HomeMy WebLinkAboutD - HBC AEA Costworksheet Renewable Energy Fund
Application Cost Worksheet
Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project
phases. 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. Varies with stream flows, 4,000,000 kWh average.
See attached hydrograph.
Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel)
2. Existing Energy Generation
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 5 hydro turbines, 4 diesel generators
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 2 x 500kW Kato/Francis turbine, 1 x 250kW
Kato/Turgo turbine, 2 x 3,000 kW Gilkes turbines, 1
x EMD generator 2,500 kW, 1 x Fairbanks/Morse
2,403 kW generator, 2 x Caterpillar generator 1,090
kW.
iii. Generator/boilers/other type See above
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other All generators and turbines re-built in 2006
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Diesel efficiency is 13.65 kWh/gallon, 1999 – 2007
average.
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $662,390
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $595,486
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] 24,969,557 kWh, 2002 – 2007 average
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 841,763 gallons without Humpback Creek in service
Other Water
iii. Peak Load 6,136 kW (2007)
iv. Average Load 3.069 kW (2007)
v. Minimum Load 1,635 kW (five year minimum system load as of 10/5/08)
vi. Efficiency Diesel efficiency is 13.65 kWh/gallon, 1999 – 2007 average.
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.
RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9/26/08 Page 1
Renewable Energy Fund
vii. Future trends Sharply increasing peak demand and kWh in summer, decreasing in winter.
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] No data available to CEC.
ii. Electricity [kWh] Very little, estimated less than 1% systemwide.
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] No data available to CEC.
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] No data available to CEC.
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] No data available to CEC.
vi. Other
3. Proposed System Design: CEC Humpback Creek Renewable Hydro-electric
a) Installed capacity 1,250 kWh
b) Annual renewable electricity generation
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Electricity [kWh] 4,000,000 kWh
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $8.6 million for engineering, new in-take and diversion
b) Development cost $11,600,000
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $79,394 (savings of $65,406 over existing system)
d) Annual fuel cost $50 annual water rights fee
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity 293,040 gallons of diesel fuel
ii. Heat
iii. Transportation
b) Price of displaced fuel $3.87/gallon x 293,040 = $1,134,065 saved annually
c) Other economic benefits Reduced O&M, lower fuel surcharge to consumers,
dramatically increased project life cycle
d) Amount of Alaska public
benefits
Model for improved fuel efficiency in rural Alaska communities
RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9/26/08 Page 2
Renewable Energy Fund
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale CEC produces and sells power at published rates.
See attached annual power cost summary.
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/
cost ratio
[$ 65,406 (O&M savings) + $1,134,065 (fuel savings)] x 50 year project life
= $59,973,540 project life cycle savings / $11,600,000 project cost =
5.17 benefit to cost ratio
Payback $11,600,000 project cost / $1,199,470 annual savings =
9.67 years for project payback.
RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9/26/08 Page 3