HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1654I
AppendixA.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
ALASKA
U.s.D
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF ELECTRIC POWER REGULATION
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FERC NO.7114 -ALASKA
Volume 2.
Load Growth Forecast:The Alaska Power
Authority Forecasts
Future Energy Resources .
Energy Conservation
345-kV Transmission Line Electrical
Environmental Effects
Applicant:Alaska Power Authority
333 West 4th Avenue
Suite 31
Anchorage,Alaska 99501
FERC/DEIS-0038 ~~
/425
,--/"~'::::J~-E,(/
pLr::rL
VlO,t~5~
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information Services
Anchorage,Alaska
Additional copies of the Draft-EIS may be ordered from:
Division of Public Information
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
825 North Capitol St.,NE.
Washington,D.C.20426
May 1984
; ; i
'"
~
CONTENTS ','
Page
APPENDIX A.LOAD GROWTH FORECAST:THE ALASKA ~OWER AUTHORITY FORECASTS ,
A.l METHODOLOGY.,. . . ...~..'A-3
A.2 LOAD PROJECTION ',1'..A-4
A.3 WORLD OIL PRICE ,. . . . . ..."A-4
A.3.1 Some Current Views . . . . . .......A-4
A.3.2 Masking Effect of Inventory Changes.A-5
A.3.3 Some Recent Trends and Their Meaning .'A-5
A.3.4 APA Oil Price and Load Projection .A-6
A.3.5 FERC Projections . . ....A-13
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-17
APPENDIX B.FUTURE ENERGY RESOURCES y
B.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . .. .B-3
B.2 PETROLEUM FUELS.. . . . .. .B-3
B.J NATURAL GAS . . . . . . . .. .B-3
B.3.1 Reserves/Resources . .•B-3
B.3.2 Pricing of Natural Gas .. .8-4
B.3.3 Future Price of Natural Gas.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....B-5
B.3.3.1 Completion of the ANGTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B-5
B.3.3.2 Completion of Gas Pipelihe to Alaskan Gulf and Construction of
LNG Export Facilities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B-6
B.3.3.3 Construction of Facilities to Export Additional Volumes of
Cook Inlet Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B-6
B.3.3.4 No Additional Facilities for Export of Cook Inlet Gas B-6
B.3.3.5 Future Gas Prices B-7
B.4 COAL . . . . . .B-7
B.5 PEAT . . . . . ..B-B
B.6 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY.B-B
B.7 TIDAL POWER.. .B-B
B.B SOLAR ENERGY . .B-8
REFERENCES . . . . . .B-9
APPENDIX C.ENERGY CONSERVATION
C.l ENERGY CONSERVATION AND THE NATIONAL ENERGY ACT OF 1978 . . . . . . . . . . ...C-3
C.2 CONSERVATION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS--THE POWERPLANT AND INDUSTRIAL
FUEL USE ACT OF 197B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...C-3
C.3 THE PUBLIC UTILITY REGULATORY POLICIES ACT OF 1978--RATE DESIGN,LOAD MANAGEMENT,
AND REDUCTION OF THE GROWTH RATES IN THE DEMAND FOR ELECTRIC POWER C-4
C.4 RATE DESIGN AND LOAD MANAGEMENT--THE NARUC RESOLUTION NO.9 STUDY.. . . . ...C-4
APPENDIX D.345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE ELECTRICAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
D.l INTRODUCTION . . . ..D-3
D.2 OZONE PRODUCTION . . . . . .D-6
D.3 AUDIBLE NOISE . . . . . . . .D-B
D.4 RADIO NOISE.. . . . . . . .D-10
D.5 ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS D-19
D.5.1 Electric Fields D-19
D.5.2 Magnetic Fields D-21
D.6 ELECTRICAL SAFETY.D-22
REFERENCES . . . . . . ..D-23
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
COVER PHOTO:Artist1s Rendition of the Proposed Watana Dam and Reservoir
APPENDIX A.LOAD GROWTH FORECAST:THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY FORECASTS
A-I Projected World Oil Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-7
A-2 Price of Oil Under Various Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-7
A-3 Alternative APA Load Projections for 1983-2010 . . . . . . . ...A-12
A-4 FERC Staff Load Projections and Selected APA Load Projections--1983-2010 A-16
APPENDIX D.345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE ELECTRICAL EFFECTS
D-l Susitna Project 345-kV Transmission System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .D-4
D-2 Typical Tangent or Light-Angle Structure Placement Along Knik Arm-Gold Creek
Section of Anchorage-Fairbanks 345-kV Transmission Corridor.. . . . . . . .0.-5
v
..
LIST OF TABLES
Table
APPENDIX A.LOAD GROWTH FORECAST:.THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY FORECASTS
A-I APA's Reference Case World Oil Price Scenario .
A-2 APA's Reference Case Railbelt Load Projection,1983-2010
A-3 APA's DRI "Base Case"World Oil Price Scenario,1983-2005
A-4 APA's DRI "Base Case"Railbelt Load Projection,1983-2010
A-5 Implicit World Oil Price Scenario for·DOR Mean Projection
A-6 APA's DDR Mean Case Railbelt Load Projection,1983-2010 ...
A-7 World Oil Price Scenario Implicit in DOR's 30%Case Projection
A-8 APA's OOR 30%Case Railbelt Load Projection,1983-2010 ....
A-9 APA's Load Projections Relative to the Reference Case Forecast
A-I0 Annual Load Growth Implied by APA Forecasts .
A-II Railbelt Load Forecast,FERC High World Oil Price Scenario,1983-2022 .
A-12 Railbelt Load Forecast,FERC Medium World Oil Price Scenario,1983-2022
A-13 Railbelt Load Forecasts of the Last Decade .
A-14 Average Annual Expenditures for Electricity per Residential Household
in the Railbelt .
APPENDIX D.345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE ELECTRICAL EFFECTS
D-l Noise Levels of Typical Noise Sources .
D-2 Calculated Audible Noise Levels for the Anchorage-Fairbanks Corridor with
Three 345-kV Lines on a Common Right-of-Way Operating at 362.5 kV ..._.
D-3 Summary of Noise Levels Identified by USEPA as Requisite to Protect Public
Health and Welfa~e with an Adequate Margin of Safety .
D-4 Summary of Human Effects for Outdoor Day-Night Average Sound-Level of'
55 dB(A).
D-5 Audible Noise Complaint Guidelines Developed by Bonneville Power
Administration .
D-6 AM Radio Stations Received During Preconstruction Survey of Anchorage-Fairbanks
Transmission Corridor between Willow and Healy,July 1981 .
D-7 Existing Quality of Reception for AM Radio Stations .
D-8 Calculated Transmission Line Radio Frequency Noise Levels .
D-9 Zones of I nfl uence of Radi 0 Frequency Noi se . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0-10 TV Stations Received During Preconstruct ion Survey of Corridor Route,
July 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0-11 Existing Quality of Television Reception .
D-12 Possible EHV Line Effects on Communications Facilities and Recommended
Mi nimum Cl earances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D-13 Calculated Intertie Electric Field Strengths .
0-14 Right-of-Way Use of Single and Multiple Single-Circuit Transmission Lines
(
Page
A-8A-a
A-9
A-:9
A-I0
A-I0
A-l1
A-l1
A-12
A-13
A-14
A-14
A-17
A-17
D-9
D-I0
D-l1
D-12
D-12
D-14
0-14
D-16
D-17
D-18
D-18
D-20
D-22
D-23
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information serVices
Anchorage,Alaska
""
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT,FERC NO.7114
APPENDIX A
LOAD GROWTH FORECAST:THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY FORECASTS
prepared by
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Staff
A-I
.,(-
A-3
~
APPENDIX A.LOAD GROWTH FORECAST:THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY FORECASTS
A.1 METHODOLOGY
The Applicant has submitted a number of alternative load forecasts for the Railbelt,based on
varying world oil price scenarios.All these forecasts were generated by means of the same
modeling structure.That structure employs three computer-operated models that provide projec-
tions of:(1)regional demographic,and state economic and fiscal variables,(2)regional
electricity demands given specific energy price assumptions,and (3)least-cost generation
expansion programs given a demand forecast.The last two model s are iterated to determine a
consistent electricity demand forecast given the cost of power projected by the generation
expansion program appropriate to that demand forecast..
The first computer model--the Man in the Arctic Program (MAP)Economic Mbdel--operates for each
of 20 regions within the state;the Railbelt consists of six of those regions.Region-specific
projections are produced by disaggregating a statewide projection of employment,population,and
household formation variables.The state-level economic,fiscal,and population portions of MAP
are solved algebraically in simultaneous fashion.That is,equations within the economic portion
of the model are dependent,for instance,on projections within the population portion of the
model.The population projections also are dependent on the economic projections.This inter-
dependence,or simultaneity,requires the MAP model to solve iteratively for each year1s set of
projections.The fourth portion of MAp--the household formation portion--is not interdependent
with any of the other projections,but merely produces project ions based on the results of the
population forecast.
While the many simultaneous and recursive relationships,as well as the large number of equations
(more than 1,000)contained in MAP,suggest a highly complex forecasting system (which it is),
it is also the case that a great deal of critical information concerning the Railbelt economy
has to be forecast exogeneous to the MAP model.For instance,employment projections for the
most important sectors of the basic economy have to be assumed.Similarly,large components of
the state's projected revenues--a dominant influence in the Railbelt economy--have to be assumed
in order to generate forecasts with MAP.The inability of MAP to generate projections for some
of these economic variables is due in part to their dependence on influences outside the economy
of Alaska.(For instance,employment within the fishing industry is determined in the main by
demand fOI'Alaska IS fi sh products in the export markets.)In other instances,independent
mode 1i ng efforts conducted by unaffi 1i ated organi zat ions have been used to formul ate assumed
values for some of the MAP data inputs.The MAP projections rely,for instance,on some fore-
casted data prepared by the Alaska Department of Revenue.
The MAP model operates to produce annual forecasts through the year 2010.Output from the MAP
model that is used subsequently by the Rai'lbelt Electricity Demand (RED)Model as input data
consists of annual population projections by load center,total annual employment by load center,
and annual household formation projections by load center.The RED model requires exogeneous
forecasts of retail pri ces for fue 1 oi 1,natural gas,and e 1ectri city.The project ions of
electricity demand produced by the RED model are customer-class-specific for three categories of
customers--residential,business and miscellaneous--and represent total annual kilowatt-hour
(kWh)consumption at the customer's meter for five-year intervals.Linear interpolation of
these forecasts is used to derive annual projections.
The residential consumption portion of RED employs an end-use approach that recognizes nine
major end uses and one catch-all category of end use appropriate to this group of consumers.
The total stock of electricity-consuming appliances and equipment is a function of time and the
type-of-household-formation projections generated with RED.(The latter are consistent with MAP
model input data for households.)Vintage-specific electricity consumption profi les for the
various end uses are combined with the stock projections to compute energy usage before making
adjustments for fuel price changes.The price-induced consumption adjustments are premised on
assumed values for Railbelt own-and cross-price elasticities associated with electricity,
natural gas,and fuel oil prices.
The business consumption portion of the RED model actually encompasses the commercial,small
industrial,and government sectors of the Railbelt.Aggregate electricity consumption in the
absence of any change in fuel prices is forecast as a function of regional commercial floor
space,which is derived from an ad hoc assumption regarding future trends in the relationship
between floor space and total emplOyment.The price-induced changes in consumption of electri-
city by the business sector are modeled in a fashion similar to that used in the residential
sector.That is,the values for own-and cross-price elasticity terms are assumed.
A-4
The mi see 11 aneous sector e1ectri ci ty consumpti on projections represent use for street 1ight i ng,
vacation homes,and vacant dwellings.These consumption projections are forecast by assuming a
multiplier for total residential and business sector kWh consumption representative of street
lighting requirements,a multiplier for total number of households times a constant kWh con-
sumption factor to represent vacation home electrical consumption,and a multiplier for the
total number of vacant houses representing vacant-dwell i ng kWh consumption.The sum of these
three products is the projected miscellaneous-section consumption.
In"addition to the residential,business,and miscellaneous sectors,a fourth component of elec-
tricity consumption is appended to each year's kWh projection.This component is identified as
"exogenous i ndustri all oad."The kWh load projected for thi s customer category is an ad hoc
forecast based on the judgment of a consulting firm that participated in the preparationo{the
license application.
The Applicant's projections of annual peak demand within the Railbelt are computed by means of a
load factor multiplier that operates on the kWh projections to produce the peak kW demand.Load
factor is defined as the ratio between the average hourly kW demand for the year and the annual
peak kW demand for the year.Thus,dividing the annual kWh load projection from a RED model
forecast by the number of hours in the year (i.e.,8,760 in a non-leap year)and then dividing
by the load factor results in a figure for peak demand.The load factors used in the Applicant's
projections are assumed values specific to the Anchorage area and to the greater Fairbanks area
of the Railbe1t.These assumed load factors are the simple averages for the period 1971-1980
for each of the two regions.The project variation over time in the implied load factor for the
Ra il be 1t as a whole deri ves from the varyi ngcontri but ions to total kWh load attri butab 1e to
Anchorage and Fairbanks over the forecast period.
A.2 LOAD PROJECTION
The Applicant has prepared load projections for 1983-2010 under a wide range of alternative
scenarios.Each forecast scenario is characterized by a specific trajectory for the price that
crude oil will command in world markets over the forecast horizon.
There are at least three reasons that the world oil price is chosen as the single exogenous
variable to be altered in attempting to bracket the load growth in the Rail belt.First,world
oil prices affect the level of petroleum revenues to the State of Alaska,mainly through sever-
ance taxes and royalty payments.These revenues account for more than 80%of total state revenues,
and the 'state is the single largest economic force acting on the Rai1belt economy.Second,
world oil prices affect directly the costs of electricity generated in the Railbelt because of
the linkage between prices of crude and other fossil fuels.As demonstrated in Section 1.2,the
Rai1belt depends heavily on fossil-fired electric generation.Third,world oil prices,through
their influence on other fuel prices,affect the substitution possibilities that exist for
electricity in the Railbelt.
A.3 WORLD OIL PRICE
A.3.1 Some Current Views
There is little consensus in views concerning future world oil prices.Oil price forecasts for
the year 2010 range from as low as about $12 per barrel to $110 per barrel ($88 to $809 per
metric ton)(in 1983 dollars).Clearly,there is considerable uncertainty concerning future oil
prices.The uncertainty can be traced back to one fact--since late 1973,the price of oil has
contained a large element of monopoly profit.*The high oil price projections are all based on
an inherent assumption that the OPEC nations will maintain their market power and continue to
extract large monopoly profits from the price of oi1.**The lower oil price projections derive
from an inherent assumption that the OPEC nations will lose much of their market power and that
prices will fall toward the marginal cost of finding and producing new oil.The OPEC nations
already have lost most of the market power they possessed before 1979.The rapid decline in
*As used here,monopoly profit is defined as the difference between the actual price of oil and
the price it ,would bring in-a fully competitive market.For example,assume that the actual
price of a .barre1 of oil is $29/barrel ($213/metric ton),that it would only be $15/barre1
($110/metricc ton)in a fully competitive market (its cost to the marginal cost producer),and
that the cost to actually produce a barrel of Middle East crude oil is only $3/barrel ($22/
metric ton).~Middle Eastern country would thus extract $14 ($103)monopoly profit and $12
($88)economic rent (or producer surplus)from each barrel produced and sold.Its total profit
(economic rent and monopoly profit)"'would be $26/barrel ($195/metric ton).
**Market power is possessed whenever a group of producers,by restricting production,are able to
maintain the price of a product higher than it would otherwise be i'n a fully competitive market.
Market power is a requirement for extracting monopoly profits.
~
A-5
OPEC oil demand (from 31 million barrels per day [mmb/d][4.2 million metric tons per day (MT/d)]
in 1979 to 14.3 mmb/d [1.9 million MT/d]in February 1983)forced these nations to reduce the
price of oil during March 1983.A further decline in OPEC ~ildemand would likely cause further
price cuts.
Consequently,the key question in predi ct i ng future oil pri ces relates to whether,demand for
OPEC oil will remain strong enough to allow the OPEC nations to continue to extrcft;t monopoly
profits from the price of oil.If so,how much can they extract and for how 10ng?'Ylf not,then
how far will prices fall?Those individuals forecasting higher oil 'prices assume that a strong
upturn in the world economy will increase world oil consumption and cause incl'eased prices.
Forecasters projecting lower oil prices assume that the demand for OPEC oil will continue to
fall in spite of an improving world economy due to continuing fuel switching,conservation,and
a growth in non-OPEC oil production,causing a loss of market power and a further oil price
decline.Most forecasters expecting oil prices to rise acknowledge that if the demand for OPEC
oil continues to decline,then oil pri ces also wi 11 fall.The differences in oil price forecasts,
therefore,stem from di fferent expectations of future demand for OPEC oil.'
A.3.2 Masking Effect of Inventory Changes
Oil prices have stabilized and OPEC oil production has increased since the March 1983 oil price
reduction.While OPEC oil production has risen,oil consumption likely has continued to fall.
This discrepancy between production and consumption results from inventory changes.Throughout
most of 1982,world petroleum inventories were reduced by about 1.5 mmb/d (200,000 MT/d).Thus,
1982 oil consumption was actually higher than indicated by production data.In addition,about
200 million barrels (27 million MT)were withdrawn from storage immediately prior to the March
1983 official oil price reduction.This abnormal inventory drawdown resulted in about a 4.5 mmb/d
(600,000 MT/d)reduction in OPEC oil demand during a season when demanu normally increases.
Actual oil consumption during the period was several million barrels per day higher than oil
production.
Recent OPEC oil production levels of 17.5 to 18.5 mmb/d (2.4 to 2.5 million MT/d)should not be
viewed from the perspective of OPEC's February 1983 production level [14.3 mmbld (1.9 million
MT/d)],which was abnormally low due to rapid inventory withdrawals,but from the perspective of
the approximately 20 mmbld (2.7 mi 11 ion MT/d)average rate that OPEC woul d have produced duri ng
1982 had it not been for inventory drawdowns.OPEC's recent production is about equal to its
expected oil demand,assuming world oil consumption has continued to decline relative to energy
consumption as it did in 1982.Thus,the true demand for OPEC oil still appears to be declining.
If so,then OPEC may have difficUlty maintaining the current oil price structure.
A.3.3 Some Recent Trends and Their Meaning*
Spot-market oil prices have declined approximately 27%(in nominal dollars)since they
peaked in 1981.There is considerable speculation that they may fall again soon.
Thus,the OPEC nations have lost much (but not yet all)of their market power.
Oil has rapidly lost its share of the world's energy consumption.It lost a 6%share
during the last three years.The free world's oil production declined 10.lmmb/d
(1.4 million MT/d)from 1979 through 1982.Adjustments for inventory changes indicate
that oil consumption declined 7.2 mmb/d (980,000 MT/d).Of this,5.7 mmb/d
(775,000 MT/d)(79%)resulted from a reduction in oil's share of total energy consump-
tion.
Oi 1 production has decl ined 7%per year during the recent world economic I'ecession
compared with a decline of only 2%in total energy production (5%and 1%when adjust-
ments are made for inventory changes).The rapid loss in market share indicates that
oil is currently overpriced relative to other fuels.
Oil's share of the world's energy consumption was declining slightly,prior to 1979
[when its price was around $17.60 per barrel ($129/MT)expressed in 1983 dollars].
The price at which oil would not lose market share may be as low as $14 per barrel
($103/MT),but likely is somewhat higher.
Conservation has reduced world energy consumption per unit of ecoQomic output.Since
1979,world energy consumption per unit of the world's Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
has declined at a rate of about 2%per year.Prior to 1973 the growth in the world's
energy consumption was about equal to the growth in the world's GDP.From 1974 through
1979 it fell below growth in the GDP by about 1%.The statistical evidence currently
available does not indicate that the rate of conservation is declining.
*All statistics and analyses in this section are based on Essley,1983.
A-6
Non-OPEC oil production has risen 6 mmb/d since 1976 at a compound growth rate of 5.3%
per year.It increased 5%during the first six months of 1983 compared with 1982.
Un 1ess oil pri ces fa 11 further,the 1arge profi t from oi 1 production shoul d continue
to draw large capital funds for exploration and development in non-OPEC countries.
OPEC oil production may continue to fall.It dropped 12 mmb/d (1.6 million MT/d)
during 1980 through 1982.If the world economic recovery is weak,if fuel switching
and conservation continue at near their recent rates,and if non-OPEC oil production
continues to rise,then OPEC oil production could decline another 3 to 7 mmb/d (400,000
to 950,000 MT/d)during 1983 and 1984.
Even a cursory analysis of recent trends indicates that oil prices could decline further.Some
analysts believe that market forces affecting oil prices will be so strong that it is only a
question of "when"prices fall rather than "if"they fall.Of course,mil itary conflict could
disrupt oil supplies and even cause an increase in oil prices.However,any supply disruption
and subsequent price increase would be temporary.Once supplies were restored,the same forces
currently tending to cause oil prices to fall,but amplified by the supply disruption and higher
prices,would again exert a strong pressure for a lower oil price.
Reduced energy conservation,and
*$l/bbl =$7.35/metric ton.
To assume that OPEC oil production will increase in the near term to the extent that some ana-
lysts have projected requires assumptions of:
29
20102000
24
1995
22
1990
2024
1985
29
1983
Oil price ($/barrel)*
Year
Strong worl d economi c recovery and future growth (i.e.,hi gher than most economi sts
are generally projecting),
Reduced fuel switching,
Figure A-I shows the oi 1 pri ce range that FERC cons i ders to be most 1 ike ly.FERC 's mi d-range
projections,expressed in 1983 dollars,are as follows:
A leveling or decline in non-OPEC oil production.
Such events are possible,and some analysts projecting increased oil prices (or even stable oil
prices)obviously consider them more likely than a continuation of recent trends.Nevertheless,
almost all analysts agree that there is so much uncertainty that any oil price projection,
whether up or down,should be viewed with circumspection.
FERC's projection is based on an assumption that the strength of economic forces now acting in
the direction of reducing oil prices (fuel switching,conservation,and the growth of non-OPEC
oil production)will continue to exceed the strength of economic forces tending to increase oil
prices (renewed world economic growth).Figure A-2 shows several oil price projections by
Alaska's Department of Revenue;Sherman H.Clark,Associates (SHCA),consultants to the Alaskan
Power Authority;and DOE.The SHCA and DOE projections are all postulated on an assumption that
the combination of economic forces will cause a sufficient growth in demand for oil to allow
OPEC to incr~ase its output,and hence maintain its market power.
If oil prices decline,then the magnitude of fuel switching and conservation should diminish,
less exploration and development should occur in non-OPEC countries,and the world's economic
growth should be stimulated.In short,a reduction in oil prices will reduce the magnitude of
forces tending to further reduce oil prices and will increase the magnitude of forces tending to
cause pri ces to ri se.As a consequence,even if oil pri ces dec 1i ne in the near term,they
eventually will start to rise again.Almost all analysts project increasing prices after about
a decade or less.Conversely,if oil prices rise,then the economic forces tending to cause oil
prices to fall will be strengthened,whereas the degree of the world's economic recovery will
tend to ~e'reduced.
A.3.4 APA Oil Price and Load Projection
The APA takes asi ts reference case for the worl d oil price scenario a projection made by
Sherman H.Clark Associates,a CaJifornia-based energy consulting firm.The forecasters respon-
sible for this oil price projection have assigned a 35%probability of occurrence to this
--I
A-7
""100 ,..---I
20502040203020202010
Year
20001990
"~,'-~~~,+~,
"",,
"Possible Supply Disruption ",-\~~'.-~~II ~~
II ~~~~"~-~,~.".
\...~~~-~\'*_~__---------_Minimum----I ---,,,--------------V----Competitive Pricing Potential Possible Decline Due to
(price collapse)Photovoltaics,Fusion,etc.
19801970
Figure A-I.Projected World Oil Prices.
100
80
CI:I...
S
"E
'1:S
N 60
coen.....
I
is-40c
CDu,-;::.
~
20
(1)
/(2)
/
/"
"/
/"
/.
/./(3)./
./,••(4)
/~..-."..~~....~.~,-
;/__(5)
.",.,.......,'..~--"-._.,.
-.~-}~....·-··_··_••_••_(6
-------(7}
1.DO ENNEP-83 Scenario C
2.Sherman H.Clark Associates-Supply
Disruption
3.DOE NNEP-83 Scenario A (low case)
4.Sherman H.Clark Associates-No Supply
Disruption -
5.Alaska Department of Revenue-Mean
6.Alaska Department of Revenue-50%
7.Alaska Department of Revenue-30%
1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
2010 2020
Figure A-2.Price of Oil Under Various Forecasts.
Table A-I.APA's Reference Case World Oil Price Scenario
A-8
Table A-2.APA's Reference Case Railbelt Load Projection,
1983-2010
-14.9
-4.7
-1.2
2.6
Annual Rate
of Change in
Price
(%)
28.95
27.61
26.30
50.39
Price in
Final Year of
Period
(1983$/bbl)
Energy Peak Demand
Year (Gwh)(MW)
1983 2,803 579
1985 3,096 639
1990 3,737 777
1995 4,171 868
2000 4,542 945
2005 5,093 1,059
2010 5,858 1,217
Source:Based on data from Application Volume 2C.
Year(s)
1983
1984
1985-1988
1989-2010
Conversion:$1/bbl=$7.35/metric ton
Source:Based on data from Applic~tion Volume 2a.
particular scenario.Among other things,this forecast,according to APA,assumes "that OPEC
will continue operating as a viable entity and will not limit production during the forecasted
period.Recent trends in economic growth in the United States and the free world ~ill continue
at reasonable rates."The particular prices for world crude associated with this reference case
are shown in Table A-I.State petroleum revenues consistent with this world oil price trajectory
are computed and are input to the MAP model to begin the load forecasting sequence.The results
of that forecast procedure are shown in Table A-2.
Load proj E!ct ions also are made that use the "base case"forecast of worl d oil pri ce constructed
by Data .~Resources,Inc.(ORO.Accordi ng to APA,the DRI forecast makes ass umpt ions si mil ar to
the Sherman Clark projections regarding the continued influence that OPEC will yield on world
oil markets,as well as the economic growth to be exhibited by the U.S.economy.DRI's forecast
of world oil prices are,however,noticeably different than the reference case scenario,as is
shown in Table A-3.
State petroleum revenue inputs to the MAP model are prepared similarly to the procedure described
above,and the load forecasts result is shown in Table A-4.
A-9
Table A-3.APA's ORI IIBase Case ll World Oil Price Scenario,
1983-2005 ....
Price in Annual Rate
Final Year of of Change)n
Period Pri ce,,-
Year(s)(1983$/bb 1)(%)
1983 28.95 -14.9
1984 25.17 -13.1
1990 36.99 6.6
2000 53.43 3.7
2001-2005 56.54 1.1
Conversion:$l/bbl =$7.35/metric ton
Table A-4.APA's DRI IIBase Case ll Railbelt
Load Projection,1983-2010
---l
Year
1983
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Energy Peak Demand
(Gwh)(MW)
2,811 580
3,109 642
3,717 773
4,341 904
5,041 1,050
5,857 1,220
6,965 1,450
~
A third load projection is presented by APA that is premised on the Alaska Department of Revenue's
(DOR)mean probability estimates of state petroleum revenues.These petroleum revenue figures
are translated into implicit prices for world oil that are presented in Table A~5.The load
projections associated with this trajectory of world oil prices are summarized in Table A-6.
A fourth projection,which repeats the process just described for the DOR's mean probability
case,is made using the DOR's "30%probability"case.That is,the Department of Revenue has
forecast a level of state petroleum revenues that their model projects has a 30%chance or less
of not being exceeded.(A more straightforward way of interpreting this is that there is a 70%
chance that state petroleum revenues will exceed the amount forecast under this case.)Again,
the implicit world oil prices consistent with these petroleum revenue projections are derived,
and the inputs to MAP are calculated.The world oil price trajectory and associated load fore-
cast for this scenario are shown in Tables A-7 and A-8.
For comparison,all four of these alternative load projections are depicted in Figure A-3.
Us i ng APA IS"Reference ll case as a standard for compari son,it shoul d be noted that there is
little to distinguish these projections in the near term.Variation around that Reference case
load projection is less than 3.5%in 1985,as shown in Table A-9.By 1990,however,significant
differences exist in the forecasts.Implied annual growth rate in kWh loads during that period
range from a high of 3.8%in the Reference case to a low of 2.2%in the DOR 30%scenario,as
shown in Table A-10.
A-10
Table A-5.Implicit World Oil Price
Scenario for DOR Mean Projection
Table A-6.APA's DOR Mean Case Railbelt
Load Projection,1983-2010
1.3
-14.9
-17.2
-5.4
-1.4
-1.8
Annual Rate
of Change in
Price
(%)
Energy Peak Demand
(Gwh)(MW)
2,776 573
3,050 630
3,508 730
3,849 801
4,228 879
4,726 982
5,399 1,121
Year
1983
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Price in
Final Year of
Period
Year(s)(l983$/bbl)
1983 28.95
1984 23.96
1985 22.67
1986 22.35
1987 21.95
1988-1999 25.60
Conyers ion:$1/bbl =$7.35/metric ton
A-ll
'"
Table A-7.World Oil Price Scenario Implicit
in DOR's 30%Case Projection·
;-;
Price in Annual Rate
Final Year of of Change in
Period Price
Year(s)(1983$/bb 1)(%)
1983 28.95 -14.9
1984 22.74 -21.5
1985 21.00 -7.7
1986 20.32 -3.2
1987 19.52 -3.9
1988-1999 14.76 -2.3
Conversion:$l/bbl =$7.35/metric ton
Table A-8.APA's DOR 30%Case Railbelt
Load Projection,1983-2010
Year
1983
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Energy Peak Demand
(Gwh)(MW)
2,753 568
3,014 622
3,364 699
3,560 740
3,890 808
4,343 926
4,950 1,026
Table A-9.APA's Load Projections Relative to the
Reference Case Forecast
Forecast Scenario 1985 1990 1995 2000 2010
DRI 1.00 0.99 1.04 1.11 1.19
Reference 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
DOR Mean 0.99 0.94 0.92 0.93 0.92
>OOR 30%0.97 0.90 0.85 0.86 0.85
Figure A-3.Alternative APA Load Projections for 1983-2010.
DDR 30%
DDR mean
DRI
Reference
20102005.·2000
A-12
199519901985
2800
5000
4000
7000
6000
GW~
A-13
Table A-10.Annual Load Growth Implied by APA Forecasts
(percent)'"
Forecast Scenario 1985-1990 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2010
ORI 3.64 3.15 3.04 3;£9
Reference 3.84 2.22 1.72 2.60
DOR Mean 2.84 1.87 3.80 2.47
DOR 30 2.22 1.14 1.79 2.44
By 1995,the differences are more pronounced.The DRI base case scenario is higher than the
Reference case by 4%,and the OOR 30%case is lower by some 15%.The average annual growth in
kWh load implied by the high and low cases in 1995 varies by more than 175%.
Between 1995 and 2000,the APA Reference case exhibits the lowest average annual load growth of
any of the scenarios,despite being 7%and 14%higher in absolute terms than the DOR mean and
30%cases,respectively.The ORI-based scenario continues to exhibit better than 3%annual
growth during this period.
There is little change in the relationships among these alternative forecasts during the period
2000-2010.The Reference and both the DOR cases have converged on average annual growth rates
of near 2.5%.The DRI-based increases its growth sl ightly to 3.3%per year.An important
implication in the relationships among these scenarios is the insulation exhibited between
e1ectri city load growth and worl d oil pri ces in the event that those pri ces are assumed to
decl i ne.Note that the Reference case is characteri zed by worl d oil pri ces that grow at 2.6%
annually in real terms during this interval.The DOR 30%case has world oil prices that decline
throughout the period.Under both scenarios,however,electricity growth is virtually the same
during the ten-year period.The reasons for this behavior in the model forecasts have been
analyzed by the APA and are discussed below.
A.3.5 FERC Projections
The FERC has judged the world oil price trajectories described earlier to be more plausible than
the oil price scenarios recommended by the Applicant.As a consequence,an additional series of
load projections have been made using these world oil price forecasts.The projections use the
same modeling apparatus constructed by the APA and require conversion of the world oil price
forecast to a forecast of state petroleum revenues for use in the MAP model.*This conversion
was carried out in a manner consistent with the one used by APA.Further,the RED model input
requirements for end-user fuel prices were made consistent with FERC world oil price trajecto-
ries.The load projections that resulted for the medium and high world oil price assumptions
are shown in Tables A-II and A-12.No projections consistent with the low world oil price
trajectory could be generated.The state economic model component of MAP was unable to compute
a solution given the drastic reductions in state revenues implied by the low oil price in 1985.
This should not be viewed as a failure of the MAP model.The result is indicative of the very
serious economic problems the world and Alaska,in particular,are likely to face if the price
of oil collapses to the $10 barrel range in 1985.
*It should be noted that in addition to the changes in world oil price scenarios that FERC chose
to make,alterations to the MAP model also were pursued.The objective in making these alter-
ations was to improve what FERC judged to be the economic consistency of what appears to be a
sophisticated forecasting tool.Nevertheless,where the specification of an equation could be
altered to add economic content,as well as improve both the statistical fit and significance
of coefficients in the equation,then such a modification was made.In those instances when an
equation was successfully altered,it was also the case that substitution of the new equation
into the model caused the system to become unstable.This was the case because critical link-
ages within the system of equations were broken as a consequence of the changes made by FERC.
This can occur despite the changes'having improved the particular equation viewed in isolation.
This is not an unreasonable circumstance given a model with the complexity of the MAP system.
For this reason,FERC has jUdged that the forecasting models employed by the Applicant could
not be improved on in the time allotted,and these same models have been adopted for purposes
of generating the FERC Railbelt forecasts.
-l
A-14
Table A-11.Railbelt Load Forecast,FERC High World
Oil Price Scenario,1983-2022
Energy Peak Demand
Year (Gwh)(MW)
1983 2,814 581
1985 3,116 644
1990 3,567 742
1995 3,927 817
2000 4,447 925
2005 4,793 996
2010 5,371 1,115
2020 6,591 1,367
2022 6,866 1,424
Table A-12.Railbelt Load Forecast,
FERC Medium World Oil Price Scenario,
1983-2022
Energy Peak Demand
Year (Gwh)(MW)
1983 2,802 579
1985 3,094 639
1990 3,474 722
1995 3,788 788
2000 4,168 866
2005 4,623 960
2010 5,234 1,086
2020 6,424 1,332
2022 6,693 1,388
A-15
There are a number of ways to put these alternative projections into perspective.Three
approaches are used here.The first is a simple comparison of the FERC projections and the APA
projections.The second is a comparison of both sets of'forecasts with other projections made
previously for the Railbelt.The third is an examination of the changes in both electricity
intensity and electricity expenditure implied by these forecasts.
A graphical comparison of APA and FERC projections is shown in Figure A-4.It i~~<apparent that
the modest differences between the APA forecasts and the FERC forecasts are the resul t of the
relative insensitivity of the forecast mechanism to the price of w6rld oil.This feature merits
some scrutiny.As explained in previous sections,the current'dependence of the state,and
particularly the Railbelt economy,on the revenues generated from petroleum is dramatic.The
state government's expenditures are one of the largest single components of total state income,
and more than 80%of the state's revenues are directly attributable to petroleum taxes and
royalty fees.The MAP model employed in the generation of these various load forecasts has two
features that act to insulate the state economy from the impact of lower severance and royalty
payments that are the direct consequence of declining world oil prices.
First,a spending rule is implemented that establishes a constant per capita state government
appropriation,adjusted for,inflation.This fiscal rule reflects a state constitutional amend-
ment scheduled to become effective with the 1984 fiscal year budget.In the event that this
spending limit cannot be financed from current state revenues,plus the state's general fund
balance,then MAP imposes several plausible fiscal fixes in an effort to maintain the appropria-
tion level.Those fixes are:(1)imposition of a state personal income tax,(2)elimination of
the state's Permanent Fund dividend program,and (3)transfer of earnings from the state's
Permanent Fund into the General Fund,where they supplement that fund's revenues.
The second insulating mechanism is that the MAP model is provided state petroleum revenue fore-
casts that contain a corporate income tax component reflective of Alaska's newly enacted unitary
tax on corporate profits.The unitary tax subjects multistate corporations to an income tax
based on the state's "share"of total corporate profits from firms'worldwide operations.The
method of allocating the state's share of those profits is based on jurisdictional sales,employ-
ment,and capital investment relative to the corporatewide totals for those items.Because
total corporate profits for petroleum firms operating within Alaska cannot be forecast,much
less Alaska's share of their sales,employment,and capital investment,a simplified forecast
rule was adopted.The rule was to escalate petroleum-related corporate income taxes by 7%per
year for a designated world oil price scenario,referred to as an index case.For the other
world oil price scenarios,the corporate income taxes are higher or lower by the ratio of the
severance taxes for those scenarios relative to severance taxes for the index case.In the DOR
30%case,for instance,these income taxes grow by 5.5%per year,even though world oil prices
fall throughout the 27-year forecast period (and severance taxes and royalties combined decline
by 2.8%per year during that period).
An additional reason MAP model results are relatively insensitive to the variation in world oil
price trajectories is that no direct impacts on the petroleum industry within Alaska are included
in the alternative scenarios.That is,there are no variations in the assumed activity levels
for oil exploration,development,transportation,and refining.(This would appear consistent
with the forecast procedure used for the.petroleum-related corporate income taxes,described
above.However,such consistency demonstrates nothing with respect to the basic plausibility of
the employment assumptions.)
By way of demonstrating this insensitivity feature of the forecast system,it will be noticed
that the oil price in the FERC high case differs from the FERC medium case in 1990 by more than
50%,and between then and 2010,never by less than 30%.Yet,the Railbelt load forecasts associ-
ated with these two scenarios exhibit a maximum difference over that period of less than 7%.
Comparison of thes€projections with previous Railbelt load forecasts is informative from several
standpoints (see Table A-13).Beginning with the Henry J.Kaiser Company load forecast d6'ne in
1974,and continuing through a recent projection made by Battelle for APA in the original Susitna
license application,the history of load forecasting for the Railbelt would appear to be one of
nearly continual revision downward.The current APA and FERC projections appear consistent with
that trend.The other feature of some significance is the apparent lack of optimism with regard
to load factor improvement that has come to characterize the more recent projections.
The final means of putting the APA and FERC load forecasts in perspective is to examine the
implied electricity intensity levels,as well as the implied electricity expenditure levels,
reflected in the forecasts.First,it should be noted that there are no significant differences
across the various forecast alternatives with respect to energy intensiveness as measured by kWh
consumption per-capita and kWh consumption per household.There is,however,a significant
upward trend in energy intensiveness over the forecast period.The average annual rate of
increase in per-capita usage implied by these forecasts is 0.6%over the 1985-2010 period.The
per household rate of increase over the same period averages 0.45%.
Figure A-4.FERC Staff Load Projections and Selected APA Load Projections--1983-2010.
APA
reference
201020052000
A-16
199519901985
3500
5500
OOR mean
FERC high
FERC
medium
5000 OOR 30%
3000
4500
4000
GWh
6000
A-l7
There are significant differences in the implied expenditures for electricity across the various
load forecasts.Average electricity expenditures per household are shown in Table A-14 for a
representative of the projections.~
The variation in the real per household expenditures for electricity should presumably be reflec-
ted in the usage intensity figures discussed previously.
Table A-13.Railbelt Load Forecasts of the Last Decade
(GWh and MW)
1
Forecast 1980 1985 1990
H.J.Kaiser Co.3,543 6,434 11,701
1974 (677)tl (1,194) (2,155)
Railbelt Utilities 3;514 --10,377
1974 (537)(1,560)
Corps of Engineers 3,240 --6,840
1975 (740)(1,480)
Alaska Power Administration 3,155 --6,110
1976
ISER 2,790 --4,030
1980 (510)(735)
Battelle -- --4,456
1981 (892)
Battelle ----4,482
1982
Battelle --3,096 3,737
1983
FERC --3,094 3,474
t 1 Numbers in parentheses are peak load forecast.
1995 2000
11,650
(2,660)
10,940
5,170 6,430
(934)(1,175)
4,922 5,469
(983)(1,084)
4,894 4,728
4,171 4,542 .
3,788 4,168
Table A-14.Average Annual Expenditures for Electricity
per Residential Household in the Railbelt
(1982 $)
Forecast 1985 1995 2005
APA Reference
Case 713 834 955
FERC Medium
Case 712 774 869
DOR 30%
Case 709 706 706
REFERENCE FOR APPENDIX A
Ess 1ey,P.L.,Jr.1983.Future Worl d Oil Pri ces--Wi 11 They Ri se or Fa 11?ORA/FERC.
(November 21).
,
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT,FERC NO.7114
APPENDIX 8
FUTURE ENERGY RESOURCES
Prepared by
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Staff
8-1
.'
B-3
"".
APPENDIX B.FUTURE ENERGY RESOURCES
B.l INTRODUCTION
The physical availability of energy resources in the Railbelt is not a significant issue.There
are sufficient reserves of oil,gas,and coal,each taken individually,to meet the most opti-
mistic projections of internal Railbelt energy use from now until well past the mid-21st Century.
The cost at which any of these resources will be made availab"le to Railbelt consumers is what is
at issue,and it is the means of measuring such cost that is central to this discussion.
The real cost of consuming an energy resource within the Railbelt is not necessarily the sum of
the labor,capital,materials,and assorted other production expenses required to extract and
convert the resource to usable energy.The real cost is what that resource will command in the
market that values it most"That market can,and often does,lie outside the region.Where the
export price (i.e.,value)exceeds the cost of producing the resource for local consumption,it
is the export markets'payment foregone that is the cost of consuming the resource locally.By
consumi ng the energy locally,in thi s instance,the opportuni ty to recei ve the export value is
lost.Therefore,depending on what assumptions are made about the "highest valued use"to which
the Railbelt's energy resources can be put,there will be radically different circumstances that
characterize both the economic availability of energy resources and the most efficient means of
meeting the energy requirements of the region.
Although the Railbelt has been able to meet its current energy requirements at reasonable cost
(in certain cases,at comparatively modest cost),the issue of future energy cost is subject to
debate.The major source of controversy stems from the future course of world oil prices and
their relationship to the supply and demand for fossil fuels of all types.For this reason a
di scuss i on of the worl d oi 1 pri ce and its probable future range is necessary.,
B.2 PETROLEUM FUELS
The supply of petroleum fuel is related to the supply of crude6il.From Alaska's point of
view,its crude oil reserves are so large relative to its internal needs that supply should not
be a constraint on the use of petroleum fuels for the foreseeable future.Price i5 another
matter.If oi 1 pri ces ri se re 1at i ve to other energy resources,whi ch al so are abundant in
Alaska,then the state may receive the greatest economic benefit from "exporting".its petroleum
resources while consuming its lower-cost resources.Petroleum fuel consumption could become
"demand-constrained".'
The prices of petroleum fuels obviously are related to the price of crude oil.However,refin-
ing costs are independent of the price of crude oil;hence,fluctuations in crude oil prices
will not cause similar fluctuations in .refining costs.The cost of refining is unlikely to
change appreciably over time (in real dollars).As a consequence,variation in crude oil prices
should result in equivalent dollar variations in petroleum fuel prices (but not equivalent
percentage changes).
Various petroleum fuels'exceed crude costs by different amounts,due to different refining costs
and differences i ndemand.Normally,gaso 1i ne has the hi ghest refi nery markup of the hi gh-
volume petroleum fuels.Residual fuels normally are by-products and generally are sold for less
than the cost of crude oil.Recently,however,high-sulfur residual fuels have commanded a
higher price than low-sulfur crude oil on the U.S.West Coast and in Alaska.This abnormal
condition appears to be a result of the peculiarity of U.S.export laws (Tussing,1983)."Projec-
tions of future residual fuel prices thus are even more uncertain than projections of crude oil
prices,since an additional political uncertainty is added.
B.3 NATURAL GAS
8.3.1 Reserves/Resources
Alaska's proven gas reserves far exceed its internal needs for the foreseeable future under even
the most extremely optimistic projections of growth.Further,its potential gas resources may
materially exceed its proven reserves.The amount of gas required to generate all the Rail-
belt's electric power needs for the next half century [about 3 trillion cubic feet (Tcf)]is
1i ke ly 1ess than 10%of Alas ka I s proven gas reserves and perhaps 4%of its potential gas
resources.Paradoxically,some have suggested that Alaska's gas reserves may not be sufficient
to prudently plan to use gas for future electric power generation.
ilil
8-4
This paradox results from the location of Alaska's gas reserves and its potential gas resources.
The bulk of Alaska's gas may not be accessible for use to generate power in the Railbelt area,
may be accessible only after it is needed,or may be accessible only at a cost that prohibits
its use.Unless oil prices increase materially,a pipeline to transport Prudhoe Bay gas may not
be constructed.If oil prices follow FERC's projections,for instance,Prudhoe Bay gas may
remain locked in place well into the next century.The Cook Inlet proven reserves,while readily
accessible to the lower Railbelt area,may not be sufficient to meet the area's power needs for
more than about 20 years if consumption continues at the present rate.
However,in addition to the approximately 3.4 Tcf of proven reserves in the Cook Inlet area,the
United States Geological Survey indicates that there is likely another 1.3 to 13 Tcf of gas as
yet undiscovered.If so,then there should be more than adequate gas to meet the Railbelt's
power needs for the next half century.But since such potential reserves are not proven,and
may not materialize,it is argued that it would be imprudent to plan on the use of the as yet
undiscovered gas.Further,it is argued that even if the gas is present,gas prices will have
to rise materially to ensure that it is discovered and developed.If Prudhoe Bay gas reserves
remain locked in place,and if no new reserves are discovered in the Cook Inlet area,then a
strategy by Anchorage area electric utilities to rely on natural gas as a fuel for power genera-
tion could result in their turbines running out of fuel early in the 21st Century.
However,there is another side to the paradox that presents a dilemma to Alaska.It is ~uite
possible that Alaska's remote location may result in Alaskans receiving abundant gas supplies at
appreciably less than the cost of alternative energy supplies.If so,then the use of gas as a
fuel for power generation could result in,by far,the least costly power for Alaska.The
questions Alaska must answer with regard to future power generation,therefore,are (1)will gas
be available where it is needed,and (2)will it be available at a price that allows economic
power generation?
The reason natural gas may be an abundant,low-cost fuel in the future is similar to the reason
natural gas currently is an abundant,low-cost fuel in Alaska.Anchorage residents enjoy the
lowest natural gas rates in the United States,and because natural gas is used to generate
electricity,they enjoy some of the lowest electricity rates as well.The reason relates to
circumstances that determine natural gas prices.
B.3.2 Pricing of Natural Gas
Natural gas often is described as a II superi or"fue 1 because it is c 1ean-burni ng and does not
require user storage.Traditionally,however,when price distortions due to regulation are
stripped away,natural gas has never commanded as high a price at the wellhead as crude oil.
This paradox results from the fact that natural gas has higher long~distance transportation
costs as well as higher distribution costs than oil.Natural gas often is discovered during
exploration for crude oil,and produced with crude oil.Until sufficient gas reserves are
discovered to justify construction of transportation facilities to distant markets,gas produc-
tion often greatly exceeds local needs,and gas sells at distressed prices.When gas is trans-
ported a long distance to markets,net-back prices from the point of competition generally cause
gas to sell for less than alternative fuels.
Natural gas prices normally are determined by one of the following methods:
1.The marginal cost of production from previously discovered reserves.This condition
prevails whenever there is a large surplus,and producers compete to sell their gas in
a limited market.
2.The marginal cost to discover and develop new reserves (when no surplus exists).
3.A net-back price from a distant marginal point of competition (where gas competes with
other fuels).This condition normally prevails when local supply greatly exceeds
local needs and the gas is shipped to distant markets.
The first condition results in the lowest price.The second condition may allow (require)a
higher price than the third.However,when large volumes of gas are transported long distance
from a prodllci ng area,net-back priei ng may either set a 1imi t on the pri ce of gas or pull it
higher.
Gas reserves discovered in the Cook Inlet area were large compared with local needs,but were
not sufficient to justify construction of a pipeline to distant markets.As a consequence of
the large gas surplus,Anchorage atea electric and gas utilities have been able to purchase gas
on long-term contracts at low cost in a buyer's market.In an attempt to obtain a higher price
for their gas,Cook Inlet producers constructed two export facilities.One facility liquefies
the gas and shi ps it to Japan as 1 i quefi ed natural gas (LNG);the other faeil i ty converts gas to
urea and ships the urea to the U.S.West Coast and foreign markets.Currently these two facili-
ties consume about two-thirds of the gas produced from Cook Inlet gas fields,excluding field
8-5
use and losses.However,reserves are still large compared with local needs,and producers have
not yet obtained the market power to substantially raise grices.
Present gas contracts in Alaska were negotiated in a buyer's market.Future gas contracts will
more likely be negotiated under less ideal conditions from the buyer's point of view,although
it is possible that the reserve/production (R/P)ratio in the Cook Inlet area may,as a result
of new discoveries,remain high enough to keep prices low.",.
8.3:3 Future Price of Natural Gas
There are four possible scenarios of events that could result in somewhat different gas prices
in the Railbelt area.These are:
1.Completion of the Alaskan Natural Gas Transportation System (ANGTS)as currently
proposed.(This would make natural gas available in the northern Railbelt area.)
2.Completion of a gas pipeline to the Gulf of Alaska and construction of LNG facilities
for shipment to Japan or the U.S.West Coast.
3.North Slope gas not available to the Railbelt area but facilities are constructed to
export additional volumes of Cook Inlet gas.
4.North Slope gas not available to the Railbelt and no additional facilities are con-
structed to export additional Cook Inlet gas.
Under the first two scenarios,the adequacy of supply is not a factor,and price is the only
consideration relative to whether or not gas should be used for power generation.Under the
last two scenarios,both price and adequacy of supply are considerations.
8.3.3.1 Completion "of the ANGTS
If the ANGTS is completed,North Slope gas will compete with residual fuel oil for industrial
markets in the northern United States.The cost of gas in the Fairbanks area will be the net-
back price at the marginal point of competition,likely in the Chicago area.It should also be
equal to the North Slope wellhead price (determined on a net-back basis)plus the cost of trans-
portation to the Fairbanks area.Under present market conditions and projected costs of the
ANGTS,the net-back price to Fairbanks would be negative--which is why plans for the pipeline
have been "temporarily"delayed.If projected transportation costs do not decline significantly,
or if oil prices do not rise appreciab'ly,then the "temporary"delay could extend for several
decades.
Assuming that the North Slope producers will not agree to sell their gas until the net-back
price is positive,present transportation cost projections require market prices of approxi-
mately $10 per thousand cubic feet (Mcf)(in 1983 dollars)to ensure marketability of the gas
and construction of the pipeline.In such a case the net-back price at Fairbanks would likely
be close to $5.00 per Mcf,or higher.However,the Incentive Rate-of-Return (IROR)regulation
adopted by FERC provided a strong incentive for the Applicant to inflate the cost estimates.It
is quite possible that under the changed market circumstances the Applicant and producers will
now discover methods to reduce the cost of construction.Tussing et al.(1983)discuss such a
possibility.In addition to the possibility of building a pipeline at less cost than currently
projected,the cost per Mcf transported could also be reduced if additional reserves are dis-
covered on the North Slope and the size of the pipeline is increased to handle a large volume.
Any projection of net-back prices in Fairbanks following completion of the ANGTS at this point
in time is speculative.However,considering the possibilities for reducing costs,an initial
net-back price as low as $3.00 per Mcf or less seems conceivab"le.Although high compared with
current gas prices paid by Railbelt utilities,such a price would be appreciably less than
alternative fuel prices,and could allow electric power generation at considerably less cost
than is likely to be supplied by any other means.Even if cost reductions are not possible,and
the net-back price would be as high as indicated by current price projections,power could still
be generated at less cost than is likely to be supplied by any other potential source of power.
If one assumes that the ANGTS (or an equivalent pipeline)will be constructed,when is it likely
to be completed?If cost reductions are not possible,then the projected pipeline is unlikely
to be completed prior to gas prices rising to approximately $10 per Mcf in the Midwest indus-
trial market (expressed in 1983 dollars).This is unlikely to happen before oil prices rise to
approximately $60 per barrel (in 1983 dollars),which could be a long time in the future.If
substantial pipeline cost reductions are possible,and additional reserve discoveries allow
transportation of greater volumes to achieve economies of scale,then a market price of $6 to $7
per Mcf might be sufficient to provide an economic incentive to construct a pipeline.This
would require oil prices of $35 to $40 per barrel.If FERC oil price projections are correct,
it could be well into the 21st Century before such an oil price is reached.Although oil prices
:!:lli
8-6
could rise above those projected by FERC,there appears sufficient doubt concerning future oil
prices to cast considerable uncertainty on the potential availability of North Slope gas as a
potential fuel for power generation in the Railbelt.
8.3.3.2 Completion of Gas Pipeline to Alaskan Gulf and Construction of LNG Export Facilities
Should the gas pipeline be completed,gas would become available in essentially unlimited quanti-
ties in both the Fairbanks and Anchorage areas.The net-back price in Fairbanks would be the
same as if the ANGTS were constructed,since it would still be equal to the net-back wellhead
price plus the transportation cost to Fairbanks.The cost in the Anchorage area could be as low
as $4 per Mcf or less,although this,too,is speculative.The principal difference from the
ANGTS case is that liquefaction and transportation costs to Japan could be less than transporta-
tion costs to Chicago,which could allow an LNG project to become economic at a lower world oil
price,and hence sooner,than for the ANGTS case.However,considering the problems LNG projects
have had recently,and the risk that would be involved with a project of the magnitude necessary
to market the large volumes of North Slope gas within a period of time that the sponsors would
consider to be a reasonable market life,the prospects for completion of a pipeline to transport
North Slope °gas to the Alaskan Gulf may be even more remote thanothe prospects for the ANGTS.
8.3.3.3 Construction of Facilities to Export Additional Volumes of Cook Inlet Gas
A plan to export Cook Inlet gas to the U.S.West Coast has been actively considered and is still
pending.Two California utilities and their subsidiaries,PacAlaska LNG and PacIndonesia LNG,
filed applications with the Federal Power Commission (now FERC)in 1974.The utilities have
defended their application against challenges on siting,environmental,economic,and safety
issues,and the application is still pending before the FERC (Docket 75-140).However,the
Indones i an reserves ori gi na lly dedi cated to the project have been re 1i nqui shed and recent LNG
sales from Indonesia have been at prices that could make export to the United States uneconomic.
In addition,the option period for the 950 billion cubic feet (8cf)of Cook Inlet gas dedicated
to the contract has expired and the producers can now sell the gas to other bidders should they
so desire (in fact,some gas appears to have been sold recently).Further,under the presiding
Administrative Law Judge's initial decision (August 13,1979,Docket CP75-140),Phase 1 of the
project cannot be authorized until 1.6 Tcf of proven reserves are dedicated to it.Phase 2
(contemplated to start a year after Phase 1)can be authorized only when another 1.0 Tcf are
dedicated to the project.The 2.6 Tcf required represent only 78%of the project's require-
ments.Thus,the total requirements for the project are approximately equal to the present
proven reserves in the Cook Inlet area.
Currently,the necessary reserves are not dedicated to the project,declining oil prices are
inhibiting sale of the gas in California,and there is still strong opposition to the project
there.As a consequence,the short-term prospects of initiating the project certainly are not
encouraging.However,conditions could change,and the PacAlaska project (or a similar project)
could provide effective competition to electric utilities in bidding for additional volumes of
Cook Inlet gas.In any such bidding,the consortium wishing to export the gas would have a
di st i nct advantage,since they coul d offer contracts to the producers for much 1arger gas
vol urnes.
If large additional reserves are discovered in the Cook Inlet and export facilities are author-
ized,the likely net-back price in Alaska theoretically could be quite low.A producer might
consider even a wellhead price of less than $1 per Mcf preferable to leaving the gas shut in.
However,at present the necessary reserves are not available,and prices will have to rise above
current levels to ensure exploration.
8.3.3.4 No Additional Facilities for Export of Cook Inlet Gas
The condition of no additional facilities being built for export of Cook Inlet gas is likely if
no new gas reserves are discovered,or if additional reserves are not discovered at a suffi-
ciently rapid rate to justify new export facilities,or if gas and oil prices are not sufficient
to justify liquefaction of the gas and its transport as LNG.If oil prices fall,it may be
close to a decade before the economics of LNG export begin to look favorable again.If so,the
electric util ities may be_successful in obtaining contracts for gas previously dedicated to
PacAlaska.-However,they will have to compete with the existing LNG and urea plants in bidding
for °the gas.Such competition for uncommitted gas should cause gas prices to rise,1ikely
resulting ln additional exploration.What would happen then would depend on the results of the
exploration.If very large volumes were discovered,there would likely be sufficient gas to
supply both the local market and an export market.In such a case,adequate quantities of gas
should be available for electric Qower generation at relatively low net-back prices.If suffi-
cient gas were discovered to justi1y export,but not enough for both export and the local market,
the producers 1i kely woul d opt for the 1arger volumes of the export market.In thi s case,gas
might not be available for power generation.If insufficient gas is discovered to justify
export facilities,there could still be sufficient gas to supply local needs well into the 21st
Century.In such an event,the price of the gas would depend on the magnitude of reserves
........
B-7
relative to consumption.With reserve/production (R/P)ratios great~r than about 15/1,gas
prices would be low (relative to oil prices).If R/P ratios fell below about 15/1,prices would
start rising toward equivalent oil prices.This in turn w~ld stimulate additional exploration,
which,depending on results,could cause gas prices to decline.
B.3.3.5 Future Gas Prices
From the above discussion,it should be apparent that predicting future gas prices in the Rail-
belt is even more difficult and uncertain than predicting future 041 prices.It seems likely
that gas prices in the Railbelt will continue to be less than oil prices.What is not certain
is how much less,and if sufficient gas will be available for extended use in electric power
generation.On the other hand,there seems to be an excellent possibil ity that the necessary
volumes of gas wi 11 be available,and at a price sufficiently low to be the least expensive fuel
for electric power generation.This,of course,is Alaska's current dilemma.Opting to use gas
for power generation could be expensive if sufficient volumes of gas do not become available
when needed.Conversely,choosing any other alternative could result in much higher pOwer costs
than necessary,should gas be available.
FERC's gas price projections are based on an assumption that sufficient volumes of gas will be
discovered in~he Cook Inlet to meet the future power requirements of the lower-Railbelt area,
and that the electric utilities will be able to obtain several contracts for such gas.The
price projections are higher than net-back prices should be for decades,but eventually are
projected to be somewhat lower.While the Staff considers its gas price projection to be reason-
able,and sufficient to ensure additional exploration,there is considerable uncertainty in both
the underlying assumption of gas availability and the gas price projections.
B.4 COAL
Because the only significant market for coal within the Railbelt is as a boiler fuel for produc-
tion of electricity,it does not compete with electricity as an end-use energy source.Further-
more,unlike petroleum fuels and natural gas,coal as an energy source is not linked as directly
to the price of crude oil.The reason that this has been and will likely continue to be the
case is that coal is not a close substitute for oil.The major uses to which coal is likely to
be put are the conventional ones--as a boiler fuel for producing industrial process heat and for
powering steam turbines for generating electricity by the utility industry.It is the latter
use that is the internal market for coal within the Railbelt.The export market for the Rail-
belt's coal will likely entail both uses for this resource.The developing export market in the
near term is,however,as a fuel used in generating electric power.
Within the Railbelt,coal will compete with other sources of electric power generation--residual
fuel oil,distillate fuel,natural gas,and hydroelectricity.Even here,however,coal is not a
close substitute in certain applications.Coal can only be used in plants using steam as the
prime mover.Thus,it is not as well suited to providing peaking or load-following generation.
Coal transportation and fuel-handling facilities typically require significant investments,and
there are emissions problems with combustion of coal that dictate constraints on its use in
electric generation.
The minimum scale coal-fired generating plants foreseen for the Railbelt area are on the order
of 200 megawatts (MW).Plants this size constitute significant increments to the stock of total
generating capacity in the region and would require substantial lead times to construct.The
decision by a utility in the Railbelt to invest in such capacity is thus a major one,and no
coal plants are currently under construction.Therefore,internal Railbelt coal consumption
faces an upper bound during the present decade,as determihed by the fuel requirements of .
existing capacity.
The export market,on the other hand,does not suffer from the same constraints.First,there
are industrial concerns,as well as utilities,that are potential customers,Second,much of
the current interest by utilities stems from their decisions to convert existing capacity from
alternative fuels to coal-fired generation.The lead times for such conversions are not as
great as those for new plant construction.
It is this fuel conversion activity that is indicative of the manner in which coal markets are
indirectly tied to the price of world oil.The industrialized nations of the world saw the
costs of making coal a substitute for other fuels (particularly petroleum·fuels)suddenly fall
relative to the costs of continued dependence on those other fuels.This change was,of course,
due to the escalation in the price of world oil,beginning in 1973.Added to the price escala-
tion,however,was the uncertainty of oil supplies for a number of major industrialized coun-
tries.Thus,initiatives were undertaken by some to diversify their reliance on alternative
energy sources.This has had the impact of increasing the worldwide demand for coal,and
prices have climbed as a result,although not nearly as much as prices for petroleum fuel and
gas.This represents the major link between coal markets and the price of crude oil.If crude
prices cl imb,then the economic potential for substitution of coal for both oil and gas wi 11
illfll
B-8
continue to increase;the market for coal will expand,and there will be upward pressure on the
price of coal.The converse is equally true and,perhaps,more likely.
With respect to the export market for Alaskan Rai"'belt coal resources,the same economic forces
are at work.The industrialized nations looking to substitute alternative fuels for their
uncertain supplies of crude oil are the Pacific Rim countries of Japan and South Korea.Coal
has been one of the fuels these nations have chosen to use as substitute,and currently they
import coal from South Africa,Austral ia,Canada,China,and the contiguous United States.
These other sources of supply,as well as potential supplies from mines being opened in eastern
Siberia,have made for substantial competition in Alaska's attempts to expand its Pacific Rim
exports.
Should the market develop for Railbelt coal exports,then the export price that coal commands
will constitute the real cost of consuming that fuel locally.The outlook for such expansion is
mixed.Fi rst,the compet iti on among coal supp 1i ers to the Pacifi c Rim is sub stant ia 1 and wi 11
increase in the near future.Second,the motivating factor for the diversification away from
petroleum and into coal,among other fuels,has diminished measurably during the last 18 months
as the outlook for real escalation in world prices has moderated and the prospects for falling
crude prices have become reality.Thus,the value of the coal available for electricity genera-
tion within the Railbelt is"likely to be the cost of extracting and transporting it to the
generator.Given the vast suppl ies available to serve both the domestic as well as export
markets,there is no persuasive reason to anticipate that the real costs of supplying the coal
will escalate.
B.5 PEAT
Alaska contains permafrost-free peat deposits estimated at 27-107 million acres [109-433 billion
square meters (m 2 )]that represent more than half the total U.S.peat reserves.Forty-seven
million acres (190 billion m2 )are located 5 feet (ft)[1.5 meters (m)]or less from the surface.
Some 30 million acres (121 billion m2 )show promise as an energy resource.A 1980 survey by the
U.S.Department of Energy investigated large peat fields located in three separate locations
within the Railbelt (the Matanuska-Susitna Valleys,Fairbanks,and the Kenai Peninsula)and
concluded that they constituted a potentially valuable source of fuel,particularly for remote
communities.According to the Division of Energy and Power Development of Alaska,peat for use
in steam electric generation plants appears competitive with coal priced at $2.00 per million Btu;
however,developmental and operational issues associated with prototype plants would have to be
addressed before commercial plants could be contemplated.
B.6 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY
Several areas of Alaska have geothermal potential,particularly areas near or within the Rail-
belt.To date,however,only a fraction of that potential has actually been tapped-'-in the form
of hot springs used for space heating and resort spas.Such springs are located at Manley Hot
Springs,Chenea Hot Springs,and Tolovana.A number of geothermal sites are being investigated
for their thermal energy and electric generation potential.Areas containing hot igneous
systems,in or bordering on the Railbelt,include Mt.Drum,Mt.Wrangell,and Double Peak.In
most cases,however,geothermal heating systems currently are not economically competitive with
conventional heating alternatives.Drilli~g costs are extremely high,and the resource value of
geothermal energy is critically dependent on the proximity to the end user.The heat distribu-
tion system for these wells can increase costs by a factor of five or six.According to the
Division of Energy and Power Development,estimates of heat distribution piping average about
$150/ft ($500/m),so eVen a small village of 50 residences,each about 150 ft (50 m)apart,
would pay more than $1 million for the distribution system alone.
B.7 TIDAL POWER
Tidal energy is potentially available in Alaska,primarily in the Cook Inlet areas of the Rail-
belt,where the height of tidal variation and the volume of tidal flow are sufficient to make
tidal power projects practical.Tidal energy can be converted into electricity by capturing
both the potential energy associated with the height of tidal fluctuations and the kinetic
energy associated with the flow of tidal water in and out of a contained area.If all the
potential anQ~kinetic energy of Cook Inlet were captured and made available to users in the
Railbelt area'of Alaska,it would provide electric power for the entire region well beyond the
year 2050.A study prepared by Acres American identified 16 sites in the Cook Inlet area whose
total energy capacity exceeded 186,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh),with a total potential capacity of
73 GW.The Division of Energy and Power concluded,early in 1983,that development of commer-
cial tidal power is more than a deca~e away.
B.8 SOLAR ENERGY
Solar energy is not regarded as a potential source of power within the Rai"lbelt,either in the
form of photovoltaic energy or solar heat.Despite the long hours of daylight that characterize
~..a.-.
8-9
the summers in the Rai1belt,the periods of greatest energy need are during the winter,when
solar energy production in Alaska would be negligible.To justify even the projected low invest-
ment costs in solar devices,it would be necessary for su~h equipment to make substantial contri-
butions to the supply of energy when energy requirements are greatest.
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX B
Tussing,A.R.1983.ARTA energy insights.Pacific Oil Insights.-(November).
Tuss;ng,A.R.,et a 1.1983.ARTA;ns;ghts.Natural Gas Ins;ghts.(Summer).
'"
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT,FERC NO.7114
.~
APPENDIX C
ENERGY CONSERVATION
Prepared by
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Staff
C-1
_-'A!tw_'"""'"._
'"IIIII_~"'~"_,••',d1
C-3
2.Weatherization Grants for Low-Income Families.Extension through 1980 of the U.S.Department
of Energy (DOE)weatherization grants program for insulating lower-income homes at an
authorized level of $200 million in FY 1979 and 1980.
Provisions of the National Energy Conservation Act (NECA)of 1978 may have relevance to demand
forecasts and other matters with which this environmental impact statement is concerned.The
NECA provides for the following selected items:
3.Solar Energy Loan Program.A $100 million program administered by the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD)that will provide a support for loans of up to $8,000 to home-
owners and builders for the purchase and installation of solar heating and cooling equipment
in residential units.
,;"~-;
.'~
APPENDIX C.ENERGY CONSERVATION
'"
C.l ENERGY CONSERVATION AND THE NATIONAL ENERGY ACT OF 1978
1.Utility Conservation Program for Resi dences.A program requi ri ng utilities to offer to
thei r res i dent ia 1 customers energy audi ts that woul d identify appropri ate energy cOnserva-
tion and solar energy measures and estimate their likely costs and savings.Utilities also
will be required to offer to arrange for the installation and financing of any such measures.
4.Energy Conservation Load Programs.A $5 billion program of Federally supported home-
improvement loans for energy conservation measures;$3 bi 11 i on for support of reduced-
interest loans up to $2,500 for elderly or moderate income families,and $2 billion for
general standby financing assistance.
5.Grant Program for Schools and Hospitals.Grants of $900 million over the next three years
to improve the energy efficiency of schools and hospitals.
6.Energy Audits for Publ ic Buil di ngs.A two-year,$65 mi 11 i on program for energy audits in
local public buildings and public care institutions.
7.Appliance Efficiency Standards.Energy efficiency standards for major home appliances,
such as refrigerators and air conditioning units.
8.Grants and Standards.Grants and standards for energy conservation in Federally assisted
housing.
9.Loans.Federally insured loans for conservation improvements in multifamily housing.
10.Sola~Demonstration Program.$100 million for a solar demonstration program in Federal
buildings.
11.Conservation.Conservation requirements for Federal buildings.
12.Solar Photovoltaic System.$98 million for solar photovoltaicsystems in Federal facili-
ties.
13.Objectives and Reports.Industrial 'recycling targets and reporting requirements.
14.-Labeling.Energy-efficient labeling of industrial equipment.
C.2 CONSERVATION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS--THE POWERPLANT AND INDUSTRIAL FUEL USE ACT OF 1978
The Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act (PPIFUA)of 1978 has as its principal objective the
conservation of oil and natural gas supplies.The following provisions of the PPIFUA should
effect substantial reductions in the nation's oil and natural gas consumption and should accel-
erate the conversion of oil-fired and gas-fired electric utility plants to coal-fired facilities:
1.Prohibition of New Oil-and Gas-Fired Boilers.Prohibition against use of oil or natural
gas in new electric utility generation facilities or in new industrial boilers with a fuel
heat input rate of 100 million Btu's per hour or greater,unless exemptions are granted
by DOE.
C-4
2.Restrictions on Existing Coal-Capable Large Boilers.DOE authority to require existing
coal-capable facilities,individually or by categories,to use coal and to require non-
coal-capable units to use coal/oil mixtures.
3.Restrictions on Users of Natural Gas for Boiler Fuel.Limitation of natural gas use by
existing utility power plants to the proportion of total fuel used during 1974-1976,and a
requirement that there be no switches from oil to gas.There is also a requirement that
natural gas use in such facilities cease by 1990 (with certain exceptions).
4.Pollution Control Loan Program.An $800 million loan program to assist utilities to raise
necessary funds for pollution control.
5.Supplementary Authority.Supplemental authority to prohibit use of natural gas in small
boilers"for space heating and in decorative outdoor lighting and to allocate coal in emer-
gencies.
6.Other Provi si ons.Fundi ng of several programs to reduce negative impacts from increased
coal production,energy impact assistance,and railroad rehabilitation.
C.3 THE PUBLIC UTILITY REGULATORY POLICIES ACT OF 1978--RATE DESIGN,LOAD MANAGEMENT,AND
REDUCTION OF THE GROWTH RATES IN THE DEMAND FOR ELECTRIC POWER
The Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA)of 1978 is directed at reducing the growth
rate in the demand for electric power,the reduction in the need for new generating capacity,
and conservation of fuels in short supply.The PURPA provides for the following:
1.Rate Design Standards.Eleven voluntary standards on rate design and other utility prac-
tices for consideration by state regulatory authorities and non-regulated utilities--
includingtime~of-day-rates,seasonal rates,cost of service pricing,interruptible rates,
prohibiting of declining block rates,and lifeline rates.
2.Cons i derat i on of Rate Des i gn Standards.A requi rement that state regul atory authorities
and utilities consider each standard within prescribed periods and determine if the
standards are appropriate for conservation,efficiency,and equity,as well as consistent
with state 1aws.Voluntary gui de 1 i nes.with respect to the standards may be prescri bed.
3.Retail Pol icies for Natural Gas Activities.Consideration by gas util ities of two stan-
dards--i.e.,service termination procedures and advertising expenditures.A DOE study of
the best rate design for gas utilities is also required.
4.Cogeneration.FERC rules favoring industrial cogeneration facilities and requiring utili-
ties to buy or sell power from qual ified cogenerators at just and reasonable rates.
5.Wholesale Provisions.FERC authority to require interconnections of electric power trans-
mission facilities,to order utilities to provide transmission services between two noncon-
tiguous utilities,and to report anticipated power shortages;FERC review of automatic
rate-adjustment clauses.
6.Aid to States and Consumer Representation.Funding to assist state implementation and
consumer intervention in proceedings.
7.Small Hydroelectric Facilities.Loan program to aid development of small hydroelectric
projects.
8.Significant Miscellaneous Provisions.Authorization funding for the National Regulatory
Research Institute;establishment of three additional university coal research laboratories;
rules for conversion from use of natural gas to use of less desirable heavy fuel oils;
emergency conversion of utilities and other facilities during natural gas emergencies;
natural gas transportation policy,and rules for treatment of conserved natural gas.
C.4 RATE D~?fGN AND LOAD MANAGEMENT--THE NARUC RESOLUTION NO.9 STUDY
A study of rate design and load management as potential expedients for the reduction of demand
peaks and the associated need for additional peaking capacity in electric utility systems was
initiated in 1974 by the National Association of Regulatory Commissioners (NARUC).
""Resolution No.9,Appendix A (1974),of this Commission called for "a study of the technology
and cost of time-of-day metering and electronic methods of controlling peak-period usage of
electricity,and also a study of the feasibility and cost of shifting various types of usage to
off-peak periods.'1 It resulted in a detailed research plan that focused on shifting and con-
trolling loads in a way that would lessen the growth of peak demand.The ensuing research
c-s
emphasized the development of time-differentiated rates based on alternative costing method-
ologies and the evaluation of various direct load control techniques.In mid-1976,NARUC
requested a continuation of the research.'
A Rate Design and Load Control Study was sponsored by the Edison Electric Institute (EEl),the
American Public Power Association (APPA),the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
(NRECA),and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).These sponsors and NAR~C encouraged
representatives of their groups to participate in the study.;
The November 1977 report states that "--the research findings confirm a generally held but
heretofore untested hypothesis that load management may yield benefits."The research findings
indicate the desirability of load management techniques in some cases,as discussed below.
First,for a small but diverse sample of companies,bulk power supply costs were found to vary
markedly by time of day and season.The study established that time-differentiated rates,which
reflect these costs much better than non-time-differentiated or seasonally differentiated rates,
are administratively feasible.
Second,the study found that customer use of electricity is responsive to time-differentiated
rates,although the exact degree of c-hange is uncertain.Whether based on accounting or
marginal costs,time-differentiated rates should,therefore,tend to reduce peak demand growth
and the average bulk power s~pply cost.If electricity rates reflect marginal costs or if these
rates diverge from marginal costs to recognize that the prices of other relevant commodities
(e.g.,fuels)are not based on marginal costs,economic logic suggests that the resulting use
patterns should conserve society's scarce economic resources.It remains,however,a matter for
further research,experimentation,and analysis to determine whether,for individual customers
in individual systems,the sensitivity of consumption to price is high enough to yield total
benefits commensurate with the total costs of time-differentiated rates.
Third,the research established that direct loan controls have,in selected instances,benefits
that exceed their costs.It should follow that individual systems should investigate load con-
trols as a cost-effective method for curbing peak demand growth and the consequent capacity
expansion requirement.
The final report on Phase II of the NARUC Study will supposedly emphasize critiques of proposed
methodologies applicable to rate design and load management.Results of cost-benefit analyses
to be included in the Phase II Report are expected to provide a better understanding of the
potential impacts of rate design and load management on future load shapes.
Recognized experts in the field of rate-making and load management were quick to respond to the
Phase II Report on the NARUC Study and their comments clearly indicated that the study left many
unanswered questions and raised many new ones.Some of these comments appear in the December 1,
1977,issue of "Electrical World,"pp.21-22.
ALASKA
U.S.
l:T~~'HARY,
11',rrEI{;IOR
'"
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT,FERC NO.7114
APPENDIX 0
345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE ELECTRICAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Prepared by
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Staff
0-1
~>'?-~
1
D-3
""
APPENDIX D.345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE ELECTRICAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECF~<
~
D.l INTRODUCTION
Transmission lines of practical design create high electric field gradients at the conductor
surface that cause ionization of the surrounding air layers when the field intensity exceeds the
breakdown strength of this air.The resulting corona formation on the conductors (along with
random gap discharges on other line hardware)gives rise to radio noise,audible noise,and
generation of ozone (0 3 )and oxides of nitrogen (NO).Corona formation is a function of line
voltage,conductor radius,line geometry,conductorXsurface condition (roughness,adherence of
foreign particles,etc.),relative air density,humidity,wind,and precipitation.Corona and
its associated audible and radio noise levels increase substantially during periods of foul
weather,espeti ally rain.Hence,it is neither pract i ca 1 nor economi ca 11y feas ib1e to des i gri
extra-high-voltage (EHV)lines such that they will never be in corona,as is accomplished at
lower voltages,although lines are commonly designed with sufficient conductor size or bundling
to limit surface gradients,within the normal operating voltage range,below the critical level
at which corona begins to sharply increase.
Energized,load-carrying transmission lines also generate electric and magnetic fields that
permeate the surrounding medium and induce voltages and currents in conducting objects in the
vicinity,including persons and animals.The question of potential hazards of these fields from
a biological and environmental standpoint has been given increasing attention in recent years,
particularly with regard to lines designed for operation in the EHV range [345 to 1,000 kilovolt
(kV)]and for future lines being considered for operation in the ultra-high-voltage (UHV)range
(above 1,000 kV).
In assessing the environmental impact of the expected levels of these electrical effects for the
Susitna project 345-kV transmission lines,due recognition should be made of the fact that such
lines have been in existence in other parts of the United States for some 30 years now.These
lines traverse sparsely settled rural regions as well as high-density populated areas.As a
result of this development,the design of these lines with regard to known electrical effects
and other environmental aspects has become well established.Furthermore,the 345-kV operating
voltage lies near the lower threshold voltage level at which many of the electrical effects
associated with higher voltage lines become of marginal significance.
Nevertheless,the Alaska Power Authority (APA)had an analysis made to predict levels of elec-
trical effects from the proposed project transmission lines,calculated using methods developed
at Project UHV (Electric Power Research Inst.,1975a).A survey also was made of existing radio
and television broadcast signal strengths and ambient radio noise levels along the Anchorage-
Fairbanks transmission corridor*for use in evaluating the influence of some of these line-
generated electrical effects.In addition,a survey was made of sensitive communication facility
locations in the vicinity of the corridor,such as microwave installations and air navigational
radio beacons.Recommended minimum separation distances of those facilities from the lines were
developed,based on existing guidelines and criteria.This study was performed by APAls con-
sultant,Commonwealth Associates,Inc.(CAl).The results are presented in the IIElectrical
Environmental Effects Report R-2394 11 (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982).
The presently planned routes and number of circuits ultimately to be installed as part of the
Susitna project 345-kV transmission system are indicated in Figure D-1.The calculations used
to develop the predictions of electrical effects discussed in Report R-2394 were based on three
single-circuit 345-kV transmission lines on a common 400-foot (ft)[120-meter (m)]right-of-way
(ROW),as shown in Figure D-2,operating at a voltage of 362.5 kV.This would be typical of the
structure placement for the Knik Arm-Gold Creek section of the Anchorage-Fairbanks transmission
corridor.Electrical effects generated by this particular transmission link should be representa-
tive of the entire 345-kV transmission configuration ultimately to be installed as part of the
Susitna project,and the Report calculations should be conservative due to ~he multiple-circuit
ROW occupancy represented and the upper limit of the normal operating voltage range,362.5 kV
(5%above nominal 345-kV level).Both of these factors tend toward increased intensity of such
effects as audible and radio noise,and ozone production.
*Hereinafter referred to as the IIAnchorage-Fairbanks corridor,1I or simply IIcorridorli where the
meaning is clear from the context.
Figure D-1.
D-4
,/_.
~~~..,
PrUKON_,..
...r--....."'-.•.····-------~~-_____,"""....-___l_---~~~~~>O,L------~-I-_:.../
/
LEGEND
ooo(!>-PRIIlARY ""'VED UNDIVIDED HIGHWAY
---SECDNIWlY ""'vED UNDIVIDED HI,GHWAY
------SECON!WN GRAVEL HIGHWAY,
-RAILROAD
_...-RIVER=Eiii PRD~ECT TRANSIiISSION LINIS
~PlIOPOIED DAII SITE
6.TIIANSIiISSIDII SUUTATIDN
O~~~2~Oiiiiiiiiiii;i40 MILESSCALEI:
'\....",~.
.~
,,~
'\.."".;.
r'!'!.~..·'::~\..~'-.I ".f/WILLOW!r ,SUBSTATION
\.
Susitna Project 345-kV Transmission System
(ultimate configuration).
--
/
---
0-5
'"
62'
N.T.S,
EDGE OF R.O.W.
,,',,·AVG.TOWER
1 \WI '~;1 SPACING =1400 FT.
1-0/&"DIA.ENS.
----105'-I
----------200"--------------1.1
85'
74'
98.5'
1
,.105'------'-
EDGE OF R.O,W.
62'
EST.FOOT ING
RESISTANCE =50.\1
GUYED STEEL
X-FRAME
I-400'_I
R.O.W.
I-'200'-,-,-,--------
Notes:
Dimensions indicated are in feet (')and inches (").1 ft.=0.305 m.
Average Conductor Sag =37 ft.**Minimum Ground Clearance at RR Crossing =38 ft.
The 30-ft minimum phase-to-ground clearance is recommended in the APA Anchorage-Fairbanks
Transmission Intertie basic design criteria,dated September 1981,pg.6 (Prepared by
Commonwealth Assoc.,Inc.).This will be the design clearance fit 120°F.For railroad
crossings,this clearance will be increased to 38 ft.
The 44.7-ft minimum average height is equal to the minimum conductor-to-ground clearance
(30-ft)plus one-third the conductor sag.(Transmission Line Reference Book,345 kV and
above,2nd.ed.,1982,Electric Power Research Inst.,pg.219.)This is the height
commonly chosen on which to base line electrical performance design curves,stich as radio
noise generation.·
The 63.3-ft minimum shield wire height is based on a shield wire sag of 80%of the shown
maximum conductor sag (44 ft)(the APA Shielding and Shield Wire Coordination Study for
the Anchorage-Fairbanks Transmission Intertie,January 1982,pg.4.)
The sub conductor and bundle size for the phase conductors and the shield wire size to be
used are given in the APA Environmenta·l Assessment Report,R-2422,dated March 1982,
pp.18,27.'
All other information taken from Application,dated February 1983,Exhibit F (Plates F80,
F8l),and from the APA structure study for the Anchorage-Fairbanks Transmission Intertie,
dated September 1981.
Figure 0-2.Typical Tangent or Light-Angle Structure Placement Along
Knik Arm-Gold Creek Section of Anchorage-Fairbanks 345-kV
Transmission Corridor.
0-6
The following sections contain a brief discussion of the nature of the environmental effects
produced by transmission line operation,along with an assessment of the environmental sig-
nificance of these effects,particularly with regard to the relevant parameters of electrical
effects calculated for the Susitna project transmission lines in Report R-2394.Guidelines used
in making this assessment consisted of material contained in the referenced report,as well as
reference information and data on this subject developed by the Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI)and others.The following topics are covered:
Ozone and other air pollutants generated by transmission line corona,
Audible noise generated by transmission line corona,
Radio noise generated by transmission line corona,and minimum separation distances between
the 345-kV lines and existing communication towers,
Electrostatic and electromagnetic field strengths set up by transmission line operation,
and related field effects,and
Line clearances and electrical safety.
As a result of this review,the Staff concurs with the electrical environmental effects analysis
and conclusions reached by APA/CAI;i.e.,no adverse environmental consequences of a permanent
and irremediable nature should result that could be attributed to the operational performance of
the 345-kV transmission 1 ines that would be constructed as part of the SusHna project.
Specifically,the following qualitative assessment is made:
1.No environmentally hazardous levels of corona-generated ozone or oxides of nitrogen should
result from operation of the lines;in fact,the resulting increment to ambient levels due
to line operation would likely not even be measurable.
2.Audible noise generated by corona formation on the lines would not be objectionable and
would not contribute significantly to ambient noise levels.
3.Corona-generated radio noise would not likely interfere with AM radio broadcast reception
at distances greater than 1,000 ft (300 m)from the centerl ine of the right-of-way even
under worst-case weather conditions for noise generation,viz.,during rain.No inter-
ference at all would be expected for FM radio reception due to its inherent noise rejection
capability.Television reception should be unaffected at locations where television recep-
tion is presently good.Problems would be expected to arise only rarely,if at all,and
mitigative measures could generally be employed to alleviate them on a case-by-case basis
(such as by relocating receiving antennas).The routing of the lines would be adjusted as
necessary to allow for industry-recommended separation distances from sensitive microwave
and other types of communication facil ities to avoid potential interference problems.
4.Results of studies on possible biological harm from exposure to electric and magnetic
fields are inconclusive at best,and no general acceptance of such a correlation seems to
exist among the scientific community (Bridges,1975;Sheppard and Eisenbud,1977;Riog,
1979;Electric Power Research Inst.,1982;Mahmoud and Zimmerman,1982).Inasmuch as the
proposed line design conforms to generally accepted and long-established design practice
for 345-kV transmission lines,the same normal levels of field intensity at ground level
would result from these lines as for all the other numerous existing 1ines in this class.
It is therefore concluded that no reasonable basis for concern exists On this account.
Likewise,no shock hazards from induced potentials due to these fields would be expected.
5.The 30-ft (9-m)minimum phase-to-ground clearances are more than sufficient to satisfy the
present requirements of the National Electric Safety Code,including the 5 milliampere
induced current limit on large vehicles short-circuited to ground under the lines.Again,
this conforms to present and long-established design practice for lines in the 345-kV
class.
The foregoing conclusions apply for the Susitna lines operated within the normal ±5%limits of
their nominal design voltage level,345 kV.Initially,the first transmission link,currently
bei ng construc:t~d along the Anchorage-Fai rbanks corri dor,wi 11 be operated at 138 kV,at whi ch
voltage the levels of the foregoing electrical effects should be entirely negligible.
D.2 OZONE PRODUCTION
....Operation of EHV transmission lines of practical design causes the formation of corona around
the line conductors.Corona consists of ionized air particles in the adjacent air layers.
Corona is formed when the electric field gradient at the conductor surface exceeds the breakdown
strength of the adjacent air.Ozone and oxides of nitrogen,by-products of this ionization,add
to the ambient atmospheric concentrations of these oxidants.The latter are created by natural
0-7
processes,primarily by the action of ultraviolet light from the sun on upper atmospheric air
layers and on automotive and industrial emissions near the earth1s surface.They also are
generated by lightning discharges.Ozone is the most impo~tant of these products from an envi-
ronmental standpoint because it comprises 80%to 90%of the atmospheric oxidants (Electric Power
Research Inst.,1975b),whether produced from natural or man-made processes.In concentrated
form,it is a powerful oxidizing agent with high chemical reactivity.
Ambient levels of ozone generally vary from about 0.01 to 0.03 parts per million {ppm)in rural
areas,although concentrations up to 0.10 ppm have been measured in-some rural areas (Bonneville
Power Admin.,1977).In urban areas,concentrations of 0.10 ppm can be expected,and in some
cities,such as Los Angeles,concentrations as high as 0.5 ppm have been measured,apparently
due to the high levels of auto emissions and industrial combustion (Bonneville Power Admin.,
1977).However,a number of investigations carried out over the past decade,including both
field and laboratory test programs,have shown that practically no measurable incremental con-
tribution to ground-level concentration of ozone and oxides of nitrogen result,under any weather
condition,in the immediate vicinity of transmission lines designed for operation not"only at
345 kV,but also at voltages through 765 kV (Frydman et al.,1972;Scherer et al.,1972;Frydman
and Shik,1973;Fern and Brabets,1974;Sebo et al.,1975).These results are based on state-
of-the-art instrumentation accuracy of 0.001-0.002 ppm.In interpreting these results,it
should be kept in mind that ground-level concentrations of ozone and other oxidants are a func-
tion of not only the generation rate (whether by natural or man-induced processes),but also the
rate of decay and diffusion in the atmosphere.Ozone,for example,is one of the most chemically
reactive agents known.It is therefore very unstable and is readily consumable by plants,
animals,nitric oxide in the atmosphere,and by other substances,although at different rates.
Under normal atmospheric conditions,ozone has a characteristic half-life of ~to 1 hr (Frydman
and Shik,1973).Its rates of generation and decay are functions of temperature,humidity,
initial concentration level,sunlight,rainfall,and other factors.As a result,ambient ozone
concentrations are subject to large daily variations of as much as 0.08 ppm,with the highest
concentrations occurring during daylight hours and the lowest at night (Electric Power Research
Inst.,1982).The ground-l eve 1 concentration of ozone near transmi ss i on 1i nes is also a func-
tion of wind speed,direction of wind relative to the line direction,and line height.Trans-
verse winds result in greater diffusion,and the ground-level concentration diminishes with
increases in wind speed and line height,It follows that ground-level concentrations of ozone
and other oxidants generated by transmission line operation are not cumulative over time.
Ozone production increases with an increase in corona level,which for a given line design is a
function of the operating voltage,surface conditions of the conductor,and atmospheric condi-
tions.As has been indicated,as long as a line is operated within its design voltage limits,
the maximum corona generation,and therefore ozone production,is fairly predictable.But a
sufficiently high overvoltage,say,on a long line under light loading conditions,could exceed
the critical level at which corona generation begins to increase much more sharply with voltage.*
Under these conditions,the ozone generated by the line would increase correspondingly.However,
sufficient reactive power sources are normally provided for transmission system operation to
maintain the voltages within fairly close tol~rances (about ±5%),primarily for equipment protec-
tion and other operating reasons,but which also attends to the matter of ozone production.
However,with the miniscule production of ozone at normal operating voltage,it is unlikely that
any degree of sustainable steady-state operating voltage would result in an environmentally
objectional production of ozone from_t/~e line.
Corona loss in foul weather,particularly rain,is typically at least one order of magnitude
greater than the corresponding fair weather loss on a given line,resulting in increased ozone
production.However,field tests showed that the actual ozone concentration at ground level
under rain conditions decreased,indicating that the accelerated decomposition of the ozone
caused by the increased moisture more than compensated for the increased production rate due to
the increased corona level (Fern and Brabets,1974).
The toxicological effect of ozone on humans has b~en investigated,and a maximum allowable
concentration of 0.1 ppm for eight hours continuous exposure per day,five days per week has
been establ ished by the American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (Fern and
Brabets,1974).However,the EPA air quality standards allow a maximum concentration of ozone
of 0.12 ppm,not to be exceeded more than one day per year (U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,
National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone,40 CFR 50.9).Reports
of studies performed by EPA (Bonneville Power Admin.,1977)and others indicate that human
respiratory tract irritation occurs at ozone levels between 0.5 and 0.7 ppm.Small laboratory
animals developed chronic bronchitis when exposed to doses of 1 ppm for one year.Insofar as
its effect on vegetation and ground foliage is concerned,studies on selected species known to
be sensitive to such effects showed that a concentration of 0.07 ppm lasting four hours was
*Overvoltages from switching surges and lightning strikes could also cause this,although they
are much too transitory in nature to be of significance with regard to ozone production.
0-8
requi red to damage eastern white pi ne,and concentrati ons of 0.10-0.12 ppm 1ast i ng two hours
were required to damage sensitive varieties of alfalfa,spinach,clover,oats,radish,corn,and
beans (Bonneville Power Admin.,1977).The levels cited are well above the minute incremental
concentrations caused by EHV transmission line operation in their immediate vicinity,but are
not always above the ambient levels of ozone in some areas,as previously indicated.
In summary,based on results of recent investigations,it appears that no significant levels of
ozone would be produced by the project 345-kV transmission lines,even for as many as three
345-kV lines on the same right-of-way.Existing oxidant limits imposed by Federal and state
agencies should create no difficulties for these or other EHV transmission lines,although
existing ambient levels are close to or exceed the limits being set in some locations.
0.3 AUDIBLE NOISE
High-voltage transmission lines generate audible noise as a result of corona formation along the
1i ne conductors.The noi se produced cons i sts of two pri ncipa 1 components:(1)a broadband
noise created by the random pulse discharges in the air at the surface of the conductor,and
(2)a low-frequency pure-tone noise (hum)predominantly at a frequency of 120 Hz and created by
the alternate attraction and repulsion of positive and negative ions (generated by the corona)
under the action of the alternating electric field.The main contributor to annoyance is from
random (broadband)noise in the 1-8 kHz range (Electric Power Research In~t.,1982)..
Audible noise,like the corona that produces it,depends significantly on prevailing weather
conditions for a given line geometry and operating voltage.A person standing under or near a
line built to acceptable design standards for foul weather corona probably would not be aware of
any audible noise in fair weather unless he were listening for it.Any appreciable air turbu-
lence probably would mask this effect.The fair weather noise level is,therefore,generally of
no concern (Electric Power Research Inst.,1982),typically lying considerably below that for
foul weather,particularly for rain when audible noise generation is highest due to the localized
high electric field gradients formed at the water droplets.However,in assessing the potential
disturbing effect of transmission-line-generated audible noise,account must be taken not ohly
of the generation rate,but also of the rate of attenuation of the noise with distance from the
line,the absorption of sound energy by the surrounding air,the masking effect of other envi-
ronmental noise sources,and the relative level of pUblic activity and degree of 'exposure to the
noise under weather conditions that produce high noise levels (rain and intense fog).The sound
,pressure level of the noise varies inversely as the square of the lateral distance from the line
due to the divergence of the sound pressure waves (Electric Power Research Inst.,1982).
However,the actual attenuation is somewhat greater than this due to atmospheric absorption,
which increases with frequency and is also a function of air temperature and relative humidity.
During rain,background noise from wind,thunder,and the rain itself,combined with reduced
outdoor public activity and the reduced possibility of direct public exposure to the noise
through open wi ndows near the 1i ne,all woul d tend to reduce any di sturbi ng effed of the
increased noise generaiion rate:However,at other times,such as during periods of snow,heavy
fog,or immediately after a rain,the outdoor environment often becomes quiet,making the
increased audible noise generated by the water drops on the line relatively more evident,even
though the noise generation rate is somewhat less than during heavy rain.This "wet conductor"
condition closely corresponds to the mean noise level in rain (Electric Power Research Inst.,
1982).For these reasons,it is often us'ed for assess i ng the audi bl e floi se performance of AC
transmission lines,at least in the absence of more comprehensive statistics on audible noise.
The range of sound pressure levels that the human ear can detect and assimilate is on the order
of 1,000,000/1.For this reason,these levels are customarily expressed on a logarithmic scale
by relating the measured sound pressure from a source,in micropascals (~Pa),to a reference
sound pressure of 20 ~Pa (where 1 ~Pa =1 ~N/m2 =10-5 ~bar)and taking 20 times the logarithm
to the base 10 of this ratio,i.e.,
Sound pressure level (SPL)=20 10g10 SP~o(i~~Pa)dB.
in decibels (dB)~a
-(0-1)'
Some common noise levels are given in Table 0-1.
The range of fregQencies audible to the human ear is about 15-20,000 Hz.However,human hearing
is more sensitive to the range of frequencies in which most speech information is carried,or
from about 500-4000 Hz,and falls off fairly sharply beyond these limits (Electric Power Research
Inst.,1982).In measuring broadband noise,it is therefore customary to apply weighting to the
different frequencies contained in the monitored noise in accordance with this characteristic
such that the overall sound pressure level measured will relate as closely as possible to the
ear's perception of the sound.This is commonly referred to as the A-weighting network in
standardized sound level instruments,and the corresponding meter scale reading is referred to
in units of dB(A),as in Table 0-1.Standardized B,C,and 0 weighting networks also are avail-
able that have different frequency response.characteristics suitable for measuring impulsive and
other types of sound,some of which have been advocated for measuring transmission line noise.
However,the A-weighted network is by far the most widely used noise-rating scale.
0-9
Table O-l.Noise Levels of Typical Noise Sources
,...
Operatort 1 Communityt 2
Noise Source [dB(A)][dB(A)]
Air conditioners 70-96 52-77
'.>
Power lawn equipment 80-95 59-85
Chain saws 103-115 64-86
Automobiles 55-87 77-87
Snowmobiles 100-116 78:::'88
Motorcycles
Less than 240 cc 90-105 70-90
Greater than 240 cc 95-115 78-95
Trucks 70-100 70-95
t 1 Operator:Noise levels measured at the position of the
operator of the noise source .
.t 2 Community:Noise levels measured at locations 50 ft
(15 m)from the center line of the path of the source or
50 ft (15 m)from the source.
Source:Anonymous (1974).
Inasmuch as many sounds,including transmission line noise,have sound pressure levels that are
not constant with time,they cannot adequately be characterized by a single value of SPL.To
deal with this problem,statistical correlation with time is often resorted to,using indices
such as Ls ,indicating the A-weighted sound level that is exceeded only 5%of the time;Lso for
A-weighted sound levels exceeded 50%of the time,etc.(Electric Power Research Inst.,1982).
(The Ls level corresponds to heavy rain generation,and the Lso corresponds to wet conductor
generation.)If a noise is intermittent or fluctuating,an equivalent sound level,L ,is
used,defined as the energy average (usually A-weighted)of a varying sound over a splc~fied
period of time;i.e.,a steady sound having the same level as the L would have the same sound
energy as the fluctuating sound.This is a useful measure in conne~~ion with transmission line
noise measurements;however,it does not account for the more annoying effect of noise at night.
For this purpose,a modified L has been developed,designated as L for day-night level
(U.S.Environmental Protection ~ency,1974).It adds a 10 dB penal~9 for noise occurring
between the hours of 2200 and 0700,and is calculated as:
Ldn =10 10g10 2~[15 (10 Li10 )+9 (10 (L n +10)/10)]dB(A),(0-2)
where
Ld =Leq for daytime hours (0700-2200)and
Ln =Leq for nighttime hours (2200-0700).
Transmission line audible noise levels can be estimated for design purposes based on empirical
formulas developed from laboratory and field measurements that correlate such factors as con-
ductor geometry,tower design,conductor surface gradient,and distance from line to the measur-
ing point to determine a value for sound pressure level in dB(A).The audible noise levels for
the project 345-kV lines have been calculated using methods developed at Project UHV (Electric
Power Research Inst.,1975a).The calculated noiSe levels at the edge of a right-of-way con-
taining three single-circuit 345-kV lines under heavy rain and wet conductor conditions,and at
maximum operating voltage of 5%above normal,or 362.5 kV,are given in Table D-2.Estimated
fair weather levels (inaudible)also are given.Using the wet-conductor levels as a measure of
the line audible-noise performance,the formulation of Eq.0-2 was used to calculate an equivalent
day-night level,Lrl 'at the edge of the right-of-way under the very conservation assumption
that the conductorsnwill remain wet for 24 hours,i.e.,L =L =44 dB(A).Allowing for the
10 dB nighttime penalty incorporated in Eq.0-2,this resJilted"in a day-night average (L )of
50.4 dB(A).These computer-calculated numbers,taken from Report R-2394,are in reasoni~ly
close agreement and are conservative with respect to corresponding values of 41.7/48.1 dB(A)
computed by the FERC Staff using manual methods based on design curves and formulas given by the
Electric Power Research Institute (1982).
0-10
Table 0-2.Calculated Audible Noise levels for
the Anchorage-Fairbanks Corridor with Three
345-kV Lines on a Common Right-of-Way
Operating at 362.5 kV
Weather Conditions
Heavy rain
Wet conductor
Fair weather
L at Edge ofRight~8f-Way [dBCA)Jtl
54
44
Inaudiblet2
t 1 200 ft (61 m)from centerline.
t 2 Estimated.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
So far as is known,no existing noise limits specified by ordinance,regulation,or statute
specifically refer to transmission lines.However,based on summaries of guidelines developed
by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency as given in Table 0-3,by the Committee on Hearing,
Bioacoustics,and Biomechanics (CHABA)of the American Academy of Sciences as given in Table 0-4
and by the Bonneville Power Administration as given in Table 0-5 (all of these relate to the
effects of noise and community reaction and annoyance),the day-night average of 50.4 dB(A)
calculated for the 345-kV lines at the edge of the right-of-way should present no environmental
problem.Although this value represents a day-night average,it is unlikely that peak noise
levels would exceed the 52.5 dB(A)threshold level given in Table 0-5,except possibly for very
limited periods in heavy rain when the lines were simultaneously operating at maximum voltage
(362.5 kV).A comparison of the 50.4 dB(A)average with the noise levels given in Table 0-1,
which represent levels to which people are normally exposed,suggests that the audible noise
generation by the line should not contribute significantly to these levels.
0.4 RAOIO NOISE
IIRadio Noise ll (RN),sometimes referred to as lI el ec tromagnetic interference ll (EMI),is a rather
general term used to refer to any unwanted interference of an electromagnetic nature (such as
radio static)with any signal or communication channels or devices throughout the radio
frequency band of operation (3 kHz to 30,000 MHz).The pulsative corona discharges produced by
energized high-voltage transmission line'conductors generate such disturbances by virtue of the
steep ri se and decay rates of the mi nute components of currentfeedi ng thi s corona and by _the
rapid and random repetition rate of the corona pulse discharges along the line conductors and
other line and substation hardware.Radio noise can also be generated by sparking at loose or
broken line hardware parts.
Theoretically,cotona-generated radio noise could cause interference with virtually any type of
radio reception.However,in practice it has been found that the bands principally affected are
the AM (amplitude-modulated)broadcast band (535 to 1,605 kHz)and the video signals of the low
television bl70adcast band (Channels 2 to 6,54 to 88 MHz).FM (frequency-modulated)radio
signals (88-108 MHz),which are also generally used for the sound transmission for television,
are virtually immune to the static-type interference generated by transmission line radio noise.
This is because (1)the magnitude of the radio noise is generally quite small in the FM broad-
cast band,and (2)FM radio systems inherently reject this pulsative-type noise.
For a given operating voltage,radio noise generation from a transmission line is principally a
function of conductor geometry,conductor height above ground,phase spacing,and ground resistiv-
ity.Since it is a product of the line corona,it also depends on the condition of the conductor
surface,increasing with roughness and contamination,and on weather conditions,becoming several
orders of magilitude greater in rain than during fair weather.The radiated radio noise is
broadband irf~gcharacter,with a decreasing frequency spectrum.For example,the magnitude
typically decreases on the order of five to six times (around 15 dB)per decade of frequency,
measured 400-500 ft (122-152 m)from the edge of the right-of-way,and becomes quite low in the
frequency range above 10 MHz (Electric Power Research Inst.,1982).The radio noise level also
attenuates with lateral distance from the line,typically at rates varying from 10 to 30 times
(20-30 dB)per decade of distance,depending on the measuring frequency (Electric Power Research
Inst.,1982).Interference caused by this noise to radio and television receivers in the vicinity
therefore depends on their proximity to the line as well as on the signal strength of the desired
o-n
'"
Table 0-3.Summary of Noise Levels Identified by USEPA as
Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an
Adequate Margin of Safety
Avoided Effect
Outdoor activity interference
and annoyance
Indoor activity interference
and annoyance
t 1 ·Notes:
Maximum
Allowable
Level [dB(A)Jt 1
Ldn ~55
Ldn ~61.4
Ldn ~45
Ldn ~51.4
Area
Outdoors in residential areas and farms,
and other outdoor areas where people spend
widely varying amounts of time,and other
places in which quiat is a basis of use
Outdoor areas where people spend limited
amounts of time,such as school yards,
playgrounds
Indoor residential areas
Other indoor areas with human activities
such as schools
1.
2.
3.
4.
Source:
Ld is a weighted day-night average noise level with a 10 dB penalty added to the night-tr~e equivalent noise level (2200-0700 hours).
Anchorage-Fairbanks corridor estimated Ldn at edge of right-of-way =50.4 dB(A).
An indoor Lri of 45 dB(A)wi 11 permit speech communication in the home,whi 1e an outdoor
Ldn not exci:!Qding 55 dB(A)will permit normal speech communication at approximately
10 ft (3 m).
Maintenance of L of 55 dB(A)will provide an indoor L of approximately 40 dB(A)with
windows partly oSQn for ventilation.The nighttime por~~on of this Lri (indoor level)
will be approximately 32 dB(A),which should,in most cases,protect ~8ainst sleep
interference..
u.S.Environmental Protection Agency (1974).·
0-12
Table 0-4.Summary of Human Effects for Outdoor Day-Night Average
Sound-Level of 55 dB(A)
Type of Effect Magnitude of Effect
Speech
Indoors
Outdoors
Average community reaction
High annoyance
Attitude toward area
No disturbance of speech:100%sentence intelligibility
(average)with 5 dB margin of safety
Slight disturbance of speech with 100%sentence intelligibility
(average)at 0.35 m,or 99%at 1.0 m,or 95%at 3.5 m
None;7 dB below level of significant ~complaints and threats of
legal actionll and at least 16 dB below ~vigorous action~(atti-
tudes and other non-acoustical factors may modify this effect)
Depending on attitude and other non-acoustical factors,approx-
imately 5%of the population will be highly annoyed
Noise essentially the least important of various factors
Conversion:to convert meters to feet,multiply by 3.28.
Source:National Academy of Sciences (1977).
Table 0-5.Audible Noise Complaint Guidelines Developed
by Bonneville Power Administration
Audible Noise Level
100 ft Laterally
from Line Centerline
Lso (wet conductor)[dB(A)]
0-52.5
52.5-58.5
>58.5
Probabil ity of
Receiving Complaints
Few or no complaints
Moderate or some complaints
High or numerous complaints
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:Bonneville Power Administration (1977).
D-13
incoming signal,its frequency,and the ambient radio noise level.*Depending on those factors,
the magnitude of corona-generated noise can range anywhere from barely discernible levels to a
point where reception is completely unintell igible.In lines of modern design,interference is
likely to be most noticeable in AM receivers located close to or under a line,such as in an
automobile passing under the line,and possibly in television receivers in proximity to the line
in the far-fringe areas of reception.,;,.
";..,
Radio noise is measured with standardized radio noise meters that,in essence,ate calibrated
radio receivers that function as radio frequency voltmeters.They are capable of measuring
radi 0 frequency noi se down to fractions of a mi crovo It.The annoyance 1eve 1 of transmi ss i on
line radio noise on communication receivers is characterized in terms of a signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR),defined as the ratio of the average signal level field strength,in microvolts per meter
(~V/m),to the quasi-peak level of the noise,measured in the same units.The quasi-peak is a
level intermediate between the peak and average noise levels.It is a standardized measure that
accounts not only for the amplitude but also the repetition rate of the noise pulses,andthus
more accurately represents the nuisance value of the radio noise field with respect to broadcast
reception.Because of the wide range of possible signal and noise levels,a logarithmic scale
is used to express these levels in decibels (dB s and dBn'respectively),based on a 1 micrQvolt
per meter (1 ~V/m)reference level,as
VsdBs=20 log 10 -r dB~**
VndBn=20 log 10 -r dB~
whence
SNR =dB s -dB n =20 log 10 ~s dB~
n
(D-3)
(D-4)
(D-5)
~
where Vs and Vn are the signal and noise field strengths,respectively,in ~V/m.
Estimates of expected radio noise levels generated by transmission lines can be calculated from
empirical formulas and design curves that have been developed from data obtained in laboratory
and field test investigations.In the United States,there are no'regulations on a local or
Federal level that expressly limit the level of radio noise that a transmission line may produce,
although Federal Communications Commission (FCC)rulings require,in general,that no device
that radiates radio frequency energy shall endanger or seriously degrade the function of radio
navigation services or radio communication service&(Federal Communications Commission,1975).
Technicafly,transmission lines fall within this category.Tolerability criteria for trans-
mission line-generated noise must therefore be based on subjective ratings of listeners and
viewers exposed to radio,and television programs containing various amounts of injected or
measured ambient noise.
A preconstruction survey of signal strengths of AM radio broadcasts was made by the Alaska Power
Authority (APA)through their consultant,~ommonwealth Associates,Inc.(CAl),at 11 sites near
the right-of-way of the 345-kV Anchorage-Fairbanks transmission corridor in the section between
Willow and Healy (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982:Fig.A-I).A list of stations received at various
sites is given in Table D-6,and the site locations are listed in Table D-7.All of the station
signal levels were below the 40 dB~level required by the FCC for primary service in the northern
rural areas of Alaska,defined as those areas in which the ground wave is not subject to objec-
tionable interference or fading (Federal Communications Commission,1968).The maximum signal
strength of any of the stations monitored at the eleven sites was only 37 dB~(KOFD,in Anchorage).
Ambient radio noise levels were also measured at each of these sites at this time at selected
frequencies in the AM broadcast band.The measurements were made during daytime under overcast
or rain conditions.The resulting SNR varied from about -8 to +12.5 dB.While these readi-ngs
were being taken,a subjective rating of each radio signal received was made by the team of
observers on a scale ranging from "All (ll en tirely satisfactoryll)to IIE II (II speech unintelligible ll ).
The results are tabulated in Table D-7.At two of the measuring sites,no AM broadcast signals
at all were heard,and,at best,only IIC II (llfairly satisfactoryll)signal s were heard,with
background noise plainly evident at three locations.Of the total of 32 signal receptions at
the 11 monitoring sites (with a given station often received at more than one site),the 18
signa 1s with the II Ell qual i ty correlated wi th an SNR range of -8.8 to -1.2 dB~.The ni ne signals
with a IID II quality correlated with an SNRrange of -4.4 to +3.0 dB~,and the remaining six
signals with a IIC II quality correlated with an SNR range of +4.2 to 12.5 dB~.On this basis,an
*Ambient radio noise originates from atmospheric or other man-induced sources.A sufficiently high
level of ambient noise could render the corona-generated noise component negligib'le by comparison.
**dB~signifies dB relative to 1 microvolt per meter.
0-14
!Table 0-6.AM Radio Stations Received During Preconstruction Survey of Anchorage-
Fairbanks Transmission Corridor between Willow and Healy,July 1981
Frequency Station Powert 1
(kHz)Call Location (kW)
550 KENI Anchorage 5
560 KVOK Kodiak 1
580 KYUK Bethel 5
590 KHAR Anchorage 5
650 KYAK Anchorage 50
660 KFAR Fairbanks 10
700 KBYR Anchorage LS-l,N-.5
750 KFQO Anchorage LS-50,N-I0
900 KFRB Fairbanks·10
970 KIAK Fairbanks 5
1080 KANC Anchorage 10
1150 KABN Long Island 5
(Big Lake)
1170 KJNP North Pole 50
Antenna
Limitationt 1
DA-2
DA-N
Station
Classt2
III
III
III
III
II
II
II
II
II
III
II
III
II
t 1 Key:
DA-2--0irectional antenna,different patterns day and night
OA-N--Directional antenna during night only
LS--Local Sunset
N--Night.
t 2 Only Class II and Class III stations were received.Class II stations are
licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)to operate on a clear
channel and render primary service over wide areas.Class III stations are
licensed by the FCC to operate on a regional channel and render primary
service to large cities (municipalities)and surrounding areas.The primary
service area is the area in which the radio signal is not subject to objec-
tionable interference or fading.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
Table 0-7.Existing Quality of Reception for AM Radio Stationst 1
Number of Radio Stations Judged to
Have the Following Quality of
Site Audio Receptiont 2
Number Location A B C 0 E
10 Wi 11 ow 3 3
20 Trapper Creek 2 2 3
30 Chase 1 4
40 Lane Creek 1 1 4
50A Curry 1
60 Cantwell 1
70 Carlo Creek 1
80 Oeneki Lake 1 3
90 McKinley Village
100 McKinley Park
110A Healy 1 1
.<~.
,::;Tota 1 0 0 6 9 18
t 1 Based on field measurements of radio station signal strengths
July 9-15,1981.
t 2 A--entirely satisfac~ry;B--very good,background unobtrusive;
C--fairly satisfactory,background plainly evident;O--background
very evident,speech understandable with concentration;E--speech
unintelligible.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
0-15
SNR of +4.2 dB~is about the minimum acceptable level,which was met by only six signal reception
.points.Reception of the remaining 27 would be considered below par or unsatisfacto~under
this standard,even with presently existing ambient conditfbns and without the installation of
the Intertie.
An estimated lateral profile of radio noise levels along the corridor was calculated by APA/CAl
(Commonwealth Assoc.,1982)for the ultimate configuration of three single-circuit/-~45-kV lines
in parallel alignment on common right-of-way (Fig.0-2)and operating at maximum rated voltage
of 362.5 kV.The results,calculated by computer program by CAl using algorithms described by
Electric Power Research Institute (1975a)and given in Table D-8,agree closely with manual
calculations performed by FfRC using formulas and design curves given in Electric Power Research
Institute (1982).The calculated values apply for a 1 MHz simulated noise measuring frequency,
which is centrally located in the AM broadcast band.'"Based ·on a 25 dB~average level of
measured ambient radio noise,this table indicates that clearances of 200,300,and 600 ft (60,
90,and 180 m)from the edge of the right-of-way would probably be required under fair weather,
wet conductor,or heavy rain conditions,respectively,to avoid the possibility of significant
adverse impact on AM radio reception due to corona-generated radio noise.This is summarized in
Table 0-9.
Based on these calculations and survey measurements,it appears reasonably conservative to allow
for a 1,000-ft (300-m)minimum separation between the corridor centerline and residences and
between the centerline and long parallels with the Parks Highway,as recommended by APA/CAI."''''
This should be adequate to protect against significant radio noise contributions from the lines
on AM broadcast reception under worst-case weather conditions and should ensure that existing
quality of AM radio reception is preserved.
However,mitigative measures can be taken to restore AM reception quality should particularly
troublesome problems arise after line installation,such as installing a separate receiving
antenna beyond the influence zone of the radio noise and connecting it to the receiver by a
shielded lead-in cable.This or other means could be resorted to on a case-by-case basis within
practical limits.Any problems that conceivably could be traceable to project transmission line
operation would have to lie within areas where intelligible reception now exists.For the
Willow-Healy section of the Anchorage-Fairbanks transmission corridor,this would include only
the portion between Willow and Curry,since,as Table 0-7 shows,useful AM radio reception north
of Curry is practically nonexistent.
In interpreting the resul ts of thi s i nvesti gat i on conducted by APA and its consul tants,it
should be noted that the radio reception analysis appl ies only to AM radio reception under
daytime conditions,i.e.,by ground wave transmission.At night,the radiowave propagation
characteristics change markedly,which can result in deterioration of reception quality.This
influence and the static noise generated from thunderstorm activity can mask the effects of any
line-generated noise.
Radio interference to citizens band (CB)communications from a transmission lioe can come from
two sources:(1)from a static-type interference caused by line corona or spark discharges from
loose or broken line hardware,which can often be located and repaired;and (2)from the blocking
action due to the physical presence of the line itself.The corona noise only causes receiving
interference.The signal-to-noise ratio with regard to corona noise is likely to be quite high,
since corona-generated radio noise falls off to negligible intensity beyond about 10 MHz,well
below the 27 MHz of the CB band,in which region the noise will be about 250 times lower (48 dB~)
than at 1 MHz,the mid-point of the AM broadcast band.Furthermore,atmospheric static will
likely mask the radio noise at the time when the latter will be at its maximum (during thunder-
storms).80th the sending and receiving modes could be affected by the blocking.However,
since CB units are often mobile or portable,they can be easily moved to a location 100 ft
(30 m)or more from the line,which should be sufficient to restore good CB communications.
Therefore,CB interference from line-generated radio noise would not be anticipated to present a
problem of any consequence.
Television interference (TVI)can occur in the AM video portion of the television signal from
radio noise."'''''''As in the case with radio interference (Rl),TVl generation on transmission
"'Values at the low frequency end of the broadcast band (550 kHz)are typically about 4.0 dB
greater than the value at 1 MHz,and those at the higher end (1600 kHz)are about 5 dB lower,
reflecting the dropoff with increasing frequency noted earlier (Electric Power Research
Inst.,1982).
"''''This 1,000-ft (300-m)separation is equivalent to 800 ft (240 m)from the edge of the 400-ft
(120-m)right-of-way.
"'''''''As previously mentioned,the audio portion of the television signal is broadcast on FM and is
not subject to static interference.
~-----------------------
0-16
Table D-8.CaJeulated Transmission Line Radio Frequency (RF)
Noise Levels (three single-circuit transmission lines on a
common right"'of-wayt!simulated noise measuring
frequency =1 MHz)
.Lateral Separation Weather Conditions
from Edge of Heavy Rai nt 2 Wet Conductort 3 Fair Weather
Right-of-Way (ft)(dBIJ)(dBIJ )(dBIJ)
0 69 57 49
100 50 38 30
200 40 28 20t 4
300 34 22t 4 14t4
400 29 19t 4 9t4
500 .'25 15t 4 5t4
600 22t 4 12t4 2t4
700 20t 4 10t4 Ot 4
800 18t4 8t4 -2t4
t 1 Configuration along part of the 345 kV Anchorage-Fairbanks trans-
mission corridor.
t 2 "Heavy rain"is considered as a natural rainfall rate on the order
of 0.31-0.47 in/hour (8-12 mm/hr)or greater.It is the highest
corona and radio-noise-producing condition.For 99%of the total
foul-weather period,the radio noise generated by corona can be
expected to be below the heavy rain value (Electric Power Research
Instit.,1982).
t 3 The "wet conductor"condition represents a natural condition of
very light rain,drizzle,or dense fog when the conductor is satu-·
rated with pendant water drpps and the concentration of moisture in
the air is just sufficient to maintain an equilibrium between the
loss and replacement of water drops (Electric Power Research
Inst.,1982).
t 4 Average value of measured ambient RF noise level during the Intertie
route survey was about 25 dBIJ.Therefore,the corona-generated
transmi-ssion line RF noise component is not expected to have a sig-
nificant impact on the existing quality of radio reception for the
noted calculated levels corresponding to the indicated weather
conditions and lateral distances from the edge of the right-of-way.
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
..
0-17
Table 0-9.Zones of Influence of Radio Frequency Noise
(three single-circuit transmission lines on a
common right-of-wayt 1 operating~t 362.5 kV)
Width of Distance from
Zonet 2 Edge of Right-of-Wayf2;<
Weather Condition (ft)(ft)t 3 "
Fair weather 800 200
Wet conductort 4 1000 300
Heavy raint 4 1600 600
t 1 Configuration along part of the 345-kVAnchorage-Fairbanks
transmission corridor.
t 2 The right-of-way width is assumed constant at 400 ft.
t 3 At greater distances from the edge of the right-of-way,no
impact on the quality of radio reception from the operation
of the Intertie is foreseen for the weather conditions cited.
t 4 Defined in Table 0-8.
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:.Commonwealth Associates (1982).
lines results from corona formation on the conductors as well as from spark discharges on loose
or broken line hardware.TVI in the form of "ghost"images can also result due to the physical
presence of the transmission line,causing signal reflections.Since corona-generated radio
frequency noise drops off at the higher frequency levels and becomes quite low in intensity
above 10 MHz,the TVI,even in the low television band (Channels 2-6,54-88 MHz),will generally
be negligible,particularly if the AM radio reception in the vicinity of the transmission line
is acceptable (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982),as is expected to be the case for the corridor lines.
Problems resulting from spark discharges on line hardware can generally be attended to satis-
factorily on a case-by-case basis by suitable repairs or local minor design modifications.
Television signal reflection problems caused by transmission lines traversing sparsely settled
rural areas should likewise be few in number and can be relieved by modification or relocation
of the antenna on the receiving apparatus.
A preconstruction television reception survey was made by APA/CAI similar to the radio reception
survey described above in connection with AM radio reception (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982).The
same 11 measuring sites were chosen along the corridor.Thirteen television signals were
monitored,as given in Table 0-10.Of these,nine were from television translators,which are
commonly used among the rural communities that 1 ie along the corridor route.Translators are
low-power facilities (normally 10 watts)that receive weak signals from primary television
stations located in Anchorage and Fairbanks and rebroadcast the video and audio on a different
channe 1 to 1oca 1 small geographi ca 1 area withi n a 20-to 30-mi (30-to 50-km)radi us.Because
the rebroadcasted signal is relatively much stronger than the weak primary signal,it is less
susceptible to interference from the transmission lines.Quasi-peak measurements were made of
the signal strength of the television signals that could be received at each of the 11 sites
along with measurements of the ambient noise level at a clear frequency slightly below the video
carrier frequency.The resulting signal-to-noise ratios ranged from 2 to 44 dB~,with an average
of 12 dB~.Only two of the 34 values of SNR were above 30 dB~,the minimum level judged accept-
able for viewing by a 500-person test group in a study sponsored by the Electric Power Research
Institute (1982).However,the qual ity of audio reception (FM),as judged by the observers
making these measurements,was entirely satisfactory (A-rating)in some cases,as shown in
Table 0-11.This is the same rating scale used in the evaluation of AM radio reception
(Table 0.7).
In summary,it appears that no significant television reception problems would be likely to
develop as a consequence of the installation of the corridor transmission link,and that accept-
able TV reception should be preserved where present reception is good.
Insofar as the remaining sections of the project 345-kV transmission are concerned,the results
of the analytical study should still be valid [the recommended 1,000-ft (300-m)separation
between the lines and residences and between the lines and long parallels with highways,etc.].
In fact,this requirement should be increasingly conservative for rights-of-way containing less
than three circuits,although the effect of multiple circuit right-of-way occupancy is secondary
0-18
Table D-10.TV Stations Received During Preconstruction
Survey of Corridor Route.July 1981
Operating Antenna
Call Power (kW).Height (ft),
Channel Letters Location Visual/Aural AT/AGt l
2·KEN I Anchorage 26.9/2.69 70/173
2 KFAR Fairbanks 5.37/.676 45/200
Cantwell translator at earth station operated
by Alaska Department of Highways
4 K04CO Healy translator
(Primary Ch.11,KTVF Fairbanks)
4 K04DO Talkeetna translator
(Primary Ch.11,Anchorage)
6 K06KG Talkeetna Translator
(Primary Ch.13,Anchorage)
7t2 KAKM Anchorage 105/20.90 143/250
7 K0900 Healy translator
(Primary Ch.9.Fairbanks)
9 KUAC Fairbanks 46.7/1.16 200/255
9 K0900 Talkeetna translator
(Primary Ch.2.Anchorage)
11 KTVA Anchorage 26.3/5.35 300/391
13 KIMO Anchorage 30/6.17 90/347
13 Healy translator
t 1 AT--above average terrain;AG--above ground.
t 2 Non-commercial educational station.
Conversion:,To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
Table 0-11.Existing Quality of Television Reception (audio)t 1
Number of TV Signals Judged to
Have the Following Quality of
Site Audio Receptiont 2
Number Location A B C 0 E
10 Wi 11 ow 3 1 1
20 Trapper Creek 1 1 1 1 1
30 Chase 2 1 3 1
40 Lane Creek 2 3
50A Curry 1
60 Cantwell 1 1 1
70 Carlo Creek 1
80 Deneki Lake 2
90 McK in 1ey Vill age 1
100 McKinley Park
119A Healy 2 1 1
Total 11 4 2 9 8
t 1 Based on field measurements of radio station signal strengths
July 9-15,1981......
t 2 A--entirely satisfactory;B--very good,background unobtrusive;
C--fairly satisfactory,background plainly evident;D~-background
very evident.speech understandable with concentration;E--speech
unintelligible.
Sou~ce:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
..
D-19
with regard to radio noise generation.No surveys of radio or television broadcast reception
qual ity have yet been reported by APAa long other transmi ss i on routes,although there seems to
be no reason why reception of acceptable quality should not be preserved in locations where
present reception is good,particularly with the 1,000-ft (300-m)recommended separation distance
between the lines and receiving antennas.
A survey of existing potentially sensitive communication tower locations along th~proposed
corridor route was conducted by APA's consu1tants (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982)to form the basis
of determining minimum separation distances between the edge of the-345-kV transmission right-
of-way and these towers to preclude the likelihood of static noise or reflective type inter-
ference to the operation o~these facilities due to corona formation on the conductors and the
physical presence of the line conductors and towers.An additional objective was to ensure
adequate safety clearance between the towers and the lines in the event of wind toppling and for
tower maintenance.Necessary corrective measures could then be carried out prior to construc-
tion to minimize these impacts.Altogether,50 such radio communication facilities were identi-
fied along the Anchorage-Fairbanks transmission corridor between Willow and Healy (Commonwealth
Assoc.,1982:Fig.B-1).Included were FM translators,TV translators,earth stations (for
communications with geostationary satellites),air navigational aids,and point-to-point micro-
wave facilities.These facilities are licensed to various business and governmental agencies in
Alaska,including the Federal Aviation Administration,the Alaska Railroad,the Alaska Depart-
ment of Highways,the Golden Valley Electric Association,the Mantanuska Telephone Association,
and Alascom,Inc.
The criteria for minimum clearances for the various types of communication facilities is given
in Table D-12.The basis for these criteria take into account both the operational interference
and the safety aspects,discussed above.A survey of the owners of these facilities indicated,
in general,agreement as to the guidelines outlined in the criteria,and no problems are antici-
pated to result from their use.The precise locations of the communication towers with respect
to the corridor will be verified by aerial photographs.
Surveys of communication facility locations along 345-kV transmission routes other than between
Willow and Healy along the corridor have yet to be made by APA.However,the foregoing criteria
should be applicable to these lines,also.
D.5 ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS
D.5.1 Electric Fields
Energized overhead transmission lines generate electrostatic fields in the surrounding insulating
medium that give rise to induced electric charges in other conducting objects in the vicinity of
the line,such as vehicles,fences,rain gutters,etc.If these objects are insulated,or
semi - i nsul ated from ground,the induced charge accumul ati on on the object produces a potential
difference,or voltage,between the object and ground.Depending on the resistivity of the path
between the object and ground,this induced voltage will give rise to a current flow,generally
measured in milliamperes.If a person were to approach and touch this object (say,a parked
vehicle),a second parallel path to ground would be created and a small current would pass
through his body,the amount depending on his internal body resistance and the resistance from
his body to ground.This might be accompanied by a mild shock and spark discharge.This mainly
constitutes an annoyance and never (or seldom)results in physical injury,except due to a
secondary reaction,such as an involuntary muscle contraction.
The foregoing effects vary with the intensity of the electrostatic field,which is generally _
measured in terms of the field gradient (in kV/m)at "ground level"(or,more precisely,the
gradient measured or calculated at 1 m above ground).This standardization permits comparisons
to be made between different line designs in this respect.The earth's ambient DC electric
field at ground level is 0.13 kV/m,although beneath thunder clouds the fields may reach 3 kV/m
even in the absence of lightning (Bonneville Power Admin.,1977).The ground-level gradient is
a valid parameter for the prediction of electrostatic effects and,for given conductor-to-ground
heights,does not vary more than 10%to 15%for heights up to 10 ft (3 m)(Bonneville Power
Admin.,1977).Electric fields under energized lines can be measured with instrumentation,but
they also can be accurately calculated,enabling transmission lines to be designed with known
field strengths at ground level.For a given line design and measuring point,the field strength
varies directly with line voltage.It also varies with conductor bundle geometry,phase spacing,
height of the conductors above ground,and lateral distance of the measuring'point from the line
centerline.As this lateral distance increases,the field strength decreases,dropping rapidly
and leveling off at a low value beyond the edge of the right-of-way.Therefore,the effects of
the field directly under or very close to the line are of primary interest.
For Anchorage-Fairbanks transmission corridor sections having three 345-kV lines on a common
400 ft (120 m)right-of-way and at maximum operating voltage of 362.5 kV,the maximum calculated
·Tabl e 0-12.Possible EHV Line Effects on Communications Facilities and Recommended Minimum Clearancest1
Recommended
Minimum
Communication .-No Reported Clearance to
Facil ity Reflection Diffraction Absorption Ghosting Effects EHV Lines Criterion
FM Translator X Antenna height Antenna Toppling Guy
plus 200 ft Anchor Maintenance
TV Translator X X X Antenna height Antenna Toppling Guy
plus 200 ft Anchor Maintenance
Earth Stations 10 tower heights Line of sight for low
zenith of approximately
19°above the horizon
NAVAJOS
(Enroule)
NDB X 1000 ft FAA
RCAG X 1000 ft FAA
SFO X 1000 ft FAA
SSFO X 1000 ft FAA CI,
NAVAJOS N
0
(At Airports)1.5°DOT/FAA
VOR X 1.5°FAA (1968)
Unicorn X Airport
Criterion
RCO X Airport
Criterion
FSS X Airport
Criterion
AAS X Airport
Criterion
ALAS X Airport
Criterion
Point-to-Point X X X Antenna height Antenna Toppling and
Mi crowave plus 200 ft Guy Anchor Maintenance
0.6 First Fresnel Zone
Radius
t 1 "X"denotes potential exists for specified effect.
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
'"
D-21
electric field strength at ground level is 6.9 kV/m,*which occurs within the right-of-way
limits near the outside phase conductors.At the edge of the right-of-way,the calculated field
is-1.6 kV/m (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982).Other values as"-a function of distance from the right-
of-way centerline are given in Table 0-13,which shows the rapid dropoff of field intensity
beyond the edge of the right-of-way.Calculations made for a large vehicle [13.5 ft high,
$.5 ft wide,and 70 ft long**(4.1 x 1.6 x 21 m)J parked in this field and oriented transversely
to the line indicated that a current of approximately 4.5 milliampere (rna)would.<flow from the
ve~icle through a ground connection to earth at a conductor height of 30 ft (9 ~)'and an operat-
ing voltage of 362.5 kV.This is slightly below the 5-ma criterion of the National Electrical
Safety Code (NESC).·However,the current resulting with this vehicle oriented parallel to and
under the line in the maximum field position exceeds the 5-ma limit,although such a circumstance
would rarely occur.
Measurements have shown that persons standing on the ground and touching such an object as that
described above receive a I'short circuit"current pf less than 10%of the total induced current
prior to the contact about 90%of the time (Inst.of Electrical and Electronic Engineers,1979).
This current,0.5 rna or less,can be perceived by approximately 1.0%of adult males.The remain-
ing 10%of the time,a person will receive up to 80%of the total induced current (Inst.of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers,1979).However,even this is below the NESC limit of
5.0 rna referenced above.Hence,it can be concluded that no significant shock hazard exists
with regard to accidental contact with metallic objects located under,orin the close vidnity
of,the Intertie.As an additional precaution,however,such objects could be grounded where
considered necessary.
A number of investigations and research projects relative to biological effects of electric
fields on people and animals have been conducted over the past decade,and a number of others
are underway.To date,however,there seems to be no conclusive evidence of harmful biological
effects due to exposure to transmission line-generated electric fields,at least none that has
been generally accepted by the scientific community (Bridges,1975;Sheppard and Eisenbud,1977;
Riog,1979,Electric Power Research Inst.,1982;Mahmoud and Zimmerman,1982).Brief reports on
recent literature surveys on this subject (Riog,1979;Electric Power Research Inst.,1982)
hoted that health complaints were reported by EHV substation workers in the Soviet Union,where
work duration limits now exist to limit daily exposure.However,the same survey noted that
medical examinations of 1inemen in the United States,Canada,and Sweden failed to find health
problems ascribable to AC electric field exposure.Controlled tests on animals exposed to
electric fields have also been performed.Ohe such test was on the effects on hogs raised under
a 345-kV line in Iowa (Mahmoud and Zimmerman,1982).No negative biological effects on these
animals were detected as a result of this exposure as compared to a control group not so exposed.
On the basis of evidence accumulated to date,there does not seem to be a direct confirmed
relationship between electric field exposure and adverse health effects on humans and animals,
notwithstanding the experience reported in the Soviet Union.The same results appear to be
generally true for plant life for EHV lines operating at 345 kV.It is only at the higher
transmission voltages that induction space potentials reach levels such that significant leaf
damage and tree and pole burning is likely to occur,and even then only within or adjacent to
the right-of-way,as demonstrated by tests at Project UHV (Electric Power Research Inst.,1982).
Insofar as corona-induced or spark-induced fuel ignition is concerned,tests have shown (Riog,
1979,Electric Power Research Inst.,1982)that chances for such ignition are extremely remote,
and that there have been no reports of the accidental ignition of fuel caused by spark discharges
induced from transmi ss ion line fi e 1ds.Neverthe 1ess,it is generally good practice not to
refuel under a transmission line.
D.5.2 Magnetic Fields
Overhead transmission lines carrying load current generate magnetic fields around the line
conductors that permeate the surrounding medium.The effect of the continuously changing mag-
netic fields associated with AC transmission is to induce voltages and currents in surrounding
conduct i ng _objects.Li ke e 1ectri c fi e 1ds,the magnetic fi e 1d strength (measured in gauss)can
be calculated for a given line design and is proportional to the load current carried by the
line conductors.The maximum magnetic field close to heavily loaded 345-kV transmission lines
under balanced phase loading conditions is typically only 0.5 gauss or less at a height of 3 ft
(1 m)above ground ("ground level"),which is less than the field level in certain industrial
environments,especially near high current-carrying conductors (Electric Power Research Inst.,
*This is a computer-calculated value given in the Report R-2394 (Commonwealth Assoc.,1982),
which is in reasonably close agreement and is conservative with respect to the 6.74-kV/m value
computed manually by FERC using methods described by the Electric Power Research Institute
(1982).The 6.9-kV/m value is also below the 8.0-kV/m limit set in the Anchorage-Fairbanks
Intertie Basic Design Criteria (Commonwealth Assoc.,1981).
**The largest size permitted on Alaskan State highways.
-1IiIIlIl rene,ttm'~1fr@~..:~;CJ:.::..'.:.:;;,L;,.;;..-~;~,i'~;':;'ili';f~;,;;&:i*N'#i""·''h'j;;'"".:iW"t¥i"i
D-22
Table D-13.Calculated Intertie Electric Field
Strengths (three transmission lines operating
at 362.5 kV)tl
Lateral Separation
from Centerline of
Right-of-Way (ft)
o
50
100
150
200
300
400
Calculated Electric Field
Strengths (kV/m).
at 1 m above Ground Levelt 2
5.14
3.78
3.90
6.90t3
1.6lt4
0.22
0.07
t 1 Configuration along part of the Anchorage-Fairbanks
345-kV transmission corridor.
t 2 Values are calculated for a minimum conductor height
(atmid~span)of 30 ft and a 33-ft phase-to-phase
spacing.
t 3 The maximum value of electric field strength occurs
near the outside phase conductors.
t 4 Value of electric field strength at th~edge of the
right-of-way..
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by
0.305.
Source:Commonwealth Associates (1982).
1982).Si nce thi sis al so one to two orders of magnitude smaller then the magnetic fields
produced by common household appliances (Bridges,1975),its effect is considered harmless.
Unbalanced phase loadihg can produce induced voltages up to ten times those of the balanced
condition on account of the absence of cancellation in magnetic field coupling caused by the
.dissymmetry (Electric Power Research Inst.,1975b).However,under normal conditions the phase
loadings are nearly perfectly balanced.Significant unbalances are likely to result only during
fault conditions and then only for extremely short periods of time necessary for fault clearing.
In the balanced loading case,the induced current density in a person standing close to the line
from the magnetic field is on the order of 1/10 that resulting from the electric field induction.
Furthermore,the magnetic fields do not Cause transient currents of high peak value,which can
result from electric-field-induced spark discharges (Electric Power Research Inst.,1975b).
As in the case of electric fields,experimental findings with regard to biological effects from
continued exposure to magnetic fields are inconclusive (Sheppard and Eisenbud,1977;Electric
Power Research Inst.,1982).Based on a survey of the literature reported by the Electric Power
Research Institute (1982),the inconclusive nature of the results is due in part to the wide
variatioriin field strengths,frequencies,and exposure durations used in different studies,
One such study noted an increase in triglyceride in humans exposed to a I-gauss field of 45 Hz
for 22.5 hours.However,these findings were not duplicated in more controlled tests on monkeys
in fields up to 10-gauss at 45 Hz.Another study in Germany showed no effect on reaction times,
pulse frequency,arterial pressure,or electrocardiographic and electroencephalographic traces
on three volunteers sUbjected to a 3-gauss field at 50 Hz.These findings,which generally
agree with those from studies of the effects of electrostatic fields,have resulted in little
concern ,for the~biological effects of magnetic fields,particularly in view of the relatively
lower level of lnduction from magnetic fields than from electric fields.
D.6 ELECTRICAL SAFETY
Physical contact with energized transmission line conductors,either directly or through other
inetallic objects will,of course,be fethal,the same as is likely with accidental contact with
residential distribution lines,which operate at much lower voltages.Precautions should there-
fore be exercised when operating or transporting under the line any kind of apparatus or equip-
ment that exceeds normal vehicle height to prevent accidental contact with the line conductors,
either directly or by flashing.
D-23
For the proposed project 345-kV transmission lines,the minimum vertical line clearance of phase
conductors above ground at 120 0 F (49°C)would be 30 ft (9 m)for farmland and highways,which
exceeds the National Electric Safety Code (NESC)minimum or 27.3 ft (8.3 m)(American National
Standards Inst.,1984).This and other dimensions pertinent to safety clearances and right-of-
way occupancy are given in Figure 0-2 for the Knik Arm-Gold Creek section of the Anchorage-
Fa irbanks 345-kV transmi ss i on corri dor.Ri ght-of-way wi dths and spaci ng of 1i nes ~pp 1i cab 1e to
right-of-way occupancies of one to four single-circuit lines are given in Table D-:tLt-;:
Table D-14.Right-of-Way Use of Single and Multiple
Single-Circuit Transmission Lines
No.of Single-Width of Lateral Separation Distance from Line L
Circuit Lines ROW (ft)of Line L (ft)to Edge of ROW (ft)
1 190 --95
2 300 105±95
3 400 105±95
4 510 105±95
Conversion:To convert feet to meters,multiply by 0.305.
Source:Application ExhibitF,Plate F81.
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX D
American National Standards Institute.1984.National Electrical Safety Code.1984 Ed.,C2.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,Inc.New York.
Anonymous.1974.Sound and Vibration Magazine.pp.33-36 (September).
Bonneville Power Administration.1977.The Role of the Bonneville Power Administration in the
Pacific Northwest Power Supply System.Appendix B.BPA Power Transmission.
Bridges,J.E.1975.Biological Effects of 60 Hertz Electric Fields.ITT Research Institute.
Final Report E8151,EPRI Project RP-381-1.
Commonwealth Associates,Inc.1981.Anchorage-Fairbanks Transmission Intertie,Basic Design
Criteria.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority.
Commonwealth Associates,Inc.1982.Electrical Environmental Effects Report.Engineering
Report R-2394.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority.
Electric Power Research Institute.1975a.Transmission Line Reference Book,345 kV and Above,
1st Ed.
Electric Power Research Institute.1975b.
Ultrahigh-Voltage Transmission Lines.
Electrostatic and Electromagnetic Effects of
Report EL-802,EPRI Project 566-1,Final Report.
-d
Electric Power Research Institute.1982.Transmission Line Reference Book,345 kV and Above,
2nd Ed.
Federal Aviation Administration.1968.VOR/VORTAC Criteria,6700.11.
Federal Communications Commission.1968.Federal Communication Commission Rules and Regulations.
Vol.III.
Federal Communications Commission.1975.Federal Communication Commission Rules and Regulations.
Vol.II,Part 15.Revised to May 1975.
Fern,W.J.and R.I.Brabets.1974.Field investigation of ozone adjacent to high voltage
transmission lines.Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems,Vol.PAS-93(5).
Frydman,M.,A.Levy and S.E.Miller.1972.Oxidant measurements in the vicinity of energized
765 kV lines.Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems,Vol.PAS-92(3).
~,-
0-24
Frydman,M.and C.H.Shih.1973.Effects of the environment on oxidants production in AC
corona.Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems,Vol.PAS-93(1).
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.1979.The Electrostatic and Electromagnetic
Effects of AC Transmission Lines.Tutorial Course 79 EH0145-3-PWR.New York.
Mahmoud,A.A.and D.Zimmerman.1982.Pigs fare well under 345 kV line.Transmission and
Distribution Magazine (December).
National Academy of Sciences.1977.Guidelines for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements
~n Noise.Committee on Hearing,Bioacoustics,and Biomechanics.Washington,DC.
Riog,R..1979.The effects of transmission Lines.Record of the Maryland Power Plant Siting
Act~Vol.7,No.1.
Scherer,H.N.,B.J.Ware and C.H.Shih.1972.Gaseous effluents due to EHV transmission line
corona.Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems,Vol.PAS-92 (3).
Sebo,S.A.,J.T.Heibel,M.Frydman and C.H.Shih.1975.Examination of ozone emanations from
EHV transmission line corona discharges.Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,Vol.PAS-95(2);
Sheppard,A.R.and M.Eisenbud.1977.Biological Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields of
Extremely Low Frequency.New York University Press.New York.
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.1974.Information on Levels of Environmental Noise
Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety.NTIS
PB-239429.