Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutYukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation Wind Generation Feasibility Study Aug 2004Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation Wind Generation Feasibility Study Prepared For U.S. Department of Energy Golden, CO Final Report, Rev. 1 Prepared by Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation Bethel, AK with the assistance of EMCOR Energy & Technologies 505 Sansome Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 434-2600 August 20, 2004 YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface and Acknowledgements........................................................................................... ii 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................1-1 2. BACKGROUND......................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Study Overview...........................................................................................2-1 2.2 Description of DOE Grant Program .............................................................2-1 2.3 Overview of Tribal Structure, Location and Demographics..........................2-2 2.4 Integration With the Cultural, Social and Long-term Self-Sufficiency or Economic Goals of the Tribe.......................................................................2-4 2.5 Tribal-specific Project Objectives ................................................................2-4 2.6 How the Range of Renewable Energy Technologies Have Been Evaluated to Determine Which Are Technically and Economically Viable and Provide the Greatest Benefits to the Tribal Community............................................2-5 2.7 Detailed Description of Chosen Sites ..........................................................2-6 3. RESOURCE ASSESSMENT & ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ........................................3-1 3.1 Wind Resource Assessment .......................................................................3-2 3.2 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Regulations Affecting Anemometer Towers........................................................................................................3-9 3.3 Data Analysis............................................................................................3-10 3.4 Existing Site Utility Loads and Savings Potential.......................................3-22 4. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION............................................................................4-1 4.1 Decision Making and Sources of Funding ...................................................4-1 4.2 Conceptual Design......................................................................................4-1 5. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE .......................................................................5-1 5.1 Preliminary Operation and Maintenance Plan .............................................5-1 5.2 Preliminary Training and Infrastructure Development Plans........................5-2 6. OTHER RELATED ISSUES ...................................................................................6-1 6.1 Description of the Anticipated Economic, Environmental, Cultural, and Social Benefits to the Tribe(s) and Tribal Members as a Result of Implementation of Wind Generation ............................................................6-1 6.2 Plan for Assessing the Environmental Benefits and Impacts of the Project ........................................................................................................6-2 7. CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................7-1 7.1 Recommendation........................................................................................7-1 7.2 Moving Forward with Wind Generation Implementation – Roles, Responsibilities, and Capabilities................................................................7-1 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc i Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) APPENDICES Appendix A – Copy of Executive Order 13123 Appendix B – Correspondence Between Study Authors and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Appendix C – Project Calculations Appendix D – Manufacturer's Noise Test Data for 10 kW Wind Turbine Appendix E – AOC Manufacturer Data Appendix F – Bergey Manufacturer Data 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc ii Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study PREFACE The Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation (YKHC), applied for and received a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct a Wind Generation Feasibility Study in the YKHC region, under the direction of Tom Humphrey, P.E., of YKHC. EMCOR Energy & Technologies (EE&T) and Gary Kuhn of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Corporation (ANTHC) helped prepare the grant application and EE&T provided technical support for the study. The purpose of this study is to investigate the technical and economic feasibility of installing wind generation equipment in Bethel, Alaska and surrounding Alaska Native communities in YKHC region. This study identifies existing electric and thermal loads, investigates and evaluates appropriate equipment configurations and sizing options, provides preliminary savings estimates for a selected option, and establishes order of magnitude cost estimates. Some of the assumptions used in this analysis may have a significant impact on project economics and should be confirmed before project implementation. The optimal methods of accomplishing the recommendations should be determined during the implementation phase. This study does not include specific design instructions. It is not intended as a design document and projects have not been developed to design level. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. EE&T of San Francisco, California, prepared this document on behalf of YKHC. The authors of this report are Lance C. Kincaid, P.E., and Taylor T. Geer of EE&T. Michael K. J. Anderson, P.E., of EE&T reviewed this report for technical quality. Tom Humphrey, YKHC; David Berlin, YKHC; Gary Kuhn, ANTHC; and other YKHC staff performed the final review of the report. Please note that during the course of this study, EE&T changed its name from Newcomb Anderson Associates as part of a corporate branding initiative. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS YKHC gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Lizana Pierce and Lisa Decker in coordinating with the DOE and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc iii Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this study is to investigate the technical and economic feasibility of installing wind generation equipment in Bethel, Alaska and surrounding Alaska Native communities in YKHC region. This study identifies existing electric and thermal loads, investigates and evaluates appropriate equipment configurations and sizing options, provides preliminary savings estimates for a selected option, and establishes order of magnitude cost estimates. Some of the assumptions used in this analysis may have a significant impact on project economics and should be confirmed before project implementation. Early on in the process, four specific sites were chosen for focused analysis of wind generation potential. These sites were chosen based on the perceived wind resources available and the existing and planned host energy requirements. The sites were also selected based on the ability to conduct the feasibility study activities and potentially establish wind generation facilities without negatively affecting endangered wildlife in the YKHC region. Consideration was also given to benefits that proposed wind generation facilities would confer on the surrounding environment and the people living at or near the chosen sites. Four sites were chosen based on this evaluation, and wind measurement equipment was erected at the following sites:  On land adjacent to the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Regional Hospital (YKDRH) in Bethel, near the local utility power plant,  Near the new YKHC McCann Treatment Center (Kasayuli Inhalant Clinic) in Bethel,  Near the YKHC Clinic in Emmonak Village, and  Near the YKHC Clinic currently being constructed in Newtok Village. At each of these sites, wind velocity and direction were monitored with 20-meter anemometer towers. Data were collected and logged every 10 minutes for a period of at least one year at each site, with the exception of Newtok, which had a shorter data collection period due to conflicts with construction and other issues. This data collection period lasted from March 2003 to April 2004. Table 1.1 shows a summary of the measured wind data at the four chosen sites. Based on the energy requirements at the host sites, the YKDRH was matched with a 50 kW nominal capacity wind turbine manufactured by the Atlantic Orient Corporation, and the other three sites were matched with 10 kW nominal capacity wind turbines manufactured by Bergey Windpower, Incorporated. The matching of the 10 kW turbine at the Newtok site is based on the expectation that the clinic currently being constructed there will have loads similar to those experienced by the Emmonak site. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 1-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Table 1.1: Monthly Averages and Yearly Extremes of Measured Wind Speed Data Monthly Average Data Month Avg. Wind Speeds (mph) Avg. Wind Speeds (m/s) YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok 1 11.86 12.94 15.88 5.30 5.79 7.10 2* 11.75 10.71 14.72 5.25 4.79 6.58 3* 12.80 11.82 15.13 5.72 5.29 6.77 4* 11.26 10.76 13.63 9.28 5.03 4.81 6.09 4.15 5 9.75 9.65 11.29 10.83 4.36 4.32 5.05 4.84 6 9.09 9.14 10.80 11.99 4.06 4.09 4.83 5.36 7 10.95 9.93 12.48 13.23 4.90 4.44 5.58 5.92 8 9.15 8.66 10.35 4.09 3.87 4.63 9 9.83 9.18 11.89 4.40 4.10 5.32 10 10.86 10.55 12.90 4.86 4.72 5.77 11 10.73 11.86 13.59 4.80 5.30 6.08 12 8.63 10.77 11.21 3.86 4.82 5.01 Yearly Extremes Wind Speeds (mph) Wind Speeds (m/s) YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok Max 37.00 42.54 43.48 35.87 16.54 19.02 19.44 16.04 Avg. 10.63 10.18 12.70 11.33 4.75 4.55 5.68 5.07 Median 10.03 9.74 12.12 11.93 4.48 4.36 5.42 5.33 Min.** 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 * Where two years of data have been gathered for a given month (Feb to Mar), the values shown represent the average of both years, 2003 and 2004. ** The minimums shown here represent the lowest non-zero measurements recorded. These may indicate zero wind speed readings of the measurement equipment (zero-reading measurement “noise”). 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 1-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study The economics of the proposed wind generation facilities were then analyzed, based on the measured wind data specific to each site and manufacturer’s performance specifications associated with the matched wind turbine equipment. Annual cost savings were calculated using historical energy rates for each site. Construction cost estimates have been generated using manufacturer supplied information, RSMeans estimating data, and information from other wind farms nearby in Alaska. Annual maintenance costs were estimated using manufacturer information and industry standards. See Table 1.2 for an economic summary of the analysis for the four sites. Additionally, non-quantifiable benefits were identified and discussed. These include environmental benefits, opportunities for employment and skill development among the local residents, and increased self-sufficiency and independence for YKHC and the native peoples it serves. These issues should be considered when evaluating the simple payback periods of the proposed wind generation projects. This report recommends that wind turbine generation facilities be erected at the two sites with the lowest simple payback periods: 50 kW at YKDRH (approximately 14 year simple payback period) and 10 kW to 15 kW at Newtok Subregional Clinic (approximately 17 to 20 year simple payback period). A range of capacity is given for the Newtok site, which is dependent upon whether it is more feasible to export excess electrical production to the local utility grid, or to store the energy in a local battery system. Simple payback periods are over 10 years, but projects are justified based on decreased emissions and increased employment opportunities discussed in later sections. In addition, any potential future increases in the cost of fossil fuels will make the electricity generated by wind turbines more valuable, and thus simple payback periods will decrease. The conceptual design of the proposed 50 kW and 10 kW to 15 kW wind generation facilities are discussed in this study, as well as their operation and maintenance. Potential environmental impacts that would result from the construction and operation of these plants include avian interactions, and visual and noise impacts on the surrounding areas. These issues affecting the design are addressed, as well as recommendations for dealing with these issues during the final design development and implementation phases. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 1-3 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Table 1.2: Summary of Analysis SiteProposed Wind GenerationCapacity(kW)EstimatedAnnualElectricityGenerated(kWh/yr)EstimatedAnnualEnergyCostSavings($/yr)EstimatedAnnualMaintenanceCosts($/yr)EstimatedAnnual Net CostSavings1($/yr)EstimatedConstructionCost($)Unit Cost ($/kW)EstimatedNetSimplePaybackPeriod2(yrs)YKDRH 50 84,507 $14,168 $2,000 $12,168 $169,002 $3,380 13.9McCann Treatment Center 10 10,000 $1,736 $619 $1,117 $71,512 $7,151 64.0Emmonak Village Clinic 10 17,948 $2,788 $619 $2,169 $71,512 $7,151 33.0Newtok Village Clinic (grid-tie, paralleling option)310 17,900 $4,819 $619 $4,200 $71,512 $7,151 17.0Newtok Village Clinic (battery charging option)42 x 7.5 22,400 $6,638 $1,045 $5,593 $109,655 $7,310 19.61Estimated Annual Net Cost Savings = Estimated Annual Energy Cost Savings – Estimated Annual Maintenance Costs 2Estimated Net Simple Payback Period = Estimated Construction Cost  Estimated Annual Net Cost Savings3Assumes excess electricity can be exported to local utility grid, offsetting site electricity purchases4Assumes excess instantaneous electricity is stored in batteries for later site use when wind resource is not available. Further excess energy can be used for heating purposes. To be conservative, it is assumed that 33% of the wind turbines' output will be used for heating instead of electricity. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 1-4 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 Study Overview The YKHC, in cooperation with the ANTHC and assisted by EE&T, has performed a study of the feasibility of installing new wind turbines on tribal lands in the town of Bethel, Alaska and surrounding communities served by YKHC facilities. YKHC investigated four site locations in and around the communities it serves. These locations are as follows: On land adjacent to the YKHC Bethel Hospital (YKDRH) near the local utility power plant, Near the new YKHC McCann Treatment Center in Bethel, Near the YKHC Clinic in Emmonak Village, and  Near the YKHC Clinic currently being constructed in Newtok Village. The primary goal of this project for the communities represented within this study is to achieve energy self-sustainability and reduce the area’s dependence on fossil fuel based technologies. In pursuing this project, YKHC has had the opportunity to investigate reducing its dependence on utility supplied power that comes from power plants that utilize diesel driven technologies while creating its own clean energy supply. This report was provided by EE&T for YKHC. 2.2 Description of DOE Grant Program This feasibility study was conducted as part of the US DOE Renewable Energy on Tribal Lands Program. The YKHC was one of 14 Native American and Alaskan Native entities selected in 2002 for the program. This study is intended to investigate the technical, economic, and regulatory feasibility of installing small-scale wind turbines to provide power to YKHC facilities. The purpose of the study is to determine technical and economic feasibility and provide a plan for the implementation phase, which would consist of installing and operating wind turbines at the sites that prove feasible. The study analyzes four sites in detail. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 2.3 Overview of Tribal Structure, Location and Demographics The YKHC, a non-profit organization, is a regional health corporation, authorized by resolution of the traditional or IRA councils of its 58 members, to provide health care services to the people of the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta under Title III of the Indian Self- Determination and Education Act. YKHC is a federally recognized village corporation, organized group per the PL 92-638 Compact with the Indian Health Services (IHS) and YKHC. YKHC is governed by a 21-member Board of Directors elected from 11 Administrative Units in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. YKHC has three divisions: Administrative Services, Community Services, and Hospital Services. The President/CEO, who is hired by the Board of Directors, hires an Executive Vice President who oversees Administrative Services and the Vice Presidents of Community and Hospital Services. The corporation has over 1,000 employees and is steadily growing. YKHC currently serves 56 western Alaska villages, which include three sub-regional clinics. More and more services are moving out to the villages, where the recipients of those services live. Besides the 50-bed acute care facility in Bethel, YKHC operates 47 village clinics, which are staffed by Village Health Aides who are certified nurses aides. It also supports one sub-regional clinic staffed by physician's assistants and nurse practitioners and there are plans for two additional sub-regional clinics. The City of Bethel is located in southwestern Alaska, 40 miles from the mouth of the Kuskokwim River, and 400 air miles from Anchorage. One of the largest communities in western Alaska, it lies within the 20-million acre Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, the largest wildlife refuge in the nation. Bethel serves as an administrative and transportation hub for 56 villages in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Figure 2.1 shows southwestern Alaska with air miles from each village to Bethel. Bethel has experienced tremendous population growth over the past two decades. U.S. Bureau of Census and Alaska Department of Labor figures show Bethel’s population in 1960 at 1,258; 1970 at 2,416; 1980 at 3,576; and 1990 at 4,764. The current population is 5,500. Roughly 2/3 of the population in Bethel is Yup’ik Eskimo. The traditional Yup’ik Eskimo practices and language remain predominant in the area, with subsistence activities and commercial fishing major contributors to residents’ livelihoods. There is also a substantial Caucasian presence, plus other Alaska Natives, Aleuts, African Americans, Koreans, Filipinos and Albanians. Local, state, and federal employment accounts for 50.2% of the jobs in Bethel, with private industry close, at 49.8% of the full-time work force. Almost 30% of the population are high school graduates, with an additional 10.5% having 1-4 years of college education. Many Bethel residents supplement their income with subsistence hunting, fishing, and berry picking activities. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 2.1: Map of Areas Served by YKHC x2 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-3 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 2.4 Integration With the Cultural, Social and Long-term Self-Sufficiency or Economic Goals of the Tribe Alternative power generation will provide the opportunity for self-sufficiency and fossil fuel independence in an unstable energy economic environment. Bethel and the surrounding communities are somewhat isolated regional communities in that there are no other sources of power beyond the utility monopoly or self-generation. Local utility power generation is exclusively fossil fuel based, primarily utilizing diesel fuel. Therefore, the more unstable the international oil industry becomes, the greater the impact locally on tribes’ resources to meet and pay for their heating and electricity needs. The local villages served by YKHC have a strong connection and reliance on the environment for the basic necessities of life, including food, water, shelter, and work. In promoting self-sufficiency, the villages gain better control over their resources and have better opportunities to protect the resources against depletion or degradation while harvesting these resources in a more sustainable fashion. Diesel fuel generation technologies typically give off significantly more emissions than other fossil fuels. By offsetting the need for power generated through these plants, local emissions can be lowered significantly. Through implementation of wind power generation, YKHC will bring to the area new jobs and opportunity for education and training in renewable energy technologies. YKHC construction labor force, consisting of local trades people, would be used throughout the construction phase of any wind power generation project. YKHC maintenance staff would maintain the wind generators long-term. 2.5 Tribal-specific Project Objectives The primary mission of the YKHC is to provide quality health care to the Alaska Native communities that it serves. Implementation of wind power generation will support that mission by reducing the YKHC’s energy costs, freeing up more money for health care. Another major objective of the YKHC and the Alaska Native communities that it serves is self-sufficiency. By reducing its reliance on diesel fuel that is drilled, refined, distributed, and sold by non-tribal entities, implementation of wind power generation will help achieve that goal. The construction, operation, and maintenance of wind power facilities will be done by YKHC employees, and the YKHC will gain valuable experience in renewable energy and self-generation that will allow it to continue to move toward energy self-sufficiency. A third objective of the YKHC is the protection of the natural environment. The majority of the Alaska Native population served by the YKHC obtains at least part of its diet from hunting and fishing. They have a direct interest in maintaining a healthy environment. The reduced emissions and reduction in fuel transport and handling resulting from implementation of wind power generation will help maintain the local environment, as well as help address regional and global environmental issues such as acid rain and global warming. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-4 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 2.6 How the Range of Renewable Energy Technologies Have Been Evaluated to Determine Which Are Technically and Economically Viable and Provide the Greatest Benefits to the Tribal Community Prior to this study, YKHC undertook a comprehensive energy efficiency study of the Main Hospital Building in Bethel. This energy efficiency study included a preliminary assessment of self-generation potential, which indicated that a wind turbine project could be cost effective. This conclusion was based on the excellent wind resources in Bethel and the surrounding communities, and on the competitive price of wind power. Also, the feasibility of wind power has been successfully demonstrated in Kotzebue, Alaska, which has similar climatic characteristics as Bethel and is located close by to the north. The technical and economic viability of wind turbine technology have been further evaluated in this feasibility study. Economic benefits have been quantified based on energy cost reductions and employment opportunities versus capital, operations, and maintenance costs. Non-quantifiable benefits are also identified and discussed. The YKHC uses Executive Order 13123 criteria as a basis for evaluating the feasibility of projects in addition to other factors, including those mentioned in this report (environmental, social, cultural, etc.). 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-5 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 2.7 Detailed Description of Chosen Sites A description of the four sites considered under this study follows. These sites were chosen because of their appropriate electric loads, space available for wind generation facilities, high costs of energy, and expectations of favorable wind resources. These sites were also evaluated based on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' concern for endangered bird species in the area, specifically eider species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that the feasibility study activities at these sites would have no effect upon the threatened species. Under this study, a wind resource measuring station was erected at each of these sites, such that a year’s worth of wind data could be measured. Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Regional Hospital - Bethel YKDRH is located in the City of Bethel. The YKDRH is a 50-bed general acute care medical facility. The single-story, 100,000 square foot steel frame structure is fully accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Services located in the hospital include an adult medical-surgical ward, a pediatric ward, an obstetric ward, as well as outpatient family medicine clinics, an emergency room, pharmacy, lab, X-ray, and specialty clinics. The Bethel Utilities Corporation provides electricity in Bethel. The wind monitoring tower was installed between the hospital and the power plant. The YKDRH and the area where the tower was erected are shown in the map provided below. This also shows the likely location of a wind generation facility, if one were to be constructed. Figure 2.2: Potential Wind Turbine Area Near YKDRH X 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-6 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study McCann Treatment Center – Bethel, Kasayuli Subdivision The McCann Treatment Center is located in the Kasayuli Subdivision, about a mile and a half from the Bethel Airport. The McCann Treatment Center is a Residential Psychiatric Treatment Center (RPTC) located in Bethel, Alaska, which provides clinical psychiatric and substance abuse services for Alaskan youth between the ages of 10 and 17. The wind- monitoring tower was installed in an empty lot owned by YKHC near the clinic. Construction of this Center was completed and operation began in January 2004. Pearl E. Johnson Subregional Clinic - Emmonak Emmonak is a predominantly native village of approximately 800 people. The village is located on Kwiguk Pass, 8 miles from the Yukon River entering into Bering Sea. It is 490 air miles from Anchorage, Bethel, and Nome. A charter service provides transport to surrounding villages and also operates a small hotel. The City of Emmonak has a hotel, cafe, showers, laundromat, and a sauna. A lighted, well-graveled 4,400 foot runway for private and commercial aircraft is located just outside of town. Yukon kayakers and canoeists end Yukon river trips at this village. YKHC operates a subregional clinic in Emmonak, and two buildings are being constructed for YKHC personnel housing. The wind monitoring tower was installed in a clearing behind the housing buildings. Power in Emmonak is supplied by the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC). Village Health Clinic - Newtok Village Newtok is a predominantly native village of approximately 350 people. YKHC currently operates a village clinic in Newtok and is constructing a new subregional clinic near the existing clinic. The clinic currently under construction is assumed to be a quarter of the size of the subregional clinic YKHC currently operates in Emmonak. The wind monitoring tower was installed next to the water tower near the proposed clinic site. Power in Newtok is supplied by the Tribe-owned Ungusraq Electric Corporation. A diesel generator located near the existing clinic provides power to the Tribe. A wind turbine was installed in Newtok approximately 15 years ago as part of an experimental State-run program. Due to a malfunction with the turbine electrical system, the building that housed the turbine electrical system, a post office, and city office burned down. Since then the turbine has not been operational. Nick Tom, Jr., of the Newtok Tribal Council, says that the Tribe is still interested in wind power because of the high price of electricity produced by diesel fuel. The river bank near Newtok is eroding at a rapid rate, and there is some discussion about relocating the entire village to a nearby island, approximately 8 miles away. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 2-7 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3. RESOURCE ASSESSMENT & ECONOMIC ANALYSIS This study focuses on wind power as the most viable renewable energy resource in the areas served by YKHC. This is evident based on the historically excellent wind resources in Bethel and the surrounding communities, and on the competitive price of wind power. Also, the feasibility of wind power has been successfully demonstrated in Kotzebue, Alaska, which has similar climatic characteristics as Bethel. Maps showing the wind resources in Alaska are provided below. The wind resource at the four chosen sites served by YKHC has been assessed through analysis of historical recorded wind data and measured data gathered under this study. Historical utility bills have also been gathered under this study in order to understand the existing energy consumption at the four chosen sites. These bills include information about both electricity and fuel consumption and costs, on a month-by-month basis. These data have been used to select appropriate wind generation equipment and sites, and to quantify the amount of electricity that will be produced by the turbines. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.1 Wind Resource Assessment 3.1.1 Historical Wind Data Figures 3.1 through 3.3 show historical wind resources in the State of Alaska and the YKHC region [ref: http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps.html]. It can be seen that much of the areas served by YKHC are historically designated as Wind Power Class 5 or greater. The area under consideration has been boxed in Figures 3.1 and 3.3. The NREL says the following about Wind Power Classes in their Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States: “The wind resource maps estimate the resource in terms of wind power classes (Table 1-1), ranging from class 1 (the lowest) to class 7 (the highest). Each class represents a range of mean wind power density (in units of W/m2) or equivalent mean wind speed at the specified height(s) above ground. Areas designated class 3 or greater are suitable for most wind turbine applications, whereas class 2 areas are marginal. Class 1 areas are generally not suitable, although a few locations (e.g., exposed hilltops not shown on the maps) with adequate wind resource for wind turbine applications may exist in some class 1 areas. The wind power estimates apply to areas free of local obstructions to the wind and to terrain features that are well exposed to the wind, such as open plains, tablelands, and hilltops. Within the mountainous areas identified, wind resource estimates apply to exposed ridge crests and mountain summits.” The information shown in the following figures is based on historical data gathered prior to 1979, and then updated in 1983 by the U.S DOE. Figure 3.3 shows the variation in wind power class at the four sites included in this study. The YKDRH and McCann Treatment Center Sites, both located in Bethel, are shown to be in regions with wind power class 4 to 5. The Emmonak Clinic Site is shown to be in a region with a wind power class of 5 to 6. The Newtok Clinic Site is shown to be in a region with a wind power class of 6 to 7. According to the historical data shown in this figure, all four of the sites included in this study are in regions with wind power classes of 3 or above, which are designated as “suitable for most wind turbine applications”, according to DOE publications. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.1: Wind Resources in Alaska – Average Annual Wind Resources 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-3 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.2: Wind Resources in Alaska – Average Seasonal Wind Resources Winter Spring Summer Autumn 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-4 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.3: Wind Resources in the Area of YKHC – Annual Average Wind Resources x2 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-5 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.1.2 Measured Wind Data Gathered Under this Study At the specific sites that were included in this study, wind velocity was monitored with 20-meter anemometer towers. The anemometer installed in Newtok was obtained through NREL’s Native American Anemometer Loan Program. The anemometers installed at the other three sites were purchased under this study. Each wind monitoring system consisted of an NRG 20-meter tilt-up tower, an NRG Wind Explorer data logger, an NRG #40 anemometer, an NRG #200P wind direction sensor, and an NRG #110S temperature sensor. The anemometer towers were erected at the YKDRH, McCann Treatment Center, and Emmonak Subregional Clinic sites at the end of February 2003 and immediately began collecting data. Due to a combination of inclement weather and logistical delays, the tower at the Newtok Clinic site could not be erected until the end of April 2003. During August 2003, the anemometer tower at the Newtok Clinic site was taken down due to conflicts with the construction of a new clinic building in the village, and data collection was ended at this site. The crews building the new facility found it necessary to take down the tower in spite of prior efforts to locate the tower in a place that would not interfere with construction activities. Village representatives have confirmed that the disassembled tower components remain functional and are currently stored safely. The measured wind data that were gathered under this study are presented and analyzed in this section. Approximately 580,000 data points were recorded and analyzed, which included measurements of wind speed, wind speed standard deviation, and wind direction, at 10-minute intervals over the course of a year at the four chosen sites. 3.1.3 Special Considerations When Erecting the Anemometer Towers Permafrost The nature of the ground in the areas where the anemometer towers were erected required that guy-wire anchors be driven deep into the ground, such that they reached the permafrost (year-round permanently frozen layer of ground). If this had not been accomplished, there would have been a danger of the anchors pulling free during the summer when the ground thawed and lost its integrity. The permafrost layer in this region typically begins at a depth of 5 feet. The tower guy-wires were secured into the permafrost by connecting each (of four sets of two) to two pieces of metal rebar, approximately 7 feet in length. One piece of rebar was driven down perpendicular to the ground surface such that approximately 3 feet of permafrost was penetrated. The other was driven in at an angle, toward the base of the tower, such that the tension of the guy-wires did not pull the anchors out of the ground. Figure 3.4 shows a schematic of this configuration. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-6 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.4: Guy-wire Configuration(a) (a)Units are given in inches. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-7 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Avian Populations Special consideration was given to the potential that the anemometer towers would interfere with the flight of local avian populations by outfitting the guy-wires with BIRD-FLIGHT diverters, manufactured by Preformed Line Products. These are designed to make overhead lines and guyed structures visible to birds, and are recommended to be installed at 15-foot intervals along the guy-wires. Icing In colder climates such as is studied here, ice can build up on wind measuring equipment, which can lead to faulty data. During an icing event, typically the wind direction measurement vanes will freeze first. Both the average and standard deviation of an iced vane channel will read 0. The data loggers used for this study did not collect standard deviation data for each interval of wind direction data collected, therefore, this signal of icing events was not available for analysis. The wind speed measurement anemometer can display signs of icing when the standard deviation slowly decreases to lower than normal levels over the course of many 10- minute intervals as the ice builds up on the spinning cups. The additional mass of the ice makes the anemometer act more like a flywheel, responding more slowly to changes in wind speed, hence, the lower standard deviation. After many 10-minute intervals of showing a decreasing standard deviation, the anemometer channel will often show a standard deviation "spike" in the 10-minute interval right before the anemometer stops spinning. That is, the standard deviation will rise sharply in one interval within a few 10-minute intervals of the anemometer stopping and then quickly going to 0. The data collected for this study were reviewed for evidence of icing events, as displayed by the standard deviation of wind speed measurements, and at each site less than 0.5% of the data points collected exhibited the behavior described above that may have indicated icing was occurring. The conclusion is that the data as presented have not been significantly altered by equipment icing. 3.1.4 Data Collection and Transfer Measured data were accumulated into modular data plugs located on the base of the anemometer towers. Local YKHC personnel and village residents were hired and trained to swap the data plugs. Each month a new data plug was installed at each of the four sites, and the removed plugs were mailed to NREL offices in Colorado. NREL staff downloaded the information from the plugs and converted the data into Excel spreadsheet format. The converted files were then sent to EE&T for analysis. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-8 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.2 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Regulations Affecting Anemometer Towers Federal Regulation 49 CFR Part 77 establishes standards and notification requirements for objects affecting navigable air space. This notification serves as the basis for determining the potential hazardous effect of proposed construction on air navigation. Notification allows the FAA to identify potential aeronautical hazards in advance, thus preventing or minimizing adverse impacts to the safe and efficient use of navigable air space. Prior to the erection of the anemometer towers, the FAA office in Anchorage was contacted, and assistance of an Airport Planner (Gabriel Mahns) was obtained. The FAA representative indicated that the sites at YKDRH, McCann Treatment Center, and Emmonak Subregional Clinic were clear of what is deemed navigable air space, but that the Newtok Clinic site would require formal notification due to the nearby Newtok Airport. The formal FAA notification process was followed for the Newtok Clinic anemometer. On February 25, 2003, the FAA provided approval to proceed with no aeronautical objections to the proposal for 12 months of monitoring. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-9 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.3 Data Analysis Table 3.1 shows the months for which data were collected for each site. Figures 3.5 through 3.8 show the daily averages of the 10-minute interval wind speed readings at the four sites. Note that due to the nature of computation of daily averages, the following figures are not representative of maximum and minimum wind speeds at the sites under consideration. Table 3.1: Months of Wind Data Gathered Under Study YKDRH (Bethel Main Bethel McCann Hospital) Center (Kasayuli) Emmonak Clinic Newtok Clinic March 2003 March 2003 March 2003 * April 2003 April 2003 April 2003 * May 2003 May 2003 May 2003 May 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 July 2003 July 2003 July 2003 July 2003 August 2003 August 2003 August 2003 ** September 2003 September 2003 September 2003 ** October 2003 October 2003 October 2003 ** November 2003 November 2003 November 2003 ** December 2003 December 2003 December 2003 ** January 2004 January 2004 January 2004 ** February 2004 February 2004**** February 2004 ** March 2004 March 2004 April 2004*** April 2004*** * Erection of the Newtok Clinic anemometer tower delayed due to weather and logistical delays. ** Tower down due to conflict with construction projects. *** Only 15 days of data (1/2 month) gathered for April 2004. **** Only 5 days of data gathered for February 2004. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-10 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies Avg Daily Wind Speed (mph) Avg Daily Wind Speed (mph) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2/12/153/13/153/294/124/265/105/246/76/217/57/198/28/168/309/139/2710/1110/2511/811/2212/612/201/31/171/312/142/283/13Date Figure 3.6: Average Measured Daily Wind Speeds at McCann Treatment Center, [20 meters height] Avg Daily Wind Speeds - Kasayuli Inhalant Clinic 2/12/153/13/153/294/124/265/105/246/76/217/57/198/28/168/309/139/2710/1110/2511/811/2212/612/201/31/171/312/142/283/13YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.5: Average Measured Daily Wind Speeds at YKDRH, [20 meters height] Avg Daily Wind Speeds - Bethel Main Hospital Date 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-11 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies 3/27 3/274/10 4/104/24 4/24 Avg Daily Wind Speed (mph) Avg Daily Wind Speed (mph) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 25 20 15 10 5 0 2/12/153/13/153/294/124/265/105/246/76/217/57/198/28/168/309/139/2710/1110/2511/811/2212/612/201/31/171/312/142/283/132/12/153/13/153/294/124/265/105/246/76/217/57/198/28/168/309/139/2710/1110/2511/811/2212/612/201/31/171/312/142/283/13YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.7: Average Measured Daily Wind Speeds at Emmonak Clinic, [20 meters height] Avg Daily Wind Speeds - Emmonak Clinic Date Figure 3.8: Average Measured Daily Wind Speeds at Newtok Clinic, [20 meters height] Avg Daily Wind Speeds - Newtok Clinic 35 30 Date 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-12 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies 3/273/274/104/104/244/24 YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Table 3.2 shows the monthly averages and the annual extreme high and low wind speed measurements taken under this study. Table 3.2: Monthly Averages and Yearly Extremes of Measured Wind Speed Data Monthly Average Data Month Avg. Wind Speeds (mph) Avg. Wind Speeds (m/s) YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok 1 11.86 12.94 15.88 5.30 5.79 7.10 2* 11.75 10.71 14.72 5.25 4.79 6.58 3* 12.80 11.82 15.13 5.72 5.29 6.77 4* 11.26 10.76 13.63 9.28 5.03 4.81 6.09 4.15 5 9.75 9.65 11.29 10.83 4.36 4.32 5.05 4.84 6 9.09 9.14 10.80 11.99 4.06 4.09 4.83 5.36 7 10.95 9.93 12.48 13.23 4.90 4.44 5.58 5.92 8 9.15 8.66 10.35 4.09 3.87 4.63 9 9.83 9.18 11.89 4.40 4.10 5.32 10 10.86 10.55 12.90 4.86 4.72 5.77 11 10.73 11.86 13.59 4.80 5.30 6.08 12 8.63 10.77 11.21 3.86 4.82 5.01 Yearly Extremes Wind Speeds (mph) Wind Speeds (m/s) YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok Max 37.00 42.54 43.48 35.87 16.54 19.02 19.44 16.04 Avg. 10.63 10.18 12.70 11.33 4.75 4.55 5.68 5.07 Median 10.03 9.74 12.12 11.93 4.48 4.36 5.42 5.33 Min.** 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 * Where two years of data have been gathered for a given month (Feb to Mar), the values shown represent the average of both years, 2003 and 2004. ** The minimums shown here represent the lowest non-zero measurements recorded. These may indicate zero wind speed readings of the measurement equipment (zero-reading measurement “noise”). 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-13 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study The following Figures 3.9 through 3.12 show the distribution (across all data measurements) of wind direction data as well as the average wind speed measured in each direction at each site. On each of these figures, 0 represents the north direction and 90 represents east. Figure 3.9: YKDRH Wind Rose 2003-02-23 to 2004-04-15 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 22.5 45 67.5 90 112.5 135 157.5202.5 225 247.5 270 292.5 315 337.5 180 Percent Time [%] Average Wind Speed [mph] 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-14 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.10: McCann Treatment Center Wind Rose 2003-02-23 to 2004-04-15 0 60 337.5 22.5 50 315 45 40 30 292.5 67.520 10 270 0 90 247.5 112.5 225 135 202.5 157.5 180 Percent Time [%] Average Wind Speed [mph] 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-15 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.11: Emmonak Wind Rose 2003-02-25 to 2004-02-03 0 60 337.5 22.5 50 315 45 40 30 292.5 67.520 10 270 0 90 247.5 112.5 225 135 202.5 157.5 180 Percent Time [%] Average Wind Speed [mph] 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-16 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.12: Newtok Wind Rose 2003-04-26 to 2003-08-01 0 60 337.5 22.5 50 315 45 40 30 292.5 67.520 10 270 0 90 247.5 112.5 225 135 202.5 157.5 180 Percent Time [%] Average Wind Speed [mph] 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-17 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.13 shows a bin analysis of the measured wind data gathered under this study. The figure shows how many hours per year the various wind speeds occurred as indicated across the bottom of the graph. The data shown represent a full-year of hourly wind- speeds, or 8,760 hours total per site. Since data were collected at Newtok for only a fraction of the year, the data shown in the figure for that site represents an extrapolation of the collected data to 8,760 hours. The figure demonstrates that each of the sites studied experience wind speeds between 8 and 12 mph for a large number of hours per year. Also shown on the graph is the bin analysis of 20-year, typical meteorological year (TMY) wind speed data for Bethel, for purposes of comparison. The wind data measured under this study are similar to the TMY data. Figure 3.13: Wind Speed Distribution of Measured Wind Data at All Four Sites and TMY Data for Bethel (8,760 hours total) YKHC Annual Binned Measured Wind Data 2003-2004 Hours per Year 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Measured Wind Speed (mph) YKDRH McCann Emmonak Newtok Bethel TMY 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-18 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study As stated above, the Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States groups regions into seven different wind power classes. This document indicates that locations in regions with a wind power class of 1 are poorly suited to make use of wind power generation, and regions with a wind power class of 2 are marginally suited candidates for wind power. Locations in regions with wind power classes of 3 through 7 are deemed to be good candidates for wind power generation. Figures 3.14 through 3.17 show the percentage of hours measured at each site that would put the sites into “poor”, “marginal” or “good” classifications for wind power implementation. These figures show this information for the entire year, and provide breakdowns for summer (May through October) and winter (November through April) operation. As is expected for this geographic region, more time is spent in the “good” wind power class territory during the winter half of the year than during the summer half. Figure 3.14: Percentage of Hours at Various Wind Power Classes – YKDRH Percent of Time Spent in Wind Power Classes - Bethel Hospital 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Percent of Hours 1 - Poor Wind Power Potential 2 - Marginal Wind Power Potential Class 3-7 - Good Wind Power Potential Wind Power Classes All Year May through October November through April 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-19 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.15: Percentage of Hours at Various Wind Power Classes – McCann Center Percent of Time Spent in Wind Power Classes - Kasayuli Inhalant Clinic 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Percent of Hours 1 - Poor Wind Power Potential 2 - Marginal Wind Power Potential Class 3-7 - Good Wind Power Potential Wind Power Classes All Year May through October November through April Figure 3.16: Percentage of Hours at Various Wind Power Classes – Emmonak Percent of Time Spent in Wind Power Classes - Emmonak Clinic 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Percent of Hours 1 - Poor Wind Power Potential 2 - Marginal Wind Power Potential Class 3-7 - Good Wind Power Potential Wind Power Classes All Year May through October November through April 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-20 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.17: Percentage of Hours at Various Wind Power Classes – Newtok (No data obtained for winter half of year) Percent of Time Spent in Wind Power Classes - Newtok Clinic 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Percent of Hours 1 - Poor Wind Power Potential 2 - Marginal Wind Power Potential Class 3-7 - Good Wind Power Potential Wind Power Classes May through October 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-21 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.4 Existing Site Utility Loads and Savings Potential The analysis in this study assumes that all of the power produced by subsequent wind turbines will be used by the YKHC facilities located at the specific sites under consideration. It is expected that the power generated at each site will serve a single facility. Equipment selection has been based on historical records of monthly annual electricity use, with the goal of matching turbine output to the facility loads. The sizes of the wind power generation projects that were considered do not exceed the needs of the community, therefore, the export market has not been analyzed. The specific design strategy will depend on the connection agreement with the local utility. If the system is connected directly to the grid and net metering is allowed on an annual basis, the design will be based on producing no more than the expected annual electricity use of the facility. If no net metering is allowed, then the design may be based on turbine production not exceeding the minimum site electric demand. Net metering may allow the site to use excess power generated during times of low host requirements to reduce costs when electricity must be purchased from the utility. The “net” effect will still be that the wind generation equipment produces no more electricity per year than the host uses. 3.4.1 Historical Energy Use As part of this study, the historical electricity use of the facilities to be served has been studied. Expected changes in facility operation that will affect energy use have also been considered. 3.4.1.1 YKDRH - Bethel YKDRH is provided electricity by Bethel Utilities Corporation, Inc. (BUC). The total electricity produced by BUC is approximately 39,000,000 kWh per year. A detailed energy audit of the YKDRH was conducted prior to this wind generation feasibility study, and was completed in 2001. In the 12-month period from April 2000 to March 2001, this facility used 3,916,800 kWh of electricity. Its maximum monthly demand during that period was 656 kW in July 2000. According to more recent bills gathered during this study, this facility used 4,033,600 kWh of electricity in the 12-month period from April 2003 to March 2004. The average demand during this period was 460 kW. Average maximum monthly demand during this period was 688 kW. It follows that from 2000 to 2004, the electric loads at the YKDRH have remained relatively constant and represent approximately 10% of the load served by BUC. Figure 3.18 shows historical monthly electricity consumption at the YKDRH. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-22 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies Electricity Use (kWh) YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.18: Monthly Electricity Consumption at YKDRH 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 September 030 October 02November 02December 02January 03February 03March 03April 03May 03June 03July 03August 03October 03November 03December 03January 04February 04March 04 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-23 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study The BUC has a flat rate structure that charges $0.1054 per kWh for energy and $22.21 per kW, per month billing demand. Billing demand is calculated as the maximum average rate of energy use for any 15-minute interval during the billing month. There is a demand ratchet at 80% of the maximum billing demand for the previous 11 months. A “Cost of Power Adjustment Surcharge” and a “Regulatory Cost Charge” also appear on the Hospital’s electricity billing statements. During the month of January 2004, the final month for which a copy of a billing statement was obtained, the Cost of Power Adjustment Surcharge was $0.0757/kWh, and the Regulatory Cost Charge was $0.000392/kWh. Based on copies of billing statements from another site in Bethel (Kasayuli Inhalant Center/McCann Center), it appears that the Cost of Power Adjustment Surcharge varied from $0.0654 to $0.0757 per kWh from May 2003 to April 2004, with an average of $0.0682 per kWh. If a wind generation facility were to be implemented at this site, the electricity generated at the facility would be valued at the equivalent cost of electricity purchased from the local utility, not including demand costs. In the most recent year of electricity bills examined, this value is equivalent to $0.168/kWh. Based on the typical charges outlined above, it is estimated that YKDRH typically pays $420,000 per year for electrical energy and $200,000 per year for electricity demand (assuming 4,000,000 kWh/yr consumption and 750 kW average peak monthly demand). Cost of Power Adjustment Surcharges add approximately $273,000 per year. The YKDRH site consumes #2 fuel oil (diesel) in an incinerator, humidification units, laundry, and kitchen. The fuel purchased for the Hospital is also used by a neighboring facility, the Community Health Services Building (CHSB). Fuel is purchased from Bethel Fuel Sales, and is delivered by the Hoffman Company. From May 2003 to April 2004, the site consumed approximately 9,600 million Btu of #2 fuel oil (69,000 gallons), at a total cost of approximately $143,000. The average unit cost of #2 fuel oil is $14.90 per million Btu. The site also purchases hot water (190F - 195F) from the BUC, which is used for space heating and domestic water heating. From May 2003 to April 2004, the site consumed approximately 13,200 million Btu of hot water, at a total cost of approximately $162,000. The average unit cost of hot water was approximately $12.30 per million Btu. 3.4.1.2 McCann Treatment Center – Bethel, Kasayuli Subdivision The BUC also provides electricity to the McCann Treatment Center. This facility just recently began operation, therefore, a limited amount of historical utility consumption data exists. Copies of billing statements for the months when the center has been fully operational (January 2004 to April 2004) show that the average electricity consumption is approximately 5,940 kWh per month, or 71,280 kWh per year, and that the average peak monthly demand is approximately 19 kW. If a wind generation facility were to be implemented at this site, the electricity generated at the facility would be valued at the equivalent cost of electricity purchased from the local utility, not including demand costs. In the most recent year of electricity bills examined, this value is equivalent to $0.174/kWh. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-24 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Based on the typical charges indicated above, the McCann Treatment Center is expected typically to pay $7,500 per year for electrical energy and $6,200 per year for demand. Cost of Power Adjustment Surcharges add approximately $4,900 per year. 3.4.1.3 Subregional Village Clinic - Emmonak The YKHC subregional clinic in Emmonak is currently provided electricity by the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC). From March 2003 to April 2004, the YKHC Subregional Clinic at Emmonak Village consumed approximately 122,000 kWh of electricity. During that same period, the peak demand was approximately 38 kW and the average demand was approximately 14 kW. The site purchases electricity at two rates. Rate 1 applies to the first 1,500 kWh consumed each month, equal to $0.14 per kWh. Rate 2 applies to all electricity purchased in excess of the first 1,500 kWh, equal to $0.06 per kWh. From December 2002 to February 2004, AVEC charged the site $45 per kW for billed demand, except for the period from February 2003 to June 2003, when this charge was omitted. During the period being examined, AVEC also charged a “Fuel Charge” of $0.0824 per kWh. If a wind generation facility were to be implemented at this site, the electricity generated at the facility would be valued at the equivalent cost of electricity purchased from the local utility, not including demand costs. In the most recent year of electricity bills examined, this value is equivalent to $0.155/kWh. Based on the typical charges outlined above, Emmonak Village Clinic can be expected to pay approximately $8,800 per year for electrical energy and $17,300 per year for demand (assumes 122,000 kWh/yr consumption and 32 kW average maximum monthly demand). Additional Fuel Charges could potentially add approximately $10,000 per year to the electricity costs. Figure 3.19 shows the historical monthly electricity consumption at the Emmonak Village Clinic operated by YKHC. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-25 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Figure 3.19: Monthly Electricity Consumption at Emmonak Clinic, Similar to Newtok Clinic Currently Under Construction Monthly Electricity Use 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Electricity Use (kWh) December 02January 03February 03March 03April 03May 03June 03July 03August 03September 03October 03November 03December 03January 04February 04 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-26 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.4.1.4 Newtok Village Clinic YKHC is currently constructing a new, larger clinic building at the Newtok site. This clinic will be about a quarter of the size of the subregional clinic currently operating at Emmonak. Once the new Newtok Clinic building is completed, it is assumed that its electricity use profile will be scaled down to 25% of the profile of the existing Emmonak Clinic. Because this construction is currently ongoing at Newtok, future electrical consumption can only be estimated. Electricity use is estimated to be approximately 30,500 kWh per year, and maximum and average demand are estimated to be approximately 10 kW and 3.5 kW, respectively. The existing village clinic in Newtok purchases electricity from Ungusraq Power Company. Based on the most recent billing information available (January 2001 to November 2002), electricity costs in Newtok averaged $0.54 per kWh consumed. A “PCE discount” was subtracted from this charge, averaging $0.2688 per kWh, leaving a net average annual electricity cost to the site of $0.2712 per kWh. No demand charges are imposed by the local utility. If a wind generation facility were to be implemented at this site, the electricity generated at the facility would be valued at the equivalent cost of electricity purchased from the local utility. In the most recent year of electricity bills examined, this value is equivalent to $0.2712/kWh. By assuming that the electric loads at the new clinic currently under construction will be approximately a quarter of the existing electric loads at the Emmonak subregional clinic, and that electricity rates will continue as indicated in the most recent Newtok bills examined, an annual electricity cost of approximately $8,300 is estimated. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-27 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 3.4.2 Expected Cost Savings - Project Economic Analysis How the Economic Viability of the Proposed Project Has Been Evaluated The viability of this project, in general, will include an economic analysis and will consider environmental and social impacts. Typically, Executive Order 13123 economic criteria are used when evaluating the economic viability of projects. Executive Order 13123 outlines a 10-year simple payback period for approval of any project. However, the environmental and social benefits of the project may be significant enough to warrant modification of the payback requirement. Executive Order 13123 explicitly points out goals of reducing greenhouse gas production (Section 201), promotion of renewable energy (Section 204), and reduction of the use of petroleum (Section 205), all of which will result from implementation of the wind generation projects outlined in this study. The economic benefit of the project has been quantified by determining the expected amount of electricity that will be generated by the proposed wind generation facilities, and calculating the effect on the proposed sites’ annual energy costs. Utility rates and expected electricity use and electric demand have been analyzed. Additional economic benefits include short-term and long-term employment in construction and operation and maintenance, respectively. Where possible and reasonable, these benefits have been quantified as well. Anticipated Economic Benefits to the Tribe and Tribal Community The primary anticipated economic benefits from this measure will result from decreased energy costs. Monies not spent to purchase electricity from the utility will be available to deliver YKHC’s core health care services. The project will result in increased local employment opportunities for construction, operation, and maintenance of the wind turbines. Summary of Economic Benefits of the Wind Generation Projects At the YKDRH, a nominal 50 kW output wind turbine has been deemed the best fit. Atlantic Orient Corporation manufactures this turbine, and it is the same model used by the Kotzebue Electric Association located nearby in Kotzebue, AK. Kotzebue Electric Association has been successfully operating three of these units since July 1997 and seven additional units since May 1999. At the other three sites, Bethel McCann Center (Kasayuli), Emmonak Village Clinic, and Newtok Village Clinic, nominal 10 kW output wind turbines are proposed. This study used the 10 kW turbines manufactured by Bergey Windpower for its analysis. These wind turbine models were chosen for consideration based on their ability to match the electric load of the YKHC facilities located at the four sites under consideration. Some consideration was given to using the electrical output of the wind turbines for heating purposes, thus displacing either heating hot water purchases at the YKDRH, or direct fuel fired heating at the other sites. However, the economic benefits of displacing electricity purchases were shown to be greater than those associated with reducing hot water 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-28 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study purchases or heating fuel consumption, so this approach was disregarded from the economic justification analysis. Table 3.3 shows a summary of the economic analysis of the wind generation projects considered at each of the four sites. For each site, a regular-tower and a tall-tower scenario is presented. The tall-tower scenarios are expected to produce greater amounts of electricity due to better wind resources at higher elevations above ground, but will cost more to construct and have to greater visual impacts on the surrounding areas. The table shows the amount of electricity that would likely be generated from a wind generation facility at each site, given the wind resources measured under this study as described in the previous section. These amounts of wind-generated electricity would be equivalent to the reduction in electricity that YKHC would have to purchase annually from the sites’ local utilities. The estimated economic value of these reductions in electricity purchases is also indicated in the table. The electricity cost savings numbers presented here do not include demand cost savings because the wind generation systems will occasionally need to be taken offline for maintenance activities. Finally, the table presents the expected annual reduction in electric utility power-plant emissions that would result from on-site wind power generation. Special Considerations for Newtok Clinic Site A range of annual cost savings, implementation costs, and simple payback periods are shown for the Newtok site. These values are presented as a range because the site is currently under construction, and therefore the electrical loads are uncertain at this time. The low end of annual cost savings and low end of implementation costs (lower simple payback periods) will be applicable if the site can use most of the electricity directly at the new clinic, and the remaining electricity can be exported to the local utility grid. In this case, the recommended configuration would consist of one 10 kW turbine, with a grid-paralleling inverter. After being exported to the grid, excess electricity could be used in other nearby Tribe-owned buildings. For the purposes of these calculations, it is assumed that the new YKHC clinic will be allowed to deduct the exported electrical kilowatt-hours from their monthly utility bills, on a one-for-one basis. This type of “net-metering” arrangement with the local utility is typical of what is offered by larger utilities (see Pacific Gas & Electric’s E-NET electric rate schedule). The high end of annual cost savings and high end of implementation costs (higher simple payback periods) will be applicable if export of electricity to the local utility grid is not feasible for any reason. In this case, the recommended configuration would be two 7.5 kW remote system wind turbines, with a battery backup system and option to switch to local grid power if the wind system is ever unavailable. This system is recommended for non-grid-paralleling applications using approximately 100 kWh per day, which is anticipated at the new clinic building. In this configuration, if the site electrical load is fulfilled, electrical energy is sent to the batteries, where it is stored for use when the wind is not blowing strongly enough fulfill the site’s loads. If the site load is fulfilled and the batteries become fully charged, this system would allow excess electrical energy to be used to heat hot water for the building’s heating system. If the wind turbine and the batteries are not able to fulfill the site’s electric loads, the system would automatically switch over to local electricity grid power. The wind 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-29 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study turbine manufacturer (Bergey Windpower, Inc.) has indicated that this is a common system configuration. The calculations leading to the values presented in Table 3.3 can be found in the appendices of this report. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-30 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Table 3.3a: Summary of Wind Generation Projects Considered Location Bethel Main Hospital (YKDRH) Bethel McCann Center Site Annual Electricity Use 4,033,600 kWh 71,280 kWh Site Peak Demand 688 kW 19 kW Average Cost of Electricity (Not $0.168 /kWh $0.174 /kWh Incl. Demand) Number of Wind Turbines 1 1 Type/Model Atlantic Orient AOC 15/50 Bergey BWC Excel-S Nominal Turbine Rating 50 kW 10 kW Tower Type Lattice Lattice Hub Height 26.5 m 30.5 m 24 m 37 m Estimated Availability 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% Estimated Average Wind Speed 11.63 mph 11.87 mph 10.94 mph 11.63 mph Estimated 12-month Production 79,733 kWh 84,507 kWh 8,338 kWh 10,000 kWh Estimated Time Turbines Generating 57.2% 57.2% 82.8% 82.8% Percentage of Site Load Generated by Wind 2.0% 2.1% 11.7% 14.0% Estimated Net Annual Cost Savings $11,385 $12,186 $829 $1,117 Estimated Construction Cost $164,082 $169,002 $69,175 $71,512 Estimated Unit Construction Cost $3,282 /kW $3,380 /kW $6,918 /kW $7,151 /kW Simple Payback Period 14.4 yrs 13.9 yrs 83.5 yrs 64 yrs Emissions Reductions NOX 38 lb/yr 41 lb/yr 4 lb/yr 5 lb/yr SOX 150 lb/yr 159 lb/yr 16 lb/yr 19 lb/yr CO2 46,262 lb/yr 49,032 lb/yr 4,838 lb/yr 5,802 lb/yr 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-31 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Table 3.3b: Summary of Wind Generation Projects Considered Location Emmonak Village Clinic Newtok Village Clinic Site Annual Electricity Use 122,157 kWh 30,500 kWh Site Peak Demand 38 kW 10 kW Average Cost of Electricity (Not $0.155 /kWh $0.271 /kWh Incl. Demand) Number of Wind Turbines 1 1 (grid-tie) or 2 (battery charge) Type/Model Bergey BWC Excel-S Bergey BWC Excel-S or Excel-R Nominal Turbine Rating 10 kW 10 kW (grid-tie) or 2 x 7.5 kW (battery charge) Tower Type Lattice Lattice Hub Height 24 m 37 m 24 m 37 m Estimated Availability 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% Estimated Average Wind Speed 13.8 mph 14.68 mph 14 mph 15 mph Estimated 12-month Production 15,362 kWh 17,948 kWh 15,400 kWh to 19,300 kWh 17,900 kWh to 22,400 kWh Estimated Time Turbines Generating 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% Percentage of Site Load Generated by Wind 12.6% 14.7% 50% to 63% 59% to 73% Estimated Net Annual Cost Savings $1,767 $2,169 $3.5k to $4.5k $4.2k to $5.6k Estimated Construction Cost $69,175 $71,512 $68k to $104k $72k to $110k Estimated Unit Construction Cost $6,918 /kW $7,151 /kW $7k to $14k/kW $7k to $15k/kW Simple Payback Period 39.1 yrs 33.0 yrs 19 to 23 yrs 17 to 20 yrs Emissions Reductions NOX 7 lb/yr 9 lb/yr 7 lb/yr 9 lb/yr SOX 29 lb/yr 34 lb/yr 29 lb/yr 34 lb/yr CO2 8,913 lb/yr 10,414 lb/yr 8,935 lb/yr 10,386 lb/yr 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 3-32 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 4. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Decision Making and Sources of Funding Plans to Obtain a Tribal Council Resolution to Implement the Wind Generation The YKHC Board of Directors represents the communities served by YKHC, thus project approval can be obtained through a simple Board vote. Potential Sources of Funding for Project Implementation and Plan to Obtain Financing In order to pay for construction of wind generation facilities, YKHC will likely seek third-party funding in the form of public sector grants or loans, private party cash, third-party insurance reimbursement, or other sources, as available. 4.2 Conceptual Design YKDRH Bethel – 50 kW AOC 15/50 Wind Turbine A wind generation system consisting of ten 50 kW Atlantic Orient Corporation wind turbines, similar to the one being proposed here, is currently installed and operating in Kotzebue, Alaska. Kotzebue is nearby, to the north of the site under consideration in Bethel. The design of the proposed wind generation facility at the YKDRH would be similar to the design of the installation in Kotzebue. The proposed wind turbine generation system would likely be constructed at or near the site where the anemometer tower associated with this study is currently erected. The proposed system would consist of a single 50 kW nominal output model AOC 15/50 wind turbine mounted on an 80-foot to 100-foot tall steel lattice, free-standing tower. The tower has three footings that will rest on concrete foundations. The hub of the wind turbine is mounted to the top of the tower. A crane would be required during construction in order to erect the tower. The proposed wind turbine consists of three air foil blades, each 23.7 feet in length. The swept diameter of the wind turbine is 49.2 feet. The blades are connected to a hub, which in turn is connected to the power output shaft. The power output shaft transmits the mechanical energy gathered from the wind into electrical generator via a gearbox. The power output shaft, gearbox, and electrical generator are all housed at the top of the wind turbine tower. The generator produces 480V, three phase, AC power. A pair of flexible cables carry electrical power from the generator to a junction box at the tower base, and control signals to and from the turbine. The proposed wind generation system would produce electricity for use at the Bethel Main Hospital, and feed the facility electricity in parallel with Bethel Utility Corporation’s local grid. The size of the proposed wind turbine (50 kW) is such that it should never exceed the demand of the Main Hospital, and therefore electricity should never be exported onto BUC’s 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 4-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study system. When the proposed wind turbine is down due to failure or planned maintenance activities, BUC’s system would support the entire Main Hospital electric load. Constant supervision of the proposed system is not expected nor accounted for in the operating cost assumptions. The turbine has several braking mechanisms designed to keep the rotor spinning at proper speeds and protect the equipment from damage in high winds. Braking mechanisms include tip brakes on the ends of the blades to assist in slowing and stopping the rotor, a parking brake, and a dynamic braking system using the residual power of the generator to help slow the rotor. A computer control system is used to operate the turbines. The controller reads wind speeds and the turbine’s status and then makes control decisions, sending signals to regulate the speed or shut down the rotors when necessary. Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center, Emmonak Village Clinic, & Newtok Village Clinic – 10 kW Bergey Windpower BWC Excel-S Wind Turbine The future electric loads at these sites would likely accommodate the output of a 10 kW capacity wind turbine and, under normal conditions, all of the electricity produced would be used within the YKHC facilities. Bergey Windpower produces the 10 kW wind turbine considered for these applications under this study. This model was introduced in 1983 and has reportedly been installed at over 800 sites around the world. The electric output from these turbines is typically used in either water pumping, battery charging, or grid-connected applications. The proposed wind turbine generation systems would likely be constructed at or near the locations at these sites where the anemometer towers associated with this study are currently erected. The proposed systems would consist of a single 10 kW nominal output model BWC Excel-S wind turbine mounted on an 80-foot to 120-foot tall steel lattice, guyed tower, at each site. The tower lattice structure has three footings that will rest on concrete foundations. The guy-wires steadying the tower are secured to the ground at three anchor bolts, also mounted in concrete foundations. The hub of the wind turbine is mounted to the top of the tower. The tower can be erected using a crane if available, but tilt-up construction kits are also available if crane access is not possible. The proposed wind turbine consists of three blades, and the swept diameter of the wind turbine is 22 feet. The blades are connected to a hub, which in turn is connected to the power output shaft. Blades can be painted black for enhanced ice-shedding capabilities. The power output shaft transmits the mechanical energy gathered from the wind into the electrical generator. The power output shaft and electrical generator are all housed at the top of the wind turbine tower. The generator produces DC power, which is converted to AC power by the GridTek 10 power processor (inverter), also provided by Bergey. The inverter would be mounted at ground level, where it can be easily accessed. This inverter produces 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 4-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 240V, single-phase, AC electricity that can be connected to an existing circuit breaker panel. Operation of the system is fully automatic. The proposed wind generation systems would produce electricity for use at the YKHC centers and clinics at the sites, and feed the facilities electricity in parallel with the local utilities’ electric grids. The size of the proposed wind turbines (10 kW) is such that it should never exceed the demand of the YKHC facilities at the sites, and therefore electricity should never be exported onto the local utilities’ systems. When the proposed wind turbines are down due to failure or planned maintenance activities, the local utilities’ systems would support the entire electric load. Constant supervision of the proposed system is not expected nor accounted for in the operating cost assumptions. The turbine has several speed control mechanisms designed to keep the rotor spinning at proper speeds and protect the equipment from damage in high winds. Braking mechanisms include blades that flex in the wind (“auto-furling”), which prevent turbine overspeed during high winds, and a furling winch that can be manually operated to stop the turbine from the base of the tower. Alternative to Grid-paralleling Arrangement for the Newtok Clinic Site – Battery Charging Configuration Because the electrical loads at the Newtok Clinic Site are expected to be smaller than those at Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center and Emmonak Village Clinic, the output from the 10 kW turbine may at times exceed the site electrical load. When this occurs, if the system is designed as described above, electricity would be exported to the local utility’s grid. If the export of electricity from the wind generation system is not feasible or desired, it is recommended that a battery charging system be installed. In a battery charging configuration, excess electrical energy is stored in a battery bank on-site, rather than exported to the local utility grid. Due to the nature of the battery charging application, the peak capacity of the wind turbine is limited to 7.5 kW (rather than 10 kW as in a grid- paralleling application), and it is recommended that two of these wind turbines be installed, for a total of 15 kW nominal capacity. The wind turbine manufacturer recommends these systems for retrofit to existing diesel-only power systems, similar to what is found in Newtok. The systems are modular and can be expanded easily. As an alternative mode of operation, local grid power can be used to charge the battery bank. If the wind turbine output exceeds the site electrical loads and the batteries are already fully charged, electrical power can be diverted to provide heat to the site. If electricity is not available from the wind turbine or batteries, the system can automatically switch to receive power from the local utility grid. The wind turbine manufacturer considered here (Bergey Windpower, Inc.) uses Trojan T-105 batteries. Typically, a total of 40 batteries are connected in five parallel strings in series (48 Volts DC nominal). This battery bank will support the load for approximately one full day without wind energy input or grid backup power. Two electrical inverters would be provided, one for each wind turbine. The inverter would convert the electricity into 120 Volt AC power for use at the site, with enough capacity to start difficult motor loads. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 4-3 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 5. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 5.1 Preliminary Operation and Maintenance Plan The proposed wind generation facilities will be designed and implemented in order to ensure long-term sustainability. YKHC employees or other local persons will perform the construction, operation, and maintenance. Training will be provided as part of the implementation of wind generation. The operating costs of the wind turbines that will be installed are minimal, especially since maintenance will be provided in-house, by YKHC employees. The turbines, towers, controls, and other components will be selected to ensure a long lifetime. A wind farm installed in 1997 in Kotzebue, Alaska has proven the viability of wind technology in extreme weather conditions. YKHC employees will operate and maintain the entire project with training provided by the selected equipment vendor. Table 5.1 describes a typical maintenance schedule1. The annual maintenance costs have been estimated to be equivalent to 2.5% of the capital costs of the turbines themselves, for the purpose of establishing net annual savings amounts. This is approximately $2,000/year for the 50 kW units, and $600/year for the 10 kW units. This represents the high end of the range typically accepted by the wind industry and it agrees well with the estimate of 40 hours/year for each 50 kW obtained from Katzebue Electric Association. Table 5.1: Typical Maintenance Schedule for 50 kW Wind Turbine Generation Facility Monthly Every 6 Months Visually inspect turbine/site for Tower fasteners visual inspection with random obvious problems torque check Record meter & run time readings Check/clean electrical connections as needed Inspect dynamic brake components Check all accessible fasteners (emphasis on rotor) Yearly Look for loose fasteners Inspect yaw bearing/lock Inspect tip brakes needed) Re-calibrate control system (as Inspect generator-connections and fasteners Replace anemometers (if needed) Inspect gearbox for leaks Inspect main shaft Inspect rotary transformer Re-grease yaw bearing and yaw lock Inspect transmission vent for blockage 1 From Atlantic Orient Corporation “AOC 15/50 Wind Turbine Generator Customer Information Packet.” Similar or less rigorous maintenance schedule anticipated for the 10 kW capacity turbines. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 5-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 5.2 Preliminary Training and Infrastructure Development Plans If wind generation were implemented at YKHC sites, the selected equipment vendor will provide training on equipment operations and maintenance. A training program will consist of a formal on-site program, documentation support in the form of detailed manuals, and ongoing vendor technical support. Implementation of wind generation at YKHC would provide the opportunity for key personnel in YKHC and ANTHC to gain valuable experience in wind power technology and self-generation projects. This process of gaining experience has already begun over the course of this feasibility study. YKHC personnel will receive specific training and will experience the process that is required to implement these projects. This will position them as leaders in future energy-related projects. It is anticipated that the successful completion of this project will lead to more projects in YKHC region and other Alaska Native communities. As a result, the YKHC and ANTHC will have in-house expertise in the planning, financing, management, design, construction, and operation of these projects. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 5-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 6. OTHER RELATED ISSUES 6.1 Description of the Anticipated Economic, Environmental, Cultural, and Social Benefits to the Tribe(s) and Tribal Members as a Result of Implementation of Wind Generation The potential economic benefits to the tribal community will primarily derive from decreased energy costs. As stated previously, the City of Bethel and the surrounding communities are 100% reliant on power supplied by the local utilities. This power is derived from fossil fuels that have a very volatile market price. Budgeting for the communities’ energy needs is becoming increasingly difficult. Decreased energy costs due to the displacement of electricity purchases with self-generated electricity mean that the YKHC can focus more of its spending on its core mission, to provide quality health care to the Alaska Native communities it serves. An additional economic benefit to the tribal community is the employment that the construction, operation, and maintenance of this project will provide. It is anticipated that the wind generation facilities will be constructed using a local workforce, with supervision provided by the selected turbine manufacturer. YKHC personnel will also be trained to operate and maintain the turbines. The goal is for this to be a pilot project that will provide the YKHC with training and experience in wind energy projects. Successful completion of wind generation projects could lead to further projects throughout the YKHC service area and beyond, with YKHC positioned in a leadership role. The primary environmental benefits to the tribal community will derive from the reduction in emissions from the diesel-fired power plants that currently provide power. Power generation in the region is based primarily on diesel fuel technologies. Diesel fuel is considered one of the dirtier fossil fuels and is relatively high in emissions. EMCOR Energy & Technologies’ preliminary analysis of wind generation found significant potential for reduction of NOx, SO2, and CO2 emissions. NOx and SO2 are local pollutants that can cause respiratory health problems and contribute to acid rain. CO2 is the major contributor to anthropogenic global warming. Wind technology, on the other hand, does not deplete natural resources and is a clean technology with no combustion requirements when producing electricity. An additional environmental benefit is the reduced environmental hazards associated with fuel handling. This project will reduce the amount of diesel fuel that must be transported to the communities, thereby reducing the chance of accidental fuel spills. Diesel fuel is a toxic substance, and fuel spills pose a health threat to communities through direct contact and potential contamination of water and food supplies. The cultural and social benefits of this project include increased self-sustainability. The local communities place great importance on being able to meet all local needs through local resources. Commercial fishing is an important source of income in the region; over 200 residents hold commercial fishing permits, primarily for salmon and herring roe net fisheries. Subsistence activities contribute substantially to villagers’ diets, particularly salmon, freshwater fish, game birds, and berries. The existing dependence on imported or local fossil fuel power generation is contrary to this concept as it poses potential threats to the ecosystems the region relies so heavily upon. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 6-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 6.2 Plan for Assessing the Environmental Benefits and Impacts of the Project This feasibility study has quantified the reductions in emissions and fuel handling that will result from implementation of wind generation, and it has identified the environmental benefits resulting from those reductions. Anticipated benefits include improved local air quality and a reduction in potential fuel spills, resulting in reduced instances of respiratory illness and health problems arising from contaminated water and food supplies. Potential environmental impacts of the measure have also been addressed. Anticipated impacts include aesthetic and noise impacts, and potential for avian mortality. The aesthetic and noise impacts have been addressed by working closely with the local populations to ascertain the level of concern over these issues, and to identify ways to mitigate these impacts through proper siting and equipment selection. The avian mortality issue has been addressed by reviewing studies of potential impacts on birds, mitigation strategies, and by talking with experts about the local bird populations, migration patterns, etc. The goal has been to minimize and mitigate any possible negative impacts resulting from this project, during the feasibility study phase, and during the proposed construction and operation phases. These are discussed in more detail below. Environmental Impacts  Avian Interaction In determining at which sites to install the wind monitoring towers, a list of all YKHC sites in regions of potentially good wind resources was sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel ranked the sites as high concern, medium concern, or low concern for the Spectacled Eider and Stellar's Eider. The four selected sites are all low concern for these species. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that the wind monitoring activities and wind turbine projects would have no impact on these endangered species at these sites. It is recommended that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service be further consulted as specific plans to implement wind generation move forward. Please see Appendix B for copies of correspondence between the study authors and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service offices in Anchorage, including a list of YKHC sites in addition to the four discussed here and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's associated levels of concern for impacts on endangered species. Visual The wind turbines will be highly visible in all of the selected sites. They will be the tallest structures in the area. During the design and siting phases of any potential wind generation project, care should be taken to work with residents and stakeholders in the surrounding area to ensure that visual impacts are mitigated. The tower heights considered under this study are up to approximately 100 feet for the 50 kW wind turbines and up to approximately 120 feet for the 10 kW wind turbines. Noise Wind turbines do make a certain amount of noise, both from the movement of the mechanical parts and the wind blowing around the blades, tower, and guy wires. Manufacturer's test data for the 10 kW Bergey wind turbine report that from 20 to 50 feet away, the operating wind turbine creates approximately 5 dBA of noise above the 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 6-2 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study ambient, and that at distances of 100 feet away and greater, there was no additional noise created above the ambient. According to these tests, the idle wind turbine structure was found to create no noise above ambient levels. See Appendix D for a copy of the manufacturer's Noise Test Report. The 50 kW wind turbine manufactured by AOC and proposed for installation at the YKDRH has the potential to become a more significant noise impact. This is because it incorporates a “downwind” design, meaning that wind hits the tower and generator first and then passes over the turbine blades. On downwind designs, where the wind hits the tower first, its "shadow" can cause a thumping noise each time a blade passes behind the tower. A wind farm (meaning multiple wind turbines at a single site) is generally accepted to generate between 35-45 dBA at a distance of 350 meters [ref: The Scottish Office, Environment Department, Planning Advice Note, PAN 45, Annes A: Wind Power, A.27. Renewable Energy Technologies, August 1994]. This range can be used as an upper limit guideline for the expected noise generated from the single 50 kW unit wind generation facility proposed at YKDRH, which is at the smaller end of the spectrum of wind turbines available in the market. A noise analysis can be done based on the operating characteristics of the specific wind turbine that will be used, the type of terrain in which the project will be located, and the distance to nearby residences. Particular attention will need to be paid if residences are sheltered from the wind. Also, pre-construction noise surveys can be conducted to ascertain the normally-occurring background noise levels at the site, and to determine later how much, if anything, the wind project has added to those levels. The most common method for dealing with a potential noise issue is to simply require a "setback," or minimum distance between any of the wind turbines in the project and the nearest residence. The size of a setback that is sufficient to reduce the sound level to a regulatory threshold will need to be determined. Noise at the YKDRH site and the Newtok site is not expected to be a problem because both sites are near the city power plants, which create a significant amount of noise that would drown out the noise of the wind turbines. The McCann Center site and the Emmonak site are located near residential buildings, and noise should be a consideration in equipment selection and siting. Environmental Benefits Many of the persons served by YKHC rely on traditional subsistence activities such as fishing and hunting for some part of their livelihood. Changes in the environment due to increased CO2 and other emissions resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels threatens many of these traditional activities. Implementation of clean, renewable wind generation will supplant the use of electricity that is typically generated by burning diesel fuels in this region. Diesel fuels are 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 6-3 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study considered to be especially "dirty" sources of combustion, generating high levels of emissions per unit of electricity generated when compared with other fossil fuels, such as natural gas. The quantity of reduction of harmful emissions that would result from implementation of wind generation at these sites has been estimated and can be found in Table 3.3 a,b. These reductions in NOx, SOx, and CO2 given off to the atmosphere would be realized at existing power plants where electricity is currently being generated. In addition to the reduction in airborne emissions associated with combustion of fossil fuels, implementation of wind generation will also reduce the amount of fuel that needs to be transported to the existing power plants. This reduction in fuel handling requirements will likely result in a drop in the occurrence of spill accidents, which are another path by which harmful substances reach the local environment. Non-quantifiable Benefits  Increased Self-sufficiency A primary goal of YKHC and the Alaskan Native peoples it serves is greater self- sufficiency. Currently, YKHC is dependent on local utilities to provide power; oil companies to drill, refine and transport fuel to the local utilities; and, in most cases, the state government to subsidize the cost of electricity through the Power Cost Equalization Program. Using wind power produced with YKHC-owned wind turbines will increase the self-sufficiency and independence of the YKHC organization and these Native peoples. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 6-4 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study 7. CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Recommendation It is recommended that wind turbine generation facilities be erected at the two sites with the lowest simple payback periods: 50 kW at YKDRH and 10 kW or 15 kW at Newtok Subregional Clinic. Payback periods are over 10 years, but the projects are justified based on decreased emissions and increased employment opportunities discussed in previous sections. In addition, any potential future increases in the cost of fossil fuels will make the electricity generated by wind turbines more valuable, and thus simple payback periods will decrease. 7.2 Moving Forward with Wind Generation Implementation – Roles, Responsibilities, and Capabilities YKHC will be the point of contact for this project. Tom Humphrey, P.E., of YKHC, is the project manager. YKHC has been responsible for wind monitoring activities, including procuring anemometers through the NREL Native American Anemometer Load Program, installing anemometers, downloading data, and returning anemometers. YKHC has a technical staff of approximately 50, including mechanical and electrical engineers, technicians, electricians, and maintenance personnel. ANTHC has been the primary advisor for YKHC, with EMCOR Energy & Technologies acting as the primary technical consultant to YKHC. ANTHC has a technical staff of approximately 200, consisting primarily of mechanical, electrical, and civil engineers, technicians, electricians and maintenance personnel. The specific roles of the ANTHC staff are undetermined at this time, but it is expected that ANTHC will provide programmatic and engineering support. Mr. Gary Kuhn, P.E., of ANTHC has coordinated and will continue to coordinate all ANTHC activities. Mr. Kuhn will lend YKHC the required technical assistance and resources to ensure a successful project outcome and promote renewable resource utilization as a replacement for fossil fuel energy production. Mr. Kuhn is a registered Electrical Engineer in the State of Alaska and has attained proficiency in power generation, distribution, demand-side management and alternative energy efficiency project design, construction and project and program management, and healthcare environmental engineering. EMCOR Energy & Technologies has helped conduct and oversee the data collection, analysis and reporting activities associated with this feasibility study and conceptual design. EMCOR Energy & Technologies is a leader in the analysis, design, and implementation of energy efficient systems and efficient power generation. It has provided energy engineering services to ANTHC and YKHC in the past and currently is under contract with ANTHC to provide energy engineering services. Michael K. J. Anderson, P.E., Chief Engineer of EMCOR Energy & Technologies, will be responsible for overseeing engineering activities. Lance C. Kincaid, P.E., has been the EMCOR Energy & Technologies project manager and lead engineer for this feasibility study. 1611.01/YKHC Wind Study Report – Final.doc 7-1 Final Report Rev. 1, August 20, 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies APPENDICES Appendix A Copy of Executive Order 13123 Appendix B Correspondence Between Study Authors and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Appendix C Project Calculations Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 7/28/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 1 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Project Summary YKHC Wind Generation Feasibility Study Project Summary Summary of Proposed Wind Generation Projects Location Site Annual Electricity Use Site Peak Demand Average Cost of Electricity (Not Incl. Demand) Number of Wind Turbines Type/Model Nominal Turbine Rating Tower Type Hub Height Predicted Availability Predicted Average Wind Speed Predicted 12-month Production Predicted Time Turbines Generating Percentage of Site Load Generated by Wind Predicted Net Annual Cost Savings Predicted Construction Cost Predicted Unit Construction Cost Simple Payback Period Emissions Reductions NOX SOXCO2Bethel Main Hospital Bethel McCann Center Emmonak Village Clinic Newtok Village Clinic kWh4,033,600 kWh71,280 122,157 kWh 122,000 kWh kW688 kW19 38 kW 38 kW /kWh$0.168 /kWh$0.174 $0.155 /kWh $0.271 /kWh 1 1 1 1 Atlantic Orient AOC 15/50 Bergey BWC Excel-S Bergey BWC Excel-S Bergey BWC Excel-S kW50 kW10 10 kW 10 kW Lattice Lattice Lattice Lattice 26.5 m 30.5 m 24 m 37 m 24 m 37 m 24 m 37 m 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 11.63 mph 11.87 mph 10.94 mph 11.63 mph 13.8 mph 14.68 mph 14 mph 15 mph 79,733 kWh 84,507 kWh 8,338 kWh 10,000 kWh 15,362 kWh 17,948 kWh 15,400 kWh 17,900 kWh 57.2% 57.2% 82.8% 82.8% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 2.0% 2.1% 11.7% 14.0% 12.6% 14.7% 12.6% 14.7% $11,385 $12,186 $829 $1,117 $1,767 $2,169 $3,500 $4,200 $164,082 $169,002 $69,175 $71,512 $69,175 $71,512 $69,175 $71,512 $3,282 /kW $3,380 /kW $6,918 /kW $7,151 /kW $6,918 /kW $7,151 /kW $6,918 /kW $7,151 /kW 14.4 yrs 13.9 yrs 83.5 yrs 64 yrs 39.1 yrs 33.0 yrs 19.8 yrs 17.0 yrs 38 lb/yr 41 lb/yr 4 lb/yr 5 lb/yr 7 lb/yr 9 lb/yr 7 lb/yr 9 lb/yr 150 lb/yr 159 lb/yr 16 lb/yr 19 lb/yr 29 lb/yr 34 lb/yr 29 lb/yr 34 lb/yr 46,262 lb/yr 49,032 lb/yr 4,838 lb/yr 5,802 lb/yr 8,913 lb/yr 10,414 lb/yr 8,935 lb/yr 10,386 lb/yr Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 2 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Utility Bethel YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Utility Data for Bethel Electric Utility Bethel Utilities Corporation, Inc. * 0.139 MMBtu/gallon $4,033,600 $601 $425,141 $197,591 $251,992 $240 $20,481 $895,445 $69,418 $9,649 $143,397 $181 $1,321,205 $13,212 $162,466 $12.30 Cost of Cost of 80% of Power Power Peak Adjustment Customer Regulatory Energy Demand Adjustment Regulatory Waste Waste kWh Billed Demand Energy Demand Surcharge Charge Cost Rate Rate Rate Cost Rate Oil Oil* Oil Rate Waste Heat Heat Heat Cost Oil Rate Month (kWh) (kW) Charge ($) Charge ($) ($) ($) Charge ($) Total ($) ($/kWh) ($/kW) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) (gallons) (MBtu) Oil Cost ($) ($/MBtu) (10k x Btu) (MBtu) ($) ($/MBtu) Jan-04 312,000 550 $32,884.80 $12,792.96 $23,618 $20.00 $122.30 $69,438.46 $0.1054 $23.24 $0.0757 $0.000392 4,999 695 $10,943 $15.75 162,315 1,623 $20,298 $12.51 Feb-04 308,800 566 $32,547.52 $15,712.16 $20,196 $20.00 $121.05 $68,596.25 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0654 $0.000392 4,948 688 $10,831 $15.75 134,360 1,344 $16,802 $12.51 Mar-04 302,400 536 $31,872.96 $14,879.36 $19,777 $20.00 $118.54 $66,667.82 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0654 $0.000392 11,069 1,539 $24,230 $15.75 134,653 1,347 $16,839 $12.51 Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Total 923,200 $97,305.28 $43,384.48 $63,590.88 $60.00 $361.89 $204,702.53 $0.1054 $0.0689 21,016 2,921 46,004 $15.75 431,328 4,313 53,939 $12.51 Jan-03 323,200 573 $34,065.28 $15,906.48 $19,812.16 $20.00 $2,094.12 $71,898.04 Feb-03 299,200 548 $31,535.68 $15,212.48 $18,340.96 $20.00 $1,953.27 $67,062.39 Mar-03 332,800 589 $35,077.12 $16,350.64 $20,400.64 $20.00 $2,155.45 $74,003.85 Apr-03 324,800 595 $34,233.92 $16,517.20 $19,910.24 $20.00 $2,120.44 $72,801.80 May-03 345,600 657 $36,426.24 $18,238.32 $21,185.28 $20.00 $2,276.10 $78,145.94 Jun-03 379,200 688 $39,967.68 $19,098.88 $23,244.96 $20.00 $2,469.95 $84,801.47 Jul-03 380,800 662 $40,136.32 $18,377.12 $22,924.16 $20.00 $2,443.73 $83,901.33 Aug-03 396,800 676 $41,822.72 $18,765.76 $23,887.36 $20.00 $2,534.88 $87,030.72 Sep-03 320,000 660 $33,728.00 $18,321.60 $19,264.00 $20.00 $2,140.01 $73,473.61 Oct-03 339,200 563 $35,751.68 $15,628.88 $20,419.84 $20.00 $2,154.61 $73,975.01 Nov-03 323,200 567 $34,065.28 $15,739.92 $19,456.64 $20.00 $2,078.46 $71,360.30 Dec-03 300,800 487 $31,704.32 $13,519.12 $18,108.16 $20.00 $1,900.55 $65,252.15 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006479 8,600 1,195 $4,824 $4.04 167,944 1,679 $19,129 $11.39 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006528 8,600 1,195 $4,824 $4.04 138,349 1,383 $15,759 $11.39 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006477 8,600 1,195 $4,824 $4.04 143,375 1,434 $16,331 $11.39 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006528 6,740 937 $13,379 $14.28 118,591 1,186 $13,508 $11.39 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006586 2,500 348 $4,963 $14.28 95,898 959 $10,923 $11.39 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0613 $0.006514 5,300 737 $10,733 $14.57 53,904 539 $6,378 $11.83 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006417 8,400 1,168 $17,951 $15.37 50,883 509 $6,291 $12.36 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006388 2,800 389 $7,180 $18.45 61,659 617 $7,623 $12.36 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006688 2,800 389 $6,180 $15.88 83,585 836 $10,611 $12.69 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006352 5,600 778 $12,902 $16.58 124,552 1,246 $15,576 $12.51 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006431 7,450 1,036 $17,165 $16.58 128,935 1,289 $16,124 $12.51 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0602 $0.006318 6,812 947 $6,940 $7.33 171,870 1,719 $21,493 $12.51 Total 4,065,600 $428,514.24 $201,676.40 $246,954.40 $240.00 $26,321.55 $903,706.59 $0.1054 $0.0607 $0.006474 74,202 10,314 111,865 $10.85 1,339,545 13,395 159,746 $11.93 Jan-02 337,600 599 10,345 1,438 $20,535 $14.28 112,531 1,125 $12,818 $11.39 Feb-02 342,400 627 5,900 820 $11,712 $14.28 136,916 1,369 $15,595 $11.39 Mar-02 323,200 572 2,430 338 $4,824 $14.28 171,961 1,720 $19,587 $11.39 Apr-02 May-02 Jun-02 Jul-02 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 337,600 Nov-02 342,400 Dec-02 323,200 Total 18,675 2,596 37,071 $14.28 421,408 4,214 48,000 $11.39 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 3 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Utility Bethel YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Utility Data for Bethel Electric Utility Bethel Utilities Corporation, Inc. * 0.139 MMBtu/gallon $4,033,600 $601 $425,141 $197,591 $251,992 $240 $20,481 $895,445 $69,418 $9,649 $143,397 $181 $1,321,205 $13,212 $162,466 $12.30 Cost of Cost of 80% of Power Power Peak Adjustment Customer Regulatory Energy Demand Adjustment Regulatory Waste Waste kWh Billed Demand Energy Demand Surcharge Charge Cost Rate Rate Rate Cost Rate Oil Oil* Oil Rate Waste Heat Heat Heat Cost Oil Rate Month (kWh) (kW) Charge ($) Charge ($) ($) ($) Charge ($) Total ($) ($/kWh) ($/kW) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) (gallons) (MBtu) Oil Cost ($) ($/MBtu) (10k x Btu) (MBtu) ($) ($/MBtu) 3,916,800 656 Jan-01 297,600 528.00 Feb-01 286,400 524.80 Mar-01 307,200 544.00 Apr-01 May-01 Jun-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 Sep-01 Oct-01 Nov-01 Dec-01 Total 891,200 Jan-00 337,600 576 Feb-00 300,800 560 Mar-00 326,400 592 Apr-00 323,200 592 May-00 320,000 608 Jun-00 361,600 656 Jul-00 377,600 656 Aug-00 366,400 624 Sep-00 302,400 624 Oct-00 337,600 560 Nov-00 300,800 528 Dec-00 336,000 544 Total 3,990,400 Most Recent 12 Months Total Electricity Use 4,033,600 Total Cost $895,444.84 Average Cost $0.2220 Total Energy and Fuel Costs $677,132.96 Average Energy and Fuel Cost $0.1679 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 7/7/2004 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 4 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bethel Monthly kWh Monthly Electricity Use 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 Electricity Use (kWh) Oct-02Nov-02Dec-02Jan-03Feb-03Mar-03Apr-03May-03Jun-03Jul-03Aug-03Sep-03Oct-03Nov-03Dec-03Jan-04Feb-04Mar-04 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 5 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Utility Kasayuli YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Utility Data for Kasayuli Inhalant Center Electric Utility Bethel Utilities Corporation, Inc. Cost of Cost of 80% of Power Power Peak Adjustment Customer Regulatory Energy Demand Adjustment Regulatory kWh Billed Demand Energy Demand Surcharge Charge Cost Rate Rate Rate Cost Rate Month (kWh) (kW) Charge ($) Charge ($) ($) ($) Charge ($) Total ($) ($/kWh) ($/kW) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) Jan-04 6,160 19.2 $649.26 $533.04 $466.31 $20.00 $2.41 $1,671.03 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0757 $0.000392 Feb-04 5,800 19.2 $611.32 $515.27 $379.32 $20.00 $2.27 $1,528.18 $0.1054 $26.84 $0.0654 $0.000392 Mar-04 6,120 19.2 $645.05 $497.50 $400.25 $20.00 $2.40 $1,565.20 $0.1054 $25.91 $0.0654 $0.000392 Apr-04 5,680 19.2 $598.67 $533.04 $374.31 $20.00 $2.23 $1,528.25 $0.1054 $27.76 $0.0659 $0.000392 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Total 23,760 $2,504.30 $2,078.85 $1,620.19 $80.00 $9.31 $6,292.66 $0.1054 $0.0682 $0.000392 5,940 $7,512.91 $6,236.55 $4,860.58 $240.00 $27.94 Most Recent 12 Months (Extrapolated from 4 months data) Total Electricity Use 71,280 Total Cost $18,877.98 Average Cost $0.2648 Total Energy and Fuel Costs $12,373.49 Average Energy and Fuel Cost $0.1736 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 6 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Utility Emmonak YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Utility Data for Emmonak - 1201612 Electric Utility Alaska Village Electric Cooperative $13.94 0.14 0.14 0.06 122156.5 38.0 Customer Energy Demand Cost for Cost for Cost for Total kWh Billed Demand Energy Demand Fuel Cost Charge Sales Tax Rate Rate Fuel Rate Sales Tax 1st 500 kWh 501- kWh Energy Month (kWh) (kW) Charge ($) Charge ($) ($) ($) ($) Total ($) ($/kWh) ($/kW) ($/kWh) (%) kWh 1500 1501+ Cost Jan-04 10,495 32.3 $749.70 $1,453.50 $864.79 $45.00 $93.39 $3,206.38 $0.0714 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $539.70 $749.70 Feb-04 9,986 32.3 $719.16 $1,453.50 $822.85 $45.00 $91.22 $3,131.72 $0.0720 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $509.16 $719.16 Mar-04 Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04 Total 20,481 $1,468.86 $2,907.00 $1,687.63 $90.00 $184.60 $6,338.10 $0.0717 $0.0824 3.00% Jan-03 10,453 29.8 $747.18 $1,341.00 $1,174.92 $45.00 $99.24 $3,407.34 Feb-03 9,207 31.0 $672.42 $0.00 $1,034.87 $45.00 $52.57 $1,804.86 Mar-03 9,548 29.5 $692.85 $0.00 $924.82 $45.00 $49.88 $1,712.55 Apr-03 9,888 28.0 $713.28 $0.00 $814.77 $45.00 $47.19 $1,620.24 May-03 12,295 38.0 $857.70 $0.00 $1,013.11 $45.00 $57.47 $1,973.28 Jun-03 10,654 32.0 $759.24 $0.00 $877.89 $45.00 $50.46 $1,732.59 Jul-03 9,542 32.3 $692.52 $1,453.50 $786.26 $45.00 $89.32 $3,066.60 Aug-03 10,334 33.9 $740.04 $1,525.50 $851.52 $45.00 $94.86 $3,256.92 Sep-03 9,071 32.3 $664.26 $1,453.50 $747.45 $45.00 $87.31 $2,997.52 Oct-03 10,204 32.3 $732.24 $1,453.50 $840.81 $45.00 $92.15 $3,163.70 Nov-03 10,006 32.3 $720.36 $1,453.50 $824.49 $45.00 $91.30 $3,134.66 Dec-03 10,134 32.3 $728.04 $1,453.50 $835.04 $45.00 $91.85 $3,153.43 $0.0715 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $537.18 $747.18 $0.0730 $0.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $462.42 $672.42 $0.0726 $0.00 $0.0969 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $482.85 $692.85 $0.0721 $0.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $503.28 $713.28 $0.0698 $0.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $647.70 $857.70 $0.0713 $0.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $549.24 $759.24 $0.0726 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $482.52 $692.52 $0.0716 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $530.04 $740.04 $0.0732 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $454.26 $664.26 $0.0718 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $522.24 $732.24 $0.0720 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $510.36 $720.36 $0.0718 $45.00 $0.0824 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $518.04 $728.04 Total 121,336 $8,720.13 $10,134.00 $10,725.95 $540.00 $903.60 $31,023.68 $0.0719 $0.0884 3.00% Jan-02 9,694 31.00 $701.64 $1,395.00 $893.79 $45.00 $91.06 $3,126.49 Feb-02 7,749 27.20 $584.94 $1,224.00 $714.46 $45.00 $77.05 $2,645.45 Mar-02 8,754 27.70 $645.24 $1,246.50 $983.95 $45.00 $87.62 $3,008.31 Apr-02 8,147 26.35 $608.82 $1,185.75 $915.72 $45.00 $82.66 $2,837.95 May-02 9,336 31.50 $680.16 $1,417.50 $1,049.37 $45.00 $95.76 $3,287.79 Jun-02 9,411 31.20 $684.66 $1,404.00 $1,057.80 $45.00 $95.74 $3,287.20 Jul-02 9,534 33.90 $692.04 $1,525.50 $1,071.62 $45.00 $100.02 $3,434.18 Aug-02 8,476 28.90 $628.56 $1,300.50 $952.70 $45.00 $87.80 $3,014.56 Sep-02 8,235 28.05 $614.10 $1,262.25 $925.61 $45.00 $85.41 $2,932.37 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 10,143 32.40 $728.58 $1,458.00 $1,140.07 $45.00 $101.15 $3,472.80 $0.0724 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $491.64 $701.64 $0.0755 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $374.94 $584.94 $0.0737 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $435.24 $645.24 $0.0747 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $398.82 $608.82 $0.0729 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $470.16 $680.16 $0.0728 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $474.66 $684.66 $0.0726 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $482.04 $692.04 $0.0742 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $418.56 $628.56 $0.0746 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $404.10 $614.10 $0.0718 $45.00 $0.1124 3.00% $70.00 $140.00 $518.58 $728.58 Total 89,479 $6,568.74 $13,419.00 $9,705.09 $450.00 $904.27 $31,047.10 $0.0734 $0.1085 3.00% $700.00 $1,400.00 $4,468.74 $6,568.74 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 7 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Utility Emmonak YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Utility Data for Emmonak - 1201612 Electric Utility Alaska Village Electric Cooperative $13.94 0.14 0.14 0.06 122156.5 38.0 Customer Energy Demand Cost for Cost for Cost for Total kWh Billed Demand Energy Demand Fuel Cost Charge Sales Tax Rate Rate Fuel Rate Sales Tax 1st 500 kWh 501- kWh Energy Month (kWh) (kW) Charge ($) Charge ($) ($) ($) ($) Total ($) ($/kWh) ($/kW) ($/kWh) (%) kWh 1500 1501+ Cost Jan-01 5,842 22.10 $470.52 $994.50 $486.64 $45.00 $59.90 $2,056.56 $0.0805 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Feb-01 6,584 26.60 $515.04 $1,197.00 $548.45 $45.00 $69.16 $2,374.65 $0.0782 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Mar-01 7,201 23.50 $552.06 $1,057.50 $599.84 $45.00 $67.63 $2,322.03 $0.0767 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Apr-01 8,209 26.20 $612.54 $1,179.00 $683.81 $45.00 $75.61 $2,595.96 $0.0746 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% May-01 6,658 22.40 $519.48 $1,008.00 $554.61 $45.00 $63.81 $2,190.90 $0.0780 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Jun-01 5,652 25.40 $459.12 $1,143.00 $470.81 $45.00 $63.54 $2,181.47 $0.0812 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Jul-01 6,692 27.80 $521.52 $1,251.00 $557.44 $45.00 $71.25 $2,446.21 $0.0779 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Aug-01 6,538 24.60 $512.28 $1,107.00 $544.62 $45.00 $66.27 $2,275.17 $0.0784 $45.00 $0.0833 3.00% Sep-01 6,055 24.10 $483.30 $1,084.50 $558.27 $45.00 $65.13 $2,236.20 $0.0798 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% Oct-01 9,331 29.50 $679.86 $1,327.50 $860.32 $45.00 $87.38 $3,000.06 $0.0729 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% Nov-01 9,779 30.90 $706.74 $1,390.50 $901.62 $45.00 $91.32 $3,135.18 $0.0723 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% Dec-01 8,678 25.80 $640.68 $1,161.00 $800.11 $45.00 $79.40 $2,726.19 $0.0738 $45.00 $0.0922 3.00% Total 87,219 $6,673.14 $13,900.50 $7,566.54 $540.00 $860.40 $29,540.58 $0.0765 $0.0868 3.00% Jan-00 Feb-00 Mar-00 Apr-00 May-00 Jun-00 Jul-00 Aug-00 Sep-00 Oct-00 Nov-00 3,166 $766.52 $201.67 $5.00 $29.20 $1,002.39 $0.2421 $0.0637 3.00% Dec-00 7,437 26.50 $1,706.14 $1,192.50 $473.74 $45.00 $68.32 $3,485.70 $0.2294 $45.00 $0.0637 2.00% Total 10,603 $2,472.66 $1,192.50 $675.41 $50.00 $97.52 $4,488.09 $0.2332 $0.0637 2.22% Most Recent 12 Months Total Electricity Use 122,157 Total Cost $32,149.59 Average Cost $0.2632 Total Energy and Fuel Costs $18,973.19 Average Energy and Fuel Cost $0.1553 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 7/7/2004 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 8 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emmonak Monthly kWh Monthly Electricity Use 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Electricity Use (kWh) Dec-02Jan-03Feb-03Mar-03Apr-03May-03Jun-03Jul-03Aug-03Sep-03Oct-03Nov-03Dec-03Jan-04Feb-04 Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 8/24/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 1 of 1 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.081704 Sheet: Utility Newtok YKHC Wind Feasibility Study Historical Electric Data Emmonak Building 10,000 square feet Newtok Village Clinic New Newtok Clinic 2,500 square feet Estimated Newtok Annual Heating Fuel Use 50,000 gallonsElectric Utility Ungusraq Power Co. Heating Value of Fuel 140,000 Btu/gallon HHV Predicted for New Clinic EstimatedEstimatedEstimatedPeak Base Avg Base MonthlyEstimatedEnergy PCE EnergyElectricElectricElectricEstimatedEstimatedFuelAvg Fuel ElectricityCharge DiscountTotal Bill RatePCE Rate Total Rate Load,Load,Use,Fuel Use Fuel Use EquivalentEquivalentMonth Year Use (kWh) ($) ($) ($) ($/kWh) ($/kWh)($/kWh)(kW) (kW) (kWh) Profile (MBtu) (kWh) Rate (kW) Jan 2001 763 $335.72 $244.16 $91.56 $0.4400 $0.3200 $0.1200 9.5 3.5 2,604 15% 1,050 307,440 413.2Feb 2001 741 $326.04 $237.12 $88.92 $0.4400 $0.3200 $0.1200 9.5 3.7 2,486 13% 910 266,448 396.5Mar 2001 839 $369.16 $221.33 $147.83 $0.4400 $0.2638 $0.1762 9.5 3.2 2,381 9% 630 184,464 247.9Apr 2001 738 $324.72 $194.68 $130.04 $0.4400 $0.2638 $0.1762 9.5 3.4 2,448 8% 560 163,968 227.7May 2001 689 $303.16 $181.76 $121.40 $0.4400 $0.2638 $0.1762 9.5 4.1 3,050 7% 490 143,472 192.8Jun 2001 553 $243.32 $107.95 $135.37 $0.4400 $0.1952 $0.2448 9.5 3.7 2,664 5% 350 102,480 142.3Jul 2001 600 $264.00 $145.56 $118.44 $0.4400 $0.2426 $0.1974 9.5 3.2 2,381 4% 280 81,984 110.2Aug 2001 622 $273.68 $154.88 $118.80 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 9.5 3.5 2,604 3% 210 61,488 82.6Sep 2001 551 $242.44 $137.20 $105.24 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 9.5 3.2 2,304 5% 350 102,480 142.3Oct 2001 684 $300.96 $170.32 $130.64 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 9.5 3.4 2,530 8% 560 163,968 220.4Nov 2001 704 $309.76 $175.30 $134.46 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 9.5 3.5 2,520 10% 700 204,960 284.7Dec 2001 711$312.84 $177.04 $135.80 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 9.5 3.4 2,530 13% 910 266,448 358.1Total 8,195 $3,605.80 $2,147.30 $1,458.50 $0.4400 $0.2620 $0.1780Average Demand 0.9 kWEnergyPCEElectricityCharge DiscountTotal Bill Month Year Use (kWh) ($) ($) ($)Jan 2002 705 $310.20 $175.55 $134.65 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 Feb 2002 733 $322.52 $158.77 $163.75 $0.4400 $0.2166 $0.2234 Mar 2002 764 $336.16 $165.48 $170.68 $0.4400 $0.2166 $0.2234 Apr 2002 668 $293.92 $144.68 $149.24 $0.4400 $0.2166 $0.2234 May 2002 652 $286.88 $141.22 $145.66 $0.4400 $0.2166 $0.2234 Jun 2002 606 $266.64 $108.29 $158.35 $0.4400 $0.1787 $0.2613 Jul 2002 532 $234.08 $120.98 $113.10 $0.4400 $0.2274 $0.2126 Aug 2002 530 $233.20 $142.96 $90.24 $0.4400 $0.2697 $0.1703 Sep 2002 545 $239.80 $146.50 $93.30 $0.4400 $0.2688 $0.1712 Oct 2002 693 $374.22 $186.28 $187.94 $0.5400 $0.2688 $0.2712 Nov 2002 422 $227.88 $113.43 $114.45 $0.5400 $0.2688 $0.2712 Dec 2001 711 $312.84 $177.04 $135.80 $0.4400 $0.2490 $0.1910 Total 7,561 $3,438.34 $1,781.18 $1,657.16 $0.4547 $0.2356 $0.2192 Average Demand 0.9 kWMost Recent Typical DayElectric HeatAverage Rate $0.5400 Hour Load Load PCE $0.2688 1 0.75 8.75 Rate w/ PCE $0.2712 2 1 8.53 1.3 8.2 4 1.5 85 1.8 7.7 6 2 7.57 3.3 6.2 8 4.5 59 5.8 3.7 10 7 2.511 8.3 1.2 12 9.5 013 8.3 1.2 14 7 2.515 5.8 3.7 16 4.5 517 3.3 6.2 18 2 7.519 1.8 7.7 20 1.6 7.9 21 1.4 8.1 22 1.2 8.3 23 1 8.524 0.75 8.75 AvgkWhCopyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 3.685.4 142.60.374561415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 By: LCK Check: TTG Page 10 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Binned Wind Data Binned Weather Data Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 ref: Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States, Appendix A, Vertical Adjustment Actual Data Adjusted to Tower Height (meters) Windspeed at 20 meters Bin Distribution - Actual Data Bin Distribution - Extrapolated to Full Year 24 26.5 30 30.5 37 Bin Windspeed Bin Hours (hrs/yr) Bin Hours (hrs/yr) Windspeed Windspeed Windspeed Windspeed Windspeed (mph) (mph) Bethel Kasayuli Emmonak Newtok Bethel Kasayuli Emmonak Newtok Bethel TMY (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph) 0 - 1 0 76 110 50 67 82 120 53 256 38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 - 3 2 281 295 161 148 301 323 172 565 35 2.05 2.08 2.12 2.12 2.18 3 - 5 4 654 623 331 151 701 682 354 576 202 4.11 4.16 4.24 4.25 4.37 5 - 7 6 1,003 993 651 172 1,075 1,087 696 657 726 6.16 6.25 6.36 6.37 6.55 7 - 9 8 1,236 1,300 961 229 1,325 1,423 1,027 874 860 8.21 8.33 8.48 8.50 8.73 9 - 11 10 1,255 1,290 1,081 250 1,346 1,412 1,156 954 1580 10.26 10.41 10.60 10.62 10.92 11 - 13 12 1,035 1,082 1,080 273 1,110 1,184 1,155 1,042 787 12.32 12.49 12.72 12.75 13.10 13 - 15 14 791 797 1,013 239 848 872 1,083 912 1090 14.37 14.57 14.83 14.87 15.29 15 - 17 16 559 563 814 239 599 616 870 912 649 16.42 16.66 16.95 16.99 17.47 17 - 19 18 414 386 568 193 444 423 607 737 831 18.47 18.74 19.07 19.12 19.65 19 - 21 20 306 225 440 133 328 246 470 508 551 20.53 20.82 21.19 21.24 21.84 21 - 23 22 237 140 341 92 254 153 365 351 261 22.58 22.90 23.31 23.37 24.02 23 - 25 24 161 90 221 51 173 99 236 195 370 24.63 24.98 25.43 25.49 26.20 25 - 27 26 78 54 165 25 84 59 176 95 225 26.69 27.07 27.55 27.62 28.39 27 - 29 28 37 25 125 16 40 27 134 61 209 28.74 29.15 29.67 29.74 30.57 29 - 31 30 26 16 85 8 28 18 91 31 96 30.79 31.23 31.79 31.86 32.76 31 - 33 32 7 9 40 1 8 10 43 4 116 32.84 33.31 33.91 33.99 34.94 33 - 35 34 7 1 29 4 8 1 31 15 30 34.90 35.39 36.03 36.11 37.12 35 - 37 36 5 2 16 4 5 2 17 15 41 36.95 37.48 38.15 38.24 39.31 37 - 39 38 2 2 7 0 2 2 8 0 18 39.00 39.56 40.27 40.36 41.49 39 - 41 40 0 0 8 0 0 0 9 0 30 41.06 41.64 42.39 42.49 43.67 41 - 43 42 0 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 11 43.11 43.72 44.50 44.61 45.86 43 - 45 44 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 45.16 45.80 46.62 46.73 48.04 45 - 47 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 47.21 47.89 48.74 48.86 50.23 47 - 49 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49.27 49.97 50.86 50.98 52.41 8,170 8,004 8,195 2,295 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 Avg Speed 11.2 10.7 13.4 12.1 14.5 12.1 mph 5.41 m/s Average Monthly Data Month 1 11.86 12.94 15.88 5.30 5.79 7.10 2 11.75 10.71 14.72 5.25 4.79 6.58 3 12.8 11.82 15.13 5.72 5.29 6.77 4 11.26 10.76 13.63 9.28 5.03 4.81 6.09 4.15 5 9.75 9.65 11.29 10.83 4.36 4.32 5.05 4.84 6 9.09 9.14 10.8 11.99 4.06 4.09 4.83 5.36 7 10.95 9.93 12.48 13.23 4.90 4.44 5.58 5.92 8 9.15 8.66 10.35 3.45 4.09 3.87 4.63 1.54 9 9.83 9.18 11.89 4.40 4.10 5.32 10 10.86 10.55 12.9 4.86 4.72 5.77 11 10.73 11.86 13.59 4.80 5.30 6.08 12 8.63 10.77 11.21 3.86 4.82 5.01 Latitude 60.8 N 62.8 N 60.8 N 60.9 N 60.8 N 62.8 N 60.8 N 60.9 N Longitude 161.8 W 164.5 W 161.8 W 164.6 W 161.8 W 164.5 W 161.8 W 164.6 W Avg Wind Speeds (mph) Avg Wind Speeds (m/s) Bethel Emmonak Kasayuli Newtok Bethel Emmonak Kasayuli Newtok Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 7/7/2004 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 11 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bin Figure YKHC Annual Binned Measured Wind Data 2003-2004 Hours per Year 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Measured Wind Speed (mph) Bethel Kasayuli Emmonak Newtok Bethel TMY Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 12 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bethel Wind Turbine 26.5m Yukon Kuskokwim Hospital - 80 ft tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Atlantic Orient Corporation's (AOC) 15/50 wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1679 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 50 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 25.3 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 10.2 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $2,000 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 82 0 0 $0 1-3 2.08 301 0 0 $0 3-5 4.16 701 0 0 $0 5-7 6.25 1,075 0 0 $0 7-9 8.33 1,325 0 0 $0 9-11 10.41 1,346 1 716 $120 11-13 12.49 1,110 6 5,819 $977 13-15 14.57 848 12 9,854 $1,654 15-17 16.66 599 19 11,098 $1,863 17-19 18.74 444 29 12,154 $2,040 19-21 20.82 328 37 11,414 $1,916 21-23 22.90 254 44 10,578 $1,776 23-25 24.98 173 51 8,369 $1,405 25-27 27.07 84 56 4,422 $742 27-29 29.15 40 60 2,265 $380 29-31 31.23 28 63 1,666 $280 31-33 33.31 8 64 456 $77 33-35 35.39 8 65 460 $77 35-37 37.48 5 65 333 $56 37-39 39.56 2 64 128 $21 39-41 41.64 0 63 0 $0 41-43 43.72 0 64 0 $0 43-45 45.80 0 60 0 $0 45-47 47.89 0 11 0 $0 47-49 49.97 0 0 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 79,733 $13,385 Net Annual Savings $11,385 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 13 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bethel Wind Turbine 26.5m Yukon Kuskokwim Hospital - 80 ft tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Wind Turbine (AOC 15/50) 1 $80,000 Ea. $80,000 (11) Shipping 1 $15,000 Ea. $15,000 (12) Foundation 1 $32,000 Ea. $32,000 (11) Crane Rental 1 $3,200 Ea. $3,200 (12) Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, etc.) 1 $3,200 Ea. $3,200 (11) Subtotal $133,400 Subcontractor Adder Engineering Adder 15% 8% $20,010 $10,672 (12) (12) Total $164,082 Reasonable, based on Kotzebue numbers >> $3,282 per kW Simple Payback 14.4 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for AOC 15/50 turbine. (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 26.5 meter AOC 15/50 hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for AOC 15/50 turbine, as experienced in Kotzebue, AK in Reference: AOC 15/50 Turbine, Ref: "TVP PROJECT-AT-A-GLANCE" http://www.epri.com/attachments/197566_KEA-PAAG.pdf (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per AOC. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 14 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bethel Wind Turbine 30.5m Yukon Kuskokwim Hospital - 100 ft tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Atlantic Orient Corporation's (AOC) 15/50 wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1679 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 50 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 25.3 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 10.2 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $2,000 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 82 0 0 $0 1-3 2.12 301 0 0 $0 3-5 4.25 701 0 0 $0 5-7 6.37 1,075 0 0 $0 7-9 8.50 1,325 0 0 $0 9-11 10.62 1,346 1 1,214 $204 11-13 12.75 1,110 6 6,568 $1,103 13-15 14.87 848 13 10,659 $1,789 15-17 16.99 599 21 11,878 $1,994 17-19 19.12 444 30 12,837 $2,155 19-21 21.24 328 38 11,885 $1,995 21-23 23.37 254 46 10,991 $1,845 23-25 25.49 173 52 8,597 $1,443 25-27 27.62 84 57 4,531 $761 27-29 29.74 40 61 2,285 $384 29-31 31.86 28 64 1,683 $283 31-33 33.99 8 64 456 $77 33-35 36.11 8 65 463 $78 35-37 38.24 5 65 332 $56 37-39 40.36 2 64 128 $21 39-41 42.49 0 64 0 $0 41-43 44.61 0 63 0 $0 43-45 46.73 0 60 0 $0 45-47 48.86 0 0 0 $0 47-49 50.98 0 0 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 84,507 $14,186 Net Annual Savings $12,186 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 15 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Bethel Wind Turbine 30.5m Yukon Kuskokwim Hospital - 100 ft tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Wind Turbine (AOC 15/50) 1 $80,000 Ea. $80,000 (11) Premium for Taller Tower (30.5m) 1 $4,000 Ea. $4,000 (13) Shipping 1 $15,000 Ea. $15,000 (12) Foundation 1 $32,000 Ea. $32,000 (11) Crane Rental 1 $3,200 Ea. $3,200 (12) Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, etc.) 1 $3,200 Ea. $3,200 (11) Subtotal $137,400 Subcontractor Adder 15% $20,610 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $10,992 (12) Total $169,002 Reasonable, based on Kotzebue numbers >> $3,380 per kW Simple Payback 13.9 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for AOC 15/50 turbine. (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 30.5 meter AOC 15/50 hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for AOC 15/50 turbine. Reference: AOC 15/50 Turbine, Ref: "TVP PROJECT-AT-A-GLANCE" http://www.epri.com/attachments/197566_KEA-PAAG.pdf (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per AOC. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. (13) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 16 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Kasayuli Wind Turbine 24m Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1736 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 120 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.05 323 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.11 682 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.16 1,087 0.01 10 $2 7-9 8.21 1,423 0.17 230 $40 9-11 10.26 1,412 0.48 644 $112 11-13 12.32 1,184 0.83 934 $162 13-15 14.37 872 1.34 1,110 $193 15-17 16.42 616 1.93 1,130 $196 17-19 18.47 423 2.83 1,136 $197 19-21 20.53 246 3.80 889 $154 21-23 22.58 153 4.95 720 $125 23-25 24.63 99 6.10 571 $99 25-27 26.69 59 7.26 408 $71 27-29 28.74 27 8.46 220 $38 29-31 30.79 18 9.74 162 $28 31-33 32.84 10 10.82 102 $18 33-35 34.90 1 11.59 12 $2 35-37 36.95 2 11.88 25 $4 37-39 39.00 2 11.63 24 $4 39-41 41.06 0 11.24 0 $0 41-43 43.11 1 10.72 11 $2 43-45 45.16 0 10.21 0 $0 45-47 47.21 0 9.70 0 $0 47-49 49.27 0 3.47 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 8,338 $1,447 Net Annual Savings $829 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 17 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Kasayuli Wind Turbine 24m Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $930 Ea. $930 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $9,990 Ea. $9,990 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $56,240 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,436 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,499 (12) Total $69,175 $6,918 per kW Simple Payback 83.5 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 24 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 18 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Kasayuli Wind Turbine 37m Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1736 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 120 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.18 323 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.37 682 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.55 1,087 0.04 41 $7 7-9 8.73 1,423 0.25 338 $59 9-11 10.92 1,412 0.59 791 $137 11-13 13.10 1,184 1.03 1,159 $201 13-15 15.29 872 1.57 1,301 $226 15-17 17.47 616 2.39 1,399 $243 17-19 19.65 423 3.35 1,345 $233 19-21 21.84 246 4.54 1,062 $184 21-23 24.02 153 5.76 838 $146 23-25 26.20 99 6.99 654 $114 25-27 28.39 59 8.24 463 $80 27-29 30.57 27 9.61 250 $43 29-31 32.76 18 10.79 179 $31 31-33 34.94 10 11.60 109 $19 33-35 37.12 1 11.86 12 $2 35-37 39.31 2 11.59 24 $4 37-39 41.49 2 11.13 23 $4 39-41 43.67 0 10.58 0 $0 41-43 45.86 1 10.04 10 $2 43-45 48.04 0 9.31 0 $0 45-47 50.23 0 0.00 0 $0 47-49 52.41 0 0.00 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 10,000 $1,736 Net Annual Savings $1,117 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 19 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Kasayuli Wind Turbine 37m Kasayuli/Bethel McCann Center - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $1,070 Ea. $1,070 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $11,750 Ea. $11,750 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $58,140 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,721 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,651 (12) Total $71,512 $7,151 per kW Simple Payback 64.0 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 37 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 20 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emmonak Wind Turbine 24m Emmonak Village Clinic - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1553 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 53 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.05 172 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.11 354 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.16 696 0.01 7 $1 7-9 8.21 1,027 0.17 166 $26 9-11 10.26 1,156 0.48 527 $82 11-13 12.32 1,155 0.83 910 $141 13-15 14.37 1,083 1.34 1,378 $214 15-17 16.42 870 1.93 1,595 $248 17-19 18.47 607 2.83 1,632 $254 19-21 20.53 470 3.80 1,698 $264 21-23 22.58 365 4.95 1,714 $266 23-25 24.63 236 6.10 1,369 $213 25-27 26.69 176 7.26 1,217 $189 27-29 28.74 134 8.46 1,074 $167 29-31 30.79 91 9.74 841 $131 31-33 32.84 43 10.82 440 $68 33-35 34.90 31 11.59 341 $53 35-37 36.95 17 11.88 193 $30 37-39 39.00 8 11.63 83 $13 39-41 41.06 9 11.24 92 $14 41-43 43.11 5 10.72 54 $8 43-45 45.16 3 10.21 31 $5 45-47 47.21 0 9.70 0 $0 47-49 49.27 0 3.47 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 15,362 $2,386 Net Annual Savings $1,767 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 21 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emmonak Wind Turbine 24m Emmonak Village Clinic - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $930 Ea. $930 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $9,990 Ea. $9,990 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $56,240 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,436 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,499 (12) Total $69,175 $6,918 per kW Simple Payback 39.1 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 24 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 22 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emmonak Wind Turbine 37m Emmonak Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.1553 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 53 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.18 172 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.37 354 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.55 696 0.04 26 $4 7-9 8.73 1,027 0.25 244 $38 9-11 10.92 1,156 0.59 648 $101 11-13 13.10 1,155 1.03 1,130 $175 13-15 15.29 1,083 1.57 1,615 $251 15-17 17.47 870 2.39 1,976 $307 17-19 19.65 607 3.35 1,932 $300 19-21 21.84 470 4.54 2,028 $315 21-23 24.02 365 5.76 1,995 $310 23-25 26.20 236 6.99 1,568 $244 25-27 28.39 176 8.24 1,381 $214 27-29 30.57 134 9.61 1,220 $189 29-31 32.76 91 10.79 932 $145 31-33 34.94 43 11.60 472 $73 33-35 37.12 31 11.86 349 $54 35-37 39.31 17 11.59 188 $29 37-39 41.49 8 11.13 79 $12 39-41 43.67 9 10.58 86 $13 41-43 45.86 5 10.04 51 $8 43-45 48.04 3 9.31 28 $4 45-47 50.23 0 0.00 0 $0 47-49 52.41 0 0.00 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 17,948 $2,788 Net Annual Savings $2,169 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 23 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emmonak Wind Turbine 37m Emmonak Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $1,070 Ea. $1,070 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $11,750 Ea. $11,750 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $58,140 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,721 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,651 (12) Total $71,512 $7,151 per kW Simple Payback 33.0 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 37 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 24 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 24m Newtok Village Clinic - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.2712 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (14) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 53 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.05 172 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.11 354 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.16 696 0.01 7 $2 7-9 8.21 1,027 0.17 166 $45 9-11 10.26 1,156 0.48 527 $143 11-13 12.32 1,155 0.83 910 $247 13-15 14.37 1,083 1.34 1,378 $374 15-17 16.42 870 1.93 1,595 $433 17-19 18.47 607 2.83 1,632 $443 19-21 20.53 470 3.80 1,698 $460 21-23 22.58 365 4.95 1,714 $465 23-25 24.63 236 6.10 1,369 $371 25-27 26.69 176 7.26 1,217 $330 27-29 28.74 134 8.46 1,074 $291 29-31 30.79 91 9.74 841 $228 31-33 32.84 43 10.82 440 $119 33-35 34.90 31 11.59 341 $93 35-37 36.95 17 11.88 193 $52 37-39 39.00 8 11.63 83 $22 39-41 41.06 9 11.24 92 $25 41-43 43.11 5 10.72 54 $15 43-45 45.16 3 10.21 31 $8 45-47 47.21 0 9.70 0 $0 47-49 49.27 0 3.47 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 15,362 $4,166 Net Annual Savings $3,547 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 25 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 24m Newtok Village Clinic - 24 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $930 Ea. $930 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 24 m tower 1 $9,990 Ea. $9,990 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $56,240 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,436 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,499 (12) Total $69,175 $6,918 per kW Simple Payback 19.5 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 24 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. (13) The bin hour distribution shown here is equal to that of Emmonak, due to only part of the year being measured at the Newtok Site. Conflicts with construction prevented full-year of data collection at Newtok Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 26 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 37m Newtok Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-S wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.2712 /kWh (1) Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 1 Turbine Nominal Capacity 10 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $619 /yr (5) Windspeed Power Electricity Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (14) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 53 0.00 0 $0 1-3 2.18 172 0.00 0 $0 3-5 4.37 354 0.00 0 $0 5-7 6.55 696 0.04 26 $7 7-9 8.73 1,027 0.25 244 $66 9-11 10.92 1,156 0.59 648 $176 11-13 13.10 1,155 1.03 1,130 $306 13-15 15.29 1,083 1.57 1,615 $438 15-17 17.47 870 2.39 1,976 $536 17-19 19.65 607 3.35 1,932 $524 19-21 21.84 470 4.54 2,028 $550 21-23 24.02 365 5.76 1,995 $541 23-25 26.20 236 6.99 1,568 $425 25-27 28.39 176 8.24 1,381 $374 27-29 30.57 134 9.61 1,220 $331 29-31 32.76 91 10.79 932 $253 31-33 34.94 43 11.60 472 $128 33-35 37.12 31 11.86 349 $95 35-37 39.31 17 11.59 188 $51 37-39 41.49 8 11.13 79 $22 39-41 43.67 9 10.58 86 $23 41-43 45.86 5 10.04 51 $14 43-45 48.04 3 9.31 28 $8 45-47 50.23 0 0.00 0 $0 47-49 52.41 0 0.00 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 17,948 $4,868 Net Annual Savings $4,249 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 7/30/2004 Page 27 of 27 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 37m Newtok Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By: LCK Wind Turbine Analysis Check: TTG Cost Estimate Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $1,070 Ea. $1,070 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 10 kW, 37 m tower 1 $11,750 Ea. $11,750 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-S/60) 1 $24,750 Ea. $24,750 (11) Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Electrical (Transformers, Disconnects, Inverter, etc 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $58,140 Subcontractor Adder 15% $8,721 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $4,651 (12) Total $71,512 $7,151 per kW Simple Payback 16.8 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 37 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. (13) The bin hour distribution shown here is equal to that of Emmonak, due to only part of the year being measured at the Newtok Site. Conflicts with construction prevented full-year of data collection at Newtok Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 8/24/2004 Page 1 of 2 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.081704 Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 37m w Batt. Newtok Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By:LCK Wind Turbine Analysis in Battery Charging Configuration Check:TTG Background The site has relatively good wind potential, and installation of a wind turbine to generate electricity for the hospital is evaluated in this spreadsheet. The analysis is based on the Bergey Excel-R wind turbine model. Analysis Notes: Electricity Rate (without demand) $0.2712 /kWh_e (1) Fuel Rate $2.0000 /gallon Fuel Heat Value 140,000 Btu/gallon Fuel Electric Equivalent 40.99 kWh_f/gallon Value of Fuel Electric Equivalent $0.0488 /kWh_f Quantity of Wind Turbines Proposed 2 Turbine Nominal Capacity 7.5 kW (2) Turbine Max Rated Windspeed 31 mph (2) Turbine Cut-in Windspeed 8 mph (2) Estimated Availability 95% (4) Annual Maintenance Costs $1,045 /yr (5) Assume 66% offsets electricity Assume 34% offsets fuel Windspeed Power Electricity Offset Energy Bin Windspeed Bin Hours Output Produced Electricity Offset Fuel Savings (mph) (mph) (hrs/yr) (kW) (kWh/yr) (kWh_e/yr) (kWh_f/yr) ($) (6) (6) (6) (14) (7) (8) (9) 0-1 0.00 53 0.00 0 0 0 $0 1-3 2.18 172 0.00 0 0 0 $0 3-5 4.37 354 0.00 0 0 0 $0 5-7 6.55 696 0.08 53 35 18 $10 7-9 8.73 1,027 0.50 488 322 166 $95 9-11 10.92 1,156 1.18 1,295 855 440 $253 11-13 13.10 1,155 2.06 2,259 1,491 768 $442 13-15 15.29 1,083 3.14 3,230 2,132 1,098 $632 15-17 17.47 870 4.78 3,951 2,608 1,343 $773 17-19 19.65 607 6.70 3,865 2,551 1,314 $756 19-21 21.84 470 9.08 4,057 2,677 1,379 $793 21-23 24.02 365 11.52 3,989 2,633 1,356 $780 23-25 26.20 236 13.98 3,137 2,070 1,067 $613 25-27 28.39 176 15.96 2,675 1,765 909 $523 27-29 30.57 134 15.68 1,990 1,313 677 $389 29-31 32.76 91 15.40 1,330 878 452 $260 31-33 34.94 43 15.14 616 406 209 $120 33-35 37.12 31 14.86 438 289 149 $86 35-37 39.31 17 14.58 237 156 81 $46 37-39 41.49 8 14.32 102 67 35 $20 39-41 43.67 9 14.04 115 76 39 $23 41-43 45.86 5 14.00 70 47 24 $14 43-45 48.04 3 13.72 42 28 14 $8 45-47 50.23 0 0.00 0 0 0 $0 47-49 52.41 0 0.00 0 0 0 $0 TOTALS 8,760 33,938 22,399 11,538 $6,638 Net Annual Savings $5,593 /yr (10) Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Job: 1611.01 Rev Date: 6/15/04 Print Date: 8/24/2004 Page 2 of 2 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.081704 Sheet: Newtok Wind Turbine 37m w Batt. Newtok Village Clinic - 37 meter tower By:LCK Wind Turbine Analysis in Battery Charging Configuration Check:TTG Description Quantity $ per Unit Units Total Cost Tower Wiring Kit, 10 kW, 37 m tower 2 $1,000 Ea. $2,000 (11) Tilt-up Guyed Tower, 7.5 kW, 37 m tower 2 $7,800 Ea. $15,600 (11) Jackstand 1 $380 Ea. $380 (11) Raising Kit 1 $1,990 Ea. $1,990 (11) Wind Turbine (Bergey BWC Excel-R/48) 2 $20,900 Ea. $41,800 (11) DC Power Center Option, 7 Circuit (XVPC-7) 1 $690 Ea. $690 53 kWh, 5 String, Battery Bank (5xB220-8) 1 $4,100 Ea. $4,100 5.5 kW Inverter System (SW5548) 2 $3,995 Ea. $7,990 Shipping 1 $11,000 Ea. $11,000 (12) Foundation 1 $3,600 Ea. $3,600 Subtotal $89,150 Subcontractor Adder 15% $13,373 (12) Engineering Adder 8% $7,132 (12) Total $109,655 $14,621 per kW Simple Payback 19.6 years Notes: (1) Per electric rate schedule. Using rate without demand is conservative because there will be days in each month with little or no wind and billing demand will be set during those periods. (2) Per manufacturers literature for Bergey Excel-S turbine (4) Typical number accepted by wind industry. Checked against historical availability of AOC turbines installed by Kotzebue Electric Association. (5) Based on 2.5% of capital cost of turbines. This is high end of typical range accepted by wind industry, and it agrees well with estimate of 40 hrs/yr labor per turbine from Kotzebue Electric Association. (6) Bin Data based on one year's worth of site measurements made at 20 meters above ground tower elevation. Windspeeds adjusted to account for 37 meter Bergey Excel 10 kW Tower hub height. Vr / Va = (Zr / Za)^1/7 (7) Per Power Curve (Net Power Output vs. Windspeed) for Bergey Excel-S (8) Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) = Power Output (kW) x Bin Hours (hrs/yr) x Availability (%) (9) Energy Savings ($/yr) = Electricity Produced (kWh/yr) x Electricity Rate ($/kWh) (10) Net Savings ($/yr) = Energy Savings ($/yr) - Maintenance Costs ($/yr) (11) Budget prices per Bergey. Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6 is applied to foundation and electrical costs. Foundation and electrical work would be done by other parties. (12) EMCOR Energy & Technologies estimate. Crane rental cost includes Bethel city cost multiplier of 1.6. (13) The bin hour distribution shown here is equal to that of Emmonak, due to only part of the year being measured at the Newtok Site. Conflicts with construction prevented full-year of data collection at Newtok Copyright (C) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. 415/434-2600 Cost Estimate Job No: P-1529.04 Date: 7/28/2004 File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Sheet: Emissions Reduction Page 28 of 29 Customer: YKHC By: LCK Site: Bethel, Alaska Check: TTG Site Tower Height Inputs Electricity Savings On-site Fuel Savings Electricity Generation Fuel Type On-site Fuel Type State Electricity Emissions Reductions NOx Emission Rate SOx Emission Rate CO2 Emission Rate NOx Emissions Reduction SOx Emissions Reduction CO2 Emissions Reduction On-site Fuel Emissions Reductions NOx Emission Rate SOx Emission Rate CO2 Emission Rate NOx Emissions Reduction SOx Emissions Reduction CO2 Emissions Reduction Total Emissions Reductions NOx Emissions Reduction SOx Emissions Reduction CO2 Emissions Reduction Bethel Main Hospital Bethel McCann Center Emmonak Village Clinic Newtok Village Clinic 26.5 30.5 24 37 24 37 24 37 79,733 84,507 8,338 10,000 15,362 17,948 15,400 17,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil AK AK AK AK AK AK AK AK 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.140845 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 0.552817 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 38 41 4 5 7 9 7 9 150 159 16 19 29 34 29 34 46,262 49,032 4,838 5,802 8,913 10,414 8,935 10,386 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 0.32307 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 41 4 5 7 9 7 9 150 159 16 19 29 34 29 34 46,262 49,032 4,838 5,802 8,913 10,414 8,935 10,386 meters Notes: kWh/yr (1) MBtu/yr (2) (3) (4) lb/MBtu (5) lb/MBtu (5) lb/MBtu (5) lb/yr (6) lb/yr (6) lb/yr (6) lb/MBtu (7) lb/MBtu (7) lb/MBtu (7) lb/yr (8) lb/yr (8) lb/yr (8) lb/yr (9) lb/yr (9) lb/yr (9) Notes: (1) Net reduction in electricity use at site. (2) Net reduction in on-site fuel combustion (not for electricity production). (3) Type of fuel used to generate electricity. (4) Type of fuel used for on-site combustion (not for electricity production). (5) Per "An Introduction to Externalities" Table 3a, http://www.theenergyguy.com/externalities.html (6) Emissions Reduction (lb/yr) = Electricity Savings (kWh/yr) x 3,413 (Btu/kWh) / 1,000,000 (Btu/MBtu) x Emission Rate (lb/MBtu). (7) Per "An Introduction to Externalities" Table 3b, http://www.theenergyguy.com/externalities.html (8) Emissions Reduction (lb/yr) = On-Site Fuel Savings (MBtu/yr) x Emission Rate (lb/MBtu). (9) Total Emissions Reductions (lb/yr) = Electricity Emissions Reductions (lb/yr) + On-site Fuel Emissions Reductions (lb/yr). Copyright (c) 2004 by EMCOR Energy & Technologies. All rights reserved. Confidential. 415/434-2600 Job No: 1611.01 Date: 7/28/2004 Sheet: Heating Analysis File: YKHC Wind Study Project Calcs.072804.xls Page 29 of 29 YKHC Wind Study By: TRS Heating Analysis Check: LCK Background: One possible strategy for the use of wind turbines in YKHC sites is to use the electricity for heating. Many of the clinics have a much larger thermal load than electric load, and fuel is expensive in many of the remote villages. This calculation compares the value of wind generated heat with the value of wind generated electricity. Analysis: Notes: Fuel Oil Cost $2.50 $/gallon (1) Heating Value of Fuel 140,000 Btu/gallon (2) Boiler Efficiency 80% (3) Electric Rate (no demand) $0.1119 /kWh (4) Conversion 3,413 Btu/kWh Wind Turbine Capacity Factor 40% kW (5) 1-kW Turbine Turbine Capacity 1 kW Annual Electricity Output 3,504 kWh/yr (6) Value of Electricity $392.10 /yr (7) Fuel Oil Displaced 106.8 gal/yr (8) Value of Displaced Fuel Oil $266.95 /yr (9) Approximate Cost of Turbine $10,000 (10) Electricity Simple Payback 25.5 yr Heating Simple Payback 37.5 yr 10-kW Turbine Turbine Capacity 10 kW Annual Electricity Output 35,040 kWh/yr (6) Value of Electricity $3,920.98 /yr (7) Fuel Oil Displaced 1,067.8 gal/yr (8) Value of Displaced Fuel Oil $2,669.45 /yr (9) Approximate Cost of Turbine $55,000 (10) Electricity Simple Payback 14.0 yr Heating Simple Payback 20.6 yr Conclusion: Using wind turbines for electic resistance heating does not appear to be cost effective based on typical YKHC fuel rates. The power produced by the turbines is approximately two times more valuable as electricity than as heat, even assuming low electric rates and high fuel rates. Notes: (1) Assumed fuel rate is higher than rates in Bethel and Toksook Bay. (2) Approximate heating value of distillate fuel oil. (3) Estimated boiler/furnace efficiency for YKHC sites. (4) Assumed electricity rate is avoided fuel cost for Toksook Bay. This is minimum value of electricity. (5) Assumed capacity factor is relatively high in order to give a "best case" simple payback. (6) Annual electricity output (kWh/yr) = turbine capacity (kW) x 8,760 (hr/yr) x wind turbine capacity factor (%). (7) Value of electricity ($/yr) = annual electricity output (kWh/yr) x electric rate ($/kWh). (8) Fuel oil displaced (gal/yr) = annual electricity output (kWh/yr) x 3,413 (Btu/kWh) / heating value of fuel (Btu/gal) / boiler efficiency (%). (9) Value of displaced fuel oil ($/yr) = fuel oil displaced (gal/yr) x fuel oil rate ($/gal). (10) Cost estimates are approximate and are meant to give an order of magnitude simple payback period. Copyright (c) 2004 EMCOR Energy & Technologies. All rights reserved. Confidential. 415/434-2600 Appendix D Manufacturer's Noise Test Data for 10 kW Wind Turbine Appendix E AOC Manufacturer Data AOC 15/50 Turbine Features Page 1 of 2 Atlantic Orient 15/50 Turbine Features AOC 15/50 Tower and Turbine Schematic Absolute Simplicity and Minimal Maintenance Requirements Designed for 30 Year Life in Extreme Environmental Conditions Downwind, Passive Yaw Configuration Integrated Drive Train Provides Efficient Load Path Single Piece Casting for Hub, Gearbox Housing, and Tower Top Redundant Failsafe Braking: Tip Brakes, Dynamic Brake, and Parking Brake Engineered for Use in High Penetration Wind / Diesel Hybrid Systems NREL Thick Airfoil; Well Proven (Durable) Composite Glass Epoxy Efficient Over Wide Spectrum of Wind Speeds Features For Arctic Environment Include: Turbine Metallurgy Selected for Arctic Conditions Pitch Adjustments for Higher Air Density Modified Tower to Accommodate Icing Loads Optional Gearbox and / or Control System Heater(s) http://www.aocwind.net/1550feat.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Turbine Features Page 2 of 2 Test Standard for National Certification Laboratories Engineered for use in high penetration wind/diesel hybrid systems. PLC based control system Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/1550feat.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 1 of 6 Atlantic Orient 15/50 Development History Description The AOC 15/50 wind turbine consists of a 15 meter rotor which produces 50 kW at an 11.3 m/s wind speed (60 Hz model). The turbine was developed in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) under their Advanced Wind Turbine (AWT) Program. The goal of this cost shared program was to produce economic wind generated electricity in a moderate average wind resource. This was achieved with simplicity in design, high availability and failsafe reliability. The philosophy of Atlantic Orient Corporation is reflected in every stage of machine development. We have taken a long term view of our market and product development. Each component of the machine was designed and tested to ensure that actual field performance meets or exceeds design specifications. We have successfully designed a state-of-the-art wind turbine generator and have proven results from our current installations. Recent Research and Development The AOC 15/50 wind turbine was developed with a series of R&D cost-shared contracts administered by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to comply with International Electro-Technical Commission standards. The Dutch Laboratory ECN has conducted a Failure Modes Effects Analysis (FMEA) on the 15/50 wind turbine. Field testing continues in several locations in the United States and Canada, as well as component qualification testing in our Fairlee, Vermont and Prince Edward Island, Canada facilities. AOC 15/50 Prototypes Tested at Four Major International Test Centers U.S. Department of Agriculture Test Site National Wind Turbine Test Center Bushland, Texas Boulder, Colorado http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 2 of 6 Atlantic Wind Test Site Greek National Laboratory (CRES) Prince Edward Island, Canada Near Athens, Greece One of the most important safety criterion in the design of the AOC 15/50 is the ability to safely control the wind turbine in normal and extreme conditions. This has lead to the development of redundant failsafe control mechanisms. The ultimate goal above and beyond low cost and high reliability is the protection and safe operation of the wind turbine in all specified conditions. Evolution from Enertech Beginnings In conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Advanced Wind Turbine Program, Atlantic Orient Corporation developed a next generation 50 kW wind turbine based upon the concept of simplicity. By adhering to a design philosophy, this turbine produces energy at competitive rates for distributed generation, village electrification, diesel based utilities and purchased power displacement for agriculture, industry and municipalities. http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 3 of 6 From 1982 through 1986 approximately 750 Enertech wind turbines, designated as the E44 series, were installed in wind power stations throughout the United States and several other countries (most of them are still operating today). Atlantic Orient Corporation evaluated the historic performance of a significant number of the E44 series wind turbines. Problem areas were identified and rank ordered according to their contribution to turbine downtime. Specific potential solutions to downtime related problems were conceptualized and the impact of the various options was evaluated on an economic and risk basis to further define the benefits of each candidate improvement. http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 4 of 6 Enertech 44 kW AC machines deployed in a wind farm application As a result of this analysis, Atlantic Orient Corporation developed the preliminary design of a 50 kW wind turbine designated the AOC 15/50. The results of this effort were so encouraging that final design and prototyping of the AOC 15/50 were initiated under separate NREL contracts. The Dutch National Laboratory for Renewable Energy (ECN) performed an independent reliability analysis and concluded that the AOC 15/50 was of fundamentally sound design. Bl Hi Bl bl nd Tip Brakes 106 106 Modal Test Loads Testing Loads Testing Turbine and Component Qualification Testing Test Article Results ade Root Bolt Receptors Pull Test gh Pullout Strength ade Fatigue Test Failure achieved at 55,733 cycles of 2800 Lb Load ock - 2 Test to Qualify Aerpac Blades Complete 22,500 Braking Cycles Drive Train cycles at design load cycles 20% overload Dynamic Brake Model Verification Prototype at USDA Bushland Performance Testing Frequency Measurements Power Curve as Expected Loads Well Within Design Limits Pre-production Prototype at SeaWest San Gregonio Performance Testing Analytical Models Successfully Verified After an extensive review and analysis of the operating history of existing wind turbines, AOC's design team incorporated many design features in the AOC 15/50 which enhance energy production. These features include the following: Advanced Modified NREL Thick Airfoils High Strength to Weight Ratio Wood/Epoxy Blades Electromagnetically Controlled Tip Brakes Single Piece Hub Casting Innovative Split Core Rotary Transformer to transfer power to the Tip Brakes http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 5 of 6 Integrated Gearbox with Improved Internal Components Totally Enclosed Generator Single Piece Cast Tower Top with Larger Yaw Bearings Uniformly Tapered Galvanized Lattice Tower Enhanced Dynamic Brake Advanced Controller based upon a Programmable Logic Controller 9/ / Wind Turbine / Complete 11/99 l 11/ / l R&D Undertaken with NREL/DOE for 15/50 NREL/DOE Contracts Performance Period System Stability and Penetration Study for Wind Diesel Hybrid Systems Operation and Performance Cooperative Agreement DE-FC027-87-CH10344 Complete 87-12/88 Advanced Wind Turbine AWT 15/50 Conceptual Design Subcontract No. Ag-0-19090-1 Complete 8/90-6 92 Fabrication and Testing of Advanced SERI Thick Airfoil Blades for the AOC 15/50 Subcontract No. AO-2-11101-3 Complete 1/93-1 94 Multi-Functional Soft Start Subsystem for AOC 15/50 NREL P.O>1622631 Near Term Prototype Testing Project Subcontract No. ACU-6-15077-03 80% Comp ete 95-12 00 Support Contract Round Robin Developmental Test of AOC 15/50 50% Comp eted The 15/50 designation refers to the 15-meter wood/epoxy rotor and its rated output of 50 kW at 11.3 m/s wind speed in the 60 Hz version. The tower top casting provides a rigid, low cost solution to interfacing the gearbox with the tower. The low speed shaft has sufficient diameter and material strength to accommodate the structural and fatigue loads. The hub consists of a single piece casting, again, focusing on design simplicity. Our design team has fulfilled the goal of design simplicity. The heart of the design is the integrated gearbox, which consists of a single piece, cast housing. The generator is flange- mounted to the planetary gearbox with the parking brake directly coupled to the totally enclosed generator. There is no nacelle. The design of the dynamic brake is based upon the proven design used on the Enertech E44 turbines. However, brake design has been significantly enhanced through our use of This design package has been validated through extensive bench testing. A passive resistor-capacitor network is connected to the output of the generator. The brake is operated from the control system and is triggered by either detection of faults or by high wind speed. As the result of our control strategy, the frequency of operation of the dynamic brake is greatly reduced which decreases the resulting stresses on the generator and transmission. The AOC 15/50 aerodynamic tip brakes are electromagnetically latched and released based upon instructions from the control system. In the normal stopping mode, both the dynamic brake and the tip brake are deployed the Alternative Transient Program (ATP), software that models electromagnetic transients. http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Development Page 6 of 6 simultaneously. All components are designed for fail safe operation. A spring/damper is incorporated to soften deployment of the tip brakes. Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/1550dx.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 1 of 6 Atlantic Orient 15/50 Design Specifications Chart The AOC 15/50 Drivetrain Assembly AOC 15/50 50 Hz Spec Sheet AOC 15/50 60 Hz Spec Sheet Download 50 Hz Spec Sheet in .PDF Download 60 Hz Spec Sheet in .PDF SYSTEM: 25 m (82 ft) l ) Wi i ) cut-in ) peak (survival) l il li ROTOR Fixed Pitch Swept Area 3 Rotor Solidity 0.077 62 rpm l i 6º 0º AOC 15/50 50 Hz Type Grid Connected Configuration Horizontal Axis Rotor Diameter 15 m (49.2 ft) Centerline Hub Height PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS: Rated Electrica Power 50 kW @12.0 m/s (26.8 mph nd Speed @hub he ght 25 m (82 ft 4.6 m/s (10.2 mph) shut-down (high wind) 22.4 m/s (50 mph 59.5 m/s (133 mph) Calcu ated Annual Output @ 100 % ava abi ty 5.4 m/s (12 mph) 85,000 kWh 6.7 m/s (15 mph) 145,000 kWh 8.0 m/s (18 mph) 199,000 kWh Type of Hub Rotor Diameter 15 m (49.2 ft) 177 m² (1902 ft²) Number of Blades Rotor Speed @ rated wind speed Location Re at ve to Tower Downwind Cone Angle Tilt Angle http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 2 of 6 i 6.1 ial Epoxy/Glass Fiber Airfoil (type) Ti ± 2:1 Overspeed Device Hub Attachment l Mi -25°c Frequency (Hz) 50 Hz 50 kW 55 kW Speed RPM (nominal) i TRANSMISSION ) 88 ion i ) YAW SYSTEM Normal l itions Structural Electrical Rotor Tip Speed 48.6 m/s (109 mph) @ 50 Hz Design T p Speed BLADE Length 7.2 m (23.7 ft) Mater NREL, Thick Series, modified Twist 7° outer blade Root Chord 457 mm (18 in) @ 4% 279 mm (11in) Max Chord 749 mm (29.5 in) @ 39% 2925 mm (115 in) p Chord 406 mm (16 in) @ 100 % 7500 mm (295 in) Chord Taper Ratio Electro-magnetic tip brake Embedded female bolt receptors Blade Weight 150 kg (330 bs) approximate GENERATOR Type 3 phase/4 pole asynchronous n. Ambient Temp. Voltage (V) 400, 3 phase @ 50 Hz kW @ Rated Wind Speed kW @ Peak Continuous 1500 @ 50 Hz Wind ng Configuration Ungrounded WYE Insulation Class F Enclosure Totally Enclosed Air Over (TEAO) Frame Size 365 TC Mounting Direct mount to transmission Options Arctic low temp. shafting (-40°c) Type Planetary Housing Ductile iron-integrated casting Ratio (rotor to gen. speed) 1 to 24.57 (50 Hz Rating, output horse power Lubrication Synthetic gear oil/non toxic Filtrat Service filtration cartridge @ scheduled maintenance. Heater (opt on Arctic version, electric Free, rotates 360 degrees Optiona Yaw damping-required when known cond frequently exceed 50° yaw rate per second. DRIVE TRAIN TOWER INTERFACE Yaw bearing mounted on tower top casting Twist Cable TOWER Type Galvanized 3 legged, bolted lattice, self-supporting Tower Height 24.4 m (80 ft) Options 30.5 m (100 ft) Tilt down 24.4 m (80 ft) http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 3 of 6 Concrete or special Anchor Bolts CONTROL SYSTEM PLC based l Serial i i l ROTOR SPEED CONTROL lectrical ic brake l APPROXIMATE SYSTEM DESIGN WEIGHTS 3,210 kgs (7,080 lbs) 2,420 kgs (5,340 lbs) DESIGN LIFE DOCUMENTATION l i i FOUNDATION Type Certified ASTMA-A-193-Grade B7 Type Control Inputs Wind speed, generator shaft speed Control Outputs Line interconnection, brake dep oyment Communications link to central computer for energy mon tor and maintenance d spatch (optional) Enclosures NEMA 1, NEMA 4 (optional) Soft Start Optiona Production Blade stall increases with increased wind velocity Normal Start up Aerodynamic, e boost if necessary Shut-down Control system simultaneously applies dynam and dep oys tip brakes. Parking brake brings rotor to standstill. Back-up Overspeed Control Centrifugally activated tip brakes deploy BRAKE SYSTEM CONTROL Fail-safe brakes automatically deploy when grid failure occurs. Tower Rotor & Drivetrain Weight on Foundation 5,630 kgs (12,420 lbs) 30 Years DESIGN STANDARDS Applicable Standards, AWEA, EIA and IEC Instal at on Guide and Operat on & Maintenance Manual SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE Semi-annual or after severe events. NOTE 1: Atlantic Orient Corporation and its affiliates are constantly working to improve their products, therefore, product specifications are subject to change without notice. NOTE 2: Power curves show typical power available at the controller based on a combination of measured and calculated data. Annual energy is calculated using power curves and a Rayleigh wind speed distribution. Energy production may be greater or lesser dependent upon actual wind resources and site conditions, and will vary with wind turbine maintenance, altitude, temperature, topography and the proximity to other structures including wind turbines. NOTE 3: For design options to accommodate severe climates or unusual circumstances please contact the corporate office in Prince Edward Island, Canada. NOTE 4: For integration into high penetration wind-diesel systems and village electrification schemes contact the corporate office in Prince Edward Island, Canada for technical support and systems design. Revised April 2003 SYSTEM: AOC 15/50 60 Hz Type Grid Connected Configuration Horizontal Axis http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 4 of 6 25 m (82 ft) l ) Wi i ) cut-in ) peak (survival) l il li ROTOR Swept Area 2 2) 3 Rotor Solidity 0.077 65 rpm l i 6° 0° i 6.1 ial Airfoil (type) Ti ± 2:1 Overspeed Device Hub Attachment l Mi -25°c Frequency (Hz) 60 Hz 50 kW 60 kW Speed RPM (nominal) i Rotor Diameter 15 m (49.2 ft) Centerline Hub Height PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS: Rated Electrica Power 50 kW @11.3 m/s (25.3 mph nd Speed @hub he ght 25 m (82 ft 4.6 m/s (10.2 mph) shut-down (high wind) 22.4 m/s (50 mph 59.5 m/s (133 mph) Calcu ated Annual Output @ 100 % ava abi ty 5.4 m/s (12 mph) 87,000 kWh 6.7 m/s (15 mph) 153,000 kWh 8.0 m/s (18 mph) 215,000 kWh Type of Hub Fixed Pitch Rotor Diameter 15 m (49.2 ft) 177 m (1902 ft Number of Blades Rotor Speed @ rated wind speed Location Re at ve to Tower Downwind Cone Angle Tilt Angle Rotor Tip Speed 51 m/s (114 mph) @ 60 Hz Design T p Speed BLADE Length 7.2 m (23.7 ft) Mater Wood/epoxy laminate NREL, Thick Series, modified Twist 7° outer blade Root Chord 457 mm (18 in) @ 4% 279 mm (11in) Max Chord 749 mm (29.5 in) @ 39% 2925 mm (115 in) p Chord 406 mm (16 in) @ 100 % 7500 mm (295 in) Chord Taper Ratio Electro-magnetic tip brake Embedded female bolt receptors Blade Weight 150 kg (330 bs) approximate GENERATOR Type 3 phase/4 pole asynchronous n. Ambient Temp. Voltage (V) 480, 3 phase @ 60 Hz kW @ Rated Wind Speed kW @ Peak Continuous 1800 @ 60 Hz Wind ng Configuration Ungrounded WYE Insulation Class F Enclosure Totally Enclosed Air Over (TEAO) http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 5 of 6 TRANSMISSION ) 88 ion i ) YAW SYSTEM Normal l itions Structural Electrical Concrete or special Anchor Bolts CONTROL SYSTEM PLC based l Serial i i l ROTOR SPEED CONTROL lectrical ic brake l APPROXIMATE SYSTEM DESIGN WEIGHTS 3,210 kgs (7,080 lbs) 2,420 kgs (5,340 lbs) Frame Size 365 TC Mounting Direct mount to transmission Options Arctic low temp. shafting (-40°c) Type Planetary Housing Ductile iron-integrated casting Ratio (rotor to gen. speed) 1 to 28.25 (60 Hz Rating, output horse power Lubrication Synthetic gear oil/non toxic Filtrat Service filtration cartridge @ scheduled maintenance. Heater (opt on Arctic version, electric Free, rotates 360 degrees Optiona Yaw damping-required when known cond frequently exceed 50° yaw rate per second. DRIVE TRAIN TOWER INTERFACE Yaw bearing mounted on tower top casting Twist Cable TOWER Type Galvanized 3 legged, bolted lattice, self-supporting Tower Height 24.4 m (80 ft) Options 30.5 m (100 ft) Tilt down 24.4 m (80 ft) FOUNDATION Type Certified ASTMA-A-193-Grade B7 Type Control Inputs Wind speed, generator shaft speed Control Outputs Line interconnection, brake dep oyment Communications link to central computer for energy mon tor and maintenance d spatch (optional) Enclosures NEMA 1, NEMA 4 (optional) Soft Start Optiona Production Blade stall increases with increased wind velocity Normal Start up Aerodynamic, e boost if necessary Shut-down Control system simultaneously applies dynam and dep oys tip brakes. Parking brake brings rotor to standstill. Back-up Overspeed Control Centrifugally activated tip brakes deploy BRAKE SYSTEM CONTROL Fail-safe brakes automatically deploy when grid failure occurs. Tower Rotor & Drivetrain Weight on Foundation 5,630 kgs (12,420 lbs) http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Spec Sheet Page 6 of 6 DESIGN LIFE DOCUMENTATION l i i 30 Years DESIGN STANDARDS Applicable Standards, AWEA, EIA and IEC Instal at on Guide and Operat on & Maintenance Manual SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE Semi-annual or after severe events. NOTE 1: Atlantic Orient Corporation and its affiliates are constantly working to improve their products, therefore, product specifications are subject to change without notice. NOTE 2: Power curves show typical power available at the controller based on a combination of measured and calculated data. Annual energy is calculated using power curves and a Rayleigh wind speed distribution. Energy production may be greater or lesser dependent upon actual wind resources and site conditions, and will vary with wind turbine maintenance, altitude, temperature, topography and the proximity to other structures including wind turbines. NOTE 3: For design options to accommodate severe climates or unusual circumstances please contact the corporate office in Prince Edward Island, Canada. NOTE 4: For integration into high penetration wind-diesel systems and village electrification schemes contact the corporate office in Prince Edward Island, Canada for technical support and systems design. Revised April 2003 Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/specs.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Turbine Body Page 1 of 2 Atlantic Orient 15/50 Turbine Body http://www.aocwind.net/bodydrawing.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Turbine Body Page 2 of 2 Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/bodydrawing.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Power Curve Page 1 of 1 Atlantic Orient 15/50 Power Curve Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/powercurve.htm 7/15/2004 Page 1 of 1 http://www.aocwind.net/towerbase.jpg 7/15/2004 AOC Quote Options Page 1 of 2 AOC 15/50 Typical Purchase Order AOC 15/50 Wind Turbine AOC 15/50 WTG [ ] 60 Hz, [ ] 50 Hz - standard 80 ft galvanized tower Tower Safety Climbing Cable and harness Anchor Bolts and template for standard concrete foundation (12 bolts per turbine, see note 1) Tower Options 100 ft. Tower Option 80 ft. Tilt Down Tower Option Resistive Soft Start Equipment Watts transducer and current transformer SCADA data interface 9 Bay controller for SCADA Interface Digital Display for System Monitoring Stainless Steel Control Enclosures (Required for exposed marine or tropical moist environment) NEMA 4 Control Enclosures -Control Box, Dynamic Brake Box (Required for Controls not in a weatherized shelter) Tropical Package for generator Modified Cold Weather Package Category 1 - Transmission and Parking Brake Heater - Enclosure Heater and insulation - Low Temperature Lubrication Severe Cold Weather Package Category 2 (<-40° C) - Transmission and Parking Brake Heater -Enclosure Heater and insulation - Low Temperature Lubrication - Arctic Turbine Shaft Design, Service, Support, and Freight http://www.aocwind.net/quote.htm 7/15/2004 AOC Quote Options Page 2 of 2 Design Utility Interface per person per day Export Packing Turbine Travel to site AOC site support at project site per person per day List of recommended on-site Spare Parts for one or two turbines per site or Service Center Service and Maintenance Kit Documentation package Special engineering NOTE 1: Non standard foundation configurations may require special anchor bolts. NOTE 2: Freight, fees, import duties, and taxes are the responsibility of the buyer. NOTE 3: All travel, Per Diem, and incidental expenses are for the account of the buyer. NOTE 4: Support structure or mounting hardware and connectors for control boxes are the responsibility of the buyer. NOTE 5: Recommended for weak grid or high penetration wind diesel systems. Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/quote.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 1 of 6 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist The following information is intended as a set of checklists to assist our customers in addressing the relevant details of an installation in logical sequences. Although most items apply to both large and small projects not every item will apply to every project. To insure thorough planning it is very important that the customer understand why a particular detail is or is not appropriate to the installation. By reviewing the entire list at various stages of the project, the customer should be able to ensure that he/she has not overlooked any of the details necessary to complete a project Site Construction at Kotzebue Electric Association Siting Factors Site selection may have a significant effect on annual energy production. It is typically worth the additional time and effort to locate the proper site to maximize energy production and maintain the wind turbine expected life. The following siting factors should be considered: Wind Resource Characteristics Average wind speed Makeup of average (frequency and duration of power producing winds) Prevailing wind direction (s) Turbulence Peak windspeed http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 2 of 6 Height and location of obstructions Distance from utility service point Local restrictions relative to height, proximity to boundaries, etc. Tower height Proximity of wind turbines to each other Site accessibility and its effect on construction and maintenance costs. Utility Factors The AOC 15/50 includes an induction generator which requires the interfacing electrical system to provide generator excitation. Each Turbine includes a fixed set of power factor correction capacitors located within the dynamic brake capacitor box. The turbine installation must consider specific factors regarding the interfacing utility network to provide for a safe and efficient installation. The following utility related factors should be considered: Buy back rates, contract options, green pricing, and net billing Available line capacity (in kVA) Available fault current Voltage and phase configuration of the primary circuit and the local utility line Distance to nearest substation Size and winding configuration of the step down transformer required at the site (in kVA) Line protection required Cogeneration standards for small power producers Interconnection hardware and wiring standards System operation requirements: Voltage regulation Power factor Protective devices Utility/Wind turbine interface responsibilities To properly interface with the utility network the customer needs to identify any and all power factor correction capacitors or unique loads connected to the utility system. To assist AOC in designing your interface , AOC needs the attached "Required Customer Power Grid Information" sheet to be completed. Permit and Approval Many wind turbine locations will require some of the permits and approvals identified herein. It is important to determine which permits / approvals apply to your particular site. http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 3 of 6 Issued by: Municipality or local council Country State or Province Federal (FAA, FCC, etc.) Commission (energy, conservation, historic, etc.) Utility Type: Construction Foundation Engineering Electrical Interconnection Zoning Communication Interference Aviation InterferenceEnviromental Impact Inspections required for above Plans and Drawings Suggested items to have on hand or to prepare for efficient and proper site development and for the submittal, if necessary, for various approvals: Plot plan Site layout Tower foundation drawing Tower assembly drawing Site wiring layout Control house interior wiring (if applicable) diagram Control house physical layout (if applicable) Utility interface - single line drawing Utility interface - three line drawing Wind turbine generator to control box wiring schematic Wind turbine generator wiring diagram Construction Planning Considerations To minimize time and cost, the following items should be considered in the planning process: http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 4 of 6 Subcontractor roles and responsibilities Cable trenches (type, length and depth) Control enclosure design Site specific weather extremes Tower foundation type Foundation forming details Site accessibility and road conditions Crane availability and cost Concrete availability and cost Backhoe availability and cost Concrete Reinforcing Bar availability and cost Labor skills and related costs Soil Characteristics Soil stability Depth to water table Depth to significant frost Allowable bearing capacities Blasting needs Tripod or backhoe for tower assembly Availability of hand tools Concrete working tools Anchor bolt template and verification of proper placement Fencing materials and security Electrical planning considerations Your local wiring inspector should review the design of the electrical installation prior to commencing work at the site. The following items should be considered in the design / installation of the electrical system : Wire sizes, length, and type as described in Section 1.7 and Appendix B Conduit type and size Service entrance hardware Revenue meter specifications Protective hardware required by the interfacing utility Distribution panel(s) with properly sized circuit protection Single phase power for control house lights and receptacles Step down transformer characteristics http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 5 of 6 Control house interior wireways Control house junction box (es) Multiple unit control for wind power stations Twist cable termination box Foundation / conduit interfaces Anenometer Booms Photo courtesy KEA WARNING: THE INSTALLATION OF A LARGE SIZE WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (SUCH AS THE AOC 15/50) REQUIRES SPECIALIZED SKILLS, EQUIPMENT AND EXPERIENCE. INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY ATLANTIC ORIENT CORPORATION AND ITS SUPPLIERS ASSUMES THAT PERSONNEL WILL HAVE THE REQUIRED SKILLS, EXPERIENCE, AND EQUIPMENT TO INSTALL AND/OR MAINTAIN ALL PRODUCTS. NO ONE SHOULD ATTEMPT TO CLIMB TOWERS, OPERATE, OR MAINTAIN WIND TURBINES WITHOUT THE NECESSARY SKILLS, EXPERIENCE, TOOLS, AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT. ATLANTIC ORIENT CORPORATION ASSUMES NO DIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL LIABILITY IF FAULTY OR DANGEROUS INSTALLATION OR MAINTENANCE PRACTICES ARE USED. THERE ARE TRAINED AND EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN INSTALLATION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND TROUBLE SHOOTING. CONTACT ATLANTIC ORIENT CORPORATION OR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IF CONSULTATION OR ASSISTANCE IS REQUIRED. ATLANTIC ORIENT CORPORATION AND ITS SUPPLIERS RECOMMEND RESTRICTED ACCESS, ANTI-CLIMB SECTIONS, OR FENCES FOR ALL TOWERS TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS FROM CLIMBING THE TOWER. APPROPRIATE WARNING SIGNS SHOULD ALSO BE PLACED ON THE TOWER. TOWERS SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLED NEAR UNPROTECTED POWER LINES. ALL ELECTRIC WIRES AND CABLES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS. http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 AOC 15/50 Planning Checklist Page 6 of 6 For best performance, all wind turbine installations should be thoroughly inspected by qualified personnel within 60 days after completion, at least semi-annually, and after any major windstorm, earthquake or other severe event. The inspection and service intervals identified by Atlantic Orient Corporation must be followed for any Atlantic Orient warranty to remain valid. Copyright © 2000 Atlantic Orient Corporation http://www.aocwind.net/planning.htm 7/15/2004 Appendix F Bergey Manufacturer Data Remote Home Value Package 7.5 kW Remote.System Package Performance:500 - 1,500 Kilowatt-hours (kWh's) per month (depending on wind resource) Recommended for: Note: This system contains batteries Large remote homes or facilities, using at least and is typically used in conjunction 700 kWh per month with a back-up generator (gasoline, Locations where delivering or storing diesel fuel is propane, or diesel fuel). These a problem systems are modular and can be Retrofit to existing diesel-only power system to expanded easily. provide 24-hour power availability Wind Class 2 or higher We recommend this package for larger remote homes, facilities, or communities that need more than 500 kWh's of alternating current (AC) energy per month. These systems are often retrofitted to existing diesel-only systems in order to save fuel and provide 24-hour power. The BWC Remote.System stores excess energy in batteries for use during low wind periods. It can also charge the batteries from a back-up generator. With a back-up generator the Remote.System can provide reliable 24-hour power with minimal attention from the operator. The Guyed-Lattice tower is the least cost tower type and a 100 ft. tower is tall enough for most locations. Shorter towers reduce performance. For locations where crane access is not possible, the towers are available in 10 ft sections (as an added cost option) which can be stacked using a winch and davit system. The batteries are Trojan T-105's, a workhorse of the home power industry and an excellent value. A total of 40 individual batteries are connected in five parallel strings of eight batteries in series (48 VDC nominal). This battery bank will typically support the load for 1-2 days days without wind energy input or back-up power. The Trace SW5548 sine-wave inverter provides 120 VAC (or 230 VAC, 50 Hz at 4.5 kW) with enough capacity to start difficult motor loads. A back-up engine generator can be easily added and can be controlled by the Trace inverter. In addition to the equipment costs given below, a complete installation will typically include the following costs: shipping, sales tax, permit costs, foundation and anchoring, wire run, turbine and tower erection, battery racks or vault, electrical hook-up, and inspection fees. Your dealer or Bergey WindPower can assist you in budgeting these additional costs. For budgeting purposes, these costs typically range from $4,000 (customer installed, no sales tax, etc) to $20,000 (Certified Dealer, sales tax, diesel generator, etc). 7.5 kW BWC Excel-R/48, with VCS-10 $20,900 100 ft. Guyed-Lattice Tower Kit (XLG30) $7,800 Tower Wiring Kit (XTWK30) $1,000 DC Power Center Option, 7 circuit (XVPC-7) $690 53 kWh, 5 String, Battery Bank (5 x B220-8) $4,100 5.5 kW Inverter System (SW5548) $3,995 Total Cost: $38,485 Options: Special Paint: $690 Corrosion Pkgs: $700 E-Meter: $430 50 Hz: No Charge Other Towers