Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Pilot Point Wind Generation Analysis & Feasibility Circa 2006-2010
Generation Analysis S feasibility �1 Basic Wind Plan Introduction This document shows the results of a rough analysis of the options for retrofitting the existing diesel power system in Pilot Point, Alaska to a wind -diesel system. I used Windographer (www.mista a.calwindo ra her to analyze the wind data, and HOMER (www.nrel.gov/homer) to model the wind -diesel systems. Electric Load The graph below shows the measured real electric load at Pilot Point from November 2004 to April 2005: W Nov ueC Jan Feb Mar Apr 2004 2005 From this measured data a 24-hour average Ioad profile was calculated for each month then we filled in the missing May through October data by assuming that the April profile would apply to May, June, and July, and the November profile would include August, September, and November. The data was then scaled to the daily profiles to achieve the seasonal profile shown below. Page 1 of 15 The resulting electric load data appear in the graphs below: Electric Load Data 24 -18 r. 0 12 c 6 x 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep out Nov Dec Day of Yeau max daily high mean daily low min Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ann Makn#h $ Electric Load Duration Curve 6 J4 t+ 2 W IV 78 66 54 42 30 18 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 6,000 Hours Equaled or Exceeded This information indications that the wind diesel design with the current system should accommodate an electrical load of about 50 kW with a peak of less than 80 kW and minimum load of 20 kW. Thermal Load The AEA thermal load calculator was used to generate thermal load data with the inputs shown below. An assumed value of 46,000 gal/yr of fuel use for serving the thermal load (36,000 gal/yr for space heating and 10,000 gal/yr for domestic hot water) and with a boiler efficiency of 80%. Data from the National Climatic Data Center was for Port Heiden which was the closest reporting station having the monthly average temperatures. This data indicates that the thermal energy usage ranges from a high of 250 kW to a low of 80 kW. This thermal load requires more data collection and analysis but, is likely to coincide with the availability of wind energy. Page 2of15 B ! C 0_ E F _g H 1 Original spreadshe.st developed byAE&E {"Recovered Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet') 2 Modified by Mia Devine, Alaska Energy Authority 3 Lastmodife6 March 2006 4a Instructions: User Inputs In BLUE BUILDING HEATING FUEL USE: Calculated values in BLACK _ _ EN.nn,,,l 36.000 galigi 6 10000 gnifyr 7 46,000 gaUyr Pilaf Point 80% Indoor Atr Temp (F) 70 134,0.00 Btufgal 10 1 16 17 24__I 25 The resulting thermal load data appear in the graphs below. Tlt�lrral Load Data a 4.. c 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mq)rof Year .jan rely mar Apr may dun duI AUg aep Uex Ivov uec -.nr M011011 Tlrerlrral I_orrd Rtirafiaal [_rrrvia Weathei Data Building in tine? Ruilding Heat DPman+1 Month Days'Mo. Ave Temp (F) HDD MorAh 1=yes, D=ne Not HDD.4no (GalAno) (MEtUhro) (V MlAno3 (Ave WY) January 31 225 1473 1 147$ 5.233 500,944 164,355 221 February 28 21.9 1347 1 1347 4.857 520,685 152,559 227 March 31 269 1.336 1 1336 4,825 517,258 151,555 204 April 30 33.3 1€01 i 1101 4,123 441,960 129,493 180 May 31 40.8 905 1 905 3,538 379,250 111.119 149 June 30 47 4 678 1 678 2,859 306,4e2 89,799 125 July 31 522 552 1 552 2,452 286,053 77.956 105 August 31 53-3 VCi 518 2,360 255,142 74,756 100 September 30 463 645 1 645 2,780 25 913 86.7172 120 Cdober 31 3B 3 983 1 983 3,799 404,071 113,392 159 November 3D 314 1158 1 11se 4,293 480,216 134,942 187 Derember 31 269 1355 1 1355 4,881 523,215 153,301 206 Annual 36 9 12050 12 1 Z0501 46,000 4,931,201 1,444,825 165 kA 280 240 200 160 120 60 max daily high mean daily Ins+ min 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 Nolan E(leraled or Exceeded Page 3 of 15 Wind Resource Myles O'Kelly provided a wind data set collected at Pilot Point between September 2003 and March 2006. This data set contains data from two anemometers at heights of 69 feet and 89 feet above ground. The data set contains many gaps however, it covers every month of the year and was sufficient to synthesize a year of data for use in HOMER. The time series graph and summary graphs appear below: 7003 Z004 7005 2006 The summary graphs appear below. 3�s�rrar ,err«, J h M A rN J J A .i U N r Wind Slicer Profile sau 250 - 200 -- - -fI - - 150- 100 5o 0 5 40 15 20 Average Wnd Speed (mph) Speed 89' Speed 89' - t a N a 7 Q Log law fit Power Iawfit — Measured data ZL Hour of 0ay — Speed 89' Speed 69' Speed 89' Speed 69' 0 ID 20 30 40 So 60 Speed W {n74rh� Actual data — Best -tit Weibull distril,ution (k=1.83, c=14.5 This data set indicates an average wind speed of 12.1 mph at 69 feet above ground, and 12.9 mph at 89 feet above ground. From that data set, Windographer calculates that the average wind speed at 58 feet is 11.6 mph. This is much lower than the average wind speed at 58 feet of 15.3 mph reported for "the best site in Pilot Point" in the "Pilot Point Wind Speed Monitoring Project Summary Report" by David Blecker of Earth Energy Systems. Myles O'Kelly mentioned in an email that his data set was affected by tower shading, which might account for some of the discrepancy. Based on this information the data set was compared to Port Heiden data and reevaluated. While this data set will require further confirmation, an annual average of wind speed at 13.4 mph at 58 feet was Page 4of15 used for this report. This data translates to an average wind speed at 80 feet, the assumed hub height of the wind turbines, of 14.6 mph or 6.55 iii/s. Windographer was then used to synthesize a one-year hourly data set of wind speed at 80 feet above ground from the data set that Myles O'Kelly sent, which was scaled to an average wind speed of 6.55 m/s. A sensitivity analysis from -10% to +10% of the wind speed was used to estimate annual energy output from candidate wind turbines. Diesel Generators Assumptions were made for the existing power plant and the new power plant appears in the tables below: Table 1—Assumptions for existing power plant Capital Replacement O&M Lifetime Min. Fuel Curve Fuel Curve Generator Cost Cost Cast Load Intercept Slope ($) ($) ($/hr) (hrs) Ratio (LIkWh) (LIkWh) Cat 90 kW 0 55,000 4.90 80,000 30.0 % 0.0800 0.250 Cat 113 kW 0 70,000 5.60 80,000 30.0 % 0.0800 0.250 Cat 164 kW 0 99,000 6.90 80,000 30.0 % 0.0800 0.250 Table 2 — Assumptions for new diesel power plant Capital Replacement 0&M Lifetime Min. Fuel Curve Fuel Curve Generator Cost ($) Cost M Cost ($!fir) (hrs) Load Ratio Intercept (LIkWh) Slope (LIkWh) Existing 64 kW 0 38,000 4.10 80,000 30.0 % 0.0373 0.264 New 64 kW 38,000 38,000 4,10 80,000 30.0 % 0.0373 0.264 New 95 kW 58,000 58,000 5,00 80.000 30.0 % 0.0298 0.211 Fuel curve parameters were selected for each generator using data for the closest sized diesels generators listed on www.cat.com. Accurate information for John Deere generators was unavailable. Capital and operating costs for each generator were estimated using the Alaska Energy Authority's cost data, plotted below: Diesel Installed Capital Cost $ s0a,a0a - „ $5n0,noo y=-0.178X2+673.72x-4334.8 0 $ 400.000 .Q tj $ 300,000 U $ 200,000 N c $ 100,000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Rated Capacity (kW) Page 5 of 15 Diesel O&M Plus Overhaul Cost $161hr - - - - - - $161hr O v $141hr O V21hr y =-2E-05xz + 0.0324x + 2,11613 r O `m $101hr a $51hr a $61hr $41hr - �� O $21hu $01hr . T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 80C g00 1000 Rated Capacity (M) Wind Turbines The wind turbine selected for this application was the Vestas V15. This machine is available in two generator sizes, the one rated 35 kW and the one rated at 65 kW-, both were analyzed. The graph below shows a comparison between the two power curves. The table below shows the assumptions used for both turbines. 80 0 Vower +-ut ve — Vedas V16 - 35 W — Vestas V16-65W 0 5 10 1t 20 25 30 Wnd Sped (mis) Table 3 — Wind Turbine Assumptions Rated Hub Lifetime Installed O&M Turbine Model Power Height Capital Cost Cost (kW) (m) (yr? ($) ($Iyr) Vestas 15 — 35 kW 35 24.4 15 200,000 4,800 Vestas 15 — 65 kW 65 24.4 15 200,000 4,800 Economic Inputs The economic inputs were analyzed using real discount rate of 6% and a project lifetime of 25 years. The base sensitivity analysis used a diesel fuel price of $3.50/gal and a heating fuel price of $4.50/gal. A sensitivity analysis was conducted varying those prices from -20% to +40%. Page 6 of 15 Systems Modeled HOMER modeling was used to scope a number of system configurations. The schematic diagram of an optimized HOMER output appears below. In wind -diesel systems the excess wind power was modeled as serving a single thermal load via. an electric boiler. Other options for using this energy are discussed in the more detail in the plan. The primary purpose of this analysis was to estimate the relative or energy available. For purposes of this analysis it was assumed a total capital cost of $200,000 for an energy recovery system was provided. This amount is generous and could include a number of components including an electric boiler, boiler -grid interface, some thermal electric storage, and the necessary controls. A.l pastas V15 - 35 ... .R.i Al Electric Load Vestas V15 - 65 ... 1,062 kWh/d 6 k peak JD Cat 113 kW Gump load l Cat 160 kW A4++,, ifs -_ - 1 Thermal Load Boiler Page 7 of 15 p O O O b L o O O O e c N V U-) r T 4] N r n N •� C% o O O o C O O O P O (n C O C7 O r m M r 6� LL 2 GJ (D 43 •� � L � o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 +' 4% 0 C N C7 4- a x -. ro 00 NO n 02 N t7 0 { 00 `C Lr M (D V n_ °o V] Cd H O EV r C') V Ca V N M C � N C C O e0 N ^ N M O N 61 M V n r o f CO LL ? 0 G7 0 41 p d} t m r T C t7 N � N O � L .�. �' f- co � Q1 O O 4 O F� M rn m O oo CO n h r- M r,to n m N t- M tQ M u7 ,Sy a � � G M r- V N 00 N LO T V 61 V IT ItV LL � Hl y, ,... N w r- N N O O co N n LO Lo w tO O Lo N 3 r^ N (A N tO m O m r- M N � p a Q� co M N N N N M N N N cn C/� N'r co oc CO 00 t0 ✓ l_re� i3 O T M 'r MO co W n n F- v N � V) Ln O a~ J O m N r- m t7 bk H G O M CD Ln M iT N V n M V) +✓ � O V G m ^ LL 7� } o f L O ONO o 0o M to r- tP C(D _ y - 00 w w 00 m T - w V V � � z r - - - - - r � o LL uroi L 41 ^ iri rn n N M OM u) m M n r- sVv C) tlf "I 00 M r- M ao co , p LO a) -;r rn 0 n L � r r v ^ ro 0 0 0 N co LO I- M CO M cb N (N w a of 7 o 0 rip LO r O] � ❑ U CD! U Lolt} u7 �f7 � f7 4i > cd a E to w W .�. C N M r N to r N M 4- T x w¢ _0 _0 _0 _0 _0 _0 Q¢ "O _0 Q¢ Q Q rA r N C7 V o to 1'- co O) O cn rTi Table 5 - Economic Results and Fuel Consumption for Several Sensitivity Cases Life Initial Levelized Cost Simple Diesel Fuel Consumption Total # System Description Cycle Cost Capital Cost Operating Cost of Energy Pay- back Fuel Savings Power Heating Total ($) ($) ($lyr) ($/kWh) (yrs) (gal/yr) (gallyr) (gallyr) Base case Diesel fuel $3.501gal, heating fuel $4 501gal. wind speed 6 55 m/s 1 Existing system 4,738,560 0 370,682 0,393 n/a 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 2 Add 1 V15-35kW 4,867,871 400,000 349,507 0.419 18.9 25,330 47,775 73,105 11% 3 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 4,902,300 600,000 336,555 0.426 17.6 23,072 44,489 67,561 17% 4 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 4,839,738 800,000 316,015 0.414 14.6 19,955 41,298 61,253 25% 5 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 4,848,880 400,000 348,021 0.415 17.7 26,151 46,806 72,957 11% 6 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 4,766,447 600,000 325,927 0.399 13.4 22,768 43,238 66,006 19% 7 Add 3 V15 - 65 kW 4,720.762 800,000 306,708 0.390 12.5 20,350 39,525 59,875 27% Sensitivity case #2• Fuel prices 20% above base case 1 Existing system 5,594,456 0 437,636 0.453 n/a 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 3 Add 1 V15 - 35 kW 5,644,761 400,000 410,280 0.463 14.6 25,330 47,775 73,105 11% 4 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 5,621,136 600,000 392,787 0.459 13.4 23,072 44,489 67,561 17% 5 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 5,493,937 800,000 367,191 0.433 11.4 19,955 41,298 61,253 25% 6 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 5,621,963 400,000 408,497 0.459 13.7 26,151 46,806 72,957 11% 7 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 5,468,160 600,000 380,820 0.428 10.6 22,768 43,238 66,006 19% 8 Add 3 V15 -65 kW 5,358,077 800,000 356,563 0.406 9.9 20,350 39,525 59,875 27% Sensitivity case #3 Fuel prices 40% above base case 1 Existing system 6,448,005 0 504,406 0.513 nla 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 3 Add 1 V15 - 35 kW 6,419,341 400,000 470,873 0,507 11.9 25,330 47,775 73,105 11% 4 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 6,337,819 600,000 448,851 0.491 10.8 23,072 44,489 67,561 17% 5 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 6,146,139 800,000 418,211 0.452 9.3 19,955 41,298 61,253 25% 6 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 6,392,781 400,000 468,796 0.502 11.2 26,151 46,806 72,957 11% 7 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 6,167,781 600,000 435,549 0.457 8.7 22,768 43,238 66,006 19% 8 Add 3 V15 - 65 kW 5,993,479 800,000 406,269 0.422 8.2 20,350 39,525 59,875 27% Sensitivity case #4 Fuel prices 20% below base case 1 Existing system 3,882,665 0 303,728 0.333 n/a 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 3 Add 1 V15 - 35 kW 4,090,981 400,000 288,733 0.375 26.7 25,330 47,775 73,105 11% 4 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 4,183,463 600,000 280,323 0.394 25.6 23,072 44,489 67,561 17% 5 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 4,185,538 800,000 264,840 0.394 20.6 19,955 41,298 61,253 25% 6 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 4,075,797 400,000 287,546 0.372 24.7 26,151 46,806 72,957 11% 7 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 4,064,734 600,000 271,035 0.370 18.4 22,768 43,238 66,006 19% 8 Add 3 V15 - 65 kW 4,083,447 800,000 256,853 0.374 17.1 20,350 39,525 59,875 27% Sensitivity case #5- Average wind speed 10% above base case 1 Existing system 4,738,560 0 370,682 0.393 n/a 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 3 Add I V15 - 35 kW 4,815,410 400,000 345,403 0.409 15,8 24,444 47,559 72,003 12% 4 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 4,811,898 600,000 329,483 0.40E 14.6 22,236 43,614 65,850 19% 5 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 4,671,865 800,000 302,883 0.380 11.8 18,427 40,012 58,440 28% 6 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 4,767,599 400,000 341,663 0.399 13.8 25,171 46,174 71,345 13% 7 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 4,580,989 600,000 311,420 0,361 10.1 21,090 41,741 62,831 23% 8 Add 3 V15 - 65 kW 4,470,096 800,000 287,100 0.339 9.6 18,454 37,201 55,656 32% continued... Page 9 of 15 Table 5 - continued Life Initial Levelized Cost Simple Diesel Fuel Consumption Total # System Description Cycle Cost Capital Cost Operating Cost of Energy Pay- back Fuel Savings Power Heating Total ($) ($) ($lyr) ($/kWh) (yrs) (galryr) I (gallyr) (gallyr) Sensrflvrty case #6: Average wind speed 10% below base case t Existing system 4,738,560 0 370,682 0.393 n/a 33,224 48,500 81,723 n/a 3 Add 1 V15 - 35 kW 4,924,064 400,000 353,903 0.431 23.8 26,312 47,982 74,294 9% 4 Add 2 V15 - 35 kW 4,998,486 600,000 344,079 0,446 22.6 24,023 45,387 69,410 15% 5 Add 3 V15 - 35 kW 5,010,299 800,000 329,358 0.448 19.4 2.1,502 42,676 64,178 21 % 6 Add 1 V15 - 65 kW 4,930,364 400,000 354,396 0.432 24.6 27,233 47,368 74,601 9% 7 Add 2 V15 - 65 kW 4,945,832 600,000 339,960 0.435 19.5 24,501 44,636 69,137 15% 8 Add 3 V15 - 65 XW 4,972,264 800,000 326,383 0.440 18.1 22,388 41,750 64,138 22% Definitions of Terms in Results Tables The life cycle cost is the total discounted present value of all costs incurred over the 25- year project lifetime, including initial capital costs, component replacement costs, O&M costs, and fuel costs. The levelized operating cost is the annualized value of all non - capital costs. (Actual operating costs vary from year to year depending on whether, for example, a wind turbine needs replacement that year.) The levelized cost of energy is the average total cost per kWh produced by the system. The diesel savings is the percentage reduction in annual diesel fuel consumption compared to the existing system. The simple payback of a system configuration is equal to its initial capital cost divided by its savings in levelized operating costs. Page 10 of 15 Appendix - HOMER Input Summary File name: Pilot Point old diesels rev2.hmr File version: 2.19 Author: Tom Lambert AC Load: Electric Load Data source: Pilot Point electric rev2.dmd Daily noise: 5,99% Hourly noise: 8.75% Scaled annual average: 1,062 kWhld Scaled peak load: 75.6 kW Load factor: 0.585 1-1 AC Wind Turbine: Vestas V15 - 35 kW Quantity Capital ($) Replacement ($) O&M ($1yr) 1 200,000 200,000 4,800 Quantities to consider: 0, 1, 2, 3 Lifetime: 15 yr Hub height: 24.4 m ,F-1 AC Wind Turbine: Vestas V15 - 65 kW Quantity Capital ($) Replacement ($) O&M ($lyr) 1 200,000 200,000 4,800 Quantities to consider: 0, 1, 2, 3 Page 11 of 15 Lifetime: 15 yr Hub height: 24.4 m E Wind Resource Data source: Pilot Point 80' synthetic.txt Month Wind Speed (m/s) Jan 5.05 Feb 6.75 Mar 5.82 Apr 5.94 May 5.37 Jun 5.16 Jul 4.86 Aug 5.59 Sep 4.68 Oct 5.80 Nov 5.44 Dec 7.27 Weibull k: 1.817 Autocorrelation factor: 0.881 Diurnal pattern strength: 0.1054 Hour of peals wind speed: 15 Page 12 of 15 Scaled annual average: 6.55, 5.24, 5.90, 7.21, 7.86 m/s Anemometer height: 24.4 m Altitude: 0 m Wind shear profile: Power law Power law exponent: 0.14 AC Generator: JD 64 kW Size (kW) Capital ($) Replacement ($) O&M ($Ihr) 64.000 0 38,000 4.100 Sizes to consider: 64 kW Lifetime: 80,000 hrs Min. load ratio: 30% Heat recovery ratio: 0% Fuel used: Diesel Fuel curve intercept: 0.0373 L/hr/kW Fuel curve slope: 0.264 L/hr/kW AC Generator: Cat 113 kW Size (kW) Capital ($) replacement ($) O&M ($Ihr) 113,000 0 70,000 5.600 Sizes to consider: 113 kW Lifetime: 80,000 hrs Min. load ratio: 30% Heat recovery ratio: 0% Fuel used: Diesel Fuel curve intercept: 0.08 L/hr/kW Fuel curve slope: 0.25 Uhr/kW 1-1 Page 13 of 15 AC Generator: Cat 160 kW Size (kW) Capital ($) Replacement ($) O&M ($Ihr) 160.000 0 99,000 6.900 Sizes to consider: 160 kW Lifetime: 80,000 hrs Min. load ratio: 3C% Heat recovery ratio: 0% Fuel used: Diesel Fuel curve intercept: 0.08 UhrlkW Fuel curve slope: 0.25 LlhrlkW Fuel: Diesel Price: $ 0.925, 0.740, 0.832, 1,017, 1.110, 1.202, 1.2951L Lower heating value: 43.2 MJlkg Density: 820 kglm3 Carbon content: 88.0% Sulfur content: 0.330% Fuel: Diesel2 Price: $ 1.189, 0.951, 1.070, 1.308, 1.427, 1.546, 1.66411- Lower heating value: 43.2 MJlkg Density: 820 kglm3 Carbon content: 88.0% Sulfur content- 0.330% Economics Annual real interest rate: 6% Project lifetime: 25 yr Capacity shortage penalty: $ 0/kWh System fixed capital cost: $ 200,000, 0 System fixed O&M cost, $ 01yr Generator control Check load following: Yes Check cycle charging: No Allow systems with multiple generators: Yes Page 14 of 15 Allow multiple generators to operate simultaneously: Yes Allow systems with generator capacity less than peak load: Yes Emissions Carbon dioxide penalty: $ 0/t Carbon monoxide penalty: $ Olt Unburned hydrocarbons penalty: $ 0/t Particulate matter penalty: $ Olt Sulfur dioxide penalty: $ 0/t Nitrogen oxides penalty: $ 0/t Constraints Maximum annual capacity shortage: 0% Minimum renewable fraction: 0% Operating reserve as percentage of hourly load: 10% Operating reserve as percentage of peak load: 0% Operating reserve as percentage of solar power output: 25% Operating reserve as percentage of wind power output: 50% Page 15 of 15 DCED Mini -Grant Program Pilot Point Wind Speed Monitoring Project Summary Report Grant Number Submitted by Pilot Point Traditional Council Mr. Gregory Kingsley 907-797-2273 Project Summary Pilot Point Traditional Council initiated a wind speed monitoring program in March 2001 with the support of the Alaska DCED to evaluate if the village wind resource is viable and sufficient for the economic production of wind generated electricity and electricity cost reduction and environmental protection. Three 58 foot wind speed monitoring towers were installed in different locations throughout the village. Wind speed and other weather data were automatically recorded every 10 minutes for one year. The data were collected monthly by Pilot Point personnel and then analyzed to estimate potential annual wind energy production and wind energy costs. The results of this analysis indicate that wind energy is technically and economically viable energy resource for Pilot Point. Moreover, the wind speed monitoring project funded by DCED has had widespread positive impacts in Pilot Point and in neighboring villages such that the original DCED mini -grant was a catalyst for the formation of a regional sustainable energy collaborative between the Tribes, cities and utilities in the villages of Pilot Point, Chignik, Egegik, Port Heiden and Ugashik. This Collaborative, known as the Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula or SECAP, has received financial support from the Administration for Native Americans, Environmental Protection Agency and the Alaska Conservation Fund. The work begun with the support of the DCED has blossomed into a viable regional community effort to implement sustainable energy solutions where technically feasible and economically beneficial. Background Pilot Point has long been interested in wind energy production as an alternative to our exclusive reliance on diesel fuel for electricity generation. The cost of diesel fuel, and hence our cost of electricity, has been marked by volatility and continually trends upward. This causes financial planning uncertainty since we can't accurately predict our energy budgets and acts as a cash drain on our local economy. That is, the more we spend on electricity, the less money we have for food, clothing, shelter and social services. The winds in Pilot Point have always been strong. We've suspected that wind turbines would work well in our community. However, without a quantitative assessment of the wind speed, we could not accurately estimate the economic and environmental benefits of wind power. We sought support from the DCED under the mini -grant program to initiate a wind resource evaluation for that purpose. We also knew that other communities in the Bristol Bay region faced similar situations as ours with respect to energy. Therefore, we hoped that our wind monitoring program would serve both as an impetus and model for other villages in the area to begin exploring sustainable energy resource development options. Project Overview Our wind speed monitoring project had three major objectives: 1. Evaluate and quantify the wind resource in Pilot Point to determine if wind energy would be an economic alternative to diesel electric production; 2. Involve other villages in the Bristol Bay area in our wind resource monitoring program to educate our neighbors and begin a discussion of regional sustainable energy development options; and, planning and 3. Leverage DCED funding to gain support for additional sustainable energy p g development efforts. Each of these objectives was successfully accomplished and are discussed below. Wind Speed Monitoring In March of 2001, wind speed measuring equipment was installed at three separate sites throughout Pilot Point. Each site was selected based on a number of criteria including: land use and land ownership, proximity to power lines, topography and environmental issues. In order to maximize the effectiveness of the DCED grant, we opted to use three existing radio towers on which to install the wind measurement equipment rather than buy new towers. The radio towers, which were no longer in service, are only 48 feet tall. Optimally, we would install a 100 foot tower and measure the wind speed at 100 feet and 75 feet. These are the range of tower heights commonly used for a village scale wind turbine. Instead, we designed and installed a mast extension for the radio towers, resulting in a 58 foot effective tower height. While this is shorter than the ideal, there are well -established mathematical models for estimating the change in wind speed at any specified height. Each tower was outfitted with two wind speed measuring devices (anemometers) located at 58 feet and 45 feet, a wind direction vane, temperature sensor and automatic data recorder with enough memory for 37 days of storage. The towers and equipment were installed over the course of four days by Pilot Pont personnel with supervision and instruction by Earth Energy Systems, Ltd., our energy planning experts. Our project personnel received training as to proper equipment operation and data collection techniques. The data logger was programmed to record the average wind speed, wind direction and temperature on 10 minute intervals. At the end of a year, we would then have a detailed assessment of how the wind behaves on a daily, seasonal and annual basis to determine average wind speed, maximum wind speed, and the "steadiness" of the wind. Ideally, we want to see strong steady winds rather than gusty winds. A consistent wind resource allows for optimum wind energy production on a daily basis thereby allowing greater diesel fuel savings and also minimizes the stress on a wind turbine which translates into a longer operating life and lower maintenance costs. Regional Initiatives & outreach The wind speed tower installation were held in conjunction with a sustainable energy project trick -off meeting in March 2001. Representatives from our neighboring villages traveled to Pilot Pilot Point Traditional Council DCED Report Page 2 Point and attended a one -day workshop on wind energy facilitated by Earth Energy Systems. The workshop covered wind energy basics, site assessment, wind speed monitoring and energy project development planning. Attendees included: Chignik, Port Heiden, Ugashik, Egegik and Lake and Peninsula Borough. At the end of the workshop, all participants agreed to work together to develop and implement a regional sustainable energy program based on wind power and energy conservation. That initial meeting has since led to the creation of the Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula or SECAP. The guiding principles of SECAP are presented below. The Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula (SECAP) promotes the development of economically and environmentally sustainable energy resources for the common good of our communities. The guidingprinciples ofSECAP are to: 1. Function as a community- driven representative organization and operate with full accountability to our people; 2. Increase our self-reliance and protect our environment through the use of local natural resources and decrease the use of imported fuels; 3. Partner with other entities where such collaboration will benefit the interests of our communities and our residents; 4. Advance and promote public policies that support our mission and our communities; 5. Obtain resources for the implementation of our objectives, 6 Create durable and skilled job opportunities in our communities through training for our residents; 7. Improve education and career opportunities for our residents; our youth and future generations, 8. Engage in outreach and education for the betterment ofour residents; 9. Operate in a culturally sensitive manner; 10. Promote development ofMemoranda of-4greements between appropriate entities addressingpublicpower issues; Il. Coordinate spill response efforts and equipment sharing, SECAP has since held several meetings and its members have attended wind energy training workshops in the lower 48. Additionally, two SECAP villages — Egegik and Port Heiden — are scheduled to have wind speed monitoring towers installed in their communities this summer. Additional Support We have been able to leverage the DCED mini -grant funds into additional support for Pilot Point and the members of SECAP. To date, we have received a two-year grant from the Pilot Point Traditional Council DCED Report Page 3 Administration for Native Americans that will support SECAP's development and assist with the technical and economic evaluation of sustainable energy resources in the SECAP communities. We have also received funding from the US EPA to support wind speed monitoring and resource evaluation in Egegik and Port Heiden. Finally, the Alaska Conservation Fund is supporting SECAP's organizational development efforts. We are grateful for DCED's initial support and believe that the mini -grant program was critical to the initiation and success of our regional efforts. Wind Monitoring Results Note: Our wind speed data was temporarily lost due to computer issues. This report provides a summary of the wind speed evaluation results and impact on electric costs based on preliminary data. We are working on retrieving the lost data and will provide a more detailed wind speed analysis as soon as it becomes available. The best site in Pilot Point shows an average wind speed of 15.3 miles per hour (mph) as measured at the 58 foot anemometer height. At an installed wind turbine tower height of 80 feet, the estimated wind speed is 16.0 mph and at 100 feet, the wind speed would be 16.6 mph — an eight percent increase over the monitored height. These wind speeds correspond to a "Class 5-6" (with Class 7 as the highest or best) wind resource as defined by the industry standard Battelle wind classification system. For evaluation purposes, we estimated the energy production and economics of a single 10 kilowatt (kW) wind turbine such as the Bergey Excel. A single 10 kW machine would be able to directly tie into to our existing electric system without modifications and without adverse impacts on the diesel plant. Based on the performance characteristics of the Excel, it would produce over 30,000 kWh on an 80 foot tower and over 33,000 kWh at 100 feet. This is equivalent to 5.8 percent and 6.4 percent of our 514,320 kWh annual energy needs respectively. With an estimated $50,000 installed cost, a 10 kW turbine would save Pilot Point between $6,400 and $7,000 annually (depending on tower height) in avoided diesel fuel and diesel power plant operation and maintenance costs. Over its 20 year expected operational life, we would save between $127,000 and $140,000 and realize a simple payback period of just over seven years. These estimates are based on a simple economic analysis, assuming Pilot Point pays the full cost of a turbine (i.e., grant availability was not considered) and do not include the effects of inflation and rising diesel fuel prices. Additional wind turbines, would have a significant positive effect. For example, two 10 kW wind machines would save us approximately $16,000 per year and have a simple payback period of about three years, Additional Benefits The wind speed monitoring program has resulted in additional benefits to our community and the people of Pilot Point and the Bristol Bay region. First is that as a result of our outreach activities, our youth are taking an interest in renewable energy and believe that its development can provide skilled jobs in the community. To further support our youth, we are looking into Pilot Point Traditional Council DCED Report: Page 4 options for renewable energy curricula in our schools and how to integrate the electrical and meteorological data from our wind energy development program into the classroom on a real time basis. An additional benefit is that the people in our community have an increased awareness of energy issues and the relationship between power generation options and the economic and environmental impact in our villages. This awareness has led to full community support for sustainable energy development initiatives. This support is critical and necessary for the success of our ongoing and future efforts. Finally, our sustainable energy efforts have resulted in increased cooperation and support among our tribal, city and borough governments. All parties recognize that each brings unique perspectives and abilities to the table and further realize that all of our people, regardless of intuitional or political affiliation, will benefit from increased cooperation and development of cleaner and less expensive sources of energy. Next Steps Now that the wind speed resource monitoring is completed, we have several tasks ahead of us. These include: Decommission Wind Speed Monitoring Towers , Our intent is to shut down and remove two of the three monitoring stations. The equipment from the two decommissioned towers will be sent back to the factory for inspection and repair, if needed, and will then made available to other villages in our region. The third tower at the best wind site, will remain in operation in order to develop a long-term comprehensive wind speed data base for Pilot Point, Install Wind Turbine(s) Based on the results of the wind speed analysis, we now know that wind energy is a viable and economic alternative to our exclusive use of diesel fuel for electricity. We are actively seeking financial support for the installation of one or two small (10 kilowatt) wind turbines as a demonstration project as well as for the installation of detailed performance monitoring of the turbine(s) so that we can effectively share the results and impacts of wind energy on our fuel use and costs with all who are interested. Continue SECAF Development We will continue to support SECAP's principles and work to obtain support for SECAP's activities. Institutionalize Energy Education It is our goal to develop and/or obtain and implement energy education curricula for our schools. We will work with the other villages in Bristol Bay as well as the borough school district to achieve this objective for the benefit of our people and our youth, Pilot Point Traditional Council DCE➢ Report page 5 Wind Generation for Lake and Peninsula Borough Communities It is obvious in rural Alaska that our dependence on imported oils has left our survival as communities in serious doubt. Just as we are the first to experience global warming, we are also the first to feel the threat of living at the end of a long, unpredictable supply chain that is precariously at risk. Although we live in an oil rich state, our resources are piped over 800 miles, shipped several thousand, refined and are purchased at competitive prices to be shipped several thousand miles back. In western Alaska that shipment delivery length is doubled with the seasonally unpredictable and the physically unstable transfer and storage of relatively small loads of fossil fuels. These sales are dependent upon increasingly fewer shippers and paid for in advance by already financially stressed communities who must store enough fuel to last an unpredictably long winter. At a time when we have surpassed peak world oil production and now must compete on an open market with the developing economic giants of China and India as well as deal with the possible supply interruptions of hurricanes, war and increasingly unstable politics. In the Lake and Peninsula Borough most of the coastal villages depend entirely upon oil for heat as well as power. At this time our most abundant, technologically advanced, and feasible form of alternative energy is wind power combined with diesel generation. Currently, the government funding opportunities are increasingly difficult to obtain with federal funds being diverted to war efforts and state funding reduced due to diminishing oil reserves this, at a time when interest and necessity in renewable energy is gaining nationwide attention. Many states are now providing tax breaks, energy credits, and economic incentives for companies who invest in renewable energy as well as carbon penalties for those who do not. Some of these companies are looking for outside investments to capitalize on these opportunities, especially in situations wherein they cannot change their own operations to qualify. These companies are interested in large scale, multiple community projects that can offer a sizable benefit and also provide a positive public relations reward. Alaskan villages are prime for both. Given the similarity of most of the Lake and Peninsula communities in size, resources and interconnectedness, we are excellent candidates for an investment that could easily be reproduced in multiple villages, thus attaining uniformity in systems, economies of scale in purchasing, freight, and installation, as well as operation and maintenance streamlining. The benefits to the investors not only insures success by duplicating systems that can be managed jointly, but gives them the added promotion of assisting not only the numbers of communities but, also tribes, cities, and independent utilities over a large and attractive part of rural Alaska. Before any such renewable energy project can be entertained, a thorough investigation of the resource at each site must be completed. For wind this includes multiple tower and anemometer installations with winds- speed and direction, measured over at least a one year period, preferably longer. Between a wind assessment project executed by BBNC for the villages of Kokhanok and Perryville and, through the efforts of SECAP - Sustainable Energy Council of the Alaska Peninsula, the villages of Pilot Point, Port Heiden, Ugashik, Egegik and Chignik Bay all have complete wind anemometer studies. Although there are varying conditions, most of the studies have resulted in excellent resources for wind energy. Two of the villages have had small A OkWh installations in place for over three years with positive success. The next step is to develop comprehensive energy plans for the communities interested in developing renewal energy, whether it be through wind, hydro, tidal, biomass or a new technology. This entails, among other things, an analysis of loads, existing and potential generation, varying conditions, existing infrastructure, and utility functioning evaluation. A very useful tool for calculating many of these components is the HOMER analysis. It is a free software program available on the Alaska Energy Authority website in which the utility's data is input into the program and the calculating template generates the necessary information with which an engineer can proceed with a feasibility study and preliminary system design. Discussions with the Bristol Bay Campus resulted in agreement upon the need for training in use of this program for each village interested in moving forward with developing renewables as a component to solving their own energy crisis. Given the urgency of need, climate of interest, and stage of readiness that many of our villages are at, assistance from umbrella organizations, assisting agencies and governmental entities should move with expedience to solve this critical component to our survival. Gregory Kingsley Environmental Priorities: Voted on and adopted by the Pilot Point Tribal Council at their 12-29-05 Special Meeting: 1. Pollution prevention though fossil fuel reduction. 2. Safe drinking water 3. Landfill upgrade with enclosed burnbox 4. Oil spill prevention and response 5. Toxic and hazardous waste removal and disposal b. Quality of subsistence foods 7. Indoor air quality 8. Environmental education and recycling 9. Ugashik Watershed Protection 10. Fuel storage dams and liners Priority one is being addressed through energy planning and developing our wind generation capacity. We may be funded next summer to increase our capacity by two more generators. Priority two -Safe drinking water can be achieved through protection from spills and through the City's VSW project to install water filters in all the houses with poor water quality. Priority three — The VSW project will address most of the solid waste issues however funding for an incinerator is not included at this time and monies won't be forthcoming for over a year from now. I will be writing a proposal to the Denali Commission for an incinerator due Jan. 31 st Priority four — As well as a HAZWOP class this spring/fall we will have trainings for spill response as part of our emergency response training. There are funds in [GAP to purchase a zodiac to launch booms and an evaluation of ail home tanks will be completed this spring. Priority five — all the batteries will be stored in the cannery in battery totes. When a barge with backhaul capability to an affordable disposal is available, we can ship them out. I will be attending a Brownfields training to address the asbestos problem that the cannery may have. Priority six — Pilot Point has been asked to volunteer as the control group for a Harvard Medical School Study to test Port Heiden for toxins in their diet. Any abnormalities found in subsistence foods should be reported and we can send in samples to be tested. Priority seven — I will be attending a week long indoor air quality training in Juneau in March. Since most homes in Pilot Point have basements, testing for radon is necessary. Priority eight — I'll be teaching a unit this spring at the school for stream/lake water quality assessment and environmental awareness. Priority nine — Ugashik Watershed Council will have a meeting in March, has a newsletter coming out next week and will be doing watershed assessments on Ugashik Lakes (six sites) King Salmon River, Dog Salmon River, Meshik Raver, Cinder River and Dago Creek. Priority ten - We may have to use our fuel tank liner if the Energy Authority does not fund the Bulk Fuel & Energy Upgrades that the City was scheduled to receive. They are proceeding with design and engineering however, the funding is not committed yet. Term: Course Title: Dept. & Num: Instructor: UAF/Bristol Bay Campus -Dillingham, March 19-21, 2006 Spring 2006 EXPLORATION OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGIES RD FI93P B04 Credits: Prerequisites: None Todd Radenbaugh Office telephone 907-842-5109 EMAIL: bftar@uaf.edu 1 Grading Policy: Pass/Fail Dates: March 19th -213t (Sunday -Tuesday) , Times: Sun gpm-9pm (available for student consults) Monday & Tuesday 9:00am-6:00pm Place: Dillingham UAF Bristol Bay Campus Text and Materials: Energy Power Shift (ISBN: 0-9758500-0-6) Barry Hanson Instructor Provided Handouts Course Description: With rising fuel prices and limited oil reservoirs how much longer can rural Alaskan economies depend on fossil fuels? Renewable energy comes from sources that can be maintained without depletion. Five renewable energy sources are discussed: sun, wind, water, geothermal and biomass. This course provides an overview of renewable energy allowing participants to discuss with experts the practicalities of applying some of these energy resources in the Bristol Bay area. In our quest to satisfy our seemingly insatiable energy wants and needs, energy use always introduces some new environmental issues that need to be discussed. Links to renewable energy information Wind: ht�:l/www.ne_sea.or/enery/info/wind.htrnl. Solar Electricity: http:// 'www.nesea.or uildings/info/solarelectricity.html. Solar Hot Water: h ://www.nesea.or uildin s/info/solarwater.html. Geothermal: http:// www. eothermal.marin.or wrheat.html# 2 Ground Source Heat Pumps: http://www.ipshpa.okstate.edu/geothermal/geothermal.httnl. Hydropower: http_//www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/hydro basics.btml. Eiopower: h ://www.nesea.or ener /info/bio ower.btrnl. Hydrogen Fuel Cells: http://vwvw.eere.encrgy.aovIRE/hydrogen fuel_cells.html. Oregon State University: http://zebu.uoregon.edu/200I/physI62.htm]. WI University's Focus on Energy: hqR://www.focusonenergy.coM�2age.j Course Objectives: To help participants gain a fundamental knowledge about renewable energy and how to incorporate renewable energy into their daily lives and to understand the benefits and barriers of using renewable energy. Participants will gain insight into the renewable world by discussing case studies and talking directly with experts in renewable energy. Teaching Methods: Lecture, demonstrations, and discussion. Expectations of Coarse Participants: Participants will attend the entire course and participant in and contribute to the class discussions. The web sites of reference and reading materials will be reviewed before the class so participants can share their learning and insights during the course. Evaluation: Attendance — 20%, Participation — 40%, Asking questions — 40% EXPLORATION OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGIES Course Schedule Sunday evening—19.March.06 5:00 — Reception, introductions and computer demos. 6:00 — Presentation: Overview of energy current use and energy demands of the US and world - When will our oil ran out? — Todd Radenbaugh 6:45 — Why we need a local alternative energy policy — Nels Andersen 7:00 — Personal carbon budget calculations. Monday morning — 20.March.06 8:00 — Coffee 8:30 — Presentation: What is, and where do we find petroleum — Todd Radenbaugh 9:20 — Discussion "With all this Alaskan oil, how secure is our local petroleum supplies and what does it cost?" — Frank Corbin 10:40 — Break 10:50 — Presentation: How are Dillingham's current energy needs met? — Laural Sands 12:00 — Lunch break Monday afternoon — 20.March.06 1:00 — Presentation: Overview of alternative energy sources for rural Alaska -- Nels Anderson 2:00 — Basics of wind turbines, and lessons learned at Pilot Point — Greg Kingsley and Connie Fredenberg 4:00 --Break 4:10 —Presentation and discussion: Energy needs in Bristol Bay and the potential of geothermal energy using Iceland's experience. Suzanne Lamson 5:00 — Discussion: Culture and energy. Moderator: Connie Fredenberg 6:00 — Adjourn for the day Tuesday morning — 21.March.06 8:00 -- Coffee 8:20 — Presentation: Solar energy; active and passive — Todd Radenbaugh 9:20 — Presentation and demonstration: hydrogen power -- Bill Rodawalt 10:20 — Discussion of using technologies on the edge in rural Alaska. Q & A with Barry Hanson (Author of Energy Power Shift) 12:00 — Lunch break Tuesday afternoon — 21.March.06 1:00 — Reducing energy costs using alternative energy sources — Donna Vukich 2:30 — Feasibility of using alternative energies in rural Alaska — Chris Rose 4:00 — Discussion of Bristol Bay region energy and feasibly of sources other then petroleum. Moderator: Nels Anderson and Chris Rose 5:30 — Closing remarks — Todd Radenbaugh 6:00 — Final discussion/comments Energy Class Presenters Nets Andersen, Jr. — Chairman, Rural Energy Action Council, Dillingham, AK Phone: 907.842.2366 Email: andora.nushtel.net Frank Corbin — General Manager, Nushagak Cooperative, Dillingham, AK 99576 Phone: 907.842.5251 Email: 'lamb nusha ak.coo Connie Fredenberg — Aleutian - Pribilofs Association, Palmer, AK 99645 Phone: 919222.422 Email: constancef@oiai.com Barry Hanson Phone: 715-373-5059 www: energypowershift. com Greg Kingsley, Pilot Point Tribal Council, Environmental Planning, Box 448, Pilot Point, AK 99649. Phone: 907.797.2273 or 907.797,2200 Email: kin sleyiiip. Vahoo.com. Suzanne Lamson, Naknek Electric Association, Inc, P.O. Box 118, Naknek, AK 9 963 3 Phone; 907.246,4261 Email: suzanne.lamson(a znail.com. Todd Radenbaugh, Assistant Professor, UAF, Bristol Bay Campus, P.O. Box 1070, Dillingham, AK 99576. Phone: 907, 842.4668 Email: bftar(@,,uaf.edu Bill Rodawalt, Dillingham Alternative School, Dillingham, AK 99576. Phone: 907.842.5023 Email: William cAdcsd.kl2.ak.us Chris Rose, Executive Director, Renewable Energy Alaska Project, 642 S. Alaska Street, Suite 200, Palmer AK 99645. Phone: 907.745.6000 Email: crose@alaskamet Laurel Sands, P.O. Box 1011, Dillingham, AK 99576 Phone: 907-842-4624 Email: Laurelsands@yahoo.com Donna Vukich, General Manager, Naknek Electric Association, Inc, P.O. Box 118, Naknek, AK 99633. Phone: 907.246,4261 Email: dyukichgbristolbay.com Policies: Attendance is mandatory. Late assignments are not accepted without prior approval of instructor. The instructor reserves the right to amend this course outline as needed. UAF requires students to conduct themselves honestly and responsibly, and to respect the rights of others. Support and Disability Services: UAF Disability Services for Distance Students UAF has a Disability Services office that operates in conjunction with the College of Rural and Community Development (CRCD) campuses and UAF's Center for Distance Education (CDE). Disability Services, a part of UAF's Center for Health and Counseling, provides academic accommodations to enrolled students who are identified as being eligible for these services. If you believe you are eligible, please visit http://www.uaf.edu/chc/disabiliiy.httnl on the web or contact a student affairs staff person at your nearest local campus. You can also contact Disability Services on the Fairbanks Campus at (907) 474-7043, fydso(&uafcda In Compliance with UAF Faculty SeAate Resolution/2004 L.L Q U w C CCf 0 c O V L LLJ 4 N r N O . . ......... -,", ........ .. Ail 2 7�bA a.) cn 4-j $aA ct 7:1 '4= En coo ct $am C's c,:J cci UO c� U ct cn uo o •� A cn � ono � �� � � o � � (1) 4-j 6-1 o � 41 ct u C!� 7 r4 cd Cdcn , o � cd .po ct .--q .� f ct ct �•� C� r� o ° r� 0 0 0 � � N M V ct 0 � 0i o E CL ct ct ct �-4 ct • • • • • . • • • • • • • •• • s • • • ow` • o W, c • ct v • � U 4� � ct •4i ct cn . o -� o o • • cr c . •. cn Ct . *+.i cl� • • • r--1 ct ct Ct ct O 3 ct U � .° cn Ct 11073 cn ct En 4-j 0 c� U 1cn c� � O cn , *� Uct ct c � � N M v � O O � � U U 4-1 t o 0 "-� Cd CIO U v cn v � oaf, bA bA ct v ct v . lci 4 v Ct Ct ct 0 ° ct �, ' cn ct +� cc ct ct c ct r--� cn ,cn,---��+ ct v o � o Q m VD U a' •�� ^ cam to t cn :�'• A A A v C" mWars rR "L Q r� �rrr o a� = o0 0 c� ct 43 '� N •� O cn U U E Ct , O p *� U cncn U Urd U O ct ct 4-4 ct ct p ct ct j cn • bActU •4 o C) A A A A A A L/1 .r—i a O 0 .a � wx N W � � o a O 2' a� aj ; I 4C�j ~ iW V � U \ rn rn O z° w� o o O >cn a� c O � N r� r� O ct U Ct ct ct lci O O A A A A O U CA 4� U r ct w o 0 w � � 3 O U O O U c� 3 0 vim, z ° w w � ct c cn 0 � O uo cn cn C o al ct 4-j C6 ct ct ct cq ct � •� ctct ct �0003 U U U � ✓� .0 „�� 'N U � � u ct A A A A A A A A A - 0 C� ct ct a� cn Ct GCS � � U • U "•� � • � 'cn � cn ct •cn . ,� •.�.� ct •� ct c � O ct c � O A A A A ,m oft, O 4 N a 0 0 �c�as�E���0CN �� O, Q} LU O N O_¢ P Y N O O7 L c 0 c L O O U) c Q} •� 7 Q a)O •� 0 0N���c�W�Q. ���0 N c O — O 0 Or += N M D O M Qy .� L z Qa N c to N U M (B C:L E � U c � � -0 a)•— o o w (Dw E� a� �— cn o 0 m 4, O (D N M L (a CU -0c (� LU O- -- 4) � p t/7 d3 O U) M Lu P co a �: U) U) M O O 3: tU L a at am N W C. W W H IL M m am 19 0 am C MomM,, W M C. MINES `. � J � O U O N -Q EL 0 U F, J O pVco� Qw z � N 0 c �p w >, c 0 O N Co . N c c c w N O (� E: Oi U ct U to � U Q OWN ct ° 3 �� � U bbt ¢, v oo co U > O 0' � o O a. m a) a) C/) N ;- C) O U C fA M U a) 04� E�U�coW,E=� y N p` C ~ p C (D p y� 3 �SQE U-pQ�©�� fin > ID O Co E p L 0 Q r � a) ~� E -0 Co Q X��V.♦♦+ VRO � (n coco a) Q cnCDQ_[6 4.1 4-�O cD O m�m ?CasL cm L Q (D U) -CD 0 D7 Li Q cu 4:41 co K c ��U�a���Q4-EM a� M 0 �+ oo0)q:QC=( Co ■� � N p W p U p= a) U _0 .� w W m Oo°c�mmS°� L %c < S p� W — �] p N 0 U o �, O p E 0I cn C7 - DLOC -° ` E E E C:� (u c am o ■a a. d Q EE�-O(D C 3 �Ea) 2 F' Paz H o._ DUU3�U 0a)oo=� o� :0i m M O O rr 3 O M _ 0 "M 0 O d ■0 M q ac �r► _ A 1 a>, O .� Q? CO Z O O_ q� N N c +, O U) � (D N �- > U O C*� o O > c 00 m cn n E U° o c c cv Lu o a7 c CD 00 O N (� O r L .c V Q' T3 O [� O Q) CQ a) L F, O D7 > 2� cu 0 ° L > O O •N am E'u -c azE cn•C ; a� 2 oz �,.�o E >Q O c o § a) L N c � ® uj m > ��c=�0c�T=cac0)niwc .o a. 0 E M 0 u) oOU� - E U m O n' s O a3 Co�' c E -D 2 cczE-Co •, m en > °0 (D c�ocno�� , o aDID co za c 'c co �w c c C' r�K a� X V (D o C L L ca cn cn — E o ° -0:x cm�or� �o c _ cam =� L E'c��-2-5 E0- ��°c°0 >2cu oEo�o 0-0 Z U H• Q C6 cm 0- ' c� cn U i� 0- m L lu IL) _ ' �+� _. _— moo- � 3-0u 4 M _ .=D= o •� C•� o d 0 M ca6. rw a `° c•� � 0 c 6.°=W= u Mm a .� o ?-,=75 � � � t O.s D O .� �� ... 0 fn C ,yams c 'a O d�mmD4—W d a�A°OQ N N O$ N � L co = o❑ oYco-°o -0 in a o E--U)LU cn 3° a� .� � 4-4 11 col�„ O b v 4 U o m 0 o C O E co r N N ~ (CN ++ 0 N N w a ca '55 c cn O U OU (DE a. (0 > (!) U) MUR O cn O U Cri p} (D a) p Q. w C) ° E o E 21 w co w i a.. ❑ O a U o _ D w c o- a� w � W N i -00 [L' co ❑ (� co O A A A A g a UCU U p ,DO c t) a� a) o m co S o T c� E G o Qa o m o f E o L o N hi O C o a)L c N Q E U O Q O N Uj :• (ti a) C Q` "d �? •C a} p C.:d N a)N U S N =O .E O 7 co C U d 'p 4 C 0 co N CcY/5 E "MC N C �+ E N O O O O C O 'a O CO W N L _O L f� E C O fa O q) 2 O) U i C" O N Q E m O C `� N C O U C L C O O .0 (J N fm '2 `d N O -o° O — a ° N iri 4) O L L� co N L q j C O C p° Q ��>- ° 3 C @ N mo � cn m ID o 4{ V mod°' �m� �_� m v o° E aNi 'c c°ZI a? p 'c a7 v L oo a)w ° d° - "-° LL a CaL u� O r a)" N mco U U � y 0 � O 6 O t-� 0 M C6 .o a; Pilot Point Traditional Council 2200 Main Street * P Q Box 449 * Pilot Point, Alaska 99649 Telephone (907) 797-2208 * Fax (907) 797-2258 * Internet PIPCouncil@aol.com 0C Aa �6e,- .2 a vV We, the undersigned residents of fhe village of Pilot Point, petition the Federal, State, and local government agencies to seriously consider funding our efforts to develop wind energy as a viable alternative to the ever increasing costs and environmentally unsafe system of diesel fuel generation. CITY OF PILOT POINT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITY LIST RESOLUTION NO. 11-06-01 A resolution of the Pilot Point City Council adopting the Capital Improvement Program Priority List for Fiscal Year FY07 WHEREAS, the Pilot Point City Council reviews the Priorities of the City annually; and WHEREAS, the Pilot Point City desires to maintain an accurate record of the City's current priorities for the Capital Improvement Program, therefore BE IT RESOLVED: By the Pilot Point City Council that the priorities of the City of Pilot Point for the Fiscal year 2007 are as follows: 1. Addressing the Pilot Point Energy Crisis. 2. Dago Creek Road Relocation. 3. Dago Creek Bulk Head. 4. Lower Bristol Bay Test Fisheries Study/Fisheries Infrastructure Development. 5. Ugashik river road access. 6. Address Safety & Environmental/Structural issues of aid Cannery Buildings. 7. Emergency Response Generator Upgrade. 8. Airport Extension. 9. Community Ball Field/Athletic Park. 10_ Wind Powered Community Green House. Page 'I resolution NO 11-06-01 FY07 Capital Improvement Program Priority list for FY07. 1 Pilot Point Traditional Council 2200 Main Street * P O Box 449 * Pilot Point, Alaska 99649 Telephone (907) 797-2208 * Fax (907) 797-2258 * Internet P1PCouncil@aol,com Resolution 01-05-0t A Resolution in support of the formation of an .Alaska Peninsula Renewable Energy Commission and Pilot Point's ANA application to support the Energy Commission's Goals. WHEREAS, the Native Village of Pilot Point is an isolated 'village dependent upon expensive and environmentally damaging diesel generated power; and, WHEREAS, the Native Village of Pilot Point has initiated the wind energy monitoring, feasibility studies and hosted an environmental conference to develop renewable power; and, WHEREAS, given the similarities in size, climate and culture it is in the interest of all the Native Villages of the Alaska Peninsula to combine resources, expertise and political capability to develop clean and affordable power infrastructure; and, WHEREAS, the villages of the Alaska Peninsula have been severely impacted economically due to failing commercial fishing runs and now face escalating kilowatt rates with increasing fuel costs and decreasing State assistance; and, WHEREAS, the Native Villages of the Alaska Peninsula are facing extinction due to a lack of economic development and necessity for residents to move from their Native homes to seek employment elsewhere. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: that the Pilot Point Traditional Council urges the Administration for Native Americans (ANA) Social and Economic Development Strategies (SEDS) Program, Area 2 Alaska specific, to support our grant request to develop the infrastructure of the Native Villages of the Alaska Peninsula. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the Pilot Point Traditional Council make available all financial and planning reports to the base coalition villages of Port Heiden, Ugashik, Egegik, Chignik Bay, Chignik Lagoon and Perryville. CERTIFICATION It is therefore certified that this resolution was discussed and passed unanimously by a quorum of the Pilot Point Traditional Council. i Siglied J Ruby Moore, Vice President Attes L11P g In i Y '' (lie Kalmakoff; Admini or PILOT POINT NATIVE CORPORATION P.O. Box 487, Bristol Bay / Pilot Point, Alaska 99649 Telephone: (907) 797-2206 To Whom It May Concern: October 3, 2000 The Pilot Point Native Corporation supports the Pilot Point Traditional Council, Pilot Point Electrical Utility and City of Pilot Point's efforts to establish alternative energy for the people of Pilot Point. We have discussed this matter and are willing to permit wind generation data collection towers on Pilot Point Native Corporation lands. Cecilia Christensen, President Andrew Abyo, Vice P,yOident l sfia tztt'e i slaturt, Representafive Carl E. Moses fr,W Member Louse iln2ace Conu luee SESSION State Capitol Building Juneau. Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: (907) 465-445I 800-89"51 Fax: (907) 465-3445 April 16, 20p1 TO WF(OM IT MAY CONCERN: INTERIM IM P 0. Box 730 Unalaska, Alaska 99685 Phone: (94;) 581-2275 Fax: (907) 581-4949 Affordable, sustainable, clean rural energy generation remains a priority of mine for Alaska House District 40, and indeed, for all of rural Alaska, The suc- cess of vital heap, safety, and economic development each Mutely dependent upon well-strategized and irnpleManted clean n eneramsrgy produc-so tion. I strongly recommend a favorable decision on behalf of Port Heiden's and the Egegik Village Council's applica#ion for their 2001 EJP2 grant for a Wind En- ergy Development Study, sponsored by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and submitted by Earth Energy Systems. This study prQ -0 would focus Precisely on local needs and an eventual alternative to the con, umptfoll and pol- lution created by diesel -generated electdcity- As you may know, the level of cooperation between Part Heiden and the village of Egegik is substantial, and will lend to the success of this undertaking. i applaud the efforts of the parties involved, and remain ready to assist in the success of this project in any way passible. Sincerely, Carl E, roses House District 40 ADAK-AKIJTAN = AMCWTKA • ATKA I ATTU • BED KOH KI • CF YEKNL`FSKi • CUIGNSK L?= UTCFf }_AJL Q12 • F iEGiK - I :SLS E A55 • lCailiGIls - eLS 1hiP[ - F V 1N0 F BAY • Tf1NG COVE - E'INCI SALMON • KUK= CFYIGh I3� L? i.(}(?N CfifGtvYK LAKE ' COLD BAYNniuOK • i CIKHANOK 6'AV • LEVELOCK NAKNEK - NELSON t iGO()v • NEWRALFN - t�i7KOLSKE • NCit4DALTQN - YT�•_DRO DAY - PFRRYVJLLE - PILOT POIN[' • PORY M-SWORTH • PORT JJEIDEN MKS MOLLFR - ,SAND POINT • SY jtt RYA - SQUAW € AREOR - SHUTS NAK NEK ST. GEX)KC& ISLAND - S" T. ?A] iL €S€.AN€} - €3CiASWK • €JN ALASKA - UNGA Lake and Peninsula Borough P.O. Box 495 King Salmon, Alaska 99613 Telephone: (907) 246-3421 Fax.. (907) 246-6602 May 10, 2001 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families Office of Grants Management 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W. Mail Stop HHH Room 326-F Washington, D.C. 20447 Re: Administration for Native Americans FY2001 Grant Program Competition Area 2 Alaska -Specific Social and Economic Development Strategies (SEDS) Program To Whom it May Concern In accordance with the priorities of the Overall Economic Development Plan for the Lake and Peninsula Borough we strongly support the Pilot Point. Traditional Council application for development of a renewable energy project. The communities of the Lake and Peninsula Borough are continuing to experience a downturn in their economies due to fishery disasters and now also have to contend with the high costs of energy. Therefore the villages and the Borough are communally cultivating innovative initiatives to assist in lowering energy costs as well as assisting development of supplemental economic resources. increased energy costs continue to be a barrier against sustainable economic development in the region and in order to take advantage of developing technologies it is acknowledged that a comprehensive voice for affected communities is advantageous. A renewable energy commission will enable the combined villages to share information and resources as well as provide a forum for planning and implementation. Thank you for your time and consideration of the application for a leadership project for development of renewable energy from the Pilot Point Traditional Council. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any further questions or need additional information. Sincerely, kz"' mx" Helen Allen Ph.D Economic Development Coordinator Chignik Say • Chignik Lagoon • Chignik Lake • Egegik • Igiugig • Riamr.a • Ivanof Bay ■ Kokhanok • Levelock Newhalen • Nondalton • Pedro Bav • Perryville • Pilot Point • Pope Vannoy • Part Alsworth • Port Heiden • Llgash;k Resolution 2000-03 A resolution in support of utilizing wind power as an alternative energy source: rr Whereas; the Community of Pilot Point is located in a remote region of Alaska; and Whereas; access to Pilot Point is limited to air freight and seasonal barge service; and Whereas, the current electrical system generates electricity solely with diesel engines; and Whereas, operating costs are increased because of the freight charges for barging in fossil fuels; and Whereas, petroleum products are inherently environmentally hazardous in their transportation, storage and, consumption; and Whereas, the State of Alaska Power Cost Equalization program has suffered repeated cutbacks and is in jeopardy of being eliminated completely; and Whereas, the Community of Pilot Point is actively seeking alternative energy sources; and Whereas, the potential of wind energy resources have been shown to be a viable alternative energy source as determined by wind data collection studies; so therefore BE IT RESOLVED: that the Pilot Point City Council supports all efforts to obtain funding for feasibility studies, and any other activities related to the establishment and implementation of a supplemental wind power generation program. Vote: YES Dennis Griechen ABSENT Gust Griechen Jr. ABSENT Harold Griechen YES Greg Kingsley YES Robert Kramer YES Steve Kramer YES Mayor Griechen • T Pp/ QGp11Po0d ;ACity of Pilot Point, Alaska Mayor Gust Griechen III �-i •D ATTEST: } ��� Adopted: 03J1412000 r l • � L �•22.y g9Z City Clerk Valerie Grl Page 1 of 1 Pilot Point Electric Utility A Public Consumer Owned Utility Resolution A resolution in support of the Alaska Energy Authority Cost Reduction Program. WHEREAS, The Pilot Point Utility is working with the City of Pilot Point, Pilot Point Traditional Council, and Pilot Point Native Corporation to provide the residents of the economically distressed village of Pilot Point affordable and high quality power; and WHEREAS, Based upon community and council meetings and individual surveys, Pilot Point has selected alternative power, namely wind generated electricity, as their highest priority for community development; and WHEREAS, Pilot Point has in place a wind resource study, formed a renewable energy commission of seven villages, and is developing plans to design a small village system that can be effectively installed in Western Alaska; and WHEREAS, The small villages of Western Alaska are severely impacted by not only the poor fish returns but the higher costs of fuel and transportation; and WHEREAS, Development of efficient co -generational or battery storage systems for small communities will provide economic relief and promote self sufficiency in rural Alaska; so therefore BE IT RESOLVED: That the Pilot Point EIectric Utility authorizes this application to the Alaska Energy Authority for project financing and designates Robert Kramer as the representative of the project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the applicant, Pilot Point Utility & the City of Pilot Point is in good standing with all present and past creditors as well as being current with all federal tax obligations with no record of delinquency nor default. Adopted on this Sxst day Of July, 2001 by a quorum of the Pilot Point Utility Board Pilot Point Electric Utility Chairman: Robert Kramer Pilot Point Electric Utility Administratr)J ice Ball Resolution 08-2002-29-1 To Support, and Become a Member of The Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula Whereas the Pilot Point City Council is the governing body of the City of Pilot Point; Whereas the Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula (SECAP) is an organization that was formed in February 2002 to address the energy needs of communities from Egegik to Ivanof Bay; Whereas SECAP has a Mission Statement and Guiding Principles that state: The Sustainable Energy Commission of the Alaska Peninsula (SECAP) promotes the development of economically and environmentally sustainable energy resources for the common good of our communities. The Guidiniz Principles of SECAP are to: 1. Function as a community -driven representative organization and operate with full accountability to our people; 2. Increase our self-reliance and protect our environment through the use of local natural resources and decrease the use of imported fuels; 3. Partner with other entities where such collaboration will benefit the interests of our communities and our residents; 4. Advance and promote public policies that support our mission and our communities; 5. Obtain resources for the implementation of our objectives; 6. Create durable and skilled job opportunities in our communities through training for our residents; 7. Improve education and career opportunities for our residents, our youth and future generations; 8. Engage in outreach and education for the betterment of our residents; 9. Operate in a culturally sensitive manner; 10. Promote development of Memoranda of Agrecments between appropriate entities addressing public power issues; 11. Coordinate spill response efforts and equipment sharing; Now Therefore Be It Resolved that this governing body supports SECAP and its Mission Statement and Guiding Principles, Therefore Be it Further Resolved that by passing this joint resolution, this governing body will become a member of SECAP; Therefore Be it Further Resolved that as a member of SECAP, this governing body will demonstrate its support by attending SECAP organizational meetings and participating in SECAP activities wherever possible; and Therefore Be it Further Resolved that this governing body will appoint one (1) representative to attend SECAP meetings and activities. Signed on this 29th day of 2002. Vote: VPS Wanda Griechen Steve Kramer R� _ Dennis Matson Micarlo Kalmakoff r �! Mayor Dennis Griechen ATTEST: Mayor Dennis Griechen Greg Kingsley Victor Seybert N0TARY PUSUO DREG 19NGSLEY STATE OF ALASKA My Commissbn Expires Oct. 23, 2DD4 City of Pilot Point Adopted: 08/29/02 Aug-20, 2004 10:33AM AIDEA/AEA N),4985 P. 1/3 Alaska Ioduariai Development and EYnort Authnriry Al Aiam tnmy Authority August 20, 2004 Ms, Janice Ball Utility Administrator Pilot Point Electric Utility P.C. Box 470 Pilot Point, AK 99649 Subject: Alaska Energy Cost Feduction Solicitation Dear Ms. Ball: Thank you for submitting application(s) for funding under the Alaska Energy Cost Reduction (ECR) Solicitation. Funding for the ECR program is provided by the Denali Commission and the program is administered by the Alaska Energy Authority, (luring the proposal period we received 64 applications for project funding requests totaling $19,252,860. The Alaska Energy Authority and its contractors assessed net savings over the life of each proposed project and evaluated how well the proposal met other Criteria described in the solioitationt Based on review of the proposals, the Alaska Energy Authority has recommended grant and loan financing for 16 projects with economic benefit to cost ratios greater than one (see attached summary). We anticipate that the Denali Commission and the Alaska Energy Authority will make funding available for similar grant and loan solicitations in the future. Although the project proposal you submitted was not chosen for funding in this solicitation, you are welcome to revise the proposal for submission in future solicitations. Please contact Peter Crimp (269-4631 or pormp@aidea.org) at the Alaska Energy Authority office after August 26 if you would like information regarding our review of other proposals you submitted or you have additional questions. Thank you for your time and effort. Si cerely, Mike Harper Deputy Director, Rural Energy 813 West Notthem Ught5 Boulevard +Anchorage, Alaska 59503 907 / 9F9--10nO -PAY Q07 / 9hL1_Vna.a . 7nII FoAA IAI AWA /J NA Vl APO Pain PC: —)A ... . ...;,J__ w Pilot Point Traditional Council 2200 Main Street * P O Box 449 * Pilot Point, Alaska 99649 Telephone (907) 797-2208 * Fax (907) 797-2258 * Internet PIPCouncil@aol.com Resolution 04-01-06 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING HB 445 FUNDIND FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY WHEREAS, the Pilot Point Tribal Council is a governing body of Pilot Point and, WHEREAS, the Village Council has been working with the City of Pilot Point and Lake & Peninsula Borough to address the urgent need for affordable and accessible energy and, WHEREAS, Pilot Point has succeeded in developing a renewable energy program with the completion of two years of data collection, the installation of one 10kWh Bergey wind turbine, as well as organizing a consortium of villagcs to develop renewable energy goals and, WHEREAS, we have had limited funding success in developing these critical goals due to the lack of available funding sources assigned to small rural applications and, WHEREAS, reliance on fossil fuels has reached a crisis of survival given the necessity to heat and generate power entirely with fuel oils in areas rich in alternative sources such as wind and hydro. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: that'the Pilot Point Tribal Council requests the Alaska Legislative Body to support HB 445 committing funds from oil revenues to a specific renewable energy fund supporting high energy cost areas in the State to develop their own alternative sources and, NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the Pilot Point Tribal Council requests that a special council be developed representative of energy and regional factions to act as an advisory selection committee thus allowing for equal access to projects and funding. CERTIFICATION: This resolution was duly considered and adopted at a meeting of the Pilot PointTribal Council in Pilot Point, Alaska on this 5'�' day of April, 2006 at which a quorum of Council members were in attendance: Authorized Representative: 0Y-as od Victor Seybert, President Date Att : Q. De is Matson, Vicoresident Date — 05f11/U1 15:23 FAX 907 8425932 RRIS OL RAY .DATIVE ASSOC 9001/005 6 BBIS i OL BAY NATIVE ASSOUATION 1NL'LTNGHAA1,--AzL, lS" ' 0576 PRONE (4M) $S42-5257 Tribal aILOWi14 Served by Alaknagik May 10, 2001 1_ Chignik flay U.S. Department of Health and Human-S�rvices Cliignik!taon Administration for Children & Families Chign&Lake Office of Grants Management Cla k-SPoint 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W. Mali Stop HHH, Room 326-:= curynng Washington, D.C. 20447 Egegik To Whom It May Concern: R uk Hkwok I am writing in support of Pilot Point's project proposal to establish a program that lgiu*g focuses on wind energy and other alternative energy sources for the communities along the Alaska Peninsula. [Malaita A Day The Alaska Peninsula is ideally suited for wind generation of electrica€ power. Pursuing renewable energy sources will enable the core communities that are part of Kanatttk this project - Pilot Point U ashik, Port Heiden E 2 ik Chignik Ba Chi nik Lagoon, P r g r g9�r � y, 9 KingUniva and Perryville - to transition from dependence upon petroleum products to cost- Kokhanok effective renewable resource based energy systems. Kahgarak These communities share similar characteristics in terms of population, culture and l.evelock lifestyles as well as an increased recognition and awareness of environmental concerns with air pollution from diesel generators and spills at fuel tank farms and Manakolak transportation of fuel products. They have demonstrated their commitment to the Naknak proposed project and long range goal of developing alternative energy sources by NewStuy hok farming the Alaska Peninsula Renewable Energy Commission. Newbukn Previous studies have concluded that Bristol Bay wind velocities justify a monitoring Numoallon program to identify specific locations for wi;kd power projects. In addition to benefiting the communities along the Alaska Peninsula, the proposed project would 0lsamdl!P also provide a model program for other communities in the region with potential for lledm say wind power generation. Pwryvilln Filot ]'alai Sin erely, Port Heiderr Susan Flensburg PartagaCrmk Environmental Coordinator Sauth Nakaek Cc: Pilot Point Tribal Council Tu°in 1�ilts Ugushik GARY WILKEN SENATOR Fairbanks lnterim: 1$51 Fax Ave. Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Tel: 451-5501 (from Fbks) Tel: (907) 465-3709 (outside Fbks) Fax: (907) 4654714 tk-4t r IF wtatt May 9, 2006 Mr. Victor Seybert, President Pilot Point Traditional Council P.O. Box 449 Pilot Point,/Alaska 99649 Dear Lft-&-ybert, nu,ing session: State Capitol Building Juneau, Alaska 99841-1182 Tel: 45 7-5501 (from Fbks) Tel: (907) 465-3709 (outside Fbks) Fax:(907)465-4714 Website: www.garywilken.com E-Mail: Senator.Gary.Wilken@iegis.state.ak.us I appreciated receiving Pilot Point Traditional Council resolution #04- 01-06, supporting HB 445 funding for alternative energy. it':. , rnportant to me to hear from various representative bodies, as well as from individual citizens, on matters that are of particular interest to you. I assure you that when the time comes, I'll take your position into careful consideration. Thank you for your resolution. Please stay in touch. Sincerely, Gary Wilken Senator, Fairbanks