HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrca Plant Efficiency Upgrade Cordova Electric Cooperative App
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Gran Page 1 of 16 9/2/2008
t Application
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
Cordova Electric Cooperative
Type of Entity:
Member-owned electric utility
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 20, Cordova, AK 99574
Physical Address
705 Second Street, Cordova, AK 99574
Telephone
(907)424-5555
Fax
Email
clay@cordovaelectric.com
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT
Name
Clay Koplin
Title
General Manager
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 20, Cordova, AK 99574
Telephone
(907)424-5026
Fax
Email
clay@cordovaelectric.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)
XX An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS
42.05, or
An independent power producer, or
A local government, or
A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Yes
1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its
project by its board of directors, executive management, or other governing
authority. If 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.)
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 2 of 16 9/3/2008
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
Provide a brief 1-2 page overview of your project.
2.1 PROJECT TYPE
Describe the type of project you are proposing, (Reconnaissance; Resource Assessment/
Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction) as
well as the kind of renewable energy you intend to use. Refer to Section 1.5 of RFA.
Cordova Electric Cooperative (CEC) is requesting $1.78 million to capture waste heat by
installing an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) heat recovery unit on a new high‐efficiency, low‐
emissions diesel generator. CEC has already placed a deposit on and will purchase and
install the new, efficient generator, and the addition of the O RC will increase the
generator’s fuel efficiency nearly 20 percent over CEC average fuel efficiency. This new
generator will supplement CEC’s existing diesel generators and meet emergency
redundancy needs. CEC operates an isolated electric system and therefore is solely
responsible for serving its 1,560 customers. Cordova’s high electricity costs have been
cited in several formal and informal community planning documents as a primary inhibitor
of economic development, and this project would assist in making electricity rates more
affordable for residents and businesses as well as displace diesel fuel, reducing our
particulate emissions.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a one paragraph description of your project. At a minimum include the project location,
communities to be served, and who will be involved in the grant project.
CEC proposes to serve as a model for rural Alaska utilities by installing an ORC heat recovery
unit that will capture waste heat and increase diesel generator electrical production by an
additional four to six percent. The average electric production efficiency of CEC’s Orca Power
Plant is 13.65 kWh/gallon of diesel. CEC has placed a deposit on a new, 3.6 MW rated, EMD
710 series, 20 cylinder diesel generator. The efficiency of the new generator is expected to peak
at 15 kWh/gallon. Cordova Electric Cooperative desires fit the EMD with an organic Rankine
Cycle (ORC) heat recovery system that will capture additional BTUs that would otherwise be
wasted energy. Cordova Electric Cooperative is the sole provider of power to the City of
Cordova, Alaska. We are a member-owned cooperative with 17 full time employees. CEC’s
CEO Clay Koplin, Manager of Power Production Danny Ackmann, Manager of Finance Valerie
Covel and the engineering firm of Marsh Creek make up the project team for implementing this
renewable energy project.
2.3 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. Include a project cost summary that includes an estimated total cost through
construction.
Total project expenses are estimated to be approximately $5.26 million. CEC is securing a
onstruction loan through CoBank for the $3.48 million needed to pay for and install the
ew fuel‐efficient, low‐emission generator.
c
n
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 3 of 16 9/3/2008
2.4 PROJECT BENEFIT
Briefly discuss the financial benefits that will result from this project, including an estimate of economic
benefits(such as reduced fuel costs) and a description of other benefits to the Alaskan public.
According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Cordovans pay 78% more than
the EIA’s “extremely high energy cost benchmark” for electricity. Homeowners in the
Cordova, Alaska area are paying roughly $ .4272 per kW for electricity in 2008. Based on
year to date 2008 costs, the average household energy expenditure for electricity in
ordova is $4552.24, while the federal “extremely high energy cost benchmark” price for C
10,656 kWh is only $2,546.78.
The current gas station price for diesel fuel is $5.13/gallon, propane is $4.40/gallon, and
gasoline is $4.94/gallon. Delivered propane is $4.50/gallon, and fuel oil ranges from
$4.94/gallon for fewer than 100 gallons to $4.73/gallon for aut o‐fill accounts exceeding
300 gallons (Shoreside Petroleum pricing as of 10/4/08, 907‐424 ‐3221). These prices
exceed the benchmarks for average per unit cost for each of these fuels. These prices also
emphasize that there are no low‐cost alternatives to meet energy needs in Cordova.
atural gas is not available, and wood is hard to collect for some residents and costly to dry N
in Cordova’s coastal rainforest climate.
With increased diesel fuel capacity, CEC can continue its migration from diesel fuel
dependency toward supplying 100 % of its power from renewable e nergy sources.
Shifting CEC’s power production from diesel to hydropower will result in lowering our
costs of shipping diesel fuel to Cordova, hazardous substance precautions, and the ever‐
climbing cost of diesel fuel itself. Installation of a new diesel generator and heat recovery
unit in Cordova will displace an additional 129,000 gallons of diesel per year. At a current
price of $3.87/gallon, cost savings from fuel alone will amount to $516,000 per year. We
anticipate a project pay‐back period of ten years. See attached Application Cost Worksheet.
2.5 PROJECT COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY
Include a summary of your project’s total costs and benefits below.
2.5.1 Total Project Cost
(Including estimates through construction.)
$ 5,260,000
2.5.2 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $ 1,780,000
2.5.3 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $ 3,480,000
2.5.4 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.5.2 and 2.5.3) $ 5,260,000
2.5.5 Estimated Benefit (Savings) $ 516,000 (gen and ORC)
2.5.6 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.)
Improved air quality; over
one cent per kW savings
in fuel surcharge to
customers
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
9/3/2008 AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 4 of 16
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.
John Cameron of Marsh Creek is the Project Manager for this design‐build project. Clay
Koplin, CEO of CEC is administering the contract with Marsh Creek, LLC. Cordova Electric
Cooperative (CEC) is a non‐profit electric utility that was est ablished in September, 1978.
We are an IRS recognized non‐profit organization that generates and distributes electricity
to the isolated community of Cordova, Alaska. CEC is a 17 employee Cooperative. Key
management staff is technically skilled and experienced in the electric utility industry and
at Cordova Electric Cooperative. CEC has retained Marsh Creek Engineers for project
management including design and construction of the Orca Power Plant expansion, switch
ear design and construction, preparation of design drawings for construction, preparation
f as‐builds and post construction project closeout tasks.
g
o
Resumes are attached for:
Clay Koplin, CEO
Valerie Covel, Manager of Administration and Finance
er Production
ution and Operations
Danny Ackmann, Manager of Pow
Andy Gentry, Manager of Distrib
k
John Cameron, Marsh Cree
Robert Harris, PE, Marsh Creek
Lee Whiting, Marsh Creek
Brian Wakefield, Marsh Creek
aniel Roberts, Marsh Creek
ruce Eierman, Marsh Creek
D
B
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.)
Based on an April, 2008 solicitation, CEC outlined a scope of work and selected Marsh
Creek Energy Systems to design and manage construction of expansion of the Orca Power
Plant to accommodate a new generator and heat recovery unit including installation of
both units. Remaining tasks associated with selecting and purchasing a new diesel
generator and ORC heat recovery unit include:
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 5 of 16 9/3/2008
1. Research ORC heat recovery unit models.
new generator and heat recovery 3. Engineer mechanical systems for installing and wiring
unit.
4. Purchase generator and heat recovery unit equipment
. Install new equipment.
d performance.
5
6. Monitor new generator and heat recovery unit for increase
See attached project schedule for a detailed schedule of tasks.
3.3 Project Milestones
Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them.
Key decision points include:
• Selecting generator for purchase
• Selecting heat recovery unit for purchase
3.4 Project Resources
Describe the personnel, contractors, equipment, and services you will use to accomplish
the project. Include any partnerships or commitments with othe r 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.
Under contract to CEC, Marsh Creek Engineers will assist with the procurement process for
the new generator and heat recovery unit. CEC entered into a contract for services with
Marsh Creek in June 2008.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
For installation of a new diesel generator and ORC heat recover y unit at CEC’s Orca Power
Plant, Power Production Manager Danny Ackmann will over see day‐to‐day project
progress. Mr. Ackmann will make reports to Contract Administrator Clay Koplin. Weekly
reports comparing actual progress to our work plan can be submitted to AEA electronically
if desired.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
The primary risks to the successful completion and commissioning of the plant are:
• Costs higher than estimates for diesel generator addition – Given the volatility of
commodities and labor costs, 20% commodities escalation and an additional 10% over
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AE 9/3/2008 A 09‐004 Grant Application Page 6 of 16
the total as added. The ORC unit was quoted at a ROM cost ranging from $600,000 to
$900,000 installed for the UTC package, and the high ROM was selected as the project
basis price.
• Timely design, receipt, and installation of the ORC unit – The installation of the new
diesel generator is structured to allow future installation of an ORC unit when CEC
became financially capable. This grant application cycle and CEC coinciding
construction schedule offers the opportunity and immediacy to deploy the energy-saving
technology to reduce the costs associated with retro-fitting at a future time, and maximize
the life-cycle benefit by deploying the technology to save fuel and energy costs now. The
incremental cost increase to the project is outweighed by the energy savings benefits
realized by the ratepayers.
• Conventional financing crisis – Discussion with CoBank, CEC’s primary lender,
indicates that incremental increases to the base rate structure may be necessary to secure
conventional commercial financing for the installation of the new diesel generator. CEC
does not have the financial risk tolerance in the current credit market to independently
finance the ORC unit at this time.
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 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 for completion of each phase.
• If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for
an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases
are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
4.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available.
Discuss the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may
be available for the market to be served by your project.
While we have worked hard to increase our fuel efficiency by increasing our hdyro‐
electricity capacity (see attached graph of diesel and hydro pe rcentages over time), we
trive continually to implement new technology whenever possible to improve Cordova’s s
business climate and make living in Cordova more affordable.
Our analysis of energy source alternatives leads us to the conclusion that while in the longer
term other renewable energy sources are as attractive if not more attractive, their
development horizon is much too long for meeting our immediate energy needs. Other
otential sources available to the Cordova energy market and their advantages and
isa
p
d
dvantages include:
• Increasing diesel generator efficiency, and adding heat recovery units.
• Wind: CEC and the Native Village of Eyak have entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement to collaborate on mapping wind resources.
•
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 7 of 16 9/3/2008
Solar: not readily available in the Cordova area.
Natural gas: prohibitively expensive to develop transportation infrastructure.
•
•
Propane: requires costly re‐tolling of diesel generator plant and fuel storage for
different fossil fuel operation.
• Dam storage pool: CEC is pursuing licensing of a dam storage pool and has two strong
site candidates, but the licensing, permitting and construction steps will take about
seven years.
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.
Cordova Electric Cooperative’s current energy supply portfolio includes:
• Power Creek hydro‐electric facility, with two each 3MW Turgo Turbines, capable of
generating 5.5 MW, commissioned in 2001, and the
• Orca Diesel Power Plant with four diesel generators (when the Power Creek hydro‐
elec diesel power plant) tric facility became operable, CEC retired its other, older
including:
o two 1,090 kW rated 2000 Caterpillar in a container van;
o one 2,400 kW rated 1984 Fairbanks‐Morse 38TD8‐1/8; and
o one 2,500 kW rated 1985 EMD 20‐645 E4 (system‐wide average effi ciency of all
diesel generators is 13.65 kWh/gallon in 2007)
• Conservation: CEC is replacing 20 % of Cordova’s street lights with LED lights, has
automated plant lighting at the Power Creek and Eyak plants to reduce internal use of
diesel; distributed 3,500 compact fluorescent bulbs to its Cooperative membership at no
charge; joined Touchstone Energy and distributed their energy brochures to CEC
members; formed a partnership with the Native Village of Eyak and Cordova School
District to purchase five wind anemometers to map Cordova’s wind resources.
4.2.2 Existing Energy Resources Used
Briefly discuss your understanding of the existing energy resou rces. Include a brief
discussion of any impact the project may have on existing energy infrastructure and
resources.
Due to our unique circumstance of remote location, the community of Cordova has very few
options for meeting its energy needs. Hydro‐electricity, diese l fuel, gasoline, propane and a
modest amount of wood heat meet the electrical, heating and transportation needs of the
community. The attached graph illustrates CEC’s transition in progress from sole
dependency on diesel power (from CEC incorporation in 1978) to ever greater fuel
efficiency with increased hydro‐electric capacity.
The Cordova Electric Cooperative was incorporated in 1978 and until 1989, Cordova relied
solely on diesel fuel for power. Low diesel fuel prices, low costs of shipping and storing
diesel fuel, and the relatively low installed cost of diesel generation were tolerable. Concern
for rising fuel cost and increasingly higher environmental stan dards for air quality, fuel
transport and storage prompted construction of the Humpback Creek Hydroelectric project.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 8 of 16 9/3/2008
The negative environmental impacts of the Exxon Valdez Oil spill on the community, and of
diesel generation on the air and water quality, increased the u rgency. Coal fired generation
and natural gas resources from the Carbon Mountain fields 40 miles south of Cordova were
evaluated and determined infeasible. A tidal power study was completed in 2001 and
determined infeasible. Wind resources are available, and are c urrently under assessment at
CEC cost in partnership with the Native Village of Eyak, but would compete with existing
run‐of‐river hydro assets, greatly reducing their feasibility u ntil a storage option is
developed. At least 13 hydro‐electric sites were evaluated unt il the Power Creek site was
selected and successfully developed as the second run‐of‐river hydroelectric project for the
community in 2001. Conservation has been identified as the other existing energy
“resource” and is being aggressively implemented internally and externally in the
community by CEC in the transportation and heating sectors in addition to electrical
consumption. Conservation and efficiency will free existing energy supply resources and
offset the need to develop addi tional generation assets.
A dam storage project is currently under preliminary analysis by Cordova Electric
Cooperative at CEC expense. Fuel prices have tripled in the last 18 months, diesel as a
primary fuel source is less affordable than ever, particularly given the age, inappropriate
unit sizing and dispatch, and re tively poor efficiency of the existing diesel generation. la
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on
energy customers.
Cordova is located on the eastern edge of Prince William Sound in south‐central Alaska
approximately 160 air miles east of Anchorage. Although once connected to interior Alaska
points with a railroad, there have been no overland (road or rail) connections to interior
roads and population centers for several decades. Transportation to Cordova generally
consists of scheduled air service to Anchorage or Southeast Ala ska, bi‐weekly ferry service
within Prince William Sound and barge service from Washington state.
Cordova’s principal industry is fishing and fish processing. It has been the home port and
home to fishermen and processors for Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska.
However, Cordova lost about half of its canneries and fish processors in the late 80s and
early 90s due to higher energy and transportation costs than other PWS communities. The
burden of high energy costs threatens the sustainability of Cordova’s fishing industry.
Annual energy demands include residential use, small business, and the public service and
government sectors including the USFS Ranger District, USCG Cutter, Air Station, and
Housing, municipal buildings, schools, swimming pool and recrea tion center. Cordova’s
total population as certified by the US Census 2000 is 2,564. More recent State population
counts show our population decreasing, however, and the Alaska Community Database
counts 2,194 current residents. The steady annual population decline of 14.4% since
2000 can be attributed to the hardship created by the high cost of reliable energy.
Electrical demand has exceeded CEC’s supply capacity via its two run‐of‐the‐river
hydroelectric projects, Power Creek and Humpback Creek (while Humpback Creek remains
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 9 of 16 9/3/2008
out of service). Diesel fuel generation has to be provided during the summer fish processing
season, and fish processing is Cordova’s primary industry. When Power Creek is routinely
taken out of service for an hour at a time, or for several hours a day during annual flood
events, all four diesel generators must be operated to meet sys tem loads. Loss of any one
diesel generator reduces CEC generation assets below the demand, and power outages
result.
Summer demand for energy comes primarily from the commercial seafood processing
industry, the economic lifeblood of the community. In the seafood sector, the first and third
largest processors upgraded and added demand to their facilities in 2006 and the largest
will upgrade and add additional substantial demand and fish waste processing plant
(approximately 1400 kW or 25% of system peak) in 2008. The second largest will be
upgrading and adding demand in winter 2008. This drives the economy of the community
and generates essential jobs, raw fish tax revenue, and sustainability to the community and
the State of Alaska.
This project directly reduces the use of diesel fuel and increases the productivity and
longevity of an existing system. The Orca efficiency upgrade will help CEC meet the
growing seafood processor loads. The addition of diesel capacity will ensure back‐up
capacity in cash of loss of hydropower in light of growing loads. Reduced diesel fuel
osurcharges to the consumer will make offsh re processing less attractive.
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:
• nergy technology specific to project location A description of renewable e
• Optimum installed capacity
• Anticipated capacity factor
• tion Anticipated annual genera
• Anticipated barriers
• oncept Basic integration c
• Delivery methods
CEC is requesting $1.78 million to increase its diesel fuel efficiency by purchasing a new,
fuel‐efficient, low emission diesel generator and an accompanying heat recovery unit to
further boost fuel efficiency another four to six percent. CEC has placed a deposit on a new,
3.6 MW‐rated, EMD 710 series, 20‐cylinder diesel generator. The associated installation
scope of work calls for providing engineering and project management work that allows a
simultaneous installation of an organic Rankine cycle heat recovery system on the new EMD
generator. Currently the fuel portion of the bus cost of diesel generated power is over 25
cents per kWh. In a conservative scenario, if a 250 kW auxiliary organic Rankine cycle heat
recovery unit is installed on a 2.5 MW mainline unit the fuel savings would amount to
roughly 18.32 gallons per hour of run time (250 kW/13.65 = 18.3 2 gallons). Then if we
take the 18.32 gallons per hour and multiply by $3.87/gallon of fuel cost, a savings of $70.90
per hour would be realized any time that mainline units were in service. During 2007 both
mainline units were in service for a total combined run time of 4,137 hours. If a heat
Renewable Energ
Grant App
ecovery unit had been in use the fuel cost savings would have amounted to $268,905
y Fund
lication
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 10 of 16 9/3/2008
r
(using an older fuel price of $3.17/gallon), by all standards a significant savings.
In 2000, CEC’s Eyak diesel generation plant was dismantled, removing 4.9 MW of diesel
generation capacity from the CEC grid. This generation was partially replaced in winter
months by two 3516 Caterpillar generators rated at 1,100 kW each purchased in 1999. The
dismantled diesel generation was replaced during summer months by the 6 MW‐rated
Power Creek Hydro‐electric Plant and the 1.25 MW‐rated Humpback Creek Hydro‐electric
plant (HBC). These run‐of‐the‐river hydro‐electric plants produce little power during
winter months (mid‐October through mid‐May). In 2000, the Caterpillars were moved to
he Orca Power Plant to complement our 2.4 MW Fairbanks‐Morse and 2.5 MW EMD t
generators at that plant.
In November 2005, a plant fire removed the Humpback Creek hydro‐electric plant from
service. Repairs were nearly complete when the October, 2006 f lood destroyed many of the
Humpback Creek plant features, particularly the in‐take structure. The plant is not expected
to return to service before August, 2009. System peak electrical demands increased 16
percent in 2007 to 6.3 megawatts. With Humpback Creek hydro‐electricity unavailable, all
four diesel generators must be operated to meet peak demands. Two of CEC’s largest
lectricity consumers are increasing electrical power demand, o ne in summer 2008 needing
e
an additional 300 kW and one in summer 2009 adding approximatel y 900 kW in demand.
CEC operated two diesel power plants for most of its history, but dismantled one of those
plants in 2000. The remaining plant is our sole back‐up for power in cases of power outage
and heavy loads, although we strive to take full advantage of hydro‐power when stream
flow conditions allow. Under our current circumstances (Humpback Creek hydro‐electric
facility out of service since 2005 and Power Creek hydro‐electric taken off‐line for service at
outine intervals) all four diesel generators must be placed in service to meet peak r
demands.
The barriers to the success of a new technology include inadequ ate community
maintenance and support infrastructure, community compatibility, and general acceptance
of the technology. Cordova is a fishing community with freezer plant operation as the
primary electrical demand. Installation of a heat recovery uni t based upon refrigerant
echnologies is an excellent fit for the community, and was a primary reason for the t
selection of this technology. Refrigeration support is a core industry in Cordova.
The ORC will be integrated with the new diesel generator installation to run in tandem with
he new diesel. During winter months when diesel generation peaks, ambient temperatures t
are favorable for the cooling cycle of the ORC.
Auxiliary power production from the ORC will be bussed directly onto the CEC switchgear
ore delivery. The self‐enclosed package from UTC provides the necessary switchgear and
ontrols to be grid‐ready for installation.
f
c
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 11 of 16 9/3/2008
4.3.2 Land Ownership
Identify potential land ownership issues, including whether sit e owners have agreed to the
project or how you intend to approach land ownership and access issues.
Cordova Electric Cooperative owns the Orca Power Plant on a long‐term City of Cordova
Lease and has no outstanding issues with site control. CEC has operated this plant since
1985.
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
CEC operates the Orca Power Plant under Air Quality Control Operating Permit No.
AQ0221TVP02, a draft of which was issued by the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) on July 31, 2008 in response to the CEC’s application for a permit
renewal in November, 2007. This permit was circulated for public comment before being
finalized. As of this writing no public comments were received by DEC.
4.3.4 Environmental
Addres tal and land use issues apply, and if so how they s whether the following environmen
will be addressed:
• Threatened or Endangered species
• Habitat issues
• Wetlands and other protected areas
• rces Archaeological and historical resou
• Land development constraints
• ference Telecommunications inter
• Aviation considerations
• Visual, aesthetics impacts
• Identify and discuss other potential barriers
Air quality is the primary concern, and the new diesel generato r and organic Rankine cycle
heat recovery unit will further reduce emissions from diesel power generation. CEC’s
existing plant will have to be expanded to accommodate the new EMD diesel generator. CEC
plans to build the expansion with accommodations for one EMD 20‐cylinder series 710
generator and two additional EMD 8‐cylinder 710 series generators. CEC’s engineering
scope of services for the design and construction of this facility requires specifications that
conform to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s Air Quality Operating
Permit guidelines presently in effect for the Orca Power Plant. CEC retains HMH Consulting,
LLC of Anchorage, as its air quality permitting vendor. Design work for the expanded
facility, diesel generator and heat recovery unit is required to conform to current editions of
the NEC, NESCl, UBC and RUS guidelines.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 12 of 16 9/3/2008
4.4 Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed 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 our current knowledge and detailed project cost information based on y
unders e the following: tanding of the project. Cost information should includ
• Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase
• Requested grant funding
• nd Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in‐ki
• Identification of other funding sources
• Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system
• Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
The total cost of purchasing a new fuel-efficient, low-emission diesel generator and
accompanying heat recovery unit is estimated to be $5.26 million. Because CEC is purchasing
the generator to help ensure adequate back-up capacity system-wide, the timing coincides with an
opportunity to install, at time of generator installation, a new heat recovery unit to increase the
generator’s efficiency even further. CEC is therefore requesting grant funds to cover the cost of
engineering work associated with the heat recovery unit and its purchase, or $1.78 million. CEC
is securing construction financing for the balance of the project funds from CoBank. Attached
are detailed construction and installation cost estimates prepared by Marsh Creek Engineers for
CEC.
4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Include constructed and how these would be anticipated O&M costs for new facilities
funded by the applicant.
• ost for this phase Total anticipated project c
• Requested grant funding
No additional staff component is required for this new equipment. The ORC increases required
maintenance tasks. This is offset by the reduced maintenance cost of operating the EMD
Generator. The project will operate within CEC’s current operating budget.
4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
• Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
• m indicate a price range Potential power purchase/sales price ‐ at a minimu
• Proposed rate of return from grant‐funded project
Cordova Electric Cooperative produces and sells power at published rates.
See attached summary of annual power costs.
4.4.4 Cost Worksheet
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 13 of 16 9/3/2008
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be
considered in evaluating the project.
Download the form, complete it, and submit it as an attachment. Document any conditions or
sources your numbers are based on here.
Figures used in our Application Cost Worksheet are based on current diesel fuel prices in
Cordova, and generator and heat recovery unit’s manufacturers’ specifications for fuel
efficiency.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09
‐004 Grant Application Page 14 of 16 9/3/2008
4.4.5 Business Plan
Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that i t will be sustainable. Include
at a minimum proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered.
The community of Cordova is a ready market for power supplied b y the Orca Diesel
ower
ble,
generator facility. Our business management approach to integrating this diesel fuel p
is focused on operating our most efficient generators when hydr o‐power is least availa
iven our seasonal hydrological flow patterns, with peak demand times for maximum g
hydro‐power benefit.
CEC plans to monitor the generator daily for the first three months of its operation to
ensure optimum performance, and make adjustments if necessary. We’ll adjust our
operating procedures and follow maintenance procedures accordin g to engineers’ and
manufacturers specifications. All of these actions are intended to ensure the longest
possible life of our investment and maximize energy production.
4.4.6 Analysis and Recommendations
Provide information about the economic analysis and the propose d project. Discuss your
recommendation for additional project development work.
Economic analysis conducted by CEC shows a very short project pay-back period of 7.15 years.
CEC has been aggressively working toward greater fuel efficiency, and is committed to passing
savings on to its customers. A CEC board workshop was held to present staff research and
recommendations for power requirements (including review of a power requirements study
prepared by Electric Power Systems in 2005), the necessity of purchasing a new diesel, the
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks of installing a new diesel generator. Capital costs,
ownership costs, life cycle costs, maintenance and operation considerations, service and support,
emissions standards and air quality constraints, and recommendations were presented to the
board. As a result, the EMD was selected as the generator of choice, sized appropriately per load
requirements, present and projected. The ORC was identified as an essential element in overall
fuel use reduction, but staff capabilities and the financial risks of two large capital projects were
not conducive to shouldering the additional cost.
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
• ower Purchase Agreement Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed P
price, RCA tariff, or avoided cost of ownership)
• 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
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 15 of 16 9/3/2008
CEC anticipates consuming 129,000gallons of diesel per year, and a cost savings of $516,000
year with the installation of a heat recovery unit on one of our diesel generators. Successful
completion of this project will enable us to continue investing in renewable energy by putting our
savings toward additional heat recovery units in the future. These direct savings to CEC will also
translate into lower fuel surcharges for CEC consumers.
The primary non-economic public benefit to Cordova residents, and to other communities who
choose to implement this technology, is an improvement in air quality from reduced particulate
emissions.
SECTION 6 – GRANT BUDGET
Tell us how much your total project costs. Include any investments to date and funding sources,
how much is requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an
applicant.
Include an estimate of budget costs by tasks using the form - GrantBudget.xls
Provide a narrative summary regarding funding sources and your financial commitment to the
project.
Total costs for the purchase of a new high‐efficiency, low emission diesel generator and an
organic Rankine heat recovery unit are anticipated to be $5.26 million. Funding for this
project is anticipated to come from two sources:
• CEC: we are spending $3.48 million of our funds for engineering and design work
associated with purchasing and installing the new diesel generator; and
• AEA: we are requesting $1.78 million from the AEA to purchase and install an
organic Rankine heat recovery unit at our diesel generator plant.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application
AEA 09‐004 Grant Application Page 16 of 16 9/3/2008
SECTION 7 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and
suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4
B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4
C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 6.
D. An electronic version of the entire application per RFA Section 1.6
E. Governing Body Resolution per RFA Section 1.4
Enclose a copy of the resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management that:
- authorizes this application for project funding at the match amounts indicated in
the application
- authorizes the individual named as point of contact to represent the applicant for
purposes of this application
- states the applicant is in compliance with all federal state, and local, laws
including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
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 Clay Koplin, PE
Signature
Title Chief Executive Officer
Date October 7, 2008