The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSaint Mary's - Pitka Point Wing Energy Project Conceptual Design Report - Sep 2012 - REF Grant 7040017Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis September 17, 2012 Douglas Vaught, P.E. dvaught@v3energy.com V3 Energy, LLC Eagle River, Alaska V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.350.5047 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e I i This report was prepared by V3 Energy, LLC under contract to Alaska Village Electric Cooperative to assess the technical and economic feasibility of installing wind turbines at the Pitka's Point wind site near the villages of Saint Mary's and Pitka's Point. This analysis is part of a conceptual design report and final project design funded in Round IV of the Renewable Energy Fund administered by Alaska Energy Authority Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1 Synopsis of Economic Modeling Results...................................................................................................1 Villageof St. Mary's/Andreafsky...............................................................................................................1 Wind Resource at Pitka's Point and Saint Mary's.........................................................................................2 WindSpeed...............................................................................................................................................4 ExtremeWinds..........................................................................................................................................5 WindDirection..........................................................................................................................................6 Temperatureand Density.........................................................................................................................6 Wind -Diesel System Design and Equipment.................................................................................................7 DieselPower Plant....................................................................................................................................8 WindTurbines...........................................................................................................................................8 NorthernPower 100 ARCTIC.................................................................................................................8 EWT52-900............................................................................................................................................ 9 LoadDemand................................................................................................................................................ 9 St. Mary's Electric Load.............................................................................................................................9 Combined Saint Mary's-Pilot Station Electric Load................................................................................10 ThermalLoad..........................................................................................................................................11 DieselGenerators...................................................................................................................................11 WASP Modeling, Wind Turbine Layout.......................................................................................................12 OrographicModeling..............................................................................................................................12 WindTurbine Project Site.......................................................................................................................14 Northern Power 100 ARCTIC Turbine Layout.........................................................................................14 WASP Modeling Results for Northern Power 100 ARCTIC Array........................................................14 EWT52-900 Turbine Layout....................................................................................................................16 WASP Modeling Results for EWT 52-900 Turbine...............................................................................16 EconomicAnalysis.......................................................................................................................................18 V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e I ii WindTurbine Costs.................................................................................................................................18 St. Mary's to Pilot Station Intertie Cost..................................................................................................18 FuelCost..................................................................................................................................................19 ModelingAssumptions...........................................................................................................................19 Homer Software Modeling Results.........................................................................................................22 Configuration 1: St. Mary's Only; No Intertie to Pilot Station, NP 100 Turbine Option ....................22 Configuration 2: St. Mary's Only; No Intertie to Pilot Station, EWT Turbine Option .........................23 Configuration 3: St. Mary's Intertied to Pilot Station, EWT Turbine Option......................................24 Appendix A, WASP Wind Farm Report, Pitka's Point Site, NP 100 Turbines...............................................25 Appendix B, WAsP Turbine Site Report, Pitka's Point Site, EWT Turbine...................................................26 Appendix C, HOMER System Report, St. Marys, 3 NP 100 Turbines..........................................................27 Appendix D, HOMER System Report, St. Mary's, 1 EWT-500 Turbine........................................................28 Appendix E, HOMER System Report, St. Mary's + Pilot Station, 1 EWT-500 Turbine.................................29 V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 1 1 Introduction Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is the electric utility for the City of Saint Mary's/Andreafsky as well as the interconnected village of Pitka's Point. AVEC was awarded a grant from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) to complete feasibility and design work for installation of wind turbines, with planned construction in 2014. Wind resource studies of the St. Mary's area began in 2007 with identification of possible wind turbine sites on Pitka's Point Corporation land and Saint Mary's corporation land, located relatively near each other between the villages of Saint Mary's and Pitka's Point. Both sites were equipped with 40 meter met towers, but the Pitka's Point site eventually proved to have the superior wind resource and was chosen as the primary site for conceptual design and feasibility work. CRW Engineering Group, LLC was contracted by AVEC to develop a conceptual design report and design package for a wind turbine project in Saint Mary's. This analysis is a component of that larger effort. Synopsis of Economic Modeling Results Three wind turbine options were modeled for energy balance and economic benefit and cost with Homer software. • Configuration 1 considers three Northern Power 100 turbines serving only the Saint Mary's electrical and thermal load. • Configuration 2 serves the same load, but substitutes one EWT 52-900 turbine in place of the Northern Power turbines. • Configuration 3 maintains use of the EWT turbine, but adds the Pilot Station electrical load via construction of an intertie. Basic economic modeling results are presented in the table below. Project configuration economic modeling results Configuration Wind Turbine Type and Electric Loads Benefit -to -Cost Simple Payback No. Served Ratio Period 1 NP 100's; Saint Mary's 0.94 n/a 2 EWT 52-900; Saint Mary's 1.03 13.6 years 3 EWT 52-900; Saint Mary's + Pilot Station 1.06 10.9 years Village of St. Mary's/Andreafsky St. Mary's is located 450 air miles west-northwest of Anchorage on the north bank of the Andreafsky River, five miles from its confluence with the Yukon River. The City of St. Mary's encompasses the Yupik villages of St. Mary's and Andreafsky. St. Mary's is a Yupik Eskimo community that maintains a fishing and subsistence lifestyle. The sale of alcohol is prohibited in the city. According to Census 2010, 507 people live in St. Mary's and Andreafsky. There are 209 housing units in the community and 151 are occupied. Its population is 91.5 percent Alaska Native, 3.8 percent Caucasion, and 4.7 percent multi- racial. V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 12 Water is derived from Alstrom Creek reservoir and is treated. Most homes in the village have complete plumbing and are connected to the piped water and sewer system. Waste heat from the power plant supports the circulating water system. A 1.7-million-gallon sewage lagoon provides waste treatment. A washeteria is available nearby at Pitka's Point. An unpermitted landfill is shared with Pitka's Point. Electricity is provided by AVEC with interconnection to the village of Pitka's Point and the St. Mary's airport (station code KSM). There is one school located in the community, attended by 185 students. There is a local health clinic staffed by a health practitioner and four health aides. Emergency Services have river, limited highway, and air access. Wind Resource at Pitka's Point and Saint Mary's The wind resource measured at the Pitka's Point met tower site is outstanding with measured wind power class 6 by measurement of wind power density and wind speed. Extensive wind resource analysis has been conducted in the Saint Mary's region, with met towers at a lower elevation site closer to the village of Saint Mary's and near Mountain Village, in addition to the Pitka's Point met tower. Documented in Saint Mary's Area Wind Power Report by V3 Energy, LLC, dated July 20, 2010, the wind resource measured at the nearby Saint Mary's met tower site is less robust than that measured at Pitka's Point and appears to experience similar icing problems. The Mountain Village wind resource is very good as well with mean wind speed near that measured at Pitka's Point. Considering the inland location of Saint Mary's/Pitka's Point, the wind resource measure at the Pitka's Point met tower site is highly unusual, and very favorable, with its combination of a high annual average wind speed, relatively low elevation, likely good geotechnical conditions, and proximity to existing roads and infrastructure. A 40 meter NRG Systems, Inc. tubular -type meteorological (met) tower was installed on Pitka's Point Native Corporation land on the bluff immediately above the Yukon River with excellent exposure to northeasterly winds down the Andreafsky River, northerly winds from the mountains and southerly winds from the flat, tundra plains leading toward Bethel. The met tower site is near an active rock quarry and visual inspection of that quarry indicates the likelihood of excellent geotechnical conditions for wind turbine foundations. Also of advantage for the site is near proximity of the road connecting Saint Mary's to Pitka's Point, the airport and Mountain Village. A two-phase power distribution line (connecting the St. Mary's powerplant to Pitka's Point as one phase and to the airport as the second phase) routes on the south side of the road. This line could be upgraded to three-phase at minimal cost to connect wind turbines to three-phase distribution in Saint Mary's. The Pitka's Point wind resource is comprehensively described in Pitka's Point, Alaska Wind Resource Report by V3 Energy, LLC, dated April 25, 2012. Pitka's Point met tower data synopsis Data dates October 26, 2007 to February 12, 2009 (16 months) Wind power class Class 6 (excellent), based on wind power density V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 13 Wind power density mean, 38 m Wind speed mean, 38 m Max. 10-min wind speed Maximum 2-sec. wind gust Weibull distribution parameters Wind shear power law exponent Roughness class IEC 61400-1, 3rd ed. classification Turbulence intensity, mean (at 38 m) Calm wind frequency (at 38 m) 558 W/mZ 7.62 m/s (17.0 mph) 29.5 m/s 26.3 m/s (81.2 mph), January 2008 k = 1.93, c = 8.63 m/s 0.176 (low) 2.09 (description: few trees) Class II-c (at 38 meters) 0.076 (at 15 m/s) 20% (< 4 m/s) (16 mo. measurement period) Google Earth image, Pitka's Point and Saint Mary's Pitka's Point met tower location sla. J �- _Y m i V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 14 Wind Speed Anemometer data obtained from the met tower, from the perspectives of both mean wind speed and mean wind power density, indicate an outstanding wind resource. Note that cold temperatures contributed to a higher wind power density than standard conditions would yield for the measured mean wind speeds. Anemometer data summary Speed 38 Speed 29 Speed 28 Speed 21 Variable m m m IceFree m Measurement height (m) Mean wind speed (m/s) MoMM wind speed (m/s) Median wind speed (m/s) Max wind speed (m/s) Weibull k Weibull c (m/s) Mean power density (W/m2) MoMM power density (W/m2) Mean energy content (kWh/mz/yr) MoMM energy content (kWh/mZ/yr) Energy pattern factor Frequency of calms (%) (< 4 m/s) MoMM = mean of monthly means 38 28.8 28.2 21 7.68 7.29 7.33 6.83 7.62 7.24 7.33 6.78 7.20 6.80 7.00 6.40 29.50 29.20 27.50 28.40 1.94 1.89 2.22 1.88 8.64 8.20 8.26 7.68 573 502 441 414 559 490 441 404 5,015 4,396 3,861 3,627 4,897 4,294 3,861 3,541 1.95 2.00 1.73 2.01 20.4 21.9 17.6 24.7 Time series calculations indicate high mean wind speeds during the winter months with more moderate, but still relatively high, mean wind speeds during summer months. This correlates well with the Saint Mary's/Andreafsky/Pitka's Point village load profile where winter months see high demand for electricity and heat and the summer months have lower demand for electricity and heat. The daily wind profiles indicate relatively even wind speeds throughout the day with slightly higher wind speeds during night hours. 38 m anemometer data summary Max Max 10- gust (2 Std. Weibull Weibull Mean Median min avg sec) Dev. k c Month (m/s) (m/s) (m/s) (m/s) (m/s) (-) (m/s) Jan 10.17 10.70 29.5 35.9 5.34 1.97 11.45 Feb 9.21 9.20 20.1 23.3 4.07 2.41 10.36 Mar 8.62 8.50 21.8 26.3 4.33 2.07 9.71 Apr 7.98 7.80 16.9 20.6 2.83 3.05 8.90 May 7.27 6.90 21.8 27.1 3.67 2.06 8.19 Jun 5.70 5.80 13.2 15.3 2.62 2.28 6.40 Jul 7.98 7.70 21.7 26.3 3.33 2.55 8.99 Aug 5.89 5.70 15.3 17.9 2.95 2.05 6.62 V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 15 Sep 6.37 6.70 12.5 16.8 2.44 2.85 7.11 Oct 6.80 6.60 20.1 24.8 3.81 1.80 7.62 Nov 7.32 6.40 24.1 29.8 4.48 1.72 8.23 Dec 8.97 8.90 22.9 27.5 4.69 1.95 10.07 Annual 7.62 7.20 29.5 35.9 4.09 1.94 8.64 Monthly time series, mean wind speeds Extreme Winds A modified Gumbel distribution analysis, based on monthly maximum winds vice annual maximum winds, was used to predict extreme winds at the Pitka's Point met tower site. Sixteen months of data though are minimal at best and hence results should be viewed with caution. Nevertheless, with data available the predicted Vref (maximum ten-minute average wind speed) in a 50 year return period (in other words, predicted to occur once every 50 years) is 41.6 m/s. This result classifies the site as Class II by International Electrotechnical Commission 61400-1, 3rd edition (IEC3) criteria. IEC extreme wind probability classification is one criteria - with turbulence the other- that describes a site with respect to suitability for particular wind turbine models. Note that the IEC3 Class II extreme wind classification, which clearly applies to the Pitka's Point met tower site, indicates relatively energetic winds and turbines installed at this location should be IEC3 Class II rated. Site extreme wind probability table, 38 m data Period (years) Vref (m/s) Gust (m/s) IEC 61400-1, 3rd ed. Class Vref, m/s 3 29.2 35.5 1 50.0 10 35.4 43.1 II 42.5 20 37.0 45.0 111 37.5 30 39.6 48.2 designer- 50 41.6 50.6 S specified 100 44.2 53.8 average gust factor: 1.22 V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 16 Wind Direction Wind frequency rose data indicates that winds at the Pitka's Point met tower site are primarily bi- directional, with northerly and east -northeasterly winds predominating. The mean value rose indicates that east -northeasterly winds are of higher intensity than northerly winds, but interesting, the infrequent south -southeasterly winds, when they do occur, are highly energetic and likely indicative of storm winds. Wind frequency rose (38 m vane) Wind Frequency Rose Wind energy rose (38 m anem.) Total Wind Energy (38 m� iw• �` ,a 330` s. Temperature and Density The Pitka's Point met tower site experiences cool summers and cold winters with resulting higher than standard air density. Calculated annual air density during the met tower test period exceeds the 1.204 kg/m3standard air density for a 177 meter elevation by 5.7 percent. This is advantageous in wind power operations as wind turbines produce more power at low temperatures (high air density) than at standard temperature and density. Temperature and density table Month Mean ('F) Min ('F) Temperature Max Mean ('F) ('C) Min ('C) Max ('C) Mean (kg/m3) Air Density Min (kg/m') Max (kg/m') Jan 4.7 -20.2 39.0 -15.1 -29.0 3.9 1.325 1.204 1.416 Feb 4.1 -24.7 32.4 -15.5 -31.5 0.2 1.343 1.264 1.430 Mar 11.0 -14.3 38.8 -11.7 -25.7 3.8 1.275 1.204 1.397 Apr 19.5 -6.3 44.2 -7.0 -21.3 6.8 1.299 1.235 1.372 May 39.4 13.8 65.5 4.1 -10.1 18.6 1.247 1.185 1.314 Jun 49.2 29.5 70.2 9.5 -1.4 21.2 1.223 1.174 1.272 Jul 50.5 37.9 81.9 10.3 3.3 27.7 1.220 1.149 1.250 V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 17 Aug 51.3 33.1 70.9 10.7 0.6 21.6 1.218 1.173 1.263 Sep 45.1 30.0 64.6 7.3 -1.1 18.1 1.233 1.187 1.270 Oct 22.7 5.0 37.2 -5.2 -15.0 2.9 1.290 1.252 1.339 Nov 16.3 -14.6 44.6 -8.7 -25.9 7.0 1.308 1.234 1.398 Dec 13.9 -16.2 45.0 -10.1 -26.8 7.2 1.307 1.204 1.403 Annual 27.4 -24.7 81.9 -2.5 -31.5 27.7 1.273 1.149 1.430 Wind -Diesel System Design and Equipment Wind -diesel power systems are categorized based on their average penetration levels, or the overall proportion of wind -generated electricity compared to the total amount of electrical energy generated. Commonly used categories of wind -diesel penetration levels are low penetration, medium penetration, and high penetration. The wind penetration level is roughly equivalent to the amount of diesel fuel displaced by wind power. Note however that the higher the level of wind penetration, the more complex and expensive a control system and demand -management strategy is required. This is a good compromise between of displaced fuel usage and relatively minimal system complexity and is AVEC's preferred system configuration. Installation of three Northern Power 100 wind turbines or one EWT52/54-900 wind turbine at the Pitka's Point would be configured at the medium penetration level. Categories of wind -diesel penetration levels Penetration Penetration Level Operating characteristics and system requirements Instantaneous Average Low 0% to 50% Less than Diesel generator(s) run full time at greater than minimum 20% loading level. Requires minimal changes to existing diesel control system. All wind energy generated supplies the village electric load; wind turbines function as "negative load" with respect to diesel generator governor response. Medium 0% to 100+% 20%to Diesel generator(s) run full time at greater than minimum 50% loading level. Requires control system capable of automatic generator start, stop and paralleling. To control system frequency during periods of high wind power input, system requires fast acting secondary load controller matched to a secondary load such as an electric boiler augmenting a generator heat recovery loop. At high wind power levels, secondary (thermal) loads are dispatched to absorb energy not used by the primary (electric) load. Without secondary loads, wind turbines must be curtailed to control frequency. High 0% to 150+% Greater Diesel generator(s) can be turned off during periods of (Diesels -off than 50% high wind power levels. Requires sophisticated new Capable) control system, significant wind turbine capacity, secondary (thermal) load, energy storage such as batteries or a flywheel, and possibly additional components such as demand - managed devices. HOMER energy modeling software was used to analyze the Saint Mary's power System. HOMER was designed to analyze hybrid power systems that contain a mix of conventional and renewable energy V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 18 sources, such as diesel generators, wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, etc. and is widely used to aid development of Alaska village wind power projects. Diesel Power Plant Electric power (comprised of the diesel power plant and the electric power distribution system) in Saint Mary's is provided by AVEC. The existing power plant in Saint Mary's consists of one Cummins diesel generator model QSX15G9 rated at 499 kW output, and two Caterpillar diesel generators, a model 3508 rated at 611 kW output and a model 3512 rated at 908 kW output. St. Mary's power plant diesel generators Generator Electrical Capacity Diesel Engine Model 1 499 kW Cummins QSX15G9 2 611 kW Caterpillar 3508 3 908 kW Caterpillar 3512 Wind Turbines This report considers installation of three Northern Power 100 ARCTIC turbines for 300 kW installed wind capacity to serve only the Saint Mary's load, or one EWT 52-900 for 900 kW installed wind capacity to serve Saint Mary's initially but then both Saint Mary's and Pilot Station upon completion of the intertie, which can be considered a companion project. With capacity considerations, three Northern Power 100 turbines best match the St. Mary's load while the EWT52-900 turbine, given its much higher energy output, works best when serving an intertied St. Mary's-to-Pilot Station load. Northern Power 100 ARCTIC The Northern Power 100 ARCTIC, formerly known as the Northwind 100 (NW100) Arctic, is rated at 100 kW and is equipped with a permanent magnet, synchronous generator, is direct drive (no gearbox), and is equipped with heaters and has been tested to ensure operation in extreme cold climates. The turbine has a 21 meter diameter rotor operating at a 37 meter hub height. The turbine is stall -controlled and in the proposed version will be equipped with an arctic package enabling continuous operation at temperatures down to -40' C. The Northern Power 100 ARCTIC is the most widely represented village - scale wind turbine in Alaska with a significant number of installations in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta and on St. Lawrence Island. The Northern Power 100 ARCTIC wind turbine is manufactured in Barre, Vermont, USA. More information can be found at http://www.northernpower.com/. The turbine power curve is shown below. Northern Power 100 ARCTIC power curve 12fl § 30 ak 0 5 10 15 24 25 Wind Speed (mfs) V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 19 EWT52-900 The EWT52-900 is an IEC Class II -A wind turbine rated at 900 kW, equipped with a direct drive, permanent magnet, synchronous generator, a 52 meter diameter rotor, and 40, 50 or 75 meter high towers. The turbine is pitch -controlled, variable speed, and can be equipped with an arctic package enabling continuous operation at temperatures down to -40' C. A variant of this turbine is the EWT54- 900 which is identical to the EWT52-900 but equipped with a 54 meter diameter rotor and limited to IEC Class III sites. The wind resource analysis of the Pitka's Point met tower indicated sufficiently strong wind gust potential to classify the site as IEC Class II by extreme wind probability (see earlier discussion in this report). Three EWT-900 wind turbines are presently operational in Alaska, one in Delta Junction and two in Kotzebue. The EWT52-900 wind turbine is manufactured in Amersfoort, The Netherlands, with North American representation in Bloomington, Minnesota. More information can be found at http://www.ewtinternational.com/?id=4 . The turbine power curve is shown below. EWT52-900 power curve 1,)04) 80D Ymy ?D�} T 4DD a �NO Load Demand Power C u rve WimF 5pacdimisf This analysis includes stand-alone electric and thermal load demand in St. Mary's (which includes Andreafsky and Pitka's Point) and the combined electric load demand of St. Mary's and nearby Pilot Station once the proposed electrical intertie is complete. St. Mary's Electric Load Saint Mary's/Andreafsky load data, collected from December 26, 2009 to October 27, 2011, was received from Mr. Bill Thompson of AVEC. These data are in 15 minute increments and represent total electric load demand during each time step. The data were processed by adjusting the date/time stamps nine hours from GMT to Yukon/Alaska time, multiplying each value by four to translate kWh to kW (similar to processing of the wind turbine data), and creating a January 1 to December 31 hourly list for export to HOMER software. The resulting load is shown graphically below. Average load is 354 kW with a 621 kW peak load and an average daily load demand of 8,496 kWh. V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 110 Seasonal Profit& ,rare reo niar APr May dun Jul xug pep iJel now l.re-- Puin St. Mary's electric load TD8 ODD FAS Y 4D-D��yy ��yy 0 ++4 O W D 2D8 9 im 500 M 550 550 450 ,'_50 250 150 0 12 18 24 ♦] ' '' ! NCY Jan eh r ia- Apr hlayJun Jul Aug Sep'Oct r6ov Qec Combined Saint Mary's-Pilot Station Electric Load Pilot Station is not equipped with automated logging equipment to document the electric load. But, with plant operator logs, AVEC tracks the electric load which is documented in AVEC's annual generation report and also in the power cost equalization reports that AVEC submits to Regulatory Commission of Alaska. It is assumed that the Pilot Station electrical load is similar to that of St. Mary's load on a daily and monthly basis. Hence, the measured St. Mary's load was scaled to a daily load demand of 13,726 kWh to represent a combine St. Mary's-Pilot Station electrical system when the intertie is complete. St. Mary's-Pilot Station combined electric load 1.1100 Seas Ona J. n 800 Y 0 oTA 2Dfl ' i 4D0 dan rea roser Apr rosy jWT Jui Aug pep Lra NOW ueo Ann V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 2� V Max ,�F+ly hig msaie daily Jaw rein k 98d J340 700 5b0 420 20 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 111 Thermal Load The thermal load demand in St. Mary's is well quantified and described in a report entitled St. Mary's, Alaska Heat Recovery Study, prepared for the Alaska Energy Authority by Alaska Energy and Engineering, Inc. and dated August 31, 2011. This report is quite comprehensive and won't be summarized here. Thermal load data needed for HOMER modeling was extracted from a heat demand/heat available graph on page 5 of the report. Monthly thermal heat demand is graphed as a heating fuel equivalent in gallons per month, which was converted to kW demand with a conversion of 0.0312 gallons heating fuel per kWh. Although not entirely precise, the monthly heat demand was equalized across the entire day for each month and then randomized a bit with a five percent day-to-day and five percent time step -to - time step random variability. Resulting thermal load is show below. Saint Mary's thermal load WD 4g 0 � 3r00 (U 200 0 J 19a g dan reo Nier Apr Way run Jul rug pep kAm rrov vec Ann ?70 i 200 03 0 190 4 0 B 12 1S 24 Hour 24 0 .wady hr, near gaily lax n-ir k 440 2W 200 200 120 40 Diesel Generators The HOMER model was constructed with all three St. Mary's generators. For cost modeling purposes, AEA assumes a generator O&M cost of $0.020/kWh. For HOMER modeling purposes, this was converted to $2.50/operating hour for each diesel generator. Other diesel generator information pertinent to the HOMER model is shown in the table below. Note that the Saint Mary's power plant operates is equipped with automated switchgear and can operate in automatic mode with generators in parallel. Diesel generator HOMER modeling information Diesel generator Cummins Caterpillar Caterpillar QSX15G9 3508 3512 Power output (kW) 499 611 908 Intercept coeff. (L/hr/kW rated) .0222 0.0233 0.0203 Slope (L/hr/kW output) 0.215 0.238 0.233 Minimum electric 0% 0% 0% load (%) (0 kW) (0 kW) (0 kW) V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 112 Diesel generator Cummins Caterpillar Caterpillar QSX15G9 3508 3512 Heat recovery ratio (% of waste heat that can serve the 22 22 22 thermal load) Intercept coefficient —the no-load fuel consumption of the generator divided by its capacity Slope — the marginal fuel consumption of the generator Fuel efficiency curve, QSX15G9 0 20 40 80 otttpur.I%) Electrical — Tlaarrnel Fuel efficiency curve, Cat 3508 40 W m .221) 10 0 90 100 Fuel efficiency curve, Cat 3508 1D Fa 4a CBD m � 20 10 Ouiptrt {46} Output {%) Toth Electrical — Tterrnl — Total EW_ctricad — Tharmal — Total WASP Modeling, Wind Turbine Layout WASP (Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program) and is PC -based software for predicting wind climates, wind resources and power production from wind turbines and wind farms and was used to model the Pitka's Point terrain and wind turbine performance. WAsP software calculates gross and net annual energy production (AEP) for turbines contained within wind farms, such as an array of two or more turbines in proximity to each other. For s single turbine array, WASP calculates gross AEP. With one turbine, net AEP is identical to gross AEP as there is no wake loss to consider. Orographic Modeling WAsP modeling begins with import of a digital elevation map (DEM) of the subject site and surrounding area and conversion of coordinates to Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM). UTM is a geographic coordinate system that uses a two-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system to identify locations on the surface of Earth. UTM coordinates reference the meridian of its particular zone (60 longitudinal zones are further subdivided by 20 latitude bands) for the easting coordinate and distance from the equator for the northing coordinate. Units are meters. Elevations of the DEMs are converted to meters if necessary for import into WASP software. A met tower reference point is added to the digital elevation map, wind turbine locations identified, and a wind turbine(s) selected to perform the calculations. WASP considers the orographic (terrain) effects on the wind (plus surface roughness and obstacles) and calculates how wind flow increases or decreases at each node of the DEM grid. The mathematical model has a number of limitations, including the assumption of overall wind regime of the turbine site is the same as the met tower reference site, prevailing weather conditions are stable over time, and the surrounding terrain at both sites is V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis 113 sufficiently gentle and smooth to ensure laminar, attached wind flow. WAsP software is not capable of modeling turbulent wind flow resulting from sharp terrain features such as mountain ridges, canyons, shear bluffs, etc. Orographic modeling of the wind across the site, with the Pitka's Point met tower as the reference site, indicates an outstanding wind resource on the top edge of the bluff, especially downhill from the met tower toward the Yukon River and the village of Pitka's Point. Orographic modeling of Pitka's Point site area, plan view Orographic modeling of Pitka's Point site area, view to west V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 114 Wind Turbine Project Site The project site is Pitka's Point Native Corporation land on and near the location of the Pitka's Point met tower, with boundaries of the Pitka's Point/Saint Mary's Airport road to the north, a rock quarry to the east, the bluff to the south, and a Native Allotment to the west. More specifically, AVEC has obtained site control on Lot 6 within these general boundaries for turbine siting. Site control of Lot 6 is adequate to site one EWT52-900 turbine, but lease rights to additional Pitka's Point Native Corporation property on the bluff edge would be necessary for an ideal layout of Northern Power 100 turbines. It is important to note that winds at the project site, though very robust as a Class 6 wind resource, are prone to rime icing conditions in winter. Rime icing is more problematic for wind turbine operations than freezing rain (clear ice) given its tenacity and longevity in certain climatic conditions. Anti -icing and/or de-icing features may be necessary to sustain availability during the winter months. Northern Power 100 ARCTIC Turbine Layout The Northern Power turbines are located on the bluff edge, which is on and near Lot 6 on Pitka's Point Native Corporation land. Using WAsP software, turbine locations were selected that have high gross energy production based on predicted site wind speeds, but at the same time result in minimal array loss, thus yielding a high net energy production. NP 100 Turbine Layout Turbine UTM (easting, northing) Latitude, Longitude NP 100 wtg 1 Zone 3V 591577, 6879392 62.035691° N, 163.24939° W NP 100 wtg 2 Zone 3V 591646, 6879471 62.036383° N, 163.24803° W NP 100 wtg 3 Zone 3V 591715, 6879552 62.037093° N, 163.24667° W WASP Modeling Results for Northern Power 100 ARCTIC Array The following table presents the WASP software analysis of energy production and capacity factor performance of the Northern Power 100 in a three turbine array at 100% turbine availability (percent of time that the turbine is on-line and available for energy production). The Northern Power 100 performs very well in the Pitka's Point wind regime with excellent annual energy production and minimal array wake loss. Note that the standard (atmospheric conditions) power curve was compensated to the measured mean annual site air density of 1.273 kg/ m3. For the stall -controlled Northern Power 100, power output (for each m/s wind speed step) of the standard power curve was multiplied by the ratio of site air density to standard air density of 1.225 kg kg/m3 and capped at a maximum 100 kW output. Northern Power 100 annual energy production 3 turbine array, 100% availability Parameter Total Average Each Minimum Each Maximum Each (MWh/yr) (MWh/yr) (MWh/yr) (MWh/yr) Net AEP 1,025 341.8 337.6 345.1 Gross AEP 1,043 347.8 345.9 350.6 Wake loss 1.71 % - - - V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 115 Northern Power 100 turbines, view to north Northern Power 100 turbines, view to south V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis 1 16 EWT52-900 Turbine Layout Although orographic modeling indicates highest wind resource on the bluff edge downhill from the met tower, toward the Yukon River and the village of Pitka's Point, land use restrictions dictated placement of the turbine in the southeast corner of Lot 6. This location, though, should still be considered highly desirable for wind energy production by any standard. EWT 52-900 Turbine Layout Turbine UTM (easting, northing) Latitude, Longitude EWT 52-900 Zone 3V 591648, 6879454 62.036230° N, 163.24800 W° WASP Modeling Results for EWT 52-900 Turbine The following table presents the WAsP software analysis of energy production for the EWT 52-900 wind turbine at 100% turbine availability (percent of time that the turbine is on-line and available for energy production). The EWT turbine is predicted to perform extremely well in the Pitka's Point wind regime with excellent capacity factors and annual energy productions. Note that the standard (atmospheric conditions) power curve was compensated to the measured mean annual site air density of 1.273 kg/m3. For the pitch -controlled EWT 52-, power output (for each m/s wind speed step) is multiplied by the ratio of site air density to standard air density of 1.225 kg kg/m3, raised to the one-third power. EWT 52-900 annual energy production, variable turbine availability EWT 52-900 (50 meter hub height) Energy Production Turbine Availability (KWh/yr) Capacity Factor (%) 100% 3,397,000 43.1 95% 3,227,000 40.9 80% 2,717,000 34.5 V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis 117 EWT turbine, view to southwest (village of Pitka's Point top center) EWT turbine, view to east (village of St. Mary's top right) V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 118 Economic Analysis Homer software was used to model static energy balance of the Saint Mary's electrical and thermal power system at one hour increments of time. For both wind turbines considered, they are modeled as connected to the electrical distribution system with first priority to serve the electrical load and second priority to serve the thermal load via a secondary load controller and electric boiler. Wind Turbine Costs Capital and installation costs of three Northern Power 100 ARCTIC wind turbines to serve the village of St. Mary's are based on AVEC's cost estimate in their Renewable Energy Fund Round V proposal. Total proposed project cost, including distribution system extension and AVEC cost share, is $4,443,244, based on a cost estimate developed in 2011 for a Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 analysis. An alternative consideration, which would serve only the village of St. Mary's initially but later would also serve the village of Pilot Station once the intertie is complete, is installation of one EWT52-900 wind turbine on a 50 meter tower. Total project cost for the EWT52-900 turbine, including distribution system extension and power plant upgrades, is $6,153,991. St. Mary's to Pilot Station Intertie Cost An economic analysis of the EWT 52-900 wind turbine in a combined Saint Mary's/Pilot Station electrical system must include the cost of connection as the intertie does not presently exist. This cost, though, is more than simply the cost to build the intertie. It includes avoided costs such as a power plant and bulk fuel upgrade in Pilot Station that will not be built if an intertie to Saint Mary's is constructed instead. Interestingly, this also includes the opportunity of wind power. Airspace restrictions around Pilot Station preclude the option of wind turbines for the village, but with an intertie, the wind power project plan for St. Mary's will be available to also serve Pilot Station. A preliminary cost analysis of non-intertie vs. intertie scenarios is presented in the table below. Although the intertie itself is projected to cost $5.95 million, the net cost of the intertie, with avoided capital costs considered, is a very modest $260,000. Without Intertie St. Mary's Pilot Station With Intertie St. Mary's Pilot Station Notes Powerplant capital cost $5.50 M $5.50 M $5.80 M $0.75 M Bulk fuel capital cost $4.61 M $2.39 M $5.76 M 0 Wind turbine NP100's for St. M., capital cost $4.44 M 0 $6.15 M 0 or EWT for both Intertie capital Cost Difference cost $5.95 M (no turbines) Total Cost (wind turbines not included) $18.00 M $18.26 M $260,000 V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 119 Beyond the avoided capital costs, the benefits of an electrical intertie between Saint Mary's and Pilot Station include increased efficiency of the diesel generators in Saint Mary's as they will operate at higher loading levels and hence more efficient points of their fuel curves, reduced operating and maintenance expenses with fewer diesel generators on line, lower labor costs, reduced maintenance expenses, and reduced repair and emergency expenses with operations consolidated in Saint Mary's. A separate economic analysis indicates a benefit -to -cost ratio of approximately 1.20 for 20 to 50 year evaluation periods. Fuel Cost A fuel price of $5.02/gallon ($1.33/Liter) was chosen for the initial HOMER analysis by reference to Alaska Fuel Price Projections 2012-2035, prepared for Alaska Energy Authority by the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER), dated July, 2012. The $5.02/gallon price reflects the average value of all fuel prices between the 2014 (assumed project start year) fuel price of $4.53/gallon and the 2033 (20 year project end year) fuel price of $5.48/gallon using the medium price projection analysis with social cost of carbon (SCC) included (see ISER spreadsheet for Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 analysis). By comparison, the fuel price for Stebbins (without social cost of carbon) reported to Regulatory Commission of Alaska for the 2011 PCE report is $2.71/gallon ($0.716/Liter). Fuel cost table Average Average Cost Scenario 2014 (/gal) 2033 (/gal) (/gallon) (/Liter) Medium w/ SCC $4.53 $5.48 $5.02 $1.33 Modeling Assumptions HOMER energy modeling software was used to analyze the Saint Mary's power System. HOMER is a static energy model designed to analyze hybrid power systems that contain a mix of conventional and renewable energy sources, such as diesel generators, wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, etc. Homer software is widely used in the State of Alaska to aid development of village wind -diesel power projects. HOMER modeling assumptions are detailed in the table below. Many assumptions, such as project life, discount rate, operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, etc. are AEA default values. Other assumptions, such as diesel overhaul cost and time between overhaul are based on general rural Alaska power generation experience. The base or comparison scenario is the existing St. Mary's/Andreafsky powerplant with its present configuration of diesel generators. Also assumed in the base or comparison scenario is that excess powerplant heat serves the thermal load via a heat recovery loop. Wind turbines constructed at the Pitka's Point site are assumed to operate in parallel with the diesel generators. Excess energy will serve thermal loads via a secondary load controller and electric boiler. Installation cost of either three NW100 wind turbines or one EWT-500 wind turbine assumes a three- phase distribution line extension from the road to the wind turbine site plus a two-phase to three-phase V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis Page 120 upgrade of the distribution system from the line extension tie-in to an existing three-phase distribution point on the west side of the village of St. Mary's. Basic modeling assumptions Economic Assumptions Project life 20 years (2014 to 2033) Discount rate 3% System fixed O&M cost (non -fuel) $683,198/year (St. Mary's only); $964,500/year (St. Mary's + Pilot Station) Operating Reserves Load in current time step 10% Wind power output 50% Fuel Properties (both types) Heating value 43.2 MJ/kg (18,600 BTU/Ib) Density 820 kg/m3 (6.85 lb/gal) Price $5.02/gal ($1.33/Liter) Diesel Generators Generator capital cost $0 (gensets already exist) O&M cost $2.50/hour (at $0.02/kWh) Time between overhauls 20,000 hours (run time) Overhaul cost (all diesel gensets) $75,000 Minimum load 0 kW; based on AVEC's inverter/battery integration plan to enable diesels -off operation of the wind -diesel system Schedule Optimized Wind Turbines Availability 80% (note that EWT turbine is guaranteed by manufacturer to achieve 95% availability, less downtime due to icing) O&M cost $0.0469/kWh for NP 100 and $0.018/kWh for EWT 52-900 (equates to $41,900/year for 3 NP 100 turbines and $48,250/year for EWT 52-900; based on 34% turbine CF both turbines) Wind speed 7.69 m/s at the Pitka's Point wind; scaled to 6.75 m/s in Homer software for 80% turbine availability (38 meter level) Energy Loads Electric: St. Mary's 8.74 MWh/day measured in St. Mary's power plant Electric: St. Mary's + Pilot Station 13.73 MWh/day; St. Mary's power plant data scaled to accommodate Pilot Station load Thermal 5.22 MWh/day based on recovered heat report written by AEE, Inc. Project Cost Assumptions Three basic project configuration and benefit -to -cost evaluations are considered with Homer modeling, as listed below. Configuration Number: 1. Three Northern Power 100 wind turbines serving only the Saint Mary's electrical and thermal load; total project cost of $4,443,244. V3 ENERGY LLC Cagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis 121 2. One EWT 52-900 wind turbine serving only the Saint Mary's electrical and thermal load; total project cost of $6,153,991. 3. One EWT 52-900 wind turbine serving an intertied Saint Mary's and Pilot Station electrical load and Saint Mary's thermal load; total project cost of $6,413,991. This cost estimate reflects the cost of installing one EWT 52-900 turbine in St. Mary's plus the cost the St. Mary's to Pilot Station intertie less the avoided capital costs when closing the Pilot Station powerhouse and consolidating generation operations to Saint Mary's (see below). Configuration 3: Saint Mary's to Pilot Station cost summary Project Item Cost EWT turbine project cost, St. Mary's $6.15 M Intertie project cost + $5.95 M Combined powerplant and bulk fuel upgrades (if intertied) + $12.31 M Individual village powerplant and bulk fuel upgrades (no intertie - $18.00 M Total cost: turbine project + St. Mary's-to-Pilot Station intertie - $6.41 M Percent cost increase from turbine project alone +4.2% V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska 907.3503047 W Z O U a) a O i C: M 00 IOW rn Ln r, n � N O O tD 00 W 00 O r-I M N ' 00 M O Ln O N I� tp 00 I� I Ln O I- O O O V Ln " Ln o lD Ln o F O Ln Ln Ln tD Ln O Ln M N 0 V 4J qj)- (6 " al " ci m Ili Lf1 ' ZT o� O ro a) .. f r L 2 I M O m 4 L \ \ \ cr) c-I ^ W C C C O l.f) aj toM al ri 0 N c-I L O E a +' � > O Q O O L O — aj +, U >� C m cv N O +, O Q 4-1 N O L L a! Q � +' O a1 C +, N U C a Q arc +J in 0 m w !JJ w c, LOU T N o \ 00 X Lu L N U Ln ua--� U \ N X N w v on 00 c N (U a, _ fo N O tab L.L fo O aJ M i C7 M aJ N C v � CD ci o0 C r, 00 OA U o Ln U N U J O N rI _ •0 rl ri J M Ln �M-I � Lrl N 0 r` 'a O O O O Od w � V N Lrl W LqLrl OU -le o O l0 O U n d Z `1 Lri Lfl Lri SZ„ o ^ j. o o i i cY'f ^ C M N 00 O > > Va *' m t> v o n l0 rn ri ~ tN/} iN/? C*.4.l r0 t/? N cM-I c�-I > 0.0 M Ol N m Ln: of Lri J v rn Ln O ]- 0 ri ri o c v =3U . o C E v o w U L N i 4-4� i _ LLJ a O v 4� t > o Co Q p — U tp O o 4J i .- +, � -O U (Y) t� 3 0 Q � > ti Lu L N H N 3 i Q o v o 4-1 C C U LL m N Cfl 0. E N o \ X ti V M i Ua- U L6 W v ^ 00 00 >c G N Ln - — O N O 00 N 7 > ci W ro (U M m Ln � N � M Ln C 00 00 (J -1 OA .0 ro CD �--I L r JLn 1.0 v = O m J O O a) 0 -1 O M _ c-I C M O _0 O M O w � V L1) 00 W 0 O O Il N rz d Z M tT M tD LD j, 0,o i i O N 00 O \ 00 O m N 00 fo r-I O of r-i00 on oro � C rn c J �, cc 0 0 J N 00 o 0 V i v D.0 H 00 O Cyt aJ E 1 O ti a)i coo Z E ro L a) LLI y — u aj 4� t > co a O oe tD O 0 'a v 3 o L Q+ o W 4-1 L H aJ u ai N 3 i Q O v n O �- C C U W m (n m 0. Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 125 Appendix A, WASP Wind Farm Report, Pitka's Point Site, NP 100 Turbines V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska %7,3-10.5047 9/12/12 Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' 'Northern Power 100' wind farm Produced on 9/12/2012 at 10:49:30 AM by licenced user: Douglas J. Vaught, V3 Energy, USA using WAsP version: 10.02.0010 Summary results Parameter Total Average Minimum Maximum Net AEP [MWh] 1025.507 341.836 337.647 345.105 Gross AEP [MWh] 1043.365 347.788 345.942 350.628 Wake loss [%] 1.71 - - - Site results Site Location [m] Turbine Elevation [m] Height [m] Net AEP [MWh] Wake loss [%] wtg 1 (591577, 6879392) NWP 100 162.1809 38 337.647 2.4 wtg2 (591646, 6879471) NWP 100 169.5611 37 342.756 2.25 wtg3 (591715, 6879552) NWP 100 170 38 345.105 0.49 Site wind climates Site Location [m] H [m] A [m/s] k U [m/s] E [W/m2] RIX [%] dRIX [%] wtg1 (591577, 6879392) 38 8.5 2.02 7.56 519 4.0 0.7 wtg2 (591646, 6879471) 37 8.6 2.01 7.63 536 3.6 0.4 wtg3 (591715, 6879552) 38 8.5 2.02 7.57 521 3.5 0.3 The wind farm lies in a map called KWIGUKutmDV. file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReporti ngTem pora ryFile.htm 1 1/7 9/12/12 Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' a 6MDDD i 4 The wind farm is in a project called PitcaPoint_testcase A wind atlas called Wind atlas 2 was used to calculate the predicted wind climates Calculation of annual output for'Northern Power 100' 0 Decay constants: 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 cPrrnr 1 (n°1 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] wtg 1 9.7 2.29 5.64 8.58 24.111 24.111 100.0 wtg2 9.9 2.28 5.78 8.74 25.327 25.327 100.0 wtg3 19.7 2.30 5.62 8.60 24.074 24.074 100.0 Sector 1 total - - I- - 173.512 173.512 1100.0 Sertnr 2 (1 no) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] wtg 1 9.4 2.25 5.51 8.29 22.368 22.368 100.0 wtg2 9.5 2.24 5.60 8.43 23.273 23.273 100.0 wtg3 19.4 2.25 5.56 18.34 122.775 122.775 1100.0 Sector 2 total - - - - 68.417 68.417 100.0 Sector 3 (200) file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm 1 2/7 9/12/12 Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' Turbine A [m/s] k IFreq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.7 2.12 4.59 7.72 16.651 16.651 100.0 wtg2 8.8 2.10 4.58 7.79 16.829 16.829 100.0 wtg3 8.8 2.13 4.69 7.80 17.298 17.298 100.0 Sector 3 total - - - - 150.778 150.778 1100.0 Sector 4 (30°) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.1 2.09 3.78 7.17 12.123 10.739 88.58 wtg2 8.2 2.10 3.77 7.25 12.336 10.984 89.04 wtg3 8.2 2.09 3.84 7.23 12.513 12.513 100.0 Sector 4 total I - I - I -I - 136.972 134.236 192.6 Sartnr 5 (4n°) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.1 2.34 3.52 7.16 11.268 7.042 62.49 wtg2 8.2 2.33 3.57 7.28 11.797 8.586 72.78 wtg3 8.2 2.34 3.58 17.23 111.645 111.645 1100.0 Sector 5 total - - - - 34.710 127.273 178.57 Sector 6 (500) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.9 2.40 4.11 7.87 15.503 12.846 82.86 wtg2 8.9 2.39 4.08 7.91 15.487 13.612 87.89 wtg3 19.0 2.40 4.18 17.95 116.013 116.013 1100.0 Sector 6 total - - - - 47.002 42.470 90.36 SPrtnr 7 (6no) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 10.0 2.22 5.19 8.87 23.064 23.037 99.88 wtg2 10.1 2.21 5.20 8.93 23.284 23.284 100.0 wtg3 10.1 2.22 5.29 18.97 23.818 123.818 1100.0 Sector 7 total - - - - 70.167 70.139 99.96 Sector R (700) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] wtg 1 9.8 2.10 4.93 8.66 21.019 21.019 100.0 wtg2 9.7 2.08 4.80 8.61 20.298 20.298 100.0 wtg3 9.8 2.09 4.96 8.70 21.230 21.230 100.0 Sector 8 total - - - - 162.548 162.548 1100.0 Sartnr 9 (Rno) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 9.1 2.03 4.23 8.04 16.219 16.219 100.0 wtg2 9.0 2.02 4.12 8.00 15.657 15.657 100.0 wtg3 9.1 2.03 4.22 8.04 116.163 116.163 1100.0 Sector 9 total - - - - 48.039 148.039 1100.0 Sartnr 1 n (Qn°l Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.3 2.13 3.67 7.38 12.369 12.369 100.0 wtg2 8.3 2.12 3.58 7.35 12.005 12.005 100.0 wtg3 8.3 2.13 3.66 7.38 12.341 12.341 100.0 Sector 10 total - - - - 36.71-9 136.71.5 1100.0 Sector 11 1000 Turbine JA [m/s] Ik IFreq. [%] U [m/s] IMWh (free) IMWh (park) jEff. [%] file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm I 3/7 9/12/12 Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' Wtg 1 8.0 2.15 13.41 7.09 10.753 10.753 100.0 wtg2 8.0 2.14 3.35 7.08 10.526 10.526 100.0 wtg3 8.0 2.15 3.37 7.07 10.577 10.577 100.0 Sector 11 total - - - - 31.855 31.855 100.0 Sector 12 (1100) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 7.8 2.10 2.88 6.90 8.651 8.651 100.0 wtg2 7.8 2.09 2.86 6.90 8.577 8.577 100.0 wtg3 17.8 2.10 2.83 6.88 18.437 8.437 100.0 Sector 12 total - - - - 125.664 125.664 1100.0 Sector 13 1200 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.0 2.10 2.32 7.08 7.283 7.283 100.0 wtg2 8.0 2.09 2.32 7.08 7.282 7.282 100.0 wtg3 18.0 2.10 2.27 7.05 7.089 17.089 1100.0 Sector 13 total - - - - 121.654 121.654 1100.0 Sector 14 (1300) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.4 2.12 1.93 7.46 6.616 6.616 100.0 wtg2 8.5 2.11 1.94 7.49 6.707 6.707 100.0 wtg3 18.4 2.12 1.89 7.41 16.426 6.426 1100.0 Sector 14 total - - - - 119.749 119.749 100.0 Sector 15 1400 Turbine JA [m/s] 18.9 k 1.94 Freq. [%] 2.00 U [m/s] 7.91 MWh (free) 7.424 MWh (park) 7.424 Eff. [%] 100.0 Wtg 1 wtg2 9.0 1.96 1.99 7.94 7.455 7.455 100.0 wtg3 8.8 1.94 1.96 7.85 7.209 7.209 100.0 Sector 15 total - - - - 22.087 122.087 1100.0 Sector 16 1500 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 9.5 1.67 2.26 8.45 8.802 8.802 100.0 wtg2 9.6 1.67 2.29 8.58 9.062 9.062 100.0 wtg3 19.4 1.67 2.22 8.40 18.614 8.614 100.0 Sector 16 total - - - - 126.477 126.477 1100.0 Sector 17 (1600) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 9.6 1.69 2.42 8.60 9.651 9.651 100.0 wtg2 9.8 1.67 2.47 8.74 9.974 9.974 100.0 wtg3 9.6 1.68 2.39 8.55 9.446 9.446 100.0 Sector 17 total - - - - 129.071 129.071 100.0 Sector 18 (1701) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 9.7 1.82 2.43 8.60 9.910 9.910 100.0 wtg2 9.9 1.82 2.48 8.77 10.366 10.366 100.0 wtg3 19.7 1.82 2.42 8.60 19.864 9.864 1100.0 Sector 18 total - - - - 130.139 130.139 1100.0 Sector 19 (1800) Turbine A [m/s] Ik IFreq. JU [m/s] IMWh (free) IMWh (park) jEff. [%] Wtg 1 8.4 11.72 12.10 17.52 17.150 17.150 1100.0 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm 1 4/7 9/12/12 Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' wtg2 18.6 11.71 12.15 17.64 7.456 17.456 1100.0 wtg3 18.5 11.73 12.12 17.60 7.324 17.324 1100.0 Sector 19 total - - - - 21.931 121.931 1100.0 Sector 20 (1900) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 7.2 1.79 1.87 6.37 4.902 4.902 100.0 wtg2 7.3 1.79 1.90 6.45 5.100 5.100 100.0 wtg3 17.2 1.78 1.89 16.44 5.041 5.041 100.0 Sector 20 total - - - - 15.043 15.043 100.0 Sector 21 (2000) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 6.4 1.96 1.54 5.71 3.218 3.218 100.0 wtg2 6.5 1.95 1.54 5.76 3.271 3.271 100.0 wtg3 16.5 1.96 1.58 5.77 3.364 3.364 100.0 Sector 21 total - - - - 9.853 19.853 1100.0 Sector 22 (2100) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 5.9 2.07 1.20 5.25 2.018 2.018 100.0 wtg2 6.0 2.07 1.18 5.30 2.038 1.723 84.54 wtg3 6.0 2.06 1.22 5.30 2.108 1.701 80.73 Sector 22 total - - - - 6.164 15.443 188.3 Sector 23 (2200) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 5.7 2.35 0.97 5.09 1.437 1.437 100.0 wtg2 5.8 2.37 0.97 5.16 1.482 0.800 54.02 wtg3 15.8 2.35 0.99 5.14 11.499 0.658 43.88 Sector 23 total - - - - 14.417 12.895 165.54 Sector 24 2300 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 6.1 2.79 0.92 5.45 1.535 1.535 100.0 wtg2 6.1 2.78 0.92 5.47 1.542 1.110 72.01 wtg3 6.2 2.79 0.94 5.50 1.602 1.160 72.4 Sector 24 total - - - - 4.679 13.806 81.33 Sector 25 (2400) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 6.0 2.72 1.17 5.37 1.889 1.889 100.0 wtg2 6.0 2.71 1.17 5.37 1.889 1.882 99.66 wtg3 16.1 2.72 1.19 5.42 1.969 1.969 199.99 Sector 25 total - - - - 15.746 15.740 199.89 Sector 26 2500 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 6.0 2.55 1.14 5.35 1.868 1.868 100.0 wtg2 6.0 2.53 1.12 5.33 1.815 1.815 100.0 wtg3 16.1 2.54 1.15 5.38 1.916 1.916 100.0 Sector 26 total I - I - I - - 15.599 15.599 1100.0 Sector 27 (2600) Turbine A [m/s] Ik IFreq. JU [m/s] IMWh (free) MWh (park) jEff. [%] Wtg 1 5.9 12.41 1.01 5.26 1.609 1.609 1100.0 wtg2 5.9 12.40 10.98 15.23 11.550 1.550 1100.0 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm 1 5/7 9/12/12 wtg 3 Sector 27 total Wind farm report for'Northern Power 100' 5.9 12.41 11.01 15.27 1.618 11.618 1100.0 4.777 14.777 1100.0 Sector 29 (27n°) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 5.9 2.42 1.05 5.27 1.677 1.677 100.0 wtg2 5.9 2.42 1.02 5.25 1.618 1.618 100.0 wtg3 16.0 2.44 1.07 15.29 11.728 11.728 1100.0 Sector 28 total I - I - I - 15.023 15.023 1100.0 Sartnr 2Q (2Rno) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 6.4 2.55 1.43 5.71 2.763 2.763 100.0 wtg2 6.4 2.54 1.39 5.68 2.656 2.656 100.0 wtg3 6.5 2.56 1.43 5.74 2.795 2.795 100.0 Sector 29 total - - - - 8.214 18.214 100.0 Cartnr in (?QnO) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 7.1 2.63 1.63 6.30 3.959 3.959 100.0 wtg2 7.1 2.62 1.60 6.28 3.863 3.863 100.0 wtg3 7.1 2.63 1.62 6.29 3.909 3.909 100.0 Sector 30 total - - - - 11.731 111.731 1100.0 Sartnr 31 ('inno) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 7.6 2.29 1.71 6.70 4.834 4.834 100.0 wtg2 7.6 2.31 1.69 6.71 4.779 4.779 100.0 wtg3 7.5 2.29 1.69 6.67 4.727 4.727 100.0 Sector 31 total I - I - I - I - 114.339 114.339 1100.0 Sartnr R7 (11 no) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.1 2.03 2.13 7.15 6.798 6.798 100.0 wtg2 8.1 2.03 2.09 7.18 6.733 6.733 100.0 wtg3 8.0 2.03 2.10 7.11 6.638 16.638 1100.0 Sector 32 total - - - - 120.169 120.169 1100.0 Sertnr';I (,i2no1 Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 7.5 2.14 2.82 6.60 7.791 7.791 100.0 wtg2 7.5 2.10 2.79 6.68 7.877 7.877 100.0 wtg3 7.4 2.13 2.77 6.55 7.526 7.526 100.0 Sector 33 total - - - - 23.195 123.195 1100.0 Sartnr '44 ('4'4no) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 8.2 2.49 3.42 7.25 11.188 11.188 100.0 wtg2 8.3 2.47 3.45 7.33 11.516 11.516 100.0 wtg3 8.1 2.49 3.36 7.19 10.814 10.814 100.0 Sector 34 total - - - - 33.517 133.517 1100.0 Sector 35 (34n°) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] Wtg 1 9.0 2.57 4.11 8.04 16.104 16.104 100.0 wtg2 9.2 2.56 4.18 8.16 16.749 16.749 100.0 wtg3 9.0 2.56 4.04 7.97 15.638 15.638 100.0 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm I 6/7 9/12/12 Wind farm report for 'Northern Power 100' (Sector 35 total +- - - - 48.491 I48.491 1100.0 I Sector 36 (3500) Turbine A [m/s] k Freq. [%] U [m/s] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] wtg 1 9.7 2.45 4.95 8.60 21.417 21.417 100.0 wtg2 9.9 2.44 5.06 8.76 22.454 22.454 100.0 wtg3 9.7 2.46 4.89 8.57 21.047 21.047 100.0 Sector 36 total - - - - 164.918 164.918 1100.0 All SPctnm Turbine Location [m] MWh (free) MWh (park) Eff. [%] wtg1 (591577, 6879392) 345.942 337.647 97.6 wtg2 (591646, 6879471) 350.628 342.756 97.75 wtg3 Wind farm (591715, 6879552) 346.794 11043.365 345.105 11025.507 99.51 198.29 Data origins information The map was imported by 'User' from a file called 'C:\Users\User\Documents\WIndConsUItLLC\Alaska\MAPS\KWIGUKutm DV. map', on a computer called 'SERVER'. The map file data were last modified on the 2/7/2012 at 6:08:37 PM There is no information about the origin of the wind atlas associated with this wind farm. The wind turbine generator associated with this wind farm was imported by 'Doug' from a file called 'C:\Users\Doug\Documents\Wind Turbines\WAsP turbine curves\NW100B_21, 37 meter.wtg', on a computer called 'V3ENERGYACER-PC'. The wind turbine generator file was last modified on the 8/29/2012 at 10:35:48 AM Project parameters The wind farm is in a project called PitcaPoint_testcase. Here is a list of all the parameters with non -default values: Air density: 1.272 (default is 1.225) file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Local/Temp/WaspRepartingTemporaryFile.html 7/7 Saint Marys, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 126 Appendix B, WAsP Turbine Site Report, Pitka's Point Site, EWT Turbine V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska %7,3-10.5047 9/11/12 Turbine site report for'EWT turbine site' 'EWT turbine site' Turbine site Produced on 9/11/2012 at 11:37:19 PM by licenced user: Douglas I Vaught, V3 Energy, USA using WASP Version: 10.02.0010 Site information Location in the map The turbine is located at co-ordinates (591648,6879454) in a map called 'KWiguk A3'. The site elevation is 170.0 m a.s.l. Site effects Sector Angle [0] Or.Spd [%] Or.Tur [0] Obs.Spd [%] Rgh.Spd [%] Rix [%] 1 0 27.48 -6.1 0.00 0.00 0.2 2 10 22.71 -6.4 0.00 0.00 1.0 3 20 18.03 -5.9 0.00 0.00 0.0 4 130 14.06 -4.5 0.00 0.00 0.0 5 40 11.36 -2.5 0.00 0.00 1.4 6 50 10.36 -0.1 0.00 0.00 2.3 7 60 11.24 2.4 0.00 0.00 1.7 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm 1 1/3 9/11/12 Turbine site report for'EWT turbine site' 8 170 13.84 4.4 0.00 0.00 2.1 9 80 17.75 5.8 0.00 0.00 2.5 10 90 22.40 6.4 0.00 0.00 2.7 11 100 27.18 6.2 0.00 0.00 3.6 12 110 31.54 5.3 0.00 0.00 4.4 13 120 35.00 3.8 0.00 0.00 5.3 14 130 37.24 2.0 0.00 0.00 5.5 15 140 38.04 0.1 0.00 0.00 6.2 16 150 37.33 -1.9 0.00 0.00 6.3 17 160 35.19 -3.7 0.00 0.00 6.5 18 170 31.79 -5.2 0.00 0.00 5.9 19 180 27.48 -6.1 0.00 0.00 5.4 20 190 22.71 -6.4 0.00 0.00 5.1 21 200 18.03 -5.9 0.00 0.00 6.3 22 210 14.06 -4.5 0.00 0.00 6.3 23 220 11.36 -2.5 0.00 0.00 7.7 24 230 10.36 -0.1 0.00 0.00 2.9 25 240 11.24 2.4 0.00 0.00 2.8 26 250 13.84 4.4 0.00 0.00 2.9 27 260 17.75 5.8 0.00 0.00 1.0 28 270 22.40 6.4 0.00 0.00 2.0 29 280 27.18 6.2 0.00 0.00 4.7 30 290 31.54 5.3 0.00 0.00 10.6 31 300 35.00 3.8 0.00 0.00 6.1 32 310 37.24 2.0 0.00 0.00 1.8 33 320 38.04 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.8 34 330 37.33 -1.9 0.00 0.00 0.0 340 35.19 -3.7 -5.2 0.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.0 L35 36 350 31.79 The all -sector RIX (ruggedness index) for the site is 3.4% The predicted wind climate at the turbine site Tota I Mean wind speed 8.45 m/s Mean power density 1725 W/mz Wind at maximum power density distribution 13.39 m/s 63 (W/mz)/(m/s) file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/WaspReportingTem pora ryFile.htm 1 2/3 9/11/12 Turbine site report for'EWT turbine site' Results Me Location [m] ITurbine Height [m] Net AEP [GWh] lWake loss [%] :WT turbine site (591648, 6879454) EWT52-900 150 13.397 10.0 The combined (omnidirectional) Weibull distribution predicts a gross AEP of 3.432 GWh and the emergent (sum of sectors) distribution predicts a gross AEP of 3.397 GWh. (The difference is 1.02% ) Project parameters The site is in a project called Saint Mary's EWT. Here is a list of all the parameters with non -default values: Air density: 1.273 (default is 1.225) Data origins information The map was imported by 'Doug' from a file called 'C:\Users\Doug\Documents\AVEC\St Marys\WAsP\Surfer conversion\Kwiguk A3.map', on a computer called 'V3ENERGYACER-PC'. The map file data were last modified on the 8/31/2012 at 9:47:38 AM There is no information about the origin of the wind atlas file. The wind turbine generator was imported by 'Doug' from a file called 'C:\Users\Doug\Documents\Wind Turbines\WAsP turbine curves\EWT52-900, 50 m.wtg', on a computer called 'V3ENERGYACER-PC'. The wind turbine generator file were last modified on the 8/31/2012 at 1:12:58 PM file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Local/Temp/WaspRepartingTemporaryFile.html 3/3 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 127 Appendix C, HOMER System Report, St. Mary's, 3 NP 100 Turbines V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska %7,3-10. 047 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Sensitivity case Primary Load 1 Scaled Average: 8,496 kWh/d Wind Data Scaled Average: 6.75 m/s EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 Capital Cost Multiplier: 1 System Fixed O&M Cost: 683,198 $/yr System architecture Wind turbine Northwind100B, rho=1.272 QSX15G9 499 kW Cat 3508 611 kW Cat 3512 908 kW Cost summary Total net present cost $ 30,255,056 Levelized cost of energy $ 0.556/kWh Operating cost $ 1,734,959/yr 15,aao,00 0 L7 aaa 5,000,00 Q. to Z 0 Net Present Costs — Narthwind100B, rha=1.272 - asxl sG9 — Cat 3505 — Cat 3512 — Boiler Other Component Capital Replacement O&M Fuel Salvage Total Northwind100B, rho=1.272 4,443,244 0 623,366 0 0 5,066,611 QSX15G9 0 444,142 315,626 10,940,718 -21,344 11,679,142 Cat 3508 0 0 10,191 668,347 -30,148 648,390 Cat 3512 0 0 0 0 -40,695 -40,695 Boiler 0 0 0 2,737,356 0 2,737,356 Other 0 0 10,164,263 0 0 10,164,263 System 4,443,244 1 444,142 11,113,448 14,346,421 -92,187 1 30,255,064 Annualized Costs Capital I Replacement I O&M I Fuel I Salvage Component file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm Total 1/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Northwind100B, rho=1.272 QSX15G9 ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) 298,656 0 41,900 0 0 340,556 0 29,853 21,215 735,388 -1,435 785,022 Cat 3508 0 0 685 44,923 -2,026 43,582 Cat 3512 0 0 0 0 -2,735 -2,735 Boiler 0 0 0 183,993 0 183,993 Other 0 0 683,198 0 0 683,198 System 298,656 29,853 746,998 964,305 -6,196 2,033,616 1,000,000 0 -1,550,050 LL s m-2,000,000 C� m -3,000,000 O z -4,000,00D -5,000,000 _�_T Electrical 11111 m elm s M a 0 1 all- 5 B ' 7 0 9 10 11 '12 13 14'15 = Year Kumber Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) Wind turbines 836,247 27% QSX15G9 2,140,260 69% Cat 3508 125,717 4% Cat 3512 0 0% Total 3,102,223 100% 500 — �S7C15G9 = Cat 3508 = Cat 3512 u-0 Consumption Fraction Load (kWh/yr) AC primary load 3,101,035 100% Total 3,101,035 100% Quantity Value Units Excess electricity 1,183 kWh/yr file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St-Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F-6-a na lysis.htm — Capital Replacement Salvage — Operating — Fuel 2/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Unmet load 0.000549 kWh/yr Capacity shortage 0.00 kWh/yr Renewable fraction 0.166 Thermal Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) 726,109 38% QSX15G9 Cat 3508 45,463 1,138,333 2% Boiler 60% Excess electricity 1,183 0% Total 1,911,089 100% Q;!( "K 2N Y ��5� D r�y5 UO 2 E 1 ED 1-00 5D ,D rbguninivAve raae IneFinalF'rcfauGiiun uan Feo mar Apr niay jun. uui Aug pep va rmy L?Ec Load Consumption Fraction (kWh/yr) Thermal load 1,905,663 100% Total 1,905,663 100% Quantity Value Units Excess thermal energy 5,426 kWh/yr QS1C15t�9 Cat 3508 — Cat 3512 — Bailer Ext Eiectrimr t AC Wind Turbine: Northwind100B, rho=1.272 Variable Value Units Total rated capacity 300 kW Mean output 95.5 kW Capacityfactor 31.8 % Total production 836,247 kWh/yr Variable Value Units Minimum output 0.00 kW Maximum output 295 kW Wind penetration 27.0 % Hours of operation 7,339 hr/yr Levelized cost 0.407 $/kWh file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 3/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis 24 I I ortlhw ind100B. 17o=t.272Out ut WIL - rEL - _Pf I.lay �Un .. - _ - _. . -. .. - _- QSX15G9 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 8,486 hr/yr N umber of starts 88 starts/yr Operational life 2.36 49.0 yr % Capacityfactor Fixed generation cost 21.0 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.285 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production 2,140,260 kWh/yr Mean electrical output 252 kW Min. electrical output 1.32 kW Max electrical output 453 kW Thermal production 726,109 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 85.6 kW Min. thermal output 24.3 kW Max. thermal output 135 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 552,923 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.258 L/kWh Fuel energy input 5,440,765 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 39.3 % Mean total efficiency 52.7 % 3L�4 24 QSX15 9 Qutput kw 400 I 16 a 12 � 1� � � II �1� I � � 2W c .;sn Fey Nlaa Apa Niag' Cat 3508 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 274 hr/yr file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 4/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Number of starts 87 starts/yr Operational life 73.0 yr Capacityfactor 2.35 % Fixed generation cost 25.2 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.316 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production Mean electrical output 125,717 kWh/yr 459 kW Min. electrical output 308 kW Max electrical output 546 kW Thermal production 45,463 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 166 kW Min. thermal output 121 kW Max. thermal output 192 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 33,777 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.269 L/kWh Fuel energy input 332,366 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 37.8 % Mean total efficiency 51.5 % 24 Cat 3512 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 0 hr/yr Number of starts 0 starts/yr Operational life 1,000 yr Capacityfactor 0.00 % Fixed generation cost 30.8 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.310 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production 0.00 kWh/yr Mean electrical output 0.00 kW Min. electrical output 0.00 kW Max. electrical output 0.00 kW file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 5/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Thermal production 0.00 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 0.00 kW Min. thermal output 0.00 kW Max thermal output 0.00 1 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 0 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.000 L/kWh Fuel energy input 0 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 0.0 % Mean total efficiency 0.0 % 24 pan Fib Mar Apr :lay uur. ;UI Aug SEG- Oct NDV DEC Emissions Pollutant Emissions (kg/yr) Carbon dio)ade 1,911,006 Carbon mono)ade 3,814 Unburned hydocarbons 422 Particulate matter 287 Sulfur dioxide 3,851 Nitrogen oxides 34,029 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 6/6 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 128 Appendix D, HOMER System Report, St. Mary's, 1 EWT-500 Turbine V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska %7,3-10. 047 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Sensitivity case Primary Load 1 Scaled Average: 8,496 kWh/d Wind Data Scaled Average: 6.75 m/s EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 Capital Cost Multiplier: 1 System Fixed O&M Cost: 683,198 $/yr System architecture Wind turbine 1 EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 QSX15G9 499 kW Cat 3508 611 kW Cat 3512 908 kW Cost summary Total net present cost $ 27,725,176 Levelized cost of energy $ 0.502/kWh Operating cost $ 1,449,923/yr 12,000, D D D �o,oco,aa� ±R 8,0fl0,000 i� 0 L7 $,000,000 m 4,000,000 Q. Z 2,000,000 0 -2,000,000 Casty HOW _.' OF WM Capital Replacement wpErating FuEI SSIV13gE Net Present Costs EINT52-9DG, rtra=1.272 — 12SX15G9 — Cat 35 — Cat 3512 — 8viler - Other Component Capital Replacement OEM Fuel Salvage Total EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 6,153,991 0 717,838 0 0 6,871,830 QSX15G9 0 393,079 292,528 7,640,398 -5,606 8,320,399 Cat 3508 0 0 5,728 375,983 -35,131 346,580 Cat 3512 0 0 0 0 -40,695 -40,695 Boiler 0 0 0 2,062,807 0 2,062,807 Other 0 0 10,164,263 0 0 10,164,263 System 6,153,991 1 393,079 11,180,359 10,079,184 -81,432 27,725,180 Annualized Costs Capital I Replacement I O&M Component file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm Fuel I Salvage I Total 1/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 QSX15G9 ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) 413,645 0 48,250 0 0 461,895 0 26,421 19,663 513,555 -377 559,262 Cat 3508 0 0 385 25,272 1 -2,361 23,296 Cat 3512 0 0 0 0 -2,735 -2,735 Boiler 0 0 0 138,653 0 138,653 Other 0 0 683,198 0 0 683,198 System 413,645 1 26,421 751,496 677,480 -5,474 1 1,863,568 2.000.0100 fl i; 0 m C� m-4,000,000 C ,r O -8,000,000 0 1 2 3 e, 5 - 2 5 10 11 12 1" 'q 15 1' Year llmrtber Electrical Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) 2,483,950 63% Wind turbine QSX15G9 1,394,670 35% Cat 3508 70,731 2% Cat 3512 0 0% Total 3,949,351 100% M0 e[ 400 Y 300 4 200 d 100 ID Consumption Fraction Load (kWh/yr) AC primary load 3,101,035 100% Total 3,101,035 100% Quantity Value Units Excess electricity 848,323 kWh/yr file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St-Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F-6-a na lysis.htm — �S7C15G9 = Cat 3508 = Cat 35112 — Capital Replacement Salvage — Operating — Fuel 2/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Unmet load 0.000183 kWh/yr Capacity shortage 0.00 kWh/yr Renewable fraction 0.425 Thermal Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) QSX15G9 529,058 23% Cat 3508 25,573 1 % Boiler 857,821 38% Excess electricity 848,323 38% Total 2,260,776 100% 410c F.9OninIV Ave FBCie 1 rfermal YrOaucroon dan reD F., APT riay,run uui ,qua pep UIX MW L,__ Load Consumption Fraction (kWh/yr) Thermal load 1,905,663 100% Total 1,905,663 100% Quantity Value Units Excess thermal energy 355,113 kWh/yr AC Wind Turbine: EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 Variable Value Units Total rated capacity 900 kW Mean output 284 kW Capacityfactor 31.5 % Total production 2,483,950 1 kWh/yr Variable Value Units Minimum output 0.00 kW Maximum output 885 kW Wind penetration 80.1 % Hours of operation 8,218 hr/yr Levelized cost 0.186 $/kWh QS1C15t�9 Cat 3508 Cat 3512 Bailer F me&E Eiectrimr t file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 3/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis F65fTFi?_4Rf1. rht-9_MObi fr:iit lkw 24 -__ .-... IYIay Jun — - _ - _. - _. .. _ QSX15G9 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 7,865 hr/yr N umber of starts 232 starts/yr Operational life 2.54 yr Capacityfactor 31.9 % Fixed generation cost 21.0 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.285 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production 1,394,670 kWh/yr Mean electrical output 177 kW Min. electrical output 0.188 kW Max electrical output 453 kW Thermal production 529,058 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 67.3 kW Min. thermal output 24.0 kW Max. thermal output 135 1 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 386,131 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.277 L/kWh Fuel energy input 3,799,532 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 36.7 % Mean total efficiency 50.6 % 4_+ i D9Y1r1rt'4 OLItnidt k 1Clay iun Cat 3508 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 154 hr/yr 400 Soo 200 100 0 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 4/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Number of starts 59 starts/yr Operational life 130 yr Capacityfactor 1.32 % Fixed generation cost 25.2 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.316 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production Mean electrical output 70,731 kWh/yr 459 kW Min. electrical output 368 kW Max electrical output 546 kW Thermal production 25,573 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 166 kW Min. thermal output 139 kW Max. thermal output 192 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 19,001 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.269 L/kWh Fuel energy input 186,974 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 37.8 % Mean total efficiency 51.5 % 24 Cat 3512 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 0 hr/yr Number of starts 0 starts/yr Operational life 1,000 yr Capacityfactor 0.00 % Fixed generation cost 30.8 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.310 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production 0.00 kWh/yr Mean electrical output 0.00 kW Min. electrical output 0.00 kW Max. electrical output 0.00 kW TT i file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 5/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Thermal production 0.00 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 0.00 kW Min. thermal output 0.00 kW Max thermal output 0.00 1 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 0 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.000 L/kWh Fuel energy input 0 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 0.0 % Mean total efficiency 0.0 % 24 pan Fib Mar Apr :lay uur. ;UI Aug SEG- Oct NDV DEC Emissions Pollutant Emissions (kg/yr) Carbon dio)ade 1,342,680 Carbon mono)ade 2,633 Unburned hydocarbons 292 Particulate matter 199 Sulfur dioxide 2,707 Nitrogen oxides 23,498 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 6/6 Saint Mary's, Alaska Wind Power Conceptual Design Analysis P a g e 129 Appendix E, HOMER System Report, St. Mary's + Pilot Station, 1 EWT-500 Turbine V3 ENERGY LLC Eagle River, Alaska %7,3-10. 047 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Sensitivity case Primary Load 1 Scaled Average: 13,726 kWh/d Wind Data Scaled Average: 6.75 m/s EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 Capital Cost Multiplier: 1.04 System Fixed O&M Cost: 964,500 $/yr System architecture Wind turbine 1 EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 QSX15G9 499 kW Cat 3508 611 kW Cat 3512 908 kW Cost summary Total net present cost $ 39,219,376 Levelized cost of energy $ 0.465/kWh Operating cost $ 2,205,058/yr Cast Flaw Smlmry 20,000,000 15,000,000 0 L7 10,000,000 Q. m Vm Z 0 -5,0D0,D00 Capital Replacement Oper$tirtg FuEI SSIV13gE Net Present Costs Ef 52-9DG, rtra=1.272 — 12SX15139 — Cat 35 — Cat 3512 — 8viler - Other Component Capital Replacement O&M Fuel Salvage Total EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 6,413,689 0 717,838 0 0 7,131,528 QSX15G9 0 218,024 166,553 3,832,180 -21,676 4,195,081 Cat 3508 0 100,115 79,706 4,915,244 -35,588 5,059,477 Cat 3512 0 100,004 79,483 6,654,991 -35,837 6,798,643 Boiler 0 0 0 1,685,331 0 1,685,331 Other 0 0 14,349,329 0 0 14,349,329 System 6,413,689 1 418,143 15,392,909 17,087,746 -93,101 39,219,392 Annualized Costs Capital I Replacement I O&M Component file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm Fuel I Salvage I Total 1/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis EWT52-900,rho=1.272 QSX15G9 ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) ($/Yr) 431,101 0 48,250 0 0 479,351 0 14,655 11,195 257,583 -1,457 281,975 Cat 3508 0 6,729 5,358 330,382 -2,392 340,076 Cat 3512 0 6,722 5,343 447,320 -2,409 456,976 Boiler 0 0 0 113,281 0 113,281 Other 0 0 964,500 0 0 964,500 System 431,101 28,106 1 1,034,645 1,148,565 1 -6,258 1 2,636,159 2,0110,000 4 0 li-2,OU8,000 s m C� R-4,000,000 C ,r O Z -a,00-13,000 -8,000,00-0 U 1 2 3 e, 5 e. f 5 1D 11 12 1 Electrical Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) 2,483,950 46% Wind turbine QSX15G9 672,038 13% Cat 3508 916,917 17% Cat 3512 1,275,518 24% Total 5,348,422 100% s00 — �S7C15G9 = Cat 3508 Cat 3512 Y 4-1310 4 20-D Consumption Fraction Load (kWh/yr) AC primary load 5,009,989 100% Total 5,009,989 100% Quantity Value Units Excess electricity 338,447 kWh/yr file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St-Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F-6-a na lysis.htm — Capital Replacement Salvage — Operating — Fuel 2/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Unmet load 0.00555 kWh/yr Capacity shortage 0.00 kWh/yr Renewable fraction 0.332 Thermal Component Production Fraction (kWh/yr) 271,406 13% QSX15G9 Cat 3508 336,030 16% Cat 3512 Boiler 447,474 21 % 700,847 33% Excess electricity 338,447 16% Total 2,094,204 100% B50 C110 259 2,06 E 15C 10 50 11 11 11� n �� wwnl 11 11 �nnnnnn �n i nnnnnn 1:�11:. ■ v 11 11 11 11 II sY.YW Load Consumption Fraction (kWh/yr) Thermal load 1,905,663 100% Total 1,905,663 100% Quantity Value Units Excess thermal energy 188,542 kWh/yr AC Wind Turbine: EWT 52-900, rho=1.272 Variable Value Units Total rated capacity 900 kW Mean output 284 kW Capacityfactor 31.5 % Total production 2,483,950 kWh/yr Variable Value Units Minimum output 0.00 kW Maximum output 885 kW Wind penetration 49.6 % Hours of operation 8,218 hr/yr Levelized cost 0.193 1 $/kWh QS1€15G8 — cat 3508 - Gat 3512 - Boiler Excess Electricity file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 3/6 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis F65fTFi?_4fH1. rht-9_MObi fr:iit kVw QSX15G9 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 4,478 hr/yr N umber of starts 431 starts/yr Operational life 4.47 15.4 yr % Capacityfactor Fixed generation cost 21.0 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.285 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production Mean electrical output 672,038 kWh/yr 150 kW Min. electrical output 0.413 kW Max electrical output 499 kW Thermal production 271,406 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 60.6 kW Min. thermal output 24.0 kW Max. thermal output 146 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 193,671 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.288 L/kWh Fuel energy input 1,905,724 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 35.3 % Mean total efficiency 49.5 % 11119.71W 24 m 1B a 0 x � U Jan Fea pa play jun _.4f - _ Cat 3508 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 2,143 hr/yr file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 4/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Number of starts 680 starts/yr Operational life 9.33 yr Capacityfactor 17.1 % Fixed generation cost 25.2 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.316 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production Mean electrical output 916,917 kWh/yr 428 kW Min. electrical output 22.6 kW Max electrical output 555 kW Thermal production 336,030 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 157 kW Min. thermal output 37.4 kW Max. thermal output 194 kW Value Units Quantity Fuel consumption 248,407 L/yr Specific fuel consumption 0.271 L/kWh Fuel energy input 2,444,326 kWh/yr Mean electrical efficiency 37.5 % Mean total efficiency 51.3 % 24 Cat 3512 Quantity Value Units Hours of operation 2,137 hr/yr N umber of starts 302 starts/yr Operational life 9.36 yr Capacityfactor 16.0 % Fixed generation cost 30.8 $/hr Marginal generation cost 0.310 $/kWhyr Quantity Value Units Electrical production 1,275,518 kWh/yr Mean electrical output 597 kW Min. electrical output 89.2 1 kW Max electrical output 814 kW l4T M Q00 4W 240 120 0 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 5/6 9/17/12 System Report - St Marys -Pilot Stn, REF 6 analysis Thermal production 447,474 kWh/yr Mean thermal output 209 kW Min. thermal output 65.2 kW Max thermal output 271 kW Quantity Value Units Fuel consumption 336,331 L/yr Specific fuel consumption Fuel energy input 0.264 L/kWh kWh/yr % 3,309,494 Mean electrical efficiency 38.5 Mean total efficiency 52.1 % 24 an Feb Mar Apr hbay Jun. Jul Aug Sep � _. , _ . � _L Emissions Pollutant Emissions (kg/yr) Carbon dio)ade 2,275,165 Carbon mono)ade 5,060 Unburned hydocarbons 560 Particulate matter 381 Sulfur dio)ade 4,577 Nitrogen oxides 45,148 file:///C:/Users/Doug/AppData/Loca I/Temp/St_Marys-Pilot_Stn,_RE F_6_a na lysis.htm 6/6