0.03 2.36 0.07 44.80
(59)0.52 0.39 4.16 5.78 0.38 2.70 0.14 2.61 0.08 1.98 0.03 2.40 0.07 45.49
efour, PLLC 3 of 5
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
oil heat
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
annual
gal
gal 21,855 20,783 19,765 10,662 6,568 3,537 3,567 5,159 7,883 15,259 17,969 22,338 155,344
Predicted fuel demand, gph, heating
bin
mid
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
gph deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
3.18 85 : 3.2 : 3
3.21 83 : 3.2 3.2 : 6
3.25 81 : 3.2 3.2 : 6
3.28 79 : 3.3 3.3 3.3 : 10
3.32 77 : 3.3 3.3 3.3 : 10
3.35 75 : 3.4 3.4 3.4 : 10
3.39 73 : 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 : 14
3.92 71 : 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 : 16
3.96 69 : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 : 20
3.99 67 : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 : 20
4.03 65 : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 : 20
4.06 63 : 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 : 20
4.10 61 : 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 : 20
4.79 59 : 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 : 24
5.48 57 : 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 : 33
6.17 55 : 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 : 37
6.86 53 : 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 : 41
7.55 51 : 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 : 45
8.24 49 : 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 : 49
8.93 47 : 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 : 54
9.62 45 : 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 : 58
10.31 43 : 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 : 62
11.00 41 : 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 : 77
11.69 39 : 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 : 82
12.38 37 : 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 : 74
13.07 35 : 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 : 78
13.76 33 : 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 : 83
14.45 31 : 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 : 87
15.14 29 : 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 : 121
15.83 27 : 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 : 127
16.52 25 : 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 : 132
17.21 23 : 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 17.2 : 120
17.89 21 : 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 : 143
18.58 19 : 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 : 149
19.27 17 : 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 : 154
19.96 15 : 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 : 160
20.65 13 : 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 : 165
21.34 11 : 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 : 149
22.03 9 : 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 : 154
22.72 7 : 22.7 22.7 22.7 22.7 22.7 22.7 22.7 : 159
23.41 5 : 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 : 164
24.10 3 : 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 : 169
24.79 1 : 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 : 174
25.48 (1): 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 : 178
26.17 (3): 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 : 183
26.86 (5): 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 : 188
27.55 (7): 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6 : 165
28.24 (9): 28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2 28.2 : 169
28.93 (11): 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 : 174
29.62 (13): 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 : 178
30.31 (15): 30.3 30.3 30.3 30.3 30.3 30.3 : 182
31.00 (17): 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 : 186
31.69 (19): 31.7 31.7 31.7 31.7 31.7 31.7 : 190
32.38 (21): 32.4 32.4 32.4 32.4 32.4 32.4 : 194
33.07 (23): 33.1 33.1 33.1 33.1 33.1 33.1 : 198
33.76 (25): 33.8 33.8 33.8 33.8 33.8 33.8 : 203
34.45 (27): 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 : 207
35.14 (29): 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 : 176
35.83 (31): 35.8 35.8 35.8 35.8 : 143
36.52 (33): 36.5 36.5 36.5 36.5 : 146
37.21 (35): 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.2 : 149
37.90 (37): 37.9 37.9 37.9 37.9 : 152
38.59 (39): 38.6 38.6 38.6 38.6 : 154
39.28 (41): 39.3 39.3 39.3 39.3 : 157
39.97 (43): 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 : 160
40.66 (45): 40.7 40.7 40.7 40.7 : 163
41.35 (47): 41.4 41.4 41.4 : 124
42.04 (49): 42.0 42.0 42.0 : 126
42.73 (51): 42.7 42.7 : 85
43.42 (53): 43.4 43.4 43.4 : 130
44.11 (55): 44.1 44.1 44.1 : 132
44.80 (57): 44.8 44.8 : 90
45.49 (59): 45.5 : 45
::
efour, PLLC 4 of 5
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
oil heat
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
134,000 BTU/gal
0.830 eff
annual
kBTU
2,431 2,312 2,198 1,186 730 393 397 574 877 1,697 1,998 2,484 17,277,360
Predicted heat load profile, buildings, kBTU/h
bin
mid
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
kBTU/h deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec kW
353.7 85 : 354 : 103.7
357.6 83 : 358 358 : 104.8
361.4 81 : 361 361 : 105.9
365.3 79 : 365 365 365 : 107.1
369.1 77 : 369 369 369 : 108.2
373.0 75 : 373 373 373 : 109.3
376.8 73 : 377 377 377 377 : 110.4
436.5 71 : 436 436 436 436 : 127.9
440.3 69 : 440 440 440 440 440 : 129.1
444.2 67 : 444 444 444 444 444 : 130.2
448.0 65 : 448 448 448 448 448 : 131.3
451.9 63 : 452 452 452 452 452 : 132.4
455.7 61 : 456 456 456 456 456 : 133.6
532.5 59 : 532 532 532 532 532 : 156.1
609.2 57 : 609 609 609 609 609 609 : 178.5
685.9 55 : 686 686 686 686 686 686 : 201.0
762.7 53 : 763 763 763 763 763 763 : 223.5
839.4 51 : 839 839 839 839 839 839 : 246.0
916.1 49 : 916 916 916 916 916 916 : 268.5
992.8 47 : 993 993 993 993 993 993 : 291.0
1,069.6 45 : 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,070 1,070 : 313.5
1,146.3 43 : 1,146 1,146 1,146 1,146 1,146 1,146 : 336.0
1,223.0 41 : 1,223 1,223 1,223 1,223 1,223 1,223 1,223 : 358.4
1,299.7 39 : 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 : 380.9
1,376.5 37 : 1,376 1,376 1,376 1,376 1,376 1,376 : 403.4
1,453.2 35 : 1,453 1,453 1,453 1,453 1,453 1,453 : 425.9
1,529.9 33 : 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 : 448.4
1,606.6 31 : 1,607 1,607 1,607 1,607 1,607 1,607 : 470.9
1,683.4 29 : 1,683 1,683 1,683 1,683 1,683 1,683 1,683 1,683 : 493.4
1,760.1 27 : 1,760 1,760 1,760 1,760 1,760 1,760 1,760 1,760 : 515.9
1,836.8 25 : 1,837 1,837 1,837 1,837 1,837 1,837 1,837 1,837 : 538.3
1,913.6 23 : 1,914 1,914 1,914 1,914 1,914 1,914 1,914 : 560.8
1,990.3 21 : 1,990 1,990 1,990 1,990 1,990 1,990 1,990 1,990 : 583.3
2,067.0 19 : 2,067 2,067 2,067 2,067 2,067 2,067 2,067 2,067 : 605.8
2,143.7 17 : 2,144 2,144 2,144 2,144 2,144 2,144 2,144 2,144 : 628.3
2,220.5 15 : 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 : 650.8
2,297.2 13 : 2,297 2,297 2,297 2,297 2,297 2,297 2,297 2,297 : 673.3
2,373.9 11 : 2,374 2,374 2,374 2,374 2,374 2,374 2,374 : 695.8
2,450.6 9 : 2,451 2,451 2,451 2,451 2,451 2,451 2,451 : 718.2
2,527.4 7 : 2,527 2,527 2,527 2,527 2,527 2,527 2,527 : 740.7
2,604.1 5 : 2,604 2,604 2,604 2,604 2,604 2,604 2,604 : 763.2
2,680.8 3 : 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681 2,681 : 785.7
2,757.6 1 : 2,758 2,758 2,758 2,758 2,758 2,758 2,758 : 808.2
2,834.3 (1): 2,834 2,834 2,834 2,834 2,834 2,834 2,834 : 830.7
2,911.0 (3): 2,911 2,911 2,911 2,911 2,911 2,911 2,911 : 853.2
2,987.7 (5): 2,988 2,988 2,988 2,988 2,988 2,988 2,988 : 875.7
3,064.5 (7): 3,064 3,064 3,064 3,064 3,064 3,064 : 898.1
3,141.2 (9): 3,141 3,141 3,141 3,141 3,141 3,141 : 920.6
3,217.9 (11): 3,218 3,218 3,218 3,218 3,218 3,218 : 943.1
3,294.6 (13): 3,295 3,295 3,295 3,295 3,295 3,295 : 965.6
3,371.4 (15): 3,371 3,371 3,371 3,371 3,371 3,371 : 988.1
3,448.1 (17): 3,448 3,448 3,448 3,448 3,448 3,448 : 1,010.6
3,524.8 (19): 3,525 3,525 3,525 3,525 3,525 3,525 : 1,033.1
3,601.5 (21): 3,602 3,602 3,602 3,602 3,602 3,602 : 1,055.6
3,678.3 (23): 3,678 3,678 3,678 3,678 3,678 3,678 : 1,078.0
3,755.0 (25): 3,755 3,755 3,755 3,755 3,755 3,755 : 1,100.5
3,831.7 (27): 3,832 3,832 3,832 3,832 3,832 3,832 : 1,123.0
3,908.5 (29): 3,908 3,908 3,908 3,908 3,908 : 1,145.5
3,985.2 (31): 3,985 3,985 3,985 3,985 : 1,168.0
4,061.9 (33): 4,062 4,062 4,062 4,062 : 1,190.5
4,138.6 (35): 4,139 4,139 4,139 4,139 : 1,213.0
4,215.4 (37): 4,215 4,215 4,215 4,215 : 1,235.5
4,292.1 (39): 4,292 4,292 4,292 4,292 : 1,257.9
4,368.8 (41): 4,369 4,369 4,369 4,369 : 1,280.4
4,445.5 (43): 4,446 4,446 4,446 4,446 : 1,302.9
4,522.3 (45): 4,522 4,522 4,522 4,522 : 1,325.4
4,599.0 (47): 4,599 4,599 4,599 : 1,347.9
4,675.7 (49): 4,676 4,676 4,676 : 1,370.4
4,752.5 (51): 4,752 4,752 : 1,392.9
4,829.2 (53): 4,829 4,829 4,829 : 1,415.4
4,905.9 (55): 4,906 4,906 4,906 : 1,437.8
4,982.6 (57): 4,983 4,983 : 1,460.3
5,059.4 (59): 5,059 : 1,482.8
::
efour, PLLC 5 of 5
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G, part 3:
Sample Calculations: Pipe Sizing and Routing Diagram
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
p dwg
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
delta T 25.0 M2
water fraction 1.00 5,059.4 M2 M2 M2
max avg T 177.5 415.1 3,953.5 3,808.3 2,762.9
DSHP 487.6 8.0 324.3 312.4 226.7
M1 8.0 8.0 4.0 224.0 O Clinic
w/Plant 4,835.4 M1 M1 M1 18.4 15
396.7 3,729.5 3,584.3 2,538.9 1.5
M2 5,209.4 8.0 306.0 294.0 208.3 1,360 340
M1 4,985.4 E1 8.0 8.0 4.0 N Clinic M2 M1/E1 2.0
E1 4,608.3 4,458.3 E1 E1 E1 684.3 12 908.3 684.3 25.9
E2 3,985.4 365.7 3,352.4 3,207.2 2,161.8 56.1 74.5 56.1 315.6
Base 3,376.0 8.0 275.0 263.1 177.3 2.5 m 3.0 2.5 City B
E2 4.0 4.0 4.0 540 11
3,835.4 E2 E2 E2 M1 / E1 M2
314.6 2,729.6 45 2,584.4 1,538.9 90 999.9 1,223.9 240
fuel store 150.0 Plant 8.0 223.9 1.5 212.0 126.2 2.5 82.0 100.4 2.0
space heat 12.3 Base 4.0 11.9 4.0 4.0 47.7 3.0 4.0 22.6
1.5 3,226.0 Base 145.2 Base Base 580.9 275.0
a 264.6 2,120.1 State 1,974.9 929.5 CATG Off l Tribal
4.0 173.9 6 162.0 76.3 5 13
e 4.0 f 4.0 3.0 jk n
b hiM2 3 M2 4 M2 E2/M1,2 14
462.6 DHW Base g 2,181.9 Store 1,833.4 P. Off 1,601.0 377.1 Water T
37.9 c 1,105.8 12 179.0 348.6 150.4 232.4 131.3 30.9 102.1
2.0 Shop Base 90.7 School Gym 4.0 28.6 4.0 19.1 4.0 2.0 8.4
20 93.2 643.3 3.0 598.4 447.0 M1 2.0 M1 2.0 M1 1.5
d 7.6 52.8 49.1 36.7 1,957.9 50 1,609.4 50 1,377.0 185
1.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 160.6 132.0 113.0
90.8 35 24 24 4.0 4.0 4.0
7.4 Church Base 1 + 2 E1 E1 E1
1.5 9 District 550.1 1,045.4 1,580.9 1,232.3 999.9
35 8 45.1 85.8 129.7 101.1 82.0
250.5 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0
20.6 E2 E2 E2
2.0 958.0 609.4 377.1
10 (ch+Dist)a segment designator 78.6 50.0 30.9
Y Flats dist only 550.1 peak load in KBTU/h 3.0 2.5 2.0
299.5 159.8 45.1 peak flow rate in gpm Base Base
24.6 13.1 2.5 indicated pipe size in inches 348.6 232.4
2.0 1.5 35 length of run-out to a building, feet 28.6 19.1
900 35 2.0 2.0
efour, PLLC 1 of 1
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G, part 4:
Sample Calculations: Pipe Sizing and Heat Loss Calculations:
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
p Tables
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
2.0 3,164 3,068 4,312 4,802 7,522 use sizes: 2.0
4.0 3,110 7,376 3,016 6,516 6,516 4.0
8.0 870 870 1,730 1,730 8.0
Segments, length, ft Size, calculated, NPS (8" = (2) x 4") Size, BOD, NPS (8" = (2) x 4")
Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
a : 435 435 435 435 435 a : 4.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 a : 4.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
b : 98 98 98 98 98 b : 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 b : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
c : 90 90 90 90 90 c : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 c : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
d : 228 228 228 228 228 d : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 d : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
e : 260 260 260 260 260 e : 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 e : 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0
f : 170 170 170 170 170 f : 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 f : 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0
g : 100 100 100 100 100 g : 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
h : 60 60 60 60 60 h : 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 h : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
i : 200 200 200 200 200 i : 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 i : 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
j : 188 188 188 188 188 j : 2.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0 j : 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
k : 95 95 95 95 k : 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 k : 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
l : 1,255 1,255 1,255 l : 3.0 3.0 4.0 l : 4.0 4.0 4.0
m : 290 290 290 m : 2.5 2.5 3.0 m : 4.0 4.0 4.0
n : 442 442 442 n : 2.0 2.0 2.0 n : 2.0 2.0 2.0
sub 1,829 3,469 2,366 3,911 3,911
Run-outs, length, ft Size, calculated, NPS (8" = (2) x 4") Size, BOD, NPS (8" = (2) x 4")
Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
1 : 24 24 24 24 24 1 : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1 : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
2 : 24 24 24 24 24 2 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
3 : 50 50 50 50 50 3 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
4 : 50 50 50 50 50 4 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
5 : 90 90 90 90 90 5 : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 5 : 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
6 : 45 45 45 45 45 6 : 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
7 : 35 35 35 35 35 7 : 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 7 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
8 : 35 35 35 35 35 8 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
9 : 35 35 35 35 35 9 : 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 9 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
10 : 900 900 900 900 900 10 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 10 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
11 : 340 340 340 11 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 11 : 2.0 2.0 2.0
12 : 540 540 540 12 : 2.5 2.5 2.5 12 : 4.0 4.0 4.0
13 : 240 240 240 13 : 2.0 2.0 2.0 13 : 2.0 2.0 2.0
14 : 185 185 185 14 : 1.5 1.5 1.5 14 : 2.0 2.0 2.0
15 : 1,360 15 : 1.5 15 : 2.0
PH : 20 20 20 20 20 PH : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PH : 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
sub 1,308 2,188 1,733 2,613 3,973
total 3,137 5,657 4,099 6,524 7,884
efour, PLLC 1 of 2
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
p Tables
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
bury depth, in 51 R dry med moist
T(avg): 177.5 2.0 13.413 6.990 6.562 T(avg): 137.5
min soil T: 0.0 4.0 9.784 3.993 3.607 max soil T: 45.0
use Cond:med 8.0 4.892 1.997 1.804
1
Max Heat Loss, kBTU/h Min Heat Loss, kBTU/h
Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
a : 38.7 77.3 77.3 77.3 77.3 a : 20.2 40.3 40.3 40.3 40.3
b : 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 b : 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
c : 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 c : 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2
d : 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 d : 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.6
e : 23.1 23.1 23.1 46.2 46.2 e : 12.0 12.0 12.0 24.1 24.1
f : 15.1 15.1 15.1 30.2 30.2 f : 7.9 7.9 7.9 15.8 15.8
g : 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 8.9 g : 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
h : 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 h : 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8
i : 10.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 i : 5.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3
j : 9.5 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 j : 5.0 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7
k : 8.4 4.8 8.4 8.4 k : 4.4 2.5 4.4 4.4
l : 111.6 111.6 111.6 l : 58.1 58.1 58.1
m : 25.8 25.8 25.8 m : 13.4 13.4 13.4
n : 22.4 22.4 22.4 n : 11.7 11.7 11.7
sub 147.8 347.1 228.6 407.8 407.8 sub 77.0 180.9 119.1 212.5 212.5
Max Heat Loss, kBTU/h Min Heat Loss, kBTU/h
Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2 Base Exp 1 Exp 2 Max 1 Max 2
1 : 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 1 : 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1
2 : 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 2 : 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
3 : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 : 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
4 : 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4 : 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
5 : 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5 : 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2
6 : 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 6 : 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
7 : 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 7 : 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
8 : 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 8 : 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
9 : 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 9 : 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
10 : 45.7 45.7 45.7 45.7 45.7 10 : 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8
11 : 17.3 17.3 17.3 11 : 9.0 9.0 9.0
12 : 48.0 48.0 48.0 12 : 25.0 25.0 25.0
13 : 12.2 12.2 12.2 13 : 6.4 6.4 6.4
14 : 9.4 9.4 9.4 14 : 4.9 4.9 4.9
15 : 69.1 15 : 36.0
PH : 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 PH : 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
sub 70.8 136.1 92.4 157.6 226.7 sub 36.9 70.9 48.1 82.1 118.1
total 218.6 483.1 320.9 565.4 634.5 total 113.9 251.8 167.2 294.6 330.6
efour, PLLC 2 of 2
Fort Yukon District Heating Plant Final Design Process
Fort Yukon, Alaska 35 Percent Report
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
Appendix G, part 5:
Sample Calculations: Calculation of Heat Sources (recovered heat, wood, oil), and associated
fuel consumption (wood, oil, and electrical energy)
NOTE: Only the chosen plant, Maximum Plant 1, is shown – there are four more sets of these
calculations for the other four plants studied.
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Max Plant 1
Bin hours, Fort Yukon Airport Data, average of 2007 / 08
bin
mid 744 672 744 720 744 720 744 744 720 744 720 744 8,760
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
85 : 1.5 : 1.5
83 : 2.0 2.0 : 4.0
81 : 14.0 9.5 : 23.5
79 : 22.5 18.5 1.5 : 42.5
77 : 14.0 16.5 1.0 : 31.5
75 : 27.5 40.5 1.5 : 69.5
73 : 11.0 26.5 38.5 10.0 : 86.0
71 : 9.0 37.0 41.5 14.5 : 102.0
69 : 17.0 56.5 53.5 30.0 1.0 : 158.0
67 : 15.5 50.5 49.0 23.5 4.5 : 143.0
65 : 13.5 63.5 56.0 36.0 12.0 : 181.0
63 : 19.5 68.5 67.5 40.0 15.0 : 210.5
61 : 25.5 53.0 69.0 43.5 20.0 : 211.0
59 : 18.0 42.0 41.0 46.5 8.5 : 156.0
57 : 1.5 38.5 63.5 73.0 77.0 14.0 : 267.5
55 : 7.0 50.5 53.5 60.5 64.0 17.5 : 253.0
53 : 4.5 36.5 43.5 49.0 49.5 19.0 : 202.0
51 : 10.5 57.5 30.0 23.0 50.5 35.5 : 207.0
49 : 8.5 47.0 24.5 19.5 37.0 39.0 : 175.5
47 : 20.5 52.5 11.5 5.5 48.0 39.0 : 177.0
45 : 26.5 59.0 7.0 6.0 56.0 53.5 : 208.0
43 : 30.0 44.0 4.0 3.0 34.0 53.5 : 168.5
41 : 24.0 29.0 2.0 0.5 17.0 36.5 0.5 : 109.5
39 : 38.5 49.5 1.5 0.5 29.5 64.0 2.0 : 185.5
37 : 41.5 38.0 0.5 15.5 52.0 2.5 : 150.0
35 : 2.0 45.0 34.0 7.5 41.5 3.5 : 133.5
33 : 2.0 65.0 29.5 4.0 48.5 16.0 : 165.0
31 : 0.5 48.5 26.5 2.0 31.0 23.5 : 132.0
29 : 2.4 0.5 63.5 13.5 3.0 36.0 27.5 3.5 : 149.9
27 : 5.8 3.0 50.0 7.0 1.5 31.5 47.5 9.5 : 155.8
25 : 0.5 3.9 2.5 39.0 1.5 22.0 52.0 2.5 : 123.9
23 : 0.5 1.4 3.5 19.0 6.5 37.0 2.0 : 69.9
21 : 0.5 5.3 8.5 40.5 1.0 9.5 63.5 3.5 : 132.3
19 : 1.0 3.4 8.5 34.5 4.5 60.5 6.0 1.5 : 119.9
17 : 1.0 4.3 19.0 23.5 2.0 46.5 28.0 8.0 : 132.3
15 : 8.5 10.1 21.5 15.0 2.0 69.0 48.0 8.5 : 182.6
13 : 15.0 11.2 27.5 10.5 0.5 43.0 32.5 4.5 : 144.7
11 : 8.0 10.2 24.0 10.5 28.5 41.5 8.0 : 130.7
9 : 19.5 14.7 36.0 12.5 23.5 53.5 14.0 : 173.7
7 : 14.0 18.7 35.5 12.5 27.5 31.0 18.5 : 157.7
5 : 7.0 17.2 21.0 3.5 10.5 32.0 7.0 : 98.2
3 : 31.0 27.6 45.0 7.0 20.0 61.0 20.5 : 212.1
1 : 52.0 29.5 44.5 1.5 23.5 69.5 38.0 : 258.5
(1): 17.0 19.6 32.0 1.5 7.5 26.0 9.5 : 113.1
(3): 44.0 22.1 32.5 3.0 8.5 30.5 30.0 : 170.6
(5): 69.0 32.8 49.0 1.0 8.0 37.5 49.5 : 246.8
(7): 44.0 25.5 40.0 9.0 28.0 44.0 : 190.5
(9): 43.5 30.4 38.5 8.5 30.0 33.0 : 183.9
(11): 54.0 20.1 49.5 13.0 21.5 42.5 : 200.6
(13): 20.5 7.9 25.5 9.0 11.5 30.0 : 104.4
(15): 41.0 22.6 32.5 10.0 10.0 44.0 : 160.1
(17): 38.5 18.7 23.0 10.5 12.5 52.0 : 155.2
(19): 34.5 12.2 26.5 8.0 20.5 45.5 : 147.2
(21): 18.5 10.8 14.0 6.5 21.5 32.5 : 103.8
(23): 23.0 19.2 15.5 5.5 33.5 34.0 : 130.7
(25): 11.5 21.5 7.0 5.5 11.0 21.0 : 77.5
(27): 13.5 24.1 8.5 3.0 2.0 24.5 : 75.6
(29): 12.0 24.7 11.0 3.5 26.5 : 77.7
(31): 8.0 16.3 5.0 18.5 : 47.8
(33): 9.0 19.7 3.5 12.0 : 44.2
(35): 13.5 21.8 4.5 13.5 : 53.3
(37): 8.5 11.8 4.0 10.5 : 34.8
(39): 6.5 17.3 3.0 5.5 : 32.3
(41): 7.0 15.3 5.0 12.0 : 39.3
(43): 6.0 11.9 3.5 10.5 : 31.9
(45): 16.0 11.4 4.0 5.0 : 36.4
(47): 10.5 13.9 1.5 : 25.9
(49): 4.5 8.9 0.5 : 13.9
(51): 3.0 9.4 : 12.4
(53): 4.5 7.9 2.5 : 14.9
(55): 4.0 11.7 6.0 : 21.7
(57): 10.6 0.5 : 11.1
(59): 5.8 : 5.8
::
efour, PLLC 1 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Max Plant 1
annual
min kBTU
max 150 mmBTU 2,747 2,602 2,507 1,450 986 630 641 825 1,130 1,987 2,292 2,803 20,600,577
at 49
Predicted heat load profile, biomass plant, kBTU/h
bin
piping mid
bldgs plant losses total pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
kBTU/h kBTU/h kBTU/h kBTU/h deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec total
350 295 645 85 : 645 : 645
354 298 653 83 : 653 653 : 1,305
358 302 660 81 : 660 660 : 1,321
362 306 668 79 : 668 668 668 : 2,004
366 310 676 77 : 676 676 676 : 2,027
370 313 683 75 : 683 683 683 : 2,049
374 317 691 73 : 691 691 691 691 : 2,763
433 321 754 71 : 754 754 754 754 : 3,017
437 325 762 69 : 762 762 762 762 762 : 3,809
441 328 769 67 : 769 769 769 769 769 : 3,847
445 332 777 65 : 777 777 777 777 777 : 3,885
449 336 785 63 : 785 785 785 785 785 : 3,923
452 340 792 61 : 792 792 792 792 792 : 3,961
525 344 869 59 : 869 869 869 869 869 : 4,345
599 347 946 57 : 946 946 946 946 946 946 : 5,675
672 351 1,023 55 : 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 : 6,136
745 355 1,099 53 : 1,099 1,099 1,099 1,099 1,099 1,099 : 6,597
818 359 1,176 51 : 1,176 1,176 1,176 1,176 1,176 1,176 : 7,057
891 3 362 1,256 49 : 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,256 : 7,535
964 5 366 1,335 47 : 1,335 1,335 1,335 1,335 1,335 1,335 : 8,012
1,037 8 370 1,415 45 : 1,415 1,415 1,415 1,415 1,415 1,415 : 8,489
1,110 11 374 1,494 43 : 1,494 1,494 1,494 1,494 1,494 1,494 : 8,966
1,183 14 377 1,574 41 : 1,574 1,574 1,574 1,574 1,574 1,574 1,574 : 11,018
1,256 16 381 1,653 39 : 1,653 1,653 1,653 1,653 1,653 1,653 1,653 : 11,574
1,329 19 385 1,733 37 : 1,733 1,733 1,733 1,733 1,733 1,733 : 10,398
1,402 22 389 1,813 35 : 1,813 1,813 1,813 1,813 1,813 1,813 : 10,875
1,475 25 392 1,892 33 : 1,892 1,892 1,892 1,892 1,892 1,892 : 11,352
1,548 27 396 1,972 31 : 1,972 1,972 1,972 1,972 1,972 1,972 : 11,830
1,621 30 400 2,051 29 : 2,051 2,051 2,051 2,051 2,051 2,051 2,051 2,051 : 16,409
1,694 33 404 2,131 27 : 2,131 2,131 2,131 2,131 2,131 2,131 2,131 2,131 : 17,045
1,767 35 407 2,210 25 : 2,210 2,210 2,210 2,210 2,210 2,210 2,210 2,210 : 17,682
1,840 38 411 2,290 23 : 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 2,290 : 16,028
1,913 41 415 2,369 21 : 2,369 2,369 2,369 2,369 2,369 2,369 2,369 2,369 : 18,954
1,986 44 419 2,449 19 : 2,449 2,449 2,449 2,449 2,449 2,449 2,449 2,449 : 19,591
2,060 46 423 2,528 17 : 2,528 2,528 2,528 2,528 2,528 2,528 2,528 2,528 : 20,227
2,133 49 426 2,608 15 : 2,608 2,608 2,608 2,608 2,608 2,608 2,608 2,608 : 20,863
2,206 52 430 2,687 13 : 2,687 2,687 2,687 2,687 2,687 2,687 2,687 2,687 : 21,500
2,279 55 434 2,767 11 : 2,767 2,767 2,767 2,767 2,767 2,767 2,767 : 19,369
2,352 57 438 2,847 9 : 2,847 2,847 2,847 2,847 2,847 2,847 2,847 : 19,926
2,425 60 441 2,926 7 : 2,926 2,926 2,926 2,926 2,926 2,926 2,926 : 20,482
2,498 63 445 3,006 5 : 3,006 3,006 3,006 3,006 3,006 3,006 3,006 : 21,039
2,571 65 449 3,085 3 : 3,085 3,085 3,085 3,085 3,085 3,085 3,085 : 21,596
2,644 68 453 3,165 1 : 3,165 3,165 3,165 3,165 3,165 3,165 3,165 : 22,153
2,717 71 456 3,244 (1): 3,244 3,244 3,244 3,244 3,244 3,244 3,244 : 22,709
2,790 74 460 3,324 (3): 3,324 3,324 3,324 3,324 3,324 3,324 3,324 : 23,266
2,863 76 464 3,403 (5): 3,403 3,403 3,403 3,403 3,403 3,403 3,403 : 23,823
2,936 79 468 3,483 (7): 3,483 3,483 3,483 3,483 3,483 3,483 : 20,897
3,009 82 471 3,562 (9): 3,562 3,562 3,562 3,562 3,562 3,562 : 21,374
3,082 85 475 3,642 (11): 3,642 3,642 3,642 3,642 3,642 3,642 : 21,851
3,155 87 479 3,721 (13): 3,721 3,721 3,721 3,721 3,721 3,721 : 22,328
3,228 90 483 3,801 (15): 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 : 22,806
3,301 93 486 3,880 (17): 3,880 3,880 3,880 3,880 3,880 3,880 : 23,283
3,374 95 490 3,960 (19): 3,960 3,960 3,960 3,960 3,960 3,960 : 23,760
3,447 98 494 4,040 (21): 4,040 4,040 4,040 4,040 4,040 4,040 : 24,237
3,520 101 498 4,119 (23): 4,119 4,119 4,119 4,119 4,119 4,119 : 24,715
3,594 104 501 4,199 (25): 4,199 4,199 4,199 4,199 4,199 4,199 : 25,192
3,667 106 505 4,278 (27): 4,278 4,278 4,278 4,278 4,278 4,278 : 25,669
3,740 109 509 4,358 (29): 4,358 4,358 4,358 4,358 4,358 : 21,789
3,813 112 513 4,437 (31): 4,437 4,437 4,437 4,437 : 17,749
3,886 115 517 4,517 (33): 4,517 4,517 4,517 4,517 : 18,067
3,959 117 520 4,596 (35): 4,596 4,596 4,596 4,596 : 18,385
4,032 120 524 4,676 (37): 4,676 4,676 4,676 4,676 : 18,703
4,105 123 528 4,755 (39): 4,755 4,755 4,755 4,755 : 19,022
4,178 125 532 4,835 (41): 4,835 4,835 4,835 4,835 : 19,340
4,251 128 535 4,914 (43): 4,914 4,914 4,914 4,914 : 19,658
4,324 131 539 4,994 (45): 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 : 19,976
4,397 134 543 5,074 (47): 5,074 5,074 5,074 : 15,221
4,470 136 547 5,153 (49): 5,153 5,153 5,153 : 15,459
4,543 139 550 5,233 (51): 5,233 5,233 : 10,465
4,616 142 554 5,312 (53): 5,312 5,312 5,312 : 15,936
4,689 145 558 5,392 (55): 5,392 5,392 5,392 : 16,175
4,762 147 562 5,471 (57): 5,471 5,471 : 10,942
4,835 150 565 5,551 (59): 5,551 : 5,551
::
efour, PLLC 2 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Max Plant 1 max kW 1,627
5,315 BTU/lb max HR kW 285
0.840 eff 1,342
annual
tons
308 291 281 162 110 71 72 92 127 223 257 314 2,307
Predicted wood consumption, lb/hr (no HR)
bin
mid
pt 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 365
lb/hr deg F Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec kW
144.5 85 : 144 : 189.1
146.2 83 : 146 146 : 191.3
147.9 81 : 148 148 : 193.5
149.6 79 : 150 150 150 : 195.7
151.3 77 : 151 151 151 : 198.0
153.0 75 : 153 153 153 : 200.2
154.7 73 : 155 155 155 155 : 202.4
168.9 71 : 169 169 169 169 : 221.0
170.6 69 : 171 171 171 171 171 : 223.3
172.3 67 : 172 172 172 172 172 : 225.5
174.0 65 : 174 174 174 174 174 : 227.7
175.8 63 : 176 176 176 176 176 : 229.9
177.5 61 : 177 177 177 177 177 : 232.2
194.7 59 : 195 195 195 195 195 : 254.7
211.9 57 : 212 212 212 212 212 212 : 277.2
229.1 55 : 229 229 229 229 229 229 : 299.7
246.3 53 : 246 246 246 246 246 246 : 322.2
263.5 51 : 263 263 263 263 263 263 : 344.7
281.3 49 : 281 281 281 281 281 281 : 368.0
299.1 47 : 299 299 299 299 299 299 : 391.4
316.9 45 : 317 317 317 317 317 317 : 414.7
334.8 43 : 335 335 335 335 335 335 : 438.0
352.6 41 : 353 353 353 353 353 353 353 : 461.3
370.4 39 : 370 370 370 370 370 370 370 : 484.6
388.2 37 : 388 388 388 388 388 388 : 507.9
406.0 35 : 406 406 406 406 406 406 : 531.2
423.8 33 : 424 424 424 424 424 424 : 554.5
441.7 31 : 442 442 442 442 442 442 : 577.8
459.5 29 : 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 : 601.2
477.3 27 : 477 477 477 477 477 477 477 477 : 624.5
495.1 25 : 495 495 495 495 495 495 495 495 : 647.8
512.9 23 : 513 513 513 513 513 513 513 : 671.1
530.7 21 : 531 531 531 531 531 531 531 531 : 694.4
548.6 19 : 549 549 549 549 549 549 549 549 : 717.7
566.4 17 : 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 : 741.0
584.2 15 : 584 584 584 584 584 584 584 584 : 764.3
602.0 13 : 602 602 602 602 602 602 602 602 : 787.6
619.8 11 : 620 620 620 620 620 620 620 : 811.0
637.6 9 : 638 638 638 638 638 638 638 : 834.3
655.5 7 : 655 655 655 655 655 655 655 : 857.6
673.3 5 : 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 : 880.9
691.1 3 : 691 691 691 691 691 691 691 : 904.2
708.9 1 : 709 709 709 709 709 709 709 : 927.5
726.7 (1): 727 727 727 727 727 727 727 : 950.8
744.5 (3): 745 745 745 745 745 745 745 : 974.1
762.4 (5): 762 762 762 762 762 762 762 : 997.4
780.2 (7): 780 780 780 780 780 780 : 1,020.8
798.0 (9): 798 798 798 798 798 798 : 1,044.1
815.8 (11): 816 816 816 816 816 816 : 1,067.4
833.6 (13): 834 834 834 834 834 834 : 1,090.7
851.4 (15): 851 851 851 851 851 851 : 1,114.0
869.2 (17): 869 869 869 869 869 869 : 1,137.3
887.1 (19): 887 887 887 887 887 887 : 1,160.6
904.9 (21): 905 905 905 905 905 905 : 1,183.9
922.7 (23): 923 923 923 923 923 923 : 1,207.2
940.5 (25): 941 941 941 941 941 941 : 1,230.5
958.3 (27): 958 958 958 958 958 958 : 1,253.9
976.1 (29): 976 976 976 976 976 : 1,277.2
994.0 (31): 994 994 994 994 : 1,300.5
1,011.8 (33): 1,012 1,012 1,012 1,012 : 1,323.8
1,029.6 (35): 1,030 1,030 1,030 1,030 : 1,347.1
1,047.4 (37): 1,047 1,047 1,047 1,047 : 1,370.4
1,065.2 (39): 1,065 1,065 1,065 1,065 : 1,393.7
1,083.0 (41): 1,083 1,083 1,083 1,083 : 1,417.0
1,100.9 (43): 1,101 1,101 1,101 1,101 : 1,440.3
1,118.7 (45): 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,119 : 1,463.7
1,136.5 (47): 1,136 1,136 1,136 : 1,487.0
1,154.3 (49): 1,154 1,154 1,154 : 1,510.3
1,172.1 (51): 1,172 1,172 : 1,533.6
1,189.9 (53): 1,190 1,190 1,190 : 1,556.9
1,207.8 (55): 1,208 1,208 1,208 : 1,580.2
1,225.6 (57): 1,226 1,226 : 1,603.5
1,243.4 (59): 1,243 : 1,626.8
::
efour, PLLC 3 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Max Plant 1
Boiler max 3,241
boiler min 1,297
kBTU
mmBTU 667 604 472 428 328 378 345 295 287 430 622 669 5,524,605
Load to HR, kBTU/h
bin
mid
pt
deg F J F M A M J J A S O N D total
85 : 555 :
83 : 546 496 :
81 : 538 489 :
79 : 533 484 484 :
77 : 528 479 479 :
75 : 525 475 475 :
73 : 524 524 472 472 :
71 : 523 523 470 470 :
69 : 524 524 468 468 468 :
67 : 526 526 467 467 467 :
65 : 528 528 467 467 467 :
63 : 532 532 467 467 467 :
61 : 537 537 467 467 467 :
59 : 542 542 469 469 469 :
57 : 549 549 549 470 470 470 :
55 : 556 556 556 472 472 472 :
53 : 564 564 564 475 475 475 :
51 : 573 573 573 478 478 478 :
49 : 583 583 583 481 481 481 :
47 : 39 39 39 39 39 39 :
45 : 118 118 118 118 118 118 :
43 : 198 198 198 198 198 198 :
41 : 277 277 277 277 277 277 277 :
39 : 357 357 357 357 357 357 357 :
37 : 436 436 436 436 436 436 :
35 : 514 516 516 514 514 514 :
33 : 520 596 596 520 520 520 :
31 : 526 675 675 526 526 526 :
29 : 709 532 709 709 532 532 532 709 :
27 : 723 539 723 723 539 539 539 723 :
25 : 737 737 545 737 737 545 545 737 :
23 : 752 752 552 752 552 552 752 :
21 : 766 766 558 766 766 558 558 766 :
19 : 780 780 565 780 565 565 780 780 :
17 : 793 793 571 793 571 571 793 793 :
15 : 807 807 577 807 577 577 807 807 :
13 : 819 819 584 819 584 584 819 819 :
11 : 831 831 590 831 590 831 831 :
9 : 843 843 596 843 596 843 843 :
7 : 853 853 602 853 602 853 853 :
5 : 863 863 607 863 607 863 863 :
3 : 872 872 612 872 612 872 872 :
1 : 879 879 617 879 617 879 879 :
(1): 885 885 622 885 622 885 885 :
(3): 890 890 626 890 626 890 890 :
(5): 894 894 629 894 629 894 894 :
(7): 896 896 632 632 896 896 :
(9): 896 896 635 635 896 896 :
(11): 895 895 637 637 895 895 :
(13): 898 898 638 638 898 898 :
(15): 901 901 639 639 901 901 :
(17): 904 904 639 639 904 904 :
(19): 907 907 657 657 907 907 :
(21): 911 911 677 677 911 911 :
(23): 914 914 696 696 914 914 :
(25): 917 917 716 716 917 917 :
(27): 920 920 736 736 920 920 :
(29): 923 923 757 757 923 :
(31): 926 926 778 926 :
(33): 929 929 800 929 :
(35): 933 933 822 933 :
(37): 936 936 844 936 :
(39): 939 939 867 939 :
(41): 942 942 890 942 :
(43): 945 945 913 945 :
(45): 949 949 937 949 :
(47): 952 952 962 :
(49): 955 955 955 :
(51): 958 958 :
(53): 962 962 962 :
(55): 965 965 965 :
(57): 968 968 :
(59): 971 :
::
efour, PLLC 4 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Max Plant 1
Boiler max 3,241
boiler min 1,297
kBTU
mmBTU 71 147 36 18 157 219 275 246 103 6 1 63 1,341,548
Load to oil, kBTU/h
bin
mid
pt
deg F J F M A M J J A S O N D total
85 : 90 :
83 : 107 157 :
81 : 122 171 :
79 : 135 184 184 :
77 : 147 196 196 :
75 : 158 208 208 :
73 : 167 167 218 218 :
71 : 231 231 284 284 :
69 : 238 238 294 294 294 :
67 : 244 244 302 302 302 :
65 : 249 249 310 310 310 :
63 : 253 253 318 318 318 :
61 : 255 255 325 325 325 :
59 : 327 327 400 400 400 :
57 : 397 397 397 476 476 476 :
55 : 466 466 466 550 550 550 :
53 : 535 535 535 625 625 625 :
51 : 603 603 603 698 698 698 :
49 : 673 673 673 774 774 774 :
47 ::
45 ::
43 ::
41 ::
39 ::
37 ::
35 ::
33 ::
31 ::
29 ::
27 ::
25 ::
23 ::
21 ::
19 ::
17 ::
15 ::
13 ::
11 ::
9 ::
7 ::
5 ::
3 ::
1 ::
(1)::
(3)::
(5)::
(7)::
(9)::
(11)::
(13)::
(15)::
(17):1 1:
(19): 61 61 :
(21): 122 122 :
(23): 182 182 :
(25): 40 40 241 241 40 40 :
(27): 117 117 300 300 117 117 :
(29): 193 193 359 359 193 :
(31): 270 270 418 270 :
(33): 346 346 476 346 :
(35): 422 422 533 422 :
(37): 499 499 590 499 :
(39): 575 575 647 575 :
(41): 651 651 704 651 :
(43): 728 728 760 728 :
(45): 804 804 815 804 :
(47): 880 880 870 :
(49): 957 957 957 :
(51): 1,033 1,033 :
(53): 1,109 1,109 1,109 :
(55): 1,186 1,186 1,186 :
(57): 1,262 1,262 :
(59): 1,338 :
::
efour, PLLC 5 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
Boiler max 3,241
Max Plant 1 boiler min 1,297
kBTU
total 2,747 2,602 2,507 1,450 986 630 641 825 1,130 1,987 2,292 2,803 20,600,577
HR 667 604 472 428 328 378 345 295 287 430 622 669 5,524,605
oil 71 147 36 18 157 219 275 246 103 6 1 63 1,341,548
mmBTU 2,009 1,851 1,999 1,003 501 34 21 284 740 1,551 1,670 2,072 13,734,424
Load to wood 20,600,577
bin checksum
mid
pt
deg F J F M A M J J A S O N D total
85 ::
83 ::
81 ::
79 ::
77 ::
75 ::
73 ::
71 ::
69 ::
67 ::
65 ::
63 ::
61 ::
59 ::
57 ::
55 ::
53 ::
51 ::
49 ::
47 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
45 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
43 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
41 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
39 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
37 : 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 1,297 :
35 : 1,298 1,297 1,297 1,298 1,298 1,298 :
33 : 1,372 1,297 1,297 1,372 1,372 1,372 :
31 : 1,445 1,297 1,297 1,445 1,445 1,445 :
29 : 1,343 1,519 1,343 1,343 1,519 1,519 1,519 1,343 :
27 : 1,408 1,592 1,408 1,408 1,592 1,592 1,592 1,408 :
25 : 1,473 1,473 1,665 1,473 1,473 1,665 1,665 1,473 :
23 : 1,538 1,538 1,738 1,538 1,738 1,738 1,538 :
21 : 1,604 1,604 1,811 1,604 1,604 1,811 1,811 1,604 :
19 : 1,669 1,669 1,884 1,669 1,884 1,884 1,669 1,669 :
17 : 1,735 1,735 1,957 1,735 1,957 1,957 1,735 1,735 :
15 : 1,801 1,801 2,030 1,801 2,030 2,030 1,801 1,801 :
13 : 1,868 1,868 2,104 1,868 2,104 2,104 1,868 1,868 :
11 : 1,936 1,936 2,177 1,936 2,177 1,936 1,936 :
9 : 2,004 2,004 2,251 2,004 2,251 2,004 2,004 :
7 : 2,073 2,073 2,324 2,073 2,324 2,073 2,073 :
5 : 2,143 2,143 2,398 2,143 2,398 2,143 2,143 :
3 : 2,213 2,213 2,473 2,213 2,473 2,213 2,213 :
1 : 2,285 2,285 2,547 2,285 2,547 2,285 2,285 :
(1): 2,359 2,359 2,623 2,359 2,623 2,359 2,359 :
(3): 2,433 2,433 2,698 2,433 2,698 2,433 2,433 :
(5): 2,509 2,509 2,774 2,509 2,774 2,509 2,509 :
(7): 2,587 2,587 2,850 2,850 2,587 2,587 :
(9): 2,666 2,666 2,928 2,928 2,666 2,666 :
(11): 2,747 2,747 3,005 3,005 2,747 2,747 :
(13): 2,823 2,823 3,083 3,083 2,823 2,823 :
(15): 2,900 2,900 3,162 3,162 2,900 2,900 :
(17): 2,976 2,976 3,241 3,241 2,976 2,976 :
(19): 3,053 3,053 3,241 3,241 3,053 3,053 :
(21): 3,129 3,129 3,241 3,241 3,129 3,129 :
(23): 3,205 3,205 3,241 3,241 3,205 3,205 :
(25): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(27): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(29): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(31): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(33): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(35): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(37): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(39): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(41): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(43): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(45): 3,241 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(47): 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(49): 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(51): 3,241 3,241 :
(53): 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(55): 3,241 3,241 3,241 :
(57): 3,241 3,241 :
(59): 3,241 :
::
efour, PLLC 6 of 7
Fort Yukon Biomass DH Plant
Fort Yukon Alaska
HR+wood
C:\Documents and Settings\gk\Desktop\w\Fort Yukon\L3 Ph I\FY L3 I 1 ver 11.xls
min pump speed : 0.50
VFD exp : 2.00 Max Plant 1
primary pump kW : 5.85
secondary pump kW : 37.70
parasitic power : 7.50 Annual
kWh
mWh 21 21 20 16 17 16 17 17 16 18 18 22 219,858
electrical load
bin
V C mid
load load pt
% cap kW deg F J F M A M J J A S O N D total
0.50 9.4 13.4 85 : 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 83 : 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 81 : 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 79 : 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 77 : 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 75 : 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 73 : 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 71 : 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 69 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 67 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 65 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 63 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 61 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 59 : 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 57 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 55 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 53 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 51 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 49 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 47 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 45 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 43 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 41 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 39 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 37 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 35 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 33 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 31 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 29 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 27 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 25 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 23 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 21 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 19 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 17 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 15 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 13 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 11 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 9 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.50 9.4 13.4 7 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.51 9.9 13.4 5 : 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 :
0.53 10.5 13.4 3 : 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 :
0.54 11.0 13.4 1 : 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 :
0.55 11.6 13.4 (1): 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 :
0.57 12.2 13.4 (3): 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 :
0.58 12.8 13.4 (5): 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 :
0.60 13.4 13.4 (7): 27 27 27 27 27 27 :
0.61 14.0 13.4 (9): 27 27 27 27 27 27 :
0.62 14.6 13.4 (11): 28 28 28 28 28 28 :
0.64 15.2 13.4 (13): 29 29 29 29 29 29 :
0.65 15.9 13.4 (15): 29 29 29 29 29 29 :
0.66 16.6 13.4 (17): 30 30 30 30 30 30 :
0.68 17.3 13.4 (19): 31 31 31 31 31 31 :
0.69 18.0 13.4 (21): 31 31 31 31 31 31 :
0.70 18.7 13.4 (23): 32 32 32 32 32 32 :
0.72 19.4 13.4 (25): 33 33 33 33 33 33 :
0.73 20.2 13.4 (27): 34 34 34 34 34 34 :
0.74 20.9 13.4 (29): 34 34 34 34 34 :
0.76 21.7 13.4 (31): 35 35 35 35 :
0.77 22.5 13.4 (33): 36 36 36 36 :
0.79 23.3 13.4 (35): 37 37 37 37 :
0.80 24.1 13.4 (37): 37 37 37 37 :
0.81 24.9 13.4 (39): 38 38 38 38 :
0.83 25.7 13.4 (41): 39 39 39 39 :
0.84 26.6 13.4 (43): 40 40 40 40 :
0.85 27.5 13.4 (45): 41 41 41 41 :
0.87 28.3 13.4 (47): 42 42 42 :
0.88 29.2 13.4 (49): 43 43 43 :
0.89 30.1 13.4 (51): 44 44 :
0.91 31.1 13.4 (53): 44 44 44 :
0.92 32.0 13.4 (55): 45 45 45 :
0.94 33.0 13.4 (57): 46 46 :
0.95 33.9 13.4 (59): 47 :
::
efour, PLLC 7 of 7
Appendix:
3
Resumes
of
Managers
and
Staff
involved
in
the
Fort
Yukon
District
Wood
Heating
Project
.
Appendix
4:
Grant
Budget
Worksheet
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
Milestone or Task Anticipated
Completion Date
RE- Fund
Grant Funds
Grantee Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase and type of project.
See Attached Milestone list. )
$ $ $
Project management, communication,
facilitation, Operations Reporting
10/31/2014 $120,000 $ $120,000
Confirmation that all design and feasibility
requirements are complete
7/31/2010 Phase 3 funding $
$
Completion of final design & bid
documents
7/31/2010 Phase 3 funding $
Contractor/vendor selection and award 10/31/2010 $15,000 $ $15,000
Construction Phases 9/30/2011 $1,893,255 $990,000 Federal $2,883,255
Purchase & Install 2 cat gensets 7/31/2010 $225,000 $300,000 GZ purchase gensets $525,000
Integration and testing 9/30/2011 $25000 $ $25000
Decommissioning old systems - None $ $
Final Acceptance, Commissioning and
Start-up
10/31/2011 $40,000 $40,000
$
TOTALS $2,318,255 $1,290,000 $3,606,255
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $10,000 $10,000 $20,000
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $1,799,255 $1,200,000 $2,999,255
Contractual Services $200,000 $50,000 $250,000
Construction Services $309,000 $30,000 $339,000
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $3,606,255
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
Detailed Cost analysis and break down is attached in the CDR Report for the Max1 35% Design Scenario
Appendix
5:
Documentation
of
Match
Funding
from
the
Department
of
Energy
Appendix:
6
Project
Cost/Benefit
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. 15,000 tons harvestable annually sustainably
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel)
2. Existing Energy Generation and Usage
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 2 new cat generators being purchased
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Boilers oil fired
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 60,000 hours + generators boiler various ages
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Boilers 83-83% oil fired
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $70,000
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor Not known
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 220,000 gallon annually
Other
iii. Peak Load 750 kwh
iv. Average Load 400kwh
v. Minimum Load 350kwh
vi. Efficiency unknown
vii. Future trends Increasing new power house proposed with heat capture
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] 149,000 gallons on proposed DH buildings
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] Projected at approximately 1700 tons per year
vi. Other Heat recovery from generators = 27% of total heat
generated
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
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]
3,241,000 BTU/hr or 3,241 MMBTU/hr
b) Proposed Annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Heat [MMBtu] 1,314,548 kBTUs
c) Proposed Annual fuel Usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] 1700 tons @ 25% moisture
iv. Other
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $3,606,255
b) Development cost $420,000
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $60,000
d) Annual fuel cost $269,201
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity
ii. Heat 149,000 gallons in up to 15 buildings
iii. Transportation
b) Price of displaced fuel Modeled at $4-6 per gallon
c) Other economic benefits Paying $894,000@6/gallon into village as import
substitution
d) Amount of Alaska public benefits Stabilizing heating costs for schools and clinics
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale To be determined based on price of fuel oil
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio 2:1 over 15 year life @ $6/gallon heating fuel
Payback NSP @ $4/gallon = 14.2 years NSP @ $6/gallon= 6.1 years
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 3 10-7-09
Appendix:
7
Letters
of
Local
Support
A:
From
the
City
of
Fort
Yukon
B:
From
the
School
District
C:
Selection
letter
from
CATG
Yukon Flats School District
P. O. Box 350
Fort Yukon, AK 99740
P: (907) 662-2515 or 1.800.322.2515
F: (907) 662-3094 or 2519
www.yukonflats.net
Arctic Village
Beaver
Central
Chalkyitsik
Circle
Fort Yukon
Stevens Village
Venetie
February 8, 2008
William R. Walz, Superintendent
Yukon Flats School District
RE: Letter of Intent to Use Wood Heat for School and Gym in Fort Yukon
To Whom It May Concern:
The Yukon Flats School District is fully supportive of the woody biomass energy
program being developed in Fort Yukon and Yukon Flats Region. I personally am aware
of the community benefits of a woody biomass program as an economic development
project as well as the potential cost savings on fuel to heat our school and gym. I have
experience with the ‘fuels for schools’ programs in the lower 48 and have an
understanding of what is involved in a project such as this.
Through a Statement of Interest, the district applied to the Alaska Wood Energy
Development Task Group last summer. A pre-feasibility study demonstrated that the Fort
Yukon School and Gym use over 30,000 gallons of fuel oil annually for heat at $4.00 per
gallon and an annual cost of $120,000 dollars. We are working with AVI to conduct
feasibility and payback analysis on installing either a Garn boiler or an automated chip
fed boiler. We expect that this installation and purchase of wood fuel offer significant
savings over the life of the project.
Pending Yukon Flats School Board approval of final design and securing funding, it is
our intent to utilize woody biomass for heat and to purchase this fuel from GZ
Corporation. I fully support this application for funds to help “jump start” the integrated
woody biomass program in Fort Yukon and the Yukon Flats Region.
Sincerely;
William R. Walz
Superintendent