Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Unalaska Enviromental Feasibility Report 1984
27.06 -03° April 5,1985 Mr.Ted Bond Petroleum Geologist Division of Of1 and Gas Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-034 Anchorage,Alaska 99510DearMrzBond: In response to Renel Hall's letter of March 15,1985,the following{4s a report of the results of our inspection of the Makushin ST-1 geothermal well: Inspection Date Wellhead Pressure 10/09/84 137 psi 11/16/84 137 psi 12/14/84 137 psi No signs of leakage or pressure buildup have been observed during inspections.A fourth inspection was scheduled for March but has been delayed due to inclement weather conditions fn Dutch Harbor. I wil]report the results of quarterly inspections as they occur. - a J ee ee ee ;David Denig-Chakroff Project Manager DDC/jm Pa" |fey tater BZ8959/245 Pity,Cade Fils Code:__6:2 3 4 |J.Data:55 F5.1 DC.GeO STAVE OF ALASTAIR /msuae como DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES POUCH 7-034 DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99510 RECEIVED MAR 20 1985 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY March 15,1985 Alaska Power Authority 334 W.5th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 Attn:David Denig-Chakroff Dear Mr.Denig-Chakroff: In your letter dated September 4,1984,monitoring of the goethermal ; wellhead on the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project is referenced.Itstates,"The wellhead wil]be monitored and inspected once a month for the first three months of suspension and once every three months thereafter ifnosignsofleakageorpressurebuildupareobserved". The Division of Oi]and Gas desires to keep apprised of your monitoring results.Please send a copy of the above-referenced inspection to Mr.Ted Bond. Sincerely, Hand Col.Renel Hall Clerk 02431 Pci.'Code: File Code:_4@.03 J.Date:5)7./ 2e,06.93 ALEUTIANS.EAST COASTAL RESOURCE SERVICE AREA1689"C”STREET,SUITE 201 ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 907)276-2700(RECEIVED FR:Abby Arnold,Program Director RE:Notice of Public Hearing DT:February 28,1985 -_-_-_- TO:All Interested Parties bf /j ¢PLASSAFONLAAUTHCRITY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing will be held on the Aleutians East CRSA Public Hearing DraftCoastalManagementPlanonApril1,1985 in Cold Bay,Alaska in the Com SerFacBuildingat7:00 p.m.The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimonyontheAleutiansEastCRSAdraftCoastalManagementPlanVolumesI,II,andIIIasrequiredunder6AAC85145.The public is encouraged to attend andwillbegiventheopportunitytocomment. Pre},Code:3a File Code:(gb:O3 { J.Date FS.97 ddrdthSAlibelRLALLLWadAadLEgaytheiPave(((el alWeYrais)"a ,{\| | =s \AeAnt WiDa =EG EN i ilie pL Needy Pb LTT BSowe.eal init pie 3 wos 6 §JXYheeQosfi ®L wOe &ogo 3aiQs »(OO a3 2SS%i tieFESWahD5ee= Woo 5:202 Neg DEPARTMENTOFTHEARMY NORTH PACIFIC DIVISION,CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O.BOX 2870 Portland,OR 97208-2870 Menager,Alaska Continental Shelf Bureau of Land Management Box 1159 Ancherage,Alaska 99510 GE -O%- FIRST CLASS - Ob Unalaska,AlaskaSmall-ScaleHydropower'6G oaFileCode:__.J.date:JF,/7S.L ,/ LIBRARIES Library University of Alaska College,Alaska 99701 Government Documents University of Alaska Library 3211 Providence Drive Anchorage,Alaska 99504 Z.J.Loussac Library LOT F Street Anchorage,Alaska 99502 Alaska Resources Library 701 C Street Anchorage,Alaska 99513 Alaska State Library 100 Calhoun Street State Office Building ATTN:Documents Section Juneau,Alaska 99811 Unalaska School Library Unalaska,Alaska 99685 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NORTH PACIFIC DIVISION,CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O,BOX 2870 PORTLAND,OREGON $7208 REPLY TO 26 June 1984 ATTENTION OF: Planning Division NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 'FOR HYDROELECTRIC POWER AND FISH ENHANCEMENT FOR UNALASKA,ALASKA I am pleased to announce completion of a report and environmental impact statement recommending hydropower development to provide additional electric power for Unalaska,a community located in the Aleutian Island region of southwestern Alaska.The recommended plan would provide for enhancement of fishery resources on the Shaishnikof River near Unalaska. FINDINGS The community of Unalaska has experienced increases in electrical generation costs which have nearly tripled from 13 cents per kilowatt hour (kwh)in 1979 to 34 cents per kwh in 1983.With Unalaska's increasing demand for electrical energy and the future cost of diesel fuel used by Unalaska expected to increase,it is anticipated electrical generation costs will continue to rise.J]find that hydropower development,consisting of two generating units totaling 700 kilowatts (kw)capacity on the Shaishnikof River and a 260-kw pressure-reducing turbine installed in an existing water supply line on Pyramid Creek,would be economically feasible.These would provide the best means of supplementing existing and future diesel generation at Unalaska.The combined hydropower projects would produce an estimated 5,288,000 kwh of energy annually,or a savings of $950,000 over alternative means of energy production.: In addition to hydropower development there is a need to preserve and, if possible,enhance the resource of pink salmon in Shaishnikof River. Pink salmon provide a commercially valuable source of income for fishermen in the region and contribute to the national economy.Therefore,I also find that the implementation of fish enhancement measures,involving removal of falls which block upstream passage of.pink salmon in the Shaishnikof River,would result in a substantial increase in the annual number of fish available for harvest. The first cost of the combined hydropower/fishery enhancement project is estimated to be $6,421,000 at October 1983 price levels,including $34,000 first cost for fish enhancement.Annual operation,maintenance and replace- ment costs are estimated to be $50,000 for the hydropower facilities and $2,000 for the fish enhancement measures. VIEWS OF INTERESTED PARTIES The report,including the Environmental Impact Statement,has been forwarded for review to the Chairman,Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, Kingman Building,Fort Belvoir,Virginia 22060.Information and comments on the findings in the report may be submitted in writing to reach the Chairman of the Board not later than 26 July 1984. Information and comments furnished by mail are considered just as carefully by the Board as that furnished at public meetings;therefore,the Board will not hold a public meeting unless found necessary to serve the public interest.Copies of information received by mail will not be furnished to other parties.However,such correspondence will be regarded as public information and may be inspected by the public in the office of the Board unless the correspondent requests otherwise. The Board will take action on my recommendation after the closing date of this notice and after full consideration of all comments received. Should the Board contemplate action materially different from my recommend- ations for adding hydroelectric generating and fish enhancement facilities at Unalaska,notice to that effect will be given to all interested parties directly concerned.They will be invited to state their views before the Board takes final action. FURTHER INFORMATION Further information may be obtained from my office or the office of the District Engineer,Alaska,Pouch 898,Anchorage,Alaska 99506.The report, including the Environmental Impact Statement,can be purchased from the District Engineer for $4.50.Payment should be made by check or money order made payable to the Finance and Accounting Officer,USAED,Alaska. Copies of the report will be available for review by the public at the District Office and the libraries shown on the attached list. 1 Inclosure MES H.HAGMAN List of Libraries olonel,¢érps of Engineers Acting Division Engineer THE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT: PK DEMONS INTRODUCTION AND LAND,REGULATORY,AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS D.L.CAREY®,T.J.NICHOLAS*,G.W.HUTTRER®,P.K.DEJONG**,S.T.GRABACKI*** *REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL,INC. **ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY ***DAMES AND MOORE ABSTRACT The Alaska Power Authority contracted with Republic Geothermal,Inc.in 1981 to explore Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island,Alaska for geothermal resources.The two-year,$4.7 million contract included geological,geochemical,and geophysical exploration and the drilling of three 1,500-foot temperature gradient holes in 1982,and the drilling and testing of one 4,000-foot small- diameter geothermal exploration well and one 2,000-foot temperature gradient hole in 1983.All the holes and the well have been or will be dcilled with a wireline diamond core drilling rig and suppocted entirely by helicopter.The geo- thermal lands being explored currently are being managed by the federal government as «a netional wildlife refuge,but may be conveyed to an Alaska Native corporation if the corporation chooses. This land uncertainty created many unique regula- tory problems for the project which were resolved only through the cooperation of the agencies involved and the use of the environmental base- line information collected in 1982. Introduction Unalaska Island,located approximately 900 miles southwest of Anchorage,Alaska,is one of the Fox Islands in the centrel portion of the Aleutian Islands arc (Figure 1).Makushin Vol- cano,the 6,680-foot high active volcano situated on the northern end of Unalaska Island,has nu- Sract®UNALASKA ISLAND =MAKUSHIN GEOTHERMAL AREA FIGURE1 merous fumarole fields on its eastern flanks, suggesting the presence of geothermal resources beneath the volcano. The villages of Unalaska and Dutch Harbor, which together provide the primary northern Pacific port for the crabbing and bottom fishing industries,are located approximately 12 miles east of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Bay.The area's electrical demand of approximately 11 megawatts is presently satisfied by diesel gener- ators,some of which are publically owned and some of which belong to private fish processors. Because fossil fuel costs (and thus electric power costs)are high on Unelaska Island,both the local community and the state of Alaska have been interested in evaluating the potential for economically exploiting the geothermal energy thought to exist beneath Makushin Volcano.To this end,in early 1981 the Alaska Power Author- ity (APA),a state agency with the mandate to identify,evaluate,finance,and develop electri- cal power production facilities within the state, was given funds by the state legislature to con- duct the Unalaskea Geothermal Exploration Project. In late 1981 the APA contracted with Republic Geothermal,Incorporated (Republic)to explore Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island for geother- mal resources.The two-year,4.7 million dollar exploration project was to include geological and geophysical field work and culminate in the drilling of a resource exploration well during the summer of 1983.Should a commercial resource be identified,additional work beyond the scope of this project would Likely lead to the con- struction of a small geothermal electrical gener- ating facility to provide economical,reliable electrical energy for the island. This paper is one of seven papers submitted for the Geothermal Resources Council 1983 Annual Meeting concerning the Unalaska Geothermal Explo- cation Project.This paper is intended to provide an introduction to the Unalaska Geother- mal Exploration Project and the field operations conducted to date,and to provide specific infor- mation regarding land,regulatory,and environ- mental aspects of the project.Information regarding the specific results of the exploration program are presented in the other papers. Additional detailed information concerning the results of the project are contained in a series of reports submitted to the APA:1)the Unalaska SOs O.L.CAREY,ET AL Geothermal Exploration Project,Phase IA Final Report,dated April 1982;2)the Unalaska Geo- thermal Exploration Project,Phase IB Final Report,dated June 1983;and 3)the Unalaska Geo- thermal Exploration Project,Phase II Final Report,to be submitted in early 1984.Informa- tion regarding these reports is available through the APA. Project Scope and Plan Because Aleutian weather significantly limits the length of the summer field season,Republic proposed a two-phase,multi-stage exploration program which emphasized pre-field operational planning and post-field data analysis and inter- pretation to maximize the geologic data col- lected during the two available field seasons. As proposed,Phase I of the project (initial exploration),to be conducted during 1982,was subdivided into Phase IA,collection of the existing data and program planning,and Phase IB,geological,geochemical,and geophysical exploration and temperature gradient hole drilling.Phase II,to be conducted in 1983, consisted of the drilling and testing of a resource exploration well. Phase IA of the project began in January 1982,with a data review and technical planning meeting conducted in Anchorage.The meeting was designed to bring together all previous Unalaska geothermal investigators and others knowledgeable about the logistical,environmental,legal,and institutional problems which may be encountered. This was followed by a careful synthesis and evaluation of all data and formulation of spe- cific logistical and work plans for the initial 1982 field work. Phase IB commenced in April 1982 with the environmental field work and the geological field exploration.The specific subtasks of the geo- logical field exploration consisted of a detailed mapping of geology and geothermal alteration zones,complete location and descriptions of all geothermal manifestations,a mercury soil survey, geochemical analyses of all geothermal waters, and a self-potential survey.A discussion of the environmental field work is presented below, while results of the geological field exploration are described in other papers in these proceed- ings (Parmentier et al,1983;Matlick and Parmentier,1983;Motyka,1983;and Corwin, 1983).Overlapping the end of these field pro- gtams was a compilation of the geologic and environmental data,development of a Makushin geothermal model,and program planning for the drilling of temperature gradient holes. Drilling of the three 1,500 foot temperature gtadient holes commenced the first week of June 1982 and was completed by the middle of September 1982.Phase IB continued with a synthesis of all collected data,refinement of the Makushin geo- thermal model,and selection of the deep well- site.Permit acquisition for the deep well was also begun.Results of the temperature gradient hole drilling and a discussion of the Makushin geothermal model are presented in other papers in these proceedings (Isselhardt,Matlick et al, 1983;and Isselhardt,Motyka et al,1983). Phase II commenced in April of 1983 with lo- gistical planning for the deep exploration well. Exploratory well drilling will commence in early June with the sequential drilling of both a 4,000-foot small-diameter resource confirmation well and a 2,000-foot temperature gradient hole. Should the well prove successful,well testing will occur in late-summer 1983.Well abandonment or suspension,demobilization of the field equip- ment,and the preparation of a final report con- taining conclusions and recommendations for future work will follow the testing of the well. Drilling Operations and Logistics The Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project drilling operations and logistics were unique in many respects because they were significantly in- fluenced by a combination of rugged topography, limited access,available equipment,and adverse weather. The topography of northern Unalaska Island, around Makushin Voleano,is a cugged mixture of glaciated (U-shaped)valleys,cirques,and aretes;volcanic (lava and pyroclastic)plateaus and cliffs;and deep,steep-sided stream and viver valleys.Areas of reasonably gentle relief capable of adequately accommodating a deep well- site (without the need for extensive earthmoving) were limited over much of the geothermal area. Areas of more gentle relief were typically available only in the lower valleys and atop a few of the pyroclastic and lava flows,and these areas provided the only reasonable operation sites for the field base camp and the well and holes. The rcugged topography also limited overland access to the Makushin Geothermal Area (Figure 1). With the exception of one long-abandoned World War II military road from Makushin Valley to Driftwood Bay,the entire region is roadless. Off-road vehicle use is also impossible in all but a few areas.Transport by helicopter (one A-star 350D)was determined to be the only rea- sonable means of supporting the Phase I initial geological exploration and temperature hole drilling.Preliminary evaluation of the feasi- bility of supporting the Phase II deep well drilling by road (repaicing and extending the military road or creating a new temporary road) showed that the cost was prohibitive ($2.9 to $4.0 million),that few areas were readily acces-- sible,and that potentially significant logis- tical,regulatory,and environmental constraints also existed.Although these problems should not prevent the construction of an access road if a power plant is eventually built,budget limita- tions required that the Phase II deep well dril- ling in 1983 be supported entirely by helicopter. The decision to support the deep drilling operations by helicopter also placed certain lim- itations on the drilling equipment which could be used."Helicopter”rotary rigs,which have been modified so that all loads are smaller than 4,000 pounds (the maximum lift capacity of a medium helicopter,like the Bell 205),have been created for use in similar situations,but few now exist. The two which were located were both rated at 16,000 feet and would require the support of at least two medium helicopters.This pushed the cost of drilling the 1983 deep well to approxi- mately $6,000,000.Because the Longyear 38 continuous wireline coring rig used to drill the three 1,500-foot temperature gradient holes had performed so well,the APA decided instead to drill a small-diameter exploratory well using a Longyear 44,a slightly larger wireline diamond core drilling rig.This should lower the cost to only one-third of that estimated for the rotary rig,although the lesser depth capability of the tig (4,000 feet)and smaller diameter of the bottom hole (2-1/2 inches)will somewhat limit the amount of reservoir productivity data obtainable. Weather probably provided the biggest opera- tional constraint since it limited the project to a relatively short summer field season (approx-- imately May 1 to September 15).Snow was as much as eight feet deep at the base camp plateau (1,200 feet)in mid-May,and remained on the ground at that elevation well into late-June. Snow and freezing rain were common early in the season,and rain continued to be common through- out the operations.However,the two biggest weather constraints were wind and fog.Winds of 40 to 50 mph were common,and gusts of hurricane force were not infrequent.These conditions often hampered helicopter transport of materials by sling.Fog was also very frequent,especially at elevations only slightly above base camp.The helicopter was frequently grounded because of fog (once for nearly three days)or limited by low ceilings.Emergency shelters and extra supplies (for both personnel and equipment)were placed at each operation site to partially mitigate this problen. Land Status Uncertainties At the onset of the project the APA re- quested Republic to clarify the status of surface and geothermal resource ownership for the geo- thermal area of Makushin Volcano.A summary of the land status is presented below because of its importance to the regulatory aspects of the pro- ject and its importance to the ultimate success-- ful development of the resource. Although various executive and public land orders temporarily moved the jurisdiction for Unalaska Island from one federal agency to another,until recently title to virtually all of Unalaska Island was vested in the United States of America.The land was managed as public land and was subject to public land laws,including geothermal leasing. This changed with the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA). This Act,among many other things,created Alaska Native regional corporations,each of which was to receive surface and subsurface title to a small,but at that time unknown,amount of land D.L.CAREY,ET AL selected by each regional corporation.To comply with the directives of ANCSA,in 1972 the Secre- tary of the Interior withdrew all land in the Fox Islands,including all of Unalaska Island,from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws,including selections by the State of Alaska undec the Alaska Statehood Act,location and entry under the mining laws,and leasing under the mineral leasing act. Since ANCSA set no limit on the amount of land which could be selected by (as opposed to conveyed to)a regional corporation,the Aleut Corporation (the Alaska Native regional corpora- tion responsible for the Aleutian Islands)in 1977 selected essentially all available land withdrawn by the Secretary under ANCSA within the Aleutian Islands,including Unalaska Island. Because there is no time Limit in ANCSA on these conveyances,all of these selected lands,com- monly known as overselections,remain to be prioritized by the Aleut Corporation for convey- ance of title by the United States.Therefore, the Aleut Corporation has a "time-unlimited option”on receiving title to any of these over- selections (up to their entitlement limit of approximately 46,000 acres),including any or ell of the geothermal lands. To complicate matters even more,the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA)created the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge,Aleutian Islands Unit (AMNWR- AIU),which was to be composed of the existing national wildlife refuges and all public lands in the Aleutian Islands.Since ANILCA expressly stated that lands selected by a native corpora- tion created under ANCSA were not public lands, all lands selected by the Aleut Corporation in 1977 were not made a part of the AMNWR-AIU.How- ever,in a roundabout way,ANILCA includes all of Unalaska Island within the boundaries of the AMNWR-AIU. ANILCA goes on to state that at such time as the entitlement of any native corporation to land under ANCSA is satisfied,any land within the boundaries of a wildlife refuge selected by such native corporations shall,to the extent that such land is in excess of its entitlement,become a@ part of such refuge and be administered accord- ingly.ANILCA also states that all federal lands,including native selections,within the boundaries of a wildlife refuge shall be adminis- tered in accordance with the laws applicable to such refuge. Therefore,title to the surface and subsur- face estates of the geothermal areas of Makushin Volcano remain vested in the United States of America,although all of these lands have been selected by,but not yet conveyed to,the Aleut Corporation.All of the land within these areas has been withdrawn from all forms of appropria- tion under the public land laws,including selections by the State of Alaska and mineral leasing.The lands which have been selected by, but not yet conveyed to,the Aleut Corporation are managed by the United States Fish and Wild- life Service (USFWS)as if they were part of the D.L.CAREY,ET ALnationalwildlife refuge,and will become a part of the AMNWR-AIU if they are not conveyed to the Aleut Corporation before the Aleut Corporation's entitlement is satisfied. Because the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 specifically forbids the issuing of geothermal leases under the Act for lands within a national wildlife refuge,eventual development and utili- zation of any geothermal resources confirmed by this exploration project will almost certainly Tequire conveyance of the surface and subsurface estates to the Aleut Corporation.Potential alternatives would include the passage of new federal legislation revising the boundaries of the AMNWR-AIU to allow selection or federal leas- ing by the State of Alaska,revision of the Geo- thermal Steam Act to provide for leasing within the AMNWR-AIU,or use of Title XV of ANILCA, which allows the President of the United States to transmit to Congress a recommendation that mineral exploration,development,or extraction not otherwise permitted shall be permitted in specific areas in any public lands within Alaska. Unique Regulatory Aspects The complex present and future status of the lands in question,combined with the nature of the entity sponsoring the geothermal exploration, also gives rise to unique regulatory situations. Of paramount importance to the project was the quick determination of the USFWS's interest in, and the ability to,permit the proposed geother- mal exploration operations on the lands.The Area Director of the USFWS in Anchorage quickly indicated that the USFWS would have no a priori reason for denying the requested approval,but questioned his authority to approve such opera- tions.Happily,the Department of Interior's Regional Solicitor for Alaska quickly responded to the Area Director's request for an opinion. The Solicitor stated that the Secretary of the Interior had broad management authority over national wildlife refuges,and may permit the use of any area within the system for any purpose whenever he determines that such uses are compat- ible with the major purposes for which such areas were established.He also stated that,if the lands in question were actually a part of the refuge today,the Secretary would have a Congres- sional directive to assess their mineral and energy potential to the full extent of his au- thority under ANILCA. With this opinion in hand,the Area Director of the USFWS indicated that applications for Special Use Permits for exploration would be accepted from Republic Geothermal and processed by the Refuge Manager of the AMNWR-AIU.Substan- tial thanks must be given to all levels of the USFWS in Alaska for their cooperation and timely processing of our requests for approval of these unique proposals. Other discretionary permits required for the project were primarily related to the field camp located on the eastern flanks of Makushin Vol- cano.These included solid waste disposal per- mits,drinking water permits,and food service permits from the Alaska Department of Environmen- tal Conservation (ADEC);a temporary water use permit (for the withdrawal of drilling and drinking waters from streams)from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR);and habi- tat,protection and biological sampling permits(to ensure protection of anadromous (salmon) streams)from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG).Again,thanks are to be given all these agencies for their help in keeping the pro- ject on schedule. Governmental regulation of the actual dril- ling operations remains uncertain as of this wri- ting (June,1983).Although the lands in question are owned by the United States of America,they are not subject to a geothermal lease under the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970,and thus are not subject to regulation by the U.S.Minerals Management Service under regulations created to implement the Act.The USFWS,although respon- sible for management and approval of the land-use aspects of the operations,has no expertise,nor interest,in regulating the drilling of the wells. The State of Alaska enacted statutes in 1980 which gave themselves authority to regulate the drilling of geothermal wells on all lands, including federal lands,within the state.How- ever,drafting of regulations to implement these statutes was not commenced until after the drilling of the three temperature gradient holes in 1982,and final adoption of these regulations on May 8,1983,has created a minor amount of last-minute confusion as to their degree of applicability to the 1983 operations.Consulta- tions between the APA and the ADNR appear to be quickly moving toward a resolution of this poten- tial problem. Regulatory problems were also created by the project's potential need to discharge minor amounts of waste geothermal fluids from a short- term testing of the exploration well into tribu- taries of the Makushin Valley river on Unalaska Island.The fact that no actual information about the chemical makeup of the waste geothermal fluid was available prior to testing of the well was likely to be a problem for the agencies po- tentially required to regulate this discharge: the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),which would probably have to issue a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)permit;the ADEC,which would probably have to issue a Water Quality Variance;and the ADFG,which would likely have to issue a Habitat Protection Permit. To help alleviate the agencies'concerns, Republic developed reasoned estimates of waste geothermal fluid salinity and constituents based upon a knowledge of the Makushin geothermal system and comparisons with geothermal reservoirs thought to be similar.Together with environmen- tal data collected during the 1982 field season specifically for this purpose (see below),this information was able to convince all three agen- cies that there existed very little Likelihood for significant water quality degradation from the discharge,and essentially no likelihood of impact.to the pink salmon run on the Makushin Valley river.Again,all three agencies are to be commended for their cooperation and flexibility on this particular project. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Republic's pcimary environmental subcontrac- tor,Dames and Moore,was requested to design and implement an environmental baseline data collec- tion program in conjunction with Republic's environmental staff that could:1)acquire that environmental information which was,or could be, required by permit-issuing agencies or other interested parties;2)provide data useful in the location and design of proposed operations;and 3)establish an environmentel data base upon which to judge the impacts of operations.Design of the program was based upon an analysis of the known (or assumed)characteristics of the area's environment,the potential requirements of the regulatory agencies,and the design and potential impact of the proposed operations.This analysis indicated that the existing environmental data base was significantly inadequate in the areas of water quality and freshwater aquatic biology. Areas of lesser inadequacy (primarily related to the potential for a road)included:terrestrial habitat quality;threatened,rare,or endangered species;and cultural resources.Thus,the base- line environmental data collection program was designed to collect additional data in these areas, Water quality investigations were directed towards establishing site-specific baseline con- ditions in areas that would potentially receive liquid effluent resulting from geothermal explo- ration operations.Potential effluents included drilling fluids,camp sanitary wastes,geothermal fluid,and runoff from disturbed areas.The sur- face water quality baseline study entailed two field trips (May and September 1982)to identify water quality characteristics for selected streams at two different discharge levels. The water quality baseline program was de- signed to include data collection at five or six peimary sample stations and five or six secondary stations during both field trips.The intent was to establish primary stations on the three major streams (Makushin Valley,Driftwood Bay valley, and Glacier Valley)downstream from the areas of potential impact and secondary stations on tribu- taries of the major streams closer to the poten- tial temperature gradient hole sites (Figure 2). Parameters to be measured in the field at both ptimary and secondary stations included dissolved oxygen,pH,temperature,conductivity,settleable solids,and alkalinity.Samples taken only at peimary stations and analyzed in the laboratory included physical,metal,and nonmetal inorganic parameters,along with fecal coliform bacteria and chemical oxygen demand. Although deep snow prevented the sampling of any upstream secondary stations in May,five pri- mary stations were established.In September, one primary station was eliminated,one was moved upstream,and four secondary stations were se- O.L.CAREY,ETAL &Primary Sample Station @ Secondary Sample Station @ Temperature Gradient Hole w Camp ©Proposed Temperature Gradient Hole >Exploratory Well FIGURE2 lected and sampled.The stations were selected to provide a minimum baseline for both the poten- tial deep well sites and any major road crossings. In general,the water quality at the sample stations was pristine and most parameters exhib- ited levels characteristic of natural waters in Alaska.Discharge was characteristically low in the spring and high in the fall.Correspond- ingly,mineralization decreased and turbidity and suspended solids increased from spring to fall. The three streams that could potentially be impacted by the exploration operations were also examined in the aquatic biology baseline pro- gtem.The primary objectives of the fisheries program were to:1)determine the fish species present in the streams of the project area;and 2)estimate the maximum upstream occurence of each species (proximity to a point of impact). To accomplish these objectives,fish speci- -Mens were captured by a variety of methods.Fish samplings were scheduled to correspond as closely as possible with the major biological events of the pink salmon (the major commercial salmon species known to be present):the peak of the outmigration of fry (mid-May)and the peak of the upstream spawning migration of adults (early September).The fishery sampling stations corre- sponded with the water quality primary stations. Pink salmon and Dolly Varden char were con- firmed as present in all three streams.In addition,silver salmon and threespine stickle- D.L.CAREY,ET AL back occurred in Driftwood Bay valley.No fish passage barriers (e.g.falis)were present below the locations of potential operations in Makushin and Glacier Valleys,although pink salmon were not observed in the vicinity of the operations. Aerial and ground reconnaissance of selected areas for terrestrial habitat quality were con- ducted in late August 1982.The baseline survey emphasized identification of environmentally sen- sitive areas or other constraints that could influence the selection of alternative road routes,road alignments,or other aspects of road .use. At least two eerial helicopter surveys were flown over Glacier Valley,Makushin Valley,and Driftwood Bay valley.Special emphasis was given to observations of seaside cliff areas at the margins of the above valleys because of their potential importance as nesting and roosting sites for seabirds and bald eagles.Ground sur- veys were also conducted in specific areas. During ell of the observations,notes were taken regarding utilization of the area by birds and mammals.Nest sites and other areas of ecolog- ical importance were noted.Vegetation types were also noted with special emphasis on wetland types.Vegetation was mapped using color aerial photos as a base.Ground-truthing of the vegeta- tion types as interpreted from the photos was conducted during the above-described field obser- vations. As anticipated,the greatest numbers of birds were associated with coastal habitats.Seabirds that nest and/or roost on steep,rocky coastal areas were observed at several locations.The avian fauna of interior areas was very limited. Only two land mammals were noted through direct observation or signs:arctic ground squirrels and arctic fox.Significant wetland habitat in the valleys was observed. Because of the possibility of constructing a road,a cultural resources survey was also con- ducted in late August to early September 1982. After a literature search,the survey consisted of aerial reconnaissance coupled with pedestrian investigation and limited subsurface testing to determine the presence or absence of archaeolog- ical sites.Coastal and near-coastal localities were deemed to have the greatest potential for cultural resources,but the survey boundaries included interior areas of potential impacts from alternative drillsites,the camp,and alternative road corridors.No cultural resources were found in the interior areas,and sites found in the coastal areas were not located in any areas of proposed operations. Environmental studies planned for the 1983 field season are directed towards impact moni- toring.Monitoring of the 1982 temperature gradient hole drilling activities confirmed that the Likelihood for significant environmental impacts from wireline coring drilling operations is remote.The major difference between the 1982 and proposed 1983 operations is that testing of the proposed well may require disposal of waste geothermal liquids.'Republichas received regu- latory approval to discharge these waste geother- mal liquids directly into tributaries of the viver in Makushin Valley.The primary goals of the 1983 field environmental studies are to ver- ify the assumptions regarding river flow rates and fish spawning status used to obtain this approval,to allow early detection of any envi- ronmental impacts so that significant impacts can be avoided,and to establish the level of impact that may be expected should more significant dis- charges of geothermal fluid be required for future operations. The 1982 environmental baseline data collec- tion program established late spring and early fall values for Makushin Valley river water quan- tity and quality and freshwater aquatic biology resources.In 1983,Republic will endeavor to have the fall pink salmon spawning run monitored, in cooperation with the ADFG,from its beginning to approximately establish the size of the run and the upstream limit prior to,during,and following geothermal waste liquid discharge. Makushin Valley river water quality and flow rates will also be measured prior to,during,and following discharge at the previously established water quality monitoring stations in Makushin Valley,and a new station immediately downstream from the discharge point.Conductivity or chlo- ride measurements will likely be used as the prime index of water quality in the field;how- ever,relatively complete chemical samples will likely be collected from the Makushin Valley Fiver station both prior to and during the test. BIBLIOGRAPHY Corwin,RB.F.,1983,Self-Potential survey re- sults,Makushin Geothermal Area,Unalaska Island, Alaska:Geothermal Resources Council,Transac- tions,v.7. Isselhardt,C.F.,Matlick,J.S.,Parmentier,P. P.,and Bamford,R.W.,1983,Temperature gradi- ent hole results from Makushin Geothermal Area, Unalaska Island,Alaska:Geothermal Resources Council,Transactions,v.7. Isselhardt,C.F.,Motyka,R.,Matlick,J.S., Parmentier,P.P.,and Huttrer,G.W.,1983,Geo- thermal resource model for the Makushin Geother- mal Area,Unalaska Island,Alaska:Geothermal Resource Council,Transactions,v.7. Matlick,J.S.and Parmentier,P.P.,1983, Geothermal manifestations and results of a mer- cury soil survey in the Makushin Geothermal Area, Unalaska Island,Alaska:Geothermal Resources Council,Transactions,v.7. Motyka,Roman J.,1983,Geochemical and isotopic studies of waters and gases from the Makushin Geothermal Area,Unalaska Island,Alaska:Geo- thermal Resources Council,Transactions,v.7. Parmentier,Paul P.,Reeder,John W.,and Henning, Mitchell W.,1983,Geology and hydrothermal al- teration of Makushin Geothermal Area,Unalaska Tsland,Alaska:Geothermal Resources Council, Transactions,v.7. Or.VY | NecA Uv DRAFTVeerG/2(83 THE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT:C BSINTRODUCTIONANDLAND,REGULATORY,AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS Introduction Unalaska Island,located approximately 900 miles southwest of Anchorage,Alaska,is one of the Fox Islands in the central portion of the Aleutian Islands arc (Figure l).Makushin Volcano,the 6680-foot high active volcano situated on the northern end of Unalaska Island,has at least eight fumarole fields on its eastern flanks,giving evidence of the presence of geothermal resources beneath the volcano. Unalaska Bay,located approximately 12 miles east of Makushin Volcano,supports the villages of Unalaska and Dutch Harbor,which together provide the primary northern pacific port for the crabbing and bottom fishing industries.The A presently satisfied by diesel generators,some of which are publically owned and some of which belong to privaté.,: processors.Because,fossil fuel costs /\tand-thus electrictoVes;'power costs}(have-béen rising dramatically-on-Unataska-isiand, both the local community and the state of Alaska were interested in evaluating the potential for economically |Ws \ee the geothermal energy thought to exist beneath Makushin Volcano.To undertake this evaluation,in early 1981WtyseattheAlaskaPowerAuthority(APA),a state agency created -to --------5_2g.Ob:03.eect23 AS3f_. DRAFT identify,evaluate,,and develop electrical power production facilities within the state utilizing the most appropriate technology from those that are commercially available,was given funds by the state legislature to be used to conduct theyachoratve.Unalaska Geothermal Gneegy Project. In late 1981 the APA contracted with Republic Geothermal, Incorporated (Republic)to explore the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island for geothermal resources. The two-year,4.7 million dollar exploration project was to include geological and geophysical field work and culminate in the drilling of a resource exploration well during the summer of 1983.Were this exploration to prove successful, additional work beyond the scope of the project would likely lead to the construction of a small geothermal electrical generating facility to provide economical,reliable electrical energy to the island. This paper is one of several papers submitted for the Geothermal Resources Council 1983 Annual Meeting concerning the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project.This paper is intended to provide an introduction to the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project and the field operations conducted to date,and to provide specific information regarding land, regulatory,and environmental aspects of the project. Information regarding the specific results of the exploration program,including the geology,soil mercury survey, DRAFI geochemistry,electrical self-potential survey,temperature gradient holes,and geothermal model,are presented in additional papers.Additional detailed information concerning ject YesaSUn a seritheresultsoftheprojectainaseries of reports submitted to the APA:1)the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project,Phase IA Final Report,dated April 30, 1982;2)the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project,Phase IB Final Report,dated June 30,1983;and 3)the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project,Phase II Final Report,to be submitted in early 1984.Infermatton-regarding these reports is available through the APA. Project Scope . ."mad we Because weather significantly reduced the available field season,Republic proposed a two-phase,multi-stage exploration program which emphasized pre-tield operational planning and post-field data analysis and interpretation to maximize the geologic data collecting during the two available field pa ee -_ exploration),to be conducted during 1982 was subdivided into Phase IA,geological,geochemical,and geophysical exploration,and Phase IB,temperature gradient hole drilling.Phase II,to be conducted in 1983,consisted of the drilling and testing of the resource exploration well. DRAFT Phase IA of the project began in January,1982,with a data review and technical planning meeting conducted in Anchorage.The meeting was designed to bring together all previous Unalaska geothermal investigators and others knowledgeable about the logistical,environmental,legal and institutional problems which may be encountered.This was followed by a careful synthesis and evaluation of all data and formulation of specific logistical and work plans for the initial 1982 field work. Actual field work commenced in April,1982 with the environmental field work and the geological field exploration.The specific subtasks of the geological field exploration consisted of a detailed mapping of geology and geothermal alteration zones,complete location and descriptions of all geothermal manifestations,a mercury soil survey,geochemical analyses of all geothermal waters,and a self-potential survey.A discussion of the environmental field work is presented below,while results of the geological field exploration are described in other papers in these proceedings.Overlapping the end of these field programs was a compilation of the geologic and environmental data, development of a Makushin geothermal model,and program planning for the drilling of thermal gradient holes. DRA Phase IB began with drilling of the three 1,500-foot temperature gradient holes,which commenced the first week of June,1982 and was completed by the middle of September 1982. Phase IB continued with a synthesis of all collected data, refinement of the Makushin geothermal model,and selection of the deep well site.Permit acquisition for the deep well was also begun.Results of the temperature gradient hole drilling and a discussion of the Makushin geothermal model are presented in other papers in these proceedings. Phase II commenced in March of 1983 with logistical planning for the deep exploration well.As of this writing (June,1983),exploratory well drilling is about to commence with the drilling of both a small-diameter resource confirmation well and an additional temperature gradient hole.Should the well prove successful well testing will occur in late-summer 1983.Well abandonment or suspension, demobilization of the field equipment,and the preparation of a final report containing conclusions and recommendations for future work will follow the testing of the well. Field operations were significantly constrained by a combination of rugged topography,limited access,available equipment,and adverse weather.a1 a|Bins owCaD z The topography of northern Unalaska Island,around Makushin Volcano,is a very rugged mixture of glaciated (U-shaped)valleys,cirques,and aretes;volcanic (lava and pyroclastic)plateaus and cliffs;and deep,steep-sided stream and river valleys.Because the volcano rises so abrupty from the sea (sea level to nearly 7,000 feet in about 6 miles),the frequently soft rock is subject to high rates of erosion from runoff of the abundant rain,snowmelt,and meltwater from the small glaciers.The result is that Makushin Volcano is an area of steep slopes and cliffs,broken only occasionally by more gentle relief in the lower valleys and atop a few of the pyroclastic and lava flows.These latter areas provided the only reasonable operation sites,and the field base camp and all wells were located in these areas of more gentle topography. The rugged topography also limited overland access to the Makushin Geothermal Area (that area on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano in which essentially all of the geothermal manifestations are located).With the exception of one long-abandoned World War II military road from Broad Bay to Driftwood Bay which skirts the geothermal area,the entire region is roadless.Off-road vehicle use is also impossible in all but a few areas.Transport by helicopter (one A-star 350D)was the only reasonable and feasible means of supporting the Phase I initial geological exploration and temperature hole drilling.Preliminary evaluations on supporting the 'a a a Bhs,v1oe| |DRAFT Phase II deep well drilling by road (repairing and extending the military road or creating a new temporary road)showed that the cost was prohibitive ($2.9 to $4.0 million),that few areas were accessable,and that potentially significant logistical,regulatory,and environmental constraints also existed.Although these problems should not prevent the construction of an access road should a power plant eventually be built,the Phase II deep well drilling in 1983 will also be supported entirely by helicopter. The decision to support the deep drilling operations by helicopter also placed certain limitations on the drilling equpment which could be used.Mobilizing a standard rotary drilling rig,capable of drilling to at least;/6,000 feet,to the site of the deep exploration well would require the use of some of the largest helicopters available."Helicopter"rigs, which have been modified so that all loads are smaller than 4,000 pounds (the maximum lift capacity of a more common medium helicopter,like the Bell 205),have been created for use in similar situations,but few now exist.The two which were located were both rated at 16,000 feet and would require the support of at least two medium helicopters.Because the cost of drilling the 1983 deep well with one of these rotary rigs was estimated at approximately $6,000,000,the APA decided to instead drill a small-diameter exploratory well using a "large"wireline diamond core drilling rig (Longyear 44).This should cost only approximately one-third of the DRAFT rotary rig,although the lesser depth capability (4,000 feet) and small diameter of the hole (2-1/2 inches)will limit the amount of reservoir producitivity data obtainable from testing the well. rn a Weather probably provided the biggest operational 7 constraint since it limited the project to a relatively short summer field season (approximately May 1 to September 15). Snow was as much as eight feet deep at the base camp plateau (1,200 feet)in mid-May,and remained on the ground at that elevation well into late-June.Snow and freezing rain were common early in the season,and rain continued to be common throughout the operations.However,the two biggest weather constraints were wind and fog.Winds of 40 to 50 mph were common,and gusts of hurricane force were not infrequent. Helicopter transport of materials by sling were frequently hampered.Fog was also very frequent,especially at elevations only slightly above base camp.The helicopter was frequently grounded because of fog (once for nearly three days)or limited by low ceilings.Emergency shelters and extra supplies (for both men and equipment)were placed at each operation site to partially mitigate this problem. Land Status Uncertainties At the onset of the project the APA requested Republic to clarify the status of surface and geothermal resource ownership for the Makushin Geothermal Area.A brief summary 8 DRAFT of the land status is presented below because of its importance to the regulatory aspects of the project and its importance to the ultimate successful development of the resource. Although various executive and public land orders 'temporarily moved the jurisdiction for Unalaska Island from (A? one federal agency to another,until recently title to virtually all of Unalaska Island was vested in the United States of America.The land was managed as public land and was subject to public land laws,including geothermal leasing. This changed with the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA).This Act,among many other things,created Alaska Native regional corporations,each of which was to receive surface and subsurface title to a small, but at that time unknown,amount of land.These lands were to be selected by each regional corporation from among those lands within the boundaries defined for that regional corporation.To comply with the directives of ANCSA,in 1972 the Secretary of the Interior withdrew from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws,including selections by the state of Alaska under the Alaska Statehood Act, location and entry under the mining laws,and leasing under the mineral leasing act,all land in the Fox Islands not DRAFT already withdrawn for the Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge.This withdrawal included all of Unalaska Island,and included the entire Makushin Volcano Geothermal Area. Since ANCSA set no limit on the amount of land which could be selected by (as opposed to conveyed to)a regional corporation,the Aleut Corporation,the Alaska Native regional corporation whose boundaries included all of the Aleutian Islands,in 1977 selected essentially all available land withdrawn by the Secretary under ANCSA within the Aleutian Islands,including Unalaska Island and the Makushin Geothermal Area.And,because there is no time limit in ANCSA on these conveyences,all of these lands,which are commonly known as ""overselections",remain to be prioritized by the Aleut Corporation for conveyance of title by the United States of America.Therefore,the Aleut Corporation has a time-unlimited option on receiving title to any of these "overselections"(up to their entitlement limit),including any or all of the geothermal lands. To complicate matters even more,the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA)created the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge,Aleutian Islands Unit (AMNWR-AIU),which was to be composed of the existing Aleutian Islands and Bogoslof National Wildlife Refuges,and all other public lands in the Aleutian Islands.Since ANILCA expressly stated that lands selected by a native corporation 10 _7ANILCA goes on to state that(ab such time as the DRAFT created under ANCSA were not public lands,all lands selected by the Aleut Corporation in 1977 were not made a part of the AMNWR-AIU.However,in a roundabout way,ANILCA includes all of Unalaska Island within the boundaries of the refuge. % yom entitlement of any native corporation £0.Tan under ANCSA isSatisfied,any land within the boundaries of a wildlife refuge | selected by such native corporations shall,to the extent that | such land is in excess of its entitlement,become a part of such refuge and be administered accordingly.ANILCA also states that all federal lands,including native selections, within the boundaries of a wildlife refuge shall be administered in accordance with the laws applicable to such refuge. Therefore,title to the surface and subsurface estates of the Makushin Geothermal Area remain vested in the United States of America,although all of these lands have been selected by,but not yet conveyed to,the Aleut Corporation. All of the land within the Makushin Geothermal Area has been withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws,including selections by the state of Alaska and mineral leasing.The lands which have been selected by,but not yet conveyed to,the Aleut Corporation are managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)as if they were part of a national wildlife refuge,and will become a 11 part of the AMNWR-AIU if they are not conveyed to the Aleut Corporation before the Aleut Corporation's entitlement is satisfied. Because the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 specifically forbids the issuing of geothermal leases under the Act for lands within a national wildlife refuge,eventual development and utilization of any geothermal resources confirmed by this exploration project will almost certainly require conveyance of the surface and subsurface estates to the Aleut Corporation.Potential alternatives would include the passage of new federal legislation revising the boundaries of the AMNWR-AIU to allow selection by the state of Alaska,revision of the Geothermal Steam Act to provide for leasing within this national wildlife refuge,or use of Title XV of ANILCA,which allows the President of the United States.to transmit to Congress a recommendation that mineral exploration, development,or extraction not otherwise permitted shall be permitted in specific areas in any public lands within Alaska. Unigue Regulatory Aspects The complex present and future status of the lands in question,combined with the nature of the entity sponsoring the geothermal exploration,also gives rise to unique regulatory situations.Of paramount importance to the project 12. was the quick determination of the USFWS's interest in,and the ability to,permit the proposed geothermal exploration operations on the lands.The Area Director of the USFWS in Anchorage quickly indicated that the USFWS would have no a priori reason for denying the requested approval,but questioned his authority to approve such operations.Happily, the Department of Interior's Regional Solicitor for Alaska quickly responded to the area director's request for an opinion.The Solicitor stated that the Secretary of the Interior had broad management authority over national wildlife refuges,and may permit the use of any area within the system for any purpose whenever he determines that such uses are compatible with the major purposes for which such areas were established.He also stated that,if the lands in question were actually a part of the refuge today,the Secretary would have a Congressional directive to assess their mineral and energy potential to the full extent of his authority under ANILCA. With this opinion in hand,the Area Director of the USFWS indicated that applications for Special Use Permits would be accepted from Republic Geothermal and processed by the Refuge Manager of the AMNWR-AIU.Substantial thanks must be given to all levels of the USFWS in Alaska for their cooperation and timely processing of our requests for approval of these very unique proposals. 13 Other discretionary permits required for the project were primarily related to the field camp located on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano.These included solid waste disposal permits,drinking water permits,and food service permits (for an "eating and drinking establishment")from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC);a temporary water use permit (for the withdrawal of drilling and drinking fluids from streams)from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR);and habitat protection and biological sampling permits (to ensure protection of anadromous (salmon)streams)from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG).Again,thanks are to be given all these agencies for their help in keeping the project on schedule. Governmental regulation of the actual drilling operations remains uncertain as of this writing (June,1983).Although the lands in question are owned by the United States of America,they are not subject to a geothermal lease under the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970,and,thus,are not subject to regulation by the U.S.Minerals Management Service (formerly the U.S.Geological Survey and currently the U.S.Bureau of Land Management)under regulations created to implement the Act.The USFWS,although responsible for management and approval of the land-use aspects of the operations,has no expertise,and has expressed no interest,in regulating the drilling of the wells. 14 DRAFT However,the state of Alaska adopted statues in 1980 which gave themselves authority to regulate the drilling of geothermal wells on all lands,including federal lands,within the state.However,drafting of regulations to implement these statutes was not commenced until after the drilling of the three temperature gradient holes in 1982,and final adoption of these regulations on May 8,1983,has created a minor amount of last-minute confusion as to their degree of applicability to the 1983 operations.Consultations between the APA and the ADNR appear to be quickly moving toward a resolution of this potential problem. Regulatory uncertainty of another type was created by the project's need to discharge waste geothermal fluids from testing of the exploration well into tributaries of the Makushin Valley river on Unalaska Island.In this instance, the uncertainty concerned the lack of actual information about the chemical makeup of the waste geothermal fluid.MThis information was very important to the agencies potentially required to regulate this discharge:the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),which would probably have to issue a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit;the ADEC,which would probably have to issue a Water Quality Variance;and the ADFG,which would likely have to issue a Habitat Protection Permit. 15 DRAFT To help answer the agencies'questions,Republic developed certain reasoned estimates of waste geothermal fluid salinity and constituents,estimates which were based upon a knowledge of the Makushin geothermal system and comparisons with similar geothermal reservoirs.Together with environmental data collected during the 1982 field season specifically for this purpose (see below),this information was able to convince all three agencies that there existed very little likelihood for significant water quality degradation,and essentially no likelihood of impact to the valuable commercial pink salmon run on the Makushin Valley river.Again,all three agencies are to be commended for their cooperation and flexability on this particular project. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Republic's primary environmental subcontractor,Dames and Moore,waS requested to design and implement an environmental baseline data collection program in conjunction with Republic's environmental staff that could:1)acquire that environmental information which was,or could be,required by permit-issuing agencies or other interested parties; 2)provide data useful in the location and design of proposed operations;and 3)establish an environmental data base upon which to judge the impacts of operations.Thus,design of the program was based upon the results of an analysis that combined the known (or assumed)characteristics of the area's 16 DRAFT environment,the potential requirements of the regulatory agencies,and the design and potential impact of the proposed operations.When combining this information,it was our judgement that the existing environmental data base was Significantly inadequate in the areas of water quality and freshwater aquatic biology.Areas of lesser inadequacy included:terrestrial habitat quality;threatened,rare,or endangered species;cultural resources;and geotechnical data.Thus,the baseline environmental data collection program was designed to collect additional data in these areas. Water quality investigations were directed towards establishing site-specific baseline conditions in areas that would potentially receive liquid effluent resulting from geothermal exploration operations.Potential effluents included drilling fluids,camp sanitary wastes,geothermal fluid,and runoff from disturbed areas.The surface water quality baseline study entailed two field trips (May and September,1982)to identify water quality characteristics for selected streams at two discharge levels. Efforts were directed towards establishing baseline water quality conditions in three separate drainages on Unalaska Island:Makushin Valley,Driftwood Bay valley,and Glacier Valley.The water quality baseline program was originally designed to include data collection at five or six primary stations and five or six secondary sample stations during both 17 DRAFT field trips.The intent was to establish primary stations on the major streams downstream from the areas of potential impact and secondary stations on tributaries of the major streams closer to the temperature gradient holes.Parameters to be measured in the field at both primary and secondary stations included dissolved oxygen,pH,temperature, conductivity,setteable solids,and alkalinity.The remaining parameters to be sampled at primary stations and analyzed in the laboratory included physical,metal,and nonmetal inorganic parameters,along with fecal coliform bacteria and chemical oxygen demand.Laboratory samples were collected, preserved,and shipped in accordance with the EPA manual Methods for Chemical Analysis of Waters and Wastes (EPA 1979). The proposed scope of the investigation was amended during the May field trip.Since upstream secondary stations and most small tributaries were not accessible due to snow pack. In May only five primary stations were selected and the secondary stations were eliminated.The five primary stations established were:Makushin Valley (MV),below base camp (BC), Glacier Valley (GV),an eastern Driftwood Bay valley stream (DE),and a more western Driftwood Bay valley stream (DW) (Figure 2). In early September,the primary stations located at MV, BC,and DW were sampled at essentially the same locations as in May (Figure 3).Station DE was not sampled in September 18 DRAFT because it was outside the potential zone of impact resulting from a deep well and also because it was far removed from the potential road routes.Station GV was moved up Glacier Valley in September to bring it closer to the actual location of the temperature gradient hole.Four secondary stations were also selected and sampled in September.Stations GE and MR were selected because they were at likely road crossing locations and GW and MD were sampled because they were in close proximity to potential deep well locations.The data collected from stations MR,DW,and GE provide a minimum baseline that can be used for comparison to a monitoring program should a road ever be built. In general,the water quality at the primary sample stations was pristine (TDS 50 ppm)and most parameters exhibited levels characteristic of natural water in Alaska. The GV station,however,displayed a number of parameters having relatively high concentrations.For Makushin Valley specifically,discharge was low in the spring and high in the fall.Correspondingly,mineralization decreased from spring to fall,and turbidity and suspended solids increased over the same period. The three streams that could potentially be impacted by _the exploration operations were also examined in the aquatic --'piology baseline program.The objectives of the fisheries program were to:1)determine the fish species present in the 19 DRAFT streams of the project area;2)determine the life stages of each fish species present;and 3)estimate the maximum upstream occurance of each species (proximity to a point of impact). To accomplish these objectives,fish specimens were captured by a variety of methods.Fish samplings were scheduled to correspond as closely as possible with the major biological events:the peak of the outmigration of pink salmon fry (mid-May),and the peak of the upstream spawning migration of adult pink salmon (early September).Adult Silver salmon migrate upstream somewhat later than do adult pink salmon,but since pink salmon are usually the most abundant and widespread commercial salmon species,it appeared that close attention to pink salmon would best satisfy the objectives of the program.The fishery sampling stations corresponded with the water quality primary stations. Pink salmon and Dolly Varden char were confirmed as present in all three streams.In addition,silver salmon and threespine stickleback occurred in Driftwood Bay valley.No fish passage barriers (e.g.falls)were present below the locations of operations in Makushin and Glacier Valleys, although pink salmon were not observed in the vicinity of the operations. 20 DRAFT Aerial and ground reconnaisssance of selected areas for terrestrial habitat quality were conducted in late August, 1982.The baseline survey emphasized identification of environmentally sensitive areas or other constraints that could influence the selection of alternative road routes,road alignments,or other aspects of road use. At least two aerial helicopter surveys were flown over Glacier Valley,Makushin Valley,and Driftwood Bay valley. Special emphasiswas given to observations of seaside cliff areas at the margins of the above valleys because of their . potential importance as nesting and roosting sites for seabirds and bald eagles.Ground surveys were also conducted for more specific areas.During all of the observations, notes were taken regarding utilization of the area by birds and mammals.Nest sites and other areas of ecological importance were noted.Vegetation types were also noted with special emphasis on wetland types.Vegetation was mapped using color aerial photos as a base.Ground-truthing of the vegetation types as interpreted from the photos was conducted during the above-described field observations. As anticipated,the greatest numbers of birds were associated with coastal habitats.Seabirds that nest and/or roost on steep,rocky coastal areas were observed at several locations.The avian fauna of interior areas was very limited.Only two land mammals were noted through direct 21 DRAFT observation or signs:arctic ground squirrels and arctic fox.Significant wetland habitat in the valleys was observed. Because of the possibility of constructing a road,a cultural resources survey was also conducted in late August to early September,1982.After a literature search,the survey consisted of aerial reconnaissance coupled with pedestrian investigation and limited subsurface testing to determine the presence or absence of archaeological sites.Coastal and near-coastal localities were deemed to have the greatest potential for cultural resources,but the survey boundaries included interior areas of potential impacts from alternative drillsites,the camp,and alternative road corridors.No cultural resources were found in the interior areas,and sites found in the coastal areas were not located in any areas of proposed operations. The environmental data collected for this program provides a baseline for any future operations.The data was also used, in part,for locating alternative temperature gradient hole and deep well sites and for impact monitoring activities. Because of the logistical and geological constraints placed on site selection at Unalaska,environmental information was expected to play only a "fine-tuning"role in the actual wellsite selection process.However,with the decision to evaluate potential temporary access road alignments to the alternative 1983 (Phase II)deep wellsites,environmental 22 DRAFT information became much more important.Since the decision was eventually made to conduct the 1983 operations without the use of access roads,the environmental information collected specifically to assist in the siting of these access routes became academic,but still can be used in the future should additional operations be contemplated. Environmental studies planned for the 1983 field season are directed towards impact monitoring.Monitoring of the 1982 temperature gradient hole drilling activities confirmed that the likelihood for significant environmental impacts from wireline coring drilling operations is remote.A major difference between the 1982 and proposed 1983 operations is that the proposed small-diameter resource confirmation well is anticipated to encounter a geothermal resource.If that resource is primarily a liquid,disposal of a potentially significant quantity of waste geothermal liquids must be accomplished.After analysis,Republic proposed and received regulatory approval for surface disposal of waste geothermal liquids by discharging directly into tributaries of the river in Makushin Valley.Based on certain assumptions (including reservoir and well production characteristics,dates of discharge,fish spawning status,and river flow rates),the impacts of this direct discharge are expected to be negligible;however,this must be verified in the field at the time of operations.Thus,the goal of the 1983 field environmental studies is to allow early detection of 23 DRAFT environmental impacts so that significant impacts can be avoided,and to establish the level of impact that may be expected should more significant discharges of geothermal fluid be required for future operations. The 1982 environmental baseline data collection program established late spring and early fall values for Makushin Valley river water quantity and quality and freshwater aquatic biology resources.In 1983,Republic will endeavor to have the fall pink salmon spawning run monitored,in cooperation with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,from its beginning to approximately establish the size of the run and the upstream limit prior to,during,and following geothermal waste liquid discharge.Makushin Valley river water quality and flow rates will also be measured prior to,during,and following discharge at the previously established water quality monitoring stations in Makushin Valley,and a new station immediately downstream from the discharge point. Conductivity or chloride measurements will likely be used as the prime index of water quality in the field;however,we do anticipated collecting a relatively complete chemical sample from Station MV both prior to and during the test. 24 06/03 vyeerE4:00 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL.INC.S& TtE8$23 ZAST SLAVUZON AVENUE,SUITE GNE SANTA FE SPRINGS,CALIFQRNIA $5570 213)945 3661 TELECOPIER COVER LETTER FROM:Tb waue lb.Carer DATE:Sfz é/'s£3 i é TO: company:-Acasra "ower Ayo ryTNaCITY&STATE:Ass,HOE REE Acasna ATTENTION :"Barn Be Sous | TOTAL NUMBER CF PAGES,INCLUDING COVER LETTER 4 . TRANSMITTAL SPEED:"MINUTES - WE ARE TRANSMITTING PROM A PANAFAX 2200 ADTOMATIC TELECOPIER. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PACES PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.AREA CODE 213,PHONE 945-3661,EXTENSION 255. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:"Der7)-PLEASE OSE THIS ODICLOUSLY, A iS_NWOsT_IA >)PRAY i Bh T_DOES, HOWEVEZ DEMONSTRATE THAT We Unve REED ACTIVELT eying wp cer vue ADNR m resowe tus FoR ever A VERE,Ler Me nou)(c Yoox NAL IMFORMAT0A)- OB WANT CLARIF {CATION .-eCIgonFigCig 25.06.03. 0 $B.NGL 4/15/82 -(Letter)D.Carey (RGI)to D.Hedderiy-Smith{(ADNR-DMEM).Carbon copy of letter and application for Special UsePermittoU.S.Fish and Wildlife Service for drilling three 1,500 foot temperature gradient holes on Unalaska Island. 5/4/82 -(Letter)D.Hedderly-Smith to B.Carey.AcknowledgingreceiptofcopyofU.&.Fish and Wildlife Service Special UsePermitapplicationandstatementthatdrillingthree1,500-f00t ©geothermal temperature gradient holes will require authorization by ADNR under AS 41.06. 5/10/82 -(Telephone)-BD.Carey to D.Hedderly Smith.,DiscussionofADNRapprovaloftemperaturegradientholedrillingandagreementbyHedderly-Smith that ADNR approval would not hinder 1982 fieldoperationsandwouldavoidjuristictionalconflictwithU.&.Fish and Wildlife Service. 5/27/82 -(Letter)D.Hedderly-Smith to D.Carey.Decision ofADKRauthorizinggeothermaldrillingunderAS41.96 to drill three1,500-fo0t geothermal temparature gradient holes on the flanks ofMakushinVoleanoonUnalaskaIslandasperthedetailed.description of operations attached as Exhibit A to April 15,1982 letter to Mr.Fred Zeillemaker of the U.S&S.Fiah and Wildlife Service. 7/1/82 -(Meeting)-T.Nicholas (RGI)with BD,Hedderly-Smith.Discussed project status and proposed 1983 deep well drilling.Hedderly-Smith was preparing a request for an opinion to E.River,ADNR Legal Counsel,regarding the State's authority to regulategeothermaldrillingoperationsonfederallands;Hedderly-Smithexpectedopiniontobecompletedinonemonth. 7/30/82 -(Telephone)<=T.Nicholas to D.Hedderly=Smith. Hedderly-Smith stated that request for legal opinion had not yet been written,but that it would be done in near future. 12/23/82 -(Letter)-B.Carey to K.Brown (ADNR*DMEM).RGI comments on proposed deothermal drilling and conservation reculations (11 AAC 87}. 12/28/82 -(Letter)-C.Fortney (ADNR-DMEM)to D,Carey.Acknowl- edgment of receipt of comments on proposed geothermal drillingregulations. 2/24/83 -(Letter)-T.Nicholas to D.Hedderly-Smith.Carbon copyofletterandapplicationforSpecialUse_Permit to U.&.Fish andWildlifeServicefor1983geothermalresourceexploratoryoper-ations on eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. Contains drilling programs as Section IV. 3/1/83 -(Telephone)D.Carey to D.Hedderly-Smith.Hedderly-Smith received copy of U.§,Fish and Wildlife Service applicationbuthadnotyetreviewed.Geothermal regulation-was now under oilandgasgroupofADNRandHedderly-Smith would take copy of Special Use Permit application to C.Fortney (petroleum geologist)forteview.,Hedderly-Smith suggested Republic use new regulations 48guidelines.New geothermal drilling regulations were praseantly withAttorneyGeneralforapprovalandweretobeadopted4/15/83 (effective 5/15/83). 3/9/83 -(Telephone)-D.Carey to C,FPertney.Fortney receivedinformationfromHedderly-Smith but had not yet read it.Carey gavebackgroundonlastyear's operations,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Ser-vice application,Land status (federal land),and drilling proposalsfor1963.Fortney stated that she was geothermal coordinator foroilandgasgroupofDMEM,which now had responsibility for geother-mal regulation.The geothermal drilling regulations were to beadoptedbymid-May.Fortney stated that police power of Alaska onfederallandswasstillanissue,but suggested Republic ask forprovisionaldrillingauthorityfromDMEM.Fortney also suggestedthatRepublicspeakwithAnnPrezynaofAlaskaAttorneyGeneral'sofficewhohagseenworkingonpolicepowerissueswithgeothermal.Fortney was to look at package sent to Hedderly-Smith ana pass drilling programs by Ted Bond of DMEM.Carey was to prepare supple-mental package reguesting provisional grilling authority,but stated that information would be essentially identical to that already received by Fortney. 3/18/83 -{Telephone}°D,.Carey to A.Prezyna (AAG),Prezyna outoftheoffice,Carey to call back 3/21/83. 3/21/83 -(felephona)-D.Carey to A.Prezyna.Carey explainedbackgroundonAlaskapolicepowersissue.Prazyna indicated shewouldcheckoninformationandgetbacktoCarey.Carey explainedthatneedforinformationwasnotpreasingnowsinceRepublic ;planned to proceed with request for preliminary provisional authori- zation.(Prezyna never returned call}. 4/15/83 -(Letter)-T.Nicholas to C.Fortney.Republic specifi- cally requests provisional drilling authorization by May 29,1963 for one 2,000-foot temperature gradient hole and one 4,000-foot small-diameter geothermal exploratory well on Unalaska Island.Republic specifically requests respense if approval by 5/23/83 isnotpossibleorifadditionalinformationisnecessary. 5/3/83 -(Telephone)-DBD,Carey to C.Fortney.Fortney out of theoffice;unknown ADNR-DMEM person responded that Fortney had beenworkingonapprovalandthathethoughtthatshehadpreparedadraftoftheapproval.DMEM person explained that drilling regula-tions were now filed with Attorney General but not yet effective,He would have Portney call Carey and have her sand Carey a copy oftheEiledregulations. 5/11/83 -(Telephone)-D.Carey to C.Fortney.Portney cut of thereyuntil5/23/83.Carey was instructed to call Bill Van Dyke on5/12/83. 5/12/83 -(Telephone)-D.Carey to W.Van Dyke (ADNR-DMEM). Van Dyke on the telephone;would call back. 5/12/83 (Telephone)T.Bond (ADNR«DMEM)to D.Carey.ReturningtelephonecallforVanDyke.Bond stated that he was the pereon whoshouldhavebeenreceivinginformationallalongbuthadonlybecomeinvolvedinthelasttwodays.7.Bond has certain technical ques-tions which Carey suggested would beat be answered by RGI drillingengineer,R.Yarter.7.Bond will send copy of drilling regulations(which became effective 5/8/83)to Carey and Carey will have Yarter call T.Bond on 5/16/83 upon Yarter's return from vacation. 5/13/83 -(Letter)-T.Sond to D,Carey.Copy of newly effective Alaska geothermal drilling regulations. 5/16/83 -{Telepnone)-T.Bond to D.Carey.Checking to sea ifRepublicgotdrillingregulations.TT.Bond gives Carey first indication that ADNR will require Republic to go through entireregulatoryprocedure,including drilling bond.T.Bond indicatesthatJimEason,deputy director of DMEM,has made decision.Carey responds that Republic must get Alaska Power Authority (APA)involved in decision now,but that Republic would cooperate withtechnicalinfermationforADNR.Yartar and Carey will call T.Bond Tuesday afternoon (5/17/83). 5/17/83 -(Telephone) -Yarter and Carey to T,Bond.After discus-sion of technical aspects of drilling,Yarter agreed to meet with T.Bond on Friday (5/27/83)in Anchorage (on Kia way to Unalaexa Island)to further discuss particulars of drilling program.T.BondsentpermitapplicationformtoCareyon5/14/83 and suggestedRepublicshouldcompleteandreturn,Carey repeated that Republicwishedtocooperateontechnicalaspectsofdrillingprogrambut must obtain APA concurrence on regulatory asgects and that APA would probably cali Eason.T.Bond had no difficulties with that.Yarter would probably bring permit form for meeting. 5/18/83 -(Telephone)-OD.Carey to T.Bond.T.Bond would send geothermal drilling bond form to Carey. -PBL. JAY S.HAMMOND,GOVERNOR QO 3001 PORCUPINE DRIVEANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 PHONE: DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES @ 7.0.80x 80007COLLEGE,ALASKA 99708 DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL &GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS PHONE:474-7122 October 8,1982 Department of Petroleum Engineering Mike Economides jfUniversityofAlaska! : Fairbanks,AK 99701 ° Dear Mr.Economides:A These are the results from the samples you submitted on August 27,1982: Sample No.Modal Analysis D-1 1227' Diorite-Quartz Diorite Feldspar (KF«x1/8 TF)55% Clinozoisite 14% Quartz 8% Chlorite 8% Opaque minerals 8% Sericite 7% Calcite Trace Sample No.Too fine grained for petro- D-1 1396'graphic modal analysis. Andesite X-ray diffraction pattern shows: Feldspar (Plagioclase)Major Quartz Minor Chlorite Minor Magnetite Minor Sample No.Modal Analysis D-2 351° Andesite Porphyry Feldspar (KF<1/8TF)60% Clinozoisite 26% Quartz 6% Chlorite 4% Opaque minerals 3% Biotite 1% Pyroxene (Augite?)1% Sincerely yours, Goitibe CA Lb Milton A.Wiltse cee eee Chief Geochemist,DGGS Ped Cl0Nrgcgh 32,00.02 10-J28LH J.Bete:_6Q Ol./ ba (Ge e+D 27>HySameple D-|P42 D-|l\2n2F D-|LaF DR as| h SOO ZB -ecoleuia tists obtemes' €men cus y aceferJehorsohbfemes/rie represents K - (orien) (4afee (md ) Key 2.7s Cox)/(0X) Aa To 2 'To (riex) /./Po 27o / satura tonbyfolueleLion wo,Pos pertmes meterA!aaFSPINEBsrBASFlow ENGINEERING AND GEOLOGICAL ANALYSES OF THE GEOTHERMAL ENERGY POTENTIAL OF SELECTED SITES IN THE STATE OF ALASKA Michael J.Economides",Jamal Ansar 1GaryN.Arce liniversity of Alaska, INTRODUCTION Resource assessment of a variety of locations in Alaska has demonstrated that the State owns significant geothermal sites.Certain reservoirs have already been identified and they could be utilized for either direct space heating or (probably)for power generation.While several of these reservoirs would have been quite attractive elsewhere,extremely high contruction costs,the sparsity of the Alaskan population and the remoteness fron urban markets,indicate unfavorable economics in most cases. The State owns some of the largest petroleun,natural gas and coal resources in the U.S.A.There is an enormous potential for hydroelectric power. Hence,the demonstration of the desirability of geothermal energy utilization in Alaska faces highly _adverse odds.The sites where this mode of energy could compare favorably with other available options are prima facie few. For example,the Aleutian volcanic arc represents a favorable setting, due to the existence of possible shallow magma bodies and deep tectonicfracturesfora"vapor dominated" geothermal reservoir as defined by White et al.(1971).Three 1500 ft temperature gradient wells,drilled on Unalaska in the Summer of 1982,have revealed extraordinary geothermal temperature gradients.A reservoir yet to be discovered would be of a quality to produce significant amounts of electric power.Yet,its destrability must be demonstrated against the presently used diesel.Obscuring the issue are future (real or projected)uses.The future price of fossil fuels is difficult to assess.New markets may emerge or expand such as a major bottom fish industry or other heavy users of power. and John W.Reeder 2 pivision of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Although "vapor dominated" reservoirs are expected to be rare (or non-existent)in the rest of Alaska, hot water reservoirs are presumed quite common.The State contains an impressive collection of natural hot springs.Limited drilling activity has produced very encouraging results in at least one site (Prilgrim Springs),while geological and geophysical surveys of a large number of sites have indicated good potential. It is the purpose of this report to produce ideas and/or options on how geothermal resources might be actually developed assuming a given geological data base for several geothermal prospect areas in Alaska.The possibility of geothermal energy utilization could be weighed against existing Cor proposed)modes of energy.The economic attractiveness or lack thereof,will be demonstrated using a common means of comparison among the options. Six geothermal prospect sites been selected for this study: have a)Tenakee Springs b)Sitka Region (Goddard Hot Springs) c)Pilgrim Springs d)The RKlawasi Region of Copper Valley e)Summer Bay on Unalaska f)The Makushin Volcanic Region of Unalaska. Figure 1 positions the map of Alaska.All of these have been the target of general geothermal interest in the past few years.They were included in the July 1980 Alaska Geothermal Implementation Plan (Reeder the six sites on et al.,1980).Their selection provides a geographic diversity Spanning the entire State.With the exception of Tenakee Springs,they are in relative proximity with population, centers by.-virtue-of theirwhich, ;Proj.Quen:N remoteness,pay a premium price for diesel.The attractiveness of geothermal energy utlization ts more probable in these sites than elsewhere. TENAKEE SPRINGS The thermal springs at Tenakee occur in Cretaceous granitic rocks (Brew and Morrell,1980)which are cut by Numerous high-angle joints.The two most prominent orientations are NSOE and N40W.Stlurian hornblende and biotite synenite are exposed just south of Tenakee,and have been interpreted (Loney et al.,1975)to bound the granodiorite by an east west fault which would be located just offshore. The liquid-dominated hydrothermal system at Tenakee may derive its fluids from connate waters assoctated with extensive sedimentary units located at depth.The prominent joint sets in the granitic rocks provide an avenue for transporting the heated fluids to the surface.The east-west fault likely serves as a lateral boundary on the reservoir. Subsurface reservoir temperatures, based on silica and Na-K-Ca geothermometry,have been calculated to be between 101 to 110°C (I.Barnes, personal commun.).During the drilling of seven shallow wells in 1981,temperatures of 100°F were measured at a depth of 180 ft (Miller, 1981).Very small flowrates were obtained through these wells. The most obvious geothermal resource would be the village of Tenakee.Since the springs are located within the community, direct utilization for purposes other than power generation could be easily accomplished.If a deeper high- temperature reservoir were to be discovered,the closest significant population center would be Sitka.A power line route from Tenakee under Tenakee Inlet to Kadashan Bay,over the Moore Mountains (elevation 200 ft),under Peril Strait and =onto Baranof Island at Duffield Peninsula is the most direct path.This distance is roughly 50 miles. consumer of the Tenakee could be a target for direct utilization.The heating needs of tits 50 houses and other structures can be estimated at 1.5 X 10°BTU/hrs.on an average year-round basis.The 1981 drilling produced a geothermalgradientof13°C/100 ft.and with a surface temperature of 16°C.The predicted source temperature of approximately 100°C can be expected at a depth of about 700 ft.If a well, drilled at this depth were to encounter a reservoir,it would need aflowrateof37500lbs/hour (for a 40°F useful temperature drop in th heat system).This flowrate can be translated to 70 GPM.The drilling costs are estimated at one million dollars while the distribution system would need another $1.5 million (ineluding pumps).With operating costs of $80,000 ($40,000 for a technician plus $40,000 for pumping costs)and if no taxes or rates of return infringe on the scheme,a 20 year useful life of the system would result in a cost of $15.6/million BTU or an average monthly bill of $340 per household,significantly higher than the present rates.Electric power generation would prove even more costly,compared to diesel generation, since drilling and power plan costs would be very large.Tenakee,with its small market,does not appear to be an attractive target for geothermal utilization even in the most favorable scenario. SITKA (GODDARD SPRINGS) One of the more common rock types in this portion of Southeast Alaska is the Sitka Graywacke,a steeply dipping or overturned series of ianer submarine fan turbidites.The Sitka Graywacke is prominently jointed and has been regionally metamorphosed to prehnite-pumpellyite facies. Tonalites and granodiorites are exposed south and west of Redoubt Lake,and potassium-argon ages on biotite range from 42 to 46 m.y.This indicates a middle Eocene age of intrusion (Loney and others,1975). Numerous alkali-olivine diabase dikes are exposed near the hot springs,and range in thickness from centimeters to meters. Structurally,southeast Alaska is a complex area,cut by numerous high- angle faults.One of the more prominent is the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte system,190 km in length. This right-lateral,steeply dipping fault ts the boundary between the North American and Pacific lithospheric plates.Also of notable size its the Chatam Strait Fault,400 km long,which has expertenced 190 meters of right-lateral movement since the Cretaceous (Loney and_others, 1975). Goddard and Baranof Hot Springs occur in Lower Cenozoic granodiorite (Brew and Morrell,1980).High-angle joint sets are common at orientations of NSOE and N40W.Goddard Hot Springs are located very near the northwest- trending Redoubt Lake Fault,and Baranof Hot Springs fall on the trace of the Medvejie Lake Fault (Loney and others,1975). The shallow liquid-dominated system at Goddard Hot Springs is interpreted to be of very limited extent,based on EM-31 surveys CR.Reifenstuhl, personal commun.).-This hydrothermal system is probably quite similar to the Tenakee system,with connate waters associated with sedimentary rocks acting as the fluid source. Extensive exposures of Cretaceous argillite and graywacke are common throughout the Sitka region,but these units are not likely to act as reservoir rocks due to their low permeability and discontinuous jointing. Subsurface reservoir temperatures for Goddard and Baranof Hot Springshavebeencalculatedat147°C and 118°C,respectively,based on silica and alkali geothermometry (I.Barnes, personal commun.).If a power plant were constructed near the Goddard Springs,the nearest population center is Sitka.In this case,a possible route for powerlines would be northeastward (parallel to Redoubt Lake)for several miles,then northwest around Mt. and finally Granishinikof, underwater across the Eastern Channel of Sitka Sound (a distance of about 5 miles)to Sitka. The total distance would be approximatley 21 miles. The distance between the Goddard Springs and Sitka precludes direct utilization even if a reservoir of sufficient proportions were found.Adeepwaterreservoirat150°C could produce enough power either in a flash or a binary system plant. Transmission of power would be feasible. Figure 2 presents an economic comparison between diesel and geothermal generated electrical costs.An economic model was written that used a rate of return as a comparing yardstick between geothermal and diesel generation.The high investment costs of geothermal development are eventually offset by the high operating with diesel fuel.The calculation of the rate of return did not take into account the in-town standard administrative and maintenance costs costs associated assoctated with either option, the R.O.R.should be used for what is intended,i.e.,comparison.The market size and the demand for eventual payoff is of course important.As can be seen,the two curves tntersect at a plant capacity (or market demand)of 27 MW.If the electrical demand for Sitka is above this level,geothermal becomes more atractive.Yet,the uncertainty of the existence of the Hence, geothermal reservoir and the recent committment towards hydroelectric power cast a doubtful light over geothermal energy development. PILGRIM SPRINGS The thermal activity at Pilgrim Springs is located in the Pilgrim River Valley,a fault-bounded tectonic depression (graben).Precambrian amphibolites and Mesozoic plutons are the common rock types in the area, with local exposures of conformable and unconformable Coverthrust) Paleozoic carbonates.Potassium-argon dating by Turner and Swanson (1981) indicates a cooling age of 84 mye, which suggests intrusive igneous activity in the Upper Cretaceous. Gravity surveys conducted in the region by Kienle et al.(1980) indicate that Pilgrino Springs is located near the intersection of two possible fault zones which form the corner of a downdropped basement block.Other faults in the area have been verified by geologic mapping,and one or more of these faults could provide deep conduits for the geothermal anomaly. seismic data and It has been suggested (Wescott and Turner,1982)that the Pilgrim River Valley graben nay represent an incipient rift extending 250 kilometers across the central Seward Peninsula and offshore into the Bering Sea.Based on this hypothesis,the anomalous heat flow in the Pilgrim Springs area is due to tenstional tectonics and active rifting. The possible existence of a major rift system is significant for the regional geothermal potential.A helium survey was conducted to test this rift model,and nine out of eleven helium anomalies occur near the proposed rift segments and suggest abnormally high heat flow in these areas.Futhermore,extensive basaltic fields north of the Pilgrim Springs area have been interpreted as resulting from eruption in a zone of erustal weakness produced by the general north-south extension (Turner and Swanson,1982). The amount of separation along this proposed rift is less than the widths of the Quaternary depressions which have probably been enlarged by normal faulting and marginal subsidence, along with rifting.Potassium-argon dating indicates that extrusive volcanism which was associated with rifting began in the Upper Miocene (Turner and Swanson,1981). Finally,a permafrost boundary has been identified yhich encloses an areaof1to1.5 km".The thickness of this permafrost is over 350 ft. Temperature data at Pilgrim Springs 'was previously limited to shallow depth (4.5 meters)temperature readings (Turner and Forbes,1980), Helium soil surveys (Wescott and Turner,1981),and geothermometry(Motyka and others,1980).The temperature data for this taken from temperature curves recorded in six exploration wells.These curves showed a trend toward a maximum temperature at depths from 40 to 100 ft,followed by a rapid temperature decrease at depths from 100 to 250 ft,and finally by a constant geothermal gradient rangingfrom1.8°C to 2.1°C per 100 ft,down to a depth of 900 ft.Two deep wells (PS4 and PS5)show temperature trendsthatwouldintersectat155°C at a depth of 4875 ft,suggesting that all the wells overlay the source reservoir at a depth of 4875 ft. study were versus depth The shallow temperature observed in all the wells suggests that,somewhere in the immedtate vicinity,hot water is flowing upward through a fault or fissure system which extends vertically from a depth of about 50 ft to the deep source reservoir at a depth of 4875 ft.* anomaly If a power plant were constructed at Pilgrim Springs,the closest major consumer of that electricity would be the community of Nome.One possible route for powerlines would be westward from Pilgrim Springs to the Cobblestone River Valley,crossing the Kigluaitk Mountains at Mosquito Pass, and then south to Jensens Camp and along the road to Nome.This distance is roughly 55 miles.The next closest significant settlement is at Teller, which would be a distance of 45 miles. The Pilgrim Springs geothermal site has a proven intermediate temperature and shallow reservoir capable ofproducing300GPMof90°C (at the wellhead)artesian water.Induced air Lifted flowrates may reach 1500 GPM. A much hotter and hence deeper reservoir has been postulated. However,the distance between Pilgrim Springs and Nome prohibits the consideration of a hot water pipeline while power generation is also quite doubtful.The depth of the reservoir, the length of the transmission line, and transmission line losses preclude a reasonable calculation. The presence,though,of a significant amount of hot water could aid in two areas:a)development of a large resort area on site and,b)use of the water as a mineral leaching or permafrost thawing medium in present or contemplated mining operations. Such speculative uses are beyond the scope of this report. COPPER VALLEY The tectonic framework of the Copper River Basin is dominated by east-west trending orogenic arcs which are concave to the south,and by the Wrangell Mountains to the east.The regional aeromagnetic map of the Copper River Basin suggests that the andesitic and basaltic lavas of the Wrangell massif underlie the mud volcanoes of the Klawasi hydrothermal springs at a relatively shallow depth (Andreason and others,1964).A rapid 'decrease in the magnetic gradient westward from Mte Drum probably indicates that the lavas are thinner and more deeply buried under the alluvium of the Copper River. The Moore Creek exploration well drilled by the Pan American Petroleum Corporation penetrated olivine basalt of the Talkeetna Formation after passing through 7500 ft of Cretaceous sedimentary rocks.These units probably extend underneath the Wrangell volcanic pile.The Moose Creek Well encountered high pressure water in bentonitic shale at a depth of 5430 ft. The hydrothermal reservoirs in the Klawasi area are probably artesian aquifers lying at depths of up to 7000 ft within the sedimentary sequence.A significant amount of cooling and mixing occurs during the upward migration of these fluids,especially in passing through glacial till and permafrost.Nichols and Yehle (1961) report surface temperatures of 12 to30°C and flow rates up to 10 GPM for the Klawasi springs. For a constructed atpowerplant wf Upper Klawasi Spring,the Lower Klawasi and Shrub Springs are at distances of roughly five and seven miles,respectively,so heat loss during piping of the fluids could be significant.Glennallen is about 20 miles west of Upper Klawasi Spring, and the other community in the area is Copper Center,roughly 15 niles southwest of Upper Klawasi Spring. Either of these two communities would be a likely reciplent of the geothermal engery. An economic comparison of diesel versus geothermal utilization is presented in Figure 2.(A description of the model is included in the Sitka section.)The point of intersection is 22 MW,within the range of forecasted needs in the Copper Valley region.A vigorous geothermal exploration and subsequent drilling (1f indicated)is recommended for the Copper Valley region. SUMMER BAY,UNALASKA ISLAND / The rocks of Unalaska Island consist of three main groups.The oldest and most extensive is the lower Tertiary Unalaska Formation,composed of interbedded igneous and sedimentary memberse This formation has been extensively folded,faulted and metasomatically altered.Upper Tertiary calc-alkaline plutons comprise the second lithologic category.These plutons have been emplaced by such mechanisms as assimilation,stoping,and forceful intrusion.The third group consists of basalt and andesite flows of the Quaternary Makushin Volcanics (Drewes and others,1961). The first of the two ma jor hydrothermal areas is at Summer Bay. A large normal fault striking N45W anddipping60to75°south is well exposed along the coast just south of Summer Baye This fault may be projected across Summer Bay Lake and through the Summer Bay warm spring, although exposures are poor. Therefore,joints trending N45W are highly suspected as controlling the source waters of the springs (Reeder, 1981).The largest of the springs hasatemperatureof35°C and a dishcarge of 2 GPM.Two shallow exploration wells were drilled in 1980 and encountered temperatures of 43 to §0°C.Silica geothermometry indicates a subsurface reservoir temperature of 86°C (Motyka and others,1981).It is not clear what 1lithologic unit ts acting as a cap for this aquifer, because no impermeable material was detected during drilling.A very thin layer consisting mainly of mineral precipitates,derived from the warm waters,may exist above the aquifer. Schlumberger electric soundings,EM-31 Geonics surveys,and Dipole-Dipole resistivity surveys indicate that the shallow aquifer is fairly limited in extente Data from a Helium soil survey suggests that the hydrothermal source is derived from volcanic rocks, and not from acidic igneous or metamorphic rocks found at such places as Tenakee or Goddard Hot Springs. Summer Bay is approximately 5 miles overland to Dutch Harbor or half the distance if an underwater route tis employed. The Summer Bay reservoir at 86°C could be an interesting find.The city of Unalaska presently has 200 customers with an estimated average heat demand of 20,000 BTU/hr per house.Tota use on the island is then 4 X 10 BTU/hr.The five mile distance will result in a reduction of 25°C from the wellhead temperature. Hence,in the best of cases,a usefultemperaturedropof10°F can be contemplated within a proposed system.The flow rate demand will be 400,00 lbs/hr or 800 GPM.At least four (shallow)wells would be needed for such a flowrate,costing $4 million.The pipeline and distribution system would cost another $8 million (using standard engineering economic figures)for a total of $12 million for capital expenditures.The annual operating costs are expected to top $300,000.If a 20 year useful life were to be considered and if no taxes or rates of return were to be imposed,then a cost consideration of $26 per million BTU can be calculated. An average heating bill of $375/month must be assessed on households in order to recover the investment.Such a figure is quite unattractive considering the present (or projected)costs. MAKUSHIN VOLCANO The second major hydrothermal area on Unalaska Island is at Makushin Volcano.The rock contacts between the Unalaska Formation and the granitic plutons in the Makushin region are commonly near vertical and irregular,with the tntrusive bodtes interfingering into the highly altered sediments.Joints are common in these rocks with orientations of N60E and N55W,and the fumarole activity at Fields 2 and 3 appears to follow the N60E joint system.High-angle faults are also common,along with dikes. Most of the faults appear to be normal faults and strike N55W and N35E.One of these NS5S5W faults trends directly into Fumarole Field 5,and two other faults with N55W ortentations bound Fumarole Field 2 (Reeder,1981). Large,vapor-dominated hydrothermal systems,are postulated to exist beneath the eastern and southern flanks of Makushin Volcano,where their eastern extent is marked by Field 1 and thetr western extent delineated by Fields 2 and 3.Such systems are probably driven by dike- like magma bodies located several kilometers beneath the fumaroles.The dominant gases being discharged from most of the fumaroles are C09,No, S05,and HS.Motyka and others(1982)estimated reservoir temperatures of between 232 to 278°C, based on gas geothermometry.Three temperature gradient wells drilled during the summer of 1982 encountered maximum bottomhole temperatures of 200°C at a depth of 1500 feet in the plutonic rocks. Preliminary gravity modeling suggests that the plutonic rocks and the Unalaska Formation extend beneath the Makushin volcanic pile with no major fault displacements.Such lithologies,if highly fractured, could contain large,vapor-dominated, systems at depths greather than about 1 kilometer. Should a power plant be constructed to utilize the resource,the plant would need to be close to the wells to minimize the loss in quality when transporting steam.Powerlines could follow Makushin Valley for roughly 6 miles to Broad Bay,where underwater cable could transport the electricity to Dutch Harbor,or an overland route around Captains Bay could be constructed.The safest location for power plant construction from a volcanic hazards viewpoint,would be roughly 4 miles east of Field 1 behind the north-trending massif of Vista Ridge (Arce and Economides,1982). Unalaska is a geothermal major site of exploration activities in the State.Figure 2 indicates a juncture between the diesel and the geothermal curves at 32MW.Present projections suggest an electric power demand of 50 MW by the year 2000. Geothermal development is indicated if the enormous logistical costs associated with the terrain and the weather are kept tin check. CONCLUSIONS Of the six sites examined,only two (Copper Valley and Unalaska/Makushin Volcano)appear to be attractive candidates for geothermal development. In both cases,sufficient reservoirs must be discovered.While the geothermal anomalies (and temperatures)are there,the fluid is yet to be discovered.The only means of verification is drilling.The attractiveness of geothermal development depends largely on capital expenditures.Significant overruns beyond the estimates used in this study shift the market size requirements upwards.Such an event would prove geothermal economically unattractive.A high escalation of diesel costs would have the opposite effect. REFERENCES Andreassen,G.E.,Granty,A.,Zietz, I.and Barnes,D.F.:"Geologic Interpretation of Magnetic and Gravity Data in the Copper River Basin, Alaska",U.S.G.S.Prof.Paper 316-H, 1964. Arce,G.N.and Economides,MeJe? "Analysis of Volcanic Hazards from Makushin Volcano,Unalaska Island, Proce Iv New Zealand Geothermal Workshop pp.93-99,1982. Brew,D.Ae and Morrell,R.P.: "Intrusive Rocks and Plutonic Belts of Southeastern Alaska,J.S.A.",U.S.G.S. Open-File Report 80-78,pp 34,1980. Drews,HH.Fraser,G.D.,Snyder,G.L. and Barnett,H.F.,Jr.e:"Geology of Unalaska Island and adjacent insular shelf,Aleutian Islands,Alaska", U.S.G.S.Bull.102B-S,pp 583-676, 1961. Kienle,J.,Lockhart,A.and Peace, J.:"Seismic refraction survey of the Pilgrim Springs geothermal area, Alaska",in Turner,D.L.and Forbes, R.B.(Eds.)A Geological and Geophysical study of the Geothermal Energy Potential of Pilgrim Springs, Alaska,UAF Geophysical Institute Report,UAG R-271,1980. Loney,R.A.,Brew,DeA.,Muffler,L.J. and Pomeroy,J.S.:"Reconnaissance Geology of Chichagof,Baranof and Kruzof Islands,Southeastern Alaska", U.S.G.S.Prof.Paper 792,pp.105, 1975. Miller,D.Se:"Final Completion Report,Tenakee Drilling Project", prepared for the State of Alaska, Division of Energy and Power Development,1981. Motyka,R.T.,Moorman,M.R.and Forbes,R-B.:in Turner,D.Le and Forbes,R.Bee (Eds.):"A Geological Symostum-Arc Volcansna,Volcanological Soctety of Japan and the IAVCEI,pp- 297-298,1981. Turner,D.L.and Forbes,R.B.(Eds.): "A Geological and Geophysical Study of and Geophysical Study of the the Geothermal Energy Potential of Geothermal Energy Potential of Pilgrim Pilgrim Springs,Alaska",UAF Springs,Alaska",UAF GeophysicalInstituteReportUAGR-271,1980. Motyka,R.J.,Moorman,M.A.and Poreda,R.:"Fluid geochemistry of the Makushin geothermal area,Unalaska Island,Alaska",1982. Nichols,D.R.and Yehle,L.A.s "Mud Volcanoes in the Copper River Basin, Alaska",In:Raasch,G.O0.(Ed.) Geology of the Arctic,International Symposium,Arctic Geology,Calgary, 1960.Proceedings,v.2,pp.1063 1087,1961. Reeder,JeWe,Coonrod,P.L.,Bragg, N.J.,Denig-Chakroff,D.and Markle, D.Re?"Alaska Geothermal Geophysical Institute Report,UAG R- 271 #1980. Turner,D.L.and Swanson,S.E.: "Continental rifting -a new tectonic model for the Central Seward Peninsula",in Wescott,E.M.,and Turner,D.L.(Eds.),Geothermal Reconnatssance Survey of the Central Seward Peninsula,Alaska,UAFGeophysicalInstituteReportUAGR- 284,1981. Wescott,E.M.and Turner,DeL., (Eds.):"Geothermal Reconnaissance Survey of the Central Seward Peninsula,Alaska,"UAF Geophysical Implementation Plan"Report by the State of Alaska to D.0O.E.,Contract DE-FGS1-79R000074,pp.108,1980. Reeder,JoWes ""Vapor-dominated hydrothermal manifestations of Unalaska Island and their geologic and tectonic setting,"1981 IAVCEL @ PILGRIM SPRINGS CANADA FAIRBANKS @ a MT.MCKINLEY COPPER VALLEY ANCHORAGE MT MAKUSHIN.p>oOyr)SUMMER Bay Figure 1.Geothermal Sites in Alaska. Institute Report UAG R-284,1981. Wescott,E.M.and Turner,D.L.:"Geothermal Energy Resource Assessment of Parts of Alaska,final report to the Division of Geothermal Energy, D.O.E.,pp.69,1982. White,D.E.,Muffler,L.eP.J.and Truesdell,AwHe:"Vapor-dominated hydrothermal systems compared with hot-water systems",Economic Geology, v.66,nowl,pp.75-97,1971. 80 Unalaska Geothermal Unalaska Diesel _ Sitka Geochermal _-_- } Sitka Diesel --7 {Copper Valley Geothermal -.-.+--.-.-' Copper Valley Diesel _--oOo 4 70 60 woRATEOFRETURN&o30 20 i)10 20 30 40 50 60 PLANT CAPACTTY Figure 2,Economic Comparison of Geothermal and Diesel Power Generation in Selected Sites in Alaska. MEMORANDUM State of Alaska LoDEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL &GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS TO: FROM: Patricia DeJong DATE:September 30,1982 Alaska Power Authority FILE NO:Re, TELEPHONE NO:274-9681 C 1 oSCcvNichossodRECEIVEDSUBJECT:Progress Report;Unalaska Geothermal OCT 11982 Project ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY The purpose of this memo is to summarize studies performed by DGGS during the 1982 field season in the vicinity of Makushin Volcano, Unalaska which were supported in part by APA funding.These studies included:geochemical sampling of geothermal fluids,the completion of a gravity survey,geologic mapping,and whole rock and alteration product sampling for chemical and mineralogical analysis. Preliminary results of these investigations are presented together with a status report of work in progress.A more detailed report which includes some preliminary results from the geothermal fluid sampling program and preliminary gravity modeling will be available on November 30,1982 as per terms of the APA to DGGS RSA. Attachment ec:Wyatt G.Gilbert Geothermal Section Staff Prej.Code: Fila Coda:3%,Olo.O3 |J.tete:BO,AIS:f 02-001 A(Rev.10/79) Whole Rock and Alteration Product Chemistry and Mineralogy Thirty-one whole rock samples collected from the vicinity of Makushin Volcano were analyzed by the DGGS,Fairbanks laboratory utilizing standard automated x-ray fluorescence technique (XRF).The results of these analyses are presented in Table 7.The analyses allow a positive identification of the lavas,(basalts vs.andesites)and plutonic rocks (diorites).Samples collected from the fumarole areas were analyzed,utilized x-ray diffraction (XRD)techniques for positive mineral identification.The clay mineral phases identified kaolinite,montmorillonite-illite mixed layer clays,and montmorillo- nite are characteristics of an acid alteration halo developed around fumaroles in basic rock.Kaolinite is present nearer the fumaroles and grades outward through transitional mixed layer clays to montmorillonite and chlorite.The only anamolous mineralogy detected by XRD was the presence of halite (NaCl)in the fine fraction (<2 micron)of a volcanic tuff sample collected from the steep slope of Makushin Volcano 150 yards southeast of drill site #2.The area contained iron-stained zones which appeared to be mineral water seeps.The presence of halite in the sample indicates the possible recent existence of chloride-rich fluids within an area which all other evidence indicates is dominated or "dry steam"system.Follow up sampling and analysis will be conducted early in the FY 83 field season.Assays were performed on two sulfide-rich samples collected from a diorite -Unalaska formation contact zone on the north side of Makushin Valley.The assays (included on Table 2)indicated no detectable precious metals in these samples of pyritized tuff. Age Dating Ten samples were submitted to Stan Evans Earth Science Laboratory, University of Utah Research Instititute for potassium argon dating. Samples were originally screened by DGGS staff through petrographic examination in thin section for alteration which may have released argon.Evans determined that incipient alteration coupled with the low potassium content (generally less than 1 percent Kj0 for thebasalts)would render six of the ten samples marginal or non-dateable utilizing whole rock techniques.Ages obtained from the lava samples (100,000 years B.P.)only substantiate their assumed Makushin Volcanic origin as opposed to the older lavas of the Unalaska formation,Additional samples of diorite obtained from the cores will be analyzed utilizing biotite separates,thus avoiding the low potassium/alteration problem. Gravity Survey Field data collection was completed with the addition of 64 new gravity stations.Preliminary modeling of the gravity data from a total of 156 stations will be completed in October with results available prior to site-selection meetings in November.Laboratory density determination for representative rock samples are in process, Geologic Mapping Geologic mapping was completed during the 82 field season and drafting of a preliminary geologic map for release in early November is progressing.The acquisition of excellent color aerial photo coverage by Republic Geothermal Inc.after the completion of the field season will allow considerable refinement of the preliminary map during the 1982-83 winter season and a final map will be prepared after field-checking during the 1983 field season.Mapping during the 82 season focused attention on the plutonic rocks and their probable role as fractured reservoir rocks underlying the Makushin Volcanic sequence. Geothermal Fluid Chemistry Studies Geothermal fluids (both liquids and gas samples)were collected from 12 fumarole fields and thermal field sites including the summit vents during the 82 field season.Gas and liquid analyses utilizing gas chromatagraphy,atomic absorption and wet chemistry are presently in process at the Geothermal Fluids Laboratory,and isotope analyses will be accomplished by contract and by DGGS personnel working in the Scripps Institute of Oceanography Laboratory during late October. Results of these analyses will be available in early November 1982 as planned for the site selection meeting. >”Aepeo .nat ,SyifibMadaesaeReemaeneAEiSahane REE DER,Pet!mt"Hajo:Ke 90;10,Pp Og:Hino |2109 cs a 2.TRAM ETRIG)Ss:CLAY Aliclnals BATCH NO.Z|('Rb yO $10.sol HO |cs i ,3 "Oy MIMETALG:"Anche inG/EYVLDATE OUTLoNO.LAD NO,|s1dslatgog 0,0,Fd]Hoo)as Hage”Ko 1105 P25]Mino 2103 sro Rb9o 'Lora Re ae ots TO "BS -aie S82)Ki ood pol gon)sled ioel (lag)vied abel od ole oye iL dt oozhabebe lye P72. -3E-Ci LSBU PL PLT)03 Slay 20 7)ZAG hey L19 o'271 32]oe OT oViy "pee vA TSU LEB2BK |ete rem oe3|ous]fe4,youl vast all ned avy ovsl:i]|i foe]aos lel $2: s7 5 LS¥24KI saa]wse7)say)als Bue)#ezl 230]pel rel ois]073].|Pell sos)py0 ell:10,3-U7 LS@25 F ena 37 sa3l ved ¢ee|oral z73|\0231 772]e2l|ou]bot tt 409|097 LOi62|(Os MBUNLSE2LR |eayol 1e6 x70]bio)229 (A672256 nib].a92|ast _avel |||.t |-e20|a2/709 (oe LSE2TE 706)671 ze9|102]7271 foi2s|_z.sel'abl ne av7|_aw|||ft |27)ose 2b 78. 75-1 'LSS2ER 608 2351 Is)#94 B91 7é2\-SYD).Lib pe7|opel On|i Lore g27 Sls 7 190, oS.{ LORW Kiczysl ypo3l aie |sued eset plglyag ola rob)ov azel 6-1.|G lace lode Rt eAsaLéonv0.22 12.64|g23\4ie|24|pide!290)oe sor|_a'zil_oss]!ji}z.32|gz]|Be breMoS-1ES83)Aloosal mpsol yoy sid £61 _ahig #2 200 079 a2elca |||||402|ait SH I sR ESS3LK An 15,35)p52]3621 148)is3)S31 201)087)026 BIg)|ers}eyo uy "lap, :07/8 |-0.07S78316S833Rica,(S28)762)323]£3/\B66)51S]499)O88 |28)0/7 24]122:"5-4 LSM cet]971 2eg|zi tool sigs soak bbe)ogp|ors)om i:|!|evel ace £99 98: iS |LSE3SK!gone I74S5)£Ol|28)22 gins 2.99 ob2 '103 030 O19 7:/.02|1,40 L935.yee, wee [LS8346i533]23]3.03]sey]eo]gee]250|_a97]205]01 [art |094 0.4/230.2.Vai HiL SYST Sy 0.b0)[e651 97)23d pollles 2.61 olso ob9l ovz Gil |it.fare a32 OU le SPB AGES RK odorzgh)opp BON 6A plodl ecih|_ob2|0 a7 ole |_|018 |0,39.Lol.7, a LSI37 K bootlegs)369]52M 6.4.0|p-52|2.62|ofol O7F|a/z|ass |[a4 |223 10.24 ThGENILST4ORstlarthanlFONB71oIshazel.ckol AA]aedlare |!1)|ao4-lo/¢P86 a .ac:S102 |lA 98 :Fe2U3 nee M90,GAG i wanes ;bea y! ,a7Na 20”k20 10,P 905.Magarog |Poel ae TITRAMETRIC.oer a WeREEDED No.ct ||RbzO S10 tor 207 -|a"agaiierate _loate n(/si/se vate ouTLDNO.|-LAB NO.|S10,Al,Oa]F 0305 66)MgO sapere K207 T105 POL]MnO7 207 es Rboo -H oF ay ;TO ._tere te a dep toy an ee ee ee ee | ,.Iis-GI LSB S04N TRTA 538|2:98|'#90|:928)*hyol abel A291 abel 226]ie Ar)8 ale LO3-R-S|LSBY2EK |se24 (672 3.76 lo4 ait}PH ib ZEN prs]abel tori Lb ae7z|ozol |bb/|97 STAN LSBYSE |ses 7c 296|_e's1|2.80]p55]3.5/|2421 poh]ads]alo |)|S|oS7]aes |247 'LZ -!'-.nn a,::i ft Jf,am).'ibeSLEEK|sy oel joel cep]517 Hor |i pe]367|\423]2321 abil o2d|ih i 0.291 08 Lob I 2h a>.;oe 4 .7 od -|to H :.l ;4 : ij52-2 |LS¥YSR 5493|16:88\-2.95|750 402 Fil)359 A221 427 a22|g20[)1 ||-0.431 03 LOgS Me 27 S3_|LSEYCR |so3]own 2041 Sel neal ples des]aps!py2l abolazs|-|i tease |gos Ube +74.GSH [LS84TR]soa)pattlz25|Soe]sval diel 272laks|ay|-alelae |!'tL [ooo |00 £90 ize b-SS [LSSYSK]57.03]14.68]zo0|362)sob glssl 296l'olee|224 ar7|a20](1:4034!00 [1,04 lee RBM ESBHTR |5550]682]antl we/|9991 bbe |se duel |406|abil avg |1 432/oo2 960 Mi R-BIIMESESOR |55-00]17-931 3./2|_S45)#:3/ALAS'128|0.79|026]awl '1033 bos2 tle lee "KR-SIMLSES IR [65571 1496]466|£60 24 |3991:279|a7b|ofl oo 2.751 0.19 a Me -Zz ;im:oe || a !:|3 ;'-1 !tt bea i te i | i !i , :TL 3 :! :,i !|! ,7 .!po |}ot 4 0 cel [|Aso ¥'| 'Norrial Cs Geochem (] ARF ede RNFRUBA NAAR RAS Be aldas LISA WUPEFLVAEL LD J RANMA BANS "methods No,Boxes Seemed Vota!No.Samples 3/Aecc€ S =STREAM SEDIMENT I =SOIL,Page LsP=PAN CONCENTRATE W =WATER cre UNR=ROCKS M =MINERAL ANALYSES {BATCIE NO,-2__..|arsetions:-Vohn W.KEEPER ap sof Lap xo,[SMP/BATCH ANALYSIS DESIRED GEOL/PROJ.|DATEIN|DATE U-G6-28-a |b R\[|Gadde |Citmnyie Ld) C-6-33-61\K Aondeatie Z le 377K Il R Condes her.Le x le-6-¥6,\L R Lemdbvelee.F M-G-77 |W R Lrrdecades.tr U-27-5 1b AK Pawn lle:r ll-26-$-1 \b R BuaclZe /t U-36-$-1 We R Boiliabin re " L-48-S-/\\Lendocle " U-$3-S-/|L if Bde de " "54S Mb A Ardea " MU -$5-§-2Zb R VA ( U-§E-S-3\1,'R Onn.Z.?, U-SF-5-7 i K Bacekn ?" Ll-6-5-1 |b BR bndoacks (Preccn)Z U-F7-S-/\L R Abode i M-/73-R-l|b R Pawatlce " Mt -R3L K Pncalic r UMFK f brccalinc.tt WHlasl.l1 Xt.QR aA 4:96 aH.ft 7 Pos actiy ch Ly st Agnay LJ =o methods Novnial [3.Geochem (|No.Boxes Total No.Samples 3/ - ee ee S =STREAM SEDIMENT P =PAN CONCENTRATE R=ROCKS Je 4n>We;A.E EPER I =SOW, W =WATER M =MINERAL ANALYSESBATCHNO.Le Vase =a OED NO,LAB NO,»{BATCIT NO.ANALYSIS DESIRED GEOL/PROJ.DATE IN DATE (-/76-|b /Lnbawe Lv LL Aorvee (Fans £22 nae Low Lrarel a,Lo thre OUT >=M203 KOM o a .ccAoiea.Prealé,z Borline-Le /-7*-J\tU Eon gut Clee0- 6-FR-/\L Baca LL O0-6:522\\Bacclew G a ryCue,LE. 0-6-3 |b Pncaleie Q-6:27 \t Leitalics O 6-S5)l haz \C-2 cam,elite LLL.wie oo 23 -K-Spay Lag wt Lice we 2 7-f-8h-a L Londo='r.Ze ?9-K-S)-M |SyPy|ayeaPspaPePePabsbs2 ELEMENTS SIDE 1°./!''!'!:"ELEMENTS 'SIDE 2 -a1 "meTHoDs)ine _BATCH NO.S04 ,SAMPLE TYPE _RCuPbZnAUAgMoSb)Sn einer |7 party geXRF /TYPE 'J wile :" . ;,W lug As'Gol NI Fe Mae]if).PTE UY Y Zr wedeg ity,=E+SPEC,,,.6-coLon'=,pate n.2/442 pate outBaBesicdce. ."i:!itilfotnert Pitt Betep'1 @eALT.LAB.FIELDNO.|LABNO,out Pb”anetatt Magy <r sh sn wo Hel as co”|a ;Fe-]Mn B 4 'Be Be Bi ci cen]SHIPMENT NO./DATE ws.|p tee8]3391/2 |syle ier 2 lef:aes Vy A tare LeN-7 |b sour R|ol |25|fos es!le.Zilzy delet Te AOR Sd of ocfesededabors fe.ftp ade L L L aL L r : a :ar L 7 an - : .-Cave L...,Oe ML es Mee)t q 4 ':' L _:ne i a L L ''I ' L eee L ELsfer wmefe -}i! L eRe poe ge _'i : re Dor p 1 L rtief i 4 "I ''* +2 go come areas oe wae op }enn sarees::7 a frarce og j °.cess ioeel ne MOA "tid :"h 'oc oem 'poof tb eg '.i ae ..”Cae wRs . wg bie iad _poi Sapp tyres:©GEOLJPROJECT Clay Nick /Uiaies!e .14 :3 ::my .ate toe "1 :!.'¢7 an ery ::::Mee hs ;:° 3 Ryo.S10 LolJd i wt -8 bo gt A{810g Aly289 F020g Feo:M90.cad:' p04}I! oy ae11a90)20)T109"Pe205.no ZrO,7a } { aaa ar a-::Be"TITRAMETRIO|xAP, Ao ace oho.-8 ankvinetate'He it woe rag bec4:JotunWs REEDERLoyNichiolsBATCHINAneO42eBinbjevieroare LAB NC.Na3o SL!K 20.°'TIO,:-vor]eae Fe 2 -hb. 48-S-|LS825 K-Z0bl oO '1-0,06 0.4 PLL. "S3-S-)LSF30R |fo/"12.32 04-7 6-3S-a|eS82)#2 BN ITIN 3.96 abel 625 jis 282 De 94 OVP 0:78'|me "0.07|'Bie wee ei-B8-C |LSBAR]reed ree7|asl wis 26o|sey eel desl nv o27 all Lea yeh gplb-Y%|L5S23K |s33q (59 2Ps|obs zd]gol Yost biol Kod ob Os,|boszta sell steel |-<{6 ES824R|59.07]wee7l ey |alel 3/4)247]230)24 Leh ois]ois]!Vote p isl pool 2 [eb G-Y7\L5828Kio 3/|937 szal ee Zee oirs|873 |023]2/2 oer]ovel |Lt |409]297 yoib2|.(00:72 "2N-S"LSE2LR |zo4ol reed 276)sso 229 4/eq|266)el agal airst oval |i [bezel eazy]2 |209 (00.3|Bo-S-LSY2TR|a7e6]16871 wool #02)|7271 095 2.501 obre|OA a7]alt i |v7]ade oil 8.14 Bb-S 1 LS82ER |sg 09 |7.351 aS)Hod R72|_reel ze7 pul ved avalos ot | 00|24 as 100,£4 .\aaiyl |, VonlZ -SM-S-|LES83)2 O79 |-002.OM lees ST ors LS¥32%De7 0.13 2/0 9p ol SS-S-3 LS833R Ope |-o/9 0,07 793 ss-s-4 LSI RK ate |a 0,0§98.94 S&-s-]LSS3SKI/103)0 -se8L GO 00,53 S7-S-|LS&EALE S05 0,4-/|ee/s 1N3-K-}LSS37 K |0.29 3 bap74 |GY -R-3 LEEZER FYEF0 7OF2 O94 0,Ph.2) LS-R-(L95939 £YEU,2,OGF-"2 |9RS4 1SL-€-\LSSYOKfaBE2T Loy F7252f has vv wy 4 4 :rad pe"sidg'AI 284.F850,Fed MgO,Cao”ete XRF _co "kl?;Ls Prag bypass apie td uc etp tre rg:' .*0pon[Nag0"K 20,T102.Pa0g!fino Frog oR BSiemawetnie!>Beht weReeves,wo.1 22!ne-RbLO sro Lol THgOeir ity:an 2,Be GRAVIMETRIC'aan LyDATE.ING/2Y/Z-DATE OUTELDNo.|-Lab Now |8103|A1,0)Fe,0,]F405]moO]cs wai Ka]T10g|P20g]MnO]ZeOz)Bro]Ab,O}oF nab oe Fats a roxNIS-CILSBHIR |S09)rard 538]498 790|:gat)keel "abel nee adh]p26|1 "bagol a2/l yas Fi4- "2O3-KS|LSBY2R |oe sal vel 2.76 4127 2:35)Rae,'Mib|:£61!7.¥3|029}'0.79 |1 '|ae@7|ozol |e5/P7.7wT[LS 843K |sys IZ)246|25/|2.80\235)'351 42 "p05\noel oie |iit |aS7)are]|247 753 2h LS8YN4 |syoel 1642)e4e|Alto Hoe |pre |3.25](423 4.321 abil 2d]vt Lg 29)905 70,81\ILI GS2-2/LS8YSRK |gros}rebel io.et|750 402 gi/2\5.591 *22 422\a221 g20l ||oes]ap3 Loss (00-24 GoS3_|LSENCR |szo3]ioe atl Duel adel pienl de6|nbs|py2l pbolaz/|||||Lewlaes||xed -172.99 "GSH ASSYTE|502/|post]225]Soel_sualWie)S72liaks 09/|abel arb |it lec |4.00 £90 Z2.t re"SS [ESSNRK)53.03]16.68]z00|362]sob]giss|«23x54 oby|224 ai7|920]:||_1034|a00 [1,02 (00.6! RBM ESSATR |seo]622]eel Hey]999]bel ese |bel noel abil aval ||1432 |009 260 oo.6 TRRIINESESOR [55-001 17.93|3.12]5:45]#9/||lib]'3.68||0]077]a25|ae (033 bos Gb 0.8 "K-BEMESES IR [e557 496 4e6|260 24 wr]3991 -079|a76|o/F|ovo 2.75|0./9 6F¢Loh? 7 7 oan ate eee i 7 wt Dabs os F =Z ::a . ha ae ;a Ty rs 7 ob i:| :Z | ;T ||_- *e Thermal Fluid Geochemistry of the Makushin and Akutan G Geothermal Prospects 'Or Roman J.Motyka Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys P.O.Box 80007 College,Alaska 99701 Paper presented at the April 1982 Department of Energy Conference for State-coupled Teams for Geothermal Assessment ABSTRACT The Makushin and Akutan geothermal prospects occur in the eastern Aleutian island arc,on northern Unalaska Island and on Akutan Island, respectively.Surface manifestations of the geothermal resources in both localities consists of solfatara fields and thermal springs located on the flanks or near the base of historically active volcanoes.Both Makushin and Akutan volcanoes have summit calderas averaging 3 km in diameter which contain extensive fumarolic activity. Distinct differences in chemistries of thermal springs and fumaroles associated with the two geothermal prospects reflect differ- ences in the type of subsurface reservoirs underlying the two regions. Thermal springs at Makushin are typically near-neutral in pH,have very low chloride levels {10 ppm),and are comparatively rich in Mg,Ca, sO,»HCO.,and Si0,.Similarities in cation and isotopic compositionsof+vakushin thermal springs compared to local surface streams indicate the thermal waters are locally derived meteoric waters infiltrating to relatively shallow depths where they are heated by steam and gases rising from at least a shallow vapor-dominated zone.Predominate fumarolic gases are CO.»N,,and sulfur gases.All samples showed 2significantlevelofHwandahighH/CH,ratio.The ratio of He/HeWRTatmosphericlevelsrangedfrom4.5 to 6.0.Fumaroles and hot springs in the upper parts of Glacier and Makushin Valleys form a roughly linear trend,suggesting their distribution may be structurally controlled. ._Thermal springs located in Akutan Hot Springs Bay Valley have verylowMg(<2 ppm),are SiO,-rich,and are moderately concentratedin Na-Cl,a chemistry typically assoctated with hot-water hydrothermal systems.B/Cl ratios indicate the several sets of springs are derived from a common parent hot-water reservoir.Application of silica, cation,and sulfate-water oxygen-isotope geothermmetry gives a range of160-190°C for the parent reservoir.Recent geophysical investigations performed in cooperation with the Geophysical Institute,U of Alaska, identified a broad zone of apparent low resistivity underlying the lower part of the valley in the vicinity of the thermal springs.Significant levels of CH,and low H,/CH,ratios occur in gases from both the thermal springs and from a fumarole in a solfatara field located at the head of a tributary valley about 4 km-southeast of the hot springs.--Th TEProj.Cove:-OSFiigCoda:3%.Ole tne CBee similarity in H /CH,suggests underlying,reservoir rocks are similar inbothareas.Both sites have a ratio of He/He WRT atmospheric levels of about 7.0. INTRODUCTION During the past two years,the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (DGGS)has been engaged in regional and site- specific assessments of the state's geothermal resources.Part of this work involves the extension of earlier reconnaissance surveys of the state's thermal springs and fumarole fields performed by the U.S. Geological Survey and summarized in Waring's work of 1917 and T. Miller's open-file report of 1973.The most promising region for finding and developing high-temperature hydrothermal systems,that is,systems with deep temperatures greater than 150°C,is the Aleutian arc (fig.1). The Aleutian chain of active volcanoes lies immediately north of the Aleutian Trench,a convergent boundary between the North American and the Pacific lithospheric plates.This convergence produces one of the most seismically active belts in the world with much of the seismicity originating from the Benioff Zone,the subcrustal region where the Pacific plate is being actively subducted under the North American plate.The eruption of Aleutian magmas appear to be intimately related to this subduction process. The occurrence of active volcanic systems and shallow magmatically heated rock coupled with deep,penetrating fracture and fault systems provide a favorable setting for the development of hydrothermal systems in the Aleutian arc,provided that sufficiently permeable and porous rock is available to act as reservoirs and that adequate vertical permeability exists to allow the infiltration of surface waters into the reservoir.The surface expression of such hydrothermal systems,thermal springs and solfatara fields,occur throughout the chain.Much of our recent work has been involved in identifying these systems,in obtaining baseline information,particularly regarding the geochemical composi- tions of associated geothermal fluids,and in estimating deep reservoir temperatures.Our reconnaissance studies have thus far covered the region extending from Adak Island on the west to Becherof Lake on the Alaska Peninsula on the east (Motyka and others,1981). On the basis of chemical and isotope geothermometry or the occur- rence of persistent solfatara fields.we have tentatively identified at least 13 high-temperature hydrothermal systems in this region (Motyka, 1982).White and Williams (1975)classified hot-water hydrothermalsystemswithestimatedreservoirtemperaturesexceeding150°C as high temperature systems.The temperature cutoff was based on the premisethatreservoirswithtemperaturesbelow150°C are much less attractive for generating electricity.Because none of these systems have yet been explored at depth,no distinction is made here between vapor-dominated and hot-water hydrothermal systems in the Aleutians.Although the solfatara fields indicate the existance of a shallow-vapor dominated zone,the steam and gases in these situations may actually be evolving by boiling from a deeper subsurface hot-water reservoir. In this paper the characteristics of two of these sites,Makushin and Akutan,where site-specific studies have been initiated,will be briefly examined, UNALASKA ISLAND Background Unalaska Island,second largest in the arcuate,chain of AleutianIslands,is located between latitudes 53°15'and 54°N.and betweenlongitudes166°and 168°W.,200 km southwest of the Alaska Peninsula (fig.2).Because of the large and excellent deep-water harbor located at Unalaska Bay (one of the few protected harbors in the Aleutians),the village of Unalaska has naturally evolved into the major base of opera- tions for the Bering Sea fishing industry.Thirteen fish processors operate in the area and bring in as many as 1,500 -2,000 seasonal employees during the height of crab-fishing season.Unalaska has the distinction of being the crab capital of the world.With the imminent development of the Alaskan bottom fishery,Unalaska will undoubtedly continue to expand.The village council is actively seeking an energy base to support its growing fishing industries. Unalaska Island will be the scene of an exploratory geothermal drilling program scheduled for the summer of 1982.The main targets of the exploration drilling are the hydrothermal reservoirs feeding the thermal fields located on the east flank of active Makushin Volcano. Geology Geologic mapping of the area was done by Drewes and others (1961) of the U.S.Geological Surveys in the early 1950's and is presently being mapping in detail by John Reeder of DGGS.The western part of northern Unalaska (the northern bulge)is dominated by the still active Makushin Volcano,which is about 2035 m high (fig.2).The broad dome-shaped summit has a small caldera and is capped by a glacier with tongues that descend the larger valleys to elevations as low as 300 m (1000 ft.).Several satellitic cones and craters occur on the flanks of the volcano. The Unalaska Formation constitutes the oldest and most extensive group of rocks in the island and consists of a thick sequence of coarse and fine sedimentary and pyroclastic rocks intercalated with dacitic, andesitic,and basaltic flows and sills,cut by numerous dikes and small plutons (Drewes and others,1961)(fig.2).The formation is exposed over two-thirds of the island and is thought to be early to mid-Tertiary.The formation has been extensively folded,faulted,and intruded by plutonic rocks,with moderate hydrothermal alteration occurring near the plutons.The batholiths and smaller plutons are grandiorite with border phases as mafic as gabbro.The ages of the plutons are considered to be younger than early Miocene and older than middle Pleistocene. Basalt and andesite flows and pyroclastic rocks of the Makushin Volcanics unconformably overlie the Unalaska Formation and the plutonic rocks that intrude it (Drewes and others,1961).Most of the Makushin Volcanics are believed to be middle to late Pleistocene.Late Wisconsin to Recent volcanic cinder cones,composite cones,and lava flows are scattered about the base of Makushin Volcano and have been collectively mapped as Eider Point Basalt (Drewes and others,1961). Makushin Volcano is still active and is known to have erupted at least 14 times since 1760,with a report of a minor eruption occurring in 1980 (Coats,1950;SEAN,1980);Table Top Mountain has probably been active since the last major glaciation (Drewes and others,1961). Thermal areas Several active thermal areas have been identified on Makushin Volcano (fig.2).Fumaroles and hot springs occur within the 2.5-km-dia Makushin caldera.An extensive fumarole field and a series of asso- ciated hot springs occur at the head of Glacier Valley on the south- southeast flank of Makushin Volcano (fig.3).The fumaroles lie at an elevation of about 670 m.Two fumarole fields and associated hot springs are found in the upper reaches of Makushin Valley on the north- east flank of Makushin Volcano (fig.3).The lower and smaller field occurs at an elevation of about 360 m on a small bench located on the steep north valley wall about 25 m above a stream channel.The larger field occurs about 2 km further upstream at the head of one of the tributary valleys on the east flank of the volcano at elevations varying from 600-800 n. Hot springs and fumaroles located in Glacier and Makushin Valleys appear to follow a roughly linear northeast trend,suggesting their distribution may be structurally controlled (fig.2 &3).Recent satellitic cones in the area also follow a roughly northeast trend.The springs and fumaroles occur at the eastern edge of the volcanic field and emanate from faulted and intensely hydrothermally altered rocks belonging to the Tertiary-aged Unalaska formation and the gabbroic plutons that intrude it (fig.2).Several northwest trending faults systems that cut across the volcano and pass through or near the fumaroles fields may be acting as conduits for the flow of thermal fluids. Thermal spring temperatures in Glacier and Makushin Valleys rangefromabout50°C to near boiling.Discharges from individual sets of springs range from 50 to 100 lpm.Deposits of calcite were found coating channels of thermal springs in the upper part of Glacier Valley. In one instance a multi-hued calcite sinter cone about 1/2 meter high had formed over a thermal spring orifice. Water Chemistry Table 1 gives the chemical and physical properties of thermal springs and surface waters on Makushin volcano.Key features of the thermal water chemistry in both Glacier Valley and Makushin Valley are the extremely low levels of chloride present,the relatively low cationcontent,and the comparatively high level of magnesium and calcium.The sulfate and biocarbonate contents probably arise from the oxidation of S and co,gases associated with the fumarolic activity.Most of thethermalsptingsarenearneutralinpH.However,acid springs also occur,usually in close proximity to a steam vent.The waters are similar to those that have been classified as bicarbonate-sulfate waters by others (White,1957;Ellis and Mahon,1964).Such waters typically occur on the flanks (or in wells drilled thereon)of active volcanoes in island-are settings (Oki and Hirano,1970;Mahon and others,1980). The waters are relatively high in Si0,.High SiO,may reflectequilibrationofwaterswithquartzorchatcedonyinashallowreservoir or possibly leaching of country-rock by.acid-waters formed by the reaction of volcanic gases with ground waters and equilibration withamorphoussilica. The percentage cation and anion content of thermal waters and meteoric waters are plotted on trilateral diagrams in figures 4 and 5.Deuterium and Oxygen 18 content of Makushin waters in °/SMOW areplottedinFigure6.The similarity in cation and isotopic composition of Makushin Valley hot springs to local meteoric water indicates these thermal waters are locally derived meteoric waters infiltrating to relatively shallow depths where they are heated by steam and gases rising from a deep thermal reservoir. The isotopic composition of thermal waters in Glacier Valley indicates a similar situation occurs there.Thermal springs in Glacier Valley,however,are more concentrated in sodium and potassium than thermal springs in Makushin Valley indicating a greater degree of water-rock interaction occurs in Glacier Valley.Although the sodium and potassium contents of thermal springs examined in Glacier Valley are similar,the calcium concentration differs markedly:springs at lower elevation (G2 and G3)have an order of magnitude greater calcium content than springs located directly below the fumarole field (Gl). Gas Chemistry Gas chemistry of samples obtained from fumaroles in Glacier and Makushin Valleys are given in Table 2.The first part of Table 2 presents gas composition in volume percent of total non-water consti- tuents.The second part of Table 2 gives the volume percent of gases contained in the residual fraction after carbon dioxide and sulfur gases are removed.The predominate gases in all cases is carbon dioxide, nitrogen and the sulfur gases.A significant percentage of hydrogen was found in both localities,although the Glacier Valley fumaroles have about 2-4 times hydrogen content of the Makushin fumaroles.Hydrogen in fumarolic gases may be derived from high-temperature interaction of water with ferrous-oxide silicates.Giggenbach (1980)indicates the percentage of hydrogen can increase at higher temperatures by reactions such as +2H,0 22 CO,+4HCH,2 2 2 2NH =N,+3H and In all cases sampled,the hydrogen to methane ratio is high. Similar high ratios were found in gases from the Mud Volcano region of Yellowstone,an identified vapor-dominated systen. In cooperation with the Scripps Institute of Oceanography,U.of California,San Diego,samples of gases obtained from fumarole and hot springs throughout the Aleutian age have been analyzed for their Heisotopecontent.Enrichments in He WRT to atmospheric levels have been correlated with magmatic activity on a wgrld7wide basis (Craig andLupton,1981).Values for the ratio of He/He at Makushin fumaroles and gases compared to atmospheric ratios (R/Ra)are typical,of other island arc settings (Poreda and others,1981).The excess He isthoughttobederivedfromthemantle.A high value for He/He ratio in gases from hydrothermal systems suggests a more direct connection to magmatic sources with little crustal contamination although it may also result from leaching of young volcanic rock (Truesdell and Hulston, 1980).Lower values indicate a crustal influence of radiogenic 'He. Discussion The distribution of neutral-p,low chloride thermal springs in association with several areas of solfatara activity indicate the presence of at least a shallow vapor dominated system.This system must extend at least as far as the lowest thermal springs in Glacier Valley which occur at an elevation of 150 m (500').The series of springs andfumarolesinGlacierValleycoveradistanceofabout4km.'Those at the head of and along Makushin Valley cover a distance of about 5 km if thermal ground located west of Sugarloaf cone is included.The springs and fumaroles in the upper parts of Glacier and Makushin Valleys form a roughly linear trend,suggesting that their distribution may be struc- turally controlled.Thermal water chemistries at Makushin are quite similar to chemistries found in thermal springs at the Kawah Kamojong geothermal area,an identified vapor-dominated system located on the flanks of a volcano in Java (Mahon and others,1980). The Alaska Power Authority recently awarded a contract to Republic Geothermal of California to drill three thermal gradient holes to depths of 500-600 m on or near Makushin Volcano.The drilling will commence this coming summer,1982,after additional geophysical,geological,and geochemical surveys are performed at the sites by Republic Geothermal and DGGS.The locations of the gradient holes will be either in Driftwood Valley or at the head of Makushin Valley.The results of this coming summer's investigations and drilling program will be used to site the location of a 1200-1600 m deep test well to be drilled the following summer,in 1983, AKUTAN ISLAND Background Akutan Island is located in the eastern Aleutian Islands atapproximately54°05'latitude and 165°55'longitude,about 45 km northeast of Unalaska Island and 80 km southwest of Unimak Island (fig.7).The island is about 20 km wide and 30 km long,with its long axis aligned with the trend of this segment of the Aleutian arc. Vertical aerial photography is lacking for most of the island and, except for the coastline and areas immediately adjacent to it, topographic coverage on U.S.Geological Survey and U.S.Coast and Geodetic Survey maps is nonexistent or unreliable. Akutan village,the only habitation on the island,is located on the north shore of Akutan Harbor.The present population of about 120 inhabitants depends on subsistence,commercial fishing,and fish processing for their economy.Several floating fish processors now operate in the protected waters of Akutan Harbor,which bring in a season influx of 200-700 nonresident workers. Geology Reconnaissance geologic mapping of the island was undertaken by F.Byers and T.Barth in 1948.A generalized geologic map based on their unpublished work appears in Figure 7.Akutan Island consists of an older sequence of volcanics deeply eroded by glaciation and a youngervolcanicpileatthewesternend.The older volcanic complex consists of a lower member of mainly pyroclastic deposits (chiefly volcanic and tuff breccias,with intercalcated basaltic andesitic flows and sills) overlain by a series of shallow-dipping basaltic and andesitic flows with some interbedded pyroclastic deposits.This sequence,which is extensively exposed over much of the island and in places exceeds 700 m thick,has been intruded by numerous volcanic necks,plugs,and dikes. A series of ring-dike intrusions exposed on the northern part of the island suggest the existence of an ancestral collapse caldera near the present site of Akutan volcano. Akutan volcano (1,300 m),a composite shield volcano,and its satellitic vents dominate the western part of the island.Recent volcanic activity has concentrated at Akutan volcano with fresh lava flows,lahars,and pyroclastic debris mantling the glacially eroded surface of the older volcanic complex.The volcano is capped by a small 2-km-dia collapse caldera thought to have formed as recently as 500 years ago (Byers and Barth,1953).Akutan volcano is one of the most active volcanoes in the Aleutian chain,having erupted more than 25 times since 1700 (Byers and Barth,1953;Coats,1950;SEAN,1980). Portions of the island not covered by recent volcanic flows show signs of intense glaciation:serrated ridges,cirques,hanging valleys, and broad U-shaped valleys.The east end of the island is split by Akutan Harbor,a deep 8-km-long fjord. Thermal Fields The Akutan hot springs are located about 4 km northwest of Akutan Harbor and 10 km northeast of the active Akutan volcano (fig.7). Although the springs are relatively close to the volcano,an intervening valley and ridge helps form a barrier to lava flows or debris flows associated with eruptions.The glacial valley containing the hot springs has been carved from a massive volcanic breccia that in places exceeds 400 m in thickness. Five geographically distinct sets of hot springs occur along and at the base of the west valley wall in a 1.5 km long zone that extends southwest from Hot Springs Bay (fig.8).The thermal waters issue from fissures in hydrothermally cemented stream bank sediments,from pools in valley alluvium,and through beach sands in the intertidal zone near the mouth of the Hot Springs Creek. The hottest springs in the valley are the southernmost,at site A,with temperatures as high as 85°C.These springs discharge into a tributary of the main valley stream.Based on the increase in chloride and silica in the tributary stream below site A compared to concen- trations in the tributary above the springs,heat loss by spring dis- charge at site A is estimated at 1.6 MW (Motyka and others,1981).A similar analysis made on chloride,potassium plus sodium,and silica concentrations in the main valley stream just below site D hot springs indicates a total heat loss by spring discharge of about 8-9 MW (Motyka and others,in preparation). In addition to the hot springs,a solfatara field occurs several kilometers up valley from the springs and is located at about 350 m elevation on the flank of the active Akutan Volcano.The field consists of a series of fumaroles,mild steam venting,and boiling acid springs, covering an area of about 5,000 m'.Temperatures of fumaroles and steam vents were at or near boiling point. Water Chemistry Tables 3 and 4 give the chemistry of thermal springs and surface streams located in Hot Springs Bay Valley.The thermal waters from spring sites A through D are moderately concentrated sodium chloride waters with a relatively high level of bicarbonate.Springs E are much more saline because of the mixing with seawater in the intertidal zone. Site D spring waters are more dilute than thermal waters from the others sites indicating colder surface waters are mixing with the thermal. waters at D.Such mixing at site D is also suggested by a preliminary enthalpy-chloride analysis and from deuterium and oxygen 18 isotope data on thermal and local meteoric waters.The similarity in the ratios of the conservative elements boron to chloride in thermal waters from sites A through D,however,suggest the spring waters are all ultimately derived from a common parent thermal reservoir. The percentage cation content of Hot Springs Bay Valley thermal and surface meteroric waters are+plotted in the trilaterial diagram in Fig.9.The seawater dilution of springs E (No.6)is readily apparent as is the dilution of thermal waters at springs D with colder surface waters (cf.No.5 to No.16).The trend in greater percentage Na +K in meteoric waters reflects the sampling of valley stream waters above, near,and below hot spring sites.Number 13 was taken from the main fork below site D,while number 7,8,and 9 were obtained at the head of the valley.Number 14 and 15 were taken from the tributary stream above and below site A respectively. Application of silica and cation geothermometry to site A hotspringsgivesarangeof160-190 C for the deep parent reservoir : ;a temperature.A sulfate-water oxygen isotope geothermometer obtained through the cooperation of N.Nehring (USGS,Menlo Park,CA)gives aconcordanttemperatureforthedeepthermalwatersof186°c. Thermal waters associated with the solfatara field at the head of the valley are highly acidic and appear to be locally derived surface waters heated by condensing steam and volcanic gases.The constituents in these thermal waters were probably leached from local rocks by the hot acid waters.The silica content of 220 ppm in one of the acid pools reflects the breakdown of silicates and equilibration of the waters to amorphous silica. Gas Chemistry The volume percent composition of gas samples obtained from the fumarole field and from hot spring site A are given in Table 5.The first part of the table presents the volume percent of all non-water gases present.The second part gives the volume percent composition of residual gases after carbon dioxide and sulfur gases are removed.The much higher percentage of residual gases from hot spring A.reflects a greater proportion of dissolved air in the thermal waters.Oxygen is selectively removed in oxidation reactions.Both samples contain methane and hydrogen in similar proportions.Exposures of rocks under- lying the Akutan volcanic sequence are lacking but,comparing to adjacent Unalaska Island,they may be similar to the Unalaska formation. Carbon 13 isotope analyses are being made on CO,and CH,in samples tohelpdifferentiatebetweenbiogenicandabiogenicorigins. Both sites show a large R/Ra ratio of 3H0/*He (6.5-7.0),suggesting a magmatic influence on the hydrothermal systems in both localities. The R/Ra ratio here is typical of ratios found in gases from other island arc settings. It is not known whether the fumarole field at the head of the valley and the hot spring system near the Bering seacoast are connected to the same thermal source of heat at depth.The similarity in H,to CH,ratio suggests that at least underlying reservoir rocks are similar in both localities. Composite Model The composite cross-section in Fig.10 shows the results of elec- trical resistivity and seismic surveys performed in cooperation with Gene Wescott and Don Turner of the Geophysical Institute,University of Alaska (Motyka and others,in prep.).The profile is of the west central part of the lower valley.The locations of the springs are projected onto the cross-section as are some of the smaller zones of low resistivity.Surface topography is exaggerated 2x to accentuate the positions of the dune.We believe the low resistivity in the medium velocity zone below the low velocity layer is caused by hot water. However,the possibiiity of connate saline waters or perhaps salt water intrusion cannot be ruled out.This low resistivity appears to extend beyond the depth range of the survey and apparently into the underlying bedrock. A recent mudflow was found to cover much of the valley floor.The low velocity layer.is thought to consist of this and other debris flows,valley alluvium and volcanoclastic sediments.The medium velocity layer may correlate with Tertiary-aged pyroclastics debris flows and breccias exposed in the adjacent valley walls.The high seismic velocities obtained below the second layer suggest bedrock underlying the valley may be basaltic flows,intrusives,or perhaps hydrothermally cemented volcanic breccias or sediments. Discussion The medium velocity layer underlying the valley may be an extension of the volcanic breccia sequence exposed along the valley walls.If capped by hydrothermal cementation,such a porous and permeable host rock could house a substantial hot-water reservoir at fairly shallow depths,one that might be easily tapped.The distribution of the thermal springs suggest they are related to this subsurface zone of apparent low resistivity.Massive dikes that appear to traverse the mouth of the valley may be acting as barriers to the intrusion of seawater into the hydrothermal system. The estimated deep-reservoir temperature of 180°C is sufficient for a variety of applications,including the generation of a modest amount of electrical power,e.g.,a 1-MW well-head-driven Rankin binary system. The nearness of this hot-water system to a well-protected deep-water harbor with a population center and potential industrial users (e.g., fishing processors)make the Akutan hot spring site a particularly attractive one for future development. REFERENCES CITED Byers,F.M.,Jr.,and Barth,T.F.W.,1953,Volcanic activity on Akun and Akutan Islands:Pacific Science Congress,7th,New Zealand,1949, Proceedings,v.2,p.382-397. Coats,R.R.,1950,Volcano activity in the Aleutian Arc:U.S.Geological Survey Bulletin 974-B,P.1-47. Craig,H.,and Lupton,J.E.,1981,Helium-3 and mantle volatiles in the ocean and the oceanic crust:in The Oceanic Lithosphere: Vol.7,The Sea,pp.391-428,John Wiley &Sons. Drewes,H.,Fraser,G.D.,Snyder,G.L.,and Barnett,H.F.,Jr.,1961, Geology of Unalaska Island and adjacent insular shelf,Aleutian Island,Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Open-file Report 1028-S, p.583-676. Ellis,A.J.,and Mahon,W.A.J.,1964,Natural hydrothermal systems and experimental hot water/rock interactions:Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta,V.28,p.1323-1357. Giggenbach,W.F.,1980,Geothermal gas equilibria:Geochimica et Cosmachimica Acta,Vol.44,pp.2021-2130. Mahon,W.A.J.,Klyen,L.E.,and Rhode,M.,1980,Neutral sodium/bicarbonate/sulphate hot waters in geothermal systems: Journal of Japan Geothermal Energy Association,v.17,p.11-24. 10 Miller,T.P.(compiler),1973,Distribution and chemical analyses of thermal springs in Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Open-file Map 570. Motyka,R.J.,and Moorman,M.A.,Liss,S.A.:"Assessment of thermal spring sites,Aleutian Arc,Atka Island to Becherof Lake---Preliminary results and evaluation",Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,Open File Report AOF-144,1981, 173 p. Motyka,R.J.:"High temperature hydrothermal resources in the Aleutian Arc",Proceedings of the Alaska Geological Society 1982 Symposium on western Alaska geology and resource potential,manuscript submitted. Oki,Y.,and Hirano,T.,1970,The Geothermal system of the Hakone Volcano,in U.N.symposium on the development and utilization of geothermal resources,Pisa,1970,v.2,pt.2:Geothermics Special Issue 2,p.1157-1166. Poreda,R.,Craig,H.,and Motyka,R.J.:."Helium isotope variations along the Alaskan-Aleutian Arc",abs.EOS,vol.62,45,1981, p-.1082. SEAN,(Scientific Event Alert Network Bulletin),1980:National Technical Information Service,U.S.Department of Commerce publica-ion no.PR 81-9157. Truesdell,A.H.,and Hulston,J.R.,1980,Isotopic evidence on environments of geothermal systems:in Handbook of Environmental Isotope Geochemistry,pp.179-219,Elsevier. Waring,G.A.,1917,Mineral springs of Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 418,114 p. White,D.E.,1957,Thermal waters of volcanic origin:Geological Society of America Bulletin,v.68,p.1637-1658. White,D.E.,and Williams,D.L.(eds.),1975,Assessment of Geothermal resources of the United States-1975:U.S.Geological Survey Circular 726,155 p. 11 Table 1, Makushin Valley Units are mg/l unless otherwise noted, Glacier Valley Water chemistry,Makushin and Glacier Valley thermal springs and cold streams” 1.Ml 2.M2 3.M3 4.G1-A 5.GI-B 6.GI-C 7.G-2 8.G-3 9 cl-ser?10,D-Ser® $10,140 88 88 94 125 120 138 142 20 4.5 Fe 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.1 0.01 nd 0.02 0.21 0.01 0.06 Ca 69.3 23.3 23,1 11,7 32.1 25.4 258 208 8.9 2.6 Mg 12.2 5.5 8.0 4.0 10.6 8.0 9.6 7.8 °1.9 0.5 Na 28 24 13.9 52.0 87,2 62 61 81 4.7 2.0 K 5.6 3.2 3.4 4.8 5.7 5.2 3.3 4.8 0.8 0.06 Li *<0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 HCO,191 nd 116 37 288 6.0 ,nd 256 nd nd 50,155 25 21 129 95 218 491 476 29 3.1 cl 5 7.8 5 10 5 6.1 2.3 7.5 5.6 2.6 F 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.28 <0.1 0.26 0.24 D.1 <0.1 B <0.5 <0.01 0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01Sr0.28 0.01 0.10 0.07 0.26 0.20 1.08 1.11 0.02 0.0! pl,field 5.48 5.28 5.32 6.40 6.50 4.34 nd 6.36 nd nd Dis.solids 607 -279 343 649 448 -1182 -- Hardness (mg/CaCO s 219 81 91 46 82 96 685 553 30 8.6SpCond(as/cm 23 600 250 255 360 580 -1400 1200 100 45tT(°c)87.4 57.5 67.0 96.8 82.4 77.5 68 79 4.9 3.8 Date sampled 8/13/80 7/4/81 8/13/80 8/11/80 8/11/80 7/5/81 7/5/81 7/5/81 7/5/81 7/1/81 pM.Moorman,Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,College,AK,Analyst.West fork upper Glacier Valley stream, Cold stream in Driftwood nd =not determined, eas Valley. Table 2.Chemical composition of fumarole and thermal spring gases from Makushim Volcano thermal fields. Volume % Mla Mlb M3.Gl-fum.Gl-spr. co 89.14 (91.29 ((#8 2.38 (92.28 2.75 (94.81 (88.66 H 0.49 0.74 0.25 1,12 1.80ch,0.002 0.021 0.031 0.006 0.020 Ny 7.91 6.87 5.61 4.04 9.41 Ar 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.11 0,-0.04 --- He (ppm)5.6 8.1 8.0 3.0 4.5 Residual Gas,Volume % Mla Mlb M3 Gl-fun.Gl-spr. %of total 8.48 7.72 5.96 5.19 11.34 H 5.75 9.63 4.22 21.47 15.86ch,0.021 0.27 0.52 0.12 0.18 N,93.24 88.90 94.06 77.67 83.00 AY 0.977 0.75 1.20 0.747 0.96 0,-0.46 --- He (ppm)66.105.134.58.40, Mla Mlb M3 Gl-fum.Gl-spr. 3He/*He,R/Ra 4.9 5.0 6.6 4.5 - H,/CH,274,36.8.179,88. *R.Poreda and J.Welhan,Scripps Institute of Oceanography, LaJolla,CA,analysts. Table 3,Water chemistry,Akutan Bay hot springs'. Units are mg/l unless otherwise noted. Fumarole 1.A3 2.A3 3.Bl 4.C 5.D2 6.E acid spr. .Fumarole Si0,145 135 103 133 91 121 220 Fe 0.05 0.01 0.57 0.01 0.03 0.04 40.7 Ca 11.3 12.4 14,7 18.0 11.0 132 31.8 Mg 2.5 1.0 1.5 1.6 11.8 317 .12.5 Na 323 328 172 207 128 1663 16.6 K 24.8 25.9 16.3 16.4 9.3 73.7 3.5 Li 1.28 1.24 0.61 0.61 0.34 1.10 0.01 Sr 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.21 0.09 1.18 0.05 HCO,172 nd 280 236 128 322 - so,42.7 40.6 22.4 42.7 26.4 495 1302 Cl 424 406 221 275 136 3444 5.2 F 1.1 0.94 0.64 0.97 0.88 0.54 0.1 Br 1,31 nd 1,34 0.27 nd 17.4 nd I 0.42 nd 0.10 0.62 nd 0.35 nd B oO 11.4 11.5 5.9 7.0 3.4 4.5 0.5 H,S 0.5 nd nd nd nd nd ndpl,field 6.98 nd 6.39 6.47 6.82 7.34 2.55 Dis.solids 1161 -667 812 546 6406 1591 Hardness (mg/CaCO,)34 35 43 52 76 1635 131SpCond(py s/cm,45°)1775 700T(°c)84.0 83.3 47.4 73.4 58.8 67.0 92.3 Date sampled 8/7/80 7/10/81 7/9/81 7/9/81 8/8/80 7/12/81 7/7/81 ™M,Moorman,Alaska Division of Geological &Geophysical Surveys,College,AK,ANalyst nd =not determined Table 4,Major cation,partial anion,and silica analyses ofsurfacestreamsinAkutanHotSpringsBayValley. Units are mg/l. 7.8.9.10.li.12.13.14.°15 S10,8.5 9.7 4.2 17.5 14 12.7 13.2 23 33 Ca 11.4 5.7 5.3 9.2 6.4 5.6 6.1 5.1 6. Mg 1.9 1.0 0.9 2.0 1.3 1.2 1,2 1.8 1. Na 6.7 4.0 4.1 8.6 9.4 7.3 9.1 9.9 37 K 0.28 0.29 0.24 0.47 0.69 0.57 0.81 1.09 3. sO,4.3 5.3 5.9 4.9 5.7 4.1 6.1 0.0 8. Cl 6.9 7.1 3.2 9.6 10.4 7.8 10.2 10.9 41. Sample Code: 7.Stream and head of main valley 8.Upper west fork Hot Springs Creek 9.Stream at head of tributary valley 10.East fork,Hot Springs Creek above confluence ll.Hot Springs Creek below confluence 12.Hot Springs Creek at outlet 13.West fork,Hot Springs Creek below springs D 14,Tributary creek above springs A 15.Tributary creek below springs A 16.Cold spring near hot springs A a)M.Moorman,Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,Analyst. Table 5.Chemical composition of fumarole and thermal spring gases from Akutan Hot Springs Bay valley. Volume % (ppm) Fumarole Field €95.37mC 0.34 1,32 2.96 0.02 7.3 Hot Springs A ((16.53 0.45 4.58 76.68 1.73 12.4 Residual Gas,Volume % %of total HcB,NyAr (@)He (ppm) Fumarole Field 4.63 7.29 28.57 63.76 0.38 157. Hot Springs A 83.47 0.54 5.49 91.85 2.07 14.9 3ue/"He,R/Ra H,/CH, Fumarole Field 7.1 0.26 Hot Springs A 6.5 +5 0.10 #R.Poreda and J.Welhan,Scripps Institute of Oceanography, LaJolla,CA,analysts. "SYeTyOTayoIg03EXPLANATION Thermal-epring sites Bechoraf Atka West :18.Unimak Atka North 19.Falee Pasa 0 100 200 Korovin 20.Kenmore t 5 1 Kliuchef 21.Egg leland Seguam 22,Frosty Peak Chuginadak 23.Cold Bay 0 60 100 Kagamil 24.Emmons Lake :u 1 Geysers Bight 26.Paviof . Hot Springa Cove 26.Balboa Bay Partov :27.Port Molbler Okmok 28.Stepovak Bay Bogoalof 29.Port Ilebden Glacler Valley 30.Surprise Lake Makueshin Valley 31.Mother Goose Summer Bay 32,Mt.Peullk Akutan 33,Ukinrek Akun 34.Gae Rocks oaaq(fhPDs, °Sampled,1980 YX Point |.Pd ..King C©=Not vialted,1980 Akptan *.5 veve Akutan a Not found,1980 Datch Iarbor Island o Activity diminished Oo Village 1 Unaleacka Unalaska 2 Islands of Island 4 Four.»Mts,6Atkabse °°Ooisland 6 Nikoleki Lecation Map PUETSIeyzy'zeuefaneTy'seazsBufidsTemrayypaezaodey*]{aan3ty "SPleTjTemIey2joSUOFIIOTPUEPUTS]BYSeTeUNursyazoujoAZoTosspazytTezseuey"7ean3qyNORTHWEST UNALASKA ISLAND >Sf vrwreetee PebdwythiftwoodBayTes»*?Pw,2''<ater wears 2 QT a,"ek a,QTm oor 720%5 \Qs.wi <=at?we Pm arieve Qel=Tabletop.Ma. eas tpreKadinVentas*"eget «e 7 o ava <”>tm very)><?i <2 Pakushiavate4F211040m cua-* , o .Mahushin Bay :p e 5 :ip ip hoa. T | 6 .wD mi. Me saan sf)Caldera Neaud Nay Satelilte Volcanocs Vents Fumaroles Hot Ground Hot Springs GENERALIZED GEOLOGY Adapted from Drewes &Othere (1961) Modilled by 3,Reeder (108s. Qs Surficiat Deposits Altuviaaa +TH -tilacial fue Eider Point Basatt ,Olivine,2 pyroxene hesale and thyodecite purpharion Yel - Preduminantly favea Yep - ,breduminantly pyroclastics aLeguynugiyasPrey o.Tn a ¢4 52MakushinVolcaniesa> Hesalt and andesite lavas,<2 prructastie socks with minor Losrdlimeniasy tucks Testiary Deposits Granodiorite -gebbronic balhollth and the Unalacke Formation,uvuzai-4-*-F aults -dashed where approximate U-upthrown side D-downthrowan alde mT 166055"Pet URSEOCA WT TING OR CaAKey)a Wea ipa ? .aayot wt the 1 72 7 74 7 U N A-|Ares of Numerous Fumaroles tmA=]imeTo Makushin Bay 166055"'odroe 1°) Spring Fumarole gw Hot Ground endpePesLieaza.Figure 3.Location of thermal fields on Makushin Volcano. SAMPLE CO! 1.Men warn Valiey M1 2.Monusrnin Vaiey M2 2.Makustn Vaiiey M3 4@ Gicser Valley G1-A S.Gleceer Vaitey G1-6 6.Giacrer Valiey GIL 7.Giecier Vaitey G2 6.Gace Voiey G3 9.Gucser Vailey G1.Stream 10.Deitrwood Valiey Susem o MAKUSHIN wlL\L\/V\LNA/N\/\A\,,LILI PLREALALLDADAAALY._. Figure 4.Trilateral cation diagram for water from Makushin ther.al fields. SAMPLE CODE MAKUSHIN 1,Makusnin Valley M1 2.Makusnin Vaiiey M2 20 802.Makushin Vatiey M2 44.Glacier Valiey G1-A ®8.Glaceer Valley G1-8 @.Giacrer Vaitey G3-C 9 ? 2.Glocser Valley G28.Glacier Vaiiey G3 ' 9.Glacier Valley G1-Stream 10.Orittwood Valley Stream >7?LIVIN HCO,+CO,20 40 60 80 cl Figure 5.Trilaterial anion diagram for waters from Makushin thermal fields. "SPTOFFTemrsy2UpYsNye_WorzSiajzemjosesXTeueoPdoqosyz°gein8tgMakushin Volcano,Unalaska Water Isotope Analysis r §D=8$"0+10 4 Hot Spring .©Surface Meteoric -50/ $D(%o SMOW)Glacier Valley Thermal Arca Gs)Mol Spring G1-A G-2 [ot Spring G1-B G-3 Cold Spring G-4 Snow Melt Run-olf G-&Cold StreamG1-Str. L G-6 ffot Spring)-C G.7 Hot Spring G2M-2 9 G-4 G9 Cola SuennGA-Suc-3 |,M-1 Qye- L M-5 woc.z_*By-gO M-4 Makushin Vailey 'Nrerimal Area Sirk i mae a @-3 M.3 Cold Stream , @G&-9 Mos Tot Spring B12M-6 Cold Stream M2-Str. -100F 1:L rt ry _t 1 1 n n 15 10 §°O(%,SMOW)"8 *pueTsS]ueanyysoAZoToaspazttTerzsueg*7ain3TZ'GENERALIZED GEOLOGY Adapted from Byers &Darth (Unpubliehed) AKUTAN VOLCANO 1304 m.AKUTAN 1978 Lava Flow BSarficial Deposits moewne R;98Qh8)ecentLAVAPOINTMtcealel=VeleanicsCINDERCONE 610 m.Cinder Cones 'Lave Flowe From Akuten Voleantcs inctud pyroclaatle beds. Ash &Mud Reworkedachand |interbedded mud flows from Akutan J 'Plugs,Dikes &Necks Rocks,dikes and irregular shaped intrusives, Flowe Anilesite Nows with interbeddedSHEAIS.;.¢r)_Glaclors &snow pyrocteatic debria. 0 12 3 4 bho _" t L i.L rm 3 :Bs 7 ByeContactDeQtails U agi ad. t i A ?iH sm D Fault Pyroclastioes Volcante breccia and tulf Ae Thermal spring breccia with interbedded flows,Contacts (letter refore to tent reference)between Qtiand Qta largely inferred,J ARZVNGALVASSOzatdmog2uwsToAT9PIOAQVILATL-XIVNUAZLVND *£8TTeAkegSZutidsJoyHuPINyyTeMoTutsuoTAeo.oTBuradsTemrsuy*gsan3Tyep WhWHiYVathHl Hy A iER;|HA Hh fy I Uy ith . . e . . *,X.Hieate)'|*.\i,Ne QN 1 0 A .emi CONTOUR INTEAVAL 100°DASHED CONTOUR INTERVAL 25°LOCATION MAPySPRINGSBAYVALLEY ae based on U.Akutan Boy,me.16632 (6720),1043.%¢ Mg . Hot Springs AKUTANLA 2A 3.B . 4c Hot Springs Bay Valley5.D 6.E 20Streams, 7,Notch 80 8.Upper West Fork 9.Upper Valley 10.East Fork 11,Below Confluence 412.Outlet > 13.West Fork Below 'D' 14,Above A'x 18.Below 'A' 16.Cold Spring 60 40 6 20 a 80 7/889 af/in2z /513 18 -A/\/\A\/\/AsCa8060462043 Na+tk Figure 9.Trilaterial cation diagram for waters from Akutan Hot Springs Bay valley. *A8TTBAFostxe03TeTTereduaye.Aatreaeqs8utads30HUFINAYJaMoTzouot300s"SSO19a3Tsodmog+oaan3zyAkutan Composite Profile 400N 0 400 |8008. E springs --:D springs -A springsdunedune'C springs B springs ||Ne ee __.-ow velocity layerESErereRiStatenomnia-aevelocity”MT High velocity layer .°OD"eo »Basemen °ee =|Hot water reservoir O 200'm ee | ERRATA To holders of Alaska Open-file Report AOF-144:Please substitute the enclosed pages 83,84,and 105 (which may have been page 96 in an earlier version)for the appropriate ones in your report. Table 18 gives the chemical composition of fumarolic gas samples obtained from sites A and C.The proportions of constituent gases are similar in the two fumarolic areas.The dominant gas in both fields is carbon dioxide.The nitrogen and argon are probably of atmospheric origin,and are probably dissolved in in- filtrating surface waters (Mazor and Wasserberg,1965).The low concentration of oxygen in both cases is probably due to oxidation of H)S and Hp. Reservoir Properties The occurrence of the thermal springs at the base of fumarole fields in Makushin Valley suggests that at least part of the spring waters may originate as condensation of steam in surface waters,which then percolate into the porous colluvium and country rock to eventually emerge as springs.The high silica content of the thermal waters,however,indicates that a large portion of the waters must have originated from a subsurface reservoir where tempera- tures exceed 150°C,assuming the silica is in equilibrium with quartz.Surface waters infiltrating this reservoir may become heated on descent,causing dis- solution of cations in the wall rock,a process aided in part by the slight acidity of the waters.The levels of calcium,and particularly magnesium, relative to sodium and potassium indicate the residence time of waters in the reservoir is too short for these constituents to equilibrate to the estimated reservoir temperature.Silica can equilibrate rather rapidly,within several days to a few weeks.This suggests the reservoir supplying the thermal spring waters lies at fairly shallow depths.The low chloride content and the slightly acid-sulfate chemistry of the thermal waters,together with their association with fumarolic activity,are evidence for a perched reservoir supplied by meteoric waters that are heated by steam and volcanic gases rising through a vapor-dominated zone from a much deeper reservoir. Table 18,Chemical composition of fumarolic gases from Makushin Valley thermal field (analysis in volume percent). Site A Site C Hy 0.49 0.252 Ar 0.083 0.0715 0»<0.0001 <0.0001 No 7.93 5.608 CH,0.0018 0.0308co,?89.14 91.29 H,S>2.38 2.75 43,Weldon and R.Poreda,analysts,Scripps Institution of Oceanography,La Jolla,Calif..bu.Moorman,analyst,DGGS. The hydrogen sulfide probably has a magmatic origin,as does as least part of the carbon dioxide (Craig,1963;White,1968).An analysis of 83- The difference in chloride and silica contents of springs A3 and D2,the similarity in their B:Cl ratios,and the large combined flow of the springs indicate that the deep thermal waters may be diluting in a shallow subsurface aquifer.If so,all three geothermometers would tend to underestimate the deep-reservoir temperature estimates.Following the method of Truesdell and Fournier (1977),application of the quartz mixing model suggests deep-reservoir temperatures as high as 235°C. Comments No geophysical exploration or exploratory drilling has yet been done near the Akutan hot springs.Thickness of the alluvial fill in the valley is unknown but is probably on the order of 100 m.Bedrock underlying the valley may be an extension of the volcanic breccia sequence exposed along the valley walls.If capped by hydrothermal cementation,such a porous and permeable host rock could house a substantial hot-water reservoir at fairly shallow depths, one that might be easily tapped. The linear distribution of the thermal springs suggests they are related to a subsurface fracture system,perhaps a seismically induced break in the cap of the hypothetical shallow reservoir.The massive dikes that appear to traverse the mouth of the valley may be acting as barriers to the intrusion of seawater into the hypothermal system. _The estimated deep-reservoir temperature of 180°C is sufficient for a variety of applications,including the generation of a modest amount of electrical power,e.g.,a 1-MW well-head-driven Rankine binary system.The nearness of this hot-water system to a well-protected deep-water harbor with a population center and potential industrial users (e.g.,fishing processors) make the Akutan hot spring site a particularly attractive one for future development.The ridge that lies between the site and Akutan volcano should help provide a protective barrier from eruptions from the active volcano. -105- -(96)- 12 ALASKA MINES &GEOLOGY it.They couldn't have negotiated the route or subsisted on the meager browse."'Dillon is really cooking now.He's wired,relishing memories of Last summer, He continued,"We covered our desired territory and mapped what we had planned to do.In addition,we had a unique wilderness experience and learned valuable lessons about the terrain llamas will cross." John summed it up,"Those little critters are all right." Sure,John,sure,But does Mary REALLY know how you spend your summers? Unalaska geothermal energy: Taming volcanoes for profit (from Alaska Industry,January 1982) Helens and kept The eruption of Mt.St. awoke the world May 18,1980, Washington,state officials and geol-ogists nationwide scrambling formonths.Now the state of Alaska is em- barking on an 'ambitious program to tame some of the awesome energy trapped be-neath the surface of the volcano's dis- tant,morthern cousin,the Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. One of 88 active volcanoes in the Aleutian Chain,Makushin is the focus of a multimillion dollar geothermal power study funded by the state Legis- lature.The Alaska Power Authority has awarded a $4.7-million contract for preliminary geothermal development on the island to Republic Geothermal,an engineering and energy firm based in Santa Fe,Calif.,and currently is negotiating thee details. The state agency expects to have the contract signed some time this month,with the first phase of the pro-ject beginning "immediately"afterward, said Patty DeJung,project manager for the Alaska Power Authority. Republic Geothermal and its sub- contractors--Dames and Moore Consulting Engineers of Anchorage--will prepare a detailed exploratory drilling plan, sink three shallow test holes,and then drill a deep hole to tap the geothermal energy,she said. What will happen after the deepholeisdrilledisalmostentirelyamatterofconjecture.Political con- cerns must be addressed:should the project be turned over to the private v sector or should the state continue the development?The answer to that quest- ion may come from the Aleut Corp.,a Native Corporation that has selected the region encompassing Makushin Vol- cano as part of its entitlement under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,although the lands have not yet been conveyed."We're expecting (the geothermal well)to be hot enough for electrical generation,"DeJung said,"It could be similar to the Geysers in California." A geothermal development in Northern California,the Geysers,is one of the three largest such projectsinexistence,annually providing elec- tricity to thousands of homes and bus- inesses in Sonoma County.The other mammoth geothermal power projects are located in Wairakei,New Zealand,and the Larderello area of Italy.The Lar- derello project,the eldest,has been in operation in one form or another since 1904 and currently has an instal-led capacity of 360 megawatts (MW). Unalaska Island has tremendous potential for geothermal power develop- ment,according to Dr.Michael J. Economides,a consultant working on the Makushin Volcano project under contract with the Alaska Power Authority. Economides said geothermal energyis"location intensive.You cannot transport geothermal (power),"he said."You must have the market to utilize it on top of the geothermal source. "Unalaska has the resource.It also has the market--the population and the fishing industry.That's whyUnalaskaissuchanattractivepros pect=-because it has both,"he said. Hydrothermal systems There are three primary types of geothermal resources:hydrothermal,hot dry rock,and geopressured zones. Nearly all of the currently developed geothermal resources are hydrothermal systems,where naturally occurring ground water is heated at depth.These systems can be either vapor-dominated(steam)or hot-water dominant,depend-ing on temperature and pressure. The essential ingredients for a hydrothermal system are a heat source,a sufficient supply of ground water,and a mechanism for transporting the heated ground water to near the surface(porous rock or natural fractures). Proj.Code: File Cods:22,06.08 J.Date:BO.a JANUARY 1982 13 The other two types of geothermal resources are hot dry rock,which re- quires injecting water as a heat- transfer medium,and geopressured zones,where water is trapped with natural gas under thousands of feet of sediment.. Among other things,Republic Geo- thermal's exploratory work on Unalaska Island will determine the temperature of the water trapped in Makushin's "roots,''and how far below the surface the potential source of energy lies. The test holes the firm plans to drill will be about 1,500 feet deep, while the development well or deep hole could be drilled between 4,000 feet and 6,000 feet into the earth,DeJung said, The depth of the only an estimation,she said, "you don't know until you go deep it will have to be." final hole is because in how Unalaska's energy needs Included in the nation's purchase of Alaska in 867,Unalaska Island wasallbutignoredbyits"mainland" neighbors until 1900,when the island's port of Dutch Harbor shipping point for Nome after the dis- covery of gold turned Nome into a boom town,Dutch Harbor next entered the history books during World War II.In 1940,the U.S.Navy established a base in the harbor,which was bombed two years later by the Japanese.The U.S. launched a successful counterattack in 1943. Nearly four decades port of Dutch Harbor has grown to achieve another kind of importance. Since 1979,the port has been the nat- ion's leading fish harbor,and about 200 million pounds of crab and fish are processed at Dutch Harbor annually. The same geographical factors that made it important during the war have made the harbor a vital shipping center for traffic between the western Alaska mainland,the Aleutians,and the oil- rich North Slope. According to the U.S. later,the census,342 people lived on Unalaska Island in 1970.A decade later,the population count has increased nearly fourfold to 1,322;and during the peak fishing season,the population swells to over 5,000. Outer-continental-shelf oil and became a trans ' gas exploration in the Aleutians,in- creased bottom fishing in the Bering Sea,and the possible expansion of its role as a transshipment point (it is the only place between Kodiak and Yoko- hama that a container ship can dock) all indicate Unalaska will continue to gzrow in importance and population. The installed electrical capacityonUnalaskaIslandcurrentlyisunder 12 megawatts.The U.S.Bureau of Land Management projects the island's powerdemandswillincreaseby40MWbythe year 2000.Because of the projected demand--and the high cost of the diesel fuel Unalaskans now depend upon for alltheirpower--the state is investingtimeandmoneyforanin-depth look attheisland's 241,000-acre Makushin Potential Geothermal Resource area. Economides estimated that a 30-MW geothermal power plant could be built on Unalaska Island for about $42.35 million (in 1981 dollars).Although the investment costs are high,a 30-KW geothermal power plant would be cheapertobuildandoperatethanahydroelec-tric or diesel power plant of compar-able size,he said, The state is also investigating other potential geothermal energy developments.A partial list,supplied by Donald Markle,energy projects man- ager for the Division of Energy and Power development,includes Pilgrim Hot Springs near Nome,the Copper River Basin,particularly the Glennallen- Copper Center area near the Glenn and Richardson highways;Adak Island,near the center of'the Aleutian Chain; Akutan Island,located approximately 770 miles southwest of Anchorage in the Fox Island group of the Aleutians;and Tenakee Springs,situated between Sitka and Juneau. "Alaska has a lot energy.To my way of thinking,it has as much as the rest of the U.S.com- bined,"Economides said."But it lacks the population to use it." of geothermal (On a related note,DGGS has released two new open-file reports on geothermal energy.One,AOF-140,is a two-plate geologic map of the PilgrimSpringsareaoftheSewardPeninsula.The other,AOQF-144,is a _lengthy(173-page)assessment of 20 thermal- springs sites from the Aleutian are to Becharof Lake,on the Alaska Peninsula.See p.6.--Ed.note.) .'.se . yee eekwatts,"mgt” Unalaska Island may have hot prospects for energy development bubbling beneath its surface. Geothermal energy: Taming volcanoes for profit The cruption of Mt.St.Helens awoke the world May 18,1980,and kept Washington state officials and geologists nationwide scrambling for months.Now the state of Alaska is embarking on an ambitious program to tame some of the awesome energy trapped beneath the sur- face of the volcano's distant,northern cousin,the Makushin Volcano on Un- alaska Island.One of 88 active volcanoes in the Aleutian Chain,Makushin is the focus of a multi-million-dollar geothermal power study funded by the state Legislature. The Alaska Power Authority has awarded a $4.7 million contract for pre- 8 ALASKAINDUSTRY !IANHIARY 1099 liminary geothermal development on the island to Republic Geothermal,an en- gineering and energy firm based in Santa Fe,Calif.,and currently is negotiating the details. The state agency expects to have the contract signed some time this month, with the first phase of the project begin- ning "immediately”afterward,said Patty DeJung,project manager for the Alaska Power Authority. Republic Geothermal and its sub- contractors -Dames and Moore Con- sulting Engineers of Anchorage -will prepare a detailed exploratory drilling plan,sink three shallow test holes,and then drill a deep hole to tap the geother- mal energy,she said. What will happen after the deep hole is drilled is almost entirely a matter of conjecture.Political concerns must beaddressed:should the project be turned over to the private sector or should thestatecontinuethedevelopment?The answertothatquestionmaycomefromfheAleutCorp.,a Native corporation ahasselectedtheregionencompassing;Makushin-Volcano as part of its entitle]ment |inder:the Alaska Native ClaimsSettlernentAct,althat the lands habénotyetbeenconveyed.oO "a're expecting (the geothermal /|" S|OQ}|BSmy Ee enna well)to be hot enough for electrical eration,”DeJung said,"Itcould bes .... lar to the Geysers in California.”A geothermal development -inNorthernCalifornia,the Geysers is one of the three largest such projects in exis- tence,annually providing electricity to thousands of homes and businesses in Sonoma County.The other mammoth geothermal power projects are located in Wairakei,New Zealand,and the Lar- derello area of Italy.The Larderello pro- ject,the eldest,has been in operation in one form or another since 1904 and cur- rently has an installed capacity of 360 megawatts (MW). Unalaska Island has tremendous po- tential for geothermal power develop- ment,according to Dr.Michael J. Economides,a consultant working on the Makushin Volcano project:under contract with the Alaska Power Author- ity. Economides said geothermal energy is "location intensive.” "You cannot transport geothermal (power),”he said."You must have the market to utilize it on top of the geother- mal source.” "Unalaska has the resource.It also has the market -the population and the fishing industry.That's why Unalaska is such an attractive prospect -because it has both,”he said. Hydrothermal systems There are three primary types of geothermal resources:hydrothermal,hot dry rock,and geopressured zones.Near- ly all of the currently developed geother- mal resources are hydrothermal systems, where naturally occurring ground water is heated at depth.These systems can be either vapor-dominated (steam)or hot water dominated,depending on tempera- ture and pressure. The essential ingredients for a hy- drothermal system are a heat source,a sufficient supply of ground water,and a mechanism for transporting the heated ground water to near the surface (porous rock or natural fractures). 'The other two types of geothermal resources are hot dry rock,which re- quires injecting water as a heat-transfer medium,and geopressured zones,where water is trapped with natural gas under thousands of feet of sediment. Among other things,Republic Geothermal's exploratory work on Un- alaska Island will determine the tempera- ture of the water trapped in Makushin's "roots,”and how far below the surface the potential source of energy lies. The test holes the firm plans to drill will be about 1,500 feet deep,while the ACWeaGECAiganea2afobusated Energy-generating steam hisses from a geothermal well in Larderelo,Italy,site of the world's largest geothermalpowerplant. development well or deep hole could be drilled between 4,000 feet and 6,000 feet into the earth,DeJung said. The depth of the final hole is only an estimation,she said,because "you don't know until you go in how deep it will have to be.” Unalaska's energy needs Included in the nation's purchase of Alaska in 1867,Unalaska Island was all but ignored by its '"'mainland”neighbors until 1900,when the island's port of Dutch Harbor became a transshipping point for Nome after the discovery of gold turned Nome into a boom town. Dutch Harbor next entered the history books during World War II.In 1940,the U.S.Navy established a base in the har- bor,which was bombed two years later North Slope. According to the U.S.census,342 people lived on Unalaska Island in 1970. A decade later,the population count has increased nearly four-fold to 1,322;and during the peak fishing season,the popu- lation swells to over 5,000. Outer continental shelf oil and gas exploration in the Aleutians,increased bottom fishing in the Bering Sea,and the possible expansion of its role as a (rans- shipment point (it is the only place bet- ween Kodiak and Yokohama that a con- tainer ship can dock).all indicate Un- alaska will continue to grow in impor- tance and population. The installed electrical capacity on Unalaska Island currently is under 12 megawatts.The U.S.Bureau of Land Management projects the island's power Although the investment costs are high,a 30 KW geothermal power plant would be cheaper to build and operate than a hydroelectric or diesel power plant Economides said. of comparable size, by the Japanese.The U.S.launched a successful counterattack in 1943. Nearly four decades later,the port of Dutch Harbor has grown to achieve another kind of importance.Since 1979, the port has been the nation's leading fish harbor,and about 200 million pounds of crab and fish are processed at Dutch Har- bor annually. The same geographical factors that made it important during the war have made the harbor a vital shipping center for traffic between the western Alaska mainland,the Aleutians and the oil-rich demands will increase by 40 MW by the year 2000.Because of the projected de- mand -and the high cost of the diesel fuel Unalaskans now depend upon for all their power -the state is investing time and moncy for an in-depth look at the is- land's 241 ,000-acre Makushin Potential Geothermal Resource area. Economides estimated that a 30 MW geothermal power plant could be built on Unalaska Island for about $42.35 million (in 1981 dollars).Al- though the investment costs are high,a Continued next page ALASKAINDUSTRY JANUARY 1982 9 10 --__-__SfiGSYSTEMS,If.-:If Not - Because ®Fewer Oi]Changes e Less Maintenance operating needs. We Are - P.O.Box 502 (907)694-9679 You Should - e@ Cost Savings From S0¢to $1.00 Per Gallon e@ Extends Your Engine's Life Due To Clean Combustion We can assist you in choosing the best system for your CNG SYSTEMS.INC. Eagle River,Alaska 99577 Propane and Natural Gas Carburetion Specialists Have You Considered Converting Your Vehicles to Propane or Natural Gas?AGSYSTEMS.Ehle|OF Bo ; ,i,4 i ¥|b:7 B y ' 5 :. te .4 art See As8iachpenis ALASKAINDUSTRY JANUARY 1982 nat Ween.telah!Ow"PROVEN SYSTEMSBUILDINGSTABILIZATIONINPERMAFROSTREGIONS ;With proper design and installation it has been shown that 'thermal piles and thermal probes can stabilize building move- »ment in areas where permafrost exists.At lower installed cost. With over 30 years FOUNDATIONS'personnel can offer you the latest in two (2) phase heat transfer systems.As a pioneer in the development of these systems,ARCTIC FOUNDATIONS can assist you in all phases of construction. If you are building in the Arctic or any other permafrost area,Stabilize your building with a system from the experts ... ARCTIC FOUNDATIONS,INC. THERMO-PROBE Energy Free Refrigeration ie Reduced Thaw.Send for technical information ARCTIC FOUNDATIONS INC. 5621 ARCTIC BOULEVARD, ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99502 (907)276-5575 f ORE art he hee,tals Fe PF at,Ib Sayin2 Paw bret 30 KW geothermal power plant would be cheaper to build and operate than a hy- droelectric or diesel power plant of com- parable size,he said. The state also is investigating other potential geothermal energy develop- ments.A partial list,supplied by Donald Markle,energy projects manager for the Division of Energy and Power Develop- ment,includes:Pilgrim Hot Springs near Nome;the Copper River Basin.particu- larly the Glennallen-Copper Center area near the Glenn and Richardson high- ways;Adak Island,near the centerof theAleutianChain:Akutan Island.located approximately 770 miles southwest of Anchorage in the Fox Istand group of the Aleutians:and Tennakee Hot Springs, situated between Sitka and Juneau. "Alaska has a lot of geothermal en- ergy.To my way of thinking,it has as much as the rest of the U.S.combined.” Economides said."But it lacks the popu- Jation to use it.”| Help America work. The National AllianceofBusinessmen individual experience ARCTIC oNMeERTOUORaR8ONtSaPOIncreased Loads Two Phase Heat Transfer ALASKA STATE LEGISLATUR. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RESEARCH AGENCY Pouch Y,State Capitol Juneau,Alaska 99811 G(907)465-3991 (7)+ > June 23,1981 MEMORANDUM TO:Representative Eric Sutcliffe FROM:0.Alexander Hoke Research Staff RE:Potential Production of Hydrogen Gas by the Electrolysis of Water from Low-cost Abundant Renewable Sources of Electric Power in the Aleutian Region Research Request 81-53 Three purposes could potentially be served by the efficient use of abundant geothermal and wind energy resources to produce hydrogen: 1)hydrogen generated by the electrolysis of water may potentiallyprovideastableenergygood(fuel)for local consumption in ruralwesternAlaskacommunities;2)hydrogen can sometimes be transportedtoisolatedvillagesmoreefficientlyandatlesscostthanelectricity; 3)hydrogen,in addition to serving as a local energy resource,can potentialy provide the basis for an export industry to western U.S. and east Asian markets in the form of raw hydrogen gas for fuel,as a feedstock for industrial applications,or as a manufactured product such as ammonia. This memorandum complements our May 14th memorandum,on yeothermal and wind energy resources in the Aleutian Island region,by examining the potential for electrolytic hydrogen production vis-a-vis the applica- tions noted above.The following material explores the industrial uses of hydrogen and assesses,in a cursory manner,the economics of hydrogen production. THE USE OF HYDROGEN IN INDUSTRY While some hydrogen is used in the space program as fuel for booster rockets,and small quantities are used in research laboratories for cryogenics applications,the preponderance of hydrogen is consumed by industry.Table 1 shows that of the 1975 total U.S.hydrogen demand of approximately 2.5 trillion cubic feet,almost half was used in petro-Teum refining processes,'while the remainder was used primarily in the production of various chemicals.Leading the list of chemicals whichrequirehydrogeninitsmanufactureisammonia,the production of which consumed over one trillion cubic feet of hydrogen in 1975.Below is a brief presentation on the more significant industrial uses of hydrogen. Parnp,Ose Fie Code:37.06.03J.Bate:S)2749.L | Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 2 TABLE 1 HYDROGEN DEMAND IN 1970 AND 1975 (Billion standard cubic feet) 1970 Petroleum Refining 900 Chemical Production Ammonia 936 Methanol 177 Cyclohexane 29 Benzene '7 Hexa-methylene-diamine 12 Aniline 5 Napthalene 9 0X0 Alcohols 6 Other Chemicals ,19 Direct Reduction 6 Hydrogenation of Oils 7 Liquid 21 Other 36 TOTAL U.S.DEMAND 2,170 World Demand (excluding U.S.)3,940 TOTAL WORLD DEMAND 6,110 Data Source:U.S.Bureau of Mines Bulletin 667,1975 Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 3 Petroleum Refining In the initial phases of crude oil refining,the major constituents of'oil are fractionated (separately boiled off)with the resultant produc- tion of somewhere between 15%and 50%gasoline depending on the qualityofthecrudeoil.Larger percentages of gasoline can be obtained from the crude through a process called "catalytic cracking"where complex hydrocarbon molecules are broken down under high temperatures into molecules with between 5 and 10 carbon atoms.These simple hydrocarbon chains resemble the gasoline initially produced through the boiling process except that these "cracked"molecules are defficient in hydro- gen atoms.By introducing hydrogen gas into a high pressure chambercontainingtheshortchainedhydrocarbonmoleculesinthepresence ofacatalyst(hence the term "catalytic cracking")high quality gasolinemoleculesareformed.This process greatly enhances the refiners capacity to extract larger percentages of gasoline from a given type of crude oil. Other refining processes rely on hydrogen to assist in reducing the sulfur content of crude oils.Because there are a wide diversity of sulfur compounds naturally occurring in crude oils,it is difficult to remove them all in any single chemical process.Among the more common sulfur compounds are the mercaptans (-CH2-SH),the thio-ethers(-CHo-S-CH9-)and the metal sulfides.Fortunately,under high tempera-ture and pressure,hydrogen gas will combine with the sulfur atoms in almost all of the crude oil sulfur compounds to form hydrogen sulfide (H25).Because hydrogen sulfide is a gas at room termperature and also a weak acid,the HoS molecules tend to boil away from the crudeoilandcanbereactedwithastrongbasesuchaslimestone(calcium carbonate)to precipitate out as calcium sulfide.In this way, hydrogen plays a vital role in the production of high quality,low sulfur petrochemical products., Gasification and Liquefaction of Coal Like crude oils,coal is a highly complex hydrocarbon which varies substantially in its composition from one deposit to another.All coals,however,contain significantly more free carbon and hydrogen- deficient hydrocarbon compounds than crude oils.Consequently,althoughtheprocessessofproducinghighqualityfuelandpetrochemicalgasses and liquids from coal and crude oi]are very similar,considerably more hydrogen is required in coal refining than for oil refining.While crude oil refining typically requires one kilogram (1 kilogram =2.2 pounds) of hydrogen for every 15 kilograms of crude oi],about twice as muchhydrogen(2 kilograms)is consumed in upgrading 15 kilograms of coal. Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 4 Ammonia Manufacture Significant quantities of ammonia are used to produce plastics and cleaning agents,but the greatest use of ammonia is as fertilizer. Healthy growth of crops and ornamental plants requires the fixed-nitro-gen compounds commonly called fertilizers.Natural fertilizers such as animal waste,nitrate deposits and the fixed-nitrogen compounds generated by bacteria living among the roots of legumes are insufficient in quantity to meet the fertilizer needs of modern agriculture.The technological breakthrough,known as the Haber process,permitted theeconomicalcombinationofonemoleculeofnitrogen(No)from the airto3moleculesofhydrogengastoproduce2moleculesofammonia(NH3).In 1975,roughly 43%of the U.S.consumption of hydrogen stemmed from the manufacture of amomonia fertilizer by the Haber process. Food Processing Hydrogen is increasingly used to saturate a wide variety of oils consumed by humans.Unsaturated oils such as linseed oil and tung seed oj] (used as a base for many paints)have a tendency to incorporate certainelements(oxygen in the air)into their molecular structure causing the oi]to.take on an infusible plastic-like structure,a quality desirable for paints.Food oils,on the other hand,must remain fluid and ingestible.The process of hydrogenation was developed by the edible oi]industry to link hydrogen atoms with the oil molecules so that the food value is maintained and that the oil is less subject to deterioration when exposed to oxygen in the air.Hydrogenation of oils also gives them the additional properties of a higher melting temperature and increased resistance to growth of bactevia. Because hydrogenated oils are prepared for human consumption,highly purified hydrogen gas is used in the process.For this purpose,hydro-gen produced by electrolysis is often used due to its high purity as com- pared to hydrogen derived from coal,natural gas and crude oil which contains numerous impurities.Hydrogenation is accomplished at high temperatures and pressures and in the presence of a highly active metal- lic nickel catalyst. Metallurgical Industry In the processing of metal ores,hydrogen is often used as a reducing agent in order to produce high quality special purpose metals.Forexample,in the refinement of iron oxide ore,the free metal (iron)is obtained by the removal (reduction)of oxygen from the iron oxide.This is normally accomplished in blast furnaces in which coal is used as the reducing agent.However,coal reduction of iron oxide leaves numerous impurities in the iron,including silicon,sulfur,carbon and phos- Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 5 phorous.Hydrogen reduction of iron ore eliminates these impurities and,consequently,is the preferred process when high quality iron is desired. Another important example of hydrogen reduction of metallic ores is the preparation of tungsten suitable for light bulb filaments.When tung- sten oxide ore is reduced by ordinary methods,substantial quantitiesofcarbonremainintherefinedtungstenmetal.The presence of carbon in tungsten makes the metal extremely brittle;so brittle in fact,that the metal cannot be drawn into the fine wires needed for light bulb filaments.The hydrogen reduction of tungsten,however,leaves the re- fined metal ductile enough for drawing into fine filaments. Other important uses of hydrogen include:1)the manufacture of meth- anol (synthetic wood alcohol)and polyurethane plastics;2)the qualitybrazingofhigh-temperature alloys where'a hydrogen gas environment ismaintainedtopreventmetaloxidesfromformingoncleanmetalsurfaces;3)rocket fuels for the space shuttle program;.4)extreme accuracychemicalanalysisusinghydrogenflameionizationdetectorsingaschromatography;and 5)subatomic particle analysisin liquid hydrogenjonizationchambers. HYDROGEN PRODUCTION Because development of hydrocarbon resources is not currently contem- plated in the Aleutian Island region in the near-term,methods of producing hydrogen from crude oil,coal and natural gas are not discussed in detail in this section.It should be noted,.however,that most hydrogen tsed by industry today is produced by the steam reformation of hydrocarbon feedstocks.The following breakdown of the three primary hydrocarbon feedstocks used for hydrogen production shows the ratio of kilograms of feedstock per kilogram of hydrogen produced,and the kilograms of carbon dioxide generated per kilogram of hydrogen produced. Kg Feedstock to Kg C02 (carbon dioxide)Feedstock Kg Hydrogen Ratio per Kg Ho Produced Methane (CH4 -gas)2.0 5.5 Residual Oils 3.6 11.7 Coal 6.4 22.0 Electrolysis The production of hydrogen and oxygen [the constituents of water (H20)]by the electrolysis of water is an old and well researched process. Basically,when a direct current (d.c.as opposed to alternating cur- Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 6 rent,a.c.)of at least 1.23 volts is passed through electrodes suspended in an electrolyte bath,hydrogen is evolved at the negative electrode (cathode)and oxygen is evolved at the positive electrode (anode). The electrolyte bath is composed of water and a chemical substancethatallowsthewatertoconductelectricity,such as potassiumhy-droxide.The electrolysis process can be made more efficient by thecarefulselectionofelectrodematerial(usually nickel and copper,but ideally platinum)and by raising the temperature and pressure of the electrolysis chamber.The electricity to hydrogen conversion efficiency of electrolysis units have run as high as 100%in the labora- tory,which means that in equivalent units of energy,one unit of hydrogen is produced for each unit.of electricity.In actual industrial practice,however,electrolyzer efficiencies usually run around 75% to 85%.. There are essentially three types of electrolyzers:1)the tank typeelectrolyzerdescribedabove;2)the filter press electrolyzer which consists of layered electrolysis cells in which each electrode acts as a cathode on one side and an anode on the other;and 3)a relatively recent electrolyzer technology developed by General Electric Company for the space program,which uses a solid polymer resin electrolyte (a material called Nafion which is chemically related to Teflon)instead of the very caustic liquid electrolytes used in the earlier generation electrolyzers.Most of the major electrolytic hydrogen plants in production today use both the tank type and the filter press type electrolyzers while recent trends have shown that the filter press type is favored.The production capacities of the largest electrolysis plants are shorn on Table 2.The Solid Polymer Electrelyte (SPE) technology is still in its infancy,though the Department of Energy has planned to sponsor research leading to the develoment of a plant capable of producing hydrogen at a rate equivalent to 200 kilowatts of energy early this decade. o Plant Location Rjukan,Norway Glomfjord,Norway Trail,Canada Nangal,Egypt Aswan,Egypt Reyjavik,Iceland Source:Hydrogen Power, TABLE 2 LARGE ELECTROLYSIS PLANTS Ha Production EfficiencyCubicFeet/Kilowatt Hour Electric Generating Hydrogen (H9)Production Capacity-Megawatts Capacity-Cubic Feet/Hour 165 .985,149 160 956,901 90 536,712 125 745,041 100 596,739 20 105,930 ° Lawrance 0.Williams,1980 5.97 5.98 5.96 5.96 5.97 5.30 Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 8 ECONOMIC PROSPECTS FOR ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN PRODUCTION Because a full feasibility analysis of the production of hydrogen in the Aleutian Island Region is beyond the scope of this memorandum,ourfinancialassessmentwillrevolvearoundasinglemajorassumption:if hydrogen can be produced at a cost commensurate with the marketpriceofhydrogeninthePacificNorthwesternUnitedStates,then there is a sufficient prospect for a hydrogen-based industry in the Aleutians to warrent an in-depth feasibility analysis.This approach does not address the following questions regarding the viability of anAleutianhydrogen-based industry:1)Is there an adequate market for hydrogen gas,ammonia,or other hydrogen compounds in either the Orient or West Coast United States?2)What portion of the break-even sale price for Aleutian hydrogen would be constituted by transportation, conditioning,and storage costs?3)What role would the sales of hydregen gas as a fuel for space heating or for generating electricity in Aleutian communities play in the economics of hydrogen industry development? Determination of the Upper Limit for Hydrogen Production Costs in Various Markets To begin our economic assessment of Aleutian electrolytic hydrogen pro- duction potential,it is instructive to examine Seattle area market prices for various gasses.According to Union Carbide Corporation in Seattle,large quantities of industrial gasses are shipped by pressur- ized and refrigerated railroad tank cars.Bulk tanker car or truck loads of liquid,refrigerated hydrogen,at a nominal pressure of 14psi(pounds per square inch)presently sell for $25.60 per 1,000 cubic feet.Liquid oxygen,pressurized at about 2,600 psi at ambient(outside)temperatures,sells for $4.00 or $5.00 per 1,000 cubic feet under contracts for millions of cubic feet per month. Smaller quantities of these gasses naturally sell at substantially higher prices due to reduced economies in storage,handling and trans- portation costs.For example,Seattle prices for liquid oxygen incontainersizesof3,000 to 4,500 cubic feet are $12.00 per mcf(1,000 cubic feet)while hydrogen gas in similar quantities sells for $37.00 per mcf.Continuing this trend of increasing prices for smaller quantities of gas is the Juneau market price for oxygen,in high pres-sure 80 c.f.bottles used for oxy-acetylene welding,of $236.63 per mcf., In our contacts with the Electrolyser Corporation (near Toronto, Canada),the only major manufacturer of unipolar tank-type electroly- zers,we learned that recent advances in unipolar electrolyzer tech- nology permit a hydrogen production efficiency of 7.69 cubic feet of wv Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 9 hydrogen per kilowatt-hour of electricity.This production efficiencycomparestotheworld's major electrolysis plants which produce hydrogenatratesjustunder1millioncubicfeetperhourwithefficienciesof about 5.97 cubic feet of hydrogen per kilowatt-hour of electricity. Using a conservative overall electrolysis plant efficiency of 6 c.f. Ho/kwh,an upper bound to the cost of electrical power can be deter-mined as follows for the cost comparison of electrolytically produced hydrogen to other fuels. (1)Aleutian Hydrogen Relative to Seattle Natural Gas as a Fuel If electrolytically produced hydrogen were to serve as a substitution fuel for natural gas in the Seattle market,equivalent energy values of the two gasses must be generated at the same cost.Hooker Chemical Company of Tacoma,Washington,a producer of chlorine,caustic soda and ammonia by electrolysis,buys large volumes of Canadian natural gas at $4.75/mcf.Using the energy equivalency table (Table 3),100 c.f.of natural gas has an energy content equal to 1000 x 3.114 or3,114 cubic feet of hydrogen.If hydrogen is produced electrolytically at the rate of 6 c.f.Ho/kwh,approximately 519 kilowatt hours (3,114+6)of electricity would be required to produce hydrogen with an equivalent energy value of 1,000 c.f.of natural gas.Consequently,an upper bound for the price of electricty in this hydrogen productionscenariois.92 cents per kwh ($4.75 =519 kwh).Of course,in this case as well as those that follow,the actual marketing of hydrogen at economical prices must account for the capital costs of the electrolysis plant,conditioning,storage,and transportation costs,as well as an allowance for profit.Obviously,the price of electricity must be significantly lower than .92 cents/kwh if these additional costs are considered.- (2)Aleutian Hydrogen Relative to Seattle Hydrogen in Industry (Mer- chant Hydrogen) Using the Union Carbide bulk price for industrial merchant hydrogen of $25.60 per 1000 cubic feet,a similar electricity threshold cost can be calculated.Based on a hydrogen production ratio of 6 c.f.Ho/kwh,about 167 kwh (1000 c.f.+6 c.f./kwh)of electricity are requiredtoproduce100cubicfeetofhydrogenbytheelectrolysisofwater. Consequently,the threshold price of electricty in this scenario is15.3 cents/kwh ($25.60 +167 kwh).Substantially more allowance can be made for capital costs,transportation costs and profit within the base price for electricity at 15.3 cents/kwh than in the preceding scenario in which the upper limit for electricity is .92 cents/kwh. Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 10 TABLE 3 ENERGY VALUES AND EQUIVALENTS FOR THREE FUELS NATURAL GAS METHANE-CH4 FUEL OIL HYDROGEN He Average Heating Value Natural Gas Equivalent(1 cubic foot) Fuel O71 Equivalent (gallon) Hydrogen Equivalent (1 cubic foot 1,012 BIU/c.f. lc.f.. 132.3 c.f. 321 c.f. Examples of energy equivalency: 133,885 BTU/gal. -00756 gal. 1 gallon .00243 gal. 325 BIU/c.f. 3.114 c.f. 412 c.f. 1 Cef. 1 gallon of fuel oi]has the equivalent heating value of 412 cubic feet of hydregen gas 1 cubic foot of hydrogen has the equivalent heating value of .321 cubic feet of natural gas (methane) Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 11 (3)Aleutian Hydrogen Relative to Bethel Fuel Oi] In order to assess the prospects of substituting hydrogen for fuel oil as a general purpose heating and power generating fuel in theAleutianregion,the energy value of hydrogen can be compared to a gallon of fuel oil currently sold for $1.28/gallon in Bethel.Theenergyequivalencytable(Table 3)shows that 1 gallon of fuel oil has the energy value of 412 cubic feet of hydrogen.About 69 kilowatt hours of electricity are required to produce 412 c.f.hydrogen given the production ratio of 6 c.f./kwh.Therefore,the upper limit forelectricitycostsinthisscenariois1.86 cents per kwh ($1.28 =69kwh).In other words,hydrogen could be substituted for fuel oil at present prices if electricity can be generated at costs,enough below 1.86 cents/kwh to account for the capital costs of an electrolysisplant,hydrogen storage and distribution costs,etc. Moreover,the fuel oi]costs in outlying communities of the Aleutian region are.higher than in Bethel,and consequently allow for higher threshold costs for electricty.For example,if present prices for fueloilare$1.60 per gallon,the threshold electricty cost for hydrogenwouldbe2.32 cents per kwh ($1.28 +69 kwh).Graph A shows how the upper limit for electricty costs varies with the prevailing price of fuel oil. (4)Aleutian Hydrogen in Conjunction With Ammonia Manufacture The Penn Walt Company of Tacoma,like Hooker Chemical Company,produces chlorine by an electrolytic process.Byproducts of this process includecausticsoda(NaOH)and hydrogen which both companies use in the syn- thesis of ammonia (NH3).Penn Walt Company manufactures about 250 tons of chlorine and 30 tons of ammonia per day,while Hooker Chemical Co. produces about 540 tons of chlorine,and 80 tons of ammonia per day.The market price for anhydrous ammonia (without water)in railroadtankcarloadsisabout$205 per ton.As shown in the table of indus- trial hydrogen requirements,approximately 70,000 to 80,000 cubic feet of hydrogen are required in the manufacture of 1 ton of ammonia. Using an average of 75,000 c.f.Ho/ton of ammonia,and disregarding the costs of reacting hydrogen with nitrogen from the air to produce NH3,it can be seen that hydrogen costs in this scenario must_notexceed$2.73/mcf ($205 +75 mcf He).The electrolytic hydrogen ratioof6c.f.Ho/kwh gives an upper limit electric power cost of 1.64cents/kwh ($2.73 +1,000 c.f./6 c.f./kwh). (5)Oxygen as a Byproduct of Electrolytic Hydrogen Production. In each of the above scenarios,one mitigating cost factor is the po- tentially marketable byproduct of electrolytic hydrogen production: oxygen.For every cubic foot of hydrogen produced by the electrolysis Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 12 of water,1/2 cubic foot of oxygen is also produced.Using the SeattlepricequotedbyUnionCarbideof$5.00 per mcf of oxygen sold in verylargevolumes,adjustments in the threshold costs of electricity for hydrogen production can be found by adding the value of byproductoxygentothemarketpriceofhydrogenineachofthescenariosabove.For instance,when the market price of hydrogen is $25.60 per mcf,theadjustedpricewouldbe$28.10 ($25.60/mcf Ho +$2.50/500 c.f.09) and the adjusted upper limit cost of electricity would be 16.8 centsperkwh($28.10 +167 Kwh/1,000 c.f.Ho +500 c.f.09). Further upward adjustments can be made in the threshold cost of elec- tricity of hydrogen generation if one assumes the higher production ratio of 7.69 c.f.H2/kwh,claimed by The Electrolyser Corporation duetoimprovedtechnology.The effects on the threshold cost of elec- tricty of the higher conversion ratio and the value of byproduct hydrogen are shown on Graph A. Ic Cr RopSST CT LonFue,Q on,a /s teeQee3lyQt High ratio,Oxy ; ene eee oe ee ee et ee ee ee .= PR 4 hoo9OWQ¥ 3 -Low.ratio,Oxy7i os ee kK ow H a -j ; High ratio,No-oxy z wecaeee ee eee ee .a=a ee|we ee eeeKZ2O04Wioiu| fly Low ratio,No-oxy Representative Succiffe June 23,1981 Page 14 TABLE 4 CONSUMPTION OF HYDROGEN FOR VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES Use ammonia synthesis methanol synthesis petroleum refining hydrotreating: naptha coking distillates hydrocracking coal conversion to: liquid fuel gaseous fuel oil-shale conversion to: liquid fuel gaseous fuel iron-ore reduction process heat SCF of H2/Unit of Product 70 000-80 ,000/(t of NH3) 36/(1b of CH30H) >610/(bb1 of crude oi1) 50/bb1 750/bb1 2 ,000-2,500/bb1 6 ,000-7 »000/(bb1 of synthetic oi1)of 1 ,560/(103 SCF of synthetic gas) 1,300/(bb]of synthetic oil)1,200/(10°SCF of synthetic gas) 20 ,000/(t of iron) 3,070/106 Btu or2,700/(103 1b of process steam) Source:Non-nuclear Energy Technologies S.S.Penner and L.Icerman wn Reprsentative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 15 Hydrogen Production from Geothermally Generated Electricity Our May 14 memorandum identified a number of thermal spring resources in the Aleutian region potentially suitable for electric power genera-tion.The largest of the resources,the Makushin fumerole field near Unalaska,has an estimated electric power production capacity of 157 megawatts.This field is a convenient size for geothermal developmentsincemoderngeothermalpowerplantsarecommonlyratedat110megawatts and large scale electrolysis plants typically are rated at 90 to 100 MW. The Geysers geothermal project north of San Francisco serves as a con- venient example for estimating the costs of electric power production. The Geysers project was first developed in 1960 and presently operates 15 electric power production plants with a total generating capacityyoofabout900megawatts.A total of 250 employees operate the facilities24hoursaday.Project Manager R.P.Wischow eyplains that Pacific Gas and Electric Company purchases steam at 356 degrees F and 100 psifromprivatefielddevelopers(primarily Union a of California andNatomas). Mr.Wischow estimates that new power plants and geothermal wells cost about $1,000/KW,and if a 110 MW project were started in the spring of1982atatotalcostofabout$110 million,it could be completed in 1985.According to Mr.Wischow,the total operating and capital costs of a geothermal plant are about half the projected costs of a comparable oil-fired plant.For example,in 1980,overall geothermally produced electricity at the Geysers cost approximately 4 cents per kilowatt hour,while oil-fired electric generator operating and capital costs resulted in 9 cents per kwh of electricity. If one were to assume that geothermal power could be produced in the Aleutian region for the same costs as power generated at The Geysers (4 cents/kwh),baseline estimates could be computed for the cost ofproducinghydrogenbyelectrolysis.Of course it is likely that geo- thermal development of the Makushin field,for example,would be more costly than in Northern California,based on the Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development's construction cost multiplier of 1.8, used to compare construction costs in Alaska to those in the contiguous United States. According to the Electrolyser Corporation of Canada,commercial electro-lyzer plants are composed of units rated at 15,000 to 20,000 cubicfeetofhydrogenperhour,with anelectric power demand of 2.6 megawattsandcapitalcostsofabout$1 million.An electrolysis plant con- figured from 50 electrolyzer units would require about 110 MW of electricpower,given a plant factor of .85 (plant efficiency of 85%)and wouldcostroughly$50 million.Total output of a plant of this size would Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 16 be about 15.8 million cubic feet of hydrogen and 7.9 million cubicfeetofoxygenperday.A $50 million electrolysis plant amortized at 11%over a period of 30 years results in the following effective cost per kilowatt hour of electric power consumed: $50 million amortized @ 11%for 30 years $5.7 million/year $5.7 million/year +963.6 million kwh/yr.=.59 cents/kwh Therefore,an estimate of the costs of electric power generated geother-mally (4 cents/kwh)plus the capital costs of the electrolysis plantestimatedintermsofthekilowattsofpowerconsumed(.59 cents/kwh), results in a baseline power cost of roughly 4.6 cents/kwh.Regarding the threshold electricity costs discussed previously,it appears that electrolytically produced hydrogen,using electricity generated from geothermal energy,is non-competitive with at least some of the market conditions mentioned earlier.For example,geothermal power costingsomewhatmorethan4.6 cents/kwh does not permit hydrogen production as a fuel competitive with Seattle natural gas,because the thresholdelectricityofthisscenariois.92 cents/kwh.Remember that we have used the term "threshold cost"to mean that actual electric power costsmustfallsomewhatunderthe"threshold cost"of electricty in order for the hydrogen produced by electrolysis to be competitively marketed relative to the scenario in question.Moreover,4.6 cents/kwh electri- city also precludes the production of hydrogen as a substitute forfueloi]at Bethel prices of $1.28/gal.since the threshold electricty cost in this scenario is 2.32 cents/kwh.Similarly,ammonia manufacture with a threshold cost of 1.64 cents/kwh falls short of the economics ofgeothermallyproducedelectricpower.Only the merchan.hydrogen sce- nario,with a threshold cost of electricity of 15.3 cents/kwh,appears promising compared to the baseline geothermally produced electric power at 4.6 cents/kwh. In the merchant hydrogen case,about 10.7 cents/kwh separating the mini-mum available cost of power (4.6 cents/kwh)and the maximum allowable cost of power (15.3 cents/kwh)can be allocated to offset the as yet undefined hydrogen storage and transportation costs,and still allow a reasonable profit margin.Even though the baseline cost of power may be somewhat higher than 4.6 cents/kwh due to the increased costs of geo- thermal development and plant operation in Alaska,the threshold costinthemerchanthydrogenscenariomaybeincreasedifthehigherratioofhydrogenconversionratio(7.69 cubic feet H2/kwh)is assumed andamarketisfoundforbyproductoxygen. Hydrogen Production from Wind Generated Electricity In our May 14 memorandum,15 Aleutian sites with substantial wind energy potential are listed along with the estimated number of 40 KW windmills ¢ Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 17 needed to produce 1 MW of electric power under average conditions. Cold Bay,for example,records an average yearly wind velocity of 17.1 miles per hour,which translates into approximately 33.5 kilowatts of electric power on the average from a 40 KW wind turbine.Consequently,a network of about 37 wind turbines rated at 40 KW each is necessarytogenerate1MWofelectricpowerunderaveragewindconditions. The data shown on Graph B was calculated by Dr.Tunis Wentink of the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute to determine the cost of electric power generated by a 40 KW wind turbine.The graph shows thatatwindvelocitiesof17mph(approximately the conditions at Cold Bay), electric power can be generated at a cost of about 3 cents per kilowatt hour. In order to produce 110 MW of electricity,a network of 3,284 wind turbines rated at 40 KW each would be required at Cold Bay.The perunitinstalledcostof$50,000 per turbine would mean that a 110 MW project would involve total capital costs of about $164.2 million. Amortized at 11%per year for 30 years,the annualized capital costswouldbe$18.8 million,which translates into 1.95 cents/kwh [$18.8million+(8760 hrs/year X 110 MW)J.If annual operating costs wereestimatedat$10 million,an additional T.04 cents/kwh would bring the total to 3 cents/kwh.The previously determined electrolyzer capitalcostsof.59 cents/kwh raise the estimated total power costs to about3.6 cents/kwh. It must be realized that the cost estimates stated above are highly speculative,since no "windfarm"of this magnitude has ever been devel- oped.However,the advantages of developing a project around 40 KWwindturbinesinclude:1)redundancy of generator units;2)poten-tial economies (beyond the cost estimates made by Dr.Wentink)basedonalargevolumepurchase(3,284 units)of wind turbines;3)the Tower risk of proven technology in the small wind turbine industry;and 4)the option of phased development of the windfarm/hydrogen plant by installing electrolysis units and windmills incrementally. Windfarms,Inc.of San Francisco recently announced an 80 MW wind energy conversion project to be built near Honolulu,Hawaii.Hamilton Standard of Connecticut is scheduled to construct 20 wind turbines for this project,each having a turbine blade diameter of 260 feet capable ofgenerating4MWofelectricpower.Chris Woodward of Windfarms,Inc.states that the capital costs of the Hawaii project are $3,500/KW in- stalled,for a total cost of $280 million.Although Mr.Woodward declined to give us proprietary information on the anticipated powerproductioncosts(cost per kilowatt hour),he did estimate the operationandmaintenancecostsat3cents/kwh (considered high)and stated that the prevailing cost for diesel generated electricity in Hawaii is 7 cents/kwh. ELECTRICITYCOSTCENTSPERKILOWATT--HOUR13a GRAPH B WIND GENERATED ELECTRICITY COSTS COST OF ELECTRICITY VERSUS AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY Assumes 40 kw-rated wind energy conversion system at a cost of $50,000 amortized overaperiodof10yearsat6.5%interest.aminesLinebeam=baa=”be)ia 11 12 13 f4 oo 1S |16 17 AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY MILES PER HOUR CAT 38 FOOT HEIGHT>w8 aRsabaiekAQhbbi iifL coe mnranaread hv: Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 19 Using the Windfarms,Inc.estimate of $3,500/KW installed,a 110 MW project would involve capital costs of $385 million,or $7 million per wind turbine.Amortized over 30 years at 11%,the annualized capitalcostsfora110MWprojectwouldbeapproximately$44 million,or 4.57 cents/kwh.The total costs for the scenario including operating andmaintenancecostsof3cents/kwh would be 7 cents per kwh. Comparing the 40 KW windmill scenario with estimated power costs of 3.6 cents/kwh to the Windfarms,Inc.project with 7 cents/kwh powercosts,one might conclude that a closer study of wind generated elec- tric power cost vis-a-vis economies of scale is in order.It is cer- tainly possible that an operating cost of $10 million/year (1 cent/kwh) estimated in the 40 KW turbine scenario is too low,and the 3 cents/ kwh operating costs in the Windfarms scenario is felt by Mr.Woodward to be too high.Some of the differences between the two scenarios include the following:1)3,284 small wind turbines present a signifi- cant monitoring problem,but the installation and maintenance of a 40 KW wind turbine can usually be accomplished by a small crew usinglightequipment;2)28 turbines rated at 4 MW each present a more manageable number of generators,but operators must generally be betterskilledandtrainedforthemoreadvancedmechanicsandelectronicsof "the large turbines;3)furthermore,significantly larger and more sophisticated equipment is required to install and maintain a 4 MW wind turbine as compared to the 40 KW machines. Wind-generated electricity costs of 3.6 cents/kwh and7 cents/kwh offer essentially the same economic prospects with regard to hydrogen produc- tion as is the case of geothermally produced electricity at 4.6 cents/ kwh.The merchant hydrogen scenario with threshold electricity costs of 15.3 cents/kwh is potentially a viable option for hydrogen productionfromeitherwind-generated or geothermally-generated electricity.The 40 KW wind turbine scenario offers the additional prospect for hydrogen production as a local fuel source if:1)increased hydrogen productionefficienciessuchasclaimedbyTheElectrolyserCorporation(7.69cubicfeetofhydrogenperkilowatt-hour)can be achieved 2)marketscanbefoundforbyproductoxygenat$5.00/mcf or high,.3)volumepurchasesof40KWwindturbinesresultinlowerunitcosts;%)operating and maintenance costs can be held at 1 cent/kwh or less.Furthermore, these conditions make the 40 KW wind turbine/electrolytic hydrogen scenario increasingly more economical as the price of fuel oil risesabovethepresentBethelpriceof$1.28/gallon. The general economics of electrolytic hydrogen production from several alternative sources are shown on Table 5.The break-even market price for hydrogen,listed on Table 5,is defined as the minimum market price at which electrolytic hydrogen production is a break-even proposi- aN Representative Sutcliffe , -. June 23,1981 Page 20 tion excluding the cost of hydrogen storage and transportation or profit margin.The break-even price of hydrogen assumes no market for byproduct oxygen.Should a suitable market for oxygen be found,a somewhat lower break-even price for hydrogen would result. TABLE 5 . BREAK-EVEN MARKET PRICE OF HYDROGEN* a Estimated Baseline +Breakeven Hydrogen Electricity Source Electric Power Cost Market Price Geothermally generated .4.6 cents/kwh $7.67 /mcf electric power at 40 KW Wind Turbine 3.6 cents/kwh $6.00/mcf electric power at 4 MW Wind Turbine 7.0 cents/kwh $11.67/mcf electric power at *Break-even price does not account for hydrogen storage costs,trans- portation costs to market,potential oxygen sales,profit margin. +Baseline power costs of electricity is the minimum anticipated cost of electric power from the source listed. y. Representative Sutcliffe June 23,1981 Page 21 FURTHER RESEARCH ON ALTERNATIVE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT The Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development is sponsoring two research projects evaluating the use of alternative energy in the state for commercial applications.These two projects are described briefly below. Hydrogen Production Prospects The Institute of Gas Technology in Chicago has received a $56,000 con- tract to assess the prospects for commercial hydrogen production inAlaska.The report,which should be available by the end of July,has the following objectives: (1)To make a state-of-the-art review of hydrogen production,use andresearch; (2)To evaluate Alaska's potential for economical hydrogen production; (3)To examine the commercialization prospects of existing electrical power generation facilities in Alaska that have surplus power capacity; (4)To prepare a commercialization development plan for one or two sites identified-in item 3. (5)To estimate total project costs of hydrogen production at these sites. Geothermal Energy Commercialization A $55,000 contract was initiated with the Morrison and Knudson Company in Idaho for the purpose of assessing the commercialization potential of geothermal resources in four locations:Adak,Unalaska,Tenakee Springs,and Akutan.The final report,due on August 30,1981,will include: (1)a data base for each site; (2)a review of state and federal regulations regarding develoment of geothermal resources; (3)an assessment of the resource potential of each site; (4)an evaluation of the local economic conditions including the exist- ing energy base; Representative Sutcliffe -oe June 23,1981 Page 22 (5)an identification of markets (local and/or regional)for geothermal energy; (6)an evaluation of the economic prospects for geothermal commerciali- zation at each site;and (7)a promotional program for geothermal development at each site. AH/dp ALASKA STATE LEGISLATUnc HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RESEARCH AGENCY Pouch Y,State Capitol Juneau,Alaska 99811 (907)465-3991 MEMORANDUM May 14,1981 e g y TO:Representative Eric Sutcliffe FROM:Alexander Hoke 6.QsResearchStaff RE:Identification of Geothermal and Wind Energy Resources intheAleutianIslandRegion Research Request No.81-53 (Part I) As part.cf an analysis of major renewable eneryy resources in the Aleutian Island region,this memorandum addresses the identification of both geothermal and wind energy resources in.the region,with the purpose of estimating the potential for conversion of these renewableenergyresourcestoelectricpower.The ultimate use of the informationpresentedinthememorandumistoassessthedevelopmentpotentialinSouthwestAlaskaforhydrogen-based industry (such as fertilizer pro-duction)with geothermal or wind generated electricity used in the production of hydrogen by electrolysis. Geothermal Energy in the Aleutian Islands Sources of geothermal energy are of three basic types:the thermal gradient of the earth,petrothermal and hydrothermal sources.Each source is evaluated below. Thermal Gradient.Due to heat flowing from the earth's mantle to the Surface,the temperature of rock in the earth's crust increases byabout77°Fahrenheitwitheach kilometer of depth.In order to usethenormalthermalgradientoftheearthasaheatsourceforthe generation of electricity (requiring temperatures of at least 300°F),geothermal wells would have to be drilled to a depth of three or four miles.The costs and technological difficulties of drilling to these depths makes the thermal gradient the least attractive geothermal energy source in Southwest Alaska under present economic conditions. Petrothermal.More potent geothermal sources in the Aleutian region,however,are the petrothermal resources.The largest source of geo-thermal energy in the Aleutian Islands results from-the molten igneousmaterial(magma)which lies in chambers beneath recently active vol- canoes.Table 1 lists the known Southwest Alaska petrothermal re- sources showing their location,estimated magma chamber volume,heat content,and potential electric power .production capacity -_-These---} Representatice Sutcliffe May 14,1981 Page 2 hightemperature magma sources present technological difficulties to heat extraction because drilling techniques have not been developed to sustain the high temperatures cf molten igneous rock.Sandia Labora- 'tories of New Mexico which is pioneering magma tap research,estimates that several 100 megawatt electrical power plants could be driven for 100 years on the energy contained within one cubic mile of 1,800°F magma.The federal Department of Energy is presently funding a $14millionprograminpetrothermalenergyresearchthroughtheLosAlamos Scientific Laboratory.Consequently,although petrothermal energy is abundant in the Aleutian Island region,the technology necessary to tap these high level energy sources is largely unproven.Perhaps the research efforts noted above will one day lead to more serious consideration of Aleutian petrothermal resources for electric powerproduction. Hydrothermal.Though constituting a far smaller proportion of the total geothermal energy present in the Aleutian Island region,hydro- thermal resources are more promising than petrothermal eneray resources in the near term given the present state of technology.Hydrothermal energy is a term relating to the heat energy of subsurface water issu- ing from high temperature regions associated with volcanic systems, faults,and generally the region of tectonic subduction of the Pacific Plate by the North American Continental Plate. Hydrothermal resources,hot springs or zones of high temperature ground water at great depth,are suitable for a range of applications including space heating,aquaculture projects,agriculture and electric power pro- duction,depending upon the temperature and flow rate of the resource. For example,hydrothermal resources with temperatures less than 300°F are generally suitable for heating purposes only.On the other hand, if the hydrothermal fluid is above 410°F,part of the water can bevaporized(flashed)into steam by rapidly reducing the wellhead pres- sure.Hydrothermal steam produced by this means can be used to drive conventional steam turbines.This technology is presently in use at The Geysers north of San Francisco,where 800 megawatts of electric power are produced on a continuous basis. About half the electricity grade hydrothermal energy in the United States is in this high temperature range,the other half lies between300°and 410°F.The binary cycle system technology of producing elec- tric power from these intermediate temperature hydrothermal resources is being tested at Heber in southern California and by Ormat Turbines, Ltd.of Israel.Binary cycle systems operate on the basis of passinggeothermallyheatedwaterthroughaheatexchanger-in which heat istransferredfromthehotwellwaterorbrinetohydrocarbonssuchas isobutane or isopentane which vaporize at significantly lower tempera- tures than does water.These hydrocarbon vapors are then used to drive a a -* Representative Sutcliffe May 14,1981 Page 3 turbines and generators to produce electricity.Ormat engineers esti- mate the overall efficiencies of binary cycle systems at about 5-1/2% at temperatures as low as 150°F and increasing to 15%efficiency atthelowerendofflashedsteamtechnologyat410°F. A synopsis of known hydrothermal sites in Southwest Alaska is given on Table 2,showing the location of each site with a description of the thermal energy value of the resource when data is available.The more promising of these locations including Adak,Hot Springs Bay,Hot Springs Cove,Okmok Caldera,Geyser Bight,Cold Bay and Makushin are shown on Table 3 with rough estimates of the electric power generating potential of each site. Estimating the Energy Potential of Geothermal Resources It should be-recognized that there is room for considerable errcr in the estimation of the electric power generation capacity at specific geothermal resource sites.The calculations used in generating the attached tables start from.gross estimates of the total heat content of identified petrothermal and hydrothermal resources.These estimates are based on temperatures recorded near the surface at the sites in conjunction with an analysis of the chemical composition of surface rocks,mineralized waters,and vapors,in addition to an estimate of the area and volume of the underlying heat source. According to Dr.Westcott of the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks,a geothermal hotspot in the crust of the earth can be defined according to its dimensions and temperature with limited precision only.Within this limitation,it is possible to estimatetheelectricpowergeneratingcapacityofaspecificgeothermalsource by assuming that all recoverable heat in the hotspot will be capturedoveragivenperiodoftime,for example,30 years.It has been esti-mated that for hydrothermal resources,roughly one-fourth of the totalavailableheatcanbeutilizedoverthelifeof_the field.By compari-son,because petrothermal resources lack the efficient heat transfer medium of hot water or steam that hydrothermal resources have,we haveestimatedthatonlyone-tenth of the available heat from petrothermalresourcescanberecoveredoverthelifeofthefield. A given geothermal hotspot is continually heated from below by thenormalthermalgradientoftheearth,but likewise,heat is dissipated from the upper surface of the hotspot by the same conduction process. Although geothermal hotspots can be rejuvenated by the intrusion ofmagmarelatedtovolcanicactivity,it can be said that without suchrejuvenationthegeothermalhotspotwilldegradeovertime,and willeventuallyreachthetemperatureofsurroundingrock.The time re- quired for total degradation of such geothermal resources can rangeintomillionsofyearsbecauseoftheoverlyingrockwhichactstoinsulatethehotspotfromheatconduction,losses.If,however,heat Representative Sutcliffe May 14,1981 Page 4 is extracted at a much higher rate for the purposes of producing elec- tric power,the life of the resource can be reduced substantially. Qur calculations were designed to determine the rate at which geothermal heat would have to be converted to electric power such that the recover- able heat of the resource would be depleted within 30 years.On this basis,the 30-year electric power production capacity for the Aleutian region geothermal resources ranges from a low of eight megawatts forHotSpringsBay(hydrothermal)to a high of 3,603 megawatts for FisherandEmmonsvolcanoes(petrothermal). The purpose of discussing our calculations of the electric power pro-duction capacity of geothermal resources in the Aleutian region is to show that there is,unfortunately,significant opportunity for error in making such estimates.Substantial error could lie in the heat content estimates used as a basis for our calculations..Furthermore,the ability to extract geothermal energy (estimated at one-tenth of total resident heat for petrothermal resources and one-fourth of total heat content for hydrothermal resources)has not been demonstrated in the Aleutian region.Actual heat recovery may exceed or fall shortofthepercentagesusedinourcalculations.Another consideration of any geothermal source is the temperatures encountered at depths which are essentially unknown at this time.Resource temperatures greatlyaffecttheefficiency(estimated at 15%in our calculations)of con- version of heat energy to electric power. Aleutian Region Wind Energy Resources One important consideration regarding the harnessing of wind energy is the relationship of wind velocity to the available power in the wind. The wind power equation: =d/2 Avs where P is the power in the wind,given wind velocity V,cross-sectionalareaofthewingA,and the air density d.The significance of the ve-locity cubed (v3 )'factor is clearly shown on table 4 where average listed for a number of southwest Alaska sites.The velocity cubed (V3) factor means that when the wind speed doubles,the resulting windpowerincreasesbytwocubed(23),or eight times.In other words,while the average yearly wind velocity at Amchitka (21.1 mph)is rough- ly twice the average wind velocity for Port Moller (10.2 mph)theestimatedpowerforAmchitka(1,025 watts per square-meter)is almosteighttimestheestimatedwindpowerforPortMoller(172 watts persquaremeter).The density component of the wind power equation means that the elevation above sea level at the windmill site,which relates Representative Sutcliffe May 14,1981 Page 5 to air density,will also result in differences in wind power for a given wind velocity. A windmill power rating indicates the expected power output of a wind turbine at a specified wind velocity.For example,a specific windmill rated at 40 kilowatts is designed to generate 40 kilowatts of electric power at wind velocities of 20 mph and up.Because wind traveling at 20 mph has significantly more energy than slower speed winds,estimatedpoweroutputfora40kwwindturbineoperatinginwindvelocities below 20 mph will produce significantly less than 40 kilowatts of electric power. Using the average wind velocity data shown on table 4 and an energy conversion efficiency profile computed by Dr.Tunis Wentink of the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute for a 40 kilowatt wind tur- bine,we are able to estimate the average power output of the turbine operating under the average wind conditions at each site listed in the table.Only at Amchitka,where the average yearly wind velocity is 21.1 mph,will the 40 kw wind turbine actually produce 40 kilowatts of power on the average.On the other hand,the same 40 kilowatt wind turbine operating at Dutch Harbor (where the average yearly wind velocity is11mph)will generate only 7.9 kilowatts of power on the average. By dividing one million watts by the estimated average power output of the 40 kw wind turbine for each southwest Alaska site,we can esti- mate the number of 40 kw wind turbines that would be required to pro- duce one megawatt of electric power on an average basis.Because the wind turbine would generate 40 kw of power in Amchitka,25 wind turbines would be required to generate one megawatt of electric power on theaverage.By comparison,127 windmills (rated at 40 kw)operating in Dutch Harbor would generate one megawatt of electric power on the average.This means that if the wind were blowing at 20 mph or more in Dutch Harbor,the 127 40-kilowatt windmills would be capable of pro- ducing 5 megawatts of electric power,but because the wind averages only 11 mph in Dutch Harbor,this system of 127 windmills would generate only one megawatt as an annual average. The 40 kw wind turbine examined in this study was chosen because it seems to be the practical limit for windmill]size suitable to Alaska operation.This determination is based on the consideration that larger windmills and supporting towers present serious installation problems in many remote locations in Alaska.Furthermore,very largewindmillsrequireconsiderablymoreinstallationandoperationexpertiseandpresentsophisticatedmaintenancerequirements. A subsequent.memorandum on this research request will include an analy-sis of the cost of generating electricity using geothermal and wind i Representative Eric Sutcliff May 14,1981 Page 6 energy showing both capital,equipment and installation costs,as well as comparative power production costs per kilowatt.Another memorandum will address the cost and operating characteristics of hydrogen elec- trolysis plants and will include an evaluation of the use of hydrogen with respect to industrial development in the Aleutian region. AH/dp Attachments TABLE 1 SOUTHWEST ALASKA PETROTHERMAL RESOURCES* Magma Chamber |Heat Potential Potential Electric Volume Total Calories Power Production Rate+ Name of Area Latitude Longitude kms x 10!Mega Watts (MW) Davidof 51°58'N |178°20'E 12.5 7 73 Little Sitkin 51°57'N |178°32'E 75 43 449 Semisopochnoi 51°56'N {|179°35'E 150 86 898 Tanaga 51°53'N |178°O7'W 400 230 2,402 Takawangha 51°52'N |178°CO'W 22.5 13 136 Kanaga 51°55'N |177°10'W 75 43 449 Great Sitkin 52°04'N |176°O7'W 5 3 3] Kliuchef 52°19'N |174°09'W 100 58 606 Seguam 52°19'N |172°23'W 200 115 1,201 Yunaska 52°39'N {|170°39'W 40 23 240 Okmok 53°25'N |168°03'W 250 144 1,504 Akutan 54°08'N {166°00'W 10 6 63 '|Fisher 54°38'N |164°25'W 600 345 3,603 Emmons 55°20'N |162°04'W 600 345 3,603 Dana 55°37'N |161°12'W 5 3 31 Ventaminof 56°10'N {|159°23'W 200 115 1,201 Black 56°32'N |}158°37'W 20 12 125 Aniakchak 56°53'N |158°10'W 225 129 1,347 Peulik 57°45'N |156°21'W 30 17 178 Novarupta 59°17'N |154°59°W 50 29 303 Katmai 8°37'N |164°05'W 20 12 125 Kaguyak 58°37'N {154°05'W 15 9 94 REGION TOTAL -3,5 1,793.18,662 *In addition to the 23 volcanic magma systems listed above,35 other known magma chambers lie at depthsgreaterthan10kilometers;generally considered economically inaccessible.The remaining 21 volcanicmagmasourcescurrentlyidentifiedintheAleutianregionrequirefurtherinvestigationbeforesizeand heat content estimates can be made. +Assumes an electricity-grade heat source (at least 410°F)and a 30-year production life of the field duringwhichone-tenth of available heat is tapped for electric power production.Also assumes an overall petro-thermal heat utilization efficiency of 15%and an electric power conversion of 5.466 x 10°cal/kwh. Source of heat potential estimates:D.E.White and D.L.Williams,Assessment of Geothermal Resources oftheUnitedStates-1975:U.S.Geological Survey. TABLE SOUTHWEST ALASKA HYDROTHERMAL 2 EXPRESSIONS (HOT SPRINGS) Further Exploration Site Latitude Longitude Resource Description*Needed Mitchell 61°18'N 4157°40°Wi25 miles south of Sleetmute X Tuluksak 61°OO'N {160°30°WiAgriculture potential X Ophir Creek 61°i1'N {159°51°W}225 gpm @ 145°F (private) Attu 52°50°N {173°10°E135 miles west of Shemya X (volcanic) Kiska 52°Oo'N }I/7/7°36°E]114°F/1000°gradient (re-mote volcano)Little Sitkin |51°57°N 1178°32°E130 miles NW of Amchitka X (volcanic)Semisopochnoi |52°00°N {179°30°£/35 miles NE of Amchitka X (volcanic)- Tanaga 51°45°N [178°00°WiFishertes or ranching X nvotential Kanaga 51°50°N {177°10°W125 mites from Adak J XGreatSitkin|52°04°N |176°05°WiDry steam,257°F,(.63 X 1010 X calories)25 miles NE of Adak,no harbor,agriculture and processing potential Adak 51°59°N [1/6°36°-W{3 wells drilled,greatestdepth200ft.150°F (25 iMpowerplanned)(.63 x 1018 calories) Kliuchef 52°20'N {174°10°WI58 x 104°calories near Atka X Korovin 52°11°N 1174°14°WiSeveral miles from Atka X (agriculture)_Seguain 52°18'N {172°28°WiNo data X Chuginadak 53°50'N {169°45'W\Remote (volcanic)X Kagamt?|52°59°N {168°42°WiRemote (volcanic K Bogos lof 54°50°N {168°.03°WIT00"geysers (crab &bottom-X fish potential) Rootok 54°03'N {125°03°WINo harbor(grazing potential)x Hot Springs 54°10'N 1165°50°Wi10-20 gpm 356°F,(.3 X 104°| Bay calories)5 miles from Akutan -electric power, aluminum and maganese pro- cessing potential,good harbor Hot Springs 53°14°N [168°21°W/28 hot springs pjus geysersCove@311°F,(3 X 1018 calories)o otent iat electric power,aluminum and manganese pro- cessing,Aleutian Pribilof Native Association owner- ship,30 miles from NikolskiOkmokCaldera|53°29'N |168°06°W{16 thermal Springs.920 gp"flow,@ 257°F (.4 X 10calorves) TABLE 2 (continued) SOUTHWEST ALASKA HYDROTHERMAL EXPRESSIONS (HOT SPRINGS) Further .ExplorationSiteLatitudeLongitudeResourceDescription*Needed Geyser Bight |53°13'N {168°28 'Wj28 thermal springs,300 gpm@410°F(.9 X 1048 calories) electric power,aluminum and manganese processing po- tential. Makushin 53°52°N [168°50°W{(6 X 10!%calories for (Unalaska)Makushin volcano),12 miles X from Unalaska,live steam from immense fumerole field, 1,000 MW electric power po- tential Akun 54°14°N {165°39'WIHigh seismicity and volcanic X hazard Unimak 54°40°N {164°42°WiNumerous springs Amagat 54°53°N [162°52°Wi15 miles east of False Pass, agriculture or ranching po- tential False Pass 54°57°N [163°15'WIi8 miles from False Pass,60 .gpm @ 145°F,agriculture and aquaculture potential Cold Bay 55°13°N [162°29°WiSeveral springs @ 293°F1(.74 X 104°calories),10 miles from Cold Bay - agriculture and aquaculture potential Emmons 55°18°N [162°02°W115 miles north of Belkofski-X several volcanic springs Balboa 95°38°N [160°34°WITS miles north of Sand Point X -aquaculture or salmon processing potential Port Heiden 56°41°N {158°50°WI15 miles west of Port Heiden X volcanic springsStaniukovich|55°52°N {160°30°W{80 gpm @ 156°F,volcanic,X seismic and tsunamis hazard, agriculture potential,9 miles from Port Moller, privately leasedMotherGoose|57°Ii'N {157°O1°W100 gpm @ 149°F,privatelease Peulik 5/°52°N {156°30°WiTwo pools @ 178°F,25 miles Northeast of Kanatak ><|><]*Under the heading "Resource Description,"the flow.rate of hot spring waterisgiveningallonsperminute{gpm)and the resource energy content isgivenincalories(i.e.,§X 10 calories)where 1018 jis equivalent to1millionbillion.1 X 1048 calories is roughly equivalent to 1.16 billion megawatt hours,assuming 100%efficiency of extraction and conversion toelectricpower.Actual efficiencies are far lower (see text). Source:Donald Markle -Geothermal Energy"in Alaska:Site Data Base andDevelopmentStatus,1979. TABLE 3 SELECTED SOUTHWEST ALASKA HYDROTHERMAL RESOURCES (HOT SPRINGS) Estimated Thermal Estimated Potential Electric Heat Content Spring Thermal/Electric Power Production Rate* Site x 1018 calories Temperature|Conversion Efficiency Mega Watts (MW) Adak 63 150°F 5.5%6 Hot Springs Bay 3 356°F..13.0%7 Hot Springs Cove 3.311°F 11.4%60 Okmok Caldera sf 4 257°F 9.4%_7 Geyser Bight _9 410°F 15.0%23 Cold Bay 74 293°F 10.7%14 -»|Makushifin 6 40°F 18.0%157 *Assumes.an electricity grade heat source and a 30-year production life of the field during which one-fourth of'available heat is tapped for electric power production.Also assumes an overall hydrothermal utilizationefficiencyrangingfrom5.5%for thermal spring temperatures of 150°F to 15%for thermal spring temperaturesof410°F and above,and an electric puwer conversion of 5.466 X 10©cal/Kwh.All sites except Geyser BightandMakushinassumeelectricpowerproductionusingbinarycyclesystemtechnology. SOUTHWEST ALASKA WIND POWER POTENTIAL FOR SELECTED SITES TABLE 4 Average Yearly Wind Velocity Wind Power* Estimated Average Power Output of a 40 KW Wind Turbine? Number of 40 KW Windmills to Produce 1 MW Electric Power+Site (Miles per Hour)|(Watts/Square Meter) Amchitka 21.1 1025 40.0 25 Shemya 18.6 633 33./30 Cold Bay 17.1 574 33.5 3/7 Saint Paul Island 18.4 54]33.2 3] Cape Sarichef 15.8 504 21.8 46 Fort Glenn 15.7 -498 21.5 4] (Caps AFB) Nikolski 16.1 482 21.0 48 Port Heiden 14./430 19.2 53 Adak 15.1 -405 18.8 54 Attu Island 13.0 369 12.1 83 Atka .12.5 325 10.4 97 Dutch Harbor 17.0 233°7.9 127 (Unalaska)>a / King Salmon 11.0 191 6.8 148 Port Moller 10.2 172 4./]213 Driftwood Bay 9.6 140 3.9 257 *Wind power is a function of wind velocity and air density (which changes with elevation of test site).Consequently,the ranked sequence of locations by wind velocity will not necessarily match the sequenceWindpowerdataistakenfromGeothermalEnergyandWindPower(1976),a study sponsoredbywindpower. 'by the Alaska Energy Office and the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska. °Estimates of power output of a typical 40 KW wind turbine were made by Dr.Tunis Wentink,Jr.of theUniversityofAlaskaGeophysicalInstitute(1980). +These figures were computed by dividing 1 million watts by the estimated power output of a 40 KW windturbinegiventheaveragewindpowerconditionsateachsite. ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RESEARCH AGENCY Pouch Y,State Capitol ', Suneau,Alaska 99811 rae(907)465-3991 av) April 15,1981 MEMORANDUM TO:Representative Eric G.Sutcliffe FROM:Alexander Hoke Je-Research Staff Ab Fike RE:The Applicability of Hydrogen as an Energy Storage Medium In the Aleutian Islands 81-53 This memorandum constitutes a status report on your research requestregardingthepotentialuseofalternativeenergysources(geothermalandwindenergy)to produce hydrogen gas by water electrolysis.In our research on this topic,we are surveying the following reports and documents: -Solar/Hydrogen Systems Assessment -U.S.Department of Energy Geothermal Energy and Wind Power -Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska Alaska:A Guide to Geothermal Energy Development -Alaska Divi- sion of Energy and Power Levelopment State Policies for Geothermal Development -National Conference of State Legislatures Geothermal Eneray -Noyes Data Corporation Non-Nuclear Energy Technologies -University of California, Department of Applied Mechanics and Engineering Sciences Hydrogen Power -An Introduction to Hydrogen Eneray and Its Ap-lication -Laurence Williams of the Aerospace Corporation,|Mary land Our plan is to transmit to you three separate research memoranda on this topic,as follows: Proj.Code:oF J.ose BP /OS.f I Representative Eric G.Sutcliffe April 15,1981 Page 2 An inventory of geothermal and wind energy resources with- in the Aleutian Island region will be prepared in the first memorandum.As part of this inventory,specific sites will be identified and estimates of the electric power generating capacity will be given for each energysource.(Anticpated transmittal -April 22.) The second memorandum will identify manufacturers of elec- trolytic hydrogen gas plants,describe the power require- ments for these electrolysis units,and estimate the capital and operating costs in the production of hydrogen gas.This memorandum will also describe,in simple terms,several hydrogen storage alternatives (high pressure and low pres- sure tank storage,underground storage and metal hydride absorption)and estimates will be given for pipeline trans- Mey 6)costs of hydrogen gas.(Anticipated transmittal -May 6. The third memorandum will summarize the findings of the first two memoranda,and address in general terms the applicability of hydrogen as a fuel source for the Aleu- tian region and as a feedstock for industrial applications such as the production of fertilizer.(Anticipated trans- mittal -May 20.) If you have any suggestions or concerns regarding the focus of our re- search,do not hesitate to call us. AH/bf ANALYSIS OF VOLCANIC HAZARDS FROM MAKUSHIN VOLCANO, UNALASKA ISLAND Gary N.Arce Michael J.Economides University of Alaska,Fairbanks fdrs Proj.Code: File Code: 3.Date:: ABSTRACT An analysis of volcanic hazards in the Makushin region of Unalaska Island is presented in this paper.Since a major geothermal energy develop- ment is now underway on the site,the signifi- cance of these volcanic hazards as they pertain to future activities and the design of facilities for geothermal utilizations is enhanced. A historic analysis of local volcanism is followed by structural analysis.Recommendations for the positioning of facilities and distribution sys- tems are offered.Finally,the impact of this analysis on the plant design is presented. INTRODUCTION An awareness of the growth of energy consumption and the simul- taneous natural resource depletion,coupled with a demand for environ- mental protection,has led to a diversification in power development. Present research is now aimed at exploiting energy sources which in the past were largely ignored or unknown;these include oil shale, coal gasification,hydroelectric power,and geothermal power (Otte and Kruger,1973).Although the physical characteristics and municipal demands of a specific area place constraints on the type of power and energy source which can be utilized,several regions exist where the future of geothermal energy appears attractive.One such area is Unalaska Island,in the Aleutian volcanic are of Alaska (Economides and others,1981;Reeder,1981). Drilling is currently underway to ascertain the vital character- istics (such as depth,temperature and extent)of the reservoir.If the geothermal resource is such that it can be profitably exploited, the community of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor is likely to provide a ready market in the form of public and industrial consumers. However,many of the thermal areas on the island are located near Makushin Volcano.This broad domical cone has erupted at least 14 times since 1760 and is still active today (Drewes and others,1961). This paper attempts to identify hazardous areas in the vicinity of Makushin Volcano,and also to recommend various sites where geothermal power facilities may be placed. BACKGROUND ON UNALASKA ISLAND Unalaska Island is the second largest island west of the Alaska Peninsula,comprising an area of approximately 1200 square miles (Figure 1).The geothermal resource on the island is probably asso- ciated with the two oldest lithologies:the Unalaska Formation and a series of granitic plutons.The interbedded igneous and sedimentary members of the Unalaska Formation are postulated to contain a shallow perched reservoir supplied by meteoric waters which are heated by steam and volcanic gases rising through a vapor-dominated zone from a much deeper reservoir.Fault and fracture systems,generated by the convergence of two major lithospheric plates and also by the forceful intrusion of calc-alkaline plutons,likely act as avenues for the circulation of heated fluids (Motyka and others,1981). The geothermal potential on Unalaska is attractive for two reasons. First,the reservoir appears to be a high-temperature system.Initial geologic mapping by Reeder (1981)and geochemical work by Motyka and others (1981)has shown that water temperatures in the perched reser- voir approach 150°C,based on silica geothermometry.Drilling of three temperature gradient wells,just completed at press time of this paper, has revealed a maximum bottomhole temperature of 210°C at 400 meters depth in the plutonic rock.Second,the towns of Unalaska and Dutch Harbor support a permanent population of over 1,000 people,and these communities are close enough to the geothermal fields to provide a market for the resource (Figure 2). BACKGROUND ON VOLCANIC HAZARDS The underlying premise of a volcanic hazards study is to predict how an eruption would most likely occur and how large an area would be affected.This is based on the geologic record preserved in vol- canic strata,the tectonic environment involved,and so on.In order to arrive at a conclusion,one must first assume that the volcano will behave in the future as it has in the past.This means that tomorrow's volcanism will be roughly of the same frequency,type,and scale as yesterday's episodes (Crandell and Mullineaux,1978). The end-product of such studies is a report which identifies and describes the various risks in the vicinity of a given volcano,and a map which delineates hazardous zones.It must be remembered,however, that the risks may be quite variable throughout any hazard area and are influenced by such factors as local topography,elevation and proxi- mity to source vents.Risks can change either abruptly or gradually across zone boundaries,depending on the nature of the boundary.Abrupt changes in risk are associated with topographic features,such as valleys,which may funnel and concentrate lava flows (Peterson and Mullineaux,1977).An example of a gradational boundary would be the designation of the outer line of a volcanic bomb fallout zone. Flowage Hazards Pyroclastic Flows Pyroclastic flows are defined as air-cushioned avalanches of hot, dry debris (Kienle and Swanson,1980).Pyroclastic flows may be asso- ciated with volcanic domes (gravitational collapse as in the Merapi type or laterally directed blasts as in the Pelee type),or with the collapse of an eruptive column (Soufriere type).Large volumes of hot air and other gases are liberated within pyroclastic flows. 3 These gases,combined with the cushion of trapped air beneath the flow and the force of the volcanic blast,account for the great speed and mobility of pyroclastic flows.Miller and Smith (1977)have studied several flows on the Alaska Peninsula which surmounted for- midable topographic barriers (over 250 meters in height)at distances of tens of kilometers from their source. Pyroclastic flows may also travel for significant distances over and under water.Sparks and others (1980)postulate that flows can move underwater for distances as great as thirteen kilometers without losing their fundamental characteristics. Debris Flows This category includes landslides and rockfalls,mudflows and lahars,and outburst floods (jokulhlaups).These phenomena,combined with pyroclastic flows,constitute some of the most destructive and far-reaching effects of volcanism. Rockfalls,lahars,and mudflows travel in much the same manner as dry debris flows,and present many of the same hazards.Because of their fluid nature they generally follow channels and valleys (Miller, 1980).The distance and speed which may be attained is sizeable-- some have been reported to travel up to 85 km/h.This velocity is mainly dependent on the viscosity of the fluid and the angle of the Slope over which it travels (Crandell,1979). As the amount of rock debris decreases and the amount of water increases,these debris flows grade into jokulhlaups.Water reservoirs which may lead to jokulhlaups are formed at the ice-rock interface beneath surficial depressions of a glacier.The initial depression is commonly caused by local areas of high heat flow.This leads to considerable subglacial melting and the subsequent accumulation of 4 water.Sudden release of this reservoir creates jokulhlaups (Bjornsson, 1975). Lava Flows Lava flows are coherent streams of molten material which commonly issue in a nonexplosive manner from a volcano and move slowly down- Slope.Lava rarely moves rapidly unless it is following a well- established channel down a steep slope.The fronts of lava flows usually advance at rates ranging from those which are barely per- ceptible (0.05 km/h)to about the speed of walking (3.25 km/h) (Miller,1980). Lava flows do not usually threaten people directly because their direction of movement can be roughly predicted once they begin.However, such flows are difficult or impossible to control or stop,and con- siderable property damage may result. Tephra Hazards Tephra in this paper refers to molten or solid material of any size (from fine ash to coarse blocks)which is ejected into the atmosphere above a volcano.Tephra eruptions may be extremely serious since they can occur suddenly and may be one of the first events in an eruptive episode.Thus there may be little,if any,time to warn those near the volcano (Miller,1980). If winds are present during an eruption,the falling particles will form a progressively thinning blanket which stretches from the vent downwind for hundreds of kilometers (Miller,1980).The effects of tephra fallout are therefore most pronounced near the volcano and along the axis where the material is thickest. A change in wind direction during an eruption would spread tephra over a larger area.Consequently the amount deposited at a given location would be reduced.Strong winds during a tephra eruption have a similar effect in that they disperse the same quantity of material over a greater distance downwind.The risks would also be lessened if tephra were to be extruded in small increments over a long period of time (Mullineaux,1974). Miscellaneous Hazards Earthquakes The common mode of seismicity in areas of recent volcanism is in the form of earthquake swarms,which are commonly quite shallow in depth.The mean magnitude of the earthquakes comprising the swarm tend to increase with time.Major earthquakes associated with swarms are not known to exceed magnitude M=6.5.This is apparently due to the fact that the strain accumulation in this type of shallow activity is not large enough to produce a major shock (Lomnitz and Singh,1976). It must be remembered,however,that even though the quakes them- selves are not of exceptional magnitude,they may still be large enough to trigger hazardous events.This is the situation which occured prior to the May 18,1980 eruption of Mount St.Helens.The actual eruption (lateral blast)was caused by a catastrophic land- slide,which in turn was initiated by a magnitude M =5.1 earthquake (Decker and Decker,1981). Tsunamis Tsunamis are the longer water waves (with periods in the 5 to 60 minute range)generated impulsively by mechanisms such as underwater tectonic displacements,high speed subaqueous slides,volcanic explosions,and debris flows which enter the ocean.These giant waves spread outward in all directions from their source,and'can travel i across the deep ocean floor at speeds approaching 800 km/h (Wiegel, 1976).On encountering shallow water they decrease in speed.Some waves have been recorded at heights of over thirty meters (Lambert, 1980). Gas Emission Active volcanoes may emit large quantities of gas either during an eruptive episode (due to the great decompression which occurs when the melt approaches and reaches the surface),or by quiet degassing from the vent.The most abundant constituent of this gaseous mixture is HO,followed by COp,S05,H2S,CO,NH3,Clo,and Fo (Kienle and Swanson,1980). Acid Rain The reaction'of volcanogenic material (chlorine and sulfur gases) with atmospheric water can lead to the formation of acid rain.The effects from acid rain may be far reaching.Kienle and Swanson (1980, p.106),summarizing work by Griggs (1922),state that acid rains from the 1912 Katmai eruption were experienced as far away as Vancouver and Chicago. Lightning and Whirlwinds Lightning flashes are very common during volcanic eruptions, especially Vulcanian eruptions involving abundant ash.Lambert (1980,p.32)states that the cause af lightning is believed to be a result of either contact of seawater with magma (or lava),or the generation of static electricity by frictional interaction of colliding particles. Also common during volcanic eruptions are whirlwinds.Workers in Iceland (Thorarinsson and Vonnegut,1964)have postulated that the energy for the whirlwinds may come from high-velocity gas jets,heat e released into the atmosphere during tephra fallout,or phreatic 7 explosions between lava and seawater. HAZARDS FROM MAKUSHIN VOLCANO Pyroclastic flows,debris flows,and tephra fallout present the most serious hazards to life and property in the vicinity of Makushin Volcano.Although other types of risk may arise during a given erup- tion,they are not as serious. | Several large pyroclastic flows have originated from Makushin in the Recent past.These deposits may be found in Jasper,Bishop,and upper Makushin valleys (Figure 3).The flow in Makushin Valley is the most crirical since this is the present area of exploratory drilling and the likely location of future power facilities. The Makushin Valley flow consists of vesicular basalt,andesite, and obsidian clasts up to two meters in diameter,within a sand-sized matrix of scoria and glass.The flow is over fifty meters thick,and is at least three kilometers in length. »The three major thermal areas in the vicinity of Makushin Valley, are located 4 to 6 kilometers from the summit caldera.These areas offer little or no topographic protection and would be extremely vulnerable' to any future flows on the volcano's eastern flank'.The location of the drilling camp,directly on the pyroclastic flow,also represents a high risk zone.This is based on the assumption that future flows will follow old patterns. From a safety standpoint,the above assumption dictates that power generating facilities should be located as far from the volcano as is technologically possible.However,since heat dissipates to the at- mosphere,geothermal fluids cannot be transported far from their point of recovery without suffering substantial heat losses. A 10"insulated hot water pipeline carrying fluid of initial 8 temperature of 150°c loses approximately 375 kcal/h per linear foot. A 12"insulated steam pipeline carrying vapor of initial temperature of 200°c loses approximately 500 kcal/h per linear foot.Table 1 represents the temperature loss of hot water at various distances with a flow rate of 500,000 kgr/h. Table 1 Example Output Temperature of Geothermal Water Pipeline.Flow rate =500,000 kgr/h. T =5°C T =150°c ambient initial L (meters)T output (°c) 1,000 147.5 2,000 145 10,000"125 20,000 100 Table 2 represents the quality loss (i.e.,the degree of conden- sation)in a steam pipeline carrying 200 tons/h of saturated steam of initial temperature of 200°C.The site of temperature gradient well D-2 is approximately 2,000 meters away from Sugarloaf. Table 2 Example Quality Loss of Geothermal Steam Pipeline.Flow rate =200 tons/h. T =200°C T =5° initial ambient L (meters)Steam Quality 0 100.0% 200 99.6% 500 99.1% 1,000 98.2% 4,000 92.8% During future volcanic events it is likely that debris flows will be generated.Because of abundant hydrothermal activity on upland slopes and the 40 km*ice cap on the summit,debris flows may originate from virtually any location on the mounatin.Areas of 9 especially high risk include the broad north and northwestern flank of the volcano,along with Scorpio,Glacier,and Makushin valleys (Figure 4).As with pyroclastic flows,the risks from debris flows would be lessened on ridges and elevated plateaus away from the volcano (such as Sugarloaf Plateau). Damage from tephra fallout comprises another category of major hazards from Makushin Volcano.Individual ash layers over 23 kilometers from the vent are almost one meter thick.The immediate vicinity around the volcano therefore constitutes a high risk zone.Since the prevailing wind direction is from the west,those areas east of the summit are likely to sustain the worst damage (Figure 5). Although not as serious as the above hazards,potential damage from lava flows is also possible.Quaternary lava flows have occurred at several locations around Makushin Volcano.These include Point Kadin, Table Top Mountain,Koriga Point,and Sugarloaf Plateau (Drewes and others,1961).The movement of lava along a unique structural conduit is thus absent.As with other types of flows,lavas may follow valleys and other topographic lows. Even though earthquakes related to magma movement are not excessively dangerous,tremors related to tectonics present a serious risk in the Aleutian Islands.Recent work by Davies and others (1981)has drawn attention to the Shumagin Gap and the resulting high earthquake potential of this region.Subductive interaction between the Pacific and North American plates has in the past produced earthquakes of magnitude M =8.These workers state that a great earthquake with resultant magnitude up to My =9 is probable within the next one or two decades. Since faults and joints may provide avenues for both the escape of lava and the explosive (phreatic)mixing of lava and seawater,their location and orientation is important.Reeder (1981)has recognized 10 several faults striking between N40W to N7OW in the vicinity of the fumarole fields.Two of these faults (which strike about N60W)extend nearly the entire length of northern Unalaska Island,a distance of over 36 kilometers.These two active faults bound the largest fumarole field in the area (Figure 2).Reeder states that such faults probably penetrate deep into the crust,where they may contain magma.Extensive flows and vents of Recent age at the Point Kadin rift indicate that this magma reached the surface.Therefore,the Point Kadin rift,and its southeast extension,represents a proven structural weakness which could again be the site of volcanism in the future. The final variable which must be identified in order to predict the severity of an eruption and the locations of hazardous zones is the chemical composition of the magma body.Kienle and Swanson (1980,p.68) explain that silica forms a three dimensional framework due to its polymerization with oxygen.The higher the silica content of the magma, the larger the polymers.Since flowage of the magma (or lava)is re- lated to the size and abundance of these polymers,silica-rich magmas (Si05 =65%)will be much more viscous and flow slower than silica-poor magmas.Because of this high resistance to flow,silicic magmas cause violent explosions during volcanic eruptions (such as Tambora,Katmai, and Krakatoa). In contrast to these violent eruptions are the relatively mild events associated with magmas of basic composition.These basalts have a Significantly lower silica content (approximately 50%).This means that there are fewer polymers within the melt to retard flowage.As a result, volcanic eruptions are commonly characterized by fluid flows which emanate rather quietly from their source vents.Although tall lava fountains may be produced during the initial stages of volcanism, 11 these eruptions do not approach their silicic counterparts in violence. The SiOy content of volcanic rocks from Unalaska Island (including both the Makushin volcanics and Eider Point basalts)range from 49.5 to 63.0 weight percent (Drewes and others,1961).Most of the samples, however,are located closer to the basic end of the spectrum (49 to 53 wt.%SiOz).An arguement could thus be made that the most likely type of future activity would not be of the violent,silicic nature. A further point Supporting this contention is that many soil-ash profiles near Makushin display an upward decrease in grain size of pyroclastics,and this may indicate a gradual decrease in violence and frequency of eruptions (Drewes and others,1961).These two observations could therefore suggest that the volcanic hazards from Makushin Volcano are not extreme. CONCLUS IONS In light of our study two locations are recommended for power facilities.These sites are interpreted as representing the most reasonable locations given the contrasting influences of fluid transport and safety. The first location is on Sugarloaf Plateau,roughly eight kilometers northeast of Makushin's summit (Figure 6).Of the two recommended sites, this is closest to both the volcano and the geothermal areas. Sugarloaf Plateau is a gently rolling plateau of basaltic lava which dips northward.The best location for power facilities would be north- east of Sugarloaf Cone.This area would likely provide protection from the hot avalanche portion of a pyroclastic flow since it lies over 300 meters above the valley bottom and is screened from the valley by Sugarloaf Cone.The same reasoning applies to debris flows,which should be deflected away from the Sugarloaf vicinity and into the drainage of the Makushin River.Futhexrmore,this site is judged to 12 be safe from tsunami hazard,for besides the fact that this location is 450 meters above sea level it_is also seven kilometers inland from Driftwood Bay (on the north)and eleven kilometers inland from Broad Bay (on the east). The main hazards to life and property at this location would be from tephra fallout and nuees ardentes.Since the Sugarloaf Plateau is extremely close to the source vent it could conceivably receive damage by volcanic bombs or fine ash particles.Also,those areas east of the summit would probably incur the heaviest damage from tephra due to prevailing winds (Figure 5).Another possibility is that the glowing cloud portion of a pyroclastic flow could detach itself from the underlying avalanche and seriously damage generating structures (Figure 4).If such an event were to occur,the screening effect of Sugarloaf Cone could prove to be insignificant.A final consideration is that structures built here should be located away from local depressions. These depressions,a common feature on this undulating plateau,could be extremely dangerous since they may concentrate and confine noxious gases. The second location is in Vista Canyon,approximately nine kilo- meters east of Makushin's summit (Figure 6).Although this site is also close to the summit caldera,it is protected from eastward blasts by the north-trending massif of Vista Ridge.This ridge provides a barrier over 300 meters high.Therefore,Vista Canyon would likely be protected from both the basal avalanche and glowing cloud portions of pyro- clastic flows,and from debris flows.Since this area is away from known points of lava extrusion,and since no major faults in the Unalaska Formation (which may provide lava pathways)have been mapped through here,this site should also be safe from lava flows. 13 Tsunamis would not be a problem since this area is over 400 meters above sea level and ten kilometers inland.But as with the first location,this site would also be susceptible to tephra fallout. As it appears from Table 2,a substantial loss in quality will ke experienced in transporting saturated steam.This loss will result in an unacceptable composition of the inlet fluid in power generating turbines.So while the distance between Sugarloaf and the reservoir is necessary to alleviate volcanic hazards,an unavoidable consequence is the installization of large gas-liquid separating vessels at the entrance of the power plant.This would increase substantially the cost of construction. 14 REFERENCES Bjornsson,H.,1975:Subglacial water reservoirs,jokulhlaups,and volcanic eruptions;Jokull,v.25,p.1-11. Budd,C.F.,1973:Steam production at the Geysers Geothermal Field; in Geothermal Energy,Kruger and Otte (editors),Stanford Press, p.129-144. Crandell,D.R.,and D.R.Mullineaux,1978:Potential hazards from future eruptions of Mount St.Helens volcano,Washington;U.S.Geol.Surv. Bull.1383-C,26pp. Crandell,D.R.,1979:Surficial geology of Mount Rainier National Park,Washington;U.S.Geol.Surv.Bull.1288,4lpp. Davies,J.,Sykes,L.,House,L.,and L.Jacob,1981:Shumagin Gap, Alaska -history of great earthquakes,tectonic setting,and evidence for high seismic potential;J.Geophys.Res.,May 1981. Decker,R.W.,and B.Decker,1981:The eruptions of Mount St.Helens; Amer.Sci.,v.244,n.3,p.68-80. Drewes,H.,Fraser,G.D.,Snyder,G.L.,and H.F.Barnett,Jr.,1961: Geology of Unalaska Island and adjacent insular shelf,Aleutian Islands,Alaska;U.S.Geol.Surv.Bull.1028-S,p.583-676. .Economides,M.J.,Reeder,J.,and D.Markle,1981:Unalaska geothermal development;Proc.Third New Zealand Geothermal Workshop,1981, Univ.of Aukland Geothermal Inst.,p.7-12. Keinle,J.,and S.E.Swanson,1980:Volcanic hazards from Augustine Volcano,Alaska;report submittedto BLM,NOAA,and ADDGS,122pp. Lambert,M.B.,1980:Volcanoes;Univ.of Michigan Press,64pp. Lomnitz,C.,and S.K.Singh,1976:Earthquakes and earthquake prediction; in Seismic Risk and Engineering Decisions,Lomnitz and Rosenblueth (editors),Elsevier Publishing Co.,p..3-30. MacDonald,G.A.,1972:Volcanoes;Prentice-Hall Publishing Co.,510pp. Miller,T.P.,and R.L.Smith,1977:Spectacular mobility of ash flows around Aniakchak and Fisher calderas,Alaska;Geology,v.5, n.3,p.173-176. Miller,C.D.,1980:Potential hazards from future eruptions in the vicinity of Mount Shasta volcano,California;U.S.Geol.Surv. Bull.1503,43pp. Motyka,R.J.,Moorman,M.S.,and S.A.Liss,1981:Assessment of thermal springs sites in the Aleutian arc,Atka Island to Becharof Lake - preliminary results and evaluations;ADDGS Open-File Report 144, 1732p. 15 Mullineaux,D.R.,1974:Pumice and other pyroclastic deposits in Mount Rainier National Park,Washington;U.S.Geol.Surv.Bull.1326, 83pp. Otte,C.,and P.Kruger,1973:The energy outlook;in Geothermal Energy, Kruger and Otte (editors),Stanford Press,p.1-13. Peterson,D.W.,and D.R.Mullineaux,1977:Natural hazards in the island of Hawaii;U.S.Geol.Surv.Pamphlet 0-240-966/36,l4pp. Reeder,J.W.,1981:Vapor-dominated hydrothermal manifestations on Unalaska Island,and their geologic and tectonic setting;report submitted to IAVCEI,Symposium on Arc Volcanism,p.297-298. Sparks,R.S.J.,Sigurdsson,H.,and S.N.Carey,1980b:The entrance of pyroclastic flows into the sea,II.Theoretical considerations on on subaqueous emplacement;J.Volc.Geotherm.Res.,7,p.97-105. Thorarinsson,S.,and B.Vonnegut,1964:Whirlwinds produced by the eruption of Surtsey Volcano;Bull.Am.Meteorol.Soc.,v.45, p.440-444. Wiegel,R.L.,1976:Tsunamis;in Seismic Risk and Engineering Decisions, Lomnitz and Rosenblueth (editors),Elsevier Publishing Co.,p.225- 286. 16 EXPLANATION Thermaleopring aites 1,Atha West 186,Unimek 2.Atha North 10,Falee Pass 3.Korovin 20.Kenmore 4.Kliiuchef 21.Egg leland 6,Beguam 22,Frosty Peak 6.Chuglinadek 23,Cold Bay 1.Kageamil 24.Emmone Lake 8.Geyoera Bight 26,Pavilof 0.Hot Springs Cove 24,NWalboa Hay 10,Partov 27,Port Molter 11,Okmok 28,Btepovak Day 12,Bogoalof 29.Port Helden 13.Qlhacler Valley 30,Surprise Lake '14,-Mahushin Valley Sl.Mother Goose 16.Summer Bay 42,Mt,Peulit 16,Akutan $3,Ukineek 17,Ahun 34,GQae Rocks °Sampled,1080 °Not vielted,1980 a Not found,1080 Activity diminished ”Village 2 Istancs of4Four0Atka95MeANIsland Atka Sequam o°Island 6Ssi fachoreft 0 100 200t-t n 300 km Pilot Polat. 0 60 100 160 200 mi 3 t t l l 00 =Port Helden 4 Port Moller tPromennn? Cold Bay 3 abed e220/2"a4 (is f}"6 we,Band Je g,Unimak ve ay Point "#0 Akutan Ishin 0 .,King Cove AkulanDutchHarbor!8 [se ralee Passbop ed 12-0 ae i 1 v8 Unaleskea 9 8 Unalaska Island 0 Umnak 'Island Nikolakl Lecation Map Figure 1:Reported thermal sites in the Aleutian arc,from Becharof Lake to Atka Island (From Motyka and others,1981). ee air TALS sc :AUG 8 as va Oevillish Pr Leaa%.-Mukushin,ye=jae- "s ' -Humpback Makushin Bay Bov 'Cathedral Rks Figure 2:Locations of major thermal,sites (dots)on northern Unalaska Island,and trend of faults (From Reeder,1981). | Volcanag Bay Nd rey 4 Cus Makushin,27ty. :Rock oN MahushinPh,' Makushin Bay Figure 3:Locations of known pyroclastic flows around Makushin Volcano (From Drewes and others,1961; Reeder,1981). Hum pback mB tdCathedralRks nin f/het,14),A)ae (20 js waye wrigorur,re|af 4 tPriestPees, ' \.Cape Kalekta f islowy al,I.ot Jip Or3h ;|Sion asulete Princess Hea { #Fishermant Pt SAunds tlead olEN i Sereoe=x=ae jj :aS ./\ao :>>,-/ ,ay NN .0775 :-'LOM,[Uhl F ;ara SEN Mame ” .yA PENS A f 1 LL eA EAL Lo PS RAIN ES ASE ee soo .Aa 1 Sy WN a 4Ph :f:BY SF ISSA CR RQ of UM etna SW ho Gay i 4,OMY.i Conk.B :O*.,my a ©ushin Bay - .Sik ee a (Or?2,AREAS 'Cathedral Ris ES 8 emi Of ak - ;a AS?TZ,dice Oe Ny UES .=Os a a:wo =\is }i *-6,War? Figure 4:Zones of probable damage due to flowage hazards from future eruptions of Makushin Volcano. Dashed pattern indicates hazard zone from moderate eruption.Slanted pattern indicates hazard zone from large eruption. Y aurerurni -pues vel LAS ma) =< Lal * <*rye FAA RTOS TS a?TE aweawaSahaa =+Se 7 <=y > san -t x "+-+<==)Wh Sey er ae A St y -NW a <a PAR |2 *)eG) 4 Rel Wael jy.v a td =J,Y--AN BS ¥ + >sara awe =>."Dnameh v Ss sy i v 7 rt ae Cane REO +. eeee --"t T "r x et _wee =-2 a *>Se >aN iN rva3yodAwe! >+r - of AER at orga nha ay ytphythehy acaas -weve =hina el ae --a -:NWO bikedh2 PR AAEEAPERIIYY rly ™I IPre pee "AAAAKRE SIesTPAWANAAAAEEAREAR--oroy rawr ><Soh hndepirtinttnde-yng tno >omnres sey SOAR CREA ALEIYIVEY PLAN ARAMA SAA ALT EE SES a Samm PV eh typted LS RARE PONY >i rt =-t ->t Be PVT IVVTIIT STS *=Ts wre HersttsseavetAARARLALLILEEELEAZADNOWV YUEN | TCD OM BALREEEETD,ith ert pitpe eee netemerrerrrerryenaayanSrctstypneeeLEREREYIITISEVYY--ars py A EAEEAEVIR LIVIA AAA AGAR EEL EERE EA-ERER PROSUSEA 'i ist ReREABNAEXEDT ER v ap Poet nah perl hehrhhrhrhyd el RALAAR PERE EENIY Seber ets-A EWU AAALGALELERESEETIVOW eA LAAAAAAAEEE AAR OEEREN Fy AEC CARL TT VIVA MAAAAKLAL Re ae rrtnrehrie holy ohhh s hl :MA AAAAALAALEFELIEEPIOSA:RVAAAAAAARARE EE ZED RVOMAAALEZALEAEUTESO Ld ART EENY IYI AAAMDERAAZEZE RAT ELRARSE FLEVYSIIN Ter Tey a NM CAAAAALLAEEEEEEEYT WA AN SAALAREEES a gecnnmpenrenppermngnhyty$ )ON AGREATEDIOTY "oA AAAAAALEAIEAD LAAER FETS EVV Asa VA AAAAAALALILES LATTES AAAMAREAR GIO LLALL EXETERNSY.0ntLSLEERITUPYIDVPWACAANKA(ALA AAALAEAZERO TED.eae ee ye -AAA AAA AAARIRDLER PPTUY ce ehh decdaea)AAAALASRARIE ELITE)GTC -_Put DER LEIIIESFENS SAS PN PAA AAAAERAREATIR2 AR ZEUEITIO SS LAAAd ei = =-ewrev sasaseieeeee <ibebtery4)4p2 AAR REAL COLEENENTIA,nad AAAAALAAEAMPEI ZIRT VAAAAAAAAAEEASEEENES RAIA SETURL BEDUT IO ied LAD WUD Aad azere Selehosr totes AAARARASATELEIETENS8 ney eer LERELIV TESS ORR MAMEACRLER CIN LAA 0 ULZAROEETRUNEY r-VORTTTTrote e UNLIZEEIOV SY:(4060 ROY REPIIIY Sv Ata eek ZAXER EELS SAPP OLA AA RLARE TAL ERLE TTY CII OPV TICES ee y viutetaiein taal h CARASAAEAAI SIL ITTV LAAs * PESO were ge.sorry --PN ATTY TL VION LOG DAALEREACERI ES evr ohrirb thse (<AMALEAEIERETETED)6AAAdAAAAERARETEUSEOYPOPPAAPACADEMELAELEZEALRIDYYENIVSOALOANLAS OE = -+OfREs ore AAAAhd ars _7TVET A MAATAEER LEPC Ah Nhe AMSERESEDE LET EY am |Odie CAAAALAE EEETTVCCVTOA:AAAAMAALIAMRERTDS So robeeshessbeeue >Tt iOsere POT WTI RITAT LOTITO,beth VARA ALANIS]T 4 44 ever tee ege mea RLALEREE Te Lie pat =etre birt tees ner ory sripty EREIPVYS YOSSI AAA | 4 LACS IRITORVERYYYS |aed ga tbs,hind sas sseren yi oy "i rut ALERT OS OTS Geld ie aad &o Lenghon A ARLAELOEd rarer 7. -<r ead ot *t Trott bor rirlhhe hhh belted nk 7 Peru LAeees ghavaeaerhyrrtyrypewetenenPELTEVENTMAAKERLALLERETERSal 55 RERTET UP,+WIT TT +oe aan Z =b AAR LALLAZ ERT RSYUIY'pyr pe la >CAE IRLLY VIII vt 4 ama ,.Te VU -eobsoesesses AA RAARALELEEPEEEYY8 7 7 at very Lé CLS 2A EEE .¥ a ree anaes orviebyertppoetionneeene EPvay 73yey <--f We reat LAAAREL SER STIS U DAMA GAMAAALLLALREREEDI rer tian:an if -L hh kh he .Ma MALALAESEEIAL be olhy holy "sd.Ae ri aw =Toeetry AiAALAALS ALEERESH,OL IT ITVS IO AAR ERILTENES OS sA0S CALLEEAT EFUDOOY orbrsseeet tt WAALAAEE ETL TENE 7 rb:xg egg r MAAAAALE SAREE TEN .IV RR WA A RAARLALER AETV RAASErEryyyeveenn LA EEIYsamenbCAALLELAFRFTTIVUNTAAMAALAAAARENDCAZEYANDVYIUYvi -A AAA AAAEEE ECE PRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD WAAAAASASEELSRET' PCAADIZER TOY:Arbor MAARAALESER EET IESIEW I :RRR ET YA,: MNAAAkt OAki b Ruder 0 bath ARERR TERRIA Leaee?me PERU;aaAd heaernbkDyaptpysAMALASASLALERED attAdtente) -Pins BAN MASSLLERE oor MAAMAAD LEER 6LEETS:arn - earcenseray Bv¥se cates cancer CLEREEAYYT INO SVU 6 _LAN A AAAALARRALLEESOUTI byte teen UMALAGALR ELDIRIEYYvyMAZEEEARIOG =ADM reInen sry teteene ee +UII -xs A AhhRALREATEDERTVTCUPLPA AMAA AAAALEAEZEEDET?MALLE ELE Ee Ase y AyiyaiphhysyATEAreereuv;Ach EPRERIESTVY AaReAheniaRERERETURPCI:thee taken -Bie sheet 9999S Fr te Ahh ha ci ted at auseeeeri ETAT UA esaadiat *LELERSVERTES CPLA lad th hlsseareene .AN eARhdh REE REP asseae aeAlosrte a adeneeees -- doth chnk aah Adatlt i222A22£998)a fal AAAAAAAAR TEC erry ¥rd Lika hum he ta semdebe hrhrhedoterd.vi AMAREAARETTal+-AA RAAAREEN CSET ISGP:>a PaaS YAR ARAAAASARARIEE oll +7tTaNatidAepore.pum.abs AheadpatT-"+.wa -av A wapanetat -----0-ok eae a T -_---aN SAS Pa a -Nene " z 2a v. t =een <as "i aN -2nal?a Ss y _an ha owe ad 4.'=2pax>at <+- Bae arsart<x _Zz >endian yes a CUES eee a .><¥LS bd awe > aN < en bs a) ie} Peete Wa Makushin Bay Sot -Votcgne : Cathedral Rhs € .Elum pback fay, "thes 1A,no) |Needle Rk Mitery .Ren cy5Nesessa 7TALS_" oa '.\\|Priest Rk \° LAN Cape Kalekta FishermansLenahseG,AKNabeeee TPiVey unda,Ds vf nh Head ""S Argil nm 1 esp fevNes¢d 400 :"Q\)-lx.atpelf ”UGS v ;|. *woe ¢zy Eoule Re .-G -_ A M.eth Figure 6:Locations of recommended power plant sites (triangles)and major thermal sites.Dashed lines indicate possible powerline routes,and dotted lines indicate underwater routes. 3 USC 1608. 8 USC note rec.21. 3 USC 1601 ote. ministration. a=A Ubiadt UAW 90-451-DEC.2,1980 originating after the date of selection by the State shall be held by the Secretary until such lands have been tentatively approvedbtotheState.As such lands are tentatively approved,the Secre-tary shall pay to the State from such account the proceedsallocabletosuchlandswhicharederivedfromcontracts,leases,licenses,permits,rights-of-way,easements,or trespasses.The proceeds derived from contracts,leases,licenses,permits,rights- of-way,easements or trespasses and deposited to the account pertaining to lands selected by the State but not tentativelyapprovedduetorejectionorrelinquishmentshallbepaidas would have been required by law were it not for the provisions of this Act.In the event that the tentative approval does not cover all of the land embraced within any contract,lease,license, permit,right-of-way,easement,or trespass,the State shall onlybeentitledtothepronortionateamountoftheproceedsderivedfromsuchcontract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or ease-ment,which results from multiplying the total of such proceedsbyafractioninwhichthenumeratoristheacreageofsuch contract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or easement which is included in the tentative approval and the denominator is the total acreage contained in such contract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or easement;in the case of trespass,the State shallbeentitledtotheproportionateshareoftheproceedsinrelation to the damages occurring on the respective lands. (3)Nothing in this subsection shall relieve the State or the United States of any obligations under section 9 of the AlaskaNativeClaimsSettlementActorthefourthsentenceofsection 6(h)of the Alaska Statehood Act. (1)Ex1sTING RicHTs.-(1)All conveyances to the State under section6oftheAlaskaStatehoodAct,this Act,or any other law,shall besubjecttovalidexistingrights,to Native selection rights under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,and to any right-of-way or easement reserved for or appropriated by the United States prior toselectionoftheunderlyinglandsbytheStateofAlaska. (2)Where,prior to a conveyance to the State,a right-of-way oreasementhasbeenreservedfororappropriatedbytheUnitedStates or acontract,lease,permit,right-of-way,or easement has been issuedforthelands,the conveyance shall contain provisions making itsubjecttotheright-of-way or easement reserved or appropriated andtothecontract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or easement issued or granted,and also subject to the right of the United States,contractee,lessee,licensee,permittee,or grantee to the complete enjoyment of all rights,privileges,and benefits previously granted,issued,reserved,or appropriated.Upon issuance of tentative approval,the State shall succeed and become entitled to any and all interests of the United States as contractor,lessor,licensor,permit- tor,or grantor,in any such contracts,leases,licenses,permits,rights-of-way,or easements,except those reserved to the United States in the tentative approval. (8)The administration of rights-of-way or easements reserved totheUnitedStatesinthetentativeapprovalshallbeintheUnitedStates,including the right to grant an interest in such right-of-way or easement in whole or in part. (4)Where the lands tentatively approved do not include all of thelandinvolvedwithanycontract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or easement issued or granted,the administration of such contract,lease,license,permit,right-of-way,or easement shall remain in the \>J jou vee Wa thd.ettrUDLILLAAPUTOETTAaayBUOY United States unless the agency responsible for administration -alv inistration.;.Ie at on this subsection shall relies the State x the UnitedSobligationsundersection9oftheAlaskaStatsOL'net or the fourth sentence of section 6th)of the Alaska tStiONCUISHMENT oF CERTAIN TIME EXTENSIONS.Any exten.ions of time periods granted to the State pursuant to se ion |LoeTd(2KE)of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act are er by Sdpxtinguishedandthetimeperiodsspecifiedinsubsections(a ceuions na i ic icable .of this section shall hereafter be app cable to State segection |<:scT ON THIRD-PARTY RicuTs.-(1)No g in By |chal Eres the rights or obligation'o any party wd)regard t jauuscien 3iry2,ubli -, Sec sere <3 |Section TO Act Ao oteker i976 (Public Law 94-456),or section 3 of Busctu >rhe Act of November 15,1977 (Public Law 94-178).lections of now.*(2)Any conveyance of land to or confirmation of prior se ec io s of 88theStatemadebythisActorselectionsallowedunderthisActsnote. 3iU 608.48'U rec. fa 1 superior to any selection made by the State after July 18,1975,ith consent of theijon,and to the duty of the Secretary,withCseovakecertainlandswithintheCookInletRegion available totheCorporation,both in accordance with the provisions 0ActofJanuarblic;nend2)Kething in this title shall prejudice a claim Renae orinvalidityregardinganythird-party interest created by tnt ate onAlaskapriortoDecember18,1971,under authority of section O(g-a Statehood Act orotherwise.;the ane in this Act shall affect any right of the United States orAlaskaNativestoseekandreceivedamagesagainstanyPrty|trespass against,or other interference with,aboriginal inteingpri8,1971.)any,oceurring prior to Desert ix 7).Notwithstanding anyorTovisionoflaw,subject to valid existing rights.any vanewithdrawnpursuanttosection17(d\(1)of the Alaska Native "aimsSettlementActandwithintheboundariesofanyconseration"stem unit,National Recréation Area,Wational Conserv ation A reasSisieationalforestorforestaddition,shall be added to sun oe aneadministeredaccordinglyunless,pelo en or atte ool e dat oo neenactmentofthisAct,such lan alidly sete cate of theNativeCorporation,or unless befoconetofthisAct,such land has been validiy selected by,anditisconveye.after the date of enactment of this Act tO ne ota eder i i Native Corporation to ja ndesuchtimeastheentitlementofany=Corporaion and withinNativeClaimsSettlementActissatisfied,1tneaneionsystemunitselectedbysuchNateCorporation shaleisi S of i 'to the extent that such land is in excess ts et eed.Thatidadministeredaccordingly:,part of guctt is subsecti hall necessarily preclude the futurenothinginthissubsectionshaPredaccifiedin ;f those Federal lands which are spconveyancetOtobyoO197'tted by the State of Alaska and on1tober19,1979,submitted by the ;a list ca eee otfice of the Secretary:Provided further,That nothinginthissubsectionshallaffectanyconveyancetothep to subsections (b),(c),(d),or (g)of this section.(2)Until conveyed,all Federal lands within the boundaries of a: : ;nhconservationsystemunit,National Recreation Area,National Co 48 USC note prec.21. ec 43 USC 1616. 43 USC 1601 note.Av\\ed 48 USC note prec.22.48 UST note prec.21. 43 USC 1636. 43 USC 1613. servation Area,new national forest or forest addition,shall beadministeredinaccordancewiththelawsapplicabletosuchunit.(p}PYK Line.-The second proviso of section 6(b)of the AlaskaStatehoodActregardingPresidentialapprovaloflandselectionnorthandwestofthelinedescribedinsection10ofsuchActshallnot apply to any conveyance of land to the State pursuant to subsections(c),(d),and (g)of this section but shall apply to future State selections. ALASKA LAND BANK Sec.907.(a)EstaBLISHMENT:AGREEMENTS.-(1)In order to enhance the quantity and quality of Alaska's renewable resources and tofacilitatethecoordinatedmanagementandprotectionofFederal,State,and Native and other private lands,there is hereby establishedtheAlaskaLandBankProgram.Any private landowner is author-ized as provided in this section to enter into a written agreement withtheSecretaryifhislandsadjoin,or his use of such lands woulddirectlyaffect,Federal land,Federal and State land,or State land if the State is not participating in the program.Any private landownerdescribedinsubsection(¢2)whose lands do not adjoin,or whose useofsuchlandswouldnotdirectlyaffecteitherFederalorStatelandsalsoisentitledtoenterintoanagreementwiththeSecretary.Anyprivatelandownerwhoselandsadjoin,or whose use of such landswoulddirectlyaffect,only State,or State and private lands,isauthorizedasprovidedinthissectiontoenterintoanagreementwiththeStateofAlaskaiftheStateisparticipatingintheprogram.If theSecretaryisthecontractingpartywiththeprivatelandowner,heshallaffordtheStateanopportunitytoparticipateinnegotiationsandbecomeapartytotheagreement.An agreement may include allorpartofthelandsofanyprivatelandowner:Provided,That landsnotownedbylandownersdescribedinsubsection(cX2)shall not beincludedintheagreementunlesstheSecretary,or the State,deter-mines that the purposes of the program will be promoted by theirinclusion. (2)Ifa private landowner consents to the inclusion in an agreementofthestipulationsprovidedinsubsections(bX1),(bX2),(bX4),(bX5),and (b\7),and if such owner does not insist on any additional termswhichareunacceptabletotheSecretaryortheState,as appropriate,the owner shall be entitled to enter into an agreement pursuant to this section.If an agreement is not executed within one hundred and twenty days of the date on which a private landowner communicatesinwritinghisconsenttothestipulationsreferredtointheprecedingsentence,the appropriate Secretary or State agency head shall execute an agreement.Upon such execution,the private owner shallreceivethebenefitsprovidedinsubsection(c)hereof.(3)No agreement under this section shall be construed as affecting any land,or any right or interest in land,of any owner not a party tosuchagreement.(b)TERMS OF AGREEMENT.-Each agreement referred to in subsec-tion (a)shall have an initial term of ten years,with provisions,if any,for renewal for additional periods of five years.Such agreement shallcontainthefollowingterms: (1)The landowner shall not alienate,transfer,assign,mort- gage,or pledge the lands subject to the agreement except asprovidedinsection14(c)of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,or permit development or improvement on such lands exceptasprovidedintheagreement.For the purposes of this sectiononly,each agreement entered into with a landowner described in eet ay eee subsection (c\2)shall constitute a restriction against alienationimposedbytheUnitedStatesuponthelandssubjecttothe agreement.(2)Lands subject to the agreement shall be managed by theownerinamannercompatiblewiththemanagementplan,ifany,for the adjoining Federal or State lands,and with therequirementsofthissubsection.If lands subject to the agreementdonotadjoineitherFederalorStatelands,they shall bemanagedinamannercompatiblewiththemanagementplan,ifany,of Federal or State lands which would be directly affected bytheuseofsuchprivate!ands.If no such plan has been adopted,oriftheuseofsuchprivatelandswouldnotdirectlyaffecteitherFederalorStatelands,the owner shall manage such lands inaccordancewiththeprovisionsinparagraph(1)of this subsec-tion.Except as provided in (3)of this subsection,nothing in thissectionorthemanagementplanofanyFederalorStateagencyshallbeconstruedtorequireaprivatelandownertograntpublicaccessonoracrosshislands. (3)If the surface lancowner so consents,such lands may bemadeavailableforlocalorotherrecreationaluse:Provided,That the refusal of a private landowner to permit the uses referred tointhissubsectionshallnotbegroundsfortherefusaloftheSecretaryortheStatetoenterintoanagreementwiththelandownerunderthissection. (4)Appropriate Federal and/or State agency heads shall havereasonableaccesstosuchprivatelyownedlandforpurposesrelatingtotheadministrationoftheadjoiningFederalorStatelands,and to carry out their obligations under the agreement.(5)Reasonable access to such land by officers of the State shallbepermittedforpurposesofconservingfishandwildlife.(6)Those services or other consideration which the appropriateSecretaryortheStateshallprovidetotheownerpursuanttosubsection(c(1)shall be set forth. (7)All or part of the lands subject to the agreement may bewithdrawnfromtheAlaskalandbankprogramnotearlierthan ninety days after the landowner-(A)submits written notice thereof to the other parties which are signatory to the agreement;and(B)pays all Federal,State and local property taxes and assessments which,during the particular term then in effect,would have been incurred except for the agreement, together with interest on such taxes and assessments in anamounttobedeterminedatthehighestrateofinterest charged with respect to delinquent property taxes by theFederal,State or local taxing authority,if any.(8)The agreement may contain such additional terms,whichareconsistentwiththeprovisionsofthissection,as seemdesirabletothepartiesenteringintotheagreement:Provided,That the refusal of the landowner to agree to any additionaltermsshallnotbegroundsfortherefusaloftheSecretaryortheStatetoenterintoanagreementwiththelandownerunderthis section. (c)BENEFITS TO PRIVATE LANDOWNERS.-So long as the landownerisincompliancewiththeagreement,he shall,as to lands encom-passed by the agreement,be entitled to the benefits set forth below:(1)In addition to any requirement of applicable law,theappropriateSecretaryisauthorizedtoprovidetechnicalandotherassistancewithrespecttofirecontrol,trespass control, Jt wisih.& Land managemen Program withdrawal.