HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity of Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat Concept Design Report - Nov 2013 - REF Grant 7014025LeMay Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business
Pilot Point Wind Farm Design Services
Draft Concept Design Report
Alaska Energy Authority Grant #7030007
Prepared For:
City of Pilot Point
PO Box 430
Pilot Point, AK 99649
Suzanne Evanoff, Mayor
Prepared by:
LeMay Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
4272 Chelsea Way
Anchorage, Alaska 99504
November 2013
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2012, the City of Pilot Point consumed 50,000 gallons of fuel oil for heating and 40,000
gallons of fuel for electricity, which at $4.29/gallon resulted in an annual community cost of
$450,000. This draft feasibility study evaluated wind energy available in Pilot Point and
evaluated wind-diesel fuel saving opportunities.
Different levels of wind penetration were analyzed at three sites: Airplane Lake Hill, Post
Office, and Old Wind Farm. Annual wind speed averages for the collected meteorological data
are 6.05 meters per second (m/s) at the Airplane Lake Hill site, 5.97 m/s for the Post Office, and
5.79 m/s for the Old Wind Farm. The Old Wind Farm site annual wind speed average was the
lowest of the three sites. Airplane Lake Hill site has the highest of the three annual wind speed
averages. Additionally, the community prefers to locate the turbines further away from the
village center, and the Airplane Lake Hill site was determined to be the optimal choice.
The wind data collected and the wind turbine output calculations show that the smaller Bergey
turbine can make the best use of the Pilot Point wind regime. Twelve Bergey Excel 10 kW
turbines on 60-foot towers would produce the highest fuel savings (34.5% fuel savings) and are
recommended to be carried forward to the conceptual design phase.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 City of Pilot Point 1
1.2 Location 1
1.3 Weather 1
2.0 Purpose and Need 2
2.1 Pilot Point Potential Alternative Energy Resources 2
2.2 Pilot Point Heat Demand 2
2.3 Wind-Diesel Integration Controls 2
2.4 Wind Penetration in Pilot Point 3
2.4.1 Wind Penetration Definition 3
2.4.2 Low Penetration Systems 3
2.4.3 Medium Penetration Systems 3
2.4.4 High Penetration Systems 4
3.0 Existing Energy System 5
3.1 Power Plant 5
3.2 Control System 6
3.2.1 Switchgear Power Source 7
3.2.2 Programmable Logic Controller 7
3.2.3 Operator Interface Unit 7
3.2.4 Master Control Auto & Manual Operation 7
3.2.5 Demand Control 7
3.2.6 Main Feeder Breaker Control 8
3.2.7 Gen-Set Control Package 9
3.3 Electrical Demand 9
3.4 Pilot Point District Heat Loop and Heat Sink 9
3.4.1 Electric Boiler Capacity and Fuel Oil Boiler Backup 9
3.4.2 Domestic Heat Water 10
3.4.3 Heat Rejection or Heat Storage 10
3.5 New Power Plant Generator 10
4 Wind Project Sites and Wind Resources 12
4.1 Wind Project Sites 12
4.1.1 Airplane Lake Hill Site 12
4.1.2 Post Office Site 12
4.1.3 Old Wind Farm Site 12
4.2 Wind Analyses for the Three Wind Project Sites 12
4.2.1 Airplane Lake Hill Site 13
4.2.2 Post Office Site 13
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED
4.2.3 Old Wind Farm Site 13
4.3 Site Location Summary and Recommended Location 13
5 Wind Data Collection and Modeling 15
6 Wind Turbine System Alternatives 16
6.1 Pilot Point Wind Turbine Analysis 16
6.2 System Configuration Options 18
6.2.1 Option One (Low Penetration) 18
6.2.2 Option Two (Medium Penetration) 18
6.2.3 Option Three (Medium Penetration) 18
6.2.4 Option Four (Medium Penetration) 19
6.2.5 Option Five (Medium Penetration) 19
6.2.6 Option Six (Medium Penetration) 19
6.2.7 Option Seven (Medium Penetration) 20
7 Economic Analysis 21
8 Permitting and Environmental Analysis 23
8.1 Historical and Archaeological: Alaska State Historic Preservation Office 23
8.2 Wetlands: Determination of the Army 23
8.3 Federal Aviation Administration 23
8.4 Biotic Resources and Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species 23
8.5 Contaminated Sites, Spills, and Underground Storage Tanks 24
8.6 Anadromous Fish Streams 24
8.7 State Refuges, Critical Habitat Areas, and Sanctuaries 24
8.8 Land Ownership 24
8.9 Subsistence Activities 24
8.10Air Quality 24
8.11National Environmental Policy Act Review 25
8.12Environmental Summary and Recommendations 25
9 Geotechnical Reconnaissance 26
9.1 Location One – Airplane Lake Hill Site 26
9.2 Location Two – Post Office Site 26
9.3 Location Three – Old Wild Farm Site 26
10 Turbine Option & Final Recommendations 27
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page iv
APPENDICES
Appendix A Wind Resource Analysis
Appendix B Cost Tables
Appendix C Figures
Appendix D Letters of Support
ACRONYMS
AAC Alaska Administrative Code
AC Alternating current
Auto Automatic
CD Compact disk
DC Direct current
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
GAL Gallons
Gph Gallons per hour
Gal/yr Gallons per year
GCP Gen-set Control Package
Gen-set Generator Set
ISER Institute for Social and Economic Research
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt Hour
m Meter
MAN Manual
MBH 1,000 British Thermal Units
MCS Master Control Switch
Mph Miles per hour
m/s Meters per second
MSL Mean sea level
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page v
OIU Operator Interface Unit
PLC Programmable Logic Controller
SF Square feet
SHPO State Historic Preservation Office
USFWS United States Fish & Wildlife Service
V Volts
VAR Volts-ampere reactive
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 City of Pilot Point
Pilot Point is a city in Lake and Peninsula Borough on the Alaska Peninsula. As of the 2010
census, the population of the city was 68. Most of the community is located on a high glacial
moraine which abuts the eastern shore of Ugashik Bay six nautical miles upstream from Smoky
Point and 18 nautical miles downstream from the village of Ugashik.
This mixed Aleut and Eskimo community developed around a fish salting plant in 1889. At that
time, it was called "Pilot Station," after the river pilots stationed there to guide boats upriver to a
large cannery at Ugashik. In 1892, a saltery was opened, and by 1918, the saltery developed into
a three-line cannery. Many nationalities came to work in the canneries - Italians, Chinese, and
northern Europeans. A post office was established in 1933, and the name of the community was
changed to Pilot Point at that time.
Today, the community is primarily of Alutiiq ancestry and practices a fishing and subsistence
lifestyle. Both in historic and economic terms, Pilot Point has depended for its existence on the
substantial seasonal returns of anadromous Pacific salmon, which is the mainstay economic force
of the entire region. Over half of the residents depend directly on the salmon fishery for their
livelihood, with a small remainder depending on tourism, sports fishing and hunting, and a few
government jobs.
1.2 Location
Pilot Point is located on the northern coast of the Alaska Peninsula and on the eastern shore of
Ugashik Bay adjacent to Bristol Bay. The community lies 84 air miles south of King Salmon
and 368 air miles southwest of Anchorage. A State-owned 3,280-foot long by 75-foot wide
gravel airstrip facilitates air travel. Dago Creek serves as a natural harbor; a dock is available.
The city has a total area of 140.5 square miles of which 25.4 square miles are land and 115.1
square miles are water.
1.3 Weather
Pilot Point's maritime climate is characterized by cool, humid, and windy weather. Average
summer temperatures range from 41 to 60 degrees Fahrenheit (°F); average winter temperatures
range from 20 to 37 °F. Low cloud cover and fog frequently limit travel. Precipitation averages
19 inches per year with 38 inches of snowfall.
Forty percent of the annual precipitation falls during July, August, and September in the form of
light rain. Many windy days occur throughout the year; the prevailing winds are from the north
in winter and from the south and southwest in summer.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 2
2.0 Purpose and Need
2.1 Pilot Point Potential Alternative Energy Resources
Pilot Point is currently using diesel generators for electrical power. Building heating is by
heating oil (diesel fuel). Cooking is performed with propane. All transportation is fueled by
diesel or gasoline internal combustion engines. Fuel oil is currently $4.29/gallon.
The purpose of this feasibility study is to evaluate wind energy as an optimal renewable energy
resource available for Pilot Point. The following three locations were evaluated for a potential
Wind-Diesel Hybrid Wind Farm:
The Airplane Lake Hill Site is located north of Airplane Lake at an elevation of 135 feet
above mean sea level (MSL).
The Post Office Site is located north of Shangin Road at an elevation of 70 feet MSL.
The Old Wind Farm Site located approximately 1,000 feet east of the Old Department of
Transportation Runway at an elevation of 55 feet MSL.
Annual wind speed averages for the collected meteorological data are 6.05 meters per second
(m/s) at the Airplane Lake Hill site, 5.97 m/s for the Post Office site, and 5.79 m/s for the Old
Wind Farm site. Appendix A contains the wind resource analysis for all three sites. Appendix B
has the Community Analysis worksheets, and Appendix C presents project drawings.
2.2 Pilot Point Heat Demand
According to city records, approximately 50,000 gallons of fuel are used annually for heating,
and 40,000 gallons of fuel are used for electricity. Fuel consumption results in an annual
community cost of $450,000 to the city and city citizens.
2.3 Wind-Diesel Integration Controls
The classic wind-diesel hybrid system is based on a combination of fossil fuel engine generators
and wind turbines, usually alongside ancillary equipment such as energy storage, power
converters, and various control components, to generate electricity. Hybrid power systems are
designed to increase capacity and reduce the cost and environmental impact of electrical
generation at remote places and facilities that are not linked to the public power grid. If wind
conditions are sufficient, wind-diesel systems can lower the cost of electricity, reducing reliance
on diesel fuel for remote communities. Wind energy with diesel generator sets (gen-set) relies on
complex controls to ensure correct utilization of intermittent wind energy and controllable diesel
generation to meet the demand of the usually variable load. The diesel gen-set regulates both
voltage and frequency and provides the needed volts-ampere reactive (VAR) support.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 3
One of the considerations with high-penetration wind-diesel systems is that, ultimately, the diesel
needs to be shut off in order to realize maximum fuel savings. To supply the required power
quality and balance the system’s total reactive power at all times without using diesel, other
equipment is needed to provide VAR support (i.e., switchable capacitor bank, static converter, or
synchronous condenser). This function can also be accomplished through power electronics such
as inverters.
2.4 Wind Penetration In Pilot Point
The proposed wind-diesel hybrid in Pilot Point will be a medium penetration system with fuel
savings of up to 35% and a wind capacity factor of up to 48%. The system will have the ability
of the gen-sets to control frequency and voltage. Generators will always be on-line. The existing
John Deer generators can safely reduce their capacity to 35% as long as there are hours of
recovery where they run in the upper 50 - 90% of the rated output.
2.4.1 Wind Penetration Definition
Instantaneous Penetration = Wind Power Output (kW)/ Primary Electrical Load (kW)
Average Penetration = Wind Turbine Energy Output (kWh)/ Primary Electrical Load (kWh)
The difference in these equations is in the units:
Instantaneous penetration is in terms of power; thus, it is the ratio of how much power
is being produced by the renewable resources at any specific instant.
Average penetration is in terms of energy; it includes a time domain and is measured
over days, months, or even years.
2.4.2 Low Penetration Systems
Wind energy contribution to the power system is limited, with instantaneous penetrations below
50%, and the annual average penetration below 20%. Wind power production is always less than
the load, and power plant generators are constantly on-line to control frequency and voltage.
There is no automated control.
2.4.3 Medium Penetration Systems
Wind energy contribution to the power system is higher, with instantaneous penetrations 50-
100%, and the annual average penetration ranges between 20 - 50%. An advanced supervisory
controller is needed to ensure that power quality is maintained. Some modifications to diesel
controls may be necessary, as automated diesel operation is desirable. The integration of
secondary loads, such as a resistance heater, may be required.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 4
2.4.4 High Penetration Systems
Wind energy contribution to the power system is maximized, with instantaneous penetrations
100 - 400%, and the annual average penetration ranges between 50 - 150%. These systems
require a much higher level of system integration, technology, and complexity of control. When
the wind is producing more than the power plant’s load, the generators can go off-line
temporarily. Additional components are needed for power quality and system integrity: load
banks, converters, advanced system controls, and dispatchable loads, and (possibly) energy
storage.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 5
3.0 Existing Energy System
Electric power is provided by the village’s power plant, which is owned and operated by the City
of Pilot Point. The plant was built by AIDEA/AEA in 2008 and is in relatively new condition.
The power plant consists of a single module with separate rooms for the generators and controls
(switchgear). There are a total of three diesel engine gen-sets in the generation room. Power is
generated at 277/480 volt (V) three-phase and stepped up to 12,470/7,200 V wye configuration,
which is distributed throughout the community.
3.1 Power Plant
The following table represents the critical components of the power plant.
Table 1—Power Plant Information
Generator Rating
(kW) Voltage Phases Power
Factor
Engine
Make/Model/Serial
Generator
Make/Model/Serial
1 101 480/277 3 0.8
John Deere 6068TFM76
PE6068T636209
Standford
M08B301878-01
2 67 480/277 3 0.8
John Deere 4045TFM75
PE4045T683258
Standford
M08B301875-03
3 67 480/277 3 0.8
John Deere 4045TFM75
PE4045T68326
Standford
M08B301875-02
The control room is heated by a cabinet unit heater. Cooling and ventilation for the control room
is provided by an operable window. Cooling for the generation room is provided by wall-
mounted exhaust fans. Combustion air for the generators and make up air for the exhaust fans
and the radiators is provided through ducted intakes that are equipped with filters. All intake,
exhaust, and radiator ducts are equipped with normally closed motorized dampers that open only
when required.
All power for the plant is provided from the main bus through the station service circuit breaker.
A dry-type transformer converts the 277/480 V power to 120/208 V for usable power within the
plant, supplied by panel board “SS”.
The building is equipped with an automatic fire suppression system. Multiple detectors are
installed in each room. Activation of a single detector anywhere in the plant shuts the generators
down, closes all duct dampers, and sounds an alarm. Activation of a second detector in the
generation room begins a 30-second countdown to discharge. At the end of the 30-second
period, the system discharges and a second exterior strobe flashes to signal discharge.
The system discharges for at least 10 minutes filling the generation room with a fog of water
mist. Fire detection is provided in all rooms while fire suppression is only provided for the
generation room.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 6
A 160-gallon day tank provides diesel fuel to all engines through a piping manifold. The day
tank is supplied from the adjacent bulk fuel storage tanks. The 15,000-gallon #2 diesel tank is
the primary fuel source. The 10,000-gallon #1 diesel tank is used in cold weather. The day tank
fills automatically and is equipped with several redundant protective systems to prevent overfill
or running the plant out of fuel. All of the engines are connected to a common cooling piping
system that runs to a pair of remote radiators. The radiators are controlled by variable frequency
drive panels that modulate the fan speed to match the cooling load. Jacket water heat from the
generators is captured and used to provide space heat to the school through the heat recovery
system.
3.2 Control System
The switchgear provides control and monitoring of all power generation functions. It is set up
for fully automatic operation but can also be operated manually. It is capable of operating any
combination of gen-sets in parallel. The switchgear is comprised of five sections. There is a
master section that provides overall system control and monitoring, a feeder section that also
contains variable frequency drives, plus an individual section for each gen-set.
The upper portion of each generator section contains all of the low-voltage control equipment
including the Gen-set Control Package (GCP), the control switches, and the annunciation lamps.
The lower portion of each generator section contains the 480 V wiring, the generator circuit
breaker, and the contactor that connects the generator to the bus. The master section contains the
low voltage control equipment, the programmable logic controller (PLC), the operator interface
unit (OIU), and the power meters. The lower portion of the feeder section contains the 480 V
circuit breaker for the main feeder to the community and the circuit breaker for the station
service power. The upper portion contains the variable frequency drives for the radiators.
Under normal (automatic) operation, the PLC monitors the load on the system and selects the
appropriate generator to operate. This operation is referred to as the Demand Control. As the
load increases, the PLC brings a larger generator on-line and takes the smaller generator off-line.
As the load decreases the PLC brings a smaller generator on-line and takes the larger generator
off-line. The system automatically parallels multiple generators to the bus for a smooth and
seamless transition of power from one unit to the next. Any combination of generators can be
operated in parallel to meet an extreme high peak demand. The system will automatically share
load between the generators. These same functions can also be performed manually by the plant
operator.
All control functions can be monitored and many of the system settings can be changed through
the OIU. A server (personal computer) provides access to the same information displayed on the
OIU. The server is connected to the internet and allows the system to be monitored and modified
by another computer in a remote location. Password protection is included in the system
programming to limit access to critical settings and data.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 7
3.2.1 Switchgear Power Source - Primary control power for the switchgear is provided by a
120 V alternating current (AC) to a 24 V direct current (DC) converter located in the master
section. This system operates any time the station service power is on. Power is also supplied to
each generator section from the associated 12 V engine battery. Circuit breakers located inside
the upper portion of each generator section provide protection for the switchgear and power
supplies. A 12 V to 24 V power converter in each generator section provides backup 24 V DC
control power when the main control power is off. If engine battery DC power is lost to a single
generator section, the engine will not be able to start, the ENGINE ALARM and OVERCRANK
lamps will illuminate, and a FAIL TO START banner will display on the GCP. The most likely
cause of this is a dead battery or a tripped circuit breaker.
3.2.2 Programmable Logic Controller - Under normal (automatic) operation, the PLC runs
the Demand Control functions including starting and stopping generators, closes the main feeder
breaker to the community, monitors all system functions, and controls all annunciation lamps.
3.2.3 Operator Interface Unit - The OIU is a touch screen with colored graphic displays. It
shows system operating status, alarm history, power generated, peak load, fuel consumption, and
other data through various screens. It also provides the operator access to the Demand Control
settings and will display the current demand system operating status. The demand set-points are
stored in PLC memory and can be changed using the OIU. The OIU communicates with the
PLC via Ethernet communication. Additional information on the OIU is included in the separate
Operation and Maintenance Manual for the switchgear. All functions performed from the OIU
can also be performed from the server or a remote personal computer via the internet.
3.2.4 Master Control Auto & Manual Operation - The Master Control Switch (MCS) on
the master section will enable the automatic Demand Control when in the automatic (AUTO)
position and will disable the automatic Demand Control when in the manual (MAN) position.
When the MCS is in the AUTO position, the system will operate automatically under the
control of the PLC and will select the appropriate size generator to match the power
demand. This is the normal mode of operation for the system and is referred to as
Demand Control.
The MCS should only be placed in the MAN position in the event of a failure of the PLC.
With the MCS in the MAN position, the gen-sets must be manually controlled. Each
GCP must be set to the MAN mode. The operator must select the appropriate generator
for the power demand, manually start the unit, and place it on-line. See GCP subsection
below for the procedure.
3.2.5 Demand Control - The automatic Demand Control system operates whenever the MCS
is in the AUTO position.
Generators are considered available for Demand Control only when their GCP is in the
AUTO mode, and there are no alarms. See GCP and Alarm sections for additional
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 8
descriptions. The Demand Control system will utilize all available generators as required
to meet the load on the system. The demand levels are shown in Table 2. The operator
can view the current kilowatt (kW) load and the Demand Control set-points on the OIU.
On initial startup, the Demand Control is activated after the feeder breaker has been
closed for one minute. This allows the PLC time to determine the power demand on the
system. See Main Feeder Breaker Control section for additional description.
The PLC monitors the load on the system and compares it to the connected generating
capacity. The Demand Control provides two levels of control for increasing load -
RAISE and OVERLOAD, and one level of control for decreasing load – LOWER. When
the load exceeds the RAISE level for a pre-set time delay (usually three minutes), the
Demand Control will switch to the next higher level of generating capacity. When the
load exceeds the OVERLOAD level, the Demand Control will immediately switch to the
next higher level of generating capacity (no time delay). When the load drops below the
LOWER level for a pre-set time delay (usually five minutes), the Demand Control will
switch to the next lower level of generating capacity. Table 2 lists demand levels for
each combination of generators at the time of the original plant commissioning.
Table 2—Generator Plant Operations
Demand Generator On-Line kW Raise Level Lower Level Overload Level
1 #2 OR #3 67 60 0 67
2 #1 100 90 50 100
3 #1 & #2 OR #3 167 150 80 167
4 ALL 234 ---- 135 ---
3.2.6 Main Feeder Breaker Control - The Main Feeder breaker is used to connect the
bus to the step-up transformer that serves the community load. The MCS determines the
main feeder breaker operation. Under normal (automatic) operation, the breaker is controlled
by the PLC. A control knob can be used to manually control the breaker. A red light
indicates that the breaker is closed, and a green light indicates that the breaker is open.
On a normal startup when the MCS is in the AUTO position, the PLC will attempt to start
all available gen-sets. This is to ensure that there is adequate generating capacity on-line
prior to energizing the community. The PLC will normally wait for a pre-set time delay
(usually 15 seconds) after the available generators are on line before closing the main
feeder breaker.
When the MCS is in the AUTO position, the main feeder breaker can be opened at any
time by rotating the breaker control knob to the OPEN position. The PLC will then start
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 9
all available generators and re-close the breaker fifteen seconds after the available
generators are on-line.
When the MCS is in the MAN position and the bus is live, the main feeder breaker can be
operated manually. Rotate the control knob for the main feeder breaker to the CLOSE
position. The breaker can be opened by rotating the knob to the OPEN position.
3.2.7 Gen-Set Control Package - Each engine generator set is controlled by the GCP
located on the front panel of the associated generator section in the switchgear. The GCP has
four operating modes which are selected by the blue buttons: AUTO, MAN, TEST, and
STOP (off). The mode can be selected individually for each generator. Under normal
operating conditions, all GCPs should be set to AUTO mode.
3.3 Electrical Demand
Table 3 provides energy consumption data for 2012.
Table 3—Energy Consumption Data for Fiscal Year 2012
Community Gross
kWhs
Generated
Diesel Fuel Used Average
kWh
Load
Peak
kWh
Load
Number of
Customers
(Residential/
Community
Facilities)
Gallons Cost ($) Average
Fuel
Price
($/gallon)
Diesel
Efficiency
(kWh/Gallon)
City of Pilot
Point 477,992 39,675 $170,207 $4.29 11.38 52 102 68
Source: 2012 Pilot Point Annual Generation Data Tables, and Annual PCE Report FY 2012
3.4 Pilot Point District Heat Loop and Heat Sink
Excess wind energy can also be utilized by installing a district heating system, which would not
include the school but would include four of Pilot Point’s city buildings. The buildings that
would be connected to the district heating loop are City Hall, Village Council Office, City
Building, and VSPO Office. The proposed district heat loop would consist of two oil-fired
boilers rated at 118- One Thousand British Thermal Units (MBH) and two electric-fired boilers
rated at 54-kW (184-MBH) each. The electric boilers will be programmed to run only when there
is excess wind energy available. Table 4 shows the proposed heating load of buildings to be
connected to the heating loop.
3.4.1 Electric Boiler Capacity and Fuel Oil Boiler Backup
A double 184-MBH (54-kW) electric boiler capable of staging would capture the excess wind
energy and heat up the glycol in the district heating loop and inject the heat into the primary
heating loop. Two modulating condensing 118-MBH fuel oil boilers would maintain the district
heating supply temperature at 190 °F. The existing boilers of buildings connected to the heating
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 10
loop would be disconnected but left in place for future isolation needs. This heating loop with a
centralized heat source would be more efficient than the existing systems.
Table 4—Proposed District Heat Loop, Heating Demand
Building Building Size (SF) Heating Load (MBH)
Annual Calculated Fuel
Oil Demand (GAL)
#3 City Hall 2,880 72 2,291
#4 Village Council Office 1,000 25 796
#9 City Building (Jail) 400 20 636
#11 VSPO Office 1,200 40 1,260
Arctic Piping Heat-Loss 15
Total 4,983
Sub Heating Demand 172
Sub Domestic Water Heating Demand 30
Total Heating Demand 202
3.4.2 Domestic Hot Water
The existing domestic oil-fired and electric hot water heaters in the building connected to the
heating loop would be replaced with indirect-fired domestic hot water tanks. The larger the 140
°F domestic hot water tanks, the longer the energy can be stored.
3.4.3 Heat Rejection or Heat Storage
A heat rejection loop was included in the heat loop design prepared for the City of Pilot Point in
2012. Its pump would operate if there was no heat load in the system, but electric boiler heat was
available. Once all domestic hot water storage tanks were brought up to temperature, the
remaining heat would be rejected by a roof-mounted fin tube heat sink.
3.5 New Power Plant Generator
There are two options for the power plant generators. Leave the existing three generators (101-
kW, 67-kW, and 67-kW) in place or replace one of the 67-kW with a smaller 30-kW engine.
The wind turbine fuel savings are 18% higher for the new 30-kW generator option. For example,
the eight gaia turbine medium penetration system proposed for the Airplane Lake Hill site
produced 26% fuel savings in the wind modeling with the existing engines (see Appendix A). It
would produce 32% fuel savings with the 30-kW generator option. This is due to the smaller 30-
kW generator being a better match for the wind turbines and the village load. The estimated cost
of purchasing a 30-kW generator and installing it in the power plant is $45,000.
Proposed changes to the diesel power generation plant during the installation of the wind farm
include changing out one of the 67-kW generators with a 30-kW generator because the proposed
wind-diesel power generation system is a medium penetration system and will require a gen-set
to be running on standby mode all the time. The yearly cost for running each generator at both
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 11
full power and 50% power is shown in Table 5. Assuming the existing 67-kW generator will
need to run at 50% power after the wind turbines are installed, a cost of $93,951 per year in fuel
cost would result. If a 30-kW generator is installed and runs at full power, a savings of $9,395
per year would be gained. Being that the new generator would run in standby mode at 50%, the
full savings would result in $41,438 per year. The purchase price of the 30-kW caterpillar
generator is $22,750 without shipping and installation. Thus, this gen-set would pay for itself in
less than six months in fuel savings. The resultant changes would save 9,636 gallons per year.
Table 5—Cost Analysis of Smaller Generator
Power Fuel Consumption Fuel Cost Cost per Year
30-kW Caterpillar Generator (Proposed)
Full 2.25 gph $4.29/gal $84,556
50% 1.4 gph $4.29/gal $52,513
67-kW John Deere Generator (Existing)
Full 3.35 gph $4.29/gal $125,894
50% 2.5 gph $4.29/gal $93,951
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 12
4.0 Wind Project Sites and Wind Resources
4.1 Wind Project Sites
Three wind sites were tested: Airplane Lake Hill, Post Office, and the Old Wind Farm. All sites
are well-exposed to winds from all four horizons. Northerly and southerly winds are most
common in Pilot Point. The terrain is mostly flat with small hills. Vegetation is sparse, mostly
grass and bushes.
4.1.1 Airplane Lake Hill Site
This site is located north of Airplane Lake at 135 feet MSL. In 2012, the city installed one 30-
foot met tower on top of the hill to measure wind speed and wind direction. The met tower
location is N 57o 34’20.5” and W 157 o33’10.3”. As the data analysis shows in Appendix A, this
site has the best potential for wind farm development.
4.1.2 Post Office Site
This site is located north of the Post Office at 75 feet MSL. In 2012, the city installed one 30-
foot met tower to measure wind speed and wind direction. The met tower location is N 57o
34’06.0” and W 157 o34’02.5”.
4.1.3 Old Wind Farm Site
Pilot Point used to have two 10-kW wind turbines in an area which is now known as the old
wind farm site. Since 2002, the city has recorded wind data with annual averages of 5.5 m/s. In
2012, one new 30-foot met tower was installed near the old wind farm site to measure wind
speed and wind direction. This site is located northeast of Figley Lake in an area at 55 MSL.
The met tower location is N 57o 34’04.2” and W 157 o32’29.9”.
4.2 Wind Analyses for the Three Wind Project Sites
For all three sites, wind speed was recorded at an elevation of 30 feet. Thus, turbulence could not
be evaluated since multiple elevations are needed at each location to determine turbulence.
Further, the hourly wind speed standard deviation was not available. Therefore, wind shear could
not be evaluated.
Airport wind data was collected from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). However,
only one year (2011-2012) was available for analysis. This year had resulted in a lower average
wind speed than the three evaluated wind sites. The period is too short to be statistically
significant enough to scale the met tower data against.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 13
4.2.1 Airplane Lake Hill Site
Wind Speed: The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind
speed and mean wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power
development. The average wind speed of the data collected is 6.05 m/s, which classifies the site
as mid-wind power class 3 (fair). Missing anemometer data was synthesized to illustrate a more
complete wind profile.
Wind Direction: The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately northern.
A full wind analysis report is in Appendix A.
4.2.2 Post Office Site
Wind Speed: The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind
speed and mean wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power
development. The average wind speed of the data collected is 5.97 m/s, which classifies the site
as mid-wind power class 3 (fair).
Wind Direction: The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately northeastern,
southeastern, and southwestern winds; however, the City of Pilot Point had issues with the wind
direction sensor on this met station.
A full wind analysis report is in Appendix A.
4.2.3 Old Wind Farm Site
Wind Speed: The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind
speed and mean wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power
development. The average wind speed of the data collected is 5.79 m/s, which classifies the site
as mid-wind power class 3 (fair).
Wind Direction: The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately northeastern
and southeastern winds.
A full wind analysis report is in Appendix A.
4.3 Site Location Summary and Recommended Location
Table 6 summarizes the three proposed wind farm sites. The community of Pilot Point does not
desire to have the Wind Farm located in the center of the City. Therefore, the Post Office site
has been removed from consideration as the location for the Wind Farm. The next logical option
would be to evaluate average annual wind speeds. Airplane Lake Hill site has the best
conditions for wind energy production at 6.05 m/s over the Old Wind Farm location at 5.79 m/s.
Site development costs for both Airplane Lake Hill and the Old Wind Farm sites are about equal.
The recommended site for the wind farm location at the City of Pilot Point is the Airplane Lake
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 14
Hill site. Appendix D contains letters from the City of Pilot Point expressing their support for
this location.
Table 6—Site Selection
Site Selection Criteria Airplane Lake Hill Post Office Old Wind Farm
Community Preference Preferred Location Not desired because it is
located in the middle of
the City
Second location approved
by the Community
Average Annual Wind
Speeds
6.05 m/s (13.53 mph) 5.97 m/s (13.35 mph) 5.79 m/s (12.95 mph)
Distance for new
transmission line from
Wind Farm to Power
Plant
1.1 Miles 0.5 Miles 1.6 Miles
Additional Power Poles 0.6 miles (16 poles) None 0.1 mile (3 poles)
Additional Cross Arms 45 Arms 14 Arms 45 Arms
Site Topography Best Good Good
Trail Construction 0.4 miles None 0.1 miles
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 15
5.0 Wind Data Collection and Modeling
The Met tower at the Airplane Lake Hill site was installed on 15 August 2012. However, data
collection did not begin until 2 October 2012 when a sensor could be replaced. From 23 January
to 6 March 2013, the met stations operated intermittently due to freezing rain. Data continues to
be collected, and additional data will be added to the wind resource model during the conceptual
design phase of this project.
Table 7—Met Tower Information
Data Dates 2 October 2012 – 15 August 2013
Wind Power Class High Class 3 (fair)
Power Density Mean, 10 m 204.37 W/m2
Wind Speed Mean, 10 m 5.6 m/s
Max. 10-min Wind Speed Average 6.05 m/s
Maximum Wind Gust 24.9 m/s (12 December 2012)
Weibull Distribution Parameters k = 1.45, c = 6.62 m/s
Wind Sheer Power Law Exponent 0.14
IEC 61400-1, 3rd ed. Classification Class III-C
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 16
6.0 Wind Turbine System Alternatives
6.1 Pilot Point Wind Turbine Analysis
The City of Pilot Point selected the following six turbine options for evaluation at the Airplane
Lake Hill Site: Bergey Excel 10, Gaia-Wind 133, Seaforth AOC 15/50, Vestas V15, Vestas V17,
and Northern Power 100 Arctic. For this analysis, turbines between 10-kW and 100-kW name
plate rated output were evaluated (see Table 8 on the following page). Two criteria were used in
selection of the turbine:
Use one medium-scale turbine versus multiple small-scale turbines; and
Use a small tilt-up tower versus tall fixed tower.
The following criteria were used in turbine evaluation:
Optimized for lower wind classes;
Synchronous, asynchronous, or alternative current generators;
Third-party tested;
Turbine has been successfully used in Alaska; and
Available Alaska experienced installers.
The HOMER energy modeling software was loaded with the wind data and turbine power curves
to evaluate the system performance of each turbine as shown in Table 9.
Table 8 Homer Modeling with Existing Generators (101, 67, 67 kW) at Airplane Lake Hill
Power Unit
Electric
Energy
Produced
Energy
Produced
without
Wind
Turbines
Electric Energy
Produced with
Wind Turbines
% Wind
Capacity
Factor
Excess Electricity
for use in District
Heat Loop
kWh kWh kWh (%) kWh
Total of All Generators - 451,505 - - -
(12) Bergey Excel 10 (10 kW) 708,842 - 460,323 43.8 257,330
(8) Gaia-133 (11 kW) 740,531 - 461,960 59.9 269,801
(3) AOC 15/50 (50 kW) 702,286 - 396,547 30.2 234,579
(3) Vestas V15 (65 kW) 805,953 - 567,446 33.2 354,442
(3) Vestas V17 (75 kW) 902,234 - 678,096 34.4 450,724
NW100 (100 kW) 609,879 - 297,956 34.0 158,371
Notes: Generator Energy production is based on the Pilot Point PCE Report for 7/1/11 to 6/30/12 with a Fuel
Efficiency (kWh per gallon diesel) of $11.38 and an average fuel price of $4.29/gallon.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point AEA Grant 7030007 Page 17 Table 9Wind Turbines between 10and 100kW Rated Output that Were Evaluatedfor Pilot Point Wind FarmWind Turbine CriteriaExcel 10 Gaia-133 AOC 15/50 Vestas V15 Vestas V17 NW100 Manufacturer Bergey Gaia-Wind Seaforth Vestas Vestas Northern Systems Model Model Excel 10 133 AOC 15/50 V15 V17 NW100 Rated Output 10 kW 11 kW 50 kW 65 kW 75 kW 100kW Tower 60 feet tower tilt-up 60 feet tower tilt-up 80 feet tower tilt-up 74 feet lattice 120 feet monopole Cost of One Installed Turbine (without power plant switchgear and transmission line) $54,650 $168,000 $193,500 $475,000 $525,000 $985,000 Turbine Facts Upwind Turbine, Permanent Magnet, Three Rotor Fixed Pitch Blades, Downwind Turbine, Induction Generator, Two Rotor Blades, and Large Swept Area Downwind Turbine, Asynchronous Induction Generator, Three Rotor Blades, Free-Yaw Control Upwind Turbine, Twin Induction Generator, Three Rotor Fixed Pitch Blades, Active Electric Drive Yaw Upwind Turbine, Twin Asynchronous Generator, Three Rotor Blades, Active Electric Drive Yaw Upwind Turbine, Stall-Regulate, Direct Drive Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator, Three Rotor Blades, Active-Yaw Control Alaska Experienced Installer Renewable Energy Systems Alaska Wind Industries, Inc. KEA Halus Power Systems Halus Power Systems Marshcreek, Inc., AVEC, KEA Arctic Climate Options Rated for -40 oF Rated for -4 oFFor gear box, electric heaters lighter oil are available. For generator, low temperature shafting is available Rated for -40 oF Rated for -40 oF Rated for -40 oFThird Party Tested Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Webpage www.bergey.com www.gaia-wind.com www.seaforthenergy.com www.usasolarwind.com www.usasolarwind.com www.northernpower.com
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 18
6.2 System Configuration Options
In consideration of the wind power development options for Pilot Point, four configuration
scenarios were modeled with the HOMER software.
6.2.1 Option One (Low Penetration)
Option One consists of a low penetration wind system using six Bergey Excel 10 turbines at the
Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of six Bergey Excel 10 turbines, no changes to
the diesel generation system are proposed. Additionally, installation of a district heat loop will
not be included to recover excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 100-kW
with a cost for the wind component of the project of $523,400 (turbine and tower purchase only).
A gravel access road of approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over
one mile of transmission lines will need to be installed. The total project cost would be
$1,009,718.
6.2.2 Option Two (Medium Penetration)
Option Two consists of a medium penetration wind system using three Seaforth AOC 15/50
turbines at the Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of three Seaforth AOC 15/50
turbines, changes to the diesel generation system will also be made and include replacing the 67-
kW engine generators with a 30-kW engine generator. Additionally, installation of a district heat
loop will be included to recover excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is
150-kW with a cost for the wind component of the project of $770,100 (turbine and tower
purchase only). A gravel access road of approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and
constructed. Over one mile of transmission lines will need to be installed. Other items to be
considered during the Concept Design Phase will include: SCADA configuration, control system
for the energy recovery district heat loop, and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The
total project cost would be $1,632,281 which is $61,041 more than the grant budget. However,
the Seaforth AOC 15/50 does not have a good experience record in Alaska.
6.2.3 Option Three (Medium Penetration)
Option Three consists of a medium penetration wind system using one Northwind 100 turbine at
the Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of one Northwind 100 turbine, changes to the
diesel generation system will also be made and include replacing the 67-kW engine generators
with a 30-kW engine generator. Additionally, installation of a district heat loop will be included
to recover excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 100-kW with a cost for
the wind component of $1,020,000 (turbine and tower purchase only). A gravel access road of
approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over one mile of transmission
lines will need to be installed. Other items to be considered during the Concept Design Phase
will include: SCADA configuration, control system for the energy recovery district heat loop,
and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The total project cost would be $1,882,181
which is $310,941 more than the grant budget.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 19
6.2.4 Option Four (Medium Penetration)
Option Four consists of a medium penetration wind system using eight Gaia-133 turbines at the
Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of eight Gaia-133 turbines, changes to the diesel
generation system will include replacing the 67-kW engine generators with a 30-kW engine
generator. Additionally, installation of a district heat loop will be included to recover excess
energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 88-kW with a cost for the wind
component of $1,134,000 (turbine and tower purchase only). A gravel access road of
approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over one mile of transmission
lines will need to be installed. Other items to be considered during the Concept Design Phase
will include: SCADA configuration, control system for the energy recovery district heat loop,
and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The total project cost would be $1,996,181
which is $424,941 more than the grant budget.
6.2.5 Option Five (Medium Penetration)
Option Five consists of a medium penetration wind system using three Vestas V15 turbines at
the Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of three Vestas V15 turbines, changes to the
diesel generation system will include replacing the 67-kW engine generators with a 30-kW
engine generator. Additionally, installation of a district heat loop will be included to recover
excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 195-kW with a cost for the wind
component of $1,590,000 (turbine and tower purchase only). A gravel access road of
approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over one mile of transmission
lines will need to be installed. Other items to be considered during the Concept Design Phase
will include: SCADA configuration, control system for the energy recovery district heat loop,
and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The total project cost would be $2,140,818
which is $569,578 more than the grant budget.
6.2.6 Option Six (Medium Penetration)
Option Six consists of a medium penetration wind system using three Vestas V17 turbines at the
Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of three Vestas V17 turbines, changes to the
diesel generation system will include replacing the 67-kW engine generators with a 30-kW
engine generator. Additionally, installation of a district heat loop will be included to recover
excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 225-kW with a cost for the wind
component of $1,740,000 (turbine and tower purchase only). A gravel access road of
approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over one mile of transmission
lines will need to be installed. Other items to be considered during the Concept Design Phase
will include: SCADA configuration, control system for the energy recovery district heat loop,
and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The total project cost would be $2,290,818
which is $719,578 more than the grant budget.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 20
6.2.7 Option Seven (Medium Penetration)
Option seven consists of a medium penetration wind system using twelve Bergey Excel 10
turbines at the Airplane Lake Hill site. With this configuration of twelve Bergey Excel 10
turbines, changes to the diesel generation system will include replacing the 67-kW engine
generators with a 30-kW engine generator. Additionally, the installation of a district heat loop
will be included to recover excess energy. The total generation capacity for this option is 120-
kW with a cost for the wind component of $847,800 (turbine and tower purchase only). A gravel
access road of approximately 0.4 miles will need to be designed and constructed. Over one mile
of transmission lines will need to be installed. Other items to be considered during the Concept
Design Phase will include: SCADA configuration, control system for the energy recovery district
heat loop, and design of the 30-kW engine generator system. The total project cost would be
$1,463,618 which is under the grant budget by $107,621.
Table 10 Project Option Costs
Turbine Options Summary Turbine and Tower
Cost
Total Project Cost Budget Shortfall
and Surplus
Option 1
Low Penetration
Six (10 kW)
Bergey Excel 10 $523,400 $1,009,718 $561,522
Option 2
Medium Penetration
Three (50 kW)
AOC 15/50 $770,100 $1,632,281 ($61,041)
Option 3
Medium Penetration
One (100 kW)
Northwind 100 $1,020,000 $1,882,181 ($310,941)
Option 4
Medium Penetration
Eight (11 kW)
Gaia-133 $1,134,000 $1,996,181 ($424,941)
Option 5
Medium Penetration
Three (65 kW)
Vestas V15 $1,590,000 $2,140,818 ($569,578)
Option 6
Medium Penetration
Three (75 kW)
Vestas V17 $1,740,000 $2,290,818 ($719,578)
Option 7
Medium Penetration
Twelve (10 kW)
Bergey Excel 10 $847,800 $1,463,618 $107,621
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 21
7.0 Economic Analysis
This feasibility study was produced by LeMay Engineering & Consulting, Inc. for the proposed
Wind Diesel System at Pilot Point. Appendix A contains the Wind Resource Analysis. A
Compact Disk (CD) is provided with the Windographer Data Files for all three sites and the
Homer files for the three sites with each turbine analysis. Costs reported in this feasibility study
are provided solely for the Airplane Lake Hill site as it is the preferred community location.
Table 11—Turbine Alternative Comparison Summary at the Airplane Lake Hill Site
Turbine Name Plate
Generation
Capacity (kW)
Estimated
Capital Cost
Estimated Capital
Cost per Installed
kW
Estimated Annual Energy
Production at 100%
Availability
(12) Bergey Excel 10 120 $1,463,618 $12,197 460,426
(8) Gaia-133 88 $1,996,181 $22,684 461,757
(3) AOC 15/50 150 $1,632,281 $10,882 398,828
(3) Vestas V15 195 $2,140,818 $10,979 567,122
(3) Vestas V17 225 $2,290,818 $10,181 678,024
(1) NW-100 100 $1,882,181 $18,822 297,840
Source: Per AEA Community Analysis Worksheet, the estimated Capital Cost per Installed kW includes: $80,000 for the
Cost of Secondary Loads Component of the Project (District Heat Loop) and $20,000 for the Transmission Line
Component of the Project.
The power generation and fuel consumption results from the HOMER modeling was inserted
into the economic modeling program developed by the Institute for Social and Economic
Research (ISER). AEA uses the ISER economic model as the standard approach for scoring
wind project design and construction grant applications. The ISER model considers the capital
cost of the construction and annual cost of operating and maintaining the wind turbines and
weighs them against the benefit cost savings realized from the volume of displaced diesel fuel
required for power generation and heating public facilities. Table 12 summarizes the findings of
the economic evaluation for each turbine option.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 22
Table 12—Summary of Economic Analysis (AEA Model Results)
Turbine
Annual
Wind
Generation
at 80%
Availability
Wind
Energy
for
Power
Wind as
Total
Power
Production
Wind as
Total
Thermal
Production
Power
Generation:
Fuel
Displaced by
Wind
Energy
Thermal
Generation:
Heating
Fuel
Displaced
by Wind
Energy
Benefit/
Cost
Ratio
kWh kWh/yr % % gal/yr gal/yr
(12) Bergey
Excel 10 (10 kW) 368,341 155,672 64.9 36.3 13,679 7,436 1.34
(8) Gaia-133
(11 kW) 369,406 144,395 62.3 36.4 12,689 7,797 1.31
(3) AOC 15/50
(50 kW) 319,062 121,376 56.5 33.4 10,666 6,779 1.12
(3) Vestas V15
(65 kW) 453,698 154,267 70.4 44.0 13,556 10,243 1.54
(3) Vestas V17
(75 kW) 542,419 157,464 75.2 50.0 13,837 13,025 1.61
(1) NW-100
(100 kW) 238,272 108,791 48.9 26.0 9,560 4,577 0.89
Source: AEA Community Worksheets
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 23
8.0 Permitting and Environmental Analysis
Table 13 summarizes permitting and environmental analysis criteria.
8.1 Historical and Archaeological: Alaska State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO)
There were three known historic properties in the vicinity of Pilot Point (but not immediately
within) the three proposed wind farm locations; only one of these locations (St. Nicholas
Church) remains. The Pilot Point Cannery Store has been demolished due to asbestos
contamination and is now a buried inert cell in the landfill. The Pilot Point Cannery has been
highly modified, and most parts have been torn down. The original site is now classified as a
Brownfields cleanup.
Although there are no known or previously-recorded cultural resource sites in the actual
proposed wind farm locations, only a very small portion of the State has been surveyed for cultural
resources, and therefore, the possibility remains that previously unidentified resources may be
located there. A request for SHPO Section 106 Review of the Airplane Lake Hill site will be
submitted during the Conceptual Design Phase.
8.2 Wetlands: Department of the Army
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires a permit for placement of fill in wetlands and waters
of the United States. All three proposed wind farm locations are not in wetlands or waters of the
United States. However, a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination will be requested during the
Conceptual Design Phase.
8.3 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Preliminary coordination has already occurred with the FAA concerning the met towers at Pilot
Point. Based on preliminary review of the online Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace
Analysis tool, all proposed wind farm locations exceed the standard instrument approach area
requirements. Further coordination will be required during the Conceptual Design Phase. Part 77
regulations require an aeronautical study and filing form 7460-1 for the proposed turbine
locations to determine that there is no hazard to air navigation.
8.4 Biotic Resources and Federally Listed Threatened and
Endangered Species: United States Fish & Wildlife Service
(USFWS)
The USFWS lists spectacled eiders and sea otters as threatened species. These species
sometimes populate in the Pilot Point area. Further consultation will be required to determine if
the proposed wind towers are located in a zone designated as spectacled eider breeding habitat or
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 24
zones designated as critical habitat. Spectacled eiders typically nest on coastal tundra near
shallow ponds or lakes, usually within 10 feet of the water. However, spectacled eiders have
been known to stray overland during migration or during periods of low visibility. Section 7
Consultation is not required as federal funds are not being used for this project.
8.5 Contaminated Sites, Spills, and Underground Storage Tanks
A search of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s contaminated sites
database revealed no contaminated sites within any of the three proposed wind farm sites.
8.6 Anadromous Fish Streams
There are anadromous fish streams located within the vicinity of Pilot Point. The Ugashik River
is 3.6 miles from the city, and an unnamed river is 3.5 miles from the city. Both are anadromous
fish streams. However, no road or transmission lines will cross either of these streams. No
further action is required.
8.7 State Refuges, Critical Habitat Areas, and Sanctuaries
The three proposed sites are outside the designated Pilot Point Critical Habitat Area. No further
action is required.
8.8 Land Ownership
The Native Corporation owns all three proposed sites. See letter of support in Appendix D.
8.9 Subsistence Activities
Coordination with Pilot Point community members will be needed to ensure there is little to no
disruption of hunting and harvesting activities from wind farm development. Preliminary
discussion with community members indicate that the three proposed sites are not currently used
for subsistence activities or berry picking. The final location of the towers will be coordinated
with the community during design to minimize impacts to subsistence activities. See letter of
support in Appendix D.
8.10 Air Quality
According to Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 18 AAC 50, the community of Pilot Point is
considered a Class II area. As such, there are designated maximum allowable increased for
particulate matter ten micrometers or less in size, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. Activities
in these areas must operate in such a way that they do not need exceed listed air quality controls
for these compounds. The nature and extent of the proposed project is not likely to increase
emissions or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard or cause a maximum
allowable increase for a Class II area.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 25
8.11 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review
NEPA review is not required for state funded projects.
8.12 Environmental Summary and Recommendations
Table 13 below summarizes environmental data and permit requirements for development of
wind turbines for each of the proposed sites.
Table 13 Environmental Criteria for Proposed Wind Farm Sites
Criteria Proposed Sites
Airport Lake Hill Site Post Office Site Old Wind Farm Site
Historic and
Archaeological
It is unlikely that there are any historic and archaeological sites within the three
proposed wind farm boundaries. However, SHPO Section 106 Review is required.
Wetlands
All three proposed sites are not located in wetlands or waters of the United States.
However, a preliminary Jurisdictional Determination will be requested for the preferred
location.
Federal Aviation
Administration
All three proposed wind farm locations exceed the standard instrument approach area
requirements. Form 7460-1 will be filed for the preferred location.
Threatened &
Endangered Species
Spectacled eiders have been known to stray overland. Informal consultation with the
USFWS will be required for the preferred location. Section 7 Consultation is not
required as federal funds are not being used for this project.
Contaminated Sites There are no contaminated sites within any of the proposed wind farm sites.
Anadromous Fish
Streams No further action is required for any of the sites.
State Refuges, Critical
Habitat, and
Sanctuaries
The three proposed sites are outside the designated Pilot Point Critical Habitat Area. No
further action is required.
Land Ownership Pilot Point Native Corporation Pilot Point Native
Corporation
Pilot Point Native
Corporation
Subsistence Communication/coordination has already begun with the City of Pilot Point.
Air Quality
The Wind Farm project is not likely to increase emissions, contribute to a violation of
ambient air quality standards, or cause maximum allowable increases for PM-10 and
nitrogen and sulfur dioxide.
National
Environmental Policy
Act
Consultation is not required as federal funds are not being used for this project.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 26
9.0 Geotechnical Reconnaissance
The soils and topography in the Pilot Point area are a direct result of past glacial activity in this
region. During the Ice Age, several periods of local glacial advances covered the Pilot Point area.
The glaciers originated in the mountains of the Aleutian Range and traveled north and westward.
Soils at Pilot Point reflect both glacial and pro-glacial features; the bluffs along the Ugashik
River expose thick deposits of till with interstratified thin lenses of sand and gravel. Some of the
hills and lowlands in the area are composed of pro-glacial gravels, sands, silts, and
sand/silt/gravel mixtures.
Rocks and cobbles are located approximately 20-30 feet below ground surface with sand and
gravel 0-20 feet below ground surface on the high lands.
Terrain in the Pilot Point region consists of low hills with many shallow lakes. Many of the lakes
resulted from delayed melting of buried ice blocks within the ground moraine deposits.
9.1 Location One— Airplane Lake Hill Site
The terrain at the proposed Airplane Lake Hill site is located at the top of a hill with an elevation
of 135 feet MSL. This is the highest peak within the area. The hill slopes upward from the north
at a 10% grade and the back side of the hill continues to Airplane Lake at a 26% grade.
9.2 Location Two— Post Office Site
The terrain at the proposed Post Office site is located north of the Post Office with an elevation
of 60 feet MSL. This site slopes upward from the north at 6.5 % grade and continues on the
south side of the site to an elevation of 90 feet MSL.
9.3 Location Three— Old Wind Farm Site
The terrain at the proposed Old Wind Farm site is located at the northeast end of the former City
Air Strip with an elevation of 70 feet MSL. This site is relatively flat with the proposed site
located on a 10 foot knoll.
Draft Feasibility Study November 2013 Pilot Point
AEA Grant 7030007 Page 27
10.0 Turbine Option & Final Recommendations
Based on the findings of this feasibility study, wind analysis, and the economic evaluation,
Option Seven is the preferred wind turbine option for the City of Pilot Point wind-diesel power
generation development. This option consists of twelve Bergey Excel 10 turbines at the Airplane
Lake Hill site. Each turbine has a name plate capacity to generate 10-kW, for a total of 120-kW
of power generation. Each turbine has its own inverter, allowing power to be directed to the Pilot
Point Grid. However, it is recommended that an inverter building be constructed to house the
twelve inverters. This inverter building will have a power bus bar to collect power from all
twelve inverters. A transformer will be used to evaluate the voltage to be delivered to the
generator building for three-phase distribution. Since this is the feasibility study phase, additional
design requirements will be analyzed in the next phase (Conceptual Design Phase) of the project.
Based solely on cost analyses, configuration of twelve Bergey Excel 10 turbines is the only
alternative. The Bergey alternative comes in under budget by $107,621. The next alternative is
three AOC 15/50 turbines which would be over budget by $61,041. All six alternatives are viable
options as far as meeting the needs of the community to offset fuel consumption. AEA does not
recommend either the Gaia-133 or the AOC 15/50. The Vestas V15 and V17 are reconditioned
units and have limited availability.
By selecting one medium scale turbine (NW 100), the community has no backup. If the only
turbine is broken, there will not be any wind energy. It could take up to six months or longer to
get replacement parts to Pilot Point and repair the turbine. The lost fuel savings during that time
would be a large financial impact.
Regarding the tower size, smaller tilt-up towers are easier to install and take down for
maintenance. The community can potentially install 60 - 80 foot tilt-up towers themselves using
a ginpole or hydraulic winch. The community might benefit from tilt-up towers that can be
taken down for maintenance. Larger towers such as 120 foot or higher need to be installed by a
crane which the community of Pilot Point does not have. Maintenance on 120-foot turbines
(such as the NW100) requires tower climbing which requires trained technicians.
The best chance of quickly troubleshooting wind turbine issues in remote location such as Pilot
Point is by educating/training the local operators and making the wind turbines accessible.
The wind data collected and the wind turbine output calculation has shown that the smaller
Bergey turbine can make the best use of the Pilot Point Wind Regime. Twelve Bergey Excel 10
turbines (10 kW *12 = 120 kW) on 60 foot towers produce the highest fuel savings (34.5% fuel
savings) and are the best option to proceed forward with to the Conceptual Design Phase.
Appendix A
Appendix A
Wind Resource Analysis
For the wind farm project in Pilot Point three wind sites were tested: Airplane Lake Hill, Post
Office and the Old Wind Farm. All sites are well exposed to winds from all four horizons.
Northerly and southerly winds are most common in Pilot Point. The terrain is mostly flat with
small hills. Vegetation is sparse, mostly grass and bushes.
A-1
Airplane Lake Hill Site
This site is located north of Airplane Lake on 135ft elevation. In 2012, the city installed one 30ft
met tower on top of the hill to measure wind speed and wind direction. The met tower location
is N 57° 34' 20.5" W 157° 33' 10.3". As the data analysis shows this site has the best potential
for the wind farm development.
Table 1--Airplane Lake Hill Site – Raw Data Set Properties
Variable Value
Latitude N 57° 34' 20.5"
Longitude W 157° 33' 10.3"
Elevation 10 m
Start date 10/2/2012 12:48
End date 8/15/2013 12:58
Duration 10 months
Length of time step 10 minutes
Calm threshold 0 m/s
Mean temperature 15.0 °C
Mean pressure 101.3 kPa
Mean air density 1.225 kg/m³
A-2
Table 2-- Airplane Lake Hill Site – Data Column Properties
Label Units Height Possible
Records
Valid
Records
Recovery
Rate (%)
Mean Min Max Std.
Dev
Wind speed m/s 10 m 45,649 39,271 86.03 6.03 0.00 24.50 3.91
Wind direction average m/s 10 m 45,649 39,271 86.03 13.2 0.00 358.6 109.4
Wind Speed
The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind speed and mean
wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power development. Average wind
speed of the data collected is 6.03m/s.
Wind Direction
The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately northern.
Wind Power Density
The wind power density of 255 W/m
2 was calculated based on the average wind speed of 6.03
m/s, and the estimated air density of 1.225 kg/m³.
Probability Distribution Function
The probability distribution function (PDF), or histogram, of the 10 meter wind speeds indicates
wind speed “bins” oriented toward the lower speeds compared to a normal wind power shape
curve of k=2.0, otherwise known as the Raleigh distribution.
Daily Wind Profile
The average daily wind profile indicates somewhat significant diurnal variability of wind speeds
throughout the day, with lowest wind speeds in the very early morning hours and highest wind
speeds during late afternoon. This coincides nicely of course with typical electrical energy usage
patterns.
Time Series
As is the typical rule in Alaska, the Pilot Point met tower site experiences higher winds in the
winter compared to summer. The higher winds of January, February, and March compared to
July, and August work well with the higher heating loads in the winter months. During those
winter months, heating can be substituted with wind excess energy.
A-3
A-4
Table 3--Airplane Lake Hill – Correlated Data – Data Properties
Variable Value
Latitude N 57° 34' 20.5"
Longitude W 157° 33' 10.3"
Elevation 10 m
Start date 4/16/2012 16:05
End date 8/13/2013 12:45
Duration 16 months
Length of time step 10 minutes
Calm threshold 0 m/s
Mean temperature 15.0 °C
Mean pressure 101.3 kPa
Mean air density 1.225 kg/m³
Correlated Wind Speed
The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind speed and mean
wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power development. Average wind
speed of the data collected is 5.91 m/s. Missing anemometer data was synthesized to illustrate a
more complete wind profile. The synthetic data results in some curve smoothing, but does not
significantly change the analysis. Two wind sites were correlated for that: Airplane Lake Hill
site and Post Office site. Correlation factors were produced based on the total data set average
wind speeds.
Table 4--Correlated Airplane Lake Hill Site – Data Column Properties
Label Units Height Possible
Records
Valid
Records
Recovery
Rate (%)
Mean Min Max Std.
Dev
Correlated wind speed m/s 10 m 69,964 67,819 96.93 5.91 0.00 28.27 3.73
Wind Power Density
The wind power density of 240 W/m
2 was calculated based on the average wind speed of 5.91
m/s, and the estimated air density of 1.225 kg/m³.
A-5
A-6
Post Office Site
This site is located north of the Post Office in an area 75ft above ocean level. In 2012, the city
installed one 30ft met tower on top of the hill to measure wind speed and wind direction. The
met tower location is N 57° 34' 06.0" W 157° 34' 02.5".
A-7
Table 5--Post Office Data - Set Properties
Variable Value
Latitude N 57° 34' 06.0"
Longitude W 157° 34' 02.5'
Elevation 10 m
Start date 4/16/2012 16:05
End date 7/15/2013 23:25
Duration 15 months
Length of time step 10 minutes
Calm threshold 0 m/s
Mean temperature 15.0 °C
Mean pressure 101.3 kPa
Mean air density 1.225 kg/m³
Table 6--Post Office Site – Data Column Properties
Label Units Height Possible
Records
Valid
Records
Recovery
Rate (%)
Mean Min Max Std.
Dev
Wind speed m/s 10 m 65,564 63,681 97.13 5.97 0.00 28.00 3.65
Wind direction average m/s 10 m 65,564 63,681 97.13 0.2 0.00 343.0 10.7
Wind Speed
The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind speed and mean
wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power development. Average wind
speed of the data collected is 5.97 m/s.
Wind Direction
The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately north-eastern, south-eastern,
and south-western winds, however the City of Pilot Point had issues with the wind direction
sensor on this met station. Thus, the wind direction data might be correct.
Wind Power Density
The wind power density of 247 W/m
2 was calculated based on the average wind speed of 5.97
m/s, and the estimated air density of 1.225 kg/m³.
Probability Distribution Function
The probability distribution function (PDF), or histogram, of the 10 meter wind speeds indicates
wind speed “bins” oriented toward the lower speeds compared to a normal wind power shape
curve of k=2.0, otherwise known as the Raleigh distribution.
A-8
Daily Wind Profile
The average daily wind profile indicates somewhat significant diurnal variability of wind speeds
throughout the day, with lowest wind speeds in the very early morning hours and highest wind
speeds during late afternoon. This coincides nicely of course with typical electrical energy usage
patterns.
Time Series
As is the typical rule in Alaska, the Pilot Point met tower site experiences higher winds in the
winter compared to summer. The higher winds of January, February, and March compared to
July, and August work well with the higher heating loads in the winter months. During those
winter months, heating can be substituted with wind excess energy.
A-9
A-10
Old Wind Farm Site
Pilot Point used to have two 10kW wind turbines in an area which is now known as the old wind
farm site. Since 2002 the city had recorded wind data with annual averages of 5.5-6.0 m/s. In
2012, one new 30ft met tower was installed near old wind farm to measure wind speed and wind
direction. This site is located north-east of Figley Lake in an area 50ft above ocean level. The
met tower location is
N 57° 34' 04.2" W 157° 32' 29.9".
A-11
Table 7--Old Wind Farm Data - Set Properties
Variable Value
Latitude N 57° 34' 04.2"
Longitude W 157° 32' 29.9"
Elevation 10 m
Start date 1/28/2012 01:55
End date 8/15/2013 12:55
Duration 19 months
Length of time step 10 minutes
Calm threshold 0 m/s
Mean temperature 15.0 °C
Mean pressure 101.3 kPa
Mean air density 1.225 kg/m³
Table 8--Old Wind Farm Site – Data Column Properties
Label Units Height Possible
Records
Valid
Records
Recovery
Rate (%)
Mean Min Max Std.
Dev
Wind speed m/s 10 m 81,426 75,111 92.24 5.79 0.00 29.05 3.67
Wind direction average m/s 10 m 81,426 75,111 92.24 82.5 0.00 350.8 78.8
A-12
Wind Speed
The wind data collected from the met tower, from the perspective of mean wind speed and mean
wind power density, indicates a good wind resource for wind power development. Average wind
speed of the data collected is 5.79 m/s.
Wind Direction
The wind frequency rose for the test site indicates predominately north-eastern and south-eastern
winds.
Wind Power Density
The wind power density of 225 W/m
2 was calculated based on the average wind speed of 5.79
m/s, and the estimated air density of 1.225 kg/m³.
Probability Distribution Function
The probability distribution function (PDF), or histogram, of the 10 meter wind speeds indicates
wind speed “bins” oriented toward the lower speeds compared to a normal wind power shape
curve of k=2.0, otherwise known as the Raleigh distribution.
Daily Wind Profile
The average daily wind profile indicates somewhat significant diurnal variability of wind speeds
throughout the day, with lowest wind speeds in the very early morning hours and highest wind
speeds during late afternoon. This coincides nicely of course with typical electrical energy usage
patterns.
Time Series
As is the typical rule in Alaska, the Pilot Point met tower site experiences higher winds in the
winter compared to summer. The higher winds of January, February, and March compared to
July, and August work well with the higher heating loads in the winter months. During those
winter months, heating can be substituted with wind excess energy.
A-13
A-14
Appendix B
B-1
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 44%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 120 kW
Cost per installed kW: 13,094$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 155,672 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 13,679 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 7,436 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 21,116 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 93,435$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 50,957$
Average Annual Savings: 144,392$
Lifetime Savings: 2,887,838$
NPV: 2,103,340$
B/C Ratio: 1.34
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (Excel)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-2
B-3
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 60%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 88 kW
Cost per installed kW: 17,855$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 144,395 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 12,689 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 7,797 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 20,485 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 88,293$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 53,427$
Average Annual Savings: 141,720$
Lifetime Savings: 2,834,398$
NPV: 2,064,638$
B/C Ratio: 1.31
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (Gaia)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-4
B-5
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 30.2%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 150 kW
Cost per installed kW: 10,475$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 121,376 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 10,666 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 6,779 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 17,445 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 74,625$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 46,452$
Average Annual Savings: 121,077$
Lifetime Savings: 2,421,535$
NPV: 1,763,952$
B/C Ratio: 1.12
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (AOC)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-6
B-7
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 33%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 195 kW
Cost per installed kW: 8,058$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 154,267 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 13,556 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 10,243 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 23,799 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 97,790$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 70,188$
Average Annual Savings: 167,978$
Lifetime Savings: 3,359,561$
NPV: 2,447,623$
B/C Ratio: 1.56
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (V15)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-8
B-9
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 34%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 225 kW
Cost per installed kW: 6,983$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 157,464 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 13,837 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 13,025 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 26,862 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 104,467$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 89,254$
Average Annual Savings: 193,721$
Lifetime Savings: 3,874,414$
NPV: 2,823,260$
B/C Ratio: 1.80
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (V17)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-10
B-11
Requested Grant Funds: 1,421,240$
Matching Funds: 150,000$
Other Funds: -$
Total Project Cost: 1,571,240$
Match Percentage: 9.55%
Current Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 4.29$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Electricity: 5.48$ /gal
Current Cost of Diesel for Heat: 5.34$ /gal
20 Year Average Cost of Diesel for Heat: 6.85$ /gal
Wind Class: 3
Predicted CF: 34%
Nameplate Capacity of Proposed Wind: 100 kW
Cost per installed kW: 15,712$ /kW
Annual Net Electricity Produced from Wind: 108,791 kWh
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Electrical Generation: 9,560 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel Used for Thermal Loads: 4,577 gal
Annual Reduction in Diesel: 14,137 gal
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Electricity: 64,175$
Average Annual Savings from Wind for Heat: 31,361$
Average Annual Savings: 95,536$
Lifetime Savings: 1,910,716$
NPV: 1,391,506$
B/C Ratio: 0.89
Executive Summary
Pilot Point Wind & Heat (NW100)
Application/Grant #7030007
City of Pilot Point
B-12
Appendix C
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARM
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARMG-101
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARMG-102
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARMG-103
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARMG-104
LEMAY ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.PILOT POINT WINDFARMG-105
Appendix D
D-1
D-2