Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnalaska Power Production 1992UNALASKA POWER PRODUCTION é \ JULY,1992 |WALTERJ.HICKEL,GOVERNOR-RONALD AGARZINI INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Introduction The following report is the result of an Alaska Energy Authority initial work assignment to examine Unalaska and Dutch Harbor as a potential site for a clean coal electric generation plant to replace or significantly reduce the area's heavy dependence on diesel generating systems. In Section I,a brief description of Unalaska is followed by a discussion of the area's primary economy: seafood processing with an emphasis on bottom fish. Section II discusses energy use mix and load profiles as they relate to the task of sizing a generation system for Unalaska and items for further investigation where preliminary investigations were made. Section III discusses the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990,the process required of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to implement them,the impact of the amendments,and the status of Dutch Harbor seafood processors with respect to current Clean Air Standards. Section IV contains a brief overview of Shemya Air Force Base and Adak Naval Air Station,two U.S.military facilities in the western Aleutian Islands that also are possible candidates for replacement of diesel-driven electric generation systems with Clean Coal applications. Appended to this report is a brief,layman's description of the eight technologies offered in response to AEA's request for statements of interest in participating in a joint application for the U.S.Department of Energy's Clean Coal Technology V program. SECTION I =UNALASKA The city of Unalaska is located on Unalaska and Amaknak islands in the Aleutian Chain.By air,it is about 1,100 miles south of Cape Lisburne and about 800 miles southwest of Anchorage.The name Dutch Harbor,while actually referring to a body of water,has become the name for part of the community located on Amaknak Island.A bridge,built in 1980,connects the two islands.The city has a current resident population of about 3,500.In 1990 about 73,000 people traveled in and out of the Unalaska airport, primarily to work in the commercial fishing and processing industries.About 25 domestic and 25 foreign ships visit the city dock each month for supplies,fuel and offloading or onloading freight. Local Government Unalaska is a first-class city with a council-manager form of government.The police department includes public safety officers,communication/correction officers,an animal control/sanitation officer and a narcotics K=-9 dog. The ambulance service is staffed with EMT volunteers.The fire department has a chief,officers,volunteers and four fire trucks.The city sales tax is 3 percent. Transportation Three airlines,MarkAir Inc.,Peninsula Airways and Reeve Aleutian Airways Inc.,offer daily scheduled flights to and from Anchorage.Charter and/or scheduled services with Peninsula Airways,MarkAir Express and Aleutian Air Ltd.are available to other islands.Sea-Land Service, American President Lines,Crowley Maritime,Western Pioneer and Sunmar Shipping offer shipping via water.The Alaska Marine Highway System operates a ferry to Unalaska with four scheduled runs between May and September.In addition to Ballyhoo City Dock,Offshore Systems Inc.,Crowley Maritime, American President Lines,Delta Western and Petro Marine Services maintain docking facilities. Seafood Industry Unalaska and the Port of Dutch Harbor first gained prominence as a fishing port in the 1960s with a boom in the harvest of King crab.Currently,the port is one of the busiest in the United States based on total product landed and product value.In 1991,the Port of Dutch Harbor processed 637.7 million pounds of shell and fin fish valued at $136.7 million.This compares with 455 million pounds processed in 1989 at a value of $102.7 million.Area fish processing plants handle King crab,Opilio crab,salmon, pollock,cod,halibut,herring and other species.The portwasrankedsecondinthenationforvalueoffishdelivered and was the No.1 port for the number of pounds processed in both 1989 and 1990. On a value basis,crab is most significant,even though King crab stocks are only now beginning to recover from near disastrous declines in the mid to late 1980s.Crab processing can be expected to expand significantly as fishermen increasingly target Opilio crab.Currently,crab accounts for 40 percent of the ex-vessel value of product landed at Unalaska. Bottom fish,including pollock,Pacific cod,sablefish, Pacific Ocean perch,rockfish,Yellowfin sole,turbot, Arrowtooth flounder,other flat fish and Atka mackeral, contribute the most to Unalaska processing plants on a volume basis.Walleye pollock make up the largest percentage of the bottom fish catch.In 1990,pollock accounted for 1.35 million metric tons,or 82.3 percent,of the 1.64 million tons of bottomfish harvested in the eastern Bering Sea. In 1991,Dutch Harbor's land-based seafood processors processed about 267,300 metric tons of pollock,or about 20 percent of the eastern Bering Sea harvest of 1.3 million metric tons.There are three major shoreside processors engaged in the work:UniSea Inc.is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nippon Suisan.Alyeska Seafoods Inc.and Westward Seafoods Inc.are owned by Taiyo Fisheries,also of Japan.Trident Seafood Corp.'s plant on Akutan Island processed about 8 percent of the Eastern Bering harvest. Trident is U.S.-owned.The other major Dutch Harbor processor,Icicle Seafoods Inc.,also is U.S.-owned.Icicle does not have a land-based operation,processing fish on three processor boats.Icicle targets crab,herring and salmon and processes no pollock or other bottom fish.Other seafood processors located at Dutch Harbor include East Point Seafood Co.,Marine Management Inc.,Northern Victor Management and Royal Aleutian Seafoods. Fishing Seasons The pollock fishery begins Jan.1 with the first half of the season,the "A"season,which lasts six to eight weeks.Pollock roe is targeted,and about one-third of the pollock quota will be taken during the A season.This year, the season opening was delayed 20 days.The second half,or "B"season,typically begins June 1 and lasts between three and four months.The remaining two-thirds of the pollock quota will be taken during the B season.This year,the B season was delayed on a voluntary basis by the trawl fleetbecauseinitialfishingeffortscaughttoomuchherringand because the pollock taken were considered too small.The season is closed down for the year sometime between late August and mid-September. The Pacific trawl cod season begins Jan.1 with most of the catch taken during the first quarter of the year.It is the amount of halibut allocated to each fishery as a bycatch that regulates when a particular fishery will be closed.The halibut bycatch quota is allocated on a quarterly basis.As soon as the quota for the quarter is reached,the fishery is closed.About two thirds of the cod quota will be caught during the first quarter before the halibut bycatch quota is reached.The remaining one-third of the cod quota is taken early during the second quarter. The hook-and-line cod fishery traditionally had been 12 months.However,this year the season is forecast to close in August because of an increase in the number of vessels in the fishery and because of the addition of a halibut bycatch quota of 750 metric tons. The Yellowfin sole fishery typically starts in the spring and lasts about three months. The crab season begins in July in Norton Sound and closes between Nov.1 and the end of the year.The vessels first target King crab,then Bairdi crab,and finally Opilio crab.Crab processed in Dutch Harbor is primarily Opilio. That Opilio season starts at the beginning of the year and runs about four months. Pollock Although some of the pollock is processed into fillets, most of the resource is made into surimi,a high-protein fish paste used to make imitation crab and other products. The U.S.surimi industry has seen phenomenal growth.In 1985,the only operational surimi plant in Alaska was a demonstration effort in Kodiak sponsored by the Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation.The longevity of the bottom fish processing industry at Unalaska is closely linked to a healthy pollock resource that can be harvested at sustainable levels for years to come.The industry,the regulatory agency and the scientific community agree the probability of maintaining current harvest levels of bottom fish in general and pollock specifically remains high. From 1954 to 1963,pollock were harvested at low levels in the eastern Bering Sea.Fishing directed at pollock began in 1964.Catches increased rapidly during the late 1960s and reached a peak in 1970-1975 when catches ranged from 1.3 million to 1.9 million tons annually.Following a peak catchof1.9 million tons in 1972,catches were steadily reducedthroughbilateralagreementswithJapanandtheformer Soviet Union.Since implementation of the Magnuson FisheryConservationandManagementActin1977,catch quotas set by the regulatory agency,the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council),have ranged from 950,000 tons to 1.3 million tons.In 1980,U.S.vessels began harvesting pollock and by 1987 were able to take 99 percent of the quota.Since 1988,the harvest has been taken exclusively by U.S. vessels.The quota for pollock harvest in 1992 in the eastern Bering Sea has been set at 1.3 million metric tons. It is the policy of the Council to manage the pollock resource in such a way as to maintain an average annual catch of about 1.4 million tons in the eastern Bering Sea. The National Marine Fishery Service's Alaska Fisheries Science Center compiles the scientific data on which the Council bases its management plan and catch quotas.The Center has indicated the maximum sustained yield of all bottom fish in the eastern Bering Sea,Aleutian Islands and Bogoslof Island areas is about 3 million tons. Under the current management regime,however,a cap has been set of 2 million tons for the total bottom fish harvest,a figure which could remain stable for decades. Should the pollock component of the bottom fish resource fluctuate,the Service believes other species would fill the gap,ecologically and commercially.Over the past 50 years of data accumulation of eastern Bering Sea fish stocks,the most abundant species have varied.At one time,herring was the most abundant species.Herring was succeeded in abundance by flat fish such as Yellowfin sole.Flat fish were succeeded by rock fish which were succeeded by the cod family,including Pacific cod,Black cod or Sable fish and Walleye pollock. The current time period could be called the era of pollock.Flatfish are abundance but herring or shrimp levels have declined.If pollock stocks were to drop significantly, the scientific community believes the most likely candidate for succession is herring because of feeding requirements. Pollock,early in its life cycle,feeds heavily on planktom before becoming a more opportunistic feeder.Herring feeds almost exclusively on plankton. The Council has produced three scenarios for future exploitation of the pollock biomass in the eastern Bering Sea through 1996.One scenario contemplates a constant annual catch of 1.2 million tons.Under this,the total exploitable biomass of pollock would gradually increase from 6.18 million tons in 1992 to about 7.5 million tons in 1996. The percentage of pollock that would have to be harvested to maintain an annual 1.2 million catch level would decline from about 19 percent in 1992 to 16 percent in 1996. A second scenario would also promote an increase over time in the total exploitable biomass of pollock but not as fast.This estimate indicates the exploitable biomass would increase from 6.18 million tons in 1992 to 6.68 million tons in 1996.The projected catch level would increase from a possible 1.49 million tons in 1992 to 1.67 million tons in 1996.The harvest level would remain steady at between 23 percent and 24 percent. The third scenario is based on maximum sustained yield and would maintain the total exploitable biomass at just over 6 million tons.The annual catch of pollock would range between 1.61 million tons and 1.77 million tons.The harvest level would remain stable at between 28 percent and 29 percent. The processing industry as represented by both the onshore processors and factory trawler ships believe the pollock resource is healthy.The industry views a cap for total annual harvest of bottom fish of 2 million tons as a built in conservation measure in view of the 3 million tons that could be harvested at maximum sustained yield levels. The industry states the Council's conservative approach also reflects an effort to make sure the over fishing in the 1980s that,in part,lead to a precipitous decline in the King crab resource is not repeated. Northern Sea Lion The industry indicates the only problematic or unknown factor facing it is a sharp decline in Alaska northern sea lion numbers.The declines were sufficient to lead to a final listing on Nov.26,1990 of the species as threatened throughout its range under the Endangered Species Act. Regulatory measures included the designation of 3 nautical mile no-entry zones around all major sea lion rookeries west of 150 degrees west longitude.Subsequent regulations prohibited trawling within 10 nautical miles in the Gulf of Alaska and eastern Aleutian Islands.In addition,the Gulf of Alaska pollock allowable catch was split in half to minimize potential localized depletion of pollock stocks, which comprise:part of the sea lion's diet. A draft recovery plan for the northern sea lion is currently under review by the National Marine Fishery Service in Washington,D.C.Counts in 1991 of sea lion pups at 13 rookeries from Southeast Alaska through the eastern Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea showed a decrease at Outer and Marmot islands in the central Gulf of Alaska.Counts at other sites remained relatively stable or increased.Should the sea lion subsequently be declared an endangered species, fishing would be further curtailed.However,the industry believes sea lion populations have stabilized,albeit at low levels,and that there is no immediate need to declare the species endangered. Donut Hole The so-called donut hole is a roughly triangular, 50,000-square-mile area in the central Bering Sea that lies outside of the 200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ)of the United States and the former Soviet Union.It is in the donut hole area where the international fishery for pollock by Japan,Republic of Korea,Poland,Peoples Republic of China and the USSR is reported to take place. Exploitation of donut hole pollock began a significant increase when the catch went from 363,400 metric tons in 1985 to 1.45 million metric tons in 1989.In the ensuing two years,however,catches have dropped as pollock stocks were depleted.The donut hole pollock fishery is important to U.S.onshore and offshore processors because there is noself-sustaining stock of pollockin the area.The fish foundinthedonutholeareaarepartofthebroaderAleutian Basin stock that migrates through or resides in the donut hole area.Donut hole pollock catches are down because the catch rate is no longer economic.Fishing vessels that had targeted the area in the past have left to pursue more lucrative arrangements,such as joint venture agreements with the former Soviet Union in its exclusive economic zone. Diplomatic efforts at reaching agreements on donut hole pollock exploitation are in progress.Recent summits between the U.S.and USSR have resulted in statements on the donut hole and the Bering Sea fisheries.Japan,China,Korea and Poland have participated in meetings,symposia and work groups on the subject with the U.S.and the USSR.The six nations are scheduled to meet in mid-August in Moscow to address fishing cut backs.A draft treaty on management of the donut hole resource also is under preparation,although it may take years to reach a final version. Unalaska''s Bottom Fish Future Bottom fish processing at Unalaska plants can be expected to increase both because of its proximity to the eastern Bering Sea stocks and because of efforts to provide a specific shoreside allocation of the resource. On March 5,1991,John Knauss,U.S.Department of Commerce undersecretary of oceans and atmosphere,signed a North Pacific Fishery Management Council amendment which assigned shoreside allocations for the eastern Bering Sea. In 1991,shoreside processors handled 28 percent of all pollock caught that year in the eastern Bering Sea.Under the amendment,shoreside processors were to be allocated 35 percent of the resource in 1992.The percentage was to increase to 40 percent in 1993 and 45 percent for 1994 and 1995. The allocations were challenged in U.S.District Court in Seattle May 29 by the American Independent Fishermen,the American Factory Trawler Association,North Pacific Longline Association and Royal Seafoods Inc.of Seattle.On July 24, the judge refused to overturn the allocations but noted questions remain in the suit that must be decided at trial. The plaintiffs have indicated they will appeal the ruling. The Council and the scientific community believe the most likely outcome is a flat 35 percent shoreside allocation with no future increases.Even if the offshore processors eventually win the case,it is believed the amount of pollock available for onshore processing will increase. Unalaska processors processed about 20 percent of the eastern Bering Sea harvest in 1991.If a 35 percent shoreside allocation does become the rule and Unalaska processors maintain their market share at current levels, the 20 percent figure could be expected to increase to 25 percent.On a volume basis,that would mean the 267,300 metric tons of pollock processed by Unalaska processors in 1991 could increase to 334,125 metric tons,an increase of 66,825 metric tons or 25 percent. Unalaska pollock processors are expected to respond to an increased amount of pollock available for onshore processing this year by running their plants at full capacity rather than by expansion.Efforts by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to enforce provisions of the U.S.Clean Air Act and the impacts of 1990 amendments to the act have had a "definite chilling effect" on expansion efforts of existing companies in Unalaska, according to the industry. SECTION II =LOAD STUDY To properly size a generation station for the Dutch Harbor/Unalaska load and ensure an adequate turndown capability,historic load data was collected and load profile curves plotted.These plots are shown as Figures 1 through 7. Figure 1 shows recent monthly diesel fuel use for electric generation by the largest consumers in the Dutch Harbor area.This plot displays the variation in electrical load during the year:the peak electical use occurs during the summer and mid-winter fishing seasons.Comparison of the February,1992 use with that of the year before demonstrates that the new Opilio crab season has had a positive impact on electrical use. To give a better perspective on the actual load variations to be expected by a generation plant,weekly load profiles are plotted as Figures 2 through 6.These plots show actual kilowatt (kW)load for an entire week at the Alyeska Seafood plant.Data was obtained for the highest (July-August)and lowest (December)timeframes.Review of these plots shows the variation in load magnitude which can be expected from a seafood processing plant.For example, Figure 6 shows the extreme example of a day (Sunday)where little processing was done followed by a six days of nearly level load. Figure 7 attempts to predict the overall load profile that a centralized plant could expect if all the processors happened to have synchronized work schedules.Since the processors process the same species within the same timeframes into similar products,this is entirely probable. The same shape load profiles as that of Alyeska Seafoods was assumed for the other two processors,the magnitude was obtained by ratioing their energy consumption used for electric generation to that of Alyeska's. A significant portion of the area load is that of the City of Unalaska.A daily load profile for the city was needed for inclusion in the area load.No hourly data for the city's load is recorded,so a load profile had to be assummed. The City of Unalska records peak kW and kWh on a daily basis.The highest and lowest peak kW in each month for the past two years were made available.The highest peak kW values for December,1990 and August,1991 were used to scale Alyeska's load profile to model a profile for the city. GALLONSOFDIESEL(000's)700 + 600 500 400 300 200 100 Jun-91 FUEL USE FOR ELECTRIC GENERATION DUTCH HARBOR,ALASKA Fe Se te ;Pollock Season "B" Jul-91 Aug-91 Sep-91 ' Oct-91 Nov-91 MONTH FIGURE 1 Dec-91 Jan-92 i RNS. Feb-92 Se"Pollock Season "A"SPacificCod--> Mar-92 KILOWATTS1200 + 1000 + 800 + 600 + 400 + 200 + ALYESKA SEAFOODS LOAD PROFILE:WEEK OF 12/9/90 -12/15/90 SUNDAY ]MONDAY =TUESDAY |WEDNESDAY THURSDAY _-s FRIDAY DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 2 l "SATURDAY KILOWATTS1400 + 1200 + 1000 + 800 + 600 + 400 + 200 + ALYESKA SEAFOODS LOAD PROFILE:WEEK OF 12/16/90 -12/22/90 SUNDAY i l 1 l i"MONDAY TUESDAY |=WEDNESDAY THURSDAY _-FRIDAY DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 3 "SATURDAY KILOWATTSALYESKA SEAFOODS LOAD PROFILE:WEK OF 12/23/90 -12/28/90 1600 + 1400 + 1200 + 1000 + 800 + 600 + 400 + 200 + i I l I 1 l SUNDAY |MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY -*&FRIDAY. -_-s SATURDAY DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 4 KILOWATTS3000 + 2500 + 2000 +=on[eo]Oo1000 + 500 + ALYESKA SEAFOODS LOAD PROFILE:WEEK OF 7/28/91 -8/3/91 4 SUNDAY 1 i 1MONDAY-TUESDAY |WEDNESDAY THURSDAY -_-_s FRIDAY DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 5 rT "SATURDAY KILOWATTS3000 -+- 2900 + 2000 -=(S,)Ooo1000 - 500 + ALYESKA SEAFOODS LOAD PROFILE:WEEK OF 8/4/91 -8/10/91 SUNDAY 1 j i I 1"MONDAY -TUESDAY |WEDNESDAY THURSDAY _s FRIDAY DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 6 I "SATURDAY KILOWATTSPROJECTED WEEKLY LOAD PROFILE DUTCH HARBOR,ALASKA AUGUST LOAD DECEMBER LOAD SUNDAY "MONDAY i 1 'TUESDAY |WEDNESDAY THURSDAY | DAY OF THE WEEK FIGURE 7 FRIDAY I "SATURDAY Analysis The overall load profile for the Dutch Harbor area (Figure 7)shows a ratio between peak and minimum load which can reach up to 3.5:1 over a short period oftime.This ratio exceeds the practical turndown ratios for most coal fuel technologies.Some form of energy storage or load shifting would be required to level the area load to meet the load following capability of a coal based generation plant.Potential energy storage technologies such as compressed air storage, refrigerated water,batteries,and methanol or synthetic oil production could be used.Additional uses for the non-peak capacity such as an off-peak steam load or new customers could also be used to allow load following. While sizing the generation plant for the base load and using other means for peaking is possible in theory,it tends to work against the original driving force for the project.Other forms of generation used for peaking,such as diesel engines,will prolong the dependence on oil and fail to solve the air quality problem.Decreasing the unit size of a coal plant into increments which can be dispatched as needed will increase capital cost and may still not be adequate to meet the turndown requirements. Energy Use The use of a coal fueled plant to supply all the energy (steam and electric)needs of the Dutch Harbor area was investigated as a way to reduce overall emissions.A single energy source using the proper coal technology could theoretically eliminate a majority of the scattered sources in use today,lowering the total amount of pollutants emitted in the area.The burden of compliance with the provisions of the Act could also be lifted from individual users and consolidated in one central coal fueled electic generating facility. The dominant pollutants in Dutch Harbor,of concern to the Department of Environmental Conservation,are oxides of nitrogen (NOx)produced in the combustion process.In Dutch Harbor the main source of NOx is the burning of diesel fuel and fish oil to generate electricity,produce steam for process use,and for product drying.Most NOx is produced for the generation of electricity (see Figure 8).Any attempt to control NOx production on the part of the seafood processors should therefore target the diesel generators. Figures 9 and 10 give a percentage breakdown of the energy used for electricity,process steam,and drying. These energy uses are further divided acording to the type 10 Percentage Permitted NOx Contribution by Source for Dutch Harbor Seafood Processors EA Electric CJ Steam Hi Drying Alyeska Unisea Westward 6%6% 4% é i i3 \i FIGURE 8 2nd H 90 1stH91 2nd H 91 1stH 92 Percentage Diesel Fuel Use By Seafood Processors,Dutch Harbor,Alaska Electric Steam Drying Total Total gals. Electric Steam Drying Total Total gals. Electric Steam Drying Total Total gals. Electric Steam Drying Total Total gals. Notes: ALYESKA SEAFOODS TotalEnergy Diesel Fish Oil 52.9 52.9 0 29.7 18.6 11.1 17.4 0.8 16.6 100 72.3 27.7 911,170 47 47 0 38.9 37 1.9 14.1 0.9 13.2 100 84.9 15.1 969,949 52.2 52.2 0 35.7 17.1 18.6 12.1 1.4 10.7 100 70.7 29.3 875,277 OPoONn>UNISEA WESTWARD SEAFOODS Total Energy Diesel Fish Oil Total Energy Diesel Fish Oit 57.4 57.4 0 42.6 31.4 11.2 0 0 0 100 88.8 11.2 1,161,422 60.6 60.6 0 37.6 37.6 0 21.3 19.4 1.9 62.4 57 5.4 18.1 27 15.4 (0)0 i¢) 100 82.7 17.3 100 94.6 5.4 2,156,282 211,704 Note 2 63.8 63.8 0 51.3 51.3 0 22.4 16.1 6.3 48.7 19.2 29.5 13.8 1.3 12.5 0 it)0 100 81.2 18.8 100 70.5 29.5 1,593,584 551,876 60.6 60.6 0 34.9 34.9 0 26 25.3 0.7 65.1 33.8 31.3 13.4 2.6 10.8 Q 0 Q 100 88.5 11.5 100 68.7 31.3 1,740,708 Note 3 710,081 Note 4 Data unavailable for Alyeska (1st H 92)and Westward (2nd H 90). Two months of data only. Five months of data only. Four months of data only. Gallons are diesel fuel or equivalent on a BTU basis (1 gallon fish oil =.88 gallons of diesel). FIGURE 9 Gallons of diesel equivalent 1990 2nd half 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 4 500,000 +20 | Alyeska 1,161,422 4 oy 0 Unisea Westward No Data 1991 1st half 2,500,000 2,156,282 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 +-282.942 Alyeska FIGURE10 Page 1 of 2 211,704 Unisea Westward May -June only Drying (fish oil) Drying (diesel) Steam (fish oil)BaadSteam (diesel) Electricity (diesel) One gallon of fish oil is equivalent to 0.88 gallons of diesel. Gallons of diesel equivalent 1991 2nd half 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,593,585 1,500,000 1,000,000 - Alyeska tt 551,875 Unisea Westward 1992 1st half 2,500,000 2,000,000 7 1,740,707 1,500,000 1,000,000 7 710,080 500,000 ] 00 Alyeska Unisea Westward No Data Jan-May only Jan-April only Page 2 of 2 Drying (fish oil)BODrying (diesel) Steam (fish oil)GoBSteam (diesel)|=|Electricity (diesel) One gallon of fish oil is equivalent to 0.88 gallons of diesel. of fuel consumed.The gallons of fish oil consumed was converted to equivalent gallons of diesel fuel on an energycontentbasisof1gallonoffishoil=.88 gallons of diesel. Analysis The two processors with dryers burn primarily fishoilinthisequipment.Fish oil in excess of their drying needs is burned in the boilers,thereby reducing the amount of diesel used.The processor without drying equipment (Westward),fires all their fish oil in their boilers for steam production. Electrical power generation accounts for 50%to 60%of the total energy used by the processors.Only diesel fuel has been used to generate electricity.The remainder of the energy used by the processors is for steam production and product drying. Westward has no drying equipment,so the balance of their total energy use is for steam production. Between one quarter and one third of the energy needs of Alyeska and Unisea is for steam production.The remainder of their needs is for darying. Fish oil has been used to replace up to 60%of the diesel required for steam production.Assuming that different uses will not be found for fish oil and it will continue to be disposed of by burning for process heat and steam,the steam which will be produced by burning diesel fuel will continue to be a relativelysmallportionofthetotalenergy. A rough estimate of potential revenues from steam sales to the largest user is $400,000 per year.Given the additional capital investment which would be required to supply this quantity of steam,the sale of steam could not be economically justified.The physical distances which seperate the seafood processors and any potential steam users within the city make a central steam plant concept uneconomical. Stand-alone steam sales to generate revenues in Dutch Harbor are unjustified.Locating the coal fueled plant near a potential steam load to allow ancillary steam sales to level the plant's load profile should be evaluated. Items Requiring Further Investigation The following is not an exhaustive list of items needing resolution,but a highlight of the areas in which 11 only a preliminary investigation could be made and more thorough work needs to be done. City of Unalaska electrical load profile: The city power plant has recording capability to capture only peak kW and kWh.No data of the magnitudeofdailyloadswingsorminimumloadexists.A load profile based on that of one seafood processor was used in the above evaluation for a worst case estimate. Unisea and Westward load profiles: As with the city,data for the load profiles of these plants were not available.Some of this data may have already been collected in previous studies and be in possesion of the contractor who performed the study. Since these plants have had recent expansions,more timely data should be collected.The load profiles used in this evaluation assumed the load shape of the one processor for which data was obtained. Other Dutch Harbor area loads: The city and the three seafood processors represent the majority of the electrical load in the area.There are a number of other self generators in the area who will be covered by the new Clean Air regulations and whose loads will have an impact on a central facility.These loads have never been rigourisly quantified. Load leveling: The Dutch Harbor area load profile will make application of a typical coal fueled plant difficult. In order to use coal as a fuel,a process which can handle the load swings as estimated must be found,or the load the plant sees has to be leveled in some manner.Load leveling could involve:serving load presently self generated,finding an economically justifiable steam buyer,interim storage of the energy, or attracting a new facility and load which will compliment that which already exists. Plant optimization: The generation capability of the plant needs to be determined considering the technology chosen,the actual load to be followed and the availability of peaking generation.The turndown ratios,availability, and response times will factor into the size and number of units best suited. 12 e Location: A suitable location for the plant needs to be chosen considering the size of the plant,availability of space,and cost of interconnection. e Price of power: Changes in air quality regulations have not forced the major loads into purchased,rather than self generated,power.Power produced must therefore compete with diesel generated electricity,and a target price should be set to guage project viability and dictate capital expenditure. e Purchase commitment: A purchase power agreement which is acceptable to both parties needs to be assembled for project viability.Past studies have met with non-commitment from the major potential power purchasers. 13 SECTION III -CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1990 The recently signed U.S.Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 lower the threshold limits for requiring a permit for all criteria air pollutants from 250 tons per year to 100 tons per year.A plant emitting less than 100 tons per year of a pollutant per year would not require a permit.Air pollutants covered are:particulate,particulate matter of 10 microns or less (PM 10),carbon monoxide,oxides of nitrogen (NOx),oxides of sulfur (SO2)and ammonia.For deisel engines,for example,the criteria pollutant is NOx. Translating this to a kilowatt basis,the amendments lower the size of generators which will require a permit from 1,750 kW to 550 kW.The 550 kW limit is an approximation.This could vary by 10 kW either way and depends on the emission rate for a particular engine.It also should be noted the emission rates are calculated by "name plate."Diesel engines of a certain size are assumed to emit a certain level of NOx whether the diesel is run at capacity,less than capacity or intermittently such as for a standby generator. A goal of the Clean Air Act is for each state to develop a program to issue the permits rather than the federal government (Environmental Protection Agency).The Air Quality Management Section of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's (ADEC)Division of Environmental Quality currently is working to develop such a program.The Act states permitting agencies must collect sufficient revenue to cover the cost of operating the program.The 1990 amendments provide for a test charge of $25 per ton of emissions for each permit.The permit fee for a plant emitting 100 tons of NOx per year,for example, would be $2,500.For a plant emitting 250 tons per year,the permit fee would be $6,250.The fee system is to assure the states will have the resources to administer their programs. The $25/ton figure is neither a maximum nor a minimun, but a test mark to help EPA determine if an agency is collecting enough revenue.ADEC has developed several scenarios to help determine the fee level,but at this point has no idea of what the fee will be.The fee structure will be the subject of negotiations between ADEC and public and private entities which will be required to get permits.If the emissions of all facilities emitting 100 tons or more per year of pollutants were lumped together and divided by the expected cost to operate the permit program,ADEC speculates the fee level would be between $15 and $18 per ton.The Act gives states considerable flexibility in devising permit fee levels.Some states have set different permit fees for different pollutants.Once states have their programs implemented,it is believed EPA will probably 14 discontinue some of the funding it previously had allocated to the states to enforce the Clean Air Act. ADEC believes it will be able to implement its programinmid-1995.Writing regulations for the program cannot begin until ADEC has the statutory authority to do so.The Alaska legislature defeated clean air statutes during the last sesson.New statutes will be offered to the next session of the legislature in January 1993.It is expected the statutes will win approval because the state faces the sanction of losing $200 million in federal highway funds if they are not approved.ADEC has a Nov.15,1993 deadline to submit its program to EPA for review,but is not likely to meet the deadline.If the program is not ready for submission by the due date,EPA has 18 months during which it can either invoke the loss of highway funding sanction or allow ADEC more time to complete its program.In past such instances,EPA has not invoked sanctions if the agency responsible for submitting a program is acting in good faith and making reasonable progress.At the end of the 18 months, EPA must invoke sanctions. If ADEC has its statutory authority by the end of May 1993 with the close of the legislative session,the agency can begin the seven-month-long process of writing the regulations.That makes January 1994 the earliest ADEC could have its program back to EPA for review.EPA has one year to approve the state's program,but ADEC believes EPA will want changes made,further delaying the implementation date. Assuming another six months to comply with EPA requests, ADEC believes July 1,1995 is a reasonable date to begin implementation. The Clean Air Act amendments will not function to reduce emisssions.ADEC is not changing its ambient air standards.There will be no requirements for changes in emission rates for virtually all of those entities required to have a permit.The permit fees are not expected to be of a magnitude sufficient to force facilities to curtail emissions or use enhanced technology to reduce emissions. ADEC estimates the fee would have to be on the order of $220 per ton of emissions to be an economic compelling motive. With no means to force Dutch Harbor diesel users to reduce or eliminate their NOx emissions,ADEC has expressed interest and support for the use of different generation systems,such as clean coal applications,to eliminate emissions by replacing the diesel engines. Alaska also is exempt from Title IV of the Act which deals with acid rain and sulfur emissions.In the Lower 48, Title IV sets up allocations for facilities on the number of tons of sulfur each facility can emit.These allocations can be bartered,sold and traded.However Phase 2 of this 15 program calls for a reduction in the allocations,thereby bringing about a reduction in emissions. In Alaska,a reduction of emissions could come about if a company signed an agreement with the ADEC to restrict diesel operations,for example.This would result in lowering emissions by a measurable amount which would, therefore,also lower the company's permit fee. Currently EPA can levy criminal fines of up to $10,000 per day for violations of the act,and can collect an additional $10,000 per day up to a maximum of $200,000 in administrative fines.ADEC has no authority to assess a fine without a court order.The agency is seeking the statutory authority to levy criminal fines of up to $5,000 per day for violations,as well as the ability to collect administrative fines.With the ability to assess both such fines,ADEC believes it could preclude the EPA from overfiling on a Clean Air Act violation. Current Statusin Dutch Harbor Seafood processors at Dutch Harbor use diesel engines to generate electricity.Increased availability of pollock for shoreside processing prompted many processors to expandtheirplant's capacity.The expansions.placed processors inviolationofairqualitystandards.ADEC fined the offenders and placed them on a schedule for a PSD (prevent serious deterioration)air quality review and required them to gather meteorological data to assess the impact of the increased emissions.After ADEC has received an application for a PSD review from a processor,the agency has 30 days to decide if the application is complete or deficient.Once the application is complete,the permit must be issued within one year.However,ADEC typically has been able to complete the process within six to nine months.During that time,a technical analysis report must be written and a draft permit made available for public review.The processors currently are operating under individual compliance orders negotiated with ADEC. One criterion of the PSD review is the use of best available technology whenever a new or expanded plant will exceed emission limits.ADEC has determined best available technology for diesel engines includes engine designs that result in lower emissions.However,engine design for lowest emission rates is not the criteria on which processors made their decisions in the purchase of diesel engines.Cost was the main factor.Best available technology will therefore be retrofitting the diesels to lower emissions.ADEC indicates there are two viable and economic retrofit technologies available:exhaust gas recirculation,which is a manufacturer retrofit,and retarding the injection timing,a 16 task which can be performed on site.Timing retard is estimated to reduce NOx by 10 percent to 20 percent. ADEC is in the PSD review process with one processor, Westward Seafoods Inc.Timing retard will be recommended to Westward as the best available technology.That technology also will be recommended for the other processors when they begin their PSD review. 17 SECTION IV -SHEMYA AND ADAK In addition to Unalaska/Dutch Harbor,some research effort was put into a brief overview of Shemya Air Force Base and Adak Naval Air Station. Shemya Air Force Base By air,Shemya AFB is about 1,325 miles southwest of Cape Lisburne and 1,530 miles southwest of Anchorage.The base,sometimes referred to as the "Black Pearl of the Pacific"or "the rock,"is the most westerly of the Eleventh Air Force's bases.The 683rd Air Base Group provides support to various associate units assigned to other Air Force commands,primarily the Air Combat Command.Shemya is best known to the public in Alaska as a base from which aircraft were and are dispatched to intercept and shadow surveillance aircraft,most notably long range "Bear"bombers,from the former Soviet Union. The base has a compliment of 38 officers and 501enlistedpersonnel.At any one time,between 40 and 60 contractors may be working at the base,giving a total population of 600 or less.Shemya receives scheduled air service on a contracted basis by MarkAir twice a week (Tuesday and Thursday)and by the U.S.Military Airlift Command.There is no scheduled surface transportation to the island,however barges resupply the base during summer months.There are no civilian dependents on the base. Personnel serve a one year unaccompanied tour of duty. Shemya's power generation system is capable of 18 MW at maximum production.The peak load reached has been 16 MW, and 6 MW is the average load.The generators are driven by diesel engines. The once uninhabited island was first occupied by military forces on May 28,1943 during the final days of the battle to take nearby Attu from the Japanese during World War II.The present day 10,000-foot runway and accompanying facilities were constructed to accommodate the 28th Bomber Group whose B-24s flew bombing and photo reconnaissance missions agains the northern Kurile Islands.Air Force activities were reduced following the war.The base served as a refueling stop during the Korean War and was home to the 5021st Air Base Squadron.The base was inactivated July 1,1954 after the Korean War.The facilities were turned over to the then U.S.Civil Aeronautics Authority in 1955, and subsequently leased to Northwest Orient Airlines which remained on the island until 1961. The Air Force resumed operations on Shemya in support. of various Air Force and Army strategic intelligence collection activities,and the 5040th Air Base Squadron was 18 activated July 15,1958 to provide base support.The base's operational status was redesignated and upgraded several times during ensuing years.It was transferred from the Aerospace Defense Command to the Strategic Air Command when the former was inactivated Oct.1,1979.The base currently is part of the Alaskan Air Command which is based at Elmendorf Air Force Base just north of Anchorage. Adak Naval Air Station By air,Adak NAS is located 1,290 miles southwest of Cape Lisburne and about 1,250 miles southwest of Anchorage. The air station is a part of the Naval Air Force Pacific Command.Its mission is to support the U.S.Navy's Pacific fleet,most notably in the area of anti-submarine warfare. Adak has a compliment of 2,200 active duty military personnel.Dependents and contractors bring the total population to about 5,000 persons,which would make it Alaska's sixth largest city were it in civilian hands, according to a station spokesman.During winter months,the station's population declines by about 500.Adak is served on a scheduled basis by Reeve Aleutian Airways and MarkAir, and by the Military Airlift Command.Samson Tug and Barge Co.of Seattle is under contract to provide scheduled (every 17 days)barge service from Seattle.Adak has a peak power demand of 10.75 MW.The generators are driven by diesels which use JP 5 jet fuel.Both the diesels and generators have been characterized as "very old."Plans exist for replacing the diesel engines with turbines,but funding has not been made available. The island was occupied by the U.S.Army when it landed 3,500 troops on Aug.30,1942.Adak served as a staging area for efforts to retake Kiska during WWII,and at one time there were 100,000 personnel on the island.Adak's military population declined to about 1,000 following the end of the war.In July 1950,the Army base on Adak was turned over to the U.S.Navy.The naval air station underwent a steady build up in the 1960s and 1970s to reach its current staff level. 19 REFERENCES Tom Chappel,project manager,Air Quality ManagementSection,Division of Environmental Quality,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,Juneau,personal communication. Albert Bohn,Air Quality Management Section,Division of Environmental Quality,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,Juneau,personal communication. Bill McClarence,Air Quality Program,South Central Regional Office,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage. Roe Sturgulewski,public works director,and Jim Taylor, City of Unalaska,personal communication. R.W.Beck and Associates Inc.,Preliminary Report:Unalaska Geothermal Project,Nov.13,1991,Anchorage. Shemya,Tech.Sgt.Holbrook,Elmendorf Air Force Base public affairs office. Adak,Capt.Ellis Caldwell,command office,Adak Naval Air Station. North Pacific Fishery Management Council,"Stock assessment and fishery evaluation report for the groundfish resources of the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands region as projected for 1992,"November 1991. National Fisherman,West Coast Focus,pp.1 &4,pp.18-19, February 1992,Vol.72,No.10. National Fisherman,pp.11 &71,May 1992,Vol.73,No.1. Alaska Fisherman's Journal,pp.11,34 &36,August 1991. Richard Lauber,chairman of North Pacific Fishery Management Council and lobbyist for Pacific Seafood Processors Association,Juneau,personal communication. Bruce Buls,spokesman for American Factory Trawlers Association,Seattle,personal communication. Loh-Lee Low,Alaska Fisheries Science Center,National Marine Fisheries Service,Seattle,personal communication. Brent C.Paine,fishery biologist,North Pacific Fishery Management Council,Anchorage,personal communication. Unalaska/Dutch Harbor Chamber of Commerce,1992 Business Directory and Information Guide. 20 Appendices PROPOSED COAL FUEL TECHNOLOGIES Eight companies responded favorably to the Alaska Energy Authority's request for statements of interest in joint application for the U.S.Department of Energy's (USDOE)Clean Coal V program.Responding firms were required to offer pre- commercial technology that would meet the minimum requirements of the proposed USDOE solicitation that is also applicable to Alaska remote utility needs.Size range of potential units could vary from 200 kw to 25 MW. The eight companies were:Detroit Diesel Corp.of Detroit, Mich.,Air Products and Chemicals Inc.of Allentown,Penn., Southern Engineering and Equipment Co.of Graysville,Ala., Cooper Industries of Grove City,Penn.,The M.W.Kellogg Co.of Houston,Texas,Energy and Environmental Research Corp.of Orrville,Ohio,Hague International of South Portland,Maine and SGI International of La Jolla,Calif. Detroit Diesel Detroit,Mich. Richard Winsor,manager -combustion and emissions 313 592-7190,fax 313 592-7888 Detroit Diesel proposed a joint application to develop two- stroke diesel engines which would operate on coal-derived methanol to generate electricity in rural Alaska areas. The company proposes to further develop its Series 92 and 149 heavy-duty diesel engines which have horsepower outputs ranging from 276 hp to 1,232 hp (Series 92)and between 1,155 hp and 2,340 hp (Series 149).The engines can power a range of Detroit Diesel generator sets with outputs ranging from 200 kw to 1.5 MW per engine. Series 92 methanol diesel engines have been used to power urban buses since 1983.This engine was the first alternate fuel heavy-duty engine in the United States to win certification by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.Benefits Detroit Diesel believes can be accrued by the use of methanol-fueld diesel engines to generate electricity in rural Alaska include local fuel source,lower emissions and potentially lower fuel cost.A number of Detroit Diesel engines are in use throughout Alaska, including rural villages where they are used to generate electricity.Existing engines could be retrofitted to run on methanol,or could be replaced with the new methanol-burning engines. The company,in its expression of interest,did not specify how the methanol would be produced from coal or what the by products would be.But the company does have a relationship with Air Products and Chemicals under a USDOE Clean Coal III program to test methanol as a diesel fuel in buses on the West Coast. This is in conjunction with an Air Products Clean Coal program to demonstrate its proprietary process to produce methanol from coal-derived synthesis gas on a commercial scale at a facility located in Daggett,Calif.There is no relationship between Detroit Diesel and Air Products for an application under Clean Coal V. In a coal-to-methanol system,the coal is first crushed and pulverized before being fed into a gasifier.During gasification, the carbon in the coal reacts with oxygen and steam to form carbon oxides,methane and hydrogen.The raw gas is delivered to the synthesis gas upgrading section for production of a gas suitable for methanol synthesis.During this process the hydrogen and sulfur join to form hydrogen sulfide which is removed in a sulfur recovery unit.The other by product is virtually purecarbondioxide.The carbon dioxide is either vented or collected for future sale.In the final stage,the synthesis gas is compressed to the level required for methanol synthesis (1,390 psia).Centrifugal type compressors are used.The methanol is produced from a distillation column. Air Products Allentown,Penn. David J.Taylor,manager -business development 215 481-7440,fax 215 481-5444 Air Products proposed a joint application for the development,design,construction and operation of a pressurized fluidized bed boiler independent power plant.The plant would use Alaska coal and sell power to a utility targeted by AEA under a long term contract. A pressurized fluidized bed boiler is a container in which the combustion process occurs.Because of its pressurized operation,the container is considerably smaller than a conventional boiler of equal generating capacity.The process begins when a mixture of crushed coal and limestone or dolomite is injected,along with a uniform flow of air,through the bottom portion of the container.When the air velocity inside the container reaches a certain level,the solid particles of coal and limestone appear to float or "fluidize." During this process the coal is burned and the limestone absorbs more than 95 percent of the sulfur oxides that are produced,thus requiring no additional flue gas desulfurization. The sulfur-laden limestone forms a dry,solid waste product which is removed through the bottom of the container or captured as fly ash in dust collectors.The combustion temperature ranges from about 1,600 degrees F to 1,800 defrees F,or about half that encountered in a conventional boiler and well below the heat level needed to form nitrous oxides.The heat from the combustor is used to make hot water,hot air or steam to drive a generating system. In the Air Products combined cycle proposal,the coal and limestone are first fed into a pressurized carbonizer which produces a low-Btu fuel gas and char.The fuel gas,after having the particulate fly ash removed,is burned to produce the energy required to drive a gas turbine which,in turn,drives a generator to produce electricity.After exiting the carbonizer the char is then fed into the fluidized bed combustor.Steam generated in a heat-recovery steam generator associated with the fluidized bed drives a steam turbine generator that furnishes the balance of electric power delivered by the plant.The steam turbine generates about 80 percent of the plant's total gross electrical output,and the gas turbine produces the rest. Air Products,a company with annual sales exceeding $3 billion,has a history of involvement with USDOE in Clean Coal I, II and III and with other non-coal related projects.The company operates fluidized bed power plants in Stockton,Calif.,and Ebensburg,Penn. Southern Engineering &Equipment Co. Graysville,Ala. Neil Turner Sr. 205 674-5626,fax 205 674-5630 Southern Engineering has expressed an interest in participating in a Clean Coal V application as a provider of steam turbines and generators.The company designs,builds and installs small and medium size cogeneration systems using back pressure or condensing steam turbines and induction or synchronous generators.Southern Engineering currently has 30 installations in operation in the 35 kw to 4 MW range with the majority in the less than 500 kw range. The steam turbines and generators are assembled in Southern Engineering's Graysville,Ala.,shop,and personnel are available for re-erection at a chosen site.Size of the components to be used in an Alaska Clean Coal application would depend on the typeofturbinesandgeneratorsselected.Services of the companyincludefeasibilityanalysis,complete engineered drawings and written material for system manufacture,field installation supervision and maintenance.The equipment is designed to operate without an attendant. Cooper Industries Grove City,Penn. A.K.Rao,project manager 412 458-3550,fax 412-458-3525 Cooper Industries (Cooper-Bessemer Reciprocating Products Division)is looking for a host site and a potential partner to join it in bidding for a USDOE Clean Coal V project to demonstrate the company's coal water slurry (CWS)fueled diesel engine.Cooper-Bessemer developed the engine under the sponsorship of USDOE's Morgantown Energy Technology Center,and has successfully operated both a research engine and a production engine on CWS with under 2 percent ash production.Test results indicate power output and operating efficiencies comparable to diesel fuel operation.The slurry underwent almost complete combustion without leaving deposits inside the engine.A full scale emissions control system has been constructed and is scheduled to be demonstrated in 1993. Offered for demonstration area six-cylinder engine capableofproducing1.8 MW and a 20-cylinder engine capable of producing 6 MW of electricity.A coal cleaning and slurrying plant would be installed at the site with the engines.The plant would produce engine grade slurry with less than 2 percent ash and a boiler grade cleaned coal for use in boilers in Alaska and/or for export.Coal pulverized to an optimum 10 to 13 micron size with 98 percent less than 88 microns in size would comprize 50 percent of the slurry by weight.Electricity generated by this system could be used to power the coal preparation plant as well as meet the energy requirements of a coal mining operation.The size of the CWS plant would depend on the fuel demand of the engines, whether the plant were to be run year-round or on a seasonal basis and the nature of other AEA requirements.Components for the CWS plant are available off-the-shelf. Representatives of the Alaska Energy Authority and the Rural Alaska Power Association visited the Cooper-Bessemer research center in February 1992 where they were briefed on the technology involved and witnessed a demonstration of the coal-fueled engine. M.W.Kellogg Co. Houston,Texas William M.Campbell,manager,clean coal technologies 713-753-2184,fax 713 753-6609 M.W.Kellogg has piloted an atmospheric circulating fluidized bed combustor which could be adapted to the range of generating capacities called for in AEA's request for statements of interest for Clean Coal V.The process was piloted under a cooperative agreement with the USDOE in a one-ton-per-day facility which consumes coal,petroleum coke,lignite or other similar fuel.The process operates at atmospheric pressure,and uses limestone as the sulfur sorbent. The technology is pre-commercial,and Kellogg is seeking anindustrialorgovernmentalpartnertocommercializethe technology.The system uses a "transport-phase"â„¢combustor which uses coal pulverized to about the size of pencil eraser heads and limestone.Velocity of the air being pumped into the combustor is relatively high,in excess of 30 feet per second.The test program,in which both bituminous coal and petroleum coke feeds were used,resulted in essentially complete conversion of carbon and greater than 98 percent capture of sulfur.The transport reactor of the combustor operates in stages to minimize production of nitrous oxide. Heat from the combustor is used to generate steam for a steam turbine which drives the generator.In low capacity units, the combustor would be operated at near atmospheric pressure and power would be produced only from steam in a simple cycle.For higher capacities,the combustor would be operated at moderate pressure and the flue gas would be expanded to generate power and compress the combustion air in a combined cycle system.The low capacity unit could be transported in C-130 cargo aircraft. M.W.Kellogg currently is under contract to the USDOE to build a pressurized version of the combustor at Wilsonville, Ala.,which will consume about 40 tons per day of coal. Energy and Environmental Research Corp. Orrville,Ohio Robert A.Ashworth,process manager 216 682-4007,fax 216 684-2110 EER has expressed an interest in working with AEA to develop and commercialize its atmospheric fluidized bed cumbustor for use in burning Alaska coal and waste wood to generate electricity. Heat from the combustor could drive either a hot air turbine or create steam for a steam-driven turbine/generator system.The system also could provide hot water,steam and/or hot air for use in AEA's patented ammonia chiller to make ice. In this fluidized bed system,air and recirculated flue gas are blown up through the bottom of the combuster and the coal fuel is fed into the unit via a side port.Hot combustion gases are transmitted to a shell-and-tube heat exchanger where either water is heated or steam is created.After exiting the heat exchanger the combustion gas is filtered to remove the ash and sulfur sorbent.Combustible flue gas is then recirculated to the air blower.The remaining flue gas is sent to the exhaust stack. EER currently has a fluidized bed combustor development program underway with the USDOE.An EER representative has indicated he will recommend to the USDOE that the demonstration phase of the program be completed in Alaska in a cooperative effort with AEA.Also under discussion is a test of four Alaska coals as part of the demonstration phase.EER's commercialization partner,which fabricates the fluidized bed combustors,has been advised of the discussions and the possibility of assembling the components in Alaska. This effort would not entail an application under Clean Coal V.Funding from DOE for demonstration phase is already in place. This would significantly shorten the time needed to initiate a test of this technology in Alaska. Hague International South Portland,Maine Gwynne F.Briggs,program manager 207 799-7346,fax 207 799-6743 Hague International is interested in joining with AEA to submit a proposal to USDOE for the design,constrution, installation and start-up of an air transportable electric power generation plant for rural areas.Hague currently is developing an emerging technology for a solid fuel power cycle based on an externally or indirect-fired gas turbine and low pressure (atmospheric)ceramic heat exchangers.The program is sponsored by USDOE's Morgantown Energy Technology Center,the Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center and a consortium of electric utilities, utility organizations,industrial equipment manufacturers,state agencies and foreign government entities. Hague is constructing a test facility power plant thatincludesallofthekeycomponentsinthecycleatatestsite inKennebunk,Maine.The rated heat input of 7.3 MW is based ona Garret 831 gas turbine.Hague also is studying the application of the General Electric LM 2500 turbine for coal and bio-mass fired power plants,covering a range of 500 kw to 50 MW.The Kennebunk test facility is scheduled to go into operation on natural gas during the last quarter of 1992 for initial pressure testing,and on coal during the first quarter of 1993.Data from the tests will be available for submittal with the Clean Coal solicitation. In the company's Externally-Fired Combined Cycle (EFCC) system,clean air enters an open cycle gas turbine for compression to a pressure of 10 to 20 atmospheres.The compressed air flows through the tubes from the turbine and receives heat from the higher temperature coal combustion gases generated by a low NOX pulverized coal combustor.The heated air is sent back to the turbine through tubes to its expander section,which produces about 45 percent of the new combined cycle electricity.The exhaust air from the gas turbine becomes the combustion air for the coal combustion system.The resulting coal gases pass through a slag screen and enter the ceramic heat exchanger.The heat is then used for the bottom half of the power cycle to produce steam to generate electricity,or for injection into the the compressed air system., SGI International La Jolla,Calif. Richard McPherson,director of development 619 §51-1090,fax 619 551-0247 SGI has expressed an interest in AEA's efforts on an application for Clean Coal V,but believes it may be excluded from participating because the request for statements of interest specified coal-fired electrical generation technology.The company's Liquids From Coal (LFC)refining process takes lower rank coal and converts it to more valuable co-products of a natural gas substitute,a liquid similar to No.6 fuel oil anda higher heat content coal with low sulfur and moisture. The LCF process could be part of a package which includes use of the upgraded coal in advanced boiler technology such as fluidized bed combustion.The gas could be used to fuel the LFC refinery or in a combined cycle to drive a gas turbine to generate additional electricity such as that proposed by Air Products and Chemicals Inc.The liquid fuel could be used for powering plants and industrial boilers,as transportation fuel or as a feedstock in the production of specialty chemicals currently derived from crude oil. In 1989,SGI and its partner ENCOAL Corp.,a subsidiary of Shell Mining Co.,submitted a proposal in USDOE's Clean Coal III round which resulted in an agreement to construct and operate the first commercial LFC plant.The plant is located near Gillette, wyo. -The LFC process first uses a proprietary control system to analyze the coal which is then dried.From there,the coal goes into a pyrolyzer where heat is used to to remove the liquid and gas constituents including sulfur. Y .Vi .aN Jj 1/4 Mile Project ASCG COAL CONCEPT ( Title UNALASKA/DUCTCH HARBOR UNISEA PROXIMITY Date.-24yUL92 _|{Drawn:CH |AEA Mo.Designed:GOS =|Dota:zanna | Alyeska Seafoods Alaska Energy AuthoritaskatnergyAutnorityP.O.on y90869701EastTudorRood Anchorage,Alaska 99519-0869 Project ASCG COAL CONCEPT Title UNALASKA/DUCTCH HARBORALYESKASEAFOODSPROXIMITY Dete:24092_|Drawn:CH |AGA No. I Desionad:(Ne Tne Sannas | Westward Seafoods aoskaEtatsAuton701EastTudorRood Anchorage,Alaska 99519-0869 Project ASCG COAL CONCEPT h |Title UNALASKA/DUCTCH HARBOR . WESTWARD PROXIMITY 1/16 1/&Mile Gate PU _[Oreon |AEA 0 42 duplexes ETS. warehouse 35 unit apt.bldg.| Mark Air terminal Mark Air cargo HUD apt. Mark Air 4-plexes Power plantbldgs (3)5 units each| Napa warehouse State of Aloska Alaska Energy Authority P.O.Box 190869 701 East Tudor Road Anchorage,Alaska 99519-0869 Project ASCG COAL CONCEPT Unisea refer vans Title UNALASKA/DUCTCH HARBOR POWER PLANT PROXIMITY Oote:24JUL92 |Drown:CH AEA No. Designed:GOS Date:24JUL921/4 Mile "le:a ois "2 50 7"et Vy IcicleSeafoods OS State of Alaska .Alaska Energy Authority -P.O.Box 190869 701 East Tudor Rood Anchorage,Alaska 99519-0869 Project ASCG COAL CONCEPT Title UNALASKA/DUCTCH HARBOR ICICLE SEAFOODS PROXIMITY Dote:24JUL92 |Drown:CH Designed:GDS Date:24JUL92 Fite:5 walt =& AEA.No. set XX K